This year is projected to rank as the second hottest on record, trailing only behind 2024, as extreme weather phenomena like floods and tornadoes sweep across the United States. The increasing frequency and intensity of climate-related events signal a troubling transformation in our climate landscape. Unfortunately, the capacity of the federal government to adequately inform the public and prepare for these impending challenges is under serious threat. In a surprising move on April 28, the Trump administration dismissed hundreds of scientists from the National Climate Assessment team, an interagency report mandated by Congress. Originally set for release in 2028, the future of the sixth National Climate Assessment now hangs in the balance, creating uncertainties around the country’s readiness for many future climate-induced disasters.
The National Climate Assessment, updated every few years, derives its authority from the Global Change Research Act of 1990. Its primary aim is to consolidate existing climate research to elucidate the implications of rising global temperatures on public health and economic stability in the U.S. This report is crucial not just for governmental bodies, but also for private enterprises, especially in sectors such as insurance. It evaluates the risks posed by heat waves, droughts, and storms, among other climate change-induced crises, and examines their potential impacts on vital sectors including health, transportation, and agriculture. For instance, extreme heat can lead to health crises, fuel the spread of pests, and devastate crop yields.
The fifth iteration of this assessment, released in 2023, offered an unprecedented level of detail, incorporating regional-specific forecasts and their potential ramifications. This aspect is crucial for local and state governments, which rely heavily on the report to inform their climate adaptation strategies. Reid Sherman, who previously held a leadership role in climate adaptation, emphasized that the target audience for the information extends far beyond the scientific community, encompassing various planners and decision-makers who are focused on assessing vulnerability and risk.
While the administration cannot outright abolish this congressionally mandated report, it can effectively cripple it by cutting off critical resources. The Global Change Research Program, responsible for coordinating climate research across multiple agencies, faced abrupt changes when a key funding contract with NASA was canceled. This cancellation led to significant layoffs, including of staff who had been actively working on the upcoming assessment, creating an atmosphere of uncertainty about its future. The government’s communication to scientists informing them that their services were terminated without prior notice has left the scientific community bewildered and concerned about the implications for ongoing climate assessments.
The abrupt halt to the National Climate Assessment is alarming, especially as other governmental agencies charged with monitoring extreme weather are also facing substantial cuts. Agencies like the National Weather Service and FEMA are reportedly preparing for deep staff and program reductions, which could undermine their capacity to respond effectively to climate emergencies. This situation reflects not merely a tangible loss of personnel, but also poses a more abstract challenge: the absence of a unified voice and clear framework that the National Climate Assessment previously provided. This resource once allowed different government entities to coordinate and employ a shared vocabulary when addressing climate-related disasters, fostering improved collaboration and response strategies.
The potential discontinuation of the National Climate Assessment could create a significant knowledge gap for decision-makers who rely on comprehensive climate data to plan for the long term. As Sherman noted, the absence of this centralized resource would have dire implications for a wide array of sectors including agriculture, urban planning, and transportation, whose strategies and initiatives hinge upon accurate climate projections and risk assessments. The alarming cuts to this crucial resource, occurring alongside broader governmental shifts in climate response strategies, suggest a troubling future for the assessment itself and the broader understanding of climate science in the U.S. as society grapples with an increasingly unpredictable climate.
