In a significant policy reversal, the Trump administration is acting to loosen federal restrictions on potent greenhouse gases it had previously committed to phasing out, creating upheaval for businesses and environmental groups alike.
A Bipartisan Measure Overturned
Near the conclusion of his first term, President Donald Trump signed the bipartisan American Innovation and Manufacturing Act into law in 2020. This legislation targeted the reduction of hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs), harmful pollutants found in refrigerators and air conditioners that contribute significantly to global warming. The move was notable for uniting environmental advocates and major business organisations, including the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and the American Chemistry Council, who saw it as a win for both the environment and American jobs.
Five years on, the second Trump administration is dramatically shifting its position. The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), under Administrator Lee Zeldin, is now proposing to relax a federal rule established on the basis of the 2020 law. This rule compelled grocery stores, air-conditioning firms, and other businesses to curb their use of HFCs, which can be thousands of times more powerful than carbon dioxide in driving climate change.
Industry Disruption and Conflicting Claims
The proposed rollback is part of a broader series of environmental regulation reversals. Zeldin has framed these actions as putting a “dagger through the heart of climate change religion,” and stated that the new HFC proposal aims to “make American refrigerants affordable, safe and reliable again.” He argues that the rule finalised under President Joe Biden, known as the Technology Transitions Rule, did not allow companies sufficient time to adapt, leading to supply shortages and price increases.
During a summer appearance at a refrigeration facility in Peachtree City, Georgia, alongside Vice President JD Vance, Zeldin asserted the administration was responding to complaints from industry. The Food Industry Association has endorsed the EPA's plan, stating the original rule imposed “significant and unrealistic compliance timelines.”
However, this change in direction has sown confusion and concern within an industry that had already invested heavily to meet the original deadlines. Samantha Slater of the Air-Conditioning, Heating and Refrigeration Institute warned that “changing the schedule now would disrupt planning and inject uncertainty across the market.” She noted that nearly 90% of residential air conditioning systems already use substitute refrigerants, and a delay could advantage foreign competitors and raise costs for consumers.
Environmental and Economic Consequences
Environmentalists have condemned the move. Kiff Gallagher of the Global Heat Reduction Initiative stressed that any delay in the HFC phaseout is “going to have negative outcomes and significant ones,” exacerbating climate pollution.
The rollback also creates a potential regulatory conflict. States like California, Washington, and New York have implemented requirements similar to the now-relaxed federal rule. David Doniger of the Natural Resources Defense Council argued that “weakening the rule will confuse the market,” undoing the regulatory uniformity the federal rule was meant to provide.
Meanwhile, U.S. companies that invested in developing alternative refrigerants, such as Chemours and Honeywell, have expressed concern. Joe Martinko of Chemours stated that delays “risk undermining and stranding U.S. manufacturing and innovation investments,” potentially driving up consumer costs. He also clarified that a temporary shortage of cylinders cited by Zeldin as justification for the rollback has since been resolved.
