Thousands of scientists worldwide are uniting against the Trump administration’s attacks on science, with major protests planned today to defend research funding, diversity initiatives, and academic freedom.
Scientists across the U.S. and beyond have organized protests on March 7 under the “Stand Up For Science” banner, opposing Trump’s threats to defund schools over so-called “illegal protests” and cuts to federal science programs.
The administration’s moves to dismantle agencies like the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) align with a conservative agenda seeking to reshape science policy by slashing budgets and targeting diversity programs.
Scientists warn that suppressing research and expertise in the U.S. could have global consequences, threatening environmental protection, public health, and international collaborations.
Key quote:
“This is classic fascist tactics, labeling anything you don’t like as ‘illegal. Anti-science and authoritarianism have a dark history as two sides of the same fascist coin.”
— Michael Mann, climate scientist, University of Pennsylvania
Why this matters:
The Trump administration’s push to dismantle agencies like NOAA and weaken diversity initiatives reflects an effort to reshape science policy along ideological lines. By gutting research funding and diversity efforts, the administration risks derailing vital progress in medicine, environmental protection, and technology — impacts that could ripple across generations.
The Biden-era rules, which took effect last year, required chemical plants to adopt safeguards against climate-related risks, share more information with emergency responders, and switch to safer alternatives where possible.
The Trump administration’s EPA has filed a motion to rewrite these rules, siding with industry groups that argue the regulations impose unnecessary costs with little safety benefit.
The rollback would affect nearly 12,000 facilities handling hazardous chemicals, with environmental advocates warning that weaker oversight could lead to deadly accidents.
Key quote:
“Chemical explosions force entire neighborhoods to evacuate. First responders have died rushing into disasters they weren’t warned about. Workers have suffered burns, lung damage, and worse, all because companies cut corners to save money.”
— Adam Kron, attorney at Earthjustice
Why this matters:
Millions of Americans live near hazardous chemical sites, and past disasters have shown how devastating explosions and leaks can be. Industry groups argue these safety measures are expensive and do little to prevent accidents, but with climate-fueled storms and wildfires threatening industrial sites more than ever, the timing couldn’t be worse.
The United States is withdrawing from the Just Energy Transition Partnership, a global initiative designed to help developing nations move away from coal, according to sources in key participating countries.
The Just Energy Transition Partnership (JETP) was created in 2021 to fund coal-to-clean-energy transitions in developing countries, with South Africa, Indonesia, Vietnam, and Senegal as initial beneficiaries.
U.S. commitments to Indonesia and Vietnam exceeded $3 billion, while South Africa was set to receive $1.063 billion from the U.S. as part of an $11.6 billion pledge.
The U.S. withdrawal aligns with President Donald Trump’s policy shifts, which emphasize fossil fuel development and cuts to foreign aid.
Key quote:
"We have been informed by the U.S. of their withdrawal."
— A South Africa-based source in the donor group
Why this matters:
Coal remains one of the world’s largest sources of carbon emissions, driving climate change and harming public health. As the single largest source of global carbon emissions, its continued use is at odds with international efforts to curb warming. Beyond its climate impact, coal burning is a major contributor to air pollution, leading to respiratory illnesses and premature deaths, particularly in developing nations that still depend on it for energy.
Many countries lack the financial means to transition to cleaner alternatives. International funding and partnerships have played a crucial role in helping them shift away from coal. However, with the U.S. pulling back from climate finance commitments, progress could slow, leaving developing nations struggling to secure the resources needed for renewable energy projects.
Energy experts told lawmakers that rolling back Biden-era tax credits for renewables could slow grid expansion, raise electricity costs, and make it harder to meet surging energy demand.
The U.S. is facing an unprecedented rise in electricity demand due to artificial intelligence, manufacturing growth, and electrification.
The Trump administration has moved to halt funding for clean energy incentives, prompting concerns from utilities and grid operators that this could undermine reliability and drive up costs.
A study found that repealing clean energy tax credits could raise residential electricity bills by 7% and business costs by 10% by 2026.
Key quote:
“I mean, it’s sort of obvious, right? If you pull back incentives for a given activity, you’re going to see less of that activity. In this case, that means there’s going to be less generation out of the system, and it’s going to impose higher costs.”
