Trump’s EPA wants to reverse the course of the dangers of GHG emissions, disturbing industries, climatic objectives

The Trump administration has charged its plan to cancel the United States regulations as a means of reducing industry costs, but it could turn against car manufacturers, public services and manufacturers in the future of regulatory uncertainty and risk of dispute, according to lawyers and trade groups.

The administration of republican president Donald Trump announced on Tuesday a plan aimed at canceling the long -standing conclusion that greenhouse gas emissions endanger human health, eliminating the legal foundations of American regulations on greenhouse gases (GHG).

The administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), Lee Zeldin, said that the proposal will have to go through a 45 -day public commentary period before being adopted. In case of success, Zeldin said that this would end the limits of greenhouse gases from vehicle exhaust, electric power plants, fireplace and other sources, saving $ 52 billion in environmental compliance costs.

But the companies that have already invested massively in the reduction of emissions to comply with the limits of the government, a decision also requested by many shareholders, fear that the proposal leads to the unknown regulatory and judicial, lawyers said.

“The industries that have GHG standards established by EPA have long been comply with them and do not want them to be deleted,” said Meghan Greenfield, associated with law firm Jenner & Block and the former EPA lawyer, which represents customers in the automotive sector. “The stability of the regulatory regime is extremely important for industry as a reference.”

The abrogation of the endangering conclusion would raise questions about the state authorities to bring prosecution to request damages caused by the gases for greenhouse gases from companies or to adopt laws after these damages for damages, said Zach Pilchen, Holland & Knight principal lawyer.

“The abolition of endangerment could have ramifications not only for federal regulations, but also on the issues of state authorities in areas that were previously considered to be excluded by these federal regulations,” he said. “In this sense, it could inject much more uncertainty for businesses.”

The EPA had published the conclusion in 2009 under the Democratic President Barack Obama, following a decision of the Supreme Court of the United States of 2007 which affirmed the power of the agency to regulate greenhouse gas emissions under the Clean Air Act.

A former source from the Trump administration said during Trump’s first term, EPA refused to conclude the endangerment due to the strong resistance of industry and the legal risk associated with undermining the federal authority on this subject.

Three sources in the automaker industry have told Reuters in private that the repeal proposed by the EPA of vehicle efficiency standards was much wider than expected. In addition to exhaust pipe standards, the proposal would eliminate air conditioning efficiency tests and remove the requirements for battery monitoring and battery sustainability.

Albert Gore, Executive Director of the Zero Emission Transportation Association, said that the action of the EPA aimed at reversing the law on long establishments occurs while sales of “clean” cars are increasing regularly and fed a boom in the manufacture of battery and American vehicles.

In the past decade, manufacturers have announced $ 197.6 billion in investment in American American and battery manufacturing facilities, according to the Environmental Defense Fund.

“Take action back and add a new regulatory uncertainty harms consumers, disturbs markets and complicate current commercial decisions for car manufacturers,” said Gore.

Lukewarm reaction

Industry groups have been kept in their reactions to EPA’s announcement, mainly affirming that they will examine the proposal and comments in the coming weeks.

Edison Electric Institute (EEI), the main group of lobbies in the electrical industry, said that it supported EPA establishing clear and coherent regulatory policies to stimulate infrastructure and investment.

“It is essential that the EPA uses its authority to develop flexible regulations that take into account the impacts on reliability and customer invoices,” said EEI spokesperson Jeremy Ortiz.

The energy industry is responsible for approximately a quarter of American greenhouse gas emissions and has regularly reduced its carbon production over a decade by replacing older coal generators with natural gas, solar and wind.

The EEI had taken the side of the EPA, then part of the administration of former president Joe Biden, in a case of the Supreme Court in 2022 in which the Virginia-Western challenged the agency’s authority to regulate power plants. At the time, the EPA said that the exhaust pipe rules until 2032 would avoid more than seven billion tonnes of carbon emissions and would provide nearly 100 billion US dollars of annual annual services to the company, including fuel, maintenance and repair costs reduced for drivers.

“Cancel that authority could upset this predictability and uniformity and potentially subject individual GHG issuers to the idiosyncratic whims of individual district courts,” he said in his memory at the time.

Auto Industry Group, the Alliance for Automotive Innovation, praised the deregulation of the exhaust pipes and declared that it digested the broader proposal to repeal the conclusion of endangerment. The American Petroleum Institute and the American Trucking Associations both applauded the expected repeal of vehicle exhaust pipes.

The American Chamber of Commerce had also previously opposed the repeal because of its destabilizing effect on the members. “Although we have not called for this proposal, we examine it and consult the members so that we can provide constructive comments to the agency,” said Marty Durbin, president of Chamber’s Energy Institute on Tuesday.

In addition to the EPA proposal, the Trump administration has also reduced efforts to follow climate change, which prompted a wheelbarrow by private companies and external institutions to save data before it is lost.

This included a limitation of public access to the national climate assessment – a report published every few years to document the human influence on the rise in temperatures – as well as to deactivate the list of natural disasters of the national and atmospheric administration totaling more than a billion dollars in damages.