EPA Administrator Lee Zeldin embraced a community of climate change opponents in a speech Wednesday, emphasizing how scientific outliers have made inroads with the Trump administration.
Zeldin acknowledged in his opening remarks at the Heartland Institute conference in Washington that he was the first EPA head to attend the annual gathering, long rejected by Democratic and Republican administrations alike for pushing the view that greenhouse gas emissions are beneficial.
Zeldin said, “For those who wanted to criticize my appearance in front of this group, it really shows the frustration of how many walls of this last line of defense have collapsed.”
Greenhouse gases produced primarily from burning fossil fuels have warmed the planet by 1.4 degrees Celsius since the Industrial Revolution began, according to the World Meteorological Organization, which determined that the past 11 years have been the hottest in recorded history. According to the UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, rising temperatures have intensified extreme weather and disasters such as floods and wildfires, turbocharged deadly heat waves and increased costs through deaths, declining agricultural productivity, health illnesses and property damage.
Attendees at the Heartland annual conference disagreed with most, if not all, of the findings. Instead he advocated for the role of carbon dioxide in promoting plant growth, which he argues has been ignored by mainstream climate science and previous US administrations. Researchers say the vast body of science shows that the negative consequences of climate pollution far outweigh the potential benefits.
Zeldin, who was tapped last week as a possible replacement for former Attorney General Pam Bondi after she was fired by Trump, was at odds when she talked about the EPA’s recent move to rescind its 2009 ruling that greenhouse gases endanger public health by contributing to climate change.
The finding of the so-called threat undermined all Clean Air Act rules aimed at curbing planet-warming emissions. Removing it would put all of them in legal trouble.
James Taylor, president of the Heartland Institute, said the presence of the US government’s top environmental official marks a significant change in Republicans’ previous approach to climate change. He recalled “the tough battles with people who would have been our natural allies”, emphasizing that former President George W. Bush elevated officials who did not challenge the science that showed greenhouse gases were warming the planet.
He said that has changed with Zeldin, who has led the Trump administration’s charge in the long-running culture war around climate change.
Taylor told the audience, “We’re seeing respect for the science — not that what pollsters say will resonate with suburban women or whatever polling group they’re looking at.” “We also have the top environmental official in the administration – EPA Administrator Lee Zeldin – who is showing support, who is here to talk with us and tell the truth. How times have changed.”
Zeldin’s comments Wednesday were tantamount to an endorsement of the conference’s thesis that increasing industrial emissions would benefit humans and the environment, not harm them. They said the threat finding was based on the most pessimistic estimates across broad scenarios of human-driven climate disruption. He said the elite have exaggerated even the worst situations to maximize their power.
“There will be a group that will decide exactly which model is the chosen model, which methodology is the superior methodology,” Zeldin said. “And if all of you in this room, if any of you dare to challenge any of these people, shame on you.”
The message was a vindication of the conference’s longtime attendees, who for years had been trying to influence Washington policy from the outside.
James Carlson, who recently retired from the Institute for Defense Analyses, said it was a “significant” moment for the nation’s top environment official to defy critics and address the annual event.
“It means the administration wants to do what’s best for the country. It doesn’t just want to remain in the political arena,” he said.
The EPA’s move to rescind the endangerment finding comes at the center of a tension between climate science and Trump’s pledge to cut regulations, which he has said would boost the economy. The EPA claimed that when it rescinded the findings the move applied only to the rules for motor vehicles – which were undone as part of the same regulatory package. But on Wednesday Zeldin made clear that the action could also be applied to other sources of climate pollution.
He accused the Obama administration of releasing findings “to be able to hoard more electricity for itself”, starting with “light, medium and heavy vehicles” and extending to “stationary sources and oil and gas and airplanes”. The EPA rejected the findings based solely on legal arguments – including that the Clean Air Act does not permit regulation of global pollutants such as greenhouse gases – rather than on claims that would have sought to discredit climate science.
Zeldin spoke just before taking the stage at a panel to discuss a controversial Energy Department report on climate science that was launched last year to support repeal of the EPA’s endangerment finding. The paper, which was written by five climate protesters who were handpicked by Energy Secretary Chris Wright, was heavily cited before last year’s proposed threat repeal. last rollback. Lawyers warned that citing it could create legal vulnerabilities as the Trump administration defends the action in court.
States and environmental organizations have already filed legal challenges to the repeal. If Zeldin is confirmed to become bondi’s successor He could lead the Justice Department as it defends the threat findings.
Zeldin remained silent Wednesday on reports that he was being considered for attorney general. But he pledged to follow the letter of the law as EPA administrator and “will not fill the void by creatively giving myself powers that do not exist in the law.”
He said, “The Supreme Court – in my opinion, absolutely right – would say that the EPA should not be regulating trillions of dollars without a vote in Congress.”
