This has been a big week for political news, even by the standards of the Trump administration. We have a Supreme Court nominee who stands accused of a violent crime, leaving his confirmation in doubt (hopefully more than just in doubt). That issue is, understandably, occupying much of our attention, and much of the media’s oxygen. Speaking of oxygen, this week and many of the weeks before it have seen developments that will make the quality of the stuff we breathe, drink, and swallow much worse, and that is thanks to the very same person who brought us the nomination of Brett Kavanaugh.
How do you like breathing in methane? What do you think about trying to prevent methane from leaking into our atmosphere, given that it harms our environment by worsening the negative effects of climate change? This week we saw—not that it was a surprise—that The Man Who Lost The Popular Vote doesn’t worry about things like science. That’s why he formally reversed a rule put in place by President Barack Obama. And it wasn’t an unimportant one:
Methane, which is about 25 times more potent at trapping heat than carbon dioxide, accounts for 9 percent of all domestic greenhouse gas emissions; about a third of that is estimated to come from oil and gas operations. Under the rule, oil and gas companies would have been required to capture leaked methane, update their equipment and write new plans for minimizing waste when drilling on government property. ...
The methane waste rule was aimed at accidental gas leaks and the process of venting and burning off leaked gas, known as flaring, from oil and gas wells on public lands. It was created as part of a broad strategy to tackle climate change as well as wasteful releases of gas. The Bureau of Land Management estimated in 2016 that the rule would prevent as much as 180,000 tons of methane emissions annually, about the equivalent of taking 950,000 cars off the road.
Matt Watson at the Environmental Defense Fund didn’t mince words, calling the rollback “a complete dismantling of federal methane regulation in the United States.” Thankfully, California and New Mexico aren’t taking this action lying down. They’ve filed a lawsuit to block the Trump administration’s move. Said California Attorney General Xavier Becerra, "We've sued the administration before over the illegal delay and suspension of this rule and will continue doing everything in our power to hold them accountable for the sake of our people and planet."
This type of action is the mirror image of the countless lawsuits red-state attorneys general have filed to block executive-branch actions, not to mention legislation (cough, Obamacare). Additionally, Democratic-led states have taken specific policy steps to protect the environment despite Trump’s policies, while, for the most part, Republican-led states have chosen to go along with the White House.
The Trump administration defended its action on methane with the usual rigamarole about regulations that “unduly burden” businesses that are, you know, just trying to get more stuff out of the ground and make more money without having to waste time and some of that aforementioned money worrying about not destroying the environment in the process, because who really gives a shit about that? Please note that only the words “unduly burden” are a direct quote, but the rest of it does reasonably capture the attitude of these sons of bitches.
The rollback of Obama’s rules on methane is far from the first step taken by Mr. 46 Percent of the Popular Vote to sell out our health and that of our planet to corporate interests. These dozens of actions include: changes to rules on coal that even the Trump EPA predicts will result in 1,400 people annually dying younger in just over a decade (the Obama-era EPA predicted even more deaths); scrapping of an Obama rule on automobile emissions (the crap coming out of our tailpipes); and, in the first part of Trump’s two-step on methane, the withdrawal of a requirement that companies actually keep track of methane leaks and fix them when they do occur.
And fret not, lovers of corporate greed: more is coming, with Trump having targeted rules that protect us from silly, not-at-all-harmful mercury emissions. You can see more detailed lists of Trump’s anti-environment—which really means anti-public-health—actions and planned actions here and here.
What will all this mean? Well, an analysis published in the Journal of the American Medical Association used EPA data to estimate that 80,000 lives per decade will be lost thanks to Trump’s policies, and that, according to the authors, is “an extremely conservative estimate.” They added: “This sobering statistic captures only a small fraction of the cumulative public health damages associated with the full range of rollbacks and systemic actions proposed by the Trump Administration.”
Hurricane Florence has already taken dozens of lives in the Carolinas, and that’s with a response that puts the crime of the post-Hurricanes Irma and Maria response in Puerto Rico and the U.S. Virgin Islands in even sharper relief. We know that climate change is, overall, making storms worse, and increasing the number of extreme weather events. That’s indisputable, except by people who dispute the existence of facts and truth.
As for future hurricanes, it’s not just the rolling back of environmental rules that will increase their impact. Trump has also made things worse by, for example, weakening national standards on building in areas likely to be flooded, loosening protections for wetlands, and relaxing rules on storing dangerous chemicals. ”Have a good time” indeed.
Oh, and our polar ice caps are continuing to break apart and melt at an even faster clip. Lovely.
The real question is, What the hell are we going to do about Trump’s attacks on our environment? What are you and I and the American people going to do about it? Are we going to stand by while a billionaire sells out our health, the health of our friends and loved ones, so that other fat cats can make even more money? And not only does that greed take a toll on our bodies; it also makes it impossible for honest businesses—the ones who try to do the right thing on pollution—to compete with those all too willing to cut every corner to make another buck (or a million) so they can buy another yacht or take another jaunt to the south of France.
The answer to that question is that we are going to get out there and organize, and volunteer, and then vote. We must do whatever we can to elect candidates who will fight for our health, for our environment, and against Trump and those who support him. On this issue, as on so many others, lives depend on it.
Ian Reifowitz is the author of Obama’s America: A Transformative Vision of Our National Identity (Potomac Books).