Skip to Navigation
Skip to Content
Share this page

Support PSR!

Your membership supports PSR's work to reduce global warming, eliminate toxics in our environment and abolish nuclear weapons. YOU make our work possible. Thank you.

Donate Now »

Heat Advisory: Protecting Health on a Warming Planet
by Dr. Alan Lockwood

Drawing on peer-reviewed scientific and medical research, Dr. Lockwood meticulously details the symptoms of climate change and their medical side effects.

On sale now! Enter code M17ENV25 at checkout for 25% discount.

EPA Rejects Petitions to Overturn Greenhouse Gases Endangerment Finding

August 4, 2010

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) last week denied ten petitions challenging the EPA’s 2009 “Endangerment Finding” that greenhouse gases are a threat to human health as well as to the environment. Petitioners included the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, Peabody Energy Company, State of Texas, Commonwealth of Virginia, Competitive Enterprise Institute, and Ohio Coal Association.  Many have ties to the coal industry, whether as coal producers, industry fronted think tanks, or large-scale coal consumers.  They had sought to discredit the scientific evidence marshaled by the EPA to support its findings.

After months of extensive study, the EPA found that the petitions’ claims were unfounded.  EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson said of the petitions, “The endangerment finding is based on years of science from the U.S. and around the world. These petitions—based as they are on selectively edited, out-of-context data and a manufactured controversy—provide no evidence to undermine our determination. Excess greenhouse gases are a threat to our health and welfare.”

PSR applauded the EPA’s decision not to reconsider the Endangerment Finding.  In response to EPA's announcement Dr. Peter Wilk, PSR's Executive Director stated, “The EPA Endangerment Finding is established on abundant, rigorous scientific research and is a critical step toward setting science based regulations that will protect our health and our planet. PSR’s medical and public health experts assert that the climate science considered by the EPA to make its determination is both credible and compelling.”

The EPA’s 2009 ruling, known as the Endangerment Finding, determined that carbon dioxide, methane, and four other greenhouse gases pose significant threats to human health and the environment.  This decision was the first step needed to begin regulating greenhouse gases under the Clean Air Act, subsequent to the 2007 Supreme Court ruling in Massachusetts v EPA that greenhouse gases were air pollutants as defined by the Clean Air Act.
 
Despite the Supreme Court ruling, there have been a string of efforts to weaken the Clean Air Act and the EPA's ability to take action on carbon pollution.  The petitions joined those efforts, which include legislative proposals in the U.S. Senate.  One of the assertions petitioners made was that the EPA was purposefully using speculative and unfounded information as proof that climate change was largely man-made.  They pointed specifically to e-mails exchanged between scientists at the University of East Anglia’s Climatic Research Unit that they alleged showed manipulation of data.  Assessment by both the EPA and independent sources determined that the e-mails between the scientists were merely parts of a discussion of large data sets, and the quotations in the petition had been taken out of context.

The petitioners cited mistakes in the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change’s (IPCC) Fourth Assessment report and claimed the report was biased in the studies it chose to include. The IPCC Fourth Assessment, upon additional review, was found to have three mistakes in a 3,000-page document. These mistakes were not significant enough to cause the EPA to reconsider the Endangerment Finding. In addition, the IPCC did include studies that the petitioners argued were deliberately omitted from the report.

The petitions also claimed to have found studies that refuted the science used to determine that climate change was a threat to human health. The EPA found that those studies in fact supported the conclusions of the 2009 EPA ruling.

Action Alerts

  • Tell the EPA: Don't delay methane protections

    Tell the EPA: don't delay the proposed rule to capture leaking methane gas. Our health and the health of the climate cannot wait!

  • Tell Congress—defend the Clean Air Act against Big Oil!

    President Trump, his new EPA administrator Scott Pruitt, and some in Congress are attempting to block or weaken clean air and climate protections like the Clean Power Plan. Tell your member of Congress to support full implementation of the Clean Air Act and the Clean Power Plan.

More action alerts»

Resources

  • Video: Fracking - Too Dirty, Too Dangerous

    Former executive director of Physicians for Social Responsibility, Catherine Thomasson, MD, presents findings from PSR's report "Too Dirty, Too Dangerous: Why Health Professionals Reject Natural Gas". It is based on summaries of recent medical and scientific studies which clearly convey the health threats that accompany use of methane as a fuel. Read more »

  • Webinar: The Fight for Solar

    Solar energy is one of our best hopes for a clean energy future – yet some utility companies are trying to stifle the spread of rooftop solar. Learn more about the fight for rooftop ("distributed") solar. Read more »

  • Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative (RGGI) Fact Sheet

    RGGI has significantly reduced air pollution from fossil fuel power plants, improving the health of people living in the Northeast and mid-Atlantic regions. Read more »

In the Spotlight

  • November 30, 2016
    Eating for Climate and Health
    PSR's new PowerPoint presentation on how climate change impacts food production, and agriculture's contribution to climate change.