The Biden administration has officially granted California permission to ban new gas car sales in the state by 2035.
California set a strict emissions standard that would ban new gas cars in the state by 2035, but officials needed to obtain a waiver from the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) in order to proceed with the mandate.
The EPA on Wednesday announced that it would be approving two waivers, under the Clean Air Act, that grants California permission to phase out gas cars in the state — one of President Biden's final acts pushing the auto industry into the green energy sector.
One waiver grants California's near future request to mandate that 35% of new cars and light-duty trucks sales be zero emissions by 2026 and achieve 90% below current emissions by 2027.
The other EPA waiver allows California officials to mandate that all new car sales be zero-emission within the decade — the most strict EV mandate in the country.
However, the waivers could soon be revoked by President-elect Trump, who is reportedly planning to rescind both federal EV requirements and any waiver issued for California by the Biden administration.
"Fresh off imposing his insane, job-killing electric vehicle mandate at the federal level, Crooked Joe Biden is preparing to slaughter the remnants of the U.S. auto-industry by approving California’s waiver request outlawing the sale of all gasoline-powered automobiles," incoming White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt told Fox News Digital during the campaign.
EPA Administrator Michael Regan said that the waivers will "protect its [California] residents from dangerous air pollution coming from mobile sources like cars and trucks."
However, American Fuel & Petrochemical Manufacturers CEO and President Chet Thompson described the mandate as "unlawful."
"Contrary to claims on the campaign trail that they would never tell Americans what kinds of cars we have to drive, the Biden-Harris EPA just did exactly that by greenlighting California’s ban on sales of all new gas and traditional hybrid vehicles," Thompson said in a statement. "These policies will harm consumers — millions of whom don’t even live in California — by taking away their ability to buy new gas cars in their home states and raising vehicle and transportation costs."
FIRST ON FOX: Republican lawmakers are calling for political appointees who have already announced roles in outside environmental organizations next year to recuse themselves from pending business, citing "conflicts of interest" concerns.
In a letter to the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) on Tuesday, shared first with Fox News Digital, the Congressional Western Caucus demanded the agency identify people who are planning to join an environmental non-governmental organization (ENGO) and that they recuse themselves from pending business in their current government role. The caucus, made up almost exclusively of Republicans, seeks to be a "voice for rural America," according to its website.
The letter specifically named President Biden's BLM director, Tracey Stone-Manning, who recently announced that after the administration ends, she will assume the role of president of The Wilderness Society, an environmental group working against development, such as mining and drilling, on public lands.
"While we are not surprised to learn of this career move, we are strongly concerned about the conflict of interest that has arisen given the competing missions of her current job and her future job," the letter read.
The letter argued that given the "objectives and practices" of The Wilderness Society, her new position poses a conflict as Stone-Manning leads the government agency.
"Over the last four years, the American West has suffered greatly as the BLM has imposed policies straight from the playbook of the BLM Director’s future employer," the lawmakers wrote of The Wilderness Society. "Across the west, those who live near and rely on public lands for their economic livelihood have suffered from new resource management plans that choose preservation over multiple use."
Rep. Dan Newhouse, R-Wash., chairman of the Congressional Western Caucus, who led Tuesday's letter alongside Sen. Cynthia Lummis, R-Wyo., told Fox News Digital in a statement that BLM should not conflict with the interests of the public.
"The role of BLM is to fairly administer the multiple-use mandate for America’s public lands, a mission at odds with the agenda of extreme environmental groups who want to lock up our lands," Newhouse said in a statement shared with Fox. "For this reason, I have joined my colleagues in demanding any political appointees at the agency recuse themselves from pending official business if they have accepted future positions at ENGOs as this presents a conflict of interest."
Other Republicans cosigning the letter included Sens. John Barrasso of Wyoming, Steve Daines of Montana, and Mike Lee of Utah, along with Reps. Doug LaMalfa of California, Western Caucus executive vice chair, and Ryan Zinke of Montana.
Fox News Digital reached out to BLM for comment but did not receive a response by press time.
An environmental group is calling out Democratic Gov. Gavin Newsom's climate leadership in a six-figure battleground state ad buy which claims his policies in California have "significantly undermined climate progress."
While running for governor in 2018, Newsom said he would shut down the Aliso Canyon Natural Gas Storage Facility in California – the location of the largest methane leak in U.S. history. "I'm fully committed to doing that," Newsom told a reporter when asked if he would shut down the facility. "The question is how quickly can we do that, but my commitment is to make that happen. We need to be more aggressive than we have been."
Newsom added that he was "unequivocally" committed to shutting it down, but environmental groups are calling out the governor after allowing the facility to remain open six years later.
Food & Water Action, the political and lobbying arm of Food & Water Watch advocating against climate change, announced on Monday a $100,000 ad buy against Newsom across four battleground states – Nevada, South Carolina, New Hampshire and Michigan.
The ad buy specifically targets Newsom's leadership on the climate, specifically for not following through on his campaign promise regarding the Aliso Canyon facility.
