WEBVTT 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:02.980 From the boundless expanse of space, you know, 00:00:03.020 --> 00:00:06.000 reaching out to distant stars, to the really 00:00:06.000 --> 00:00:10.580 intricate vital systems of our own planet. Human 00:00:10.580 --> 00:00:13.400 ambition is just incredible. It really is. We're 00:00:13.400 --> 00:00:15.660 driven to push boundaries out there and right 00:00:15.660 --> 00:00:17.440 here. Exactly. But at the same time, we've got 00:00:17.440 --> 00:00:19.960 to understand the air we breathe, the oceans, 00:00:20.140 --> 00:00:22.120 the ground beneath our feet. It feels like we're 00:00:22.120 --> 00:00:25.059 at this crossroads, you know, progress versus 00:00:25.059 --> 00:00:27.879 stewardship. A huge question, yeah. Where should 00:00:27.879 --> 00:00:30.839 the focus actually lie going forward? Welcome 00:00:30.839 --> 00:00:33.399 to Meteorology Matters. Today we're navigating 00:00:33.399 --> 00:00:36.820 through some pretty significant shifts in policy 00:00:36.820 --> 00:00:39.719 and perspective. These touch both that ambitious 00:00:39.719 --> 00:00:42.359 space frontier and the vital science of our own 00:00:42.359 --> 00:00:44.979 changing climate. We'll be exploring recent developments 00:00:44.979 --> 00:00:47.060 that really highlight different priorities, different 00:00:47.060 --> 00:00:49.420 ways of approaching these critical areas. It 00:00:49.420 --> 00:00:51.609 gives you a snapshot of where things stand. Our 00:00:51.609 --> 00:00:53.969 mission today, as always on Meteorology Matters, 00:00:53.990 --> 00:00:56.189 is to help you cut through the noise, understand 00:00:56.189 --> 00:00:58.570 the core changes, and kind of grasp what they 00:00:58.570 --> 00:01:01.090 might mean down the line. Think of it as your 00:01:01.090 --> 00:01:03.429 shortcut to getting informed on topics that might 00:01:03.429 --> 00:01:06.590 seem separate but are actually surprisingly interconnected 00:01:06.590 --> 00:01:09.920 and really impactful. Okay, let's get into it. 00:01:10.079 --> 00:01:12.299 We're looking at decisions that could fundamentally 00:01:12.299 --> 00:01:15.879 redefine our reach into the cosmos and our understanding 00:01:15.879 --> 00:01:19.519 of our own planetary backyard. It's a fascinating 00:01:19.519 --> 00:01:21.859 landscape. And what's really illuminating here 00:01:21.859 --> 00:01:24.959 is how these policy shifts reflect different 00:01:24.959 --> 00:01:28.939 philosophies, you know, ideas about growth, regulation, 00:01:29.400 --> 00:01:32.239 the role of science in shaping the nation's future. 00:01:32.439 --> 00:01:35.099 It's not just what's changing, but why, right? 00:01:35.120 --> 00:01:37.359 How different groups are balancing these competing 00:01:37.359 --> 00:01:39.739 interests. Exactly. We're seeing this realignment 00:01:39.739 --> 00:01:43.140 of priorities with implications way beyond the 00:01:43.140 --> 00:01:45.180 headlines. Before we dive deep, just a quick 00:01:45.180 --> 00:01:47.500 note. You can follow meteorologist Rob Jones 00:01:47.500 --> 00:01:49.239 for more insights on what's happening in our 00:01:49.239 --> 00:01:51.400 atmosphere and beyond. Find him on Instagram. 00:01:51.400 --> 00:01:54.680 That's meteorologist. And on TikTok is TV meteorologist. 00:01:54.859 --> 00:01:57.480 Yep. And over on YouTube, follow Rob Jones hurricane. 00:01:58.060 --> 00:01:59.859 That's also where you'll find the Meteorology 00:01:59.859 --> 00:02:03.010 Matters podcast playlist. OK, let's launch. quite 00:02:03.010 --> 00:02:06.129 literally into our first big topic, the shifting 00:02:06.129 --> 00:02:08.990 ground for commercial space operations. We've 00:02:08.990 --> 00:02:11.009 seen this recent executive order from President 00:02:11.009 --> 00:02:15.289 Trump. The aim seems pretty clear. Significantly 00:02:15.289 --> 00:02:18.069 ease regulations for commercial rocket launches 00:02:18.069 --> 00:02:21.319 and also. spaceport development. Yeah, this isn't 00:02:21.319 --> 00:02:23.560 just tweaking things around the edges. It feels 00:02:23.560 --> 00:02:26.419 like a fundamental rethink of how the U .S. approaches 00:02:26.419 --> 00:02:29.639 space commerce, a real shift towards faster expansion. 00:02:30.020 --> 00:02:32.080 Absolutely. This executive order, it's pretty 00:02:32.080 --> 00:02:35.520 sweeping in its intent to streamline things and, 00:02:35.520 --> 00:02:37.919 well, cut what the administration sees as red 00:02:37.919 --> 00:02:40.639 tape. Right. Specifically, it calls for either 00:02:40.639 --> 00:02:43.659 eliminating altogether or significantly speeding 00:02:43.659 --> 00:02:46.419 up the environmental reviews that used to be 00:02:46.419 --> 00:02:48.759 mandatory for rocket launches. And those reviews, 00:02:48.879 --> 00:02:50.419 they're They're usually pretty detailed, aren't 00:02:50.419 --> 00:02:53.020 they, under laws like NEPA? Exactly. The National 00:02:53.020 --> 00:02:55.340 Environmental Policy Act. They mandate looking 00:02:55.340 --> 00:02:58.259 really closely at potential impacts on local 00:02:58.259 --> 00:03:01.740 ecosystems, wildlife, air quality, even community 00:03:01.740 --> 