SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
Climate
'A Mockery of Science': Experts Slam Trump DOE's Climate Report in New Paper
"The goal is clear," said one of the experts. "To justify inaction and avoid meaningful emissions reductions."
Sep 02, 2025
The US Department of Energy's July climate report is "biased, full of errors, and not fit to inform policymaking," according to a comprehensive review released Tuesday by a group of 85 scientists who reviewed the document independently.
The department's "Climate Working Group" drew up the report as part of the effort by US President Donald Trump to fatally undermine the Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA) determination, commonly known as the "endangerment finding," that greenhouse gases like carbon dioxide and methane endanger human lives by warming the planet.
"If successful," Andrew Dessler, a climate scientist at Texas A&M, says, "this move could unravel virtually every US climate regulation on the books, from car emissions standards to power plant rules."
The Energy Department's nearly 150-page paper, titled "A Critical Review of the Impacts of Greenhouse Gas Emissions on the US Climate." Dessler describes its five authors as "climate contrarians who dispute mainstream science." The team behind the report, he argues, was "hand-picked" by Energy Secretary Chris Wright to lend legitimacy to the Trump administration's predetermined conclusions about climate science.
The DOE report's five authors seek to contradict the much more rigorous analyses conducted by groups like the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), whose reports have been written by over a thousand researchers and which cite tens of thousands of academic studies.
The multinational panel has concluded that human fossil fuel usage has considerably warmed the planet, causing increased amounts of extreme weather, threatening food and water security, destroying ecosystems, and risking dangerous amounts of sea-level rise.
The Energy Department's report advances the main idea that climate scientists like those at the IPCC broadly "overstate" the extent of the human-caused climate crisis as well as its risks. Unlike other research of its kind, the department crafted its report in secret, which prompted the expert response.
"Normally, a report like this would undergo a rigorous, unbiased, and transparent peer review," said Dr. Robert Kopp, a climate and sea-level researcher at Rutgers. "When it became clear that DOE wasn't going to organize such a review, the scientific community came together on its own, in less than a month, to provide it."
Their review found that the Energy Department's report "exhibits pervasive problems with misrepresentation and selective citation of the scientific literature, cherry-picking of data, and faulty or absent statistics."
For instance, the report claims that there is "no obvious acceleration in sea-level rise" even though the number of days of high-tide coastal flooding per year has increased more than 10-fold since the 1970s.
It also attempts to portray CO2 emissions as a net benefit to the environment, particularly agriculture, by pointing to its benefits for crop growth, but ignores that the impact of increased droughts and wildfires far outweighs those benefits.
And it attempts to pick out isolated historical weather events like the Dust Bowl during the 1930s as evidence that dramatic climatic changes happen very frequently within short amounts of time and that the unprecedented increase in global temperatures over the past century and a half is not worthy of alarm.
"My reading of the report uncovered numerous errors of commission and omission, all of which slant toward a conclusion that human-caused climate change poses no serious risks," said Kerry Emmanuel, a meteorologist and climate scientist who specializes in hurricane physics. "It seems to work backward from a desired outcome."
Dessler notes that over 99% of the literature included in the IPCC's report was simply ignored by the Department of Energy. He described the report as a "mockery of science" akin to a "Soviet show trial."
"The outcome of this exercise by the Department of Energy is already known: climate science will be judged too uncertain to justify the endangerment finding," he said. "Once you understand that, everything about the DOE report makes total sense."
In 2025, the US National Weather Service issued a record number of flash flood warnings, while 255 million Americans were subject to life-threatening triple-digit temperatures in June. The previous year, 48 of 50 US states faced drought conditions, the most ever recorded in US history, while nearly 9 million acres burned due to wildfires.
"We live in a world where the impacts of climate change are increasingly being felt by citizens all around the globe—including communities throughout the US," said Andra Gardner, a professor of environmental science at Rowan University.
"This is perhaps what makes the DOE Climate Working Group report most astounding," she continued. "In a country where we have the tools to not only understand the impacts of climate change but also to begin meaningfully combating the crisis, the current DOE has instead decided to promote fossil fuel interests that will further worsen the symptoms of climate change with a report that turns a blind eye to the established science."