"Americans are looking for leadership to resist Trump’s assault on our climate. Someone who follows through and won’t back down," the ad says. "Gov. Newsom promised to shut down Aliso Canyon, the site of the largest gas blowout in U.S. history. A public health disaster. But his public utilities commission is considering keeping it open indefinitely – just like the oil and gas industry wants. Climate leadership? We’re looking for it."
However, in a statement shared with Fox News Digital, Daniel Villaseñor, spokesperson for Newsom, said that "the Governor’s energy policy is ambitious, not reckless."
"We are committed to safely closing Aliso Canyon without harming working families with skyrocketing utility bills," the spokesperson said. "No governor has done more to accelerate our transition to clean and renewable energy, but it would be irresponsible to close Aliso Canyon before demand for natural gas declines. That’s a recipe for precisely the same price spikes we've seen in the gasoline market."
Villaseñor added that Newsom "wants to see Aliso Canyon phased out, but not at the cost of enormous price increases for working families and our ability to keep the lights on." The California Public Utilities Commission is planning to meet on Dec. 19 to discuss the future of the facility.
The environmental group claims that Newsom is trying to appear as a climate change champion, but that his record in California suggests otherwise.
"Governor Newsom wants to position himself as a national leader on climate and in opposing Trump, but he can’t be a credible national leader if his own house is not in order," Mitch Jones, deputy director of Food & Water Action, said in a press release.
"While Newsom has taken some important steps on oil drilling, other policies have significantly undermined climate progress. These include undermining rooftop solar, embracing industry-backed plans like dirty biogas and carbon capture, and failing so far to keep his promise to close Aliso Canyon," Jones added.
While there is still a push from environmental groups to shut down the facility, it remains California’s largest underground natural gas storage facility and its operation has helped the state avoid potential energy price increases, according to the Energy Information Administration.
The ads were notably launched in battleground states amid months of speculation that Newsom could potentially launch a presidential bid in 2028.
Newsom was a top surrogate for President Biden during his re-election bid, and was floated as a leading candidate to replace him at the top of the Democratic ticket before the president dropped out of the race.
The governor's second term in Sacramento will finish at the end of next year, right around the time the 2028 presidential election will start to heat up.
President-elect Donald Trump has indicated that he would withdraw the U.S. from a global climate change agreement when he assumes office — but a second withdrawal could look different from the first.
The Paris Climate Agreement was established at the U.N. Climate Change Conference in 2015 as a legally binding treaty between nearly 195 parties who are committed to international cooperation on climate change. The U.S. officially entered into the agreement under former President Barack Obama in 2016.
Under Article 28 of the treaty, parties are allowed to withdraw from the agreement, but no earlier than three years after they officially entered. Therefore, Trump was barred from immediately leaving the treaty when he first took office and the U.S. was not officially withdrawn until the end of 2020.
President Joe Biden, in one of his first orders as president, reinstated the U.S. to the climate agreement in 2021. Ahead of the presidential election, Trump told Politico that he would be in favor of withdrawing from the treaty a second time, and given that Biden withdrew at the beginning of his term, this could be accomplished at a much quicker pace.
"It would be a very different timeline now," David Waskow, director of the international climate initiative at the World Resources Institute, told Scientific American.
Max Boykoff, professor in the Department of Environmental Studies and a fellow in the Cooperative Institute for Research and Environmental Sciences (CIRES) at CU Boulder, told the university's paper that re-exiting from the agreement could cause "a loss of trust" among world leaders.
Boykoff also suggested that a U.S. withdrawal could encourage other countries to also exit the treaty, as it was recently reported that Argentina's Libertarian President Javier Milei is considering it.
"The withdrawal may also cause other leaders, who have also expressed resistance to addressing climate policy as a priority in their own countries, to leave the agreement," Boykoff told CU Boulder Today.
However, those in favor of Trump releasing the U.S. from the agreement tell Fox News Digital that there would be many benefits to a second withdrawal.
"The benefits of exiting the Paris climate agreement are many, first and foremost reclaiming U.S. sovereignty while respecting the rule of law," said H. Sterling Burnett, Director of the Arthur B. Robinson Center on Climate and Environmental Policy at the Heartland Institute.
"Paris encourages the U.S. to agree to emission reductions that are both unnecessary from a climate perspective, since we don't control the climate, but which do place substantial costs on Americans while putting the nation at a competitive and geopolitical disadvantage to China, which emits more than double the U.S. with no firm reduction commitments," he added.
Burnett also suggested that Trump submit the treaty to the Senate for advice and consent, which would require a two-thirds vote for the U.S. to rejoin the climate agreement — creating a potential hurdle for future administrations seeking to reenter the accord.
Also under consideration is whether the incoming president will withdraw from the U.N. Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), a treaty established in 1992 to prevent "dangerous human interference with the climate system."
Mandy Gunasekara, former EPA chief of staff during Trump's first term, suggested that the incoming president should not only withdraw from the treaty, but also exit UNFCCC, POLITICO E&E Reported.
