Embracing Fossil Fuels: A Deregulation Strategy for Energy Independence
The Trump administration has significantly altered the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) during its first year, implementing cuts to federal limits on air and water pollution while promoting fossil fuels. This shift stands in stark contrast to the agency’s foundational mission of safeguarding human health and the environment.
While the administration claims these actions will “unleash” the American economy, environmentalists warn that this abrupt pivot threatens to reverse years of progress on climate-friendly initiatives, potentially making them difficult or impossible to restore.
Historian Douglas Brinkley remarked, “It just constantly wants to pat the fossil fuel business on the back and turn back the clock to a pre-Richard Nixon era,” referring to the time before the EPA was established.
Under the leadership of former New York congressman Zeldin, often referred to as “Trump’s EPA,” the agency has seen a flurry of changes. Zeldin proposed overturning the landmark finding that climate change poses a threat to human health and pledged to roll back numerous environmental regulations, dubbing it “the greatest day of deregulation our nation has seen.” He also froze billions of dollars earmarked for clean energy initiatives and disrupted agency research.
Zeldin contends that the EPA can simultaneously protect the environment and foster economic growth. He introduced “five pillars” to guide the agency’s work, four of which focused on economic objectives, including energy dominance—a term used to advocate for increased fossil fuel production—and bolstering the auto industry.
Despite his moderate Republican background on some environmental issues, Zeldin has expressed skepticism about the attainability of many federal and state climate goals, arguing that they come at a significant economic cost. “We should not be causing … extreme economic pain for an individual or a family,” he stated at EPA headquarters in early December.
However, scientists and experts caution that the EPA’s new direction could jeopardize public health, leading to increased pollutants in the environment, including mercury, lead, and fine particulate matter that can harm lung health. They also warn that higher greenhouse gas emissions will exacerbate atmospheric warming, resulting in more frequent and severe extreme weather events.
Christine Todd Whitman, a former EPA administrator under President George W. Bush, expressed her dismay at Zeldin’s efforts to dismantle air and water protections. “It’s tragic for our country. I worry about my grandchildren, of which I have seven. I worry about what their future is going to be if they don’t have clean air, if they don’t have clean water to drink,” she lamented.
The history behind EPA
The EPA was established in 1970 under Nixon in response to severe pollution issues, with cities suffering from smog and rivers contaminated by industrial waste. The agency has historically fluctuated in its aggressiveness depending on the presidential administration. For instance, the Biden administration focused on renewable energy and stricter emissions regulations, which industry groups criticized as overly burdensome.
“While the Biden EPA repeatedly attempted to usurp the U.S. Constitution and the rule of law to impose its ‘Green New Scam,’ the Trump EPA is laser-focused on achieving results for the American people while operating within the limits of the laws passed by Congress,” stated EPA spokeswoman Brigit Hirsch.
Zeldin’s list of targets is long
Zeldin has announced plans to relax soot pollution regulations, loosen restrictions on harmful refrigerants, limit wetlands protections, and weaken gas mileage standards. Additionally, he aims to exempt polluting industries from federal emissions-reduction requirements.
Much of the EPA’s new direction aligns with Project 2025, a conservative roadmap advocating for reduced staffing and regulatory rollbacks. Diana Furchtgott-Roth, director of the Heritage Foundation’s Center for Energy, Climate, and Environment, stated, “A lot of the regulations that were put on during the Biden administration were more harmful and restrictive than in any other period.”
In contrast, Chris Frey, an EPA official under Biden, emphasized that the regulations Zeldin targets “offered benefits of avoided premature deaths, of avoided chronic illness.”
Matthew Tejada, a former EPA official under both Trump and Biden, remarked on the revamped EPA, stating, “I think it would be hard for them to make it any clearer to polluters in this country that they can go on about their business and not worry about EPA getting in their way.”