— Tyler H. Norris, James B. Duke Fellow at Duke University
Why this matters:
Energy demand is rising fast, driven by AI-powered data centers and increased electrification. While renewables are expanding, traditional fossil fuel plants still provide a significant power source. Cutting tax credits for wind, solar, and nuclear energy could slow grid modernization and raise costs, potentially leading to reliability issues and higher prices for consumers. With extreme weather events straining power grids, decisions about energy investment could shape the country’s ability to keep the lights on.
The Trump administration plans to terminate the lease for the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers’ Jacksonville headquarters, which plays a key role in Everglades restoration and hurricane response, leaving employees uncertain about their future.
The Army Corps’ Jacksonville district oversees Everglades restoration, hurricane response, and water management in Florida, serving millions.
The administration’s plan to terminate the lease could impact 800 employees and comes as federal workers are being ordered back to the office.
The decision is part of a broader push to cut federal properties, with the government citing projected savings of over $4.3 million.
Key quote:
“Who fills this role if the Army Corps is pushed aside? Where do the decades of institutional knowledge go?”
— Eve Samples, Friends of the Everglades
Why this matters:
The Everglades is often called the "River of Grass," a vast wetland that stretches across much of South Florida. But beyond its reputation as a biodiverse wilderness, it also serves as a crucial freshwater source for more than nine million Floridians. Its restoration — one of the most ambitious environmental projects in history — aims to reverse decades of damage caused by development and water mismanagement.
Any disruption to the Army Corps’ operations could have serious consequences. Delays in restoration efforts risk prolonging environmental degradation, allowing saltwater intrusion to threaten freshwater supplies and leaving communities more vulnerable to extreme weather. The stakes are high, not just for wildlife but for millions of residents who rely on a stable and healthy Everglades for drinking water and storm protection.
The European Union’s ambassador to China has called on Beijing to stop approving new coal-fired power plants, warning that the country’s rapid expansion of coal projects contradicts its renewable energy leadership.
China approved 66.7 gigawatts of new coal-fired power capacity in 2024, most of it in the second half of the year, despite its commitment to peak emissions by 2030.
A report found China accounted for 93% of global coal power construction starts last year, with local policies slowing renewable energy integration.
China remains the world leader in renewable energy, with record growth in solar and wind power, but continues to view coal as vital for economic and energy security.
Key quote:
"Commentators outside China are increasingly puzzled at the continued containment of domestic renewable generation in future stranded coal assets."
— Jorge Toledo, EU ambassador to China
Why this matters:
China’s energy strategy presents a paradox: While it leads the world in renewable energy expansion, it is also dramatically increasing coal power capacity. The contradiction reflects the country’s competing priorities — balancing economic growth, energy security, and environmental goals. Coal remains the single largest source of carbon emissions, and as long as China’s reliance on it persists, international efforts to curb global warming face a significant hurdle. While Beijing has pledged to peak carbon emissions before 2030 and achieve carbon neutrality by 2060, its continued investment in coal suggests a prolonged transition. This balancing act underscores the broader challenge facing many nations: how to shift away from fossil fuels without jeopardizing economic growth or energy reliability.
Australia’s capital, Canberra, has been powered entirely by renewable energy since 2020, making it a standout in a country still heavily reliant on coal and gas.
Canberra became the first city outside Europe with a population over 100,000 to fully decarbonize its power grid, reaching 100% renewable electricity in 2020.
The Australian Capital Territory (ACT) pursued large-scale wind and solar investments despite national political resistance, benefiting from a stable pro-environment government.
Canberra’s decentralized energy model has lowered electricity costs for residents and serves as a model for other Australian states moving toward renewables.
Key quote:
"Energy is generated almost everywhere, is used everywhere, is stored everywhere."
— Greg Bourne, climate councillor at The Climate Council
Why this matters:
For years, Canberra has sourced all of its electricity from renewable energy, thanks to a combination of large-scale wind and solar projects and long-term contracts with clean energy providers. The shift has not only slashed the city’s emissions but also led to a decline in electricity costs — directly challenging the long-held argument that coal and gas are essential for economic stability.
While Australia still relies heavily on fossil fuel exports, these domestic energy shifts suggest the country may not be as far behind global clean energy leaders as once thought. If current trends continue, Australia’s vast renewable resources could redefine its energy identity — both at home and abroad.
Prisons, jails and detention centers are placed in locations where environmental hazards such as toxic landfills, floods and extreme heat are the norm.