Gunasekara said that the administration should get out of UNFCCC "if they’re looking for a more permanent response to getting out of bad deals for the American economy that do little to actually improve the environment."
Other leaders have suggested that the Paris Agreement itself could suffer in the future if the U.S. is not involved.
"The Paris Agreement can survive, but people sometimes can lose important organs or lose the legs and survive. But we don’t want a crippled Paris agreement. We want a real Paris agreement," Secretary-General of the United Nations, António Guterres, told the Guardian. "It’s very important that the United States remain in the Paris Agreement, and more than remain in the Paris agreement, that the United States adopts the kind of policies that are necessary to make the 1.5 degrees still a realistic objective."
FIRST ON FOX: A controversial judicial advocacy organization funded by left-wing nonprofits continues to work with judges and experts involved in climate change litigation despite publicly downplaying the extent of those connections.
"CJP doesn’t participate in litigation, support or coordinate with any parties in litigation, or advise judges on how they should rule in any case," the Environmental Law Institute Climate Judiciary Project President Jordan Diamond wrote in a recent letter to The Wall Street Journal in response to criticism of the project.
The Washington, D.C.-based Environmental Law Institute (ELI) created the Climate Judiciary Project (CJP) in 2018, establishing a first-of-its-kind resource to provide "reliable, up-to-date information" about climate change litigation, according to the group. The project's reach has extended to various state and federal courts, including powerful appellate courts, and comes as various cities and states pursue high-profile litigation against the oil industry.
A Fox News Digital review shows that several CJP expert lawyers and judges have close ties to the curriculum and are deeply involved in climate litigation.
Princeton University professor Michael Oppenheimer contributed to the CJP curriculum and presented "Evidence of Change: Judging Climate Litigation" with CJP’s Sandra Nichols Thiam at the 2022 Ninth Circuit Judicial Conference July 20, 2022.
Oppenheimer has a long history of filing climate-related amicus briefs from 2019-2022 in litigation across several states.
Robin Kundis Craig, a professor at the University of Utah's Law School, wrote a module for CJP in 2022 and has also filed several amicus briefs showing she is active in court cases.
One example occurred in 2023, when Craig is listed on an order granting legal scholars' request to file amicus, which was signed by Justice Mark Recktenwald, who, Fox News Digital previously reported, quietly disclosed last year that he presented for an April course in collaboration with the Environmental Law Institute Climate Judiciary Project.
Recktenwald co-presented at a December 2022 National Judicial College webinar sponsored by CJP, "Hurricanes in a Changing Climate and Related Litigation." In 2023, he co-presented with Professor Robert DeConto at a National Judicial College seminar, "Rising Seas and Litigation: What Judges Need to Know about Warming-Driven Sea-Level Rise."
In October 2023, Recktenwald’s Hawaii Supreme Court denied an appeal from oil companies to toss a Honolulu climate misinformation suit.
Craig also filed an amicus in Hawaii state court in July 2022, where an order was signed by Judge Jeffrey Crabtree allowing the brief to be filed. Crabtree is a member of the National Judicial College Curriculum Development Committee, which creates curricula for "Environmental Law Essential for the Judiciary."
"Don’t underestimate the importance of the role of state court judges in environmental law," the curriculum's website states.
Ann Carlson, who joined the Biden administration in 2021, served on ELI's board of directors for years while also "providing pro bono consulting" for Sher Edling, an eco law firm representing a number of jurisdictions, on litigation against oil companies, financial disclosures showed. Sher Edling counsel Michael Burger has also participated in multiple ELI events, and former Sher Edling lawyer Meredith Wilensky was previously an ELI Public Interest Law Fellow.
Burger is the executive director of the Sabin Center for Climate Change Law and an ELI presenter who has filed amicus briefs in support of plaintiffs in climate cases across the United States.
UCLA’s Emmett Institute on Climate Change and the Environment hosted a talk in October 2017 with Sher Edling’s Vic Sher, "Suing Over Climate Change Damages: The First Wave of Climate Lawsuits." Ann Carlson was the moderator for that discussion.
John Dernbach, listed as an expert on CJP’s website, filed an amicus brief in 2019 as part of a brief of legal scholars in support of plaintiffs in City of Oakland v BP.
"Judges attending Climate Judiciary Project events are advised that they are walking into a left-wing lobbying shop," American Energy Institute President Jason Isaac told Fox News Digital. "Under the guise of ‘judicial education,’ CJP uses activist academics to give a pro-plaintiff sneak peek at climate change lawsuits. This kind of politicking underlines that the climate change lawsuits themselves are a left-wing attack on our quality of life.
"The Supreme Court will have an opportunity early next year to hear a case asking whether blue states and far-left mayors like Brandon Johnson can sue energy providers for climate change. Let us hope the court takes the case and ends Green New Deal lawfare."
Fox News Digital previously reported that since it was founded more than five years ago, the project has crafted 13 curriculum modules and hosted 42 events, and more than 1,700 judges have participated in its activities. And multiple judges serve as advisers at CJP, potentially having an impact on its curriculum and modules.
