Massive changes at the EPA will roll back much-needed scientific research, environmental experts say

The president sits at his desk, holding up a signed executive order. Men in suits pose behind him, smiling. — President Donald Trump holds a signed an executive order during an event in the East Room of the White House, Tuesday, April 8, 2025, in Washington, as from left Environmental Protection Agency director Lee Zeldin, Interior Secretary Doug Burgum and Energy Secretary Chris Wright watch.

Andrea Asuaje is a producer with “Under the Radar with Callie Crossley.” Prior to her work at GBH, she was a senior producer and show runner at Rococo Punch; and a reporter, producer and co-host of WBUR’s radio series and podcast, Kind World.

April 25, 2025

President Donald Trump has made major changes in his first 100 days when it comes to environmental and climate-related policy and action.

That extends to the Environmental Protection Agency — whose new administrator, Lee Zeldin, vowed to “[drive] a dagger through the heart of climate change religion” and to usher in “America’s Golden Age.” He’s looking to dramatically cut staff, revoke future and existing grants, and gut the agency’s scientific research arm.

Experts fear about what the scientific community — and the public — will lose out on if EPA research projects are terminated.

“The EPA was created after literally rivers were on fire, we had acid rain, we had horrible pollution from particulate matter. And the EPA, while not perfect, cleaned up our air, our water, and made America more livable for so many people,” said Beth Daley, executive editor and general manager of The Conversation U.S. “The science that they do is incredibly important.”

The EPA’s research and enforcement efforts are not just on a federal level; it has significant effects on local communities, including here in Boston.

“At one time, the Charles River was so polluted, it was unsafe to touch,” said Cabell Eames, advocacy director for the Charles River Watershed Association. “In 1995, the EPA gave it a D grade for water quality. And today, we have a B grade, and that is because of the EPA enforcement — because the EPA exists to protect people, not polluters. So if we let the science get swept aside, we’re not just losing data, we’re losing the truth that drives smart and fair policy.”

“We do have great fishermen, but we don’t have great fisheries — it’s a limited resource,” Daley said. “And time and time again, around the world, not just the U.S., we have seen what happens when you exploit a limited resource. And that, I think, is something that people need to think about: the fact that this is not a science-based decision.”

Wildfires, too, have long been an issue on the West Coast, often with devastating effects, like the recent Palisades Fires in and around Los Angeles. But should East Coasters start worrying about wildfires, too?

“I’ve lived in Los Angeles, and I was always perplexed by the term ‘fire season,’ because it implied that there was a set window when fires would happen,” Eames said. “We’re living in a fire era, driven by rising temperatures and prolonged drought and more extreme weather. And I think if we want to protect our communities, we need to start talking and planning like that’s the reality.”

All that and more in this week’s environmental news roundtable!

Guests