President of the United States Donald tramp reversed a key decision aimed at reducing the emission of gases that warm the planet, basically greenhouse gases.
The so-called "endangerment decision" of 2009, which originates from the Obama administration and scientifically determined that various greenhouse gases pose a threat to the public health.
That decision became the legal basis for all efforts to limit emissions, especially in the motor vehicle sector.
The White House called this change "the biggest deregulation in American history," claiming that cheaper cars will reduce manufacturers' costs by about $2.400 per vehicle, the BBC writes.
Environmentalists very concerned
However, ecological organizations warn that it is by far the worst move on climate change to date and will seek to challenge it in court.
Protection Agency environment (EPA) first addressed the impact of greenhouse gases in 2009, the first year of President Barack Obama's term.
It was then decided that six key gases, including carbon dioxide and methane, pose a threat to human health.
With Congress unable to agree on legislation to address global warming, the EPA's decision became central to US efforts to limit emissions in the coming years.
"The jeopardy decision was actually key to the regulation of greenhouse gases in the US," says Megan Greenfield, a former EPA and Justice Department attorney.
"It includes motor vehicles, but also power plants, the oil and gas sector, methane from landfills, and even air traffic. So it covers all the sectors and standards that are based on this decision," says Greenfield.
The Trump administration is talking about savings
Trump administration officials point out that repealing this regulation will save more than a trillion dollars and help reduce energy and transportation costs.
"Overturning the decision would reduce the automaker's costs by $2.400 per vehicle", White House spokeswoman Caroline Leavitt told reporters.
Many environmentalists, however, doubt the alleged savings.
"This will force Americans to spend more - about $1,4 trillion in additional fuel costs for less efficient, more polluting vehicles," points out Peter Zalzal of the Environmental Defense Fund.
He adds that this decision could cause up to 58.000 premature deaths and 37 million additional asthma attacks.
For the American automobile industry, this withdrawal also represents business uncertainty, as the production of less economical vehicles may limit exports and sales abroad.
"This withdrawal actually reinforces what's already been done, like easing fuel consumption standards, but it puts American automakers in trouble because no one else will want to buy American cars," said Michael Gerard, a climate law expert at Columbia University.