"So-called ‘climate change lawsuits,' lawsuits claiming that private companies should be monetarily liable for damage to public infrastructure allegedly caused by climate change, have exploded in the past five years," GOP Sen. Ted Cruz wrote in a letter to Environmental Law Institute earlier this year.
"In tandem with this unprecedented litigation, the Environmental Law Institute (ELI) launched a ‘first-of-its-kind effort’ to provide judges with ‘education on climate science, the impacts of climate change, and the ways climate science is arising in the law.’ It appears that ELI’s goal in providing this ‘education,’ however, may be to influence judges to side with plaintiffs in climate change cases."
The letter went on to label Carlson as "one of the program’s architects" and requested "information to allow the Committee to evaluate the efforts of both Ms. Carlson and ELI to influence the federal judiciary in its adjudication of climate litigation."
Cruz alleged that "ELI intends to accomplish via the courts what it cannot get enacted into law: a radical environmental agenda."
"To help judges reach those ‘appropriate’ decisions, the Project developed the ‘Climate Science and Law for Judges Curriculum’ (the Curriculum). While ELI claims the Project is ‘neutral' and ‘objective,’ the Curriculum reads like a playbook for judges to find in favor of plaintiffs in artificial climate change cases against traditional energy companies: it includes courses that ‘show how climate science is built on long-established scientific disciplines' and 'explore the human-caused component of [global] warming,’ such as the ‘causal connections between emissions’ and ‘changes in the climate.’"
An American Energy Institute report earlier this year alleges CJP "hides its partnership with the plaintiffs because they know these ties create judicial ethics problems."
AEI says Sandra Nichols Thiam, an ELI vice president and director of judicial education, acknowledged as much in a 2023 press statement, saying, "If we even appeared biased or if there was a whiff of bias, we wouldn’t be able to do what we’re doing."
"Taken together, it appears CJP made the thinnest possible disclosures to create the appearance of rectitude," AEI states. "But their admissions confirm that CJP exists to facilitate informal, ex parte contacts between judges and climate activists under the guise of judicial education. And secrecy remains essential to their operation, whose goal, as Thiam has said, is to develop ‘a body of law that supports climate action.'"
AEI, a group self-described as "dedicated to promoting policies that ensure America’s energy security and economic prosperity," says CJP’s work is "an attack on the rule of law."
"In America, the powerful aren’t allowed to coax and manipulate judges before their cases are heard," the report states.
In a statement to Fox News Digital, an ELI spokesperson said, "CJP doesn’t participate in litigation, support or coordinate with any parties in litigation, or advise judges on how they should rule in any case. Our courses provide judges with access to evidence-based information about climate science and trends in the law.
"Of course, experts in the field are welcome to provide their expertise to CJP programs while separately and independently providing that same expertise in another setting that is unrelated to the CJP program. It is routine and encouraged for judges to participate in continuing education that exposes them to expertise in a wide variety of disciplines."
Fox News Digital’s Thomas Catenacci contributed to this report
The premier of a key region in Canada is threatening to cut off energy and critical mineral exports to the U.S. if President-elect Trump implements a sweeping tariff on all Canadian products.
Trump recently threatened a 25% tariff on all Canadian and Mexican exports in an effort to stop the flow of illegal immigration and illicit drugs coming into the U.S.
Just days after Trump's announcement, Doug Ford, the premier of Ontario, said that he would consider retaliatory measures against the U.S. if the incoming president acted on his promise.
"We will go to the extent of cutting off their energy — going down to Michigan, going down to New York State and over to Wisconsin," Ford told reporters.
"Some premiers proactively identified products that their provinces produce and export to the United States and which the U.S. relies on, and which should be considered as part of the Canadian response. This included some critical minerals and metals," Ford said.
Canada was reportedly the largest source of U.S. energy imports in 2019, according to the Energy Information Administration.
"Canadians get hurt, but I can assure you one thing: the Americans are going to feel the pain as well, and isn’t that unfortunate?" Ford said.
Ford is also reportedly considering barring American-made alcohol from being sold in Ontario.
Ford, however, might not be able to unilaterally cut off the province's energy supply to the U.S., according to a Canadian political science professor.
"I do not believe Ontario could unilaterally stop electricity exports to the U.S. without Ottawa’s approval. Similarly, Michigan cannot unilaterally stop the flow of western Canadian natural gas to eastern Canada without Washington’s approval," University of Toronto political science Professor Nelson Wiseman told Now Toronto in response to Ford's retaliatory threat.
Trump responded to the threats, saying "that's okay if he does that."
"The United States is subsidizing Canada, and we shouldn't have to do that," Trump told CNBC at the New York Stock Exchange on Thursday. "And we have a great relationship. I have so many friends in Canada, but we shouldn't have to subsidize a country."
After Trump threatened a tariff on the country, Prime Minister Justin Trudeau traveled to West Palm Beach, Florida, to meet with the incoming president at Mar-a-Lago. Trump called it a "very productive meeting."
