Federal government decides to terminate the existence of its scientific research division within the Environmental Protection Agency.
The United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has announced its decision to close its Office of Research and Development (ORD), raising concerns about the agency's ability to protect the environment and public health.
The ORD, which evaluates industry claims and technologies, funds many of the EPA's external research grants, and provides critical analysis on environmental hazards, is crucial for informed regulatory decisions. The closure of ORD, along with cutting nearly a quarter of EPA staff, reduces the agency’s ability to conduct this essential research and risks leaving people and ecosystems more vulnerable to harm.
The loss of ORD means fewer resources are available for research that underpins EPA's regulatory standards, such as assessments related to drinking water safety and pollution impacts on wildlife and ecosystems. This downsizing leads to concerns about diminished scientific expertise in critical areas like climate change, air quality, and chemical safety.
Congressional critics, including nearly 90 House Democrats, have warned that without the ORD’s research, the EPA will struggle to ensure safe air, water, and land. They have demanded explanations and opposed the reorganization, highlighting the risks to public health and environmental oversight.
EPA Administrator Lee Zeldin claims the reorganization and workforce cuts will save nearly $750 million and improve efficiency by refocusing on applied science. However, experts caution that eliminating ORD will ultimately undermine the science foundation crucial for protecting human health and environmental quality.
Environmental advocates fear the cuts will hamper effective climate change policy as ORD housed research programs addressing emission causes and consequences. They warn these actions will lead to increased pollution, degraded air and water quality, and a compromised food supply.
Paul Anastas, who headed the ORD from 2009 to 2012 and served as the agency's science adviser, has stated that the forthcoming Office of Applied Science and Environmental Solutions cannot assume the responsibilities and activities of ORD. Rebecca Aicher, project director at the American Association for the Advancement of Science's Center for Scientific Evidence in Public Issues, expresses concern about the restructuring's impact on the EPA's ability to deliver unbiased, comprehensive scientific research and analysis.
In response to the criticism, the EPA claims that its recent efforts have enhanced 'the scientific expertise and research efforts within its program offices'. The agency estimates that such 'organisational improvements' will result in savings of nearly $750 million (£556million). The EPA is creating a new Office of Applied Science and Environmental Solutions to prioritize research and science, but this new office will house only a fraction of the displaced scientists.
The ORD provided local communities and state governments with independent assessments and scientific briefings. Its studies have informed the EPA's decision-making on policies and regulations in areas including harmful chemicals in the air, soil, and water. The closure of ORD has sparked widespread condemnation, with Christine Todd Whitman, who led the EPA from 2001 to 2003, criticizing the move, stating it endangers the health of the people and the land.
In summary, while the EPA aims to save costs and streamline operations by shuttering ORD, the decision compromises the agency’s scientific capacity and could weaken its ability to effectively protect environmental and public health.
- The closure of the Office of Research and Development (ORD) within the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) raises concerns about the agency's capacity to safeguard the environment and public health through informed regulatory decisions.
- The ORD, which undertakes critical analysis on environmental hazards and funds external research grants, plays a crucial role in the EPA's regulatory standards, particularly those related to drinking water safety and pollution impacts on wildlife and ecosystems.
- The reduction of ORD and nearly a quarter of EPA staff can lead to diminished scientific expertise in key areas like climate change, air quality, and chemical safety, according to congressional critics and experts.
- Fear among environmental advocates is that the cuts will hamper effective climate change policy and lead to increased pollution, degraded air and water quality, and compromised food supply.
- EPA Administrator Lee Zeldin argues that the reorganization and workforce cuts will save nearly $750 million and improve efficiency, but experts caution that this elimination of ORD will ultimately weaken the science foundation for protecting human health and environmental quality.
- The recent efforts by the EPA to enhance 'the scientific expertise and research efforts within its program offices' and create a new Office of Applied Science and Environmental Solutions could fail to address the unbiased, comprehensive scientific research and analysis previously provided by ORD, according to critics and specialists.
