During the latest marathon cabinet meeting on Dec. 2, Energy Secretary Chris Wright made news when he told President Donald Trump that “The biggest determinant of the price of energy is politicians, political leaders, and polices — that’s what drives energy prices.”
He’s right about that, and it is why the back-and-forth struggle over federal energy and climate policy plays such a key role in America’s economy and society. Just 10 months into this second Trump presidency, the administration’s policies are already having a profound impact, both at home and abroad.
While the rapid expansion of AI datacenters over the past year is currently being blamed by many for driving up electric costs, power bills were skyrocketing long before that big tech boom began, driven in large part by the policies of the Obama and Biden administration designed to regulate and subsidize an energy transition into reality. As I’ve pointed out here in the past, driving up the costs of all forms of energy to encourage conservation is a central objective of the climate alarm-driven transition, and that part of the green agenda has been highly effective.
President Trump, Wright, and other key appointees like Interior Secretary Doug Burgum and EPA Administrator Lee Zeldin have moved aggressively throughout 2025 to repeal much of that onerous regulatory agenda. The GOP congressional majorities succeeded in phasing out Biden’s costly green energy subsidies as part of the One Big Beautiful Bill Act, which Trump signed into law on July 4. As the federal regulatory structure eases and subsidy costs diminish, it is reasonable to expect a gradual easing of electricity and other energy prices.
This year’s fading out of public fear over climate change and its attendant fright narrative spells bad news for the climate alarm movement. The resulting cracks in the green facade have manifested rapidly in recent weeks.
Climate-focused conflict groups that rely on public fears to drive donations have fallen on hard times. According to a report in the New York Times, the Sierra Club has lost 60 percent of the membership it reported in 2019 and the group’s management team has fallen into infighting over elements of the group’s agenda. Greenpeace is struggling just to stay afloat after losing a huge court judgment for defaming pipeline company Energy Transfer during its efforts to stop the building of the Dakota Access Pipeline.
350.org, an advocacy group founded by Bill McKibben, shut down its U.S. operations in November amid funding woes that had forced planned 25 percent budget cuts for 2025 and 2026. Employees at EDF voted to form their own union after the group went through several rounds of budget cuts and layoffs in recent months.
The fading of climate fears in turn caused the ESG management and investing fad to also fall out of favor, leading to a flood of companies backtracking on green investments and climate commitments. The Net Zero Banking Alliance disbanded after most of America’s big banks – Goldman Sachs, J.P. Morgan Chase, Citigroup, Wells Fargo and others – chose to drop out of its membership.
The EV industry is also struggling. As the Trump White House moves to repeal Biden-era auto mileage requirements, Ford Motor Company is preparing to shut down production of its vaunted F-150 Lightning electric pickup, and Stellantis cancelled plans to roll out a full-size EV truck of its own. Overall EV sales in the U.S. collapsed in October and November following the repeal of the $7,500 per car IRA subsidy effective Sept 30.
The administration’s policy actions have already ended any new leasing for costly and unneeded offshore wind projects in federal waters and have forced the suspension or abandonment of several projects that were already moving ahead. Capital has continued to flow into the solar industry, but even that industry’s ability to expand seems likely to fade once the federal subsidies are fully repealed at the end of 2027.
Truly, public policy matters where energy is concerned. It drives corporate strategies, capital investments, resource development and movement, and ultimately influences the cost of energy in all its forms and products. The speed at which Trump and his key appointees have driven this principle home since Jan. 20 has been truly stunning.
David Blackmon is a contributor to The Daily Caller News Foundation, an energy writer, and consultant based in Texas. He spent 40 years in the oil and gas business, where he specialized in public policy and communications.
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has filed a motion in a federal appeals court to vacate a Biden-era rule on fine particulate matter air quality standards, which was set to affect air quality regulations in Arizona.
In the motion filed in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit, Department of Justice attorneys representing the EPA told the D.C. Circuit that the agency’s 2024 rule change on fine particulate pollution standards is both legally and scientifically flawed and must be vacated. The motion noted that the “supplement” to the EPA’s 2019 Assessment of the NAAQS, or National Ambient Air Quality Standards, for particulate matter, “did not represent [a] full multidisciplinary evaluation of evidence’ for the underlying air quality criteria.” It added that the agency “lacks statutory authority to revise standards absent a thorough review.”
