Propublica is a nonprofit newsroom that investigates power abuse. Sign up and receive the biggest story as soon as it’s published.
The Environmental Protection Agency plans to eliminate long-standing requirements for polluters to collect and report heat-confined gas emissions that cause climate change. The move, ordered by Trump’s appointees, will affect thousands of industrial facilities across the country, including oil refineries, power plants, coal mines, and other things that make petrochemicals, cement, glass, iron and steel, according to documents reviewed by Propublica.
The Greenhouse Gas Reporting Program documents the amount of carbon dioxide, methane and other climate-temperature gases released at individual facilities. Publicly available data guides policy decisions and constitute a significant portion of the information governments submit to international organisations tallying global greenhouse gas pollution. Loss of data makes it difficult for an economic sector or factories to know how much climate gas is being emitted, and track these emissions over time. This granularity allows for accountability, experts say. The government cannot control the country’s emissions without knowing where they are coming from.
“This reduces the details and accuracy of reporting of greenhouse gas emissions, which most countries are trying to improve their reporting,” said Michael Gillenwater, executive director of the Institute for Greenhouse Gas Management. “This also makes it difficult for climate policies to occur in the future.”
The program has collected emissions data since at least 2010. Approximately 8,000 facilities report their emissions to the program annually. EPA officials have asked program staff to draft rules that will significantly reduce data collection. Under the new regulations, its reporting requirements apply only to approximately 2,300 facilities in certain sectors of the oil and gas industry.
Climate experts were shocked and disappointed at the obvious decision to stop collecting most information about our country’s greenhouse gas emissions. Edward Maybach, a professor at George Mason University, said: “How can we manage this incredible threat to America’s well-being and human happiness if we don’t actually monitor what we’re doing to make the problem worse?”
The EPA did not address any questions from Propublica about its greenhouse gas reporting program. Instead, the agency provided an email confirming the Trump administration’s commitment to “clean the air, land and water for all Americans.”
The agency announced last month that it was “reviewing” its greenhouse gas reporting program. In a little-known press release issued on March 12, when the EPA sent out 24 breaking news celebrating “the most consequential deregulation day in US history,” EPA administrator Lee Zeldin described the reporting program as a “burden.” Zeldin also argued that the program is “the ability to cost American businesses, produce millions of dollars, hurt small businesses, and achieve American dreams.”
Project 2025, the far-right blueprint of Trump’s presidency, proposed a severe expansion of the greenhouse gas reporting program, also described it as the burden it placed on small businesses.
In contrast, climate experts say the EPA reporting program, which tallies 85% to 90% of all US greenhouse gas emissions, is a boon for businesses in many ways. “Many companies rely on this data and use it in their annual sustainability reports,” said Edwin Lamair, an attorney for the Environmental Defense Fund. Companies also use data to show environmental progress to shareholders and meet international reporting requirements. “If a program stops, all that valuable data is stopped from being generated,” says Lamair.
That data loss could have a devastating impact on the world’s ability to curb the disastrous effects of a warming climate, according to Andrew Wright, an energy aide for international affairs for the Biden administration. Light noted that international collaboration is required to address dangerous and costly extreme weather events, and that if data fails to collect, it could give other countries an excuse to abandon their own reports.
“Unless you get the cooperation of developing countries, you won’t be able to reach the type of temperature stabilization needed to protect Americans from the worst climate impacts,” Wright said. “If the US does not measure and report our own emissions, how can we expect China, India, Indonesia and other major growth-developing countries to do the same in the world?”
In the first few months, the Trump administration has shown support for the reporting programme. The EPA left the portal, and businesses shared data for several weeks, pushing back the emissions reporting deadline in March. Then, last Friday, a meeting with several program staff raised further questions about the fate of future data collection, according to sources who were explained at the meeting and asked not to name them for fear of retaliation.
At the meeting, Abigale Tardif, the EPA’s primary assistant assistant to the Aviation and Radiation Department, directed staff to draft rules to eliminate reporting requirements for 40 of the 41 sectors that currently require data to be submitted to the program. Tardif did not respond to inquiries from Propublica about this story. Political appointee Aaron Schbo attends the meeting and is waiting for confirmation as an assistant manager in the office, but refuses to answer questions and directs reporters to the EPA communications staff.
What reality television is wrong about criminal investigations. (Spoilers: Lots of them.)
Before joining the EPA, Tardif and Szabo worked as lobbyists. Szabo represented the American Chemical Council and Duke Energy among other companies and trade groups, while Tardif worked for the Marathon Petroleum and American Fuel and Petrochemical Manufacturers Association.
Some climate advocates noted that the industry is expected to benefit from eliminating greenhouse gas reporting requirements. “This is a giveaway to emitters and we just remove them from the hook completely,” said Rachel Critos, senior policy director for the Climate and Energy Program for the Alliance of Scientists.
Cletos chose to stop the emissions record like Ostritch. “The climate crisis is not so realistic by not tracking data,” she said. “This is just putting your head in the sand.”