00:03:04.180 noise. So speeding those up or removing them, 00:03:04.460 --> 00:03:06.439 that's a big change. And it goes beyond just 00:03:06.439 --> 00:03:08.819 the launch itself. Oh, yeah. The order also looks 00:03:08.819 --> 00:03:10.939 at exempting launch vehicles from certain federal 00:03:10.939 --> 00:03:13.400 licensing rules, maybe even getting rid of some 00:03:13.400 --> 00:03:15.939 that were there for safety and oversight. And 00:03:15.939 --> 00:03:18.939 it doesn't stop there. It explicitly wants to 00:03:18.939 --> 00:03:21.740 evaluate state and local restrictions on actually 00:03:21.740 --> 00:03:24.259 building spaceports. Ah, the infrastructure on 00:03:24.259 --> 00:03:26.659 the ground. Right. And speed up the environmental 00:03:26.659 --> 00:03:29.080 and administrative reviews needed for that infrastructure. 00:03:29.500 --> 00:03:32.740 Sure. Launch pads, control centers, fuel facilities, 00:03:32.960 --> 00:03:35.719 all of it. So the whole process from the ground 00:03:35.719 --> 00:03:37.360 up. Basically, yeah. Yeah. Trying to make the 00:03:37.360 --> 00:03:40.580 whole thing faster, less cumbersome, and well, 00:03:40.699 --> 00:03:42.979 from their perspective, more efficient. And the 00:03:42.979 --> 00:03:44.919 administration's reason for this, this pretty 00:03:44.919 --> 00:03:47.020 aggressive move, it's laid out really clearly 00:03:47.020 --> 00:03:49.319 in the order itself. Yeah, what does it say exactly? 00:03:49.500 --> 00:03:51.879 It says, ensuring that United States operators 00:03:51.879 --> 00:03:54.699 can efficiently launch, conduct missions in space, 00:03:54.919 --> 00:03:57.599 and re -enter United States airspace is critical 00:03:57.599 --> 00:04:00.800 to economic growth, national security, and accomplishing 00:04:00.800 --> 00:04:03.300 federal space objectives. Pretty unambiguous 00:04:03.300 --> 00:04:05.939 language there, bolstering the nation's capabilities. 00:04:06.360 --> 00:04:08.949 It's standing in commercial space. globally. 00:04:09.409 --> 00:04:12.229 Definitely. And it even sets this, well, almost 00:04:12.229 --> 00:04:16.189 audacious goal to substantially increase commercial 00:04:16.189 --> 00:04:19.529 launches and encourage novel space activities 00:04:19.529 --> 00:04:21.750 by the end of the decade. So not just keeping 00:04:21.750 --> 00:04:26.050 pace, but accelerating dramatically. Right. Positioning 00:04:26.050 --> 00:04:28.269 the US as the leader. Right. When you look at 00:04:28.269 --> 00:04:30.509 that rationale, it's clear the vision is for 00:04:30.509 --> 00:04:33.449 commercial space to be increasingly dominant 00:04:33.449 --> 00:04:36.839 in the nation's space efforts. And easing these 00:04:36.839 --> 00:04:39.100 regulations is aimed right at clearing hurdles 00:04:39.100 --> 00:04:41.839 to rapid expansion and innovation in that sector. 00:04:42.300 --> 00:04:44.019 Creating an environment for private companies 00:04:44.019 --> 00:04:46.920 to move faster, be more agile. Theoretically 00:04:46.920 --> 00:04:49.480 leading to more launches, more development, a 00:04:49.480 --> 00:04:51.680 stronger commercial space economy. It reflects 00:04:51.680 --> 00:04:54.459 that philosophy, you know. Prioritizing growth 00:04:54.459 --> 00:04:57.000 and security through unburdened expansion in 00:04:57.000 --> 00:04:59.560 space. Viewing regulations more as obstacles 00:04:59.560 --> 00:05:01.939 than safeguards, perhaps. That seems to be the 00:05:01.939 --> 00:05:04.079 underlying message, yeah. Speed and scale are 00:05:04.079 --> 00:05:07.139 key. Speaking of major players, it's pretty hard 00:05:07.139 --> 00:05:10.319 not to mention that this order is likely to boost 00:05:10.319 --> 00:05:13.259 Elon Musk's SpaceX. Yeah, they're huge. One of 00:05:13.259 --> 00:05:15.160 the biggest, most active players out there. I 00:05:15.160 --> 00:05:17.199 mean, the scale is immense. They've already done 00:05:17.199 --> 00:05:20.459 over 100 launches just this year. Over 100. That 00:05:20.459 --> 00:05:23.540 kind of activity makes them an immediate, very 00:05:23.540 --> 00:05:27.379 clear beneficiary of any policy easing launch 00:05:27.379 --> 00:05:30.279 regulations. It's a big advantage. It's undeniably 00:05:30.279 --> 00:05:33.079 true that SpaceX stands to gain massively given 00:05:33.079 --> 00:05:35.579 their volume and, you know, their future plans. 00:05:35.959 --> 00:05:37.779 But what's kind of interesting here as a layer 00:05:37.779 --> 00:05:40.939 of complexity is the relationship described between 00:05:40.939 --> 00:05:43.480 President Trump and Elon Musk. It's apparently 00:05:43.480 --> 00:05:46.399 been quite tense recently, even though this policy 00:05:46.399 --> 00:05:50.199 benefits SpaceX. Oh, really? How so? Well, their 00:05:50.199 --> 00:05:51.879 interactions haven't always been smooth sailing. 00:05:52.480 --> 00:05:54.800 Musk apparently put, what, at least $250 million 00:05:54.800 --> 00:05:57.839 into supporting Trump's 2024 campaign. Right. 