Michael Barbaro

Well, given that uncertainty, what would the elimination of the endangerment finding mean

mean for the environment and for climate change writ large?

Is that suddenly now pretty much in the hands of industry?

It's such a hard question to answer.

I mean, yes, and part of the reason why is that the Trump administration has already pretty effectively restricted some of the things that states can do to address climate change on their own.

Like what?

California is the only state in the country that can set more stringent environmental regulations than the federal government.

It needs a waiver to do that.

California tried to set even stricter automobile emissions rules.

They had a plan to eliminate the sales of combustion engine vehicles in the next decade or so.

But the Trump administration and Congress rescinded that waiver.

I can't see California getting another waiver, at least during the next three years.

Mm-hmm.

So that really ties the hands of not just California, but other like-minded states that might want to do something very ambitious on automobiles.

So in the absence of major new state regulation and a federal government that doesn't want to regulate most of these greenhouse emissions at all, what do scientists say that the world starts to look like?

Scientists are worried.

I mean, the United States is the largest historic emitter of climate change.

It's the second largest annual emitter of carbon pollution and greenhouse gases.

If the U.S.

is not doing its part, a lot of countries could start to wonder, why should they?