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

Introduction

A proposed rule by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) aims to rescind the 2009 “endangerment finding,” a determination that greenhouse gases endanger public health and welfare. This action would dismantle the primary legal authority for U.S. climate regulation under the Clean Air Act. This report analyzes the proposed policy change through the lens of the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), highlighting significant conflicts with global targets for health, climate action, and sustainable development.

Direct Contradictions to Core Sustainable Development Goals

SDG 3: Good Health and Well-being

The proposal directly undermines SDG 3, which aims to ensure healthy lives and promote well-being for all. The 2009 finding was fundamentally a public health rule, linking greenhouse gas emissions to adverse health outcomes.

• The rescission would remove the legal basis for regulating pollution from vehicles and power plants, which is linked to a range of health issues.
• Experts warn the reversal could lead to “tens of thousands of premature deaths every year” by increasing exposure to pollution and climate-related health hazards.
• The scientific evidence linking climate change to negative health impacts has strengthened since 2009, with documented effects including:
  1. Increased frequency and intensity of heatwaves.
  2. Stronger storms and hurricanes.
  3. Exacerbated conditions leading to wildfires and floods.

SDG 13: Climate Action

The primary impact of repealing the endangerment finding is the crippling of national efforts to combat climate change, in direct opposition to SDG 13.

• The finding is the legal cornerstone of U.S. climate policy, compelling the EPA to regulate greenhouse gases.
• Its removal would eliminate existing limits on emissions and prevent future administrations from easily reinstating federal climate regulations.
• Scientific consensus, as noted by former EPA officials and environmental scientists, confirms that the climate impacts motivating the original finding are “only more clear today.”
• Since 2009, the U.S. has experienced eight of its ten hottest years on record and 255 climate-related disasters costing over $1 billion each, underscoring the urgency for action that this proposal ignores.

SDG 7: Affordable and Clean Energy & SDG 11: Sustainable Cities and Communities

The policy shift favors fossil fuel production over renewable energy sources and increases the vulnerability of communities to climate disasters, conflicting with SDG 7 and SDG 11.

• The administration’s stated goal is to avoid throttling industries, a move that supports fossil fuel production and stymies the transition to clean energy (SDG 7).
• The proposal would reverse regulations designed to cut emissions from transportation, the largest source of carbon pollution in the U.S.
• By weakening climate mitigation efforts, the policy increases the risk of “devastating events” such as floods, fires, and hurricanes, which threaten the safety and resilience of cities and communities (SDG 11).

Challenges to Institutional Integrity and Environmental Governance

SDG 16: Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions

The proposed action challenges the integrity of scientific institutions and the rule of law, key components of SDG 16.

• The plan seeks to disregard a comprehensive, 210-page scientific assessment that underpinned the 2009 finding.
• It attempts to circumvent a 2007 Supreme Court ruling that identified greenhouse gases as pollutants the EPA is obligated to regulate.
• Legal experts describe the administration’s legal grounds for the repeal as “very flimsy” and “inconsistent with the way the EPA has dealt with matters for the past 50 years.”
• While expected to face legal challenges, the move is projected to create significant regulatory uncertainty and allow for “irreversible damage” while the legal process unfolds.

Analysis of Sustainable Development Goals in the Article

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

1. SDG 3: Good Health and Well-being
   • The article directly connects pollution to public health. It states that the “endangerment finding” was based on the conclusion that greenhouse gases “harm the health of Americans.” It also warns that reversing environmental protections will “literally lead to tens of thousands of premature deaths every year.”
2. SDG 13: Climate Action
   • This is the central theme of the article. The entire piece discusses the US government’s legal authority “to limit greenhouse gases in order to address the climate crisis.” It details the consequences of inaction, such as “escalating temperatures,” “extreme weather,” and “devastating events” like floods, fires, and hurricanes, all “made worse by climate change.”
3. SDG 11: Sustainable Cities and Communities
   • The article identifies major sources of pollution linked to urban and industrial areas, mentioning “pollution coming from cars, trucks and power plants.” It also notes that the plan would reverse regulations intended to “slash emissions from transportation, the largest sectoral source of carbon pollution in the US.”
4. SDG 7: Affordable and Clean Energy
   • The article mentions that the administration has “moved to squash pollution rules, stymie clean energy and boost fossil fuel production.” This directly relates to the goal of transitioning towards cleaner energy sources.
5. SDG 16: Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions
   • The article focuses on the legal and institutional frameworks for environmental protection. It discusses the “endangerment finding,” the “Clean Air Act,” a “key 2007 supreme court ruling,” and the role of the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). The proposed repeal is described as an attack on these institutions and laws, with one expert stating the administration is “operating on theories that are inconsistent with the way the EPA has dealt with matters for the past 50 years.”

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

1. 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 article’s core argument is that greenhouse gases are pollutants that “harm the health of Americans.” The potential for “tens of thousands of premature deaths every year” due to the reversal of pollution oversight directly aligns with this target.
2. Target 13.1: Strengthen resilience and adaptive capacity to climate-related hazards and natural disasters in all countries.
   • The article explicitly lists climate-related hazards and disasters that are worsening, such as “heatwaves, stronger storms,” “floods in Texas,” “fires in California,” and “hurricanes in Florida.” The failure to regulate emissions undermines the capacity to mitigate these hazards.
3. Target 13.2: Integrate climate change measures into national policies, strategies and planning.
   • The “endangerment finding” and the subsequent regulations under the Clean Air Act are perfect examples of integrating climate change measures into national policy. The article’s main subject is the proposed dismantling of this very integration, which would “hamstring any future administration that sought to resurrect the US’s effort to curb global heating.”
4. 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 limiting pollution from “cars, trucks and power plants” and slashing “emissions from transportation” directly addresses the goal of improving urban air quality and reducing the environmental impact of cities.
5. Target 16.6: Develop effective, accountable and transparent institutions at all levels.
   • The article discusses the potential evisceration of the EPA’s scientific capacity and oversight role. The proposed repeal of a science-based finding, despite overwhelming evidence, represents a move away from effective and accountable institutions. The article notes the plan is to “eviscerate the EPA of scientists and reverse the agency’s oversight of pollution.”

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

1. Mortality from air pollution:
   • The article explicitly mentions that the administration’s actions “will literally lead to tens of thousands of premature deaths every year.” This serves as a direct, albeit projected, indicator for Target 3.9.
2. Greenhouse gas emissions levels:
   • The article is centered on the regulation of “carbon dioxide, along with five other greenhouse gases.” It discusses limiting “pollution coming from cars, trucks and power plants” and emissions from transportation. The amount of these emissions is a key indicator for Targets 13.2 and 11.6.
3. Frequency and cost of extreme weather events:
   • The article provides a specific metric: “255 disasters that have each cost $1bn or more in damages” have occurred since 2009. The increasing frequency of events like “floods,” “fires,” and “hurricanes” is also cited as an indicator of worsening climate impacts, relevant to Target 13.1.
4. Global and national temperature records:
   • The article notes that since the 2009 finding, “eight of the 10 hottest years in recorded US history have occurred.” This is a clear indicator used to demonstrate “escalating temperatures” and the reality of the climate crisis (Target 13.1).
5. Existence of national climate policies and regulations:
   • The “endangerment finding” itself, along with regulations under the Clean Air Act, serves as an indicator of a country’s commitment to integrating climate action into policy (Target 13.2). The proposed repeal is an indicator of regression on this front.

4. Summary of SDGs, Targets, and Indicators

Source: theguardian.com