00:05:58.220 --> 00:06:00.339 And he even joined the administration briefly 00:06:00.339 --> 00:06:03.360 for about four months, heading up this new Department 00:06:03.360 --> 00:06:06.040 of Government Efficiency. Ah, yes, that controversial 00:06:06.040 --> 00:06:08.439 cost -cutting effort. Exactly. Controversial 00:06:08.439 --> 00:06:10.819 aimed at cutting perceived waste. But reports 00:06:10.819 --> 00:06:13.079 suggest that roll weighed heavily on Musk and 00:06:13.079 --> 00:06:15.620 his company's reputations, drew a lot of criticism. 00:06:15.939 --> 00:06:18.600 Then, not long - after he left in May, there 00:06:18.600 --> 00:06:21.259 was this public feud between him and Trump over 00:06:21.259 --> 00:06:23.519 some bill the president called a big, beautiful 00:06:23.519 --> 00:06:26.879 bill. A public feud. Apparently so. The sources 00:06:26.879 --> 00:06:28.839 mentioned it devolved into personal attacks, 00:06:29.220 --> 00:06:31.560 disagreements, and then Musk announced he was 00:06:31.560 --> 00:06:33.879 launching a third political party, kind of out 00:06:33.879 --> 00:06:37.259 of the blue. Wow. So the policy helps SpaceX, 00:06:37.519 --> 00:06:40.019 but the personal dynamic between Trump and Musk 00:06:40.019 --> 00:06:43.800 is... complicated. Very complicated. It adds 00:06:43.800 --> 00:06:47.060 this surprising layer to understanding the motivations 00:06:47.060 --> 00:06:50.459 and who benefits. It seems business interests 00:06:50.459 --> 00:06:53.100 and maybe political expediency can outweigh personal 00:06:53.100 --> 00:06:55.699 feelings sometimes. As you'd expect, a move like 00:06:55.699 --> 00:06:57.920 this, streamlining environmental oversight for 00:06:57.920 --> 00:07:00.920 space commerce, it didn't go unnoticed by environmental 00:07:00.920 --> 00:07:03.019 groups. That's definitely not. Advocates were 00:07:03.019 --> 00:07:05.839 immediately wary, expressing strong opposition 00:07:05.839 --> 00:07:08.480 pretty much instantly. The Center for Biological 00:07:08.480 --> 00:07:10.879 Diversity, for instance, called the order reckless. 00:07:10.860 --> 00:07:13.819 So what are their main worries? Their core argument, 00:07:13.959 --> 00:07:16.560 put very forcefully, is that rockets, just by 00:07:16.560 --> 00:07:19.579 their nature, often explode and wreak devastation 00:07:19.579 --> 00:07:21.579 on surrounding areas. Right, the inherent risks 00:07:21.579 --> 00:07:23.939 involved. Which, they argue, puts people and 00:07:23.939 --> 00:07:26.220 wildlife at risk. They point to things like sonic 00:07:26.220 --> 00:07:29.300 booms, potential chemical spills from fuel, habitat 00:07:29.300 --> 00:07:31.959 destruction, new launch sites. Like down at SpaceX's 00:07:31.959 --> 00:07:35.939 Starbase in Texas. It's near sensitive ecosystems, 00:07:36.379 --> 00:07:39.519 endangered species habitats. More launches with 00:07:39.519 --> 00:07:41.800 less review could really impact those areas. 00:07:42.420 --> 00:07:44.199 Exactly. Jared Margolis, a senior attorney at 00:07:44.199 --> 00:07:47.220 the center, didn't hold back. He said, bending 00:07:47.220 --> 00:07:49.860 the knee to powerful corporations by allowing 00:07:49.860 --> 00:07:52.959 federal agencies to ignore bedrock environmental 00:07:52.959 --> 00:07:56.259 laws is incredibly dangerous and puts all of 00:07:56.259 --> 00:07:59.420 us in harm's way. Strong words. And he concluded, 00:07:59.680 --> 00:08:02.360 pretty emphatically, this is clearly not in the 00:08:02.360 --> 00:08:04.819 public interest. It highlights this fundamental 00:08:04.819 --> 00:08:06.959 tension, doesn't it? Absolutely. On one side, 00:08:07.439 --> 00:08:09.939 the administration's goals. Economic growth, 00:08:10.300 --> 00:08:12.740 national security. rapid space expansion. And 00:08:12.740 --> 00:08:15.379 on the other, these series concerns about ecological 00:08:15.379 --> 00:08:18.699 risks, human risks, with fewer safeguards. It 00:08:18.699 --> 00:08:21.259 forces that question. How do you weigh rapid 00:08:21.259 --> 00:08:23.699 expansion and tech advancement against environmental 00:08:23.699 --> 00:08:26.389 protection and public safety? It's a tough balancing 00:08:26.389 --> 00:08:28.810 act. With potentially long -lasting consequences. 00:08:29.110 --> 00:08:30.930 OK, so from reaching for the stars, let's bring 00:08:30.930 --> 00:08:33.110 our focus back down to Earth, specifically to 00:08:33.110 --> 00:08:35.149 the Environmental Protection Agency, the EPA. 00:08:35.529 --> 00:08:37.830 We're seeing a very distinct philosophy emerge 00:08:37.830 --> 00:08:40.909 there now. Critics have widely called it an embrace 00:08:40.909 --> 00:08:44.009 of climate change denial, as it seems to be actively 00:08:44.009 --> 00:08:46.990 working to dismantle existing climate regulations. 00:08:47.330 --> 00:08:50.750 It's a profound redirection for an agency traditionally 00:08:50.750 --> 00:08:53.149 tasked with protecting the environment. Indeed. 00:08:53.730 --> 00:08:56.750 And the central action here, maybe the most consequential, 00:08:57.250 --> 00:09:00.409 is EPA Administrator Lee Zeldin's proposal to 00:09:00.409 --> 00:09:04.009 repeal the 2009 endangerment finding. OK. Unpack 00:09:04.009 --> 00:09:05.929 that finding for us. What was its significance? 