| By Brian Kahn In my dozen years covering climate, nothing compares to the whiplash of the last nine months. At this time last year, the US was issuing gold-standard climate science and enacting a fitful policy to speed the energy transition. Now, the government is memory-holing some of that science and outright blocking wind and solar power. My colleagues Zahra Hirji and Eric Roston — also veteran climate reporters — and I spent the past month taking a step back to see what the hundreds of incremental actions to thwart research add up to for the US and the climate. It’s what Michael Gerrard, faculty director of Columbia University’s Sabin Center for Climate Change Law, described as “a cluster-bomb approach.” What’s clear from our reporting is that the cuts to programs and disappearing data mean that the country and many global institutions that rely on US science will have a fuzzier view of what the future could hold. At the same time that the Trump administration has gutted funding for world-class research programs, it has also welcomed in researchers with fringe views. The Energy Department put out a report downplaying the severity of climate change in July, authored by five authors handpicked by Secretary Chris Wright. Scientists whose work the analysis cites have criticized it as full of misrepresentations. Among its claims: carbon dioxide is beneficial for plants and climate change isn’t increasing the odds of extreme weather, such as heat waves, wildfires and flooding. The science undergirds the need for policies to cut emissions in order to avert even worse climate impacts. Against the backdrop of these moves to challenge science, the Trump administration and Republicans in Congress have wiped out incentives for things like electric vehicles and solar panels. Trump has also expressed disdain for wind energy in particular, and his administration has thrown up a number of roadblocks that stand to effectively put the industry on ice. “Under President Trump’s leadership, agencies are refocusing on their core missions and shifting away from ideological activism,” said White House spokeswoman Taylor Rogers when asked about the government-wide shift. The Environmental Protection Agency, meanwhile, is attempting to roll back the endangerment finding, which allows it to regulate greenhouse gas emissions. The agency, in essence, has proposed handcuffing itself. As a result, the US is now on track to emit hundreds of millions more tons of greenhouse gases in the next decade, according to Princeton University researchers. There are also ramifications for the public. The administration stopped updating the US billion-dollar disaster database earlier this year, even as the number of costly extreme weather events has risen to nearly triple the average since 1980. Insurers keep detailed information on all types of disasters, but industry insiders have warned that not updating the federal database will leave the public in the dark and less likely to take measures to reduce the risk of catastrophic losses. At the same time, Trump and Department of Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem have called for eliminating the Federal Emergency Management Agency, which DHS oversees. That would put the burden of disaster response on states, localities and individuals. Trump launched a review council “tasked with reforming and streamlining the agency,” a group that’s set to release recommendations later this fall. But taken as a whole, our new reporting for this story shows scientists and former policymakers are alarmed by what those actions mean for climate science and the decisions that rely on it. “Some damage will take decades to regain. Some cannot be repaired,” said Julio Friedmann, chief scientist of advisory firm Carbon Direct and a former Energy Department official who served in two administrations. Read the full story on Bloomberg.com. | 