According to an analysis from Climate Power published in January, oil and gas industry donors gave $96 million in direct donations to the campaign of Donald Trump and affiliated super PACs during the 2024 election, while spending $243 million to lobby Republicans in Congress.
The result has been an administration that has purged climate science information from federal websites, laid off thousands of EPA employees, and gutted government funding for wind and solar energy.
Becca Neumann, an associate professor in the Civil and Environmental Engineering Department at the University of Washington, says that "the goal" of the report "is clear: to justify inaction and avoid meaningful emissions reductions."
Keep ReadingShow Less
As Trump Pushes to Defund Infrastructure, Water Systems Serving Tens of Millions Face Flood Risk
The White House has proposed slashing funds for the nation's water systems by 90%.
Sep 02, 2025
As the Trump administration and Republicans in Congress push to eliminate hundreds of millions of dollars in federal funding for water infrastructure, they are increasing the flood risk community waters system face across the United States—making it more likely that close to 60 million people could lose access to safe water during or after such emergencies.
The environmental justice group Food and Water Watch (FWW) on Tuesday released a report on a sometimes overlooked impact of flooding: In addition to the devastating damage that floods can do to homes, roads, and community buildings, flooding can contaminate water supplies while overwhelming water utility systems and putting treatment plants out of commission even after the water has receded.
In Washed Out, FWW warns that the flood risk to the 448 largest community water systems in the country is growing as extreme weather events become increasingly common and more severe, with more than one-third of those systems facing "significant" flood risks.
At least 10% of the land served by the systems with the highest risks lie in areas prone to flooding, according to FWW, and 59.4 million people rely on those systems for safe drinking water.
About 15% of water systems evaluated by FWW have "elevated" flood risks, with at least 20% of land in high flood risk areas, where nearly 22 million people live.
Florida, which had at least four billion-dollar flood disasters between 1980-2024 and experienced several "100-year" rainstorms last year, was identified as having the highest flooding risk for large community water systems. The state is home to 10 of the country's 15 large systems that serve areas where at least half the land is in high flood risk zones.
New Jersey and Louisiana each have two large systems at high risk, while at least half the the area served by Boston's water system is also in a flood zone, putting more than 2.5 million people at serious risk of losing water access in the event of a flood.
Other high risk areas identified by FWW include New York City, where the municipal water system serves 8.2 million people and which has more than 12% of its land in high risk flood zones; Corpus Christi, Texas, where 23% of land is at high risk of flooding; and Alameda County, California, where 42% of land is in a flood zone.
"Now more than ever, it is imperative that all members of Congress stand firmly united against any shortsighted attempt to strip support for our critical water and sewer infrastructure."
"As our analysis illuminates, scores of water systems serving highly-populated communities are at significant threat of flooding that could suddenly break safe water delivery and sanitary sewer operation—for days, weeks or even months. Meanwhile, Trump and Republicans in Congress are seeking to decimate the key federal funding that keeps these systems operating safely," said Mary Grant, water program director at FWW.
Republicans in the US House are currently seeking a 25% cut to the Drinking Water and Clean Water State Revolving Funds (SRF)—the primary source of federal funding for the nation's water and wastewater systems.
An appropriations bill released last month by the House Interior Subcommittee would slash the funds from $2.8 billion to $2.1 billion, bringing them to their lowest level since 2008.
The proposal does not go as far as President Donald Trump's push to cut the programs by nearly 90% with a plan to eventually zero them out, but FWW noted last month that the proposed cuts "come at a time when the needs of our nation's water and wastewater systems are substantial and growing."
"According to the latest needs survey of the US EPA, upgrading our water and wastewater infrastructure will cost $1.3 trillion over the next two decades just to comply with existing federal law," said the group.
Slashing funds for water infrastructure, including building more climate-resilient systems, would also put the drinking water of millions of people at risk at a time when flooding and other extreme weather disasters is becoming more common due to the continued extraction of planet-heating fossil fuels.
