The National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine announced on Thursday that it will initiate an independent and expedited review of the most recent climate science. This assessment aims to provide insights into the Trump administration’s proposed repeal of a 2009 government assessment that identified greenhouse gas emissions as a threat to human health and the environment.
In a notable shift from its usual practice of responding to external requests from government entities or Congress, the National Academies will fund this study independently. The findings are expected to be publicly available by September, aligning with the Environmental Protection Agency’s considerations regarding the “endangerment finding,” according to a prepared statement.
Marcia McNutt, president of the National Academy of Sciences, emphasized the importance of grounding federal policymaking in credible scientific research. “Decades of climate research and data have vastly improved our understanding of how greenhouse gases impact the climate. This new examination aims to provide the most current assessment to policymakers and the public,” she stated.
The National Academies, operating under an 1863 congressional charter signed by President Abraham Lincoln, are nonprofit institutions dedicated to delivering independent and objective analysis to inform public policy.
The Trump administration’s proposal to revoke the endangerment finding, revealed last month, would dismantle the legal foundation for key federal climate actions concerning carbon emissions from vehicles and power plants as dictated by the Clean Air Act. EPA Administrator Lee Zeldin has indicated a commitment to overturning climate regulations established during the Biden administration, a task that would be made easier by nullifying the endangerment finding.
The EPA’s proposal largely rests on a narrow view of the agency’s legal authority, referencing uncertainties in scientific data. Specifically, it pointed to a report released by the Department of Energy the same day, crafted by a select group of well-known skeptics of the mainstream climate consensus. The administration has allotted a brief 30-day window for public feedback on both its proposed endangerment finding and the DOE’s climate science report.
The EPA has not yet responded to inquiries regarding the National Academies’ announcement. Meanwhile, critics of the Trump administration’s strategy have welcomed the initiative from the scientific community.
Bob Sussman, a former deputy administrator of the EPA during the Clinton administration and an adviser during the Obama era, remarked, “The National Academies have recognized a crucial need for impartial expert guidance on current scientific understanding.”
Earlier on Thursday, preceding the Academies’ announcement, Sussman published a blog on the Environmental Law Institute’s website advocating for a “blue-ribbon review” of the science surrounding the endangerment finding. He referred to a similar review conducted by the National Academies in 2001 at the request of the George W. Bush administration. Since then, the Academies have undertaken numerous studies regarding various climate change issues.
In 2023, the National Academies announced the development of a rapid response capability to address pressing scientific policy matters. The initial project focused on assessing avian influenza diagnostics.
Andrew Dessler, director of the Texas Center for Extreme Weather at Texas A&M University, noted that the recent controversy stirred by the Trump administration regarding climate science warranted an urgent review by the National Academies. “The National Academies were established precisely to address questions of scientific significance for the government,” he commented. “This is what the DOE should have consistently undertaken rather than enlisting a handful of individuals who represent a fringe viewpoint within the scientific community.”
Dessler is coordinating a response from scientists regarding the DOE report to be submitted to the EPA. He stated that around 70 academics expressed interest in contributing after he issued a call on the social media platform Bluesky. He also mentioned that this effort may have a slightly different focus than the National Academies’ review, which does not specifically address the DOE report but aims to evaluate the scientific evidence regarding the dangers of greenhouse gas emissions that has emerged since the endangerment finding was adopted by the EPA in 2009.
This story originally appeared on Inside Climate News.
