{"id":1638,"date":"2025-11-08T13:49:02","date_gmt":"2025-11-08T12:49:02","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.scientistrebellion.nl\/?p=1638"},"modified":"2026-01-18T12:03:46","modified_gmt":"2026-01-18T11:03:46","slug":"planet-b","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.scientistrebellion.nl\/index.php\/en\/2025\/11\/08\/planet-b\/","title":{"rendered":"Planet B"},"content":{"rendered":"\n

U.S. environmental policy shifted from historic bipartisan support\u2014embodied by the EPA, Clean Air\/Water Acts\u2014to partisan opposition driven by conservative distrust of regulation. Recent rollbacks threaten decades\u2011long air, water, and climate gains, prompting a call for cross\u2011ideological cooperation because there truly is no \u201cplanet\u202fB.\u201d<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

An editorial by R.\u202fKelman\u202fWieder \u201cThere is no planet\u202fB\u201d<\/em> in the journal Biogeochemistry<\/em> reflects on the widening political divide in the United States over climate\u2011change science and environmental regulation, tracing its roots from post\u2011World\u2011War\u202fII industrial expansion to today\u2019s partisan attacks on regulatory agencies. Early environmental crises\u2014urban smog, river fires, eutrophication of the Great Lakes, DDT\u2011induced bald\u2011eagle declines, and the 1969 Santa\u202fBarbara oil spill\u2014spurred the modern environmental movement and prompted landmark bipartisan legislation such as the Clean Air Act, Clean Water Act, and the creation of the EPA in 1970.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Survey data from Pew and other polls[1] show that while a majority of Americans trust scientists (\u224876\u202f% confidence in 2024) and view them as intelligent, fewer regard them as good communicators, and partisan gaps persist: Democrats report sadness, anxiety and motivation regarding climate news, whereas many Republicans express suspicion toward climate\u2011action advocates.[2] Recent executive orders (e.g., EO\u202f14,270, \u201cZero\u2011Based Regulatory Budgeting\u201d<\/em>) and congressional actions in 2025 have begun to roll back longstanding protections, threatening gains in air\u2011quality, toxic\u2011metal reductions, and greenhouse\u2011gas limits achieved under the Clean Air Act.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Wieder argues that this erosion of bipartisan support stems partly from a conservative backlash against government regulation\u2014viewed historically as antagonistic to business\u2014and the rise of \u201cregulatory science,\u201d which ties scientific advice directly to policy. The author calls for a renewed, cross\u2011ideological collaboration that treats environmental protection as a necessary cost of doing business rather than an impediment, emphasizing that safeguarding clean air, water, soil, and biodiversity is essential because there truly is no \u201cplanet\u202fB.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

R. Kelman Wieder (2025). There is no planet B. Biogeochemistry<\/em>, Volume 168, 82 B.  https:\/\/link.springer.com\/article\/10.1007\/s10533-025-01255-2<\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n

[1] Tyson A, Kennedy B (2024) Public trust in scientists and views on their role in policymaking. Pew Research Center.<\/em>  https:\/\/pewrsr.ch\/3USzH0S<\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n

[2] Oreskes N, Conway EM (2022) From anti-government to anti-science: why conservatives have turned against science. D\u00e6dalus<\/em> 151:98\u2013123. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1162\/daed_a_01946<\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n

\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

U.S. environmental policy shifted from historic bipartisan support\u2014embodied by the EPA, Clean Air\/Water Acts\u2014to partisan opposition driven by conservative distrust of regulation. Recent rollbacks threaten decades\u2011long air, water, and climate gains, prompting a call for cross\u2011ideological cooperation because there truly is no \u201cplanet\u202fB.\u201d An editorial by R.\u202fKelman\u202fWieder \u201cThere is no planet\u202fB\u201d in the journal Biogeochemistry reflects on … Lees verder<\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":10,"featured_media":1877,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"inline_featured_image":false,"iawp_total_views":14,"footnotes":""},"categories":[57],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-1638","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-reviews"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scientistrebellion.nl\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1638","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scientistrebellion.nl\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scientistrebellion.nl\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scientistrebellion.nl\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/10"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scientistrebellion.nl\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=1638"}],"version-history":[{"count":7,"href":"https:\/\/www.scientistrebellion.nl\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1638\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":2564,"href":"https:\/\/www.scientistrebellion.nl\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1638\/revisions\/2564"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scientistrebellion.nl\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/1877"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scientistrebellion.nl\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=1638"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scientistrebellion.nl\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=1638"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scientistrebellion.nl\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=1638"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}