The Biden administration is seeking to rapidly disperse climate funds to cement the president's green energy agenda before President-elect Trump assumes the Oval Office in January.
In a memo released by the White House, Jeff Zients, White House chief of staff, said that the administration is going to "sprint to the finish line and get as much done as possible for the American people" in the remaining weeks of President Biden's term.
The top Biden official said that they plan to "obligate as much funding as possible before the end of the term," including dishing out unspent funds from the Inflation Reduction Act (IRA) to support climate-related projects.
The White House also said that Americans can "expect more action" on funding from the IRA — the Democrats' climate legislation.
Trump has suggested that he would "undo" the IRA when he becomes president, legislation he has described as the "greatest scam in history."
Though some House Republicans, who secured a majority in the chamber in the next Congress, have also signaled support for reworking the climate bill, House Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La., told CNBC that "you've got to use a scalpel and not a sledgehammer" on the legislation.
It's unlikely, however, that the IRA would be completely overturned, given that nearly all the funds have already been awarded.
White House spokesperson Andrew Bates warned against Republicans and the incoming administration attempting to undo Biden's agenda.
"Repealing President Biden’s signature laws would be an historic redistribution of wealth from working Americans to Big Pharma and China," Bates said in a memo first obtained by NBC News, adding that despite potential pushback, projects under the IRA "have been locked-in."
Bates also suggested that Republican districts are benefiting from the IRA.
"That includes the creation of over 330,000 clean energy jobs — disproportionately in House districts represented by Republicans," he wrote. "Because of the Inflation Reduction Act, we’ve already saved more than 3.4 million Americans $8.4 million on clean energy upgrades to their homes, and more than 300,000 Americans have saved over $2 billion upfront on [electric vehicle] purchases."
The Supreme Court heard oral arguments Tuesday on a case that could reshape a key environmental law and determine the future of an oil railway project in the west.
The National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) requires federal agencies to conduct a review of environmental impacts before making any decisions and then issue a "detailed statement" of the review.
SCOTUS heard arguments in the Seven County Infrastructure Coalition v. Eagle County case, to decide whether an agency is required to study environmental impacts beyond the "proximate effects of the action over which the agency has regulatory authority." Justices appeared open to reconsidering the scope of NEPA, but did not specify how they would adjust the law.
The Seven Country Infrastructure Coalition (SCIC) petitioned the Surface Transportation Board (STB), a federal agency, to build an over 80-mile transportation system to connect crude oil from Utah's Uinta Basin to a national railway.
The STB released an Environmental Impact Statement on the railway, but opponents of the project in Eagle County, Colorado, argued that the federal agency did not consider all of its environmental effects – therefore, violating NEPA.
The case was brought to a D.C. Circuit Court, which ruled that STB had violated environmental law and that a new, more thorough review be conducted before the project moves forward. In March 2024, SCIC petitioned SCOTUS in the case.
Paul Clement, the attorney backing the SCIC project, argued that it is a "straightforward case" and requested NEPA be limited to "proximate cause" principles.
"NEPA is a self-described procedural statute. It is designed to inform government decision-making, not paralyze it," Clement argued on Tuesday.
Clement called the D.C. court's request to conduct further environmental review "a recipe for turning a procedural statute into a substantive roadblock."
"All of that is not just remote in time and space but falls well outside the STB's limited remand – remit, and it falls within the jurisdiction of other agencies that can address those issues comprehensively and concretely if and when they arise," he said during the oral arguments.
Several justices appeared to agree that the D.C. court's issuing of an entirely new environmental review of the project may have been unnecessary.
"It's not a question of did it fail to look at something," Justice Sonia Sotomayer said. "So the question before us was, was it arbitrary and capricious for it not to consider something more?"
The judges questioned Clement on how his request would impact the scope of environmental reviews, such as on smaller or larger projects.
Clement replied, "If the environmental impact statement is focused on the project, it will inform – you can pick one route versus another, or the agency itself can impose mitigation measures. But, if you have to look at everything under the sun, that's outside the ambit of the agency."
"This case is bigger than the Uinta Basin Railway," Sam Sankar, Earthjustice vice president of programs, said in a statement. "The fossil fuel industry and its allies are making radical arguments that would blind the public to obvious health consequences of government decisions. The court should stick with settled law instead. If it doesn’t, communities will pay the price."
Justice Neil Gorsuch, on Dec. 4, dismissed himself from the case ahead of arguments.
President-elect Donald Trump is expected to roll back several of President Joe Biden's green energy policies and initiatives when he assumes office in 2024.
While on the campaign trail, Trump vowed to lift the Biden administration's "war on energy" and "disastrous" energy policies.
"They annihilated your steel mills, decimated your coal jobs, assaulted your oil and gas jobs and sold off your manufacturing jobs to China and other foreign nations all over the world," Trump said of the current administration.
