Trump’s EPA Wants to Pretend That Greenhouse Gases Aren’t a Threat to Human Health

In 2009, the “EPA) was able to” find “the United States Protection Agency (EPA) to regulate greenhouse gas emissions. This scientific and legal design has eliminated that the gases aimed at the planet, such as carbon dioxide, are dangerous to human health and well -being. Now, the Trump administration has moved to cancel this discovery.

At Indiana on Tuesday, July 29, the director of the Environmental Protection Agency Li Zeldin revealed the agency’s proposal to cancel this conclusion. The Environmental Protection Agency claims that this step will save Americans with $ 54 billion of costs annually by eliminating all greenhouse gases standards for vehicles and engines, including Biden’s electric cars authorization. The decline is the most aggressive attempt by President Donald Trump to reveal federal restrictions on fossil fuels. Zealin described it as “the largest editorial work in America’s history” on Tuesday, according to Associated Press reports.

“With this suggestion, Trump suggests the 16 -year -old Environmental Protection Agency for uncertainty for American auto and consumers,” Zeldeen said, according to an agency statement.

Scientists, climate advocates, environmental policy experts and former environmental protection agents warn that cancellation will have severe consequences for American health, luxury and climate. “Abandoning all the efforts made to address climate change is not in the interest of any person other than the fossil fuel industry, which has achieved trillions of dollars over the past fifty years, and it has shown that if this is not verified, you will follow the profits at any cost, even if it destroys the American way of life,” Shannon Baker Baker Branstter, chief home climate manager at the National Center to reach the first position.

The clean air law requires the Environmental Protection Agency to organize any air pollutor that displays public health or luxury. In 2007, the Supreme Court ruled that greenhouse gases were subject to this mandate. Two years later, the discovery of exposure decided that the current and expected weather concentrations of six main greenhouse gases “threaten public health and the well -being of current and future generations.” The “cause or contribution”, which was issued simultaneously to cars and engines as major sources of dangerous greenhouse gas emissions. These decisions are the legal basis of the Environmental Protection Agency for the regulation of planet pollution.

In the 16th years since the agency issued the discovery of exposure, scientists have found overwhelming evidence to show that greenhouse gases endangered public health and payment of global warming. Even in light of the organization of the Environmental Protection Agency, emissions led to fatal consequences on countless Americans, prompting rough weather more clear and exacerbated by air quality. Nevertheless, conservatives and some Republicans in congress have argued that the real threat is excessive organization and hidden taxes.

In March, Zealin announced the official reconsideration of discovering exposure on the basis that the Environmental Protection Agency failed to consider organizational repercussions in 2009. This step was part of a series of environmental declines aimed at eliminating 31 clean air lists, climate change, and more, according to AP. Trump has set a precedent for these procedures by an executive order one day to significantly expand the scope of environmental regulations, which also called for the Environmental Protection Agency a report “on legitimacy and a continuous application” to discover exposure.

Now, Zeldin aims to “retract the basis of $ 1 trillion in expensive regulations” by completely canceling the result, according to the edition of the Environmental Protection Agency. The suggestion must pass a long review process, including the general suspension, before completing it. Environmental groups have expressed strong opposition to the decision and pledged to combat it, including the National Resources Defense Council (NRDC).

“The Environmental Protection Agency wants to put its responsibility for our protection from climate pollution, but science and law say otherwise,” Christie Goldfos, CEO of NRDC, said in a statement. “NRDC lawyers and scientists will not allow this without a fight. If the Environmental Protection Agency ends this illegal and ridiculous approach, we will see them in court.”