The PM 2.5 rule, finalized on December 15, 2024, was purported to strengthen protections against fine particulate matter pollution, which the EPA stated was linked to respiratory and cardiovascular health risks. Implementation was set to begin in 2025, with full compliance deadlines extending to 2031. The final rule revising the NAAQS lowered the annual primary PM 2.5 standard from 12.0 micrograms per cubic meter to 9.0 micrograms per cubic meter. The rule also established a new 24-hour PM 2.5 standard of 35 micrograms per cubic meter. The rule remains in effect until the court comes to a decision.
The consolidated lawsuits involved petitioners including the Commonwealth of Kentucky, et al., the Arizona Legislature, and the Arizona Chamber of Commerce, along with 21 other states and business groups against the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, et al. The states and business groups challenged the rule, arguing it would impose billions in compliance costs on states like Arizona, potentially halting construction projects and job growth in areas struggling to meet the stricter standards.
The petitioners contended that the new limits would classify more areas as being in a state of nonattainment, leading to economic restrictions under the Clean Air Act. Oral arguments in the case were heard on December 16, 2024.
Arizona Senate President Warren Petersen hailed the EPA’s motion on X on November 26, 2025, crediting EPA Administrator Lee Zeldin with what he called a “BIG WIN FOR ARIZONA!” He added that the EPA, “just filed a motion in federal court to throw out Biden’s unlawful PM 2.5 rule that made it nearly impossible for parts of Arizona to ever meet clean-air standards — a rule that would have crushed jobs, construction, and our economy with billions in costs. The AZ Legislature & the AZ Chamber sued the Biden admin to stop this job-killing regulation. Our lawsuit helped bring about this reversal. Thank you, President Trump, for keeping your promise to cut red tape and protect Arizona families!”
BIG WIN FOR ARIZONA!
The Trump EPA, under Secretary Zeldin, just filed a motion in federal court to throw out Biden’s unlawful PM 2.5 rule that made it nearly impossible for parts of Arizona to ever meet clean-air standards — a rule that would have crushed jobs, construction,… pic.twitter.com/pa7rIDKRVt
Adam R.F. Gustafson, Principal Deputy Assistant Attorney General, and Sarah I. Zafar, Trial Attorney in the DOJ Environment and Natural Resources Division, filed the EPA’s motion for vacatur. They wrote in part, “Implementation of the NAAQS is a complex process, which generates significant costs and reliance interests among States, local governments, and regulated parties.”
The DOJ attorneys also argued that the EPA, “should at least have considered the distinct costs associated with revising the NAAQS mid-cycle. EPA’s disregard of this relevant factor was arbitrary and capricious because it was unreasonable for EPA to read an exercise of discretionary authority as an invitation to ignore a relevant factor like cost.”
The case remains ongoing in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit.
In a decision advancing American energy dominance, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) announced a final rule granting the State of Arizona full primacy to control all classes of underground injection wells under the Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA).
This approval positions Arizona as the primary regulator for protecting its underground sources of drinking water, while developing economic growth and innovation in clean energy technologies.
The move aligns with the EPA’s Powering the Great American Comeback Initiative, which emphasizes delivering clean and safe water to every American, restoring U.S. energy leadership, and empowering states to manage their own resources with local expertise.
By delegating authority to Arizona, the federal government recognizes the state’s unparalleled understanding of its unique water challenges and business landscape.
“Efficient and effective permitting is essential to bolstering American industry and unleashing energy dominance while protecting our nation’s water resources,“ said EPA Administrator Lee Zeldin. “States know their water resources best and understand the needs of their business community; entrusting them to take on permitting makes common sense. I am excited to see the economic growth that will be spurred by granting Arizona primacy to regulate underground injection under the Safe Drinking Water Act.”
The approval enables the Arizona Department of Environmental Quality (ADEQ) to oversee permitting and enforcement for all underground injection wells, including Class I wells for hazardous waste storage— ensuring these operations occur far below drinking water aquifers—and Class VI wells, critical for carbon capture and storage.
