President Trump's budget expected to roll back funding of climate research

WASHINGTON — President Trump isn’t just keeping a campaign promise to roll back climate change regulations. He appears to be moving ahead to do away with the science behind the effort.

The White House has drafted a preliminary budget blueprint that would hack hundreds of millions of research dollars out of the EPA and other agencies tracking the effects of global warming in what would be a stark contrast to the policies under President Obama.

Environmental activists say rolling back rules designed to protect health and ecology is bad enough. But gutting the fact-finding and academic analysis behind the rules poses far-reaching consequences.

"If the Trump administration pulls the plug on this, the world goes dark," said David Doniger, director of the climate and clean air program at the Natural Resources Defense Council.

Among the proposed cuts the White House could unveil Thursday as part of its official budget:

Prep for the polls: See who is running for president and compare where they stand on key issues in our Voter Guide

• EPA science funding, including half the money for studies of the agency’s Air, Climate, and Energy Research Program. Bill Becker, executive director of the Association of Clean Air Agencies, which includes the Michigan Department of Environmental Quality as a member, was unable to release the proposal from the Trump administration but confirmed the figures. 
• National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration research funding to support climate research and the satellite programs that provide the basis for the Obama-era policies aimed at reducing the use of fossil fuels. The cut could be as much as 17%, according to The Washington Post.
• NASA programs coordinating the launch of satellites that monitor changes in sea level, carbon levels and air temperatures that help provide the justification for climate change rules.

Such a move would be applauded by key GOP lawmakers who challenge the science behind climate change and the resulting environmental regulations they say have stunted economic growth.

Sen. Ted Cruz and Rep. Lamar Smith, Texas Republicans who both chair congressional panels that oversee the space program, have each called for NASA to transfer earth science to other agencies so it can focus on deep space exploration.

Some of those reported cuts could change based on review and comment from individual agencies. But environmental activists are not optimistic the proposal coming out next week will change from earlier drafts that make good on the president’s campaign promises to roll back “job-killing” environmental regulations.

Trump vowed in October to “cancel all wasteful climate change spending from Obama-Clinton, including all global warming payments to the United Nations.”

The president said cutting such funding would save $100 billion over eight years, money that could be used “to help rebuild the vital infrastructure, including water systems, in America’s inner cities,” he said during last year’s presidential campaign. More recently, Trump is trying to find ways of supporting a $54 billion increase in Defense spending without raising taxes.

Read more:

Trump budget would kill Sea Grant funds, end Great Lakes coastal research

Delaware Sen. Tom Carper emerges as unlikely environmental warrior

Fact check: Scott Pruitt on climate change, again

Environmental activists and many Democrats say Trump’s proposed cuts not only would ignore what President Obama called the greatest threat to the planet, but also hamper global response because of the leading role the U.S. plays as a research engine for the international science community.

Annual federal funding for climate change research, technology, international assistance and adaptation has increased from $2.4 billion in 1993 to $11.6 billion in 2014 spread among 13 federal agencies, according to the Government Accountability Office. An additional $26.1 billion for climate change programs and activities was included in the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act in 2009.

That money is spent in a variety of ways: satellites that track Earth’s vital signs, government-funded research to measure natural phenomenon such as deforestation, ice melt and habitat migrations, ocean buoys that monitor water temperatures, and agencies that track the health effects of global shifts.

“Earth science is not unique (to the U.S.). There’s a lot of very good science around the world,” said Doniger of the NRDC. “But the U.S. has a very heavy commitment in terms of the expertise, who the scientists are and, more importantly, where does the data come from ... It's really foolish to blind yourself to the information and the information collection effort."

U.S. efforts to track climate change have grown steadily over the past 25 years as the scope of the potential threat has become clearer particularly to America’s coastal communities.

Coasts are sensitive to sea level rise, changes in the frequency and intensity of storms, increases in precipitation, and warmer ocean temperatures, according to the EPA. In addition, the agency concludes rising atmospheric concentrations of carbon dioxide are causing the oceans to absorb more of the gas and become more acidic, which “can have significant impacts on coastal and marine ecosystems.”

Trump has called climate change a hoax perpetrated by China. EPA chief Scott Pruitt in a CNBC interview Thursday said he does not believe carbon dioxide is a primary contributor to global warming.

Those views by the two people who may have the most to say about the government’s role in addressing climate change run counter to the conclusions by an overwhelming portion of the scientific community, including the EPA itself.

“Carbon dioxide is the primary greenhouse gas that is contributing to recent climate change,” according to the agency’s website. And "human activities, such as the burning of fossil fuels and changes in land use, release large amounts of CO2, causing concentrations in the atmosphere to rise.”

Government-funded research has helped pinpoint particularly vulnerable parts of the country, notably Florida, whose 1,350 miles of coastline are constantly battered by rising sea levels and fierce storms.

Climate change is of special concern to Florida Sen. Bill Nelson, the top Democrat on the Commerce, Science and Transportation Committee, which oversees NASA and NOAA. Nelson pressed newly installed Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross during his confirmation hearing for assurances he would not squelch climate science at agencies, including NOAA, under his purview.

Ross, who has a home in Palm Beach, assured Nelson he has no intention of instructing his employees to fudge or hide information on the science behind rising temperatures.

“I support the dissemination of valid information to the public,” Ross told the senator. “No valid information should be concealed. In general, I have great respect for the scientific quality of NOAA; I think the communication of factual information and data is very, very important.”

Contributing: Donovan Slack