Scientists last year said Hurricane Helene—which along with smaller storms that happened around the same time dumped 40 trillion gallons of rain on the Southeast—was made about 10% more intense and dangerous by the human-caused climate crisis. The flooding left Asheville, North Carolina without safe drinking water for more than seven weeks.
FWW on Tuesday renewed its call for the US to shift from fossil fuels to renewable energy sources—instead of slashing regulations for oil and gas industries as Trump has—and warned that "local water providers must also improve their systems to withstand today's climate reality."
"This level of investment will require a strong federal commitment," said the group.
FWW called on Congress to pass legislation like the Water Affordability, Transparency, Equity and Reliability (WATER) Act "to guarantee federal support for safe and clean water in every community" and reject efforts to strip crucial funding from the SRF.
"Now more than ever," said Grant, "it is imperative that all members of Congress stand firmly united against any shortsighted attempt to strip support for our critical water and sewer infrastructure."
Keep ReadingShow Less
'No Public Lands Are Safe': Trump USDA Moves Forward With Gutting Roadless Rule
"The Trump administration's move to gut this bedrock protection is nothing more than a handout to logging interests at the expense of clean water, wildlife, and local communities," said one advocate.
Aug 27, 2025
The U.S. Department of Agriculture on Wednesday moved to rescind a conservation policy dating back nearly 25 years that has protected more than 45 million acres of pristine public lands, as the Trump administration announced a public comment period of just three weeks regarding the rollback of the "Roadless Rule."
The rule, officially called the 2001 Roadless Area Conservation Rule, has protected against the building of roads for logging and oil and gas drilling in forest lands including Alaska's Tongass National Forest, the nation's largest national woodland.
Agriculture Secretary Brooke Rollins said in June as she announced her intention of repealing the rule that the administration aims to "get more logs on trucks," in accordance with President Donald Trump's executive order calling for expanded logging in the nation's forests. The president has asserted more trees must be cut down to protect from wildfires, a claim that's been rejected by environmental groups that note fires are more likely to be ignited in areas where vehicles travel.
The public comment period on rescinding the Roadless Rule is set to open this week and end September 19.
The environmental legal firm Earthjustice, which has fought to defend the Roadless Rule for years, including when Trump moved to exempt the Tongass from the regulation during his first term, noted that roadless forests provide vulnerable and endangered wildlife "with needed habitat, offer people a wide range of recreational activities, and protect the headwaters of major rivers, which are vital for maintaining clean, mountain-fed drinking water nationwide."
"If the Roadless Rule is rescinded nationally, logging and other destructive, extractive development is set to increase in public forests that currently function as intact ecosystems that benefit wildlife and people alike," said the group.
Gloria Burns, president of the Ketchikan Indian Community, said the people of her tribe "are the Tongass."
"This is an attack on Tribes and our people who depend on the land to eat," said Burns. "The federal government must act and provide us the safeguards we need or leave our home roadless. We are not willing to risk the destruction of our homelands when no effort has been made to ensure our future is the one our ancestors envisioned for us. Without our lungs (the Tongass) we cannot breathe life into our future generations."
Garett Rose, senior attorney at the Natural Defenses Resource Council, said Rollins and Trump have declared "open season on America's forests."
"For decades, the Roadless Rule has stood as one of America's most important conservation safeguards, protecting the public's wildest forests from the bulldozer and chainsaw," said Rose. "The Trump administration's move to gut this bedrock protection is nothing more than a handout to logging interests at the expense of clean water, wildlife, and local communities. But we're not backing down and will continue to defend these unparalleled wild forests from attacks, just as we have done for decades."
The Alaska Wilderness League (AWL) noted that 15 million acres of intact temperate rain forest, including the Tongass and the Chugach, would be impacted by the rulemaking, as would taxpayers who would be burdened by the need to maintain even more roads run by the US Forest Service.
The service currently maintains more than 380,000 miles of road—a system larger than the US Interstate Highway System—with a "maintenance backlog that has ballooned to billions in needed repairs," said AWL.
"More roads mean more taxpayer liability, more wildfire risk, and more damage to salmon streams and clean water sources," added the group.
