Word leaked a few weeks ago that the EPA is poised to finalize a rule to  limit the types of scientific studies that can be used to create new regulations. The proposal -- named “Strengthening Transparency in Regulatory Science” -- would require public health researchers to release their raw scientific data in order for their work to be considered when the EPA sets regulations. These regulations dictate things like how much pollution companies can release into the air and water. When the rule was first proposed, the agency received nearly 600,000 comments, the vast majority of them in opposition.  One of those came from Dr. Mary Rice, a pulmonary and critical care physician at Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center.  She also studies the effects of air pollution on lung health. On November 14th, Dr. Rice was one of 5 scientists to testify before the House Science Committee on the proposed rule.

Strengthening Transparency or Silencing Science?

Tracking the latest environment-related shenanigans from Trump & his allies.

News

Politics

When he first ran for President, Donald Trump was called the “chaos candidate”. And to bitter end, that has been borne out. But another kind of radical change has happened over the last four years, often out of the headlines.  So, for our last episode, we take stock of the past four years. 

Series Finale

There have been a number of changes in how the EPA, under President Trump, uses science. It has come with much criticism, including from former EPA officials. On this episode, we hear from a veteran EPA scientist on what drove him to leave the Trump Administration. Chris Zarba worked at the EPA for close to four decades. He was an official in the administrator's office of the agency and also directed the Agency’s Science Advisory Board Staff Office.  

"Sound science is not leading the decisions made by this nation."

The outgoing president has a few orders of business he’d like to take care of before January 20.  Among them is a controversial plan to drill for oil in the country’s largest stretch of untouched wilderness. The Arctic National Wildlife Refuge is 20 million acres of mountains, tundra and coast lands. Underneath it, there are billions of barrels of oil. Similar plans have sparked fights for decades, so why the Trump administration push to drill there now?  Our guest for this episode is Tegan Hanlon, a public radio reporter for Alaska’s Energy Desk in Anchorage. 

Trump’s Last Act: Drilling in the Arctic Refuge

President-Elect Biden ran as a moderate Democrat, but he also campaigned on an aggressive climate platform. How much of that agenda he can pursue could rest on who controls the US Senate, pending results of two runoff elections in Georgia.  We unpack what's coming next with Jody Freeman, law professor and director of the Environmental and Energy Law Program at Harvard Law School. Before that she worked in the Obama White House as counselor for climate and energy where she was the architect of the fuel-efficiency regulations for cars, which were later rolled back under President Trump. 

What does Biden's win mean for the environment and the fight to rein in climate change?

On this episode, we're looking at what role climate change and other environmental issues could play in deciding the election. We check in with reporters in three major battleground states--Michigan, Pennsylvania and Florida--to find out. Our guests are Alex Harris, a climate reporter with the Miami Herald; Lester Graham, a reporter with the Environment Report at Michigan Radio; and Susan Phillips who covers energy for WHYY and StateImpact Pennsylvania.            

Strengthening Transparency or Silencing Science?

Download our free app to listen on your phone