Listen to the article
Democratic lawmakers have accused the Environmental Protection Agency of violating congressional directives by moving to terminate a key greenhouse gas monitoring program that has informed state-level climate policies for over a decade.
In a letter sent Monday to EPA Administrator Lee Zeldin, Rep. Sean Casten (D-Ill.) and several Democratic colleagues voiced their objection to the proposed elimination of the Greenhouse Gas Reporting Program (GHGRP), which requires large energy producers and industrial facilities to report their greenhouse gas emissions to federal authorities.
“We write to inform you that the Environmental Protection Agency is violating clear congressional directives by proposing to end the EPA’s Greenhouse Gas Reporting Program,” stated the letter, which was also signed by Reps. Donald Beyer of Virginia, Paul Tonko of New York, Mike Quigley of Illinois, and Doris Matsui of California.
The program, established during the Obama administration through congressional appropriation, has served as the federal government’s primary mechanism for collecting and verifying data on climate pollution since its inception. Under current regulations, facilities emitting more than 25,000 metric tons of carbon dioxide annually must report their emissions to the EPA. This requirement typically applies to power plants, oil refineries, metallurgical operations, and landfills.
Casten, who serves as vice chair of a House caucus focused on sustainable energy and played a key role in developing the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative (RGGI), characterized the move as part of a broader pattern of “scientific data censorship” by the Trump administration.
The Democratic lawmakers argue that terminating the program would undermine evidence-based governance at a critical moment in addressing climate change challenges. The GHGRP has particular significance for states like California and New York, which have implemented similar programs at the state level and have used the data to inform their cap-and-trade systems.
When contacted by Fox News Digital, an EPA official acknowledged receipt of the letter and indicated the agency would respond through appropriate channels. The official did not provide further details about the agency’s rationale for the proposed termination.
However, sources familiar with the matter suggest the administration views the GHGRP as an unnecessary regulatory burden that does little to improve environmental outcomes or public health. Critics of the program contend that eliminating the reporting requirements could save the private sector up to $2.4 billion in compliance costs, allowing energy producers to focus on delivering more efficient services to American consumers.
The dispute highlights the ongoing tension between the Biden administration’s climate policies and the Trump administration’s deregulatory approach. The program’s potential elimination comes amid broader efforts by the current administration to roll back climate-related regulations across federal agencies.
The GHGRP tracks not only carbon dioxide emissions but also other potent greenhouse gases including methane, nitrous oxide, hydrofluorocarbons, and sulfur hexafluoride. This comprehensive data collection has made it a valuable resource for both policymakers and researchers studying climate change impacts.
Industry groups have generally supported the proposed termination, viewing the reporting requirements as onerous and costly. Environmental advocates and many Democratic lawmakers, meanwhile, consider the program essential for transparent climate policy development and for holding major emitters accountable.
The outcome of this dispute could have significant implications for state-level climate initiatives. New York’s Department of Environmental Protection has explicitly acknowledged that its version of the GHGRP is designed to support cap-and-trade mechanisms, which create financial incentives for reducing emissions but are often criticized by opponents as functioning as de facto taxes.
As the administration continues its review of climate-related programs and regulations, this conflict over emissions data collection underscores the fundamentally different approaches to environmental policy that have characterized recent presidential administrations.
Fact Checker
Verify the accuracy of this article using The Disinformation Commission analysis and real-time sources.
10 Comments
The Greenhouse Gas Reporting Program has been an important tool for verifying emissions data and supporting climate action. Cutting it seems short-sighted, given the urgency of the climate crisis.
Precisely. Reliable emissions data is crucial for policymakers to make informed decisions and track progress on emissions reductions. Losing this program would be a major setback.
It’s concerning to see the EPA potentially scaling back this critical greenhouse gas monitoring program. Accurate emissions data is vital for informed climate policies and holding large polluters accountable.
I agree, this program has provided invaluable emissions data for over a decade. Eliminating it could seriously undermine state and federal climate efforts.
As a taxpayer, I’m concerned to hear the EPA may terminate this congressionally-mandated program that provides critical climate data. Transparency and accountability should be priorities, not cut backs.
Cutting the EPA’s Greenhouse Gas Reporting Program seems counterproductive to addressing the climate crisis. Reliable emissions data is foundational for effective policymaking and holding polluters accountable.
I agree, this program has provided critical information for over a decade. Terminating it could significantly undermine climate action efforts at all levels of government.
This proposed cut to the greenhouse gas reporting program is troubling. Accurate, verified emissions data is essential for effective climate policy and holding major polluters accountable.
I agree, the EPA should be expanding, not eliminating, programs that provide transparent emissions data to inform policymaking and the public.
The EPA’s plans to end the Greenhouse Gas Reporting Program raise serious concerns. This program has been a valuable tool for state-level climate policies – its elimination would be a major setback.