EPA chief visits Indiana to announce repeal of landmark climate change policy
How did your country report this? Share your view in the comments.
Diverging Reports Breakdown
EPA chief visits Indiana to announce repeal of landmark climate change policy
The EPA is proposing to repeal a rule that allowed it to regulate greenhouse gas emissions. Environmentalists say the move is a direct assault on clean air protections. The state of Indiana has long opposed the rule, saying it’s not supported by science. The rule was finalized in 2009 after a Supreme Court ruling on the issue.. The decision to repeal the rule was announced at a press conference with Indiana Gov. Mike Braun. The move is the latest in a series of steps the Obama administration has taken to address climate change in the U.S. and around the world, including an executive order and a new executive order from the White House on climate change and the State of the Union. The White House says the decision is not related to climate change, but to the regulation of greenhouse gases in cars and other vehicles. It says the rule is needed to ensure the safety of the nation’s roads, bridges, buildings and other infrastructure. The EPA says it will continue to investigate the rule’s impact on public health and safety.
Rescinding the pivotal 2009 air pollution guidance would eliminate greenhouse gas standards and regulations, EPA administrator Lee Zeldin said at a press conference attended by Gov. Mike Braun and other state and federal officials.
“If finalized, today’s announcement would amount to the largest regulatory action in the history of the United States,” Zeldin said.
Environmental advocates responded, saying the devastating move is a direct assault on clean air protections, and will exacerbate climate change, endanger public health and even slow the economy.
Braun, who formerly operated an automotive parts company now embroiled in a Clean Air Act legal battle, said he was “tickled pink” the EPA chose to partner with Indiana — a state whose auto manufacturing industry could benefit from emission deregulation — in announcing the proposal.
Zeldin claimed the original finding that allowed the EPA to regulate greenhouse gasses relied “on assumptions that ended up not being true. They ended up making predictions about the science that many respects were not just pessimistic, they turned out not to be true.”
Environmental and public health advocates don’t agree. In a statement, the Sierra Club said the effort to repeal was the “most direct assault thus far on the movement to mitigate the climate crisis.”
“The vast majority of scientists will disagree with him,” said Meredith Hankins, an attorney at the Natural Resources Defense Council. “Science has gotten stronger at demonstrating the harmful effects from greenhouse gases.”
Suzanne Jawaroski, the Indiana Secretary of Energy & Natural Resources, said Indiana’s model of balancing economy and emissions could now scale nationally. She didn’t mention Indiana ranks below all other states for its natural environment, according to a US News report.
What is the endangerment finding?
Greenhouse gases weren’t always classified as air pollutants under the Clean Air Act.
Concerns about motor vehicles emissions rising throughout the early 2000s led to a petition where 19 organizations called upon the EPA to regulate greenhouse gas emissions. The EPA rejected the petition, arguing the gases weren’t considered air pollutants subject to the Clean Air Act.
Litigation ensued. And in 2007, the Supreme Court categorized greenhouse gases as “without a doubt” air pollutants in a ruling leading to the endangerment finding.
In 2009, the finding gave the EPA authority to regulate six greenhouse gases — including carbon dioxide, methane and nitrous oxide — as threats to human health. That move contributed to regulations on emissions from cars, trucks, power plants and the oil and gas industry.
The agency considered “the full weight of scientific evidence” when finalizing the finding under the Clean Air Act, and at the time, the EPA found the greenhouse gasses were dangerous to both public health and welfare for current and future generations.
Then-EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson cited assessments from the U.S. Global Climate Research Program, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change and the National Research Council as supporting evidence of the endangerment finding.
“This long-overdue finding cements 2009’s place in history as the year when the United States Government began seriously addressing the challenge of greenhouse gas pollution and seizing the opportunity of clean-energy reform,” Jackson said in a 2009 statement. “In less than 11 months, we have done more to promote clean energy and prevent climate change than happened in the last eight years.”
