Janice R. Andrews
The Trump administration has announced plans to revoke $20 billion (€18.3 billion) in funding allocated to climate and clean energy projects, a move that has sparked widespread controversy. The funds, originally awarded under President Biden’s administration, were intended to support initiatives aimed at reducing greenhouse gas emissions, including heat pumps for homes, electric vehicle charging stations, and community cooling centers. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Administrator Lee Zeldin has vowed to reclaim these “hard-earned tax dollars” from environmental NGOs and other entities that received the funding.
In a video posted on X (formerly Twitter), Zeldin declared, “The days of irresponsibly shoveling boatloads of cash to far-left activist groups in the name of environmental justice and climate equity are over.” This statement has drawn sharp criticism from clean energy advocates and environmental groups, who argue that the move undermines critical efforts to combat climate change.
What Projects Are Affected?
The $20 billion in funding was distributed through the Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund, also known as the “green bank,” a key component of Biden’s Inflation Reduction Act (IRA). The IRA is widely regarded as essential for cutting U.S. greenhouse gas emissions, a critical step in addressing the global climate crisis, especially since the U.S. is the world’s largest emitter.
The funding was divided into two initiatives: $14 billion (€13.4 billion) for the National Clean Investment Fund and $6 billion (€5.7 billion) for the Clean Communities Investment Accelerator. These programs were designed to provide competitive grants to nonprofits, community development banks, and other organizations, with a focus on disadvantaged communities.
Eight nonprofits have already received funding, including the Coalition for Green Capital, Climate United Fund, Power Forward Communities, and the Justice Climate Fund. These organizations have partnered with groups like Rewiring America, Habitat for Humanity, and the Community Preservation Corporation to implement projects that promote clean energy and environmental justice.
Republican Opposition and Allegations
Republicans in Congress have criticized the green bank, labeling it a “slush fund” and expressing concerns over transparency and accountability. Last year, the Republican-controlled House passed a bill to repeal the green bank and other parts of Biden’s climate agenda, though it was blocked in the Democratic-controlled Senate.
Zeldin has pledged “zero tolerance of any waste and abuse” at the EPA, citing a video posted by Project Veritas, a right-wing organization known for its controversial tactics. The video features Brent Efron, a former EPA special adviser, discussing the Biden administration’s spending on climate projects. Zeldin used the video to justify his actions, claiming, “We will get [the funds] back inside of control of government as we pursue next steps.”
Backlash from Environmental Advocates
Clean energy advocates have condemned Zeldin’s announcement as a politically motivated stunt. They argue that revoking funds already approved by Congress is unconstitutional and undermines efforts to combat climate change. Lena Moffitt, executive director of Evergreen Action, stated, “This is not just an attack on clean energy investments—it’s a blatant violation of the Constitution. The Trump team is once again trying to illegally slash programs meant to help American families to fund tax cuts for billionaires.”
Environmental groups have pledged to challenge the directive in court, emphasizing the importance of the green bank in advancing clean energy solutions and supporting vulnerable communities.
What’s Next?
The Trump administration’s attempt to revoke $20 billion in climate funding has ignited a fierce debate over the future of U.S. climate policy. While Republicans argue for fiscal responsibility and accountability, environmental advocates warn that this move could set back critical efforts to address the climate crisis. As legal challenges loom, the outcome of this dispute will have significant implications for the nation’s clean energy transition and its ability to meet global climate goals.
For now, the battle over the green bank underscores the deep political divide on climate action in the U.S., with high stakes for both the environment and the economy.
