On Thursday, the Trump Administration repealed the Endangerment Finding under the Clean Air Act — a determination by the Environmental Protection Act (EPA) in 2009 that certain greenhouse gasses (GHG) are harmful to the health of humans and the environment. Removal of the Finding opens the door to deregulation of carbon dioxide, methane and four other GHG emissions.

The Trump Administration hails the move as an economic boon, saying it reduces requirements that the automobile and other industries must follow. Those concerned about climate change, however, foresee the opposite, with rising costs to communities and individuals who will be subjected to increased extreme weather events.

As a concerned citizen and manager of our family’s multi-generational, ancestral farm in Iowa, the news of the repeal alarms me. For more than a decade, I joined others to fight the Dakota Access Pipeline (constructed to pump crude oil from North Dakota to Illinois) and the Navigator Heartland Greenway carbon dioxide pipeline (proposed to transport CO2 from ethanol plants in five states for sequestration in Illinois). Our farm was on the planned route of both pipelines, with the threat of eminent domain. The final placement of the Dakota pipeline borders our property. The Navigator pipeline was cancelled, but the Summit Carbon Solutions CO2 pipeline continues to threaten farmers in Iowa and other Midwestern states.

Playing the devil’s advocate, I imagine some possible “positive” ramifications of the repeal. If CO2 is no longer deemed a threat and no longer regulated, then further taxpayer dollars could be saved by ending government funding of ethanol and carbon sequestration projects.

According to the Iowa Corn Growers Association, 62% of Iowa corn goes to ethanol. The federal government provided $3.2 billion of subsidies to corn producers in 2024. Additionally, the federal government has provided hundreds of millions of dollars in subsidies for biofuel infrastructure projects. Moreover, as reported in South Dakota Voices, “the Federal Renewable Fuel Standard, administered by the EPA, requires that a certain volume of biofuels to be blended with gasoline and diesel each year. … This means even when ethanol is more expensive than gasoline, it must be produced.”

Prompted by these subsidies, farmers have increased the acres planted in corn, which has led to increased soil erosion, fertilizer use and water pollution.

Ethanol is bad not only for the environment but also for human health. Chris Jones in “Stop the Insanity” points out that E15 (85% gas and 15% ethanol) increases ground level ozone and smog, which contributes to cardiovascular diseases, respiratory illnesses, lung cancer and diabetes.

Without ethanol, there would be no need in the Midwest for heavily subsidized CO2 projects aimed at capturing CO2 generated at ethanol plants for sequestration thousands of miles away. There would be no need for eminent domain to force farmers to allow their productive soil to be harmfully disturbed to lay the pipelines for the CO2 transport. According to a report by Lew Daly of Just Solutions and Doug Koplow of Earth Track, the 45Q tax credit expansion for carbon capture, utilization and storage could cost taxpayers $46 billion per year. “Total costs could reach as high as $835 billion by 2042; and were industry-proposed expansions implemented, the taxpayer cost could surge to $2 trillion,” the report adds.

In defense of the repeal of the Endangerment Finding, EPA Administrator Lee Zelden at the Munich Security Conference on Saturday, said that section 202 of the Clean Air Act does not currently mention climate change and that Congress would have to amend that section before the EPA could regulate GHGs.

California Governor Gavin Newsom at the same conference outlined what his state and others can do to continue to fight global warming despite federal actions. For example, even though Trump withdrew the United States from the Paris Agreement, California and other states formed the U.S. Climate Alliance committed to meet the Paris target (see gov.ca.gov).

Bottom line, while the Trump Administration’s impending deregulation of GHG emissions is a horrendous move, it should embolden us at the grassroots to continue the good fight to reduce global warming, which science has proved is due to GHGs. For my part, I will continue to promote natural CO2 sequestration by planting perennials and stewarding woodlands on our farm, by partnering with others to speak up for the well-being of our planet, and by casting my vote for a Congress that will pass a bill to add “climate change” in the Clean Air Act.