The Trump administration revealed a new plan on Tuesday: they intend to loosen a previous Biden-era regulation. This original rule mandated that grocery stores, air-conditioning businesses, semiconductor factories, and other entities quickly and significantly cut down on certain potent greenhouse gases found in their cooling systems.
This new Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) proposal threatens to undo what was widely considered a major climate victory. Industry leaders and environmental advocates alike had praised a bipartisan agreement to swiftly reduce these human-made chemicals, known as hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs).
Often called “super pollutants,” HFCs are incredibly powerful; they contribute thousands of times more to global warming than carbon dioxide.
However, EPA Administrator Lee Zeldin argued that the Biden administration’s original timeline for drastically cutting HFC production and consumption—an 85% reduction by 2036—was too aggressive for companies. He claimed that the swift transition to alternative refrigerants led to shortages, leaving many families without air conditioning during peak summer heat. The air-conditioning industry, however, has stated that these claims are overblown.
In a statement, Mr. Zeldin declared, “With this proposal, EPA is working to make American refrigerants affordable, safe, and reliable again.”
This proposal was unveiled just hours before a potential government shutdown, stemming from a budget impasse between President Trump and Democrats. Should an agreement fail, leading to federal employee furloughs, all pending regulatory work would halt. Such a shutdown could also postpone Mr. Zeldin’s broader agenda of rolling back numerous climate protections established by the Biden administration.
Globally phasing out HFCs holds the potential to prevent up to 0.5 degrees Celsius of global warming by the century’s end, a significant step in mitigating the most severe impacts of climate change. Interestingly, it was President Trump himself who, during his initial term, signed legislation instructing the EPA to gradually reduce this climate pollutant. This crucial provision was discreetly included within a comprehensive Covid-19 relief package passed by Congress as his presidency concluded.
The Biden administration then developed the HFC regulations to implement this law, aiming to eliminate the equivalent of 4.5 billion metric tons of carbon dioxide by 2050 — a volume roughly equal to three years of climate pollution from the entire electricity sector.
In contrast to the contentious debates surrounding fossil fuels, efforts to cut HFCs have enjoyed widespread backing from both Democrats and Republicans, alongside key industry players and environmental organizations. As other nations transition away from HFCs, many proponents argued that the Biden rule protected the substantial $206-billion-a-year cooling industry. It achieved this by creating a fair competitive landscape for all manufacturers and encouraging the adoption of safer, more sustainable alternatives.
Francis Dietz, Vice President of Public Affairs at the Air-Conditioning, Heating, and Refrigeration Institute, affirmed, “We liked the rule that came out at the end of the Biden administration.”
Mr. Dietz countered the Trump administration’s assertions regarding critical shortages of HFC alternatives. He explained that while a temporary shortage occurred earlier this year, it has since been resolved. Furthermore, he warned that the proposed delays in compliance could hinder the planning and investment efforts of U.S. manufacturers, who have already adapted their production and supply chains to meet the existing regulatory timetable.
“We wanted certainty, and we had it. Now, potentially, we don’t,” he remarked.
However, numerous grocery store operators had been advocating for changes and expressed their satisfaction with the Trump administration’s new plan.
Leslie G. Sarasin, President and CEO of the Food Industry Association, stated that the Biden rule had imposed “significant and unrealistic compliance timelines.” She added that the Trump plan would implement changes “in a way that achieves the intended environmental benefits without placing unnecessary and costly burdens on the food industry.”
The new proposal could grant the residential air-conditioning sector, retail food refrigeration, cold storage warehouses, and semiconductor manufacturing an additional five years to transition to alternative coolants.
Environmentalists, however, contend that these changes would have minimal positive effects on businesses but devastating consequences for the climate.
David Doniger, Senior Strategic Director of the climate and clean energy program at the Natural Resources Defense Council, an environmental group, remarked, “This is not going to make potato chips or computer chips any cheaper.”
“These are extremely powerful greenhouse gases that will now linger longer in the atmosphere,” he explained.
Once the proposal is published in the Federal Register, the public will have a 45-day window to submit comments. The EPA also announced that a virtual public hearing would be held to discuss the plans before any final changes are made.