Trump Admin Snuffs Out Climate Progress at U.S. DOT

Photo: Minesweeper/Wikimedia Commons
Photo: Minesweeper/Wikimedia Commons

At the tail end of the Obama administration, U.S. DOT enacted a new rule to encourage transportation policies that reduce the threat of catastrophic climate change. For the first time, state and regional transportation agencies would have to set targets to reduce the carbon impact of their policies, and to track progress toward those goals.

The rule was supposed to make transportation agencies more accountable for the carbon emissions caused by highway expansions — and to develop plans to reduce the climate impact of transportation. With the transportation sector accounting for more U.S. greenhouse gas emissions than electric power, it was a timely intervention. And now the Trump administration and its militant climate denialism have snuffed it out.

The Federal Highway Administration announced last week that the carbon emissions rule has been revoked, even though public comments overwhelmingly supported maintaining the reporting requirements.

In its announcement, U.S. DOT cited the cost of administering the rule as the reason to discontinue it [PDF]. But the estimated costs were negligible: about $1.7 million annually, across the whole country, according to the FHWA’s own analysis.

The Natural Resources Defense Council is considering a court challenge to U.S. DOT’s decision, said the NRDC’s Deron Lovaas.

NRDC has had success opposing Trump-era environmental rollbacks. The organization won a case last year that compelled the Trump DOT to comply with the greenhouse gas rule while it was still on the books.

  • TakeFive

    I didn’t agree with everything that my favorite President did, especially on his way out to reward some admitted great supporters.

    Not sure about the accounting costs of administering but the opportunity costs of time needed for new projects was ridiculous as was the need to defend pointless lawsuits brought as a strategy to delay and throw whatever was an option against the wall.

  • Is this really a surprise, though? At least some states are still acting on their own. More need to step up and put their money where their mouth is.

  • TakeFive

    Thanks for suggesting that this can still happen; it doesn’t have to be due to federal oversight. My libertarian side suggests this is one area that is best addressed at the state and local level .

  • neroden

    I assume the NDRC will sue over this, because the administration has no rational basis for revoking the rule, so revoking it is illegal.

ALSO ON STREETSBLOG

Will U.S. DOT Get Serious About Climate Change? Here’s Cause for Optimism.

By Angie Schmitt |
Last fall, national environmental advocates sat down with officials from U.S. DOT to talk about how federal transportation policy can address climate change. There is wild variation between state transportation departments when it comes to green transportation policy. Some of the more sophisticated agencies, like California’s and Oregon’s, are starting to factor greenhouse gas emissions into their transportation plans. Most […]

Why Federal Efforts to Link Transportation to Climate Change Matter

By Tony Dutzik |
Cross posted from the Frontier Group.  Twenty-five years ago this spring, I was a fresh-faced undergrad at Penn State enrolled in a course on existential threats to civilization, including climate change. We knew then (and yes, with a reasonable degree of certainty we did know) that emissions of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases were […]