00:09:06.490 --> 00:09:08.610 Well, it was established under the Obama administration, 00:09:08.809 --> 00:09:11.269 a really critical legal determination under the 00:09:11.269 --> 00:09:13.730 Clean Air Act. It declared that planet warming 00:09:13.730 --> 00:09:17.110 gases, CO2, methane, others are a direct threat 00:09:17.110 --> 00:09:19.250 to public health and welfare. So more than just 00:09:19.250 --> 00:09:21.629 stating the science, it was the legal foundation. 00:09:21.929 --> 00:09:24.470 Exactly. The legal basis for a whole range of 00:09:24.470 --> 00:09:27.149 climate regs on industries like cars, power plants, 00:09:27.570 --> 00:09:30.309 industrial facilities. Without it, the EPA's 00:09:30.309 --> 00:09:32.570 legal power to regulate those greenhouse gases 00:09:32.570 --> 00:09:36.169 is severely weakened or even gone. And Zeldin 00:09:36.169 --> 00:09:39.159 has publicly confirmed this plan. Yes. He told 00:09:39.159 --> 00:09:42.019 Newsmax the EPA sent a proposed rule to the Office 00:09:42.019 --> 00:09:45.139 of Management and Budget specifically to repeal 00:09:45.139 --> 00:09:49.039 that 2009 finding. Wow. What's also really notable 00:09:49.039 --> 00:09:51.679 and drawing a lot of fire from scientists are 00:09:51.679 --> 00:09:54.519 his public comments about carbon dioxide itself. 00:09:55.039 --> 00:09:58.620 He explicitly said CO2 is necessary for life. 00:09:59.039 --> 00:10:01.039 Contrasting it with the view of it as a pollutant 00:10:01.039 --> 00:10:04.330 when it's in Excess. Right. He argued, quote, 00:10:04.570 --> 00:10:06.950 many on the left will say carbon dioxide is a 00:10:06.950 --> 00:10:09.009 pollutant, and they won't talk about all of the 00:10:09.009 --> 00:10:11.350 many reasons why carbon dioxide is actually necessary 00:10:11.350 --> 00:10:14.549 for life here on our planet. That framing, redefining 00:10:14.549 --> 00:10:17.389 the issue, seems central to their whole approach 00:10:17.389 --> 00:10:20.649 now. Absolutely. And this shift, especially on 00:10:20.649 --> 00:10:23.549 something as basic as CO2, brings us to a major 00:10:23.549 --> 00:10:25.789 point of conflict, the scientific community's 00:10:25.789 --> 00:10:27.889 reaction. Which has been strong, I gather. Very 00:10:27.889 --> 00:10:30.070 strong and immediate. There's this stark contrast 00:10:30.070 --> 00:10:32.580 between the agency's new line and the long established 00:10:32.580 --> 00:10:34.879 scientific consensus. The criticisms have been 00:10:34.879 --> 00:10:37.940 swift, yes, and pretty blunt. extremely blunt, 00:10:38.240 --> 00:10:40.820 Robert Bruhl from Brown University, who studies 00:10:40.820 --> 00:10:43.899 climate denial, flat out called Zeldon's actions 00:10:43.899 --> 00:10:47.980 and comments climate denial. He said, yes, he's 00:10:47.980 --> 00:10:51.120 a full -fledged climate denier. Wow, OK. He called 00:10:51.120 --> 00:10:53.960 the assertions that greenhouse gases like CO2 00:10:53.960 --> 00:10:57.080 aren't dangerous, irrational, and unscientific. 00:10:57.279 --> 00:11:00.720 He even used this analogy, saying, it's almost 00:11:00.720 --> 00:11:03.139 as if the Catholic Church is just wishing away 00:11:03.139 --> 00:11:05.919 Galileo, adding, the science is there. You can 00:11:05.919 --> 00:11:08.919 see it. It's proven. It's fact. A powerful comparison. 00:11:09.039 --> 00:11:11.379 And he pointed out that this specific argument 00:11:11.379 --> 00:11:14.139 that CO2 is needed for life, so it can't be bad, 00:11:14.299 --> 00:11:16.500 is an old staple of the climate denial movement 00:11:16.500 --> 00:11:19.240 dating back to the 90s. So recycling old talking 00:11:19.240 --> 00:11:21.039 points essentially. What about other experts? 00:11:21.299 --> 00:11:23.980 Robert Howarth at Cornell University reinforced 00:11:23.980 --> 00:11:27.019 the scientific nuance. He agreed CO2 is essential 00:11:27.019 --> 00:11:29.539 for photosynthesis, like water is essential for 00:11:29.539 --> 00:11:31.740 life. But too much of a good thing can be bad. 00:11:32.000 --> 00:11:34.399 Exactly. He said, there are lots of things which 00:11:34.399 --> 00:11:36.559 are essential for life. when they become in excess 00:11:36.559 --> 00:11:38.960 are damaging pollutants. It's not an either or. 00:11:39.139 --> 00:11:41.759 He stressed the science on CO2's climate impact 00:11:41.759 --> 00:11:44.980 is settled, known for over 150 years. Going back 00:11:44.980 --> 00:11:48.000 to the 19th century, foundational research. Right. 00:11:48.240 --> 00:11:50.259 And Jonathan Overpeck at the University of Michigan 00:11:50.259 --> 00:11:53.039 called denying climate change as a problem crazy. 00:11:53.279 --> 00:11:55.960 He pointed to the observable impacts we're already 00:11:55.960 --> 00:11:58.220 seeing. More frequent, more severe extremes. 00:11:58.659 --> 00:12:02.100 Exactly. Heat waves, droughts, extreme rainfall, 00:12:02.779 --> 00:12:05.679 flooding, all supercharged by climate change 00:12:05.679 --> 00:12:08.700 caused by emissions of CO2 and other greenhouse 00:12:08.700 --> 00:12:11.720 gases. So the collective expert feedback paints 00:12:11.720 --> 00:12:14.860 a really clear picture of scientific consensus 00:12:14.860 --> 00:12:18.179 standing in stark opposition to the EPA's position 00:12:18.179 --> 00:12:21.059 now. It's a profound battle over the definition 00:12:21.059 --> 00:12:23.740 of pollutant and the role of science and policy. 