Trump appointed North Dakota Gov. Doug Burgum to head his newly formed National Energy Council, and former Rep. Lee Zeldin to head the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) – two pro-energy appointees who are expected to take aim at several of Biden's policies. Here are five ways Trump could overturn several of those in short order:
The Paris Agreement, established at the U.N. Climate Change Conference in 2015, is a legally binding treaty among nearly 195 parties who are committed to international cooperation on climate change.
Trump officially withdrew from the treaty in 2020, but Biden reinstated the U.S. to the climate agreement after taking office in 2021.
The Trump campaign told Politico in June that the president-elect would be in favor of withdrawing the U.S. from the treaty for a second time if re-elected.
The EPA announced a final rule in March under the Clean Air Act to set new emissions standards that would require up to two-thirds of new cars sold to be electric vehicles by 2032.
The new standards would affect "light-duty vehicle manufacturers, independent commercial importers, alternative fuel converters, and manufacturers and converters of medium-duty vehicles," according to the EPA's final rule.
House Republicans have taken steps to block the mandate, passing the Congressional Review Act (CRA) in September to block the "out-of-touch regulation" from being enacted.
Biden is currently offering a tax credit of up to $7,500 to incentivize the purchase of greener vehicles.
However, sources with knowledge of the matter told Reuters that Trump plans to ax the tax credit as part of his sweep of Biden's climate agenda.
One of Trump's strongest allies, Tesla CEO Elon Musk, revealed in July that he supports getting rid of the credit. "Take away the subsidies," Musk posted to X, saying that "it will only help Tesla."
Companies that are financially sound, such as Tesla, could benefit if the playing field for electric vehicles is narrowed, while the smaller companies that rely on the tax credit for consumer affordability could face setbacks, analysts suggest.
Biden's Bureau of Land Management (BLM) recently approved an amendment to the Resource Management Plan (RMP) to ban new federal coal leases, essentially blocking any new federal mining leases in Wyoming's Powder River Basin, the country's largest coal-producing region, by 2041.
This region produces about 40% of the nation's coal. BLM, however, will allow for existing coal leases to continue to be developed.
Following the decision, Trump's transition team reinforced the idea of the president-elect's campaign promise to bolster American-made energy.
"Families have suffered under the past four years' war on American energy, which prompted the worst inflation crisis in a generation. Voters re-elected President Trump by a resounding margin, giving him a mandate to implement the promises he made on the campaign trail, including lowering energy costs for consumers," Karoline Leavitt, Trump-Vance Transition spokeswoman, said in a statement to Fox News Digital.
Biden's EPA recently announced that it will try to "incentivize" the oil and gas industry to reduce methane emissions by imposing a Waste Emissions Charge, allowed under the Inflation Reduction Act.
Under the Biden administration's new rule, certain oil and gas facilities would be charged $900 per metric ton of "wasteful" emissions in CY 2024, $1,200 for CY 2025 and $1,500 for CY 2026.
Trump-supporting oil-advocacy groups and House lawmakers slammed the fee, with the American Petroleum Institute releasing a policy road map for the incoming Trump administration to hit back against the EPA's final rule.
"Energy was on the ballot" in the 2024 elections, American Petroleum Institute President and CEO Mike Sommers told Fox News Digital in a statement following Trump's victory in November.
In electing Trump, Sommers said that voters had "sent a clear signal that they want choices, not mandates, and an all-of-the-above approach that harnesses our nation’s resources and builds on the successes of his first term."
The Biden administration has made a precedent-setting arrest related to anti-climate change activities this fiscal year, highlighted in a new report that shows a ramped-up enforcement effort against environmental offenses.
On Thursday, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) issued a final report on enforcement efforts under President Biden, which detailed how climate-related penalties were enforced this fiscal year.
The EPA worked to implement the American Innovation and Manufacturing (AIM) Act, which requires the agency to reduce hydrofluorocarbons, a synthetic compound commonly used for refrigeration or air conditioning, by 85% by 2036.
The AIM Act led to the arrest of Michael Hart, of San Diego, in March on charges related to "smuggling potent greenhouse gases," highlighted in the EPA report. The charges marked the first-ever greenhouse gas-related arrest issued under the AIM Act, but according to an EPA press release from earlier this year, "it will not be the last."
Additionally, the EPA reported issuing $1.7 billion in administrative and judicial penalties, the highest level since 2017.
The agency’s environmental enforcement efforts also saw 1,851 civil cases concluded, 121 criminal defendants charged, and it issued more than 225 million pounds of "pollution reductions" in "overburdened communities," according to the report. As of the end of 2024, there are about 480 open criminal investigations on environmental programs.
The results reflect a 3.4% increase in civil cases and a 17.6% increase in criminal charges compared to 2023, The Associated Press reported.
In the FY 2024 report, the EPA also noted that collaborative efforts on the "implementation of EPA’s national priorities" led to a "12% increase in criminal leads opened because of referrals from EPA Headquarters and regional offices."
