As Trump's EPA reverses landmark climate policy, California could lead a resistance

Los Angeles Times

4 days ago

In a stunning move, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency on Tuesday proposed to repeal its landmark 2009 finding that greenhouse gas emissions endanger public health.
The proposal would also revoke the standards the agency has set for greenhouse gas emissions from all motor vehicles.
The so-called endangerment finding is a formal determination affirming that planet-warming greenhouse gases such as carbon dioxide and methane pose a threat to human health and the environment. It forms the legal and scientific basis for regulating these emissions under the Clean Air Act and is derived from decades of expert research and analysis.
If it is reversed, many standards that rely on it could crumble — leaving the auto industry and other polluting sectors free to emit greenhouse gases without limits. But experts and state regulators say it could also represent a golden opportunity for California to set a national example, as the move may open the door for stronger regulations at the state level.
'Here in California, we recognize the science, we recognize the need for urgency, and we plan to continue doing the important work that will protect the public,' Liane Randolph, chair of the California Air Resources Board, told The Times.
The plan marks the latest in a string of actions by the Trump administration to reverse years of climate-change policy — including the EPA's proposed repeal of power plant emissions standards in June, and its recent affront on California's ability to set strict tailpipe emission standards.
A 2007 Supreme Court case, Massachusetts vs. EPA, affirmed that greenhouse gases qualify as air pollutants under the Clean Air Act and that the EPA has the authority to regulate them. The finding became the legal foundation for regulating carbon emissions from vehicles, power plants and other polluting sectors and led to the formation of the endangerment finding two years later.
A chorus of advocates and experts on Tuesday condemned the administration's plans to reverse this finding as dangerous and shortsighted. Independent researchers around the world have long concluded that carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases released by the burning of fossil fuels are dangerously warming the planet and contributing to worsening wildfires, extreme heat, floods and other natural disasters.
The effect on California is unclear at this point. Some experts said the EPA's proposal could make it harder for California to achieve its climate goals — particularly because the effects of greenhouse gas emissions do not respect state or national borders.
'What these actions are going to mean is that there are more emissions, which causes more extreme weather, which ultimately harms the residents of California as well as the residents of the United States writ large,' said Kathy Harris, director of the clean vehicles program at the nonprofit Natural Resources Defense Council.
By in effect creating the weakest possible standard, Harris said, the EPA is attempting to undermine California and other states' authority to set stronger rules and 'taking away the levers that states might have to be able to protect their citizens and their residents.'
'The Environmental Protection Agency has one job, which is to protect the environment, and they're giving up on that responsibility,' she said.
However, other experts said California is uniquely positioned to weather the storm. The state has notoriously struggled with smog and air pollution and has been a leader in adopting aggressive environmental regulations far exceeding national standards.
In fact, much of the state's ambitious work around clean air and climate predates the development of the endangerment finding and even the Clean Air Act. For example, California implemented the nation's first tailpipe emissions standards in the 1960s and became the first state to pass a law requiring greenhouse gas emissions reductions from vehicles in 2002.
Randolph, of the air resources board, noted that California also led the nation with 2002's Renewables Portfolio Standard requiring utilities in the state to source increasing percentages of electricity from renewable energy sources, and 2006's Assembly Bill 32, which mandated the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions to 1990 levels by 2020 — a goal the state met four years of ahead of schedule.
Senate Bill 100, enacted in 2018, further pioneered the clean energy space by mandating that all retail electricity sales in the state be powered by carbon-free resources by 2045, she said.
These items fall under state authority and would not be affected by a repeal of the endangerment finding, Randolph said.
Legal experts anticipated that if Donald Trump were reelected, he would drastically roll back federal greenhouse-gas regulation.
'With this proposal, the Trump EPA is proposing to end 16 years of uncertainty for automakers and American consumers,' read a statement from EPA Administrator Lee Zeldin. 'In our work so far, many stakeholders have told me that the Obama and Biden EPAs twisted the law, ignored precedent, and warped science to achieve their preferred ends and stick American families with hundreds of billions of dollars in hidden taxes every single year. '
Zeldin said the endangerment finding has been used to justify over $1 trillion in regulations that have throttled consumer choice.
Ann Carlson, director of the Emmett Institute on Climate Change and the Environment at UCLA, said that although some may see the EPA's move as another attempt to champion the fossil fuel industry, the decision could backfire.
By ceding federal authority to regulate greenhouse gases, the Trump administration could unintentionally relinquish regulatory powers to California and other progressive states to carry out their own climate agenda, Carlson said.
'If the EPA is saying greenhouse gases aren't supposed to be regulated under the Clean Air Act, then that means they can be regulated under traditional state authority,' Carlson said. 'So this could have a silver lining for California. It would undoubtedly be litigated, but it may give California a strong legal argument that it can, in fact, go ahead and regulate greenhouse gases from vehicles.'
Others said similarly that EPA's move might also have a galvanizing effect.
'They're proposing to walk away from all protections for public health and against these really damaging impacts of climate change,' said Peter Zalzal, associate vice president with the nonprofit Environmental Defense Fund. 'But states have always had an important role in regulating this pollution, and I think that role is even more pronounced in the environment we're living in.'
That said, California is not immune to decisions made by the federal government.
Fifty years ago, California asked for — and received — EPA waivers allowing it to set stricter tailpipe emissions than those mandated by the federal government. The waivers formed the foundation of the state's nation-leading ban on the sale of gas-powered cars in California by 2035. The Trump administration in June took the unprecedented step of revoking those waivers, which prompted an immediate lawsuit from California Atty. Gen. Rob Bonta, who argued that the move was unlawful.
Meanwhile, Trump administration officials and auto industry representatives celebrated the EPA's latest announcement Tuesday.
'The trucking industry supports cleaner, more efficient technologies, but we need policies rooted in real-world conditions. We thank the Trump Administration for returning us to a path of common sense, so that we can keep delivering for the American people as we continue to reduce our environmental impact,' read a statement from American Trucking Assns. President and Chief Executive Chris Spear.
'Today's announcement is a monumental step toward returning to commonsense policies that expand access to affordable, reliable, secure energy and improve quality of life for all Americans,' said U.S. Secretary of Energy Chris Wright.
The EPA proposal will undergo a public comment period and review process before being finalized. Multiple environmental groups said they are prepared to challenge the rule in court.