In a year already marked by record-breaking temperatures and mounting anxiety over the climate crisis, the Trump administration’s latest moves on energy and environmental policy have sparked a fierce backlash from the scientific community, clean energy advocates, and even some government watchdogs. The controversy centers on a series of actions critics say are designed to undercut renewable energy development, roll back climate regulations, and cast doubt on established climate science—at a time when, according to experts, the stakes could not be higher.
The flashpoint came on September 2, 2025, when more than 85 veteran climate scientists submitted over 400 pages of detailed public comments to the U.S. Department of Energy. Their target: the department’s Climate Working Group report, released July 29 and authored by five well-known climate change contrarians handpicked by Energy Secretary Chris Wright. The report, which downplays the severity of climate change and even paints it as potentially beneficial, was swiftly condemned as misleading, unsubstantiated, and unfit for policymaking.
“It makes a mockery of science,” Andrew Dessler, a climate researcher at Texas A&M University who helped organize the scientists’ response, told CNN. Dessler’s frustration was echoed throughout the scientific community, with critics noting that the report lacked peer review, misrepresented key data, and failed to account for accelerating trends like sea level rise. The scientists’ comments, which function as a point-by-point peer review, argue that the report “exhibits pervasive problems with misrepresentation and selective citation of the scientific literature, cherry-picking of data, and faulty or absent statistics.”
The stakes are not merely academic. The Environmental Protection Agency has already cited the controversial report as justification for repealing the 2009 “endangerment finding” on greenhouse gas emissions—a legal determination that human-caused climate change endangers public health. According to CNN, repealing this finding could dismantle some of the government’s most significant regulations on vehicle, power plant, and oil and gas emissions, with sweeping consequences for both the environment and public health.
Rebecca Neumann, a researcher at the University of Washington, summed up the evolving tactics of climate change skeptics: “As outright denial of climate change becomes less tenable, the new approach is to downplay its dangers and exaggerate its upsides.” Other mainstream climate science organizations have joined the chorus of criticism. The American Meteorological Society, representing thousands of weather and climate experts, issued a statement identifying “foundational flaws” in the Energy Department’s report and warning that it “selectively emphasizes a small set of unrepresentative findings, particularly those that might appear beneficial on superficial examination.”
Meanwhile, as the scientific debate rages, the Trump administration has taken concrete steps to halt or slow renewable energy development. On August 22, the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management, led by acting director and former offshore oil and gas lobbyist Matthew Giacona, ordered a halt to construction at the Revolution Wind offshore wind farm off the coast of Massachusetts and Rhode Island. The project, which was 80% complete after five years of planning and consultation with federal agencies and the military, was stopped abruptly to “address concerns related to the protection of national security interests of the United States.” No details on those concerns were provided.
For clean energy advocates, the timing couldn’t be worse. The United States currently lags far behind Europe in offshore wind development, with only three offshore wind farms and 19 turbines in operation, compared to 82 farms and 3,630 turbines in 11 European countries. The halt to Revolution Wind is just the latest in a series of setbacks. According to Gary Griggs, a distinguished professor of Earth and Planetary Sciences at UC Santa Cruz, developers have canceled $18.6 billion in renewable energy projects in 2025 alone, and new clean energy investments have dropped 20% compared to the same period last year.
Solar energy has also been caught in the crossfire. The Rural Energy for America Program (REAP), which since 2014 has awarded $1.2 billion in grants and $2.5 billion in loan guarantees for solar projects—primarily on farms—will no longer fund solar panels on productive farmland or panels manufactured by “foreign adversaries,” per an August 19 announcement from Agriculture Secretary Brooke Rollins. With China producing 80% of the world’s solar panels and the U.S. accounting for just 1.9% in 2022, the new restrictions threaten to further erode America’s competitiveness in clean energy manufacturing.
The administration’s efforts to prop up fossil fuels have been equally aggressive. In May, just days before the J.H. Campbell coal-fired plant in Michigan was scheduled to close, the federal government ordered it to remain open for an additional 90 days. The move, which Michigan’s top utility regulator estimates could cost consumers more than $100 million, is emblematic of a broader policy shift. The administration has relaxed standards on coal power plant emissions and ordered outdated, inefficient plants to keep running—even when they’re scheduled for closure.
These decisions are having a direct impact on American households. Since January, electricity bills have risen 10%, with prices increasing at more than twice the rate of inflation. A spring survey found that three out of four Americans are worried about rising utility bills. While Republican leaders, including Energy Secretary Chris Wright, have blamed renewables for the price hikes, a 2024 report from Energy Innovation found no correlation between renewable energy adoption and utility rate increases. In fact, wind, solar, and batteries remain the cheapest and cleanest forms of power available.
Adding to the controversy, a new lawsuit filed in federal court this month by the Environmental Defense Fund and the Union of Concerned Scientists alleges that the Trump administration violated the Federal Advisory Committee Act of 1972 by secretly recruiting climate change skeptics to write the Climate Working Group report. The suit claims that the Department of Energy and the EPA “flagrantly violated” the law, which requires advisory committees to be publicly disclosed and their records made available.
According to Cleanview, a research firm, as much as $317 billion in wind investment is at risk of delay or cancellation under current administration policies. States most affected include Texas, Illinois, New Jersey, Oklahoma, Kansas, Iowa, Maine, California, New York, North Dakota, Indiana, Nebraska, and Minnesota. In Congress, Republican senators have moved to strip funding for the U.S. Postal Service’s transition to an electric vehicle fleet, a move industry observers say could ultimately cost taxpayers more.
Energy Secretary Wright has indicated the working group may revisit National Climate Assessments and hold public climate science debates. However, the Trump administration has already removed these assessments from government websites and dismissed the authors of the next iteration, raising questions about the integrity of future climate reports.
As the U.S. faces rising emissions—up 4.2% in the last six months, while China’s have fallen 2.7%—the nation’s direction on climate and energy policy is at a crossroads. For now, the scientific community and clean energy advocates remain determined to push back, warning that the costs of inaction—or worse, regression—will be measured not just in dollars, but in the health and safety of generations to come.
