Report on Proposed Reversals of U.S. Climate Policy and Implications for Sustainable Development Goals

Introduction

This report analyzes the potential consequences of proposed changes to foundational United States climate policies, specifically the revocation of the Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) Endangerment Finding and the Clean Car and Truck Standards. The analysis focuses on the direct and indirect impacts of these policy reversals on the achievement of several key United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs).

Analysis of Policy Reversals and SDG Implications

Undermining Climate Action and Public Health (SDG 13 & SDG 3)

The proposed revocation of the EPA’s 2009 Endangerment Finding, which scientifically establishes that greenhouse gas pollution endangers public health, directly threatens progress on SDG 13 (Climate Action). This policy is the legal and scientific cornerstone for regulating greenhouse gases in the U.S. Its reversal would require new scientific evidence to disprove the established danger, evidence which is currently non-existent. The consequences of inaction on climate change are already evident:

• Climate-linked disasters in the U.S. have incurred costs of approximately $2.9 trillion since 1980.
• These events have resulted in the loss of nearly 17,000 lives.

These policy changes also present a significant setback for SDG 3 (Good Health and Well-being). Weakening or eliminating emissions standards is projected to increase air pollution, leading to adverse public health outcomes such as increased rates of childhood asthma, heart disease, and premature deaths.

Jeopardizing Economic Growth and Sustainable Industry (SDG 8 & SDG 9)

The Clean Car and Truck Standards are integral to fostering sustainable economic activity, aligning with SDG 8 (Decent Work and Economic Growth) and SDG 9 (Industry, Innovation, and Infrastructure). The current standards, in conjunction with the Inflation Reduction Act, have yielded significant economic benefits:

• Creation of over 200,000 new jobs in the U.S.
• Stimulation of approximately $130 billion in new investments in electric vehicle (EV) and battery manufacturing.
• Projected net benefits of up to $1.6 trillion.
• Average consumer savings of $6,000 in fuel and maintenance costs per vehicle.

Repealing these standards poses substantial economic risks:

1. Job Losses: The repeal of the Inflation Reduction Act alone could eliminate up to 130,000 direct jobs and a total of 440,000 jobs when considering indirect effects.
2. Increased Consumer Costs: Americans could face up to $890 billion in additional costs at the fuel pump.
3. Loss of Competitive Advantage: The U.S. risks ceding leadership in the global clean transportation market, valued at nearly $10 trillion, to competitors like China and the European Union. China currently accounts for over 60% of the global EV market, while EVs represent 23% of new car sales in the EU, compared to 11% in the U.S.

Impact on Sustainable Communities and Consumption (SDG 11 & SDG 12)

The vehicle standards are a key driver for SDG 11 (Sustainable Cities and Communities) by reducing transportation-related air pollution, a major factor in urban environmental quality. Furthermore, the standards promote SDG 12 (Responsible Consumption and Production) by encouraging a shift away from fossil fuels and incentivizing the manufacturing of more efficient and less polluting vehicles.

Conclusion

The proposed repeal of the Endangerment Finding and the Clean Car and Truck Standards represents a significant deviation from policies that support public health, economic stability, and environmental protection. Such actions would directly contravene the principles and objectives of multiple Sustainable Development Goals, including those related to climate action (SDG 13), good health (SDG 3), decent work and economic growth (SDG 8), and sustainable industry and innovation (SDG 9). The reversal would not only increase public health burdens and environmental degradation but also jeopardize American economic competitiveness and job growth in the critical 21st-century automotive industry.

Analysis of Sustainable Development Goals in the Article

1. Which SDGs are addressed or connected to the issues highlighted in the article?

The article discusses issues that are directly and indirectly connected to several Sustainable Development Goals. The analysis identifies the following SDGs as relevant:

• SDG 3: Good Health and Well-being: The article explicitly addresses public health, mentioning potential cuts to Medicaid, and the health consequences of air pollution such as asthma, heart disease, and premature deaths.
• SDG 8: Decent Work and Economic Growth: The text focuses heavily on the economic impacts of environmental policies, including job creation in the electric vehicle (EV) industry and the risk of significant job losses if these policies are repealed.
• SDG 9: Industry, Innovation, and Infrastructure: The discussion centers on the automotive industry’s innovation towards clean transportation, investments in EV and battery manufacturing, and the vulnerability of infrastructure to climate-related disasters.
• SDG 11: Sustainable Cities and Communities: The article touches upon the quality of life in communities by discussing air pollution from transportation and the devastating impact of climate-fueled disasters on towns and communities.
• SDG 13: Climate Action: This is a central theme, as the article’s main subject is the proposed revocation of two foundational U.S. climate policies and the consequences of inaction on climate change, such as more frequent and severe natural disasters.
• SDG 16: Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions: The article raises concerns about the integrity of governmental institutions, suggesting a shift from policy grounded in “science and the law” to decisions based on “political expedience,” thereby weakening the EPA’s role.

