Donald Trump is honored by the coal industry with an award as “Coal Champion”: The US President does not believe in man-made climate change.Image: keystone
The Trump administration is taking the next radical step in the anti-climate transition. She wants to overturn a central principle of US climate policy.
Feb 12, 2026, 3:17 p.mFeb 12, 2026, 3:17 p.m
Anna-Lena Janzen / t-online
The scientific consensus is that greenhouse gases are harmful. They increase global warming and with it risks such as sea level rise, floods, extreme heat waves, catastrophic forest fires and other natural disasters. This is also why countries around the world are trying to reduce their CO2 emissions.
This scientific principle also forms the basis of many climate regulations in the USA. The so-called risk assessment of the US Environmental Protection Agency, which was introduced in 2009 under Barack Obama, forms the legal basis for, among other things, the rules for CO2 emissions from vehicles and from gas and coal-fired power plants. It not only states that man-made climate change exists, but also that the resulting increased consequences endanger human health and well-being – and that the state must therefore act. It therefore forms the legal base on which the climate protection requirements stand.
Donald Trump wants to overturn the basis for climate protection
Now US President Donald Trump wants to overturn this important basis for climate protection in the United States. According to the White House on Thursday, his government wants to invalidate the scientific evidence that greenhouse gases are harmful to health. The White House speaks of the “largest deregulation measure” in US history. The measure was taken to “further unleash American energy dominance” and reduce costs, spokeswoman Caroline Leavitt told the press.
The requirements for coal and gas power plants remain in place for the time being, reported the Wall Street Journal, citing government circles. The revocation of the basis should initially primarily apply to vehicles: obligations to measure, report, certify and comply with nationwide greenhouse gas standards would no longer apply. Trump argues that the regulations will cause severe economic damage, including to automakers. Traffic is the largest source of CO2 in the USA.
With his announcements, Trump is making climate protection more difficult in the USA and around the world.Image: keystone
“Cynical and deeply harmful”
The headwind comes from environmental and health advocates – they want to take legal action against the abolition of the central climate protection basis and described the planned change of course as the largest attack in US history on federal efforts to combat the climate crisis.
If the statement were deleted, other environmental rules could also be more easily overturned or thinned out in the future, as the reason why the state had to intervene at all would no longer be given, writes US economist Gary W. Yohe in an article for “The Conversation”. In addition, the US government could provide support for additional measures that would harm climate protection efforts. For example, it could lead to cuts in further funding for science programs.
However, Yohe assesses the hurdles for the US government to overturn the basis as high – he expects a long fight. In order to turn things around, the environmental agency would have to go through the same thorough scientific process as it did back in 2009 – that is a difficult process. However, he thinks it is possible that in the meantime an effect could still be achieved by rolling back or not enforcing rules, as long as the courts do not stop it with an order.
According to a report by the US broadcaster PBS, lawyer Peter Zalzal from the environmental association Environmental Defense Fund warned of more climate pollution, higher health and fuel costs and “thousands of preventable premature deaths”. The US government’s move is “cynical and deeply harmful” given the evidence and the agency’s duty to protect people’s health and well-being. Lower requirements for industry in the medium term would ultimately be expensive.
Thick clouds of smoke rise from a factory chimney: fuels pollute the atmosphere and contribute to pressing problems of global warming. (symbol image)Image: KEYSTONE
In terms of content, critics also refer to the current state of research. The National Academies of Sciences, Engineering and Medicine reassessed the basis of the finding and said it was “accurate, proven and now supported by even stronger evidence.” A US panel concluded in September that the evidence of current and future harm to health and well-being from man-made greenhouse gases is “no longer scientifically disputed,” reports PBS.
Uncertainty for companies
The US government’s move could also create new uncertainties for companies with global operations, experts warn. Anyone who produces and sells in the USA expects lower standards there, but outside – in Europe, for example – they expect stricter requirements. At the same time, the repeal at the federal level in the USA could encourage individual states to introduce their own rules – a patchwork that would be particularly expensive for large manufacturers and suppliers. If the USA continues to significantly change its course on emissions and energy policy, this will also shift the pace in international negotiations in the effort to slow down global warming.
Trump has repeatedly called man-made climate change a hoax. The USA withdrew from the Paris Climate Agreement during his first term in office. Under President Joe Biden, a large climate package was finally passed through Congress in 2022. This included incentives for the conversion of renewable energies and was intended to significantly reduce CO2 emissions in the United States. Trump recently reversed key parts of this with his budget law “Big Beautiful Bill” back again. The plan promotes, among other things, fossil energy sources: the president wants to provide greater support for gas and oil exploration and expand export opportunities. Subsidies for electric cars or other climate protection programs, however, were canceled.
Sources used: