National Academies Launch Fast-Track Review of Climate Science Amid Trump Administration Changes
The National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine announced a significant step on Thursday, revealing plans to conduct an independent, fast-track review of current climate science. This initiative aims to provide vital insights ahead of the Trump administration’s proposed repeal of the 2009 "endangerment finding," which concluded that greenhouse gas emissions pose a risk to human health and the environment.
Independent Review Requested by National Academies
Traditionally, the National Academies respond to requests from government entities, but this time they are self-funding the study. The decision underscores their commitment to ensuring that federal policy decisions are grounded in rigorous scientific data. Marcia McNutt, president of the National Academy of Sciences, emphasized the importance of timely and precise scientific evidence in policy-making. “Decades of climate research and data have yielded expanded understanding of how greenhouse gases affect the climate,” she stated. The Academies plan to make their findings public by September, just as the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) will be making its decisions on the endangerment finding.
Implications of Repealing the Endangerment Finding
The move by the Trump administration to rescind the endangerment finding could dismantle crucial legislative frameworks that regulate carbon emissions from vehicles and power plants under the Clean Air Act. Newly appointed EPA Administrator Lee Zeldin’s intentions suggest that the repeal is a pivotal step towards reversing climate regulations established during the Biden administration. Critics of this proposal worry that it hinges on an overly narrow interpretation of the agency’s legal authority, citing uncertainties that were exacerbated by a recent Department of Energy report that included input from noted skeptics of mainstream climate science.
Criticism and Support for the National Academies’ Review
The announcement of an independent review has drawn praise from environmental advocates and former government officials. Bob Sussman, a former EPA deputy administrator, lauded the Academies for recognizing the pressing need for impartial scientific analysis to inform policy decisions. He remarked that the expertise offered by such independent reviews is essential, particularly given the current political climate surrounding climate science.
Andrew Dessler, director of the Texas Center for Extreme Weather at Texas A&M University, characterized the controversies stirred by the Trump administration as precisely the type of issue the National Academies were designed to address. He expressed disappointment over the Department of Energy’s reliance on a limited pool of scientific opinions, which he believes does not reflect the consensus in the broader scientific community.
The Context of Climate Research
The National Academies are not new to climate science. They have a historical mandate, originating from an 1863 congressional charter, to provide independent analysis and advice on public policy issues. Their past work includes multiple studies exploring various facets of climate change, including the establishment of a "climate-ready workforce" and emerging technologies for carbon capture.
This current fast-track review aligns with the Academies’ recent commitment, announced in 2023, to rapidly respond to evolving scientific and policy challenges. Before this review, their inaugural task involved evaluating the scientific evidence around avian influenza.
The Road Ahead for Climate Science
As public commentary on the endangerment finding proposal remains limited to a 30-day window, the urgency for rigorous scientific dialogue has never been more pronounced. Dessler is spearheading a coordinated academic response to the Department of Energy report, rallying approximately 70 academics ready to contribute.
The National Academies’ upcoming review not only aims to shed light on the significant scientific findings concerning the dangers posed by greenhouse gases since the original 2009 determination but also serves as a critical counter-narrative to the prevailing skepticism from certain quarters of the government.
Conclusion: A Turning Point in Climate Dialogue
The National Academies’ decision to undertake this review is a pivotal moment in the ongoing discourse surrounding climate science and policy. By prioritizing independent scientific insight, they are fostering a comprehensive understanding of the implications related to greenhouse gas emissions. This initiative underscores the necessity for evidence-based policy-making in addressing global climate challenges. The outcome may have far-reaching implications, potentially impacting regulatory frameworks and influencing public understanding of climate science in the context of contemporary political shifts.