"In Fiscal Year 2024, EPA’s enforcement and compliance assurance program produced its strongest results since 2017, focusing on efforts to combat climate change and tackling some of the nation’s most significant environmental threats to our shared air, water and land," David M. Uhlmann, assistant administrator for EPA’s Office of Enforcement and Compliance Assurance, said in a statement. "The progress made under the Biden-Harris Administration has sent a clear signal that polluters will be held accountable and that protecting communities from harm is a top priority."
The agency zeroed in on six areas of priority for FY 2024 as part of their National Enforcement and Compliance Initiative: mitigating climate change, exposure to PFAS, working against communities from coal ash contamination, reducing air toxics in overburdened communities, increasing compliance with drinking water standards and chemical accident risk reduction.
Biden has made issuing green energy projects a focus of his administration, most recently handing out billions of dollars to fund climate-related projects in the remaining months of his term before President-elect Trump steps into office.
The Biden administration announced a big decision to block new mining in a key region producing nearly half of the nation's coal over climate change concerns, but it could be short-lived as President-elect Trump prepares to make U.S. energy dominance a key focus of his incoming administration.
Biden's Bureau of Land Management (BLM) recently approved an amendment to the Resource Management Plan (RMP) to ban new federal coal leases and make "48.12 billion short tons of coal unavailable for leasing consideration in order to reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions as a proxy for climate change," according to Todd D. Yeager, BLM Buffalo field manager.
The decision will block any new federal mining leases in Wyoming's Powder River Basin, the country's largest coal producing region, by 2041. This region produces about 40% of the nation's coal. BLM, however, will allow for existing coal leases to still be developed.
In a statement to Fox News Digital regarding the decision, Trump's transition team reinforced the idea of the president-elect's campaign promise to bolster American-made energy.
"Families have suffered under the past four years' war on American energy, which prompted the worst inflation crisis in a generation. Voters re-elected President Trump by a resounding margin giving him a mandate to implement the promises he made on the campaign trail, including lowering energy costs for consumers," Karoline Leavitt, Trump-Vance Transition spokeswoman, said in a statement.
Leavitt added that when Trump takes office, he "will make America energy dominant again, protect our energy jobs, and bring down the cost of living for working families."
The Powder River Basin lease ban, which covers parts of southeast Montana and northeast Wyoming, includes making more than 1.7 million acres unavailable for coal leasing within the Miles City Field Office planning area.
The BLM memo claimed that the "U.S. energy market is moving away from coal to lower priced natural gas and renewable energy sources." But the affected state representatives say the region is a vital natural energy resource.
The decision was widely criticized by Montana and Wyoming elected officials, including Sen. Steve Daines, R–Mont., who said he would be introducing legislation in an attempt to reverse the decision.
"At every turn, the Biden administration has launched attack after attack on made-in-Montana energy, and the people of Montana and the rest of the country rebuked the administration for it at the ballot box," Daines said in a statement following the decision. "… Eastern Montana is rich in coal and mining operations and the jobs and coal produced in the Powder River Basin help support our national security, bolster our energy grid and create high-paying jobs."
"Once again, the Biden-Harris administration is ignoring states and crippling our energy supply," Gov. Greg Gianforte, R-Mont., said in a statement. "While Montana supports an 'all-of-the-above' energy strategy, the White House is picking winners and losers on the president's way out the door. Simply put, this rule will destroy coal jobs and defund public education in Montana. It's a disaster."
"After the American people issued a stunning rebuke to President Biden, he continues to punish Wyoming communities," Sen. John Barrasso, R-Wyo., said in a statement. "I will work with President Trump and his team to reverse this and other midnight regulations."
The BLM memo said the administration is blocking coal leasing to support Biden's target of reaching net-zero greenhouse gas emissions by 2050, suggesting that "the U.S. energy market is moving away from coal to lower priced natural gas and renewable energy sources."
Earth Justice, an environmental justice group, also claimed the mining bans stemmed from an evolving approach to energy production.
"Coal has powered our nation for many decades, but technology, economics and markets are changing radically. BLM’s announcement recognizes that coal’s era is ending, and it’s time to focus on supporting our communities through the transition away from coal, investing in workers, and moving to heal our lands, waters and climate as we enter a bright clean energy future," Paula Antoine, Western Organization of Resource Councils board chair, said in an Earth Justice press release after Biden announced his initial plans in May.
A federal judge sided with SpaceX after an environmental group sought to stop its rocket launches just months before the company's CEO is slated to work closely with the incoming Trump administration.
During static fire tests and launches, SpaceX uses a "deluge system" that applies water to the rocket engine exhaust to absorb heat and prevent explosions during takeoff.
SpaceX has said the system uses "clean, potable (drinking) water" for the tests, but a Texas-based environmental group claims the process poses a risk to the environment.
In an October lawsuit, Save RGV, a nonprofit based in the Rio Grande Valley of Texas, claimed SpaceX was violating the Clean Water Act by releasing wastewater from the launches at Starbase in Boca Chica Beach, roughly 25 miles east of the city of Brownsville.
The group requested a restraining order be put in place to block SpaceX from using the deluge system, which would put a hold on rocket launches.
