Climate research is budget casualty
Trump to propose millions of dollars in cuts to EPA, NASA, others that study global warming
WASHINGTON President Trump isn’t just keeping a campaign promise to roll back climate change regulations. He’s moving ahead to do away with the science behind the effort.
The White House drafted a preliminary budget blueprint that would hack hundreds of millions of research dollars out of the EPA and other agencies tracking the effects of global warming in what would be a stark contrast to the policies under President Obama.
Environmental activists said rolling back rules designed to protect health and ecology is bad enough, but gutting the fact-finding and academic analysis behind the rules poses far-reaching consequences.
“If the Trump administration pulls the plug on this, the world goes dark,” said David Doniger, director of the climate and clean air program at the Natural Resources Defense Council.
Among the proposed cuts the White House could unveil Thursday as part of its budget:
uEPA science funding, including half the money for studies of the agency’s Air, Climate and Energy Research Program. Bill Becker, executive director of the Association of Clean Air Agencies, which includes the Michigan Department of Environmental Quality as a member, was unable to release the proposal from the Trump administration but confirmed the figures.
uNational Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration re-
“If the Trump administration pulls the plug on this, the world goes dark.” David Doniger, Natural Resources Defense Council
search funding to support climate research and the satellite programs that provide the basis for Obama-era policies aimed at reducing the use of fossil fuels. The cut could be as much as 17%, according to The Washington Post.
uNASA programs coordinating the launch of satellites that monitor changes in sea level, carbon levels and air temperatures that help provide the justification for climate change rules.
Such a move would be applauded by key GOP lawmakers who challenge the science behind climate change and the resulting environmental regulations they say have stunted economic growth.
Some of those reported cuts could change based on review and comment from individual agencies.
Environmental activists were not optimistic the proposal coming out next week will change from earlier drafts that make good on the president’s campaign promises to roll back “job-killing” environmental regulations.
Trump vowed in October to “cancel all wasteful climate change spending from ObamaClinton, including all global warming payments to the United Nations.” The president said cutting funding would save $100 billion over eight years, money that could be used to rebuild infrastructure, such as water systems. More recently, Trump has tried to find ways to support a $54 billion increase in defense spending without raising taxes.
Environmental activists and many Democrats said Trump’s proposed cuts not only would ignore what Obama called the greatest threat to the planet but also would hamper global response because of the leading role the United States plays as a research engine for the international science community.
Annual federal funding for climate change research, technology, international assistance and adaptation has increased from $2.4 billion in 1993 to $11.6 billion in 2014 spread among 13 federal agencies, according to the Government Accountability Office. An additional $26.1 billion for climate change programs and activities was included in the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act in 2009.
That money is spent in a variety of ways: satellites that track Earth’s vital signs; governmentfunded research to measure natural phenomena such as deforestation, ice melt and habitat migrations; ocean buoys that monitor water temperatures; and agencies that track the health effects of global shifts.
“Earth science is not unique (to the USA). There’s a lot of very good science around the world,” said Doniger of the NRDC. “But the U.S. has a very heavy commitment in terms of the expertise, who the scientists are and, more importantly, where does the data come from ... It’s really foolish to blind yourself to the information and the information collection effort.”
U.S. efforts to track climate change have grown steadily over the past 25 years as the scope of the potential threat has become clearer, particularly to America’s coastal communities.
Coasts are sensitive to sea level rise, changes in the frequency and intensity of storms, increases in precipitation and warmer ocean temperatures, according to the EPA. In addition, the agency concludes rising atmospheric concentrations of carbon dioxide cause the oceans to absorb more of the gas and become more acidic, which “can have significant impacts on coastal and marine ecosystems.”
Trump has called climate change a hoax perpetrated by China. EPA chief Scott Pruitt said in a CNBC interview Thursday that he does not believe carbon dioxide is a primary contributor to global warming.
An overwhelming majority of scientists disagree, including those at the EPA.
“Carbon dioxide is the primary greenhouse gas that is contributing to recent climate change,” the agency’s website says. “Human activities, such as the burning of fossil fuels and changes in land use, release large amounts of CO2, causing concentrations in the atmosphere to rise.”