The Environmental Protection Agency is rescinding the “endangerment finding” which underpins its powers as a greenhouse-gas regulator.We explain how that fits in with the blueprint for unwinding climate research set out in “Project 2025” https://t.co/aB8w6Ir5gF ...

I just want to start with the EPA administrator Lee Zeldon's claims that overturning the EPA's endangerment finding is a good thing. You are the best science educator out there. I will say explain why overturning or potentially overturning this rule is a big deal.Well, so the pre the premise of the bit back in 2009 was carbon dioxide, if you think of it as um the greenhouse gas that keeps the earth warm enough for all of us to be here to have liquid water, solid water, and gaseous water all at the same time ...

European voters still care about climate change. But they rank it lower than they used to. The signs point to less appetite for spending on the climate or inconveniencing voters in its name https://t.co/4L0tPbBkua ...

Environmental Impact - Melting glaciers pose a threat to European villages [1] - The report questions whether the high cost of protecting villages from melting glaciers is justifiable [1]

Regulatory & Policy Changes - The Trump administration, through the EPA, is moving to revoke the endangerment finding, which forms the legal basis for regulating greenhouse gas emissions [1][2][3] - This action aims to undo the scientific and legal basis for existing and future regulations on greenhouse gas emissions [5][6] - Environmental groups, such as the Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC), plan legal challenges if their concerns are not addressed [7] Environmental & Health Impacts - Repealing the endangerment finding endangers Americans' health due to increased pollution and adverse climatic events [9][10] - Scientific evidence conclusively demonstrates that greenhouse gas emissions endanger human health through pollution and climate change impacts [10] - The revocation could exacerbate issues like wildfires, floods, hurricanes, and respiratory problems such as asthma [7][9][10] Economic & Geopolitical Implications - The move could harm the clean energy industry, potentially benefiting the fossil fuel industry [14][15] - The policy shift may give China an advantage in clean energy technologies [19] - Subsidies for the oil and gas industry are seen as detrimental to the economy and public health [17][18] Political Motivations - The decision is perceived as fulfilling a promise made to oil companies in exchange for campaign contributions [13][15] - Critics argue the administration is prioritizing the interests of the fossil fuel industry over public health and environmental protection [15][16]

From @WSJopinion: The country is witnessing the rise—finally—of a scientifically armed and debate-ready climate right. The “consensus” gatekeepers don’t like it one bit, writes @KimStrassel. https://t.co/Ngakqrwsnt ...

The Trump administration has stopped all work on the American government’s “National Climate Assessments”. But that seemingly isn’t enough. Past reports are also being removed https://t.co/18CR216Vow ...

Barclays became the latest major bank to walk out of the world’s biggest climate group for the industry, following its Wall Street peers and HSBC out of the coalition https://t.co/mMH7oXqXEY ...

The Trump administration wants to offload the cost of disaster relief to states, hoping to undo perverse incentives. This comes as climate changes is making some hazards more severe—and more expensive https://t.co/eufRwoaVJ8 ...

The Keeling curve is the world’s longest continuous measurement of the single biggest factor driving anthropogenic climate change. Its potential closure as part of Donald Trump’s science cuts will have consequences for the whole world, argues Ralph Keeling https://t.co/ZgjTElXF3R ...