00:12:24.139 --> 00:12:26.320 And it's clear this isn't just about weakening 00:12:26.320 --> 00:12:28.600 regulations. Right. It seems to be about eliminating 00:12:28.600 --> 00:12:31.259 them entirely. which is a big escalation from 00:12:31.259 --> 00:12:33.320 previous approaches. That's a key distinction. 00:12:33.639 --> 00:12:35.539 Looking back at the first Trump administration, 00:12:35.779 --> 00:12:37.899 they rolled back a lot of environmental rules, 00:12:38.159 --> 00:12:40.899 sure, but generally left some form of regulation 00:12:40.899 --> 00:12:43.259 in place. They didn't remove the endangerment 00:12:43.259 --> 00:12:46.679 finding itself, even though EPA head Pruitt publicly 00:12:46.679 --> 00:12:49.889 downplayed CO2's role back then. Exactly. But 00:12:49.889 --> 00:12:52.649 now the stated goal seems to be getting rid of 00:12:52.649 --> 00:12:55.129 regulations completely. That's much more radical. 00:12:55.370 --> 00:12:57.549 Including proposals to eliminate all climate 00:12:57.549 --> 00:13:01.070 rules for power plants. Yes. Based on an argument 00:13:01.070 --> 00:13:04.889 in a draft rule that their emissions do not contribute 00:13:04.889 --> 00:13:08.350 significantly to dangerous air pollution, which, 00:13:08.350 --> 00:13:11.370 you know, contradicts decades of science on cumulative 00:13:11.370 --> 00:13:14.809 impacts. Joe Goffman, who led the EPA's air office 00:13:14.809 --> 00:13:18.009 under Biden, called this approach nihilistic. 00:13:18.159 --> 00:13:20.720 Yeah, he described it as a pure all -or -nothing 00:13:20.720 --> 00:13:23.799 proposition suggesting the aim is to remove the 00:13:23.799 --> 00:13:26.159 agency's authority to regulate tailpipe emissions 00:13:26.159 --> 00:13:29.100 entirely. Huge implications there. And Goffman 00:13:29.100 --> 00:13:31.399 felt removing regulations altogether would be 00:13:31.399 --> 00:13:33.919 far worse than just weakening them. A profound 00:13:33.919 --> 00:13:36.919 strategic shift. And bringing in the global context, 00:13:37.240 --> 00:13:39.059 Jonathan Overpeck made that critical point about 00:13:39.059 --> 00:13:41.600 the U .S. role. Right, about emissions mattering 00:13:41.600 --> 00:13:43.740 globally. He said, we're the number two emitter 00:13:43.740 --> 00:13:45.879 of carbon dioxide behind China and we have been 00:13:45.879 --> 00:13:48.700 the number one historical emitter. Cutting U 00:13:48.700 --> 00:13:50.720 .S. emissions is crucial for tackling the global 00:13:50.720 --> 00:13:53.840 problem. To say the U .S. isn't a major contributor. 00:13:54.179 --> 00:13:56.799 He called it just crazy talk. It highlights how 00:13:56.799 --> 00:13:59.279 these domestic shifts have massive international 00:13:59.279 --> 00:14:01.899 implications. Which brings us to another really 00:14:01.899 --> 00:14:05.659 significant area seeing major changes. Federally 00:14:05.659 --> 00:14:08.419 mandated climate research. Let's start with the 00:14:08.419 --> 00:14:11.220 National Climate Assessment. Ah yes, the NCA. 00:14:11.679 --> 00:14:15.200 That's not a small thing. It's a huge, congressionally 00:14:15.200 --> 00:14:17.360 mandated effort. Designed to keep the nation 00:14:17.360 --> 00:14:19.860 informed about climate impacts, vulnerabilities, 00:14:20.299 --> 00:14:23.500 adaptation strategies, a cornerstone of our understanding. 00:14:23.659 --> 00:14:25.679 And this is where we saw something really surprising 00:14:25.679 --> 00:14:28.960 and frankly alarming to many scientists. What 00:14:28.960 --> 00:14:30.679 happened exactly? All the scientists working 00:14:30.679 --> 00:14:32.759 on the sixth National Climate Assessment, hundreds 00:14:32.759 --> 00:14:35.759 of them, mostly volunteers got an email dismissing 00:14:35.759 --> 00:14:38.620 them. Just like that dismissing them. Yeah, the 00:14:38.620 --> 00:14:41.539 email just said the assessments scope is currently 00:14:41.539 --> 00:14:44.559 being reevaluated NASA and White House officials 00:14:44.559 --> 00:14:46.840 confirmed this reevaluation but gave no further 00:14:46.840 --> 00:14:49.220 details So hundreds of volunteer experts their 00:14:49.220 --> 00:14:53.259 work just paused or ended disrupting years of 00:14:53.259 --> 00:14:56.299 effort Exactly. So what does this actually mean 00:14:56.299 --> 00:14:59.679 for people for communities across the US especially 00:14:59.679 --> 00:15:02.360 those already facing climate impacts? It means 00:15:02.360 --> 00:15:04.840 a lot because this report, mandated way back 00:15:04.840 --> 00:15:08.879 in 1990, isn't just academic. It provides crucial, 00:15:09.340 --> 00:15:12.600 detailed U .S. specific assessments, broken down 00:15:12.600 --> 00:15:14.779 by region. Making it actionable, right? That's 00:15:14.779 --> 00:15:16.820 what Rachel Cletus, an expert working on the 00:15:16.820 --> 00:15:19.679 report, stressed. It provides information about 00:15:19.679 --> 00:15:22.240 climate impact is at a local and regional level 00:15:22.240 --> 00:15:24.840 so that it's actionable for people. Think sea 00:15:24.840 --> 