Zeldin has also reduced EPA staffing by about 20%, bringing it to levels not seen since the mid-1980s. Justin Chen, president of the EPA’s largest union, called these cuts “devastating,” highlighting the dismantling of research and development offices and the firing of dissenting employees.
Relaxed enforcement and cutting staff
Many of Zeldin’s changes have yet to take effect, as proposing new rules and finalizing rollbacks is a lengthy process. However, the administration has swiftly cut grants and relaxed enforcement measures. According to the nonprofit Environmental Integrity Project, the number of new civil environmental actions is about one-fifth of what it was during the first eight months of the Biden administration.
“You can effectively do a lot of deregulation if you just don’t do enforcement,” noted Leif Fredrickson, a visiting assistant professor of history at the University of Montana.
Hirsch countered that the number of legal filings isn’t the best measure of enforcement, as they require external work and can burden staff with legal agreements. She asserted that the EPA is “focused on efficiently resolving violations and achieving compliance as quickly as possible.”
The cuts have particularly impacted climate change programs and environmental justice initiatives, which were priorities under Biden. Zeldin has dismissed staff and canceled billions in grants for projects related to diversity, equity, and inclusion, a target of the Trump administration. He also halted a $20 billion “green bank” established under Biden’s climate law, arguing it was a scheme to funnel money to Democrat-aligned organizations, a claim a federal judge rejected.
Pat Parenteau, an environmental law expert, expressed little optimism for addressing what he termed “the two most awful crises in the 21st century”—biodiversity loss and climate disruption. “I don’t see any hope for either one,” he lamented. “I really don’t. And I’ll be long gone, but I think the world is in just for absolute catastrophe.”
Photo: The Kyger Creek Power Plant, a coal-fired power plant, near Cheshire, Ohio. (AP Photo/Joshua A. Bickel, File)
___
The Associated Press receives support from the Walton Family Foundation for coverage of water and environmental policy. The AP is solely responsible for all content. For all of AP’s environmental coverage, visit https://apnews.com/hub/climate-and-environment
Copyright 2026 Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.
The Trump administration has significantly altered the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) during its first year, implementing cuts to federal limits on air and water pollution while promoting fossil fuels. This shift stands in stark contrast to the agency’s foundational mission of safeguarding human health and the environment.
While the administration claims these actions will “unleash” the American economy, environmentalists warn that this abrupt pivot threatens to reverse years of progress on climate-friendly initiatives, potentially making them difficult or impossible to restore.
Historian Douglas Brinkley remarked, “It just constantly wants to pat the fossil fuel business on the back and turn back the clock to a pre-Richard Nixon era,” referring to the time before the EPA was established.
Under the leadership of former New York congressman Zeldin, often referred to as “Trump’s EPA,” the agency has seen a flurry of changes. Zeldin proposed overturning the landmark finding that climate change poses a threat to human health and pledged to roll back numerous environmental regulations, dubbing it “the greatest day of deregulation our nation has seen.” He also froze billions of dollars earmarked for clean energy initiatives and disrupted agency research.
Zeldin contends that the EPA can simultaneously protect the environment and foster economic growth. He introduced “five pillars” to guide the agency’s work, four of which focused on economic objectives, including energy dominance—a term used to advocate for increased fossil fuel production—and bolstering the auto industry.
Despite his moderate Republican background on some environmental issues, Zeldin has expressed skepticism about the attainability of many federal and state climate goals, arguing that they come at a significant economic cost. “We should not be causing … extreme economic pain for an individual or a family,” he stated at EPA headquarters in early December.
However, scientists and experts caution that the EPA’s new direction could jeopardize public health, leading to increased pollutants in the environment, including mercury, lead, and fine particulate matter that can harm lung health. They also warn that higher greenhouse gas emissions will exacerbate atmospheric warming, resulting in more frequent and severe extreme weather events.
Christine Todd Whitman, a former EPA administrator under President George W. Bush, expressed her dismay at Zeldin’s efforts to dismantle air and water protections. “It’s tragic for our country. I worry about my grandchildren, of which I have seven. I worry about what their future is going to be if they don’t have clean air, if they don’t have clean water to drink,” she lamented.
The history behind EPA
The EPA was established in 1970 under Nixon in response to severe pollution issues, with cities suffering from smog and rivers contaminated by industrial waste. The agency has historically fluctuated in its aggressiveness depending on the presidential administration. For instance, the Biden administration focused on renewable energy and stricter emissions regulations, which industry groups criticized as overly burdensome.
“While the Biden EPA repeatedly attempted to usurp the U.S. Constitution and the rule of law to impose its ‘Green New Scam,’ the Trump EPA is laser-focused on achieving results for the American people while operating within the limits of the laws passed by Congress,” stated EPA spokeswoman Brigit Hirsch.
Zeldin’s list of targets is long
Zeldin has announced plans to relax soot pollution regulations, loosen restrictions on harmful refrigerants, limit wetlands protections, and weaken gas mileage standards. Additionally, he aims to exempt polluting industries from federal emissions-reduction requirements.
Much of the EPA’s new direction aligns with Project 2025, a conservative roadmap advocating for reduced staffing and regulatory rollbacks. Diana Furchtgott-Roth, director of the Heritage Foundation’s Center for Energy, Climate, and Environment, stated, “A lot of the regulations that were put on during the Biden administration were more harmful and restrictive than in any other period.”
In contrast, Chris Frey, an EPA official under Biden, emphasized that the regulations Zeldin targets “offered benefits of avoided premature deaths, of avoided chronic illness.”
Matthew Tejada, a former EPA official under both Trump and Biden, remarked on the revamped EPA, stating, “I think it would be hard for them to make it any clearer to polluters in this country that they can go on about their business and not worry about EPA getting in their way.”
Zeldin has also reduced EPA staffing by about 20%, bringing it to levels not seen since the mid-1980s. Justin Chen, president of the EPA’s largest union, called these cuts “devastating,” highlighting the dismantling of research and development offices and the firing of dissenting employees.
Relaxed enforcement and cutting staff
Many of Zeldin’s changes have yet to take effect, as proposing new rules and finalizing rollbacks is a lengthy process. However, the administration has swiftly cut grants and relaxed enforcement measures. According to the nonprofit Environmental Integrity Project, the number of new civil environmental actions is about one-fifth of what it was during the first eight months of the Biden administration.
“You can effectively do a lot of deregulation if you just don’t do enforcement,” noted Leif Fredrickson, a visiting assistant professor of history at the University of Montana.
Hirsch countered that the number of legal filings isn’t the best measure of enforcement, as they require external work and can burden staff with legal agreements. She asserted that the EPA is “focused on efficiently resolving violations and achieving compliance as quickly as possible.”
The cuts have particularly impacted climate change programs and environmental justice initiatives, which were priorities under Biden. Zeldin has dismissed staff and canceled billions in grants for projects related to diversity, equity, and inclusion, a target of the Trump administration. He also halted a $20 billion “green bank” established under Biden’s climate law, arguing it was a scheme to funnel money to Democrat-aligned organizations, a claim a federal judge rejected.
Pat Parenteau, an environmental law expert, expressed little optimism for addressing what he termed “the two most awful crises in the 21st century”—biodiversity loss and climate disruption. “I don’t see any hope for either one,” he lamented. “I really don’t. And I’ll be long gone, but I think the world is in just for absolute catastrophe.”
Photo: The Kyger Creek Power Plant, a coal-fired power plant, near Cheshire, Ohio. (AP Photo/Joshua A. Bickel, File)
___
The Associated Press receives support from the Walton Family Foundation for coverage of water and environmental policy. The AP is solely responsible for all content. For all of AP’s environmental coverage, visit https://apnews.com/hub/climate-and-environment
Copyright 2026 Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.