In a post on X, formerly Twitter, after the suit was filed, the aeronautics company said an environmental review had already been conducted that cleared the system from any environmental hazards.
"The Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (TCEQ) conducted a technical review of Starship’s water-cooled flame deflector, which uses potable (drinking) water and determined that its use does not pose risk to the environment," SpaceX said in an Oct. 10 post. "Save RGV acknowledged that they are aware of these straightforward facts and still filed an unwarranted and frivolous lawsuit."
In a new ruling, U.S. District Judge Rolando Olvera denied the restraining order request, saying that halting the rocket launches could have various negative implications, including for NASA.
"Being unable to launch would create various consequences for not only Defendant, but also the public at large. It would significantly delay and possibly destroy Defendant’s contracts with NASA to further the Artemis Program and Human Landing System Program — worth billions of dollars," Olvera wrote.
The judge also ruled that SpaceX has not been harming the environment, citing environmental reviews that have already been conducted on the launch system.
"At the beginning of the Starship-Super Heavy Launch System’s development, it became evident that a deluge water system was necessary to protect the launch site and surrounding areas during launches," the judge wrote. "A deluge water system sprays large quantities of potable water at the base of the spacecrafts during launch to prevent fires and reduce dispersal of dust and debris."
The decision comes just two months before Musk is expected to work closely with President-elect Trump's administration.
Musk is planning to work with Trump and entrepreneur Vivek Ramaswamy on the newly formed Department of Government Efficiency to cut government spending.
President-elect Donald Trump is reportedly planning to focus heavily on two policy changes to boost natural energy production during his first days in office, according to a new report.
As his second-term agenda takes shape, the president-elect is eyeing immediate changes to current policies on liquefied natural gas (LNG) permits and oil and gas drilling leases, sources familiar with the transition plans told Reuters.
President Biden initiated a pause on new LNG export permits in January, a move which has been widely criticized by the oil community and bipartisan lawmakers in the House. The National Association of Manufacturers conducted a study on the ban that found nearly 1 million jobs would be threatened by the LNG pause over the next two decades if the restriction remains in place, Fox News Digital previously reported.
However, Trump reportedly "plans to go strong on the issue" of LNG exports when he assumes office, sources told Reuters.
The Republican president-elect plans to lift Biden's pause and allow permits for new LNG exports next year, fulfilling a promise he made frequently while on the campaign trail.
Trump will also seek to increase lease sales for drilling along the coast, expedite permit approval, and expand drilling on federal land, the outlet learned.
The latest report comes as several of Biden's climate-focused initiatives appear to be in jeopardy under the incoming Trump administration.
Trump has talked for months about his plans to roll back Biden's green policies, such as the tax credit for electric vehicle purchases. He also plans to withdraw from the Paris climate accord for the second time, expand fracking, and revive the Keystone XL pipeline, which was canceled on Biden's first day in office.
"It's a breath of fresh air. We're running on cloud nine," former Keystone Pipeline worker Bugsy Allen said on "Fox & Friends Weekend," on Sunday – amid news of Trump's potentially reviving the pipeline that transported crude oil from Canada to the U.S.
"It will make a big difference as far as your energy cost, your food cost, your gas that you put in your cars. It is actually going to be the primary start of bringing everything … down for the American people that we have suffered so much in the last administration."
A bipartisan group of lawmakers passed legislation in the House to bolster geothermal energy production by increasing the frequency of lease sales.
The Committing Leases for Energy Access Now Act (CLEAN) passed in the House Tuesday and will amend the Geothermal Steam Act of 1970 to require the Department of Interior (DOI) to hold lease sales every year, rather than every two years.
Additionally, the bill seeks to speed up the permit process for lease sales by setting a 30-day deadline for the DOI to notify an applicant if a permit has been approved.
The bill also requires the DOI hold a replacement sale if a lease sale is canceled or missed.
Democrats arguing against the bill claimed a 30-day deadline to approve leases did not give the Department of Interior enough time to conduct thorough analysis of the projects.
The bill was approved by a bipartisan vote, securing the support of 213 Republicans and 31 Democrats.
"Geothermal energy has tremendous potential to provide reliable, clean energy for millions of Americans," Rep. Russ Fulcher, R-Idaho, who introduced the bill, said in a statement.
"As nearly 90% of our nation's geothermal resources are located on federally managed lands, I introduced the CLEAN Act to unleash these critical resources by cutting red tape and increasing lease opportunities on federal lands. This legislation will hold the Department of Interior accountable and is key to bolstering domestic energy production, reducing our reliance on foreign adversaries and meeting America’s growing energy demands."
"Geothermal is an important component of our all of the above energy strategy," said Western Caucus Chairman Rep. Dan Newhouse, R-Wash. "I was very pleased to see the passage of the CLEAN Act out of the U.S. House earlier today to help unlock the full potential of geothermal and boost energy production on federal lands across the west. I applaud Congressman Fulcher’s leadership and work on this important issue."
