The Washington Post describes the astonishing results of a new study of soil moisture on the planet. The researchers found that “the amount of water stored on lands across Earth’s continents has declined at such staggering levels that changes are likely irreversible while humans are alive.” The loss of water from the soil, caused by rising temperatures and prolonged droughts, creates challenges for farming, irrigation systems and the continued provision of critical water resources for humans. The subsequent deposition of evaporated water into the ocean contributes to sea level rise, adding (according to this new study) more each year than the melting of ice on Greenland.

At the same time, the warmer and wetter atmosphere is producing devastating downpours. The Washington Post reports that a multi-day storm inundated parts of the South with heavy rain and tornadoes. Meteorologists were warning of generational flooding that could sweep the region, including in Tennessee, which has experienced severe flooding during the past decade. The Memphis International Airport had its wettest April day ever with 5.47 inches of rain. Climate change is contributing to these downpours because the warmer air can hold more moisture, and because “storms that send extreme amounts of tropical moisture flowing into Tennessee and the South are becoming more common.”

The Guardian reports that the U.S. EPA is proposing to cut 31 regulations, “including rules limiting harmful air pollution from cars and power plants; restrictions on the emission of mercury, a neurotoxin; and clean water protections for rivers and streams.” EPA Administrator Lee Zeldin demonstrated his scientific incompetency by calling these rollbacks a “dagger straight into the heart of the climate change religion.” The EPA’s own assessments conclude that the regulations proposed for rollback “will prevent nearly 200,000 deaths over the next 25 years” and “deliver at least $254bn in economic benefits annually via lowered healthcare costs and fewer sick days, among other improvements. By contrast, the cost of complying with the regulations is around $40bn a year.”

Zeldin has also announced the wholesale dismantling of the EPA’s Office of Research and Development (ORD). Grist describes the damage this will cause to public health and the environment, as the layoffs of chemists, toxicologists, biologists, and other experts at ORD will “leave the EPA without the independent and rigorous science needed to develop effective regulations.” The leadership of ORD found out about the plan by reading the newspaper. Inside Climate News reports that the EPA has canceled the planned meeting of ORD’s Board of Scientific Counselors, “an independent federal advisory committee established in 1996 to serve the public interest by providing advice and recommendations ‘on all aspects’ of the ORD’s research programs.”

After a brief reprieve, probationary employees at NOAA have been "re-fired” pursuant to a federal court decision. The Guardian notes that, while many probationary employees are new, the probationary status also applies to long-term employees who have been promoted to new positions. As a consequence, this foolish action on the part of the Trump Administration is going to eliminate decades of expertise and experience from our leading climate and weather agency at a time when we clearly need the knowledge and work of these government scientists. “Among 800 positions cut were workers who track El Niño-La Niña weather patterns around the world, people who model severe storm risks, and scientists contributing to global understanding of what could happen as the world warms.” To further hide the truth from Americans, the Trump Administration also cut the funding for the National Climate Assessment.

In Yale e360, a climate scientist from Columbia University provides a personal and historical account of the attack on NOAA by examining the cuts at NOAA’s Geophysical Fluid Dynamics Laboratory (GFDL) in Princeton, New Jersey. GFDL is where, in the 1960s, Syukuro Manabe developed the first effective computer models of the climate, for which he was awarded the Nobel Prize in physics in 2021. GFDL is also where “modern weather forecasting itself started.” Our modern computer models have so-called “dynamical cores” that were developed at GFDL.

The attack on NOAA is coming from Project 2025, which calls NOAA a critical part of the “climate alarm industry.” The Yale e360 article points out that NOAA’s climate work, which integrates meteorology, oceanography and climate science, actually grew out of the alliance between science and the military. “It’s true that NOAA’s work, like that of scientists who study the atmosphere, oceans, and climate at countless institutions around the world, has helped to induce some alarm about climate. But that’s because the data are alarming, not because the agency has any agenda other than its simple mission statement, whose core is to understand and predict changes in climate and weather, and to share that knowledge with the public.”

Rolling Stone describes how the attack on NOAA, and the National Weather Service (which is part of NOAA), is endangering Americans by affecting the quality of weather forecasts. For example, thanks to Trump and DOGE, we’re now launching fewer weather balloons, and so we have less data to use to refine our models. This produces less-skillful forecasts of the weather, including making it more difficult to predict and track extreme weather events (The New York Times notes that NOAA’s famous Hurricane Hunters, the crews that fly into storms to provide vital data, have been let go). And these cuts are particularly stupid as they are theoretically being made to save money, when in fact NOAA and the NWS save the country money through their forecasting and expertise. And The Washington Post reports on massive proposed cuts by Trump Administration to research at NASA. All of the wanton destruction of the scientific capacity of the United States has led the Union of Concerned Scientists to share its new take on March Madness.

The New York Times reports on an important decision by the Senate parliamentarian with enormous implications for the future of automobiles in the U.S. When the Clean Air Act was passed, California was given the option of seeking waivers from federal standards and pass more-stringent air quality laws given the significant auto-based pollution in the Los Angeles basin. California has used this waiver to lead the United States, and the world, toward less-polluting vehicles. Many other states have decided to adopt California’s standards, and the collective size of the automobile market seeking cleaner vehicles has forced the industry to produce less-polluting cars and trucks.

The Biden Administration approved a new waiver for California “to require all new cars sold in the state by 2035 be free of emissions of greenhouse gases like carbon dioxide, the primary contributor to climate change.” The is the Advanced Clean Cars II rule, which sets public-health-based emission standards that will drive the market towards EVs (just as past standards drove the industry to adopt catalytic converters). “Eleven other states have said they will follow California’s lead and ban the sale of new gas-powered cars by 2035. Together, they make up nearly half the United States’ auto market.” The Trump Administration has tried to use the Congressional Review Act to reverse this decision, but the parliamentarian concluded that the Senate rules prevent this action (in addition, “California has received hundreds of waivers over the years, and none have been presented to Congress for a vote.”) While Republican legislators are going to continue to seek other ways to overturn California’s waiver, they face many challenges, including the fact that the Clean Air Act provides no mechanism to remove a waiver once granted to California.

The Trump Administration’s dirty energy policies, and the general economic chaos that’s being created, are taking a toll on the growth of the EV industry. The Washington Post reports that there have been a large number of cancellations of battery-manufacturing facilities in the first quarter of 2025, including in Georgia and Arizona, slowing the development of the American EV supply chain. The Post notes that “Republican plans to scrap nearly all federal support for electric vehicles could kneecap the nascent industry… just when more Americans are considering buying an EV and car companies are planning big investments.” Grist reports on how the Trump Administration has eliminated (possibly illegally) a program started under President Biden to improve the reliability of public charging stations, which is essential to promote the transition to electric vehicles.

Meanwhile, The New York Times notes that EV sales rose 11% during the first quarter of 2025. This rise in sales was driven by traditional auto makers, as sales of Tesla vehicles declined by 9%. About 8% of new car sales in the U.S. are now electric, and Tesla still commands 44% of the market. The Ford Mustang Mach-E was the best-selling electric vehicle that was not a Tesla, but this may change since Ford manufactures the Mustang in Mexico and now faces a costly tariff on these vehicles.

< back to news+views