00:15:28.059 level rise projections, ag yield changes, heat 00:15:28.059 --> 00:15:31.590 risks, water availability. data that communities, 00:15:31.970 --> 00:15:34.250 especially those without their own big research 00:15:34.250 --> 00:15:37.450 teams, really rely on to make plans. Without 00:15:37.450 --> 00:15:39.669 it, they'll struggle hugely to translate the 00:15:39.669 --> 00:15:41.629 science into practical plans for preparedness, 00:15:42.009 --> 00:15:44.419 for resilience. Cletus issued a pretty stark 00:15:44.419 --> 00:15:46.559 warning about that. She did. She said lives will 00:15:46.559 --> 00:15:48.639 be lost. There will be harm caused by removing 00:15:48.639 --> 00:15:51.179 access to this federally funded comprehensive 00:15:51.179 --> 00:15:53.539 scientific report. That's not hyperbole. It's 00:15:53.539 --> 00:15:55.779 about concrete consequences, lacking data for 00:15:55.779 --> 00:15:58.240 building codes, infrastructure design, heatwave 00:15:58.240 --> 00:16:00.840 plans, water management. Crystal Raymond, another 00:16:00.840 --> 00:16:03.360 scientist dismissed from the project, added it's 00:16:03.360 --> 00:16:05.759 a vital tool for communicating complex science 00:16:05.759 --> 00:16:09.019 broadly to communities, state and local governments, 00:16:09.299 --> 00:16:12.399 the public. And she felt this move showed a lack 00:16:12.399 --> 00:16:14.799 of interest. from the administration and getting 00:16:14.799 --> 00:16:17.100 that critical info out to people who need it. 00:16:17.539 --> 00:16:20.600 And while maybe not a total shock, given past 00:16:20.600 --> 00:16:23.279 moves like canceled contracts or firings in the 00:16:23.279 --> 00:16:25.720 first term, this feels like an escalation. Definitely. 00:16:26.379 --> 00:16:29.139 The fourth NCA was published even if quietly 00:16:29.139 --> 00:16:32.539 the day after Thanksgiving 2018. This action 00:16:32.539 --> 00:16:35.360 pauses the next one, actively hindering the flow 00:16:35.360 --> 00:16:37.940 of updated science. It signals this profound 00:16:37.940 --> 00:16:40.159 disengagement from the scientific process itself. 00:16:40.379 --> 00:16:43.580 OK, next up. How are these ships hitting NASA? 00:16:43.980 --> 00:16:46.659 Our National Aeronautics and Space Agency. Their 00:16:46.659 --> 00:16:48.879 long -standing mission seems to be undergoing 00:16:48.879 --> 00:16:51.440 a pretty significant reevaluation, too. That's 00:16:51.440 --> 00:16:53.559 right. Acting NASA Administrator Sean Duffy made 00:16:53.559 --> 00:16:56.399 some very explicit comments. He stated that climate 00:16:56.399 --> 00:16:59.039 and Earth science at NASA will essentially move 00:16:59.039 --> 00:17:02.440 aside. Move aside. For what? To refocus solely 00:17:02.440 --> 00:17:05.559 on space exploration. He told Fox Business, quote, 00:17:05.789 --> 00:17:08.509 all the climate science and all of the other 00:17:08.509 --> 00:17:10.549 priorities that the last administration had at 00:17:10.549 --> 00:17:13.190 NASA were going to move aside. And all of the 00:17:13.190 --> 00:17:15.430 science that we do is going to be directed towards 00:17:15.430 --> 00:17:17.950 exploration, which is the mission of NASA. And 00:17:17.950 --> 00:17:20.230 he doubled down on that. Yeah, adding, that's 00:17:20.230 --> 00:17:23.210 why we have NASA is to explore, not to do all 00:17:23.210 --> 00:17:25.910 of these earth sciences. That's a remarkably 00:17:25.910 --> 00:17:28.089 direct statement about a fundamental shift. And 00:17:28.089 --> 00:17:29.890 it's important to remember NASA's history here, 00:17:29.950 --> 00:17:32.049 right? It's always been aeronautics and space. 00:17:32.269 --> 00:17:36.019 Exactly. A dual mission. exploring air and space. 00:17:36.359 --> 00:17:38.640 For decades, they've done extensive science on 00:17:38.640 --> 00:17:41.079 both Earth and space. Their Earth science division 00:17:41.079 --> 00:17:43.720 runs satellites monitoring sea levels, ice melt, 00:17:44.380 --> 00:17:47.809 atmospheric composition, forests, rainfall. Everything. 00:17:48.130 --> 00:17:50.470 Foundational data for understanding climate change. 00:17:50.809 --> 00:17:53.470 Missions like GRACE, tracking water mass, aqua 00:17:53.470 --> 00:17:56.029 and terra, looking at clouds, temperature, land 00:17:56.029 --> 00:17:58.970 cover. Absolutely. This proposed pivot is a huge 00:17:58.970 --> 00:18:01.490 change to that long -standing dual mission, which 00:18:01.490 --> 00:18:04.329 has given us so much unbiased public data about 00:18:04.329 --> 00:18:07.369 our own planet. And this shift aligns with the 00:18:07.369 --> 00:18:09.730 broader efforts to downplay climate impacts, 00:18:10.049 --> 00:18:11.869 dismantle research. And it connects back to our 00:18:11.869 --> 00:18:14.509 first topic. It comes just as the administration 00:18:14.509 --> 00:18:16.990 is also trying to cut environmental reviews for 00:18:16.990 --> 00:18:19.410 the space industry. So it feels like part of 00:18:19.410 --> 00:18:22.809 a cohesive strategy, reorienting federal science 00:18:22.809 --> 00:18:26.299 away from Earth -centric research. Yeah. Finally, 00:18:26.559 --> 00:18:28.759 let's talk about potential budget cuts at the 00:18:28.759 --> 00:18:31.539 National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, 00:18:32.099 --> 00:18:35.519 or NOAA, another key agency for climate and weather 00:18:35.519 --> 00:18:38.039 research. And the proposed changes in recent 00:18:38.039 --> 00:18:41.180 budget documents look, well... pretty drastic. 