From Science Matters

By Ron Clutz

The news is EPA Director Zeldin has submitted recommendations to President Trump but the content has not yet been made public. How significant is this issue for climate activists? Just read the hysterical response by Sierra Club Trump, Zeldin Must Publicly Release EPA’s Endangerment Finding Recommendation on Climate Pollution.  In italics with my bolds.

People deserve to know if their government plans
to terminate their right to breathe clean air

Sierra Club Executive Director Ben Jealous released the following statement:

“The EPA’s mission is to protect human health and the environment, and any revocation or weakening of this life-saving action would endanger both. Denying both science and the Supreme Court to further unravel the Clean Air Act would be a slap in the face to the children and elderly suffering from asthma or COPD, the victims of extreme weather-fueled wildfires and floods, and to every person wanting clean air to breathe. The American people deserve answers from this administration on whether or not they plan to further ignore the law and science to put polluters over people. The Sierra Club is prepared to pursue all legal avenues and use every tool at its disposal to protect the American people and avert the very worst of the climate crisis.”

And then there’s the facts:

The origin of this insane mass delusion, it’s spurious codification into regulations and the necessity of dumping it once and for all is explained by Chris Talgo in his Town Hall article The EPA’s Endangerment Finding Belongs on the Ash Heap of History. Excerpts in italics with my bolds and added images.

Most Americans have probably never heard of the Endangerment Finding, however, this obscure rule has effectively allowed the federal government to label carbon dioxide a harmful “pollutant” that can be regulated under the Clean Air Act. This is a prime example of government gone wild. The Clean Air Act was never intended to allow the EPA to declare carbon dioxide to be a dangerous pollutant. Rather, it was designed to “address the public health and welfare risks posed by certain widespread air pollutants.”It is important to note that in 1963, when the Clean Air Act was initially passed, carbon dioxide was not listed as an “air pollutant.”

Figure 1. Change in Gross Domestic Product
and Six Common Air Pollutants, 1980–2018

Fast-forward to 1999. As the EPA notes, “On October 20, 1999, the International Center for Technology Assessment and 18 other environmental and renewable energy industry organizations filed a petition seeking the regulation of greenhouse gas emissions from on-road vehicles under the Clean Air Act.”

As happens all too often in our over litigious modern society, this “petition” eventually became a lawsuit. In 2007, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in Massachusetts v. EPA that “greenhouse gases are air pollutants covered by the Clean Air Act and that EPA must determine whether or not emissions of greenhouse gases from new motor vehicles cause or contribute to air pollution which may reasonably be anticipated to endanger public health or welfare.”

Although this is the standard interpretation of the Supreme Court’s ruling,
it is not necessarily the correct interpretation.

According to the majority opinion, authored by former Justice John Paul Stevens, “We need not and do not reach the question whether on remand EPA must make an endangerment finding, or whether policy concerns can inform EPA’s actions in the event that it makes such a finding. We hold only that EPA must ground its reasons for action or inaction in the statute.”

In other words, the Supreme Court decision did not determine that carbon dioxide is a harmful air pollutant. Instead, it simply stated that the EPA has the authority to decide whether carbon dioxide is a harmful greenhouse gas if and only if that is supported by unequivocal data.

A more recent Supreme Court decision in 2022, West Virginia v. EPA, provides even more grounds for the Endangerment Finding to be rescinded. In this landmark ruling, the Supreme Court decided that the Obama-era Clean Power Plan was unconstitutional because it violated the letter of the law under the aforementioned Clear Air Act. Specifically, the Court cited the “Major Questions Doctrine,” which clearly states “that if an agency seeks to decide an issue of major national significance, its action must be supported by clear congressional authorization.”

Incredibly, this is the first time the Supreme Court
had cited the Major Questions Doctrine in a ruling.

The fact that the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in favor of West Virginia and essentially reprimanded the EPA to stay strictly within its constitutional guardrails, bodes well for those who believe the Endangerment Finding is unconstitutional and should be eliminated.

But if that is not convincing enough, consider that the Endangerment Finding is predicated on flawed science to begin with. Despite the insistence by the EPA that carbon dioxide is a harmful pollutant that is driving an existential climate crisis, the facts and data say otherwise.

Over the past few decades, climate alarmists and environmental zealots have been somewhat successful in fooling too many Americans into believing that carbon dioxide emissions must be eliminated no matter the cost.

However, the cost of demonizing carbon dioxide as a harmful pollutant is immense. By vilifying CO2 and attempting to regulate it to death, the EPA has absolutely harmed tens of millions of Americans with higher energy bills. Moreover, the EPA’s absurd notion that carbon dioxide is a harmful air pollutant has put the entire U.S. energy grid at risk.

As we enter the AI age, there will be an enormous demand for dependable and affordable energy. The only energy sources that can deliver reliable and cost-effective energy (aside from nuclear) for the United States to remain the global leader in the AI arms race necessarily produce carbon dioxide emissions. Put simply, if we do not eliminate the Endangerment Finding and free ourselves from its shackles, the United States will not be able to keep pace with the Communist Chinese Party in the worldwide battle for AI supremacy.