2. What specific targets under those SDGs can be identified based on the article’s content?

Based on the article’s content, several specific SDG targets can be identified:

1. Under SDG 3 (Good Health and Well-being):
   • Target 3.4: By 2030, reduce by one-third premature mortality from non-communicable diseases. The article supports this by noting that the Clean Car and Truck Standards are estimated to “prevent up to 2,500 premature deaths per year” and that repealing them will lead to “more heart disease, and more lives lost too early.”
   • Target 3.8: Achieve universal health coverage. The article connects to this target by highlighting that proposed Medicaid cuts could “strip health benefits from up to 17 million Americans.”
   • Target 3.9: By 2030, substantially reduce the number of deaths and illnesses from hazardous chemicals and air, water and soil pollution and contamination. The entire discussion on the “Clean Car and Truck Standards” aims to “cut air pollution from transportation,” directly addressing this target.
2. Under SDG 8 (Decent Work and Economic Growth):
   • Target 8.2: Achieve higher levels of economic productivity through diversification, technological upgrading and innovation. The article points to this by discussing how clean air policies “drive innovation” and position the U.S. for “leadership in a critical 21st-century industry.”
   • Target 8.5: By 2030, achieve full and productive employment and decent work for all. The article directly relates to this by mentioning that current policies have “created over 200,000 new jobs” and that their repeal could lead to “440,000 total jobs lost.”
3. Under SDG 9 (Industry, Innovation, and Infrastructure):
   • Target 9.1: Develop quality, reliable, sustainable and resilient infrastructure. The article highlights the need for resilient infrastructure by citing the “$2.9 trillion” cost of escalating disasters which cause “damaged infrastructure.”
   • Target 9.4: By 2030, upgrade infrastructure and retrofit industries to make them sustainable. This is addressed through the mention of “~$130 billion in new US investments in electric vehicle (EV) and battery manufacturing,” which represents a move towards sustainable industry.
4. Under SDG 11 (Sustainable Cities and Communities):
   • Target 11.5: By 2030, significantly reduce the number of deaths and the number of people affected…by disasters. The article provides evidence of the impact of disasters, stating they have caused “nearly 17,000 lives lost” since 1980.
   • Target 11.6: By 2030, reduce the adverse per capita environmental impact of cities, including by paying special attention to air quality. The article’s focus on cutting “air pollution from transportation” via the Clean Car standards directly aligns with this target.
5. Under SDG 13 (Climate Action):
   • Target 13.2: Integrate climate change measures into national policies, strategies and planning. The article’s entire premise revolves around this target, as it discusses the potential repeal of “the two foundational pillars of United States climate policy”: the Endangerment Finding and the Clean Car and Truck Standards.
6. Under SDG 16 (Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions):
   • Target 16.6: Develop effective, accountable and transparent institutions at all levels. The article speaks to this by defending the EPA’s historical principle that “policy was grounded in science and the law” and warning that this principle is now at “grave risk.”

3. Are there any indicators mentioned or implied in the article that can be used to measure progress towards the identified targets?

Yes, the article provides several quantitative and qualitative indicators that can be used to measure progress:

• For Health (SDG 3):
  • Number of people with health coverage (threatened for “17 million Americans”).
  • Number of premature deaths prevented annually (“up to 2,500 premature deaths per year”).
  • Incidence of pollution-related illnesses (“childhood asthma attacks, more heart disease”).
• For Economy and Jobs (SDG 8):
  • Number of jobs created in the clean energy/EV sector (“over 200,000 new jobs”).
  • Number of jobs lost due to policy repeal (“up to 440,000 total jobs lost”).
  • Amount of investment in sustainable industries (“~$130 billion in new US investments”).
  • Consumer savings on fuel and maintenance (“average of $6,000 in fuel and maintenance costs per vehicle”).
• For Disasters and Climate (SDG 11 & 13):
  • Economic losses from climate-related disasters (cumulative cost of “$2.9 trillion”).
  • Number of lives lost from disasters (“nearly 17,000 lives lost”).
  • Existence and enforcement of national climate policies (the “Endangerment Finding” and “Clean Car and Truck Standards”).
• For Industry and Innovation (SDG 9):
  • Market share of electric vehicles in new car sales (“11% in the U.S.” vs. “23%” in the EU).
  • Net economic benefits of environmental regulations (“net benefits up to $1.6 trillion”).
• For Institutional Strength (SDG 16):
  • Adherence to science-based policymaking (whether policy is “grounded in science and the law” versus “political expedience”).

4. Summary of SDGs, Targets, and Indicators

Source: forbes.com