"No public lands are safe from the Trump administration, not even Alaska's globally significant forests," said Andy Moderow, senior director of policy at AWL. "Rolling back the Roadless Rule means bulldozing taxpayer-funded roads into irreplaceable old growth forest, and favoring short-term industry profits over long-term, sustainable forest uses. The Roadless Rule is one of the most effective, commonsense conservation protections in U.S. history. Scrapping it would sacrifice Alaska's public lands to the highest bidder."
Drew Caputo, vice president of litigation for lands, wildlife, and oceans at Earthjustice, emphasized that the group "has successfully defended the Roadless Rule in court for decades."
"Nothing will stop us," he said, "from taking up that fight again."
Keep ReadingShow Less
FEMA Employees Warn Trump Cuts Amount to 'Abandonment of the American People'
"Hurricane season has begun, yet FEMA continues to lack an appointed administrator with the mandated qualifications to fulfill this role," the employees wrote in a letter to Congress.
Aug 25, 2025
More than 180 federal emergency relief workers have signed a letter warning that US President Donald Trump's administration is severely harming their ability to respond to future disasters.
The letter, which was sent to members of Congress on Monday, painted a dire picture of the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) under Trump's watch.
"Since January 2025, FEMA has been under the leadership of individuals lacking legal qualifications, Senate approval, and the demonstrated background required of a FEMA administrator," the employees stated. "Decisions made by FEMA's Senior Official Performing the Duties of the Administrator (SOPDA) David Richardson, former SOPDA Cameron Hamilton, and Secretary of Homeland Security Kristi Noem erode the capacity of FEMA... hinder the swift execution of our mission, and dismiss experienced staff whose institutional knowledge and relationships are vital to ensure effective emergency management."
The employees then detailed several specific ways that the Trump administration has hamstrung the agency, which they said would be tantamount to "the effective dissolution of FEMA itself and the abandonment of the American people" if not corrected.
First, they faulted Noem for requiring personal review for all contracts, grants, and mission assignments costing more than $100,000, which they described as an improper impoundment of agency funds that "reduces FEMA's authorities and capabilities to swiftly deliver our mission."
They then took aim at Richardson, whom they lambasted as wholly unqualified for his position.
"Hurricane season has begun, yet FEMA continues to lack an appointed administrator with the mandated qualifications to fulfill this role," they warned. "The dangers of unqualified leadership were a significant lesson learned from Hurricane Katrina."
The FEMA workers noted that the Trump administration has flouted federal requirements demanding that FEMA administrators demonstrate "ability in and knowledge of emergency management." According to The New York Times, Richardson told employees in June that he hadn't been aware the US had a hurricane season.
"They're breaking the law so they can hire mediocre people," said US Rep. Sean Casten (D-Ill.). "And Americans will die as a result."
The employees also slammed the administration for its "censorship of climate science, environmental protection, and efforts to ensure all communities have access to information, resources, and support."
They also noted that the administration removed the Future Risk Index from FEMA's website this past February, which they said would harm "the nation's ability to properly prepare for and mitigate against the risks of tomorrow."
Finally, the employees called attention to the massive workforce drain FEMA has experienced under Trump's administration.
"FEMA's current capacities have been significantly limited due to a loss of personnel through programs designed to incentivize our workforce to leave federal service, ongoing hiring freezes, and the cancellation of critical support contracts," they wrote. "One-third of FEMA's full-time staff have departed the agency this year, leading to the loss of irreplaceable institutional knowledge and long-built relationships."
The employees also said that the damage done to FEMA was already visible this past summer during the agency's response to deadly floods in central Texas that claimed the lives of more than 130 people.
"As that disaster unfolded, FEMA's mission to provide critical support was obstructed by leadership who not only question the agency's existence but place uninformed cost-cutting above serving the American people and the communities our oath compels us to serve," they said.
A total of 181 FEMA employees signed the letter, although only 35 of them made their signatures a matter of public record.
Trump earlier this year said he'd like to see FEMA dismantled so that more responsibility for handling the aftermath of natural disasters would be pushed off to individual states. Meanwhile, the president has denied some states' requests for disaster declarations, including Kentucky, Tennessee, and Oklahoma.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular