Reversing Climate Action: Will Environmental Protection Agency Policy Set Back the U.S.?
The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is a U.S. federal government agency that ensures the protection of air, water, and land through laws passed by Congress. On July 29, 2025, the EPA Administrator proposed a controversial shift in climate policy. The greenhouse gases (GHGs) are declared as posing no threat and are not harmful to public health and the environment. This proposal rolls back the federal climate change regulations.
This proposal has not passed yet; however, if it passed, this would be one of the biggest setbacks in U.S. history. The potential impact of this proposal as state policy is worth $52 billion. Supporters of this proposal advocate that it will cut regulatory compliance costs and benefit fossil fuel industries. However, the opponents believe it’s a step backward in the global fight against climate change. Besides this debate, this is a high-profile proposal to repeal the EPA’s 2009 Endangerment Finding, which explicitly states that greenhouse gases are harmful.
- Economic, Social, and Environmental Impacts of the Policy Shift
This policy shift will have a huge socio-economic and environmental cost, borne not only by the U.S. but also by the whole world. Economically, this rollback could create short-term relief for industries that rely on oil, gas, and coal, but all such relief will be at the expense of environmental stability in the long term. According to the reports published by the National Bureau of Economic Research (2023), climate change could reduce U.S. GDP by 10.5% by the end of the century. This fall would disproportionately affect agriculture, coastal infrastructure, and labor productivity. If this proposal were to become an act, then the effects would be larger than expected.
This proposal also has a social perspective that is most likely to be hurt. Low-income and marginalized communities will likely face the climate-induced disasters and become larger victims. Americans are already prone to various diseases that are directly related to climate change and poor air quality. The American Lung Association warns that nearly 120 million Americansare living in unhealthy air. This situation is alarming and expected to exacerbate. If this proposal comes into force, it could worsen respiratory illnesses, increase heat-related deaths, and strain public health systems.
This policy shift is supposed to accelerate global warming by removing barriers to greenhouse gas emissions. It will be the same as the environment is being brutally torn apart. Over the past two decades, Methane gas has been 84 times more potent than CO₂, and it is an unchecked release from oil and gas operations. It could severely amplify climate risks. Additionally, U.S. credibility in global climate diplomacy could fall further in the wake of such a policy initiative. Especially, when the world prepares for binding climate commitments under COP30, all efforts will be lost. Ultimately, all the environmental efforts will go to waste along with potential irreversible consequences for future generations.
- What Happens If Congress Approves the Rollback?
- If Congress approves this policy, environmental agencies will lose their authority to regulate emissions. All environmental laws will be ruined; therefore, global warming, air pollution, and the frequency of climate-related disasters will increase. Although the decision is still pending, and final approval has not been received from the governing body, legal experts anticipate strong court challenges. Environmental activists and scientists are very concerned about this proposal. They warn that this proposal could destabilize decades of scientific consensus and court rulings related to environmentally friendly decisions.
Top environmental scientists, such as Harvard’s Naomi Oreskes, have criticized the proposal. He called it eco-denialist propaganda disguised as policy. A public opinion session was opened for 45 days to give their suggestion about the policy. It comprises widespread media coverage and civic engagement. The large majority of public comments were against declaring greenhouse gases “not harmful.” Conclusively, public reaction was negative to this new policy. The issue was also a major point of discussion at the COP30 Climate Summit in Brazil.
- Climate Policy and COP30
The Conference of the Parties, COP30, took place in November 2025. During the COP30 conference, the United States did not participate. This was a signal of absence from global efforts to address climate change. At the same time, with the Trump administration, the EPA was focused on environmental laws and rolling back regulatory measures. They did not take an interest in conference proceedings. Therefore, key environmental rules and planning did not become fruitful, especially those related to controlling methane emissions. Environmental groups and critics sharply criticized these actions of the U.S. government. They advocated that these do not align with global needs, and a stronger climate commitment is required for sustainability.
- Climate Reality: Heatwaves, Wildfires, and the Growing Risk
Meanwhile, climate change is already hitting the U.S. hard. A heat dome in the summer of 2025 affected over 255 million people. It is exposed to triple-digit temperatures, putting public health at risk. In addition, cities like Portland experienced record-breaking heat. It has doubled since the 1970s, a clear sign of climate instability.
If the EPA is stripped of its regulatory authority, the consequences could be more catastrophic on a national and global scale. Without control over greenhouse gas emissions, the world could face accelerated climate disasters. It will cause sea levels to rise, extreme weather, wildfires, and air pollution. Considering wildfire, in fact, research shows that climate change contributes to 33–82% of it.
- Green HUB Initiative: Local Action for Global Impact
This is where the Green HUB Initiative steps in. Although we do not have any direct connection with the new climate policy of the U.S. But we can be one of those who can be victims of climate change caused by losing control over harmful gases. What we can do is to spread knowledge and research related to the new policy shift and climate change. We can raise awareness among people and state stakeholders to focus on environmental laws. Even though we do not belong to the region where these policies are being discussed and implemented in the future, it’s our responsibility to connect experts to talk about such proposals and polices.
Our mission is to raise climate change awareness and take grassroots action to protect our environment. Within Green HUB’s education initiatives, we have held several ‘Sustainability Learning Sessions (SLS)’.In each of these programs, we have guests who talk about sustainability and climate change-related topics and new trends.
3.1 Green HUB in Practical
SLS program is the one which spreads knowledge but to convert this into practical we started a campaign named ‘We plant trees, We work sustainability’ at micro level. This is what we can do at our end. We focus on urban forestation where we plant trees in urban areas targeting SDG 15 (Life on Land), SDG 13 (Climate Action) and SDG 15 (Sustainable Cities). We regularly arrange plantation events and involve community to make them inclusive to this campaign. In tree plantation we focus on native trees that are environment friendly. We have used this tree plantation as an easy solution in hand to cope climate change. It has several benefits like tree plantation cools down the temperature, enhance beauty of the cities, provide shelter to birds/animals and human being. It provides fresh oxygen and brings clouds to pour rain and improve the soil quality. Based on all these benefits, we believe that our small, local actions (tree plantation) can contribute to the global impact. We work at the micro level, what the world does at the macro level will determine our shared future.