Report on the Proposed Repeal of the EPA’s Endangerment Finding and its Implications for Sustainable Development Goals

1.0 Executive Summary

A forthcoming policy announcement by U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Administrator Lee Zeldin is expected to propose the repeal of the 2009 “endangerment finding.” This finding is the legal foundation for regulating greenhouse gas emissions under the Clean Air Act. This report analyzes the proposed action and assesses its significant negative implications for the United States’ progress toward achieving key United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), particularly those concerning health, climate action, and sustainable energy.

2.0 Background of the Endangerment Finding

The authority of the EPA to regulate greenhouse gases is predicated on a series of legal and scientific determinations.

1. In 2007, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that greenhouse gases qualify as “air pollutants” under the Clean Air Act.
2. Following this ruling, the EPA in 2009 issued the “Endangerment and Cause or Contribute Findings for Greenhouse Gases.”
3. This finding officially established that a mix of six key greenhouse gases poses a threat to public health and welfare. The gases include:
   • Carbon dioxide (CO2)
   • Methane (CH4)
   • Nitrous oxide (N2O)
   • Hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs)
   • Perfluorocarbons (PFCs)
   • Sulfur hexafluoride (SF6)
4. This determination has served as the cornerstone for subsequent regulations on emissions from vehicles, power plants, and industrial sources.

3.0 Conflict with Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)

The proposed repeal of the endangerment finding directly conflicts with the principles and targets of several SDGs.

• SDG 3: Good Health and Well-being: The finding explicitly links greenhouse gases to threats against human health. Repealing it would remove the health-based justification for air pollution control, undermining Target 3.9, which aims to substantially reduce the number of deaths and illnesses from hazardous chemicals and air, water, and soil pollution.
• SDG 13: Climate Action: The primary purpose of the finding is to enable climate change mitigation efforts. Its repeal would dismantle the primary legal instrument for federal action on greenhouse gas emissions, representing a significant regression from Target 13.2, which calls for integrating climate change measures into national policies, strategies, and planning.
• SDG 7: Affordable and Clean Energy: Expert analysis suggests the policy change is intended to support carbon-intensive industries, such as coal-fired power plants. This action would impede progress toward Target 7.2, which seeks to increase substantially the share of renewable energy in the global energy mix, by disincentivizing the transition away from fossil fuels.
• SDG 11: Sustainable Cities and Communities: Weakened emissions controls would likely worsen air quality, with disproportionate impacts on urban populations. This contradicts Target 11.6, which aims to reduce the adverse per capita environmental impact of cities, including by paying special attention to air quality.
• SDG 16: Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions: The proposal to undo a science-based finding established through a rigorous legal process challenges the role of effective and accountable institutions in environmental governance. It undermines the principle of evidence-based policymaking crucial for sustainable development.

4.0 Expert Analysis and Conclusion

According to Gabe Filippelli, a biogeochemist at Indiana University, the move to repeal the endangerment finding is not supported by scientific evidence. He characterizes the action as a prioritization of polluting business interests over the health and well-being of communities. The assertion that economic needs and environmental protection are mutually exclusive is contested, with the expert noting that electricity and industry are necessary, but not at the expense of public health. In conclusion, the proposed policy reversal poses a direct and substantial threat to public health, environmental integrity, and the nation’s commitment to the global Sustainable Development Goals. It would remove a critical tool for climate action and risk long-term harm to both human and natural systems.

Analysis of Sustainable Development Goals in the Article

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

• SDG 3: Good Health and Well-being
• SDG 7: Affordable and Clean Energy
• SDG 11: Sustainable Cities and Communities
• SDG 12: Responsible Consumption and Production
• SDG 13: Climate Action
• SDG 16: Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions

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

1. SDG 3: Good Health and Well-being

   • Target 3.9: By 2030, substantially reduce the number of deaths and illnesses from hazardous chemicals and air, water and soil pollution and contamination.
   • Explanation: The article explicitly states that the EPA’s “endangerment finding” was based on greenhouse gases being “threats to human health.” It warns that rolling back this finding “could exacerbate the threats posed by climate change to human health” and quotes an expert saying that business and electricity should not come “at the expense of people’s health.” This directly connects the regulation of air pollutants (greenhouse gases) to public health outcomes.

2. SDG 7: Affordable and Clean Energy

   • Target 7.2: By 2030, increase substantially the share of renewable energy in the global energy mix.
   • Explanation: The article suggests that the repeal of the endangerment finding is an “attempt to prop up the dirtiest of businesses we still have in the U.S., which includes coal burning power plants.” This action runs counter to the goal of increasing the share of clean and renewable energy by supporting fossil fuel-based energy production, specifically coal.

3. SDG 11: Sustainable Cities and Communities

   • Target 11.6: By 2030, reduce the adverse per capita environmental impact of cities, including by paying special attention to air quality.
   • Explanation: The article notes that the endangerment finding led to “regulations on emissions from cars, trucks, power plants and the oil and gas industry.” Regulating emissions from vehicles and power plants is a primary method for improving urban air quality and reducing the environmental impact of cities, where these emission sources are concentrated.

4. SDG 12: Responsible Consumption and Production

   • Target 12.4: By 2020, achieve the environmentally sound management of chemicals and all wastes throughout their life cycle… and significantly reduce their release to air, water and soil in order to minimize their adverse impacts on human health and the environment.
   • Explanation: The core issue of the article is the regulation of greenhouse gases, which are chemical byproducts of industrial production and energy generation. The “endangerment finding” is a policy for the “environmentally sound management” of these chemicals by limiting their release into the air. Repealing it would weaken this management.

5. SDG 13: Climate Action

   • Target 13.2: Integrate climate change measures into national policies, strategies and planning.
   • Explanation: This is the central theme of the article. The “endangerment finding” is described as the cornerstone of the “EPA’s ability to regulate greenhouse gas emissions.” This finding represents a key national policy integrating climate change measures. The proposed repeal is a direct reversal of this integration, which the article states “could exacerbate the threats posed by climate change.”

6. SDG 16: Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions

   • Target 16.6: Develop effective, accountable and transparent institutions at all levels.
   • Explanation: The article discusses the authority and actions of a key national institution, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). It details the legal basis for its authority, citing the Clean Air Act and a 2007 Supreme Court ruling. The proposed policy change to “repeal” the endangerment finding is a significant action by this institution that impacts its effectiveness in environmental regulation.

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

1. For Target 3.9 & 11.6:

   • Indicator: Levels of specific air pollutants.
   • Explanation: The article explicitly names the “six greenhouse gases” regulated under the finding, including “carbon dioxide, methane and nitrous oxide.” These gases are classified as “air pollutants.” Measuring the concentration of these specific pollutants in the atmosphere is a direct indicator of air quality and exposure risk to the population.

2. For Target 7.2:

   • Indicator: Share of non-renewable energy sources in the energy mix.
   • Explanation: The article implies a focus on this indicator by stating the policy rollback is an “attempt to prop up… coal burning power plants.” Progress towards Target 7.2 is measured by the share of renewables; therefore, tracking the share of coal and other fossil fuels, as supported by this policy, serves as a counter-indicator.

3. For Target 13.2 & 16.6:

   • Indicator: Existence and enforcement of national environmental regulations.
   • Explanation: The article’s entire focus is on a specific national regulation: the “endangerment finding.” The existence of this finding is an indicator that climate measures are integrated into national policy. The act of repealing it, as discussed, would indicate a weakening of the national institutional framework for climate action. Therefore, the status of this regulation serves as a direct indicator.

4. Summary Table of SDGs, Targets, and Indicators

Source: indystar.com