EPA Halts Climate Pollution Tracking: Who Will Take Over?
▼ Summary
– The EPA will stop requiring major polluters to report greenhouse gas emissions, eliminating a key US tool for tracking emissions and forming climate policy.
– Experts and former EPA officials warn this data collection system cannot be fully replaced, though NGOs may partially fill the gap over time.
– The Greenhouse Gas Reporting Program (GHGRP) has been the backbone of US air quality reporting for 15 years, collecting emissions data from major industrial sources.
– The Trump administration is eliminating the program to reduce regulatory costs, claiming it is bureaucratic red tape that doesn’t improve air quality.
– This data is crucial for federal, international, and local climate policies, helping track emissions reductions and meet UN climate agreement obligations.
The recent decision by the Environmental Protection Agency to discontinue its collection of greenhouse gas emissions data from major industrial sources marks a significant shift in how the United States monitors climate pollution. This move effectively dismantles a foundational system that for fifteen years has supplied essential information for shaping both national and international environmental strategies. Experts and advocacy groups express deep concern that alternative efforts will struggle to fully compensate for the loss of this comprehensive federal program.
Joseph Goffman, who previously served as assistant administrator for the EPA’s Office of Air and Radiation, remarked, “I don’t believe any substitute can completely fill the void left by this program. We might come close to replicating it, but that will require considerable time and resources.”
Under the Clean Air Act, states are obligated to gather pollution data and submit it to federal authorities. For over a decade, the EPA supplemented this with the Greenhouse Gas Reporting Program (GHGRP), which required facilities such as power plants, oil refineries, and chemical manufacturers to disclose their emissions of carbon dioxide, methane, and other greenhouse gases if they exceeded specific thresholds. Kevin Gurney, an atmospheric science professor at Northern Arizona University, emphasized that the GHGRP has functioned as the central framework for air quality reporting across the nation.
This program is among several environmental data initiatives targeted by the current administration. Earlier this year, the EPA initiated a review of the GHGRP, and by September, it had proposed a rule to remove reporting mandates for major emitters. Agency officials justified the rollback by citing an estimated $2.4 billion in regulatory savings and describing the program as unnecessary bureaucracy that fails to enhance air quality.
Goffman warned that ending the GHGRP severely undercuts the government’s ability to design effective climate policies. “Without this data, it becomes incredibly difficult to evaluate new emission-reduction technologies or to determine which industries are successfully cutting their carbon footprint and which are lagging behind,” he explained.
Publicly accessible data from the GHGRP has historically supported a wide array of climate actions. It helps identify which economic sectors produce specific types of emissions, enabling targeted strategies to reduce them. Internationally, this data has been critical for meeting U.S. commitments under the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change, which provides the foundation for the Paris Agreement. Although the United States has withdrawn from the Paris Agreement, it remains a participant in the UNFCCC. At state and local levels, GHGRP data assists policymakers in assessing regional pollution, setting emissions targets, and tracking decarbonization progress, making its absence a challenge for climate governance at every level.
(Source: Wired)
