In a significant shift this Tuesday, the Trump administration revealed plans to roll back a key Biden-era climate regulation. This particular rule mandated a swift and sharp reduction in the use of hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs), powerful greenhouse gases widely used in cooling systems across various sectors, including grocery stores, air-conditioning companies, and semiconductor plants.
This move by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) threatens to undo what many industry leaders and environmental advocates hailed as a rare bipartisan triumph in climate action: a unified agreement to dramatically decrease these man-made chemicals.
HFCs are notorious for their extreme potency, contributing thousands of times more to global warming than carbon dioxide.
However, EPA Administrator Lee Zeldin argued that the previous administration’s aggressive timeline — aiming for an 85 percent reduction by 2036 — was impractical for businesses. He claimed that the rapid transition to alternative refrigerants had led to supply shortages, allegedly leaving families without vital air conditioning during peak summer months, though this assertion has been contested by the air-conditioning industry as exaggerated.
“With this proposal, EPA is working to make American refrigerants affordable, safe, and reliable again,” Zeldin stated, outlining the administration’s rationale.
The announcement came amidst brewing political tensions, just hours before a potential government shutdown triggered by a budget impasse between President Trump and Democrats. A federal furlough could halt work on all pending regulations, potentially delaying Zeldin’s broader agenda of dismantling numerous climate protections established under the Biden administration.
Globally, phasing out HFCs could prevent up to half a degree Celsius of global warming by the century’s end, a crucial step in mitigating the most severe impacts of climate change. Ironically, it was President Trump himself, during his first term, who signed into law a directive for the EPA to curb these climate pollutants. This provision was discreetly included in a comprehensive Covid-19 relief package passed toward the close of his presidency.
The Biden administration, responsible for implementing that law, aimed to eliminate the equivalent of 4.5 billion metric tons of carbon dioxide by 2050 – a reduction comparable to three years’ worth of climate pollution from the entire electricity sector.
Unlike the often contentious debates surrounding fossil fuel reductions, efforts to curtail HFCs have historically garnered broad consensus across political divides, winning support from both Democrats and Republicans, as well as from diverse industry groups and environmental organizations. With other nations already transitioning away from HFCs, many proponents of the Biden rule emphasized its role in safeguarding the $206-billion-a-year cooling industry by ensuring a level playing field for manufacturers and fostering the development of sustainable alternatives.
“We liked the rule that came out at the end of the Biden administration,” commented Francis Dietz, Vice President of Public Affairs at the Air-Conditioning, Heating, and Refrigeration Institute.
Dietz challenged the Trump administration’s claims regarding a dangerous scarcity of HFC alternatives, acknowledging a temporary shortage earlier this year but asserting its resolution. He also warned that the proposed delays in compliance could destabilize planning and investment for U.S. manufacturers, many of whom have already adapted their production processes and supply chains to the existing schedule.
“We wanted certainty and we had it and now we don’t, potentially,” he expressed.
Conversely, many grocery store operators had been advocating for changes and expressed satisfaction with the new Trump administration plan.
Leslie G. Sarasin, President and CEO of the Food Industry Association, a prominent trade group, stated that the Biden rule imposed “significant and unrealistic compliance timelines.” She praised the Trump plan for introducing changes “in a way that achieves the intended environmental benefits without placing unnecessary and costly burdens on the food industry.”
Under the revised proposal, key sectors such as residential air conditioning, retail food refrigeration, cold storage warehouses, and semiconductor manufacturing could receive an additional five years to transition to more environmentally friendly coolants.
Environmentalists, however, argue that these changes would offer only marginal benefits to businesses while inflicting substantial harm on the climate.
“This is not going to make potato chips or computer chips any cheaper,” asserted David Doniger, Senior Strategic Director of the climate and clean energy program at the Natural Resources Defense Council, an influential environmental group.
“These are extremely powerful greenhouse gases,” he added, emphasizing that the proposed relaxation means they will linger in our atmosphere for a longer duration, exacerbating climate challenges.
The public will have a 45-day window to provide feedback on the proposal once it is published in the Federal Register. The EPA also confirmed that a virtual public hearing will be held to discuss the plans before any final changes are implemented.