Do These 5 People Care If We Breathe Dirty Air?

In 1970, 20 million Americans took to the streets on the very first Earth Day. They demanded these three things: clean air to breathe, clean water to drink, and a healthy future for their families. Just a few months later, Republican President Richard Nixon created the Environmental Protection Agency (E.P.A) to deliver on that vision – the Clean Air and Clean Water Acts soon followed.

Now, over 50 years later, the E.P.A is under attack. Let’s meet some of the groups and people, who seem to be working to undermine our fundamental right to clean air and clean water. These are our nominees for the alternative E.P.A – the Environmental Pollution Agency. 

1) E. Calvin Beisner, Ph.D. of the Cornwall Alliance of the Stewardship of Creation, (CASC)

This group, led by Calvin Beisner, who holds a Ph.D. in Scottish history,believes “…that by God’s design Earth and its physical and biological systems are robust, resilient, and self-correcting. We deny that they are fragile,” as noted in point 9 of their 30 point ‘affirmation’ page. 

Climate science is often disputed to be a ‘false religion’ by groups that deny climate change. 

Mr.Besiner has testified as an expert witness on the ethics and economics of climate and energy policy before congressional committees and argues that environmental action is a deception which can potentially harm impoverished people more than others. The people living in “Cancer Alley,” who cannot afford to move away from petrochemical plants, might beg to differ. The cancer rates in “Cancer Alley” have been documented as being 12-16% higher than the rest of the US.  

Plus, if Administrator Zeldin eliminates E.P.A enforcement efforts that focus on prioritizing the protection of ‘poor communities’ – will Mr. Beisner actively campaign against these measures? Given that he feels that impoverished people should not be harmed more than others? You can find out more about how our rights to clean water and clean air are under attack HERE

2) “Big Oil” 

ExxonMobil, with a market capitalization of over $492 Billion as of September 25, 2025, i.e. the total value of all its outstanding shares, has, according to research first published in the journal Science,  been accused of spending decades misleading the public about climate change.

A 2017 Harvard study comparing ExxonMobil’s internal documents and peer-reviewed papers vs. its advertorials found that 80% of internal documents/peer‑reviewed work acknowledged human-caused climate change, while 81% of Exxon’s public advertorials expressed doubt. Their own internal documents show that their scientists understood the science of climate change and the role of greenhouse gases back as far back as the 1970s. 

Exxon has consistently denied the accusations that it misled the public.

Chevron, with a market cap of over $321 billion as of September 2025, inadvertently helped to create the legal doctrine that became known as, “the Chevron Deference”. This 1984 ruling gave the EnvironmentalProtection Agency (EPA) the broad authority to interpret and enforce ambiguous laws, including those regulating pollution. But in 2024, the Supreme Court overturned this doctrine significantly reducing the EPA’s regulatory power. 

Chevron, like most major fossil fuel companies, is a member of the American Petroleum Institute, (API), a powerful lobbying group for the oil and gas industry. The API has criticised the Endangerment Finding and hopes the new Trump administration will loosen emission regulations.

Chevron contributes to the ​​Congressional Leadership Fund (CLF), which is aligned with Speaker of the House Mike Johnson (R-La.), and the Senate Leadership Fund (SLF).  

Shell, with a market cap of around $212 billion, as of September 2025, publicly supports the Paris Climate Agreement and pledges to reach “net zero” emission by 2050. Howevert Shell spends tens of millions on lobbying groups that oppose clean energy policies. 

As of 2019 lobbying disclosures, Shell spent $49 million on lobbying in the U.S. — nearly more than any other oil company that year.

3) U.S Secretary of Energy, Chris Wright

Chris Wright, is President Trump’s U.S Secretary of Energy, and Wright has built a career on downplaying climate change, this year he said that “climate change isn’t a crisis”.

A self proclaimed “outdoor enthusiast” he doesn’t seem that keen on protecting the outdoors.  He used data to argue that reducing greenhouse gas emissions could hurt the economy more than rising global temperatures would. 

In March, 2025, Secretary Wright spoke at CERA Week, one of the world’s premier annual energy conferences, in Houston, Texas. Sadly just a few weeks later, some 200 miles southeast in the Central Texas Hill Country – tragedy struck when devastating floods killed at least 135 people.  While it is almost certainly true that natural weather patterns and geography caused the immediate flooding, it is also most likely to be true that climate change made these floods more extreme and therefore more deadly. Both things can unfortunately be true at the same time.

Wright champions fossil fuels as he believes they help to drive the U.S economy, but the real cost of his unbridled support are potentially, likely to be more extreme weather events across the U.S, with the homes and lives of Americans destroyed by climate change. 

4) Senator Ron Johnson (R‑WI)

Senator Ron Johnson ran a plastics manufacturing company (PACUR) before entering politics. He has called climate change “bullsh*t” and stated that carbon dioxide “helps trees grow.” It does. It also powers climate change when too much of it is released into the atmosphere. Again, two things can be true at the same time.

The science is proven. There is unequivocal evidence that Earth is warming at an unprecedented rate, and more than 99.9% of actively publishing climate scientists agree that human activities—chiefly the burning of fossil fuels—are the main cause.

This consensus is supported by evidence ranging from the rapid rise in global temperatures and atmospheric carbon dioxide, to melting ice sheets, rising sea levels, and shifting weather patterns measured across the globe by NASA, the National Aeronautics and Space Administration and the IPCC, Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. As well as pretty much every major national science academy worldwide. 

The League of Conservation Voters, revealed in 2022, that Senator Johnson’s office accepted over $700,000 in donations from the fossil fuel industry and voted to deregulate domestic oil drilling. 

5) Alan Carlin Ph.D.

Alan Carlin, has a PhD in economics from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) and earned an undergraduate degree in physics from the California Institute of Technology (CIT). 

In 2009, while a senior operations research analyst at the E.P.A’s National Center for Environmental Economics (NCEE), he wrote a 98-page report attacking the science behind greenhouse gas regulation. It was largely discredited by climate change experts but widely cited in the conservative media.

This is not true. In fact global temperatures have risen dramatically since the mid-20th century. According to NASA and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), the global average surface temperature has increased by at least 1.1°C (1.9°F) since 1880. With most of that occurring after 1975. In fact the five hottest years on record (as of 2023) have all occurred since 2015. 2024 was either the hottest or second-hottest year ever recorded, depending on the data set. In 2010 Carlin resigned from the EPA.

How to Take Action to Protect Clean Air and Clean Water For Us ALL

At EARTHDAY.ORG we just do not think that belief systems should determine the quality of the air we breathe or the water we drink. 

Only facts, science and strong government regulation should do that. Right now your family’s health is on the line.  The time to act is now. Nobody, no matter how rich or powerful lives in a bubble. We all breathe the same air in the end. 

Want to make a difference? On a related issue, you can speak out by writing to strongly oppose Section 453 of the Interior Appropriations Bill, which would grant pesticide manufacturers broad legal immunity, even when their products cause harm.

Tags:

• environmental protection agency (epa)
• fossil fuels
• united states politics