Trump administration officials have claimed that they are saving Americans over $1.3 trillion by ending regulation of greenhouse gas emissions from cars and trucks. But the figure does not incorporate any benefits of the emissions standards. By one of the Environmental Protection Agency’s own calculations, getting rid of the standards could cost billions.
As part of our series on Project 2025, we look at some instances where President Donald Trump and Project 2025 agree on climate change and fossil fuels — beginning with the rollback of climate change policies.
The Environmental Protection Agency is holding public hearings this week on its effort to undo the legal foundation for its regulation of greenhouse gases, the heat-trapping gases that cause climate change. In a major policy shift announced in late July, the Trump administration EPA said it would rescind the so-called “endangerment finding,” which allows the agency to regulate such emissions, arguing that legal and scientific developments justify a reconsideration.
We reviewed what each of President-elect Donald Trump’s presumptive nominees to lead the Environmental Protection Agency, the Department of the Interior and the Department of Energy have said about climate change and the environment.
President Donald Trump inaccurately tweeted that his fuel efficiency plan would reduce the cost of cars “by more than $3000” and make them “substantially safer.” Even going by his administration’s analysis — which many experts doubt — he inflated the savings and is wrong about car safety.
In a July 8 speech dedicated to the environment, President Donald Trump made a series of misleading or false statements as he played up the U.S.’s environmental achievements, many of which predate his time as commander-in-chief.
Joe Biden distorted the facts when he asserted that the auto industry thought the Obama administration’s fuel standards were “a good idea” and that automakers “didn’t even agree” with President Donald Trump’s proposal to roll them back.
We unpack the complicated and contentious world of fuel economy standards, and explain why some experts aren’t buying some of the Trump administration’s arguments for why stricter Obama-era standards should be loosened.
In recent interviews, Environmental Protection Agency Administrator Scott Pruitt made two false claims about his agency’s record on removing toxic sites from the Superfund National Priorities List.
Environmental Protection Agency head Scott Pruitt criticized former President Barack Obama for leaving “us with more Superfund sites than when he came in.” This is misleading for multiple reasons.