Following technical and legal review, the EPA confirmed that Arizona’s Underground Injection Control (UIC) program fully complies with SDWA standards. ADEQ will now handle authorizations and compliance monitoring with the EPA retaining oversight and permitting authority for wells on Indian Lands, except for Class II wells on Navajo Nation lands, because the Nation already holds primacy.
The move got the support from Arizona’s congressional delegation, emphasizing the significance of federalism and local priorities.
“Our Founding Fathers were clear in their commitment to states’ rights and a small federal government. Individual states must have the power to govern in the best interests of their own people. This ruling affirms that Arizona—not Washington bureaucrats—is best equipped to protect our water, foster economic growth, and ensure the well-being of our citizens. It is a key step in ensuring access to safe drinking water for Arizona communities for years to come. No one understands Arizona’s communities and resources better than Arizonans ourselves,” said Congressman Andy Biggs (AZ-05). “I am grateful to President Trump and EPA Administrator Zeldin for their commitment to slashing needless regulations and restoring authority to the states. This is a victory for federalism, for common sense, and for the people of Arizona.”
“Arizona understands our land, our water, and our energy needs better than anyone in Washington ever could. Granting primacy to our state of the Underground Injection Control program is a recognition that local expertise and innovation should lead the way,” said Congressman Juan Ciscomani (AZ-06). “It means that Arizona will now oversee the permitting for all underground injection wells, including Class VI wells essential for carbon capture and storage—a critical part of a secure and cleaner energy future, and Class I wells, which store hazardous waste far below drinking water resources critical for the health of all Arizonans. This step is a win for clean water, a win for responsible energy development, and a win for our economy.”
“I want to thank Administrator Zeldin and the Trump administration for recognizing that Arizona is best positioned to protect its underground sources of drinking water. This rule will allow us to provide clean and safe water for every Arizonan while bringing more and exciting economic opportunities to our great state,” said Congressman Abe Hamadeh (AZ-08). “This rule will strengthen Arizona’s ability to manage our future for our families.”
Arizona Governor Katie Hobbs also praised the decision as a pivotal achievement for the state saying, “Today’s decision is a major milestone for Arizona. By granting our state primacy over underground injection wells, the EPA is once again recognizing that Arizona is best positioned to protect its water and natural resources. This authority allows us to safeguard the integrity of our groundwater, while also supporting responsible economic growth and clean energy development. With this step, Arizona gains the tools to lead on sustainable environmental management and innovation for years to come.”
Ethan Faverino is a reporter for AZ Free News. You can send him news tips using this link.
The Trump administration recently unveiled a proposal to repeal the 2009 “Endangerment Finding,” a controversial U.S. climate policy that declared carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases a threat to public health and welfare.
The Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) proposed rule, if finalized, would dismantle the legal foundation for numerous climate regulations under the Clean Air Act, repealing all resulting greenhouse gas emissions regulations for motor vehicles and engines.
EPA Administrator Lee Zeldin described the move as “the largest deregulatory action in the history of America,” arguing that the Endangerment Finding has been misused to impose costly regulations.
“There are people who, in the name of climate change, are willing to bankrupt the country,” Zeldin said. “They created this endangerment finding, and then they are able to put all these regulations on vehicles, on airplanes, on stationary sources, to basically regulate out of existence, in many cases, a lot of segments of our economy. And it cost Americans a lot of money.”
The proposal, which follows an executive order from President Trump, directs the EPA to review the findings’ legality. It is part of a broader push to roll back 31 environmental regulations.
Zeldin criticized the Obama and Biden administrations, saying they “twisted the law, ignored precedent, and warped science to achieve their preferred ends and stick American families with hundreds of billions of dollars in hidden taxes every single year.”
In states like Arizona, the Endangerment Finding has been used to enforce mandates and shut down energy sources that Arizona relies on.
The Arizona Free Enterprise Club celebrated the EPA’s proposal, viewing it as a critical step toward alleviating economic burdens imposed on Arizona families and businesses from overreaching environmental mandates.
The Club argues that the Endangerment Finding has forced the closure of reliable energy facilities and imposed costly environmental policies that have led to soaring utility costs and raised concerns about the reliability of the state’s energy grid.