Indiana’s push to stop the endangerment finding
The state of Indiana has long opposed the endangerment finding. Before it was finalized in 2009, the state submitted comments to the EPA expressing a disagreement over the quality of the science cited by the agency.
The endangerment finding proposal “is not supported by sound science,” wrote Thomas Easterly, then-head of IDEM. The state expressed disbelief that human-caused greenhouse gas emissions have any direct impact on public health or welfare.
After pointing to studies outlining the Earth’s history of temperature fluctuation, the report argued that a clear link between climate change and greenhouse gas emissions hadn’t yet been established. The state requested the EPA conduct more research before making a finding that could result in “cumbersome and costly regulatory actions” — but ultimately, the endangerment finding was finalized later that year.
Since 2009, climate change research has proliferated. NASA has determined that despite the Earth’s history of climatic changes, the current rate of warming is unprecedented when compared to 10,000 years of the planet’s history.
But Indiana hasn’t stopped pushing for the deregulation of greenhouse gas emissions.
IDEM commissioner Clint Woods assisted in the completion of a chapter of The Heritage Foundation’s Project 2025 — a conservative vision for President Trump’s second term. The chapter, which focused on the EPA, recommended an “update the 2009 endangerment finding.”
In March, the Trump administration initiated a formal reconsideration of the endangerment finding, and this month, IDEM participated in a meeting with the federal Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs to discuss Indiana’s perspective.
“IDEM did not have access to the underlying proposal but shared previous State of Indiana comments on related issues, including on the ‘2009 Endangerment Finding,'” wrote Allen Carter, a spokesperson for IDEM.
On July 25, State Rep. Beau Baird, R-Greencastle, invited Zeldin to visit Indiana to tour conservation sites and discuss environmental issues. Just four days later, Zeldin was in Indianapolis to announce a proposal to repeal the finding.
Repeal provides economic benefits, some say
Zeldin’s tenure as EPA’s administrator has been marked by deregulation in the name of economic progress. Braun and Indiana Attorney General Todd Rokita both commended the administrator’s efforts to align the agency with President Trump’s efforts in the White House.
The Indiana Manufacturers Association also made a statement saying this will remove burdens that hindered economic growth. Ashton Eller, vice president of governmental affairs at IMA, wrote that burdensome regulatory actions cost jobs, drive up energy prices and are counterproductive.
“This is a significant victory for manufacturers and other large stationary sources that face burdensome regulations and increased costs under the previous framework,” Eller added.
Environmental advocates say it is a step backward
Several environmental organizations and Democrat lawmakers have expressed frustration with the EPA’s proposal to rescind the endangerment finding.
Rep. Carey Hamilton, D-Indianapolis, said repealing the rule is short-sighted from not only a human health perspective, but an economic one, too.
“China is eating our lunch when it comes to clean energy manufacturing,” Hamilton told IndyStar. “Indiana — thanks to the Inflation Reduction Act — has significant investments going into EV battery and solar panel manufacturing.”
She is concerned the proposal to rollback the endangerment finding threatens these investments and weakens Indiana’s foothold in renewables as the rest of the global economy is moving away from fossil fuels.
Rep. Sue Errington, D-Muncie, the ranking minority member of the House Environmental Affair Committee, said summers in Indiana are already “hotter, longer and more dangerous than they were a decade ago.” Eliminating greenhouse gas standards, she said, will accelerate climate change and harm public health.
“Environmental protections, long supported on a bipartisan basis, are now being used as a political tool,” Errington said. “Hoosiers deserve better than short-term political gain at the expense of our land, water and health.”
IndyStar’s environmental reporting project is made possible through the generous support of the nonprofit Nina Mason Pulliam Charitable Trust.
Karl Schneider is an IndyStar environment reporter. You can reach him at karl.schneider@indystar.com. Follow him on BlueSky @karlstartswithk.bsky.social or X @karlstartswithk.
Sophie Hartley is an IndyStar environment reporter. You can reach her at sophie.hartley@indystar.com or on X at @sophienhartley.