00:18:41.519 --> 00:18:43.839 If they happened, they could severely impair 00:18:43.839 --> 00:18:47.460 our ability to monitor, understand, predict environmental 00:18:47.460 --> 00:18:49.079 stuff. What kind of cuts are we talking about? 00:18:49.299 --> 00:18:52.400 A new budget document outlines proposals to completely 00:18:52.400 --> 00:18:55.660 zero out funding for several critical areas in 00:18:55.660 --> 00:18:58.940 NOAA. Zero out? Like eliminate funding entirely? 00:18:59.019 --> 00:19:01.339 That's what's proposed. For NOAA's climate labs, 00:19:01.579 --> 00:19:03.460 for regional climate data and information programs, 00:19:03.740 --> 00:19:05.859 the ones collecting and sharing vital climate 00:19:05.859 --> 00:19:08.259 data. Wow. And does it stop at climate research? 00:19:08.660 --> 00:19:12.390 No. The document also targets NOAA's weather 00:19:12.390 --> 00:19:15.589 research program, its weather labs, even its 00:19:15.589 --> 00:19:19.130 crucial tornado and severe storm research, which 00:19:19.130 --> 00:19:21.470 is fundamental for safety in the U .S. heartland. 00:19:22.049 --> 00:19:24.250 So basic weather forecasting research could be 00:19:24.250 --> 00:19:27.690 hit, too. It seems so. And it goes further, proposing 00:19:27.690 --> 00:19:30.690 the actual shutdown of specific critical labs. 00:19:30.890 --> 00:19:33.049 Which ones? For example, the lab at Mauna Loa 00:19:33.049 --> 00:19:36.170 in Hawaii. That's world famous for its long -term 00:19:36.170 --> 00:19:38.630 tracking of atmospheric greenhouse gases, especially 00:19:38.630 --> 00:19:41.730 CO2. It provides the Keeling Curve data, over 00:19:41.730 --> 00:19:45.609 60 years of continuous CO2 record. Irrefutable 00:19:45.609 --> 00:19:47.690 measure of climate change. Cutting that off would 00:19:47.690 --> 00:19:50.990 be huge. Huge. Another lab slated for shutdown 00:19:50.990 --> 00:19:53.250 is in Miami, Florida. Their research includes 00:19:53.250 --> 00:19:55.670 vital hurricane studies, storm surge modeling, 00:19:56.269 --> 00:19:58.190 intensity prediction absolutely critical with 00:19:58.190 --> 00:20:00.309 storms intensifying in the Atlantic and the Gulf 00:20:00.309 --> 00:20:02.450 of Mexico. These aren't just abstract research 00:20:02.450 --> 00:20:04.250 centers, they're foundational infrastructure. 00:20:04.369 --> 00:20:06.769 Exactly. Providing data and forecast impacting 00:20:06.769 --> 00:20:09.299 everything from farming to disaster prep. and 00:20:09.299 --> 00:20:11.779 on top of the program cuts. Staffing cuts too. 00:20:12.039 --> 00:20:15.940 Significant ones proposed. A reduction of 2 ,061 00:20:15.940 --> 00:20:20.529 fur time staff at NOAA. That's a 17 % cut. compared 00:20:20.529 --> 00:20:25.190 to fiscal 2024. 17%. That's massive. It is. And 00:20:25.190 --> 00:20:27.410 while administration budgets are often just starting 00:20:27.410 --> 00:20:29.710 points for Congress, this one feels different 00:20:29.710 --> 00:20:31.769 because of that Department of Government efficiency. 00:20:32.109 --> 00:20:34.589 Right. The one focused on cutting staff in areas 00:20:34.589 --> 00:20:37.150 not aligned with current priorities. Exactly. 00:20:37.589 --> 00:20:40.829 It suggests a strong, deliberate intent. behind 00:20:40.829 --> 00:20:43.109 these proposed cuts, more than just a budget 00:20:43.109 --> 00:20:45.569 placeholder. It looks like a strategic effort 00:20:45.569 --> 00:20:47.990 to really diminish climate and environmental 00:20:47.990 --> 00:20:49.910 research capacity in the federal government. 00:20:50.349 --> 00:20:52.150 OK, this brings us to a really critical point. 00:20:52.910 --> 00:20:55.369 How do all these seemingly separate policies, 00:20:55.730 --> 00:20:58.809 easing space rags, accelerating commercial launches, 00:20:59.329 --> 00:21:01.549 fundamentally altering climate research, dismantling 00:21:01.549 --> 00:21:04.029 scientific assessments, slashing agency budgets, 00:21:04.390 --> 00:21:06.410 how do they all fit together? Yeah, at first 00:21:06.410 --> 00:21:08.509 glance, they might seem disparate. But when you 00:21:08.509 --> 00:21:10.690 step back, there seems to be an underlying coherence, 00:21:10.690 --> 00:21:13.829 doesn't there? I think so. If you connect the 00:21:13.829 --> 00:21:16.349 dots, you see this overarching, quite deliberate 00:21:16.349 --> 00:21:20.289 theme of deregulation and a major reprioritization 00:21:20.289 --> 00:21:22.990 of federal scientific and environmental efforts. 00:21:23.289 --> 00:21:26.029 So on one hand, an emphasis on rapid commercial 00:21:26.029 --> 00:21:29.490 expansion in space, pushing forward, reducing 00:21:29.490 --> 00:21:32.109 obstacles, potentially at the expense of environmental 00:21:32.109 --> 00:21:35.190 review, valuing growth and exploration, perhaps 00:21:35.190 --> 00:21:38.150 over safeguards and acceleration. And on the 00:21:38.150 --> 00:21:40.990 other hand, a deliberate downscaling, even dismantling, 00:21:41.490 --> 00:21:43.569 of climate -related research and regulatory power 00:21:43.569 --> 00:21:47.430 in agencies like EPA, NASA, NOAA, a deceleration. 