Scot Mussi, President of the Arizona Free Enterprise Club, reacted to the Trump administration’s proposal, saying, “[The Endangerment Finding] has always been junk science used to shut down Arizona’s economy, close down our coal plants, and force our state into California-style green mandates. Repealing the Endangerment Finding is a necessary step to restore energy independence, protect ratepayers, and stop the unelected bureaucrats at the EPA from hijacking our economy in the name of climate alarmism.”
Ethan Faverino is a reporter for AZ Free News. You can send him news tips using this link.
The Trump administration is gearing up to try to revoke one of the most overreaching, unscientific regulatory edifices ever erected: the EPA’s 2009 “endangerment finding.” News broke this week that the Environmental Protection Agency has drafted a plan to rescind this cornerstone of federal climate policy, which declared that greenhouse gases like carbon dioxide and methane pose a danger to human health and welfare.
If this move succeeds, it would limit the federal government’s ability to regulate carbon dioxide emissions from cars, power plants, and industries—a prospect that has the climate alarmist crowd clutching their pearls. And frankly, it’s about time someone challenged this rank absurdity.
Let’s take a walk down memory lane to 2009, when the Obama-era EPA, emboldened by the 2007 Supreme Court ruling in Massachusetts v. EPA, decided to anoint itself the arbiter of America’s energy future. The endangerment finding was born, asserting that CO2 – literally plant food, and the fundamental building block for all life on planet Earth – is actually a “pollutant” that “endangers public health” as defined under the Clean Air Act.
This vast expansion of the regulatory state wasn’t based on some groundbreaking scientific discovery but rather on a political agenda dressed up in green rhetoric. The finding has since provided the legal foundation for a slew of regulations, from tailpipe emissions standards to power plant rules, all designed to choke the fossil fuel industry and push the U.S. toward a so-called “clean energy” utopia that exists only in the fever dreams of climate activists.
Now, the Trump EPA, led by Administrator Lee Zeldin, appears poised to dismantle this house of cards. Zeldin’s draft proposal argues that the EPA overstepped its authority by issuing such a sweeping determination.
The plan focuses on a legal argument that the EPA’s administrator lacks the power to make broad proclamations about greenhouse gases without specific congressional authorization. This is a direct jab at the 2007 Supreme Court decision, a judicial overreach that gave unelected bureaucrats a blank check to regulate the economy. It is key to also remember that that decision came at a time when the Chevron Deference, which the Court did away with a year ago, was still in effect.
Adopted in 1984, the Chevron Deference held that courts must defer to the judgment of regulators when interpreting the congressional intent of federal statutes. But the Clean Air Act was never designed to regulate CO2, a point even the late Rep. John Dingell, a co-author of the law, made clear.
Of course, the climate alarm lobby will drag this fight into the courts, so overturning the finding will not be easy. The EPA must navigate a minefield of procedural requirements under the Administrative Procedure Act, and the alarmists will try to overwhelm the courts with claims that climate change has only grown since 2009, asserting that every extreme weather event somehow proves their case.
But the Trump administration isn’t denying climate change outright; it’s questioning whether the EPA has the legal authority to act as America’s climate czar. This is a fight worth having, because if the agency can regulate CO2 without clear congressional approval, what’s stopping it from declaring water vapor a pollutant next?
The bigger picture here illustrates the absurdity of the energy transition itself. The endangerment finding has been a cudgel to force a shift away from reliable, affordable fossil fuels toward a fantasy of windmills and solar panels that can’t power a modern economy. The U.S. is the second-largest emitter of greenhouse gases globally, but even if we zeroed out emissions tomorrow, global temperatures would barely budge without similar action from China and India.
Meanwhile, Americans bear the brunt of higher energy costs and a less reliable grid. Rescinding the endangerment finding could free up the economy to innovate without the EPA’s heavy hand, letting market forces—not bureaucrats—drive energy and climate solutions.
This move is a bold step toward dismantling the regulatory state’s stranglehold on American energy. It won’t be quick or easy, and the climate zealots will fight tooth and nail. But if the Trump administration can pull it off, it’ll be a victory for common sense over green dogma, a win for innovation over regulation. A long, hard fight lies ahead, but it is one worth having, and which is long overdue.
David Blackmon is a contributor to The Daily Caller News Foundation, an energy writer, and consultant based in Texas. He spent 40 years in the oil and gas business, where he specialized in public policy and communications.
