As Yogi Berra said, “It’s like déjà vu all over again.”
Yes, Donald Trump will be president. And yes, the same types of people who populated his first administration — many of them fossil fuel lobbyists and climate deniers — will be back in power. So we’ll spend a lot of time talking about federal officials dismantling environmental rules, and environmentalists trying to stop them.
Exhausted already? I know I am.
Newsletter
You’re reading Boiling Point
Sammy Roth gets you up to speed on climate change, energy and the environment. Sign up to get it in your inbox twice a week.
You may occasionally receive promotional content from the Los Angeles Times.
But as I wrote last week, the work matters more than ever. So let’s get started.
How much power will Trump and his appointees have to undo the climate progress America has made over the last four years? Unfortunately, a pretty good amount. Several stories that shed some light:
- Can Trump roll back California initiatives on water, fires, clean air, oil drilling, renewable energy and national monuments? An L.A. Times deep dive. (Story by Susanne Rust, Ian James, Lila Seidman and Tony Briscoe)
- Unlike the first time around, when chaos reigned, Trump’s second administration might have a strong legal plan right out of the gate for undoing climate rules. (Coral Davenport and Lisa Friedman, New York Times)
- On public lands in the American West, the Trump administration is expected to allow much more oil and gas drilling, shrink national monuments and limit wildlife protections. (Jonathan P. Thompson, the Land Desk)
The Biden administration is working to shore up protections over the next two months — although it’s not clear how many of its actions will survive the next four years. Biden’s Interior Department, for instance, has proposed additional restrictions on oil drilling and renewable energy development, mostly on public land in California and Nevada, to protect greater sage grouse, a declining bird species, per the Associated Press’ Matthew Brown.
How is the resistance shaping up? Just like last time, it starts in California:
- Gov. Gavin Newsom is asking lawmakers to increase funding for lawsuits to protect state policies, including climate and environmental policies, from the incoming Trump administration. (Taryn Luna, L.A. Times)
- Newsom is in Washington, D.C., this week urging the Biden administration to approve Clean Air Act waivers before Trump takes office, so that California can push forward on electric cars. (Matt Hamilton, L.A. Times)
- Just like eight years ago, it will be up to states to take the lead on climate. (Jeff St. John, Canary Media)
- Environmental groups had a lot of success suing the first Trump administration. They say they’re even better prepared now, having done this before and with strategies in place. (Georgia Gustin, Inside Climate News)
A few other election-related stories:
- “There has been a lot of rhetoric around, ‘Gen Z is going to save us from the climate crisis, the youth are mobilized against the climate crisis,’ and it’s really not as true as I think some people think.” If you’re middle-aged or older and have been telling yourself that young people will solve the climate crisis for themselves, please read this story on the youth vote. We youths need your help. (Keerti Gopal, Inside Climate News)
- Colorado River negotiators aren’t expecting Trump to change much. Still, his presidency will probably make climate change worse, and that will further strain the river’s shrinking water supplies. (Alex Hager, KUNC)
- Speaking of the Colorado, it turns out the Western drought from 2020 to 2022 — which saw California suffer its driest three years ever measured — was mostly caused by fossil fueled climate change. Three-fifths of the drought’s severity was due to higher temperatures, according to a new study. (Ian James, L.A. Times)
And now, some more news from around the West:
ON THE LANDSCAPE
Just because it’s November doesn’t mean fire season is over.
The day after the election, the Mountain fire exploded into Southern California’s most destructive blaze in years, destroying 174 structures as of Monday afternoon, mostly homes in the foothills around the Ventura County city of Camarillo. As my L.A. Times colleagues report, the inferno was fueled by vicious Santa Ana winds — and also a whiplash between previous fires, extreme rainfall and record heat, exactly as expected with climate change.
There are many ways to try to comprehend the devastation. You can look at before-and-after satellite images of burned neighborhoods or on-the-ground pictures by L.A. Times photographers. You can read our stories about retirees fleeing for their lives or returning to find their houses destroyed. If you’re looking for hope, try this story by Noah Goldberg, about firefighters miraculously finding a woman’s wedding ring in the rubble of her home.
In related news, utility company Southern California Edison shut off electricity to tens of thousands of customers amid the intense Santa Ana winds, to limit the risk of fire ignitions. Details here from The Times’ Sean Greene.
A few more climate and air pollution stories:
- Climate pollution from private jets has increased 46% in the last five years, according to a new study. But a federal privacy measure could make it difficult to keep tracking these emissions. (Noah Haggerty, L.A. Times)
- The California Air Resources Board voted 12 to 2 to tighten the state’s low carbon fuel standard, with members — most of whom are appointed by Gov. Gavin Newsom — calling it a climate imperative. Some critics say the vote will lead to higher gas prices; others aren’t sure it’s helpful for climate. (Melody Petersen, L.A. Times)
- The oil and gas industry has spent a record $31 million lobbying California lawmakers and officials in 2024 — and that’s just through September. Big Oil is powerful in Sacramento. (Wes Venteicher, Politico; scroll down)
- What will replace the highly polluting South Bay oil refinery that Phillips 66 plans to close next year? Housing and warehouses are two of the likely options, although nothing is confirmed. (Roger Vincent, L.A. Times)
Last but not least: Have you seen those Proposition 65 labels warning Californians about toxic chemicals? According to a new scientific study, they actually work. Details here from my colleague Tony Briscoe, who explains that researchers found lower levels of 11 chemicals in blood and urine samples after those chemicals were listed under Proposition 65, presumably because businesses stopped using the chemicals to avoid warning labels.
Government regulation. Keeping toxic chemicals out of our bodies since 1986.
ONE MORE THING
“Setbacks are unavoidable, but giving up is unforgivable.” So said President Biden’s climate advisor John Podesta as the international climate negotiations known as COP29 got started Monday. Ironically, the United Nations talks are hosted this year by Azerbaijan, a huge oil and gas exporter, as the Associated Press’ Emma Burrows reports.
For all the ironies and disappointments, though, the work must go on. Negotiators in Azerbaijan are focused on hammering out financial agreements — specifically, how much money richer, historically more polluting nations should give lower-income countries to help them transition from fossil fuels to climate-friendly energy.
ACTUALLY, JUST ONE MORE
As I was finishing this newsletter, news broke that Trump will nominate former Rep. Lee Zeldin, a New York Republican, to lead the Environmental Protection Agency — the president-elect’s first environmental nominee.
Four years ago, Zeldin was one of 147 members of Congress who voted unsuccessfully to overturn the results of the presidential election amid Trump’s lies about voter fraud. Which does not bode well for his likely leadership of an agency charged with protecting public health and the environment based on facts and science.
This is the latest edition of Boiling Point, a newsletter about climate change and the environment in the American West. Sign up here to get it in your inbox. Or open the newsletter in your web browser here.
For more climate and environment news, follow @Sammy_Roth on X.