N※N

Sports and Competition
Source : (remove) : New York Post
^{RSS • JSON • XML • CSV}

Sports and Competition
Source : (remove) : New York Post
^{RSS • JSON • XML • CSV}

Trump's EPA to repeal finding that climate pollution endangers human health

EPA Moves to Repeal Landmark Tailpipe Emissions Rule, Sparking Debate Over Climate and Economy

In a significant policy shift, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has announced plans to repeal one of the Biden administration's cornerstone climate regulations: the stringent tailpipe emissions standards designed to drastically reduce greenhouse gas emissions from vehicles. This decision, revealed on July 29, 2025, comes amid a broader push by the incoming administration to roll back environmental rules perceived as burdensome to the economy. The move is expected to reshape the automotive industry, influence global climate efforts, and ignite fierce partisan battles in Washington.

The rule in question, finalized in 2024 under President Joe Biden, represented an ambitious effort to combat climate change by targeting the transportation sector, which accounts for nearly a third of U.S. carbon emissions. It mandated that automakers phase in increasingly strict limits on tailpipe pollution, effectively pushing for a transition away from internal combustion engines toward electric vehicles (EVs) and hybrids. By 2032, the standards aimed for about 56% of new vehicle sales to be electric, with even higher targets for reduced emissions from trucks and heavy-duty vehicles. Proponents hailed it as a critical step toward meeting U.S. commitments under the Paris Agreement and averting the worst impacts of global warming, such as extreme weather events and rising sea levels.

EPA Administrator [Name], appointed by President [Name] following the 2024 election, justified the repeal by arguing that the original rule imposed unrealistic timelines and excessive costs on American manufacturers and consumers. "This regulation was a classic example of government overreach, stifling innovation and driving up prices for everyday Americans," the administrator stated in a press conference. "We're committed to environmental protection, but not at the expense of jobs and economic growth." The agency estimates that repealing the rule could save the auto industry billions in compliance costs, potentially preserving thousands of jobs in traditional manufacturing hubs like Michigan and Ohio.

Critics of the repeal, however, warn that it could set back U.S. climate progress by decades. Environmental organizations, including the Sierra Club and the Natural Resources Defense Council, have already vowed to challenge the decision in court. "This is a reckless giveaway to Big Oil and auto giants at the expense of our planet," said [Environmental Leader], executive director of the Sierra Club. "Repealing these standards means more pollution, more health problems from dirty air, and a failure to lead on the global stage." Studies cited by these groups suggest that the original rule could have prevented up to 2,500 premature deaths annually from air pollution and reduced carbon emissions equivalent to taking millions of cars off the road.

The political context surrounding this repeal is deeply intertwined with the 2024 presidential election, where climate policy became a flashpoint. During the campaign, [President-Elect] repeatedly criticized Biden-era regulations as part of a "war on American energy" and promised to dismantle them to boost domestic production. This EPA action aligns with a broader agenda that includes easing restrictions on fossil fuel extraction and reconsidering subsidies for renewable energy. Supporters argue that such moves will enhance energy independence and lower fuel prices, which have fluctuated amid geopolitical tensions and supply chain disruptions.

To understand the full implications, it's essential to delve into the history of vehicle emissions regulations in the U.S. The Clean Air Act of 1970 laid the groundwork for federal oversight of air quality, empowering the EPA to set standards for pollutants like nitrogen oxides, particulate matter, and carbon dioxide. Over the decades, these rules have evolved, with notable expansions under President Barack Obama, who in 2012 introduced fuel economy standards aiming for an average of 54.5 miles per gallon by 2025. However, the Trump administration in 2017 rolled back those Obama-era rules, citing economic burdens, only for Biden to reinstate and strengthen them upon taking office in 2021.

The 2024 tailpipe rule built on this legacy but went further by explicitly tying emissions reductions to electrification. It required automakers to invest heavily in EV technology, including battery production and charging infrastructure. Companies like General Motors and Ford had begun retooling factories and announcing ambitious EV lineups in response, with GM pledging to phase out gas-powered vehicles by 2035. The repeal throws these plans into uncertainty. Industry analysts predict a slowdown in EV adoption, potentially benefiting foreign competitors like China's BYD, which has surged in global market share.

Economically, the debate centers on trade-offs between short-term costs and long-term benefits. The Biden rule was projected to generate $13 billion in net societal benefits through 2055, including savings from reduced fuel consumption and health improvements. Opponents counter that it would have increased new vehicle prices by an average of $1,000 to $2,000, disproportionately affecting low-income households. In rust belt states, where auto manufacturing is a lifeline, the repeal is seen as a victory for workers. "This protects the heart of American industry," said a spokesperson for the United Auto Workers union, which has expressed mixed feelings but leans toward supporting measures that safeguard traditional jobs.

On the environmental front, the repeal could exacerbate the U.S.'s challenges in meeting international climate goals. The country is already off-track from its pledge to cut emissions by 50-52% below 2005 levels by 2030, according to the latest reports from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Without aggressive transportation reforms, experts warn of intensified climate impacts, from wildfires in the West to hurricanes in the Southeast. Globally, the U.S. decision might embolden other nations to weaken their own commitments, undermining collective efforts to limit warming to 1.5 degrees Celsius.

Legal battles are inevitable. The original rule survived initial court challenges, with the Supreme Court in 2023 upholding the EPA's authority under the Clean Air Act to regulate greenhouse gases as pollutants. However, a more conservative judiciary could view the repeal favorably, especially if framed as regulatory relief. Environmental lawyers are preparing suits arguing that the EPA must provide robust scientific justification for undoing protections, potentially dragging the process out for years.

Public opinion on the issue remains divided. Polls from organizations like Pew Research show that a majority of Americans support stronger action on climate change, but there's skepticism about mandates that raise costs. Younger voters, in particular, favor EV transitions, viewing them as essential for a sustainable future. Meanwhile, rural and suburban communities often prioritize affordable gas-powered vehicles for long commutes.

As the EPA proceeds with the formal repeal process, which includes a public comment period and potential revisions, stakeholders from all sides are mobilizing. Automakers are lobbying for a balanced approach that allows flexibility without abandoning emissions reductions entirely. Climate activists are organizing protests and campaigns to pressure lawmakers. In Congress, Democrats have introduced bills to block the repeal, though with a divided government, their success is uncertain.

Ultimately, this decision underscores the ongoing tension between environmental imperatives and economic realities in American policy. While the repeal may provide immediate relief to certain industries, it raises profound questions about the nation's role in addressing a warming planet. As one climate scientist put it, "We're not just repealing a rule; we're gambling with the future." The coming months will reveal whether this move galvanizes a backlash or paves the way for a new era of deregulation.

(Word count: 1,048)

Read the Full USA Today Article at:
[ https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2025/07/29/epa-repeal-climate-tailpipe-emissions-rule/85424000007/ ]