EPA Proposes End to Greenhouse Gas Emissions Reporting

Key Takeaways

EPA Administrator Lee Zeldin proposed ending the Greenhouse Gas Reporting Program affecting over 8,000 U.S. facilities.
The program has contributed to a 20% reduction in emissions since its inception in 2010, according to the Associated Press.
Opponents argue removing the program will hinder accountability for polluters and worsen public health outcomes.

Proposed Rule to End Greenhouse Gas Reporting Program

Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Administrator Lee Zeldin announced on Friday a proposal to terminate the Greenhouse Gas Reporting Program. This program mandates over 8,000 facilities and suppliers in the U.S. to submit annual reports on their greenhouse gas emissions. Zeldin argued that the program is non-essential, noting that it incurs significant costs for American businesses and contributes to rising living expenses, adversely impacting communities.

The EPA clarified that the program is not required by the Clean Air Act and is not directly linked to any current regulatory actions. Kate Wright, Executive Director of Climate Mayors, condemned the proposed rule, emphasizing that tracking emissions is crucial for local governments to assess how industrial activities affect public health.

The Greenhouse Gas Reporting Program was funded by Congress in 2008 and has seen data collection start in 2010. Facilities such as refineries, power plants, and landfills reported a significant 20% reduction in emissions since the rule’s implementation. This decline accounts for more than three-quarters of the total reduction in U.S. greenhouse gas emissions since 2010.

In March, Zeldin signified that the EPA was reconsidering this program alongside other emissions regulations in line with President Donald Trump’s “Unleashing American Energy” executive order. This order mandates federal reviews of existing regulations that may place undue burdens on domestic energy resource development. Additionally, a July proposal aimed to rescind a 2009 finding that recognized greenhouse gas emissions as a danger to public health, thereby underpinning federal regulation of emissions from stationary sources.

The Environmental Defense Fund (EDF) has challenged the EPA’s decision, particularly its temporary suspension of the reporting program’s portal and the extended reporting deadline without incorporating public input. Edwin LaMair, a senior attorney at EDF, criticized the proposal to abolish the reporting program, arguing that ignorance of pollution will not mitigate the climate challenge; rather, it will complicate and escalate the costs of addressing it.

Zeldin defended the proposal by labeling the reporting program as unnecessary bureaucratic red tape that does not enhance air quality. Conversely, Wright noted that air pollution is responsible for approximately 135,000 fatalities annually in the U.S. She insisted that cities rely on the data from the reporting program to construct strategies for improving air quality and safeguarding public health.

David Doniger, senior strategist at the Natural Resources Defense Council, highlighted the widespread reliance on the data provided by the program for public, state, and local policymakers, as well as industries themselves. He cautioned that eliminating this program is a disingenuous attempt to obscure accountability for polluters, thereby hindering community efforts to address environmental issues effectively.

The content above is a summary. For more details, see the source article.