00:21:47.710 --> 00:21:49.849 pulling back from established science and protection, 00:21:50.390 --> 00:21:52.609 often redefining basic concepts. So it's not 00:21:52.609 --> 00:21:54.690 just random changes. It feels like a strategic 00:21:54.690 --> 00:21:57.529 redirection of federal resources and focus. Right. 00:21:57.730 --> 00:22:00.109 It implicitly suggests that prosperity and national 00:22:00.109 --> 00:22:02.809 strength are best achieved by unlocking new economic 00:22:02.809 --> 00:22:05.710 frontiers and pursuing big tech feats rather 00:22:05.710 --> 00:22:08.009 than, say, safeguarding and deepening our understanding 00:22:08.009 --> 00:22:10.609 of existing environmental challenges. Which really 00:22:10.609 --> 00:22:12.670 raises that big question for you, the listener. 00:22:13.309 --> 00:22:15.509 What does this mean for our collective ability 00:22:15.509 --> 00:22:18.470 to understand and prepare for challenges from 00:22:18.470 --> 00:22:21.890 things like rocket launches and the broader issue 00:22:21.890 --> 00:22:24.309 of climate change? Yeah, how do these shifts 00:22:24.309 --> 00:22:27.670 affect the availability of actionable data for 00:22:27.670 --> 00:22:30.890 communities needing to adapt or the scientific 00:22:30.890 --> 00:22:33.970 basis for future policy decisions? Are we choosing 00:22:33.970 --> 00:22:37.490 comprehensive planetary understanding or dramatically 00:22:37.490 --> 00:22:40.269 narrowing our focus? And it's crucial to remember 00:22:40.269 --> 00:22:42.130 throughout this, we're just presenting these 00:22:42.130 --> 00:22:44.470 developments as they've been reported, highlighting 00:22:44.470 --> 00:22:46.890 the different arguments and concerns from various 00:22:46.890 --> 00:22:49.250 sides. Absolutely. Our goal here on Meteorology 00:22:49.250 --> 00:22:51.809 Matters is simply to convey the ideas and propose 00:22:51.809 --> 00:22:53.970 changes, let you form your own understanding. 00:22:54.069 --> 00:22:56.170 We're not taking sides. You need to hear these 00:22:56.170 --> 00:22:59.210 different perspectives directly. Exactly. These 00:22:59.210 --> 00:23:01.150 shifts show fundamentally different views on 00:23:01.150 --> 00:23:03.329 government's role, the balance between growth 00:23:03.329 --> 00:23:05.869 and environmental protection, even how scientific 00:23:05.869 --> 00:23:08.890 consensus should inform policy. We've heard arguments 00:23:08.890 --> 00:23:11.549 for efficiency, for exploring new frontiers. 00:23:11.930 --> 00:23:14.950 And at the same time, strong warnings from experts 00:23:14.950 --> 00:23:18.029 about potentially reckless actions, about losing 00:23:18.029 --> 00:23:20.670 vital scientific information built up over decades. 00:23:20.789 --> 00:23:22.769 We just want to lay out these contrasting views 00:23:22.769 --> 00:23:25.190 so you see the full scope, understand the stakes 00:23:25.190 --> 00:23:27.170 involved. So what does this all mean for you, 00:23:27.349 --> 00:23:30.180 the listener? It means a changing landscape for 00:23:30.180 --> 00:23:33.099 how our nation tackles critical scientific and 00:23:33.099 --> 00:23:35.180 environmental challenges. It's about understanding 00:23:35.180 --> 00:23:37.839 the powerful forces at play shaping our future 00:23:37.839 --> 00:23:41.000 from the rockets overhead to the air we breathe, 00:23:41.480 --> 00:23:44.339 the climate defining our home. These aren't isolated 00:23:44.339 --> 00:23:47.000 decisions. They're interconnected threads weaving 00:23:47.000 --> 00:23:49.819 into the fabric of our national direction, our 00:23:49.819 --> 00:23:52.059 ability to navigate the coming decades. This 00:23:52.059 --> 00:23:54.819 raises an important question. As we think about 00:23:54.819 --> 00:23:57.579 all this, maybe the ultimate question is... When 00:23:57.579 --> 00:24:00.140 does pursuing new frontiers risk undermining 00:24:00.140 --> 00:24:02.140 the understanding of the very home we're leaving 00:24:02.140 --> 00:24:04.680 behind? And how do we really measure progress 00:24:04.680 --> 00:24:07.680 if the scales seem to be tilting away from essential 00:24:07.680 --> 00:24:10.799 planetary knowledge? Food for thought. Thank 00:24:10.799 --> 00:24:13.019 you for joining us on this critical Meteorology 00:24:13.019 --> 00:24:15.400 Matters discussion. We hope this brought some 00:24:15.400 --> 00:24:18.119 clarity to these significant shifts. Remember, 00:24:18.380 --> 00:24:20.980 follow meteorologist Rob Jones for more insights. 00:24:21.359 --> 00:24:24.140 He's on Instagram as Meteorologist. On TikTok 00:24:24.140 --> 00:24:27.099 as TV Meteorologist. And on YouTube, follow Rob 00:24:27.099 --> 00:24:29.059 Jones Hurricane, where you can also find the 00:24:29.059 --> 00:24:32.039 Meteorology Matters podcast playlist. Stay curious, 00:24:32.279 --> 00:24:34.640 stay informed, and we'll be back soon with another 00:24:34.640 --> 00:24:35.660 vital discussion.