The Trump administration revealed a new plan on Tuesday, seeking to roll back a crucial Biden-era regulation. This former rule mandated a swift reduction of powerful greenhouse gases, known as hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs), in cooling systems used by businesses ranging from grocery stores to semiconductor manufacturers.
This proposal from the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) threatens to dismantle what was widely considered a significant climate achievement: a bipartisan consensus to quickly phase down HFCs, a class of synthetic chemicals.
These HFCs are extraordinarily potent, trapping thousands of times more heat in our atmosphere than carbon dioxide.
However, EPA Administrator Lee Zeldin argued that the Biden administration’s original timeline—an 85 percent reduction by 2036—was too aggressive for companies to meet. He claimed that the swift transition to alternative refrigerants led to supply shortages, leaving families without air conditioning during peak summer heat. The air-conditioning industry, however, has largely disputed the severity of these claims.
In a public statement, Mr. Zeldin asserted, “With this proposal, EPA is committed to restoring affordability, safety, and reliability to American refrigerants.”
This controversial proposal emerged just hours before a looming government shutdown, fueled by a budget standoff between President Trump and congressional Democrats. Should a shutdown occur and federal workers be furloughed, all ongoing regulatory work would halt. This could, in turn, postpone Mr. Zeldin’s broader agenda to repeal numerous climate protections established by the Biden administration.
Globally, phasing out HFCs could prevent up to half a degree Celsius of global warming by the century’s end, a significant step in mitigating severe climate change impacts. Ironically, it was President Trump himself, during his initial term, who signed legislation mandating the EPA to reduce this climate pollutant. This directive was included within a comprehensive Covid-19 relief package enacted at the conclusion of his previous presidency.
The Biden administration, tasked with implementing that law, designed regulations aimed at eliminating the equivalent of 4.5 billion metric tons of carbon dioxide by 2050—a volume comparable to three years of climate pollution from the entire U.S. electricity sector.
Unlike the contentious debates surrounding fossil fuels, efforts to reduce HFCs have garnered widespread, bipartisan support from both political parties, major industry players, and environmental organizations. Many proponents argued that the Biden rule was vital for safeguarding the $206-billion-a-year cooling industry, ensuring fair competition for manufacturers, and fostering the development of eco-friendly alternatives as other nations transitioned away from HFCs.
“We were quite satisfied with the rule implemented by the Biden administration,” stated Francis Dietz, Vice President of Public Affairs for the Air-Conditioning, Heating, and Refrigeration Institute.
Mr. Dietz directly challenged the Trump administration’s assertions regarding critical shortages of HFC alternatives. He clarified that while a temporary shortage occurred earlier this year, it was quickly resolved. Furthermore, he warned that the proposed delays in compliance could severely disrupt the strategic planning and financial investments already made by U.S. manufacturers, who have recalibrated their production and supply chains to align with the existing regulations.
“We had a clear path forward and a sense of certainty, and now, potentially, that has been jeopardized,” he added.
Conversely, numerous grocery store operators had advocated for changes and expressed approval of the Trump administration’s revised plan.
Leslie G. Sarasin, President and CEO of the Food Industry Association, a prominent trade group, issued a statement arguing that the Biden rule imposed “significant and unrealistic compliance timelines.” She believes the new Trump plan will achieve environmental goals more effectively, “without imposing unnecessary and costly burdens on the food industry.”
Specifically, the new proposal could grant the residential air-conditioning, retail food refrigeration, cold storage warehouse, and semiconductor manufacturing sectors an additional five years to transition to more environmentally friendly coolants.
However, environmental advocates contend that these changes would only offer minimal benefits to businesses while inflicting substantial harm on our climate.
“These adjustments won’t lower the cost of potato chips or computer chips,” stated David Doniger, Senior Strategic Director of the climate and clean energy program at the Natural Resources Defense Council, a leading environmental organization.
He emphasized that “these are extraordinarily powerful greenhouse gases” whose delayed phase-out means they will continue to trap heat in our atmosphere for a longer duration.
The public is invited to provide feedback on the proposal for 45 days once it’s officially published in the Federal Register. The EPA has also confirmed that a virtual public hearing will be held to discuss these plans before any final decisions are made.