A new scientific report reviewing the first year of President Donald Trump’s second term finds that a series of policy decisions have significantly reshaped federal environmental protections, funding programs, and regulatory processes affecting air, water, and public lands.

The analysis appears in “The State of the Science 1 Year On,” a joint report produced by the American Geophysical Union (AGU) and the journal Eos. The environment chapter of the report examines how recent policy shifts have altered federal oversight of pollution, natural resources, and environmental review.

According to the report, the administration has pursued an agenda that prioritizes expanded energy development, mining, and infrastructure construction while scaling back a number of environmental protections and research programs.

Funding Cuts Affect Monitoring Programs

Scientists and federal agencies play a central role in monitoring the nation’s air and water quality, but the report notes that budget reductions and staffing cuts have made those tasks more difficult in several agencies.

The administration’s fiscal year 2026 spending proposal, known as the One Big Beautiful Bill (OBBB), includes major reductions for environmental programs. Among the proposed changes are the elimination of the research arm of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) and the closure of its weather and climate laboratories.

The proposal also includes:

• $2.46 billion in cuts to EPA’s Clean and Drinking Water State Revolving Funds.
  
  
• $1.01 billion in cuts to categorical grants that support air and water monitoring.
  
  
• $721 million in reductions to the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s Rural Development Program, which helps repair water systems damaged by disasters.

The budget would also cancel the launch of a planned NOAA satellite intended to monitor pollution from space, including smoke from wildfires.

Separately, the administration ordered the closure of 25 U.S. Geological Survey Water Science Centers, which collect data on flooding, drought, and water supply conditions across the country.

At NOAA’s Great Lakes Environmental Research Laboratory, the report notes that staff reductions of about 35 percent have limited the agency’s ability to monitor harmful algal blooms in the region.

Changes to Pollution Rules

The report also highlights regulatory changes affecting chemical and air pollution standards.

In May, the Environmental Protection Agency announced it would reconsider limits on four PFAS chemicals in drinking water. PFAS compounds are commonly referred to as “forever chemicals” because they persist in the environment and have been linked to several health concerns.

Later in the year, the EPA announced it would maintain a separate rule requiring polluters to address contamination from certain PFAS compounds.

Other regulatory changes described in the report include a proposal to revise chemical safety reviews for substances already on the market, including formaldehyde and asbestos, and the withdrawal of a proposed rule that would have tightened water pollution limits for slaughterhouses.

In November, the EPA also ended a previous rule designed to strengthen national standards for fine particulate pollution, commonly known as soot.

Public Lands and Wildlife Protections

The report describes several policy shifts affecting federal lands and wildlife protections.

At the Department of the Interior, a reorganization effort and workforce reductions affected agencies responsible for managing public lands. The Justice Department also reversed a longstanding legal interpretation from 1938, concluding that a president may abolish national monuments created by previous administrations.

Other proposals discussed in the report include:

• A plan to rescind the 2001 Roadless Area Conservation Rule, which protects about 45 million acres of national forest land from road construction and timber harvesting.
  
  
• A proposal to revise how the Endangered Species Act defines “harm,” potentially narrowing protections for species affected by habitat destruction.
  
  
• A proposal to redefine “waters of the United States,” which could remove federal protections from a large share of wetlands and certain upstream waterways.

The administration has also transferred or proposed transferring certain federal lands to other uses, including areas for defense infrastructure and potential commercial development.

Accelerated Permitting

The report says the administration has also moved to accelerate environmental permitting for infrastructure projects.

Changes to the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) process shortened public notice and comment periods for projects requiring environmental review. In January, the administration finalized plans to rescind several regulations associated with the law.

Additional executive orders directed federal agencies to speed up environmental reviews for data center infrastructure and commercial space launch facilities. Officials have also announced plans to significantly shorten permitting timelines for certain mining projects.

Coal and Mining Policy

Energy policy changes have also included efforts to support coal production and expand domestic mining.

Coal currently accounts for a smaller share of U.S. electricity generation than in previous decades. According to federal energy data cited in the report, coal produced about 51 percent of U.S. electricity in 2001, compared with 16.2 percent in 2023.

In April, the administration issued an executive order aimed at expanding coal mining on federal lands and designated coal as a critical mineral. The administration also granted exemptions to at least 66 coal-fired power plants from certain federal requirements to reduce emissions of mercury, arsenic, and other pollutants.

The report also describes federal initiatives to increase domestic production of critical minerals such as uranium, copper, lead, silver, and potash, and efforts to accelerate permitting for mining projects both on land and in offshore environments.

Long-Term Impacts Still Unclear

Researchers note that many of the policy changes are recent and their long-term environmental effects remain uncertain.

The report also points to broader structural changes within federal science agencies, including workforce reductions and revisions to agency missions. At the Department of Energy, for example, a revised organizational structure no longer lists the Office of Clean Energy Demonstrations, and the department’s workforce has declined by roughly 20 percent over the past year.

Scientists contributing to the report say the pace of regulatory and policy changes has made it difficult to fully assess the long-term consequences. They note that the environmental and economic impacts of these decisions may take years to emerge.