A few weeks ago, President Trump approved the largest rollback of federal land protection in our country’s history. Trump’s announcement to drastically slash the size of two national monuments in Utah - Bears Ears and Grand Staircase-Escalante among additional changes to other national monuments - was not a surprise. But it has been controversial. The day after Trump signed the order, the outdoor recreation company Patagonia posted a message on its website under the headline, “The President Stole Your Land.” Patagonia has joined a flurry of lawsuits challenging whether President Trump has the authority to undo or change monuments created by past presidents. So does the Antiquities Act allow presidents to roll back national monuments? On this episode, we hear from John Ruple, associate professor of law at the Wallace Stegner Center for Land Resources and the Environment at the University of Utah. He’s also a member of Friends of Cedar Mesa, one of the groups that is suing President Trump over his revisions to Bears Ears.

Can scientists who get grant money from the Environmental protection agency be objective enough to serve on its advisory boards? According to Administrator Scott Pruitt, the answer is “no.” Today’s episode examines one aspect of the sweeping changes taking place at EPA: Scott Pruitt’s bar on scientists who’ve taken money from the agency also serving on its scientific advisory boards. These are the scientists who help EPA evaluate the science behind its regulations. Some people who weren’t included in this new policy: people who’ve taken money from industries the EPA regulates. But scientists who receive grant money from the agency had to choose between keeping their funding or serving as advisors. We talk Robyn Wilson, a researcher from Ohio State University, who says it’s a false choice and is refusing to step down.

The Trump administration has been pulling back federal environmental regulations as fast as it can. The legal argument is that states should be the ones to decide what level of environmental protection and regulation is right for them. In practice, many regulations related to oil and gas development are already in the hands of states, and even local governments. On this episode, we look at how one state is handling one of those regulations, a pretty basic-sounding rule that says how far oil and gas wells must be from someone’s house. What should this number be? What is a safe distance? That is a big, contentious question in places where oil and gas drilling is happening near people. With help from our friends at Inside Energy, we find out how that issue is playing out on the ground.

In October, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Administrator Scott Pruitt ordered scientists who receive EPA grants to either end their grants or get off EPA scientific advisory boards.  What about industry-backed scientists? They can stay

In this episode of Trump on Earth, we talk with Washington Post Environmental Reporter Brady Dennis about industry influence at EPA as well as latest climate-denying nominees to top environmental posts and the U.N. climate talks in Bonn, Germany.

About three quarters of the 640 million acres of land that the federal government owns is managed by the Department of the Interior. And under the leadership of Interior Secretary Ryan Zinke, the Department of Interior is poised to shrink the borders of at least four national monuments, potentially opening up hundreds of thousands of acres to development. On this episode, we try to find out who Ryan Zinke is by learning about the man Zinke calls his biggest inspiration. Teddy Roosevelt basically invented the national parks system, and has arguably done more for conservation than anyone else in U.S. history. So if the top steward of public lands is modeling himself after a conservationist, why is he making headlines for rolling back land protections? Opening up federal land for more oil and gas development? We find out with the help from our friends at Inside Energy. 

As Congress pays out more than 36 billion dollars in disaster relief, the General Accounting Office recommends that the federal government find ways to minimize the economic impacts of climate change. President Obama started moving in this direction. He signed an executive order requiring infrastructure like roads and bridges be designed to survive flooding and other consequences of climate change. But President Trump issued an executive order that pretty much undid it. Our guest is Daniel Kreeger. He's the executive director of the Association of Climate Change Officers. which helps businesses and others plan for climate change. Kreeger says we built infrastructure - like highways and sewers - based on the weather we’ve had over the last century. But that’s changing.

The NY Magazine article "The Uninhabitable Earth" presents a portrait of a worst case scenario of climate change in which the planet gets so hot, humans can no longer live there. It imagines a future so grim, it spawned response articles like “Are we as doomed as that New York Magazine Article Says?” In this episode, we talk to the author of the article, David Wallace-Wells, to find out -- is it really as bad as all that? And does fear motivate people to action or acceptance? 

On Tuesday, administrator Scott Pruitt signed the paperwork to revoke the Clean Power Plan. But what is the case for its repeal? And what happens next in the search to rein in carbon dioxide pollution?We’ve heard from many of the proponents of the Clean Power Plan over the past few months, but on this week’s episode, we talk to someone who opposed it and hear why he thought it should have never been written in the first place. Jeff Holmstead has worked on environmental issues for previous Republican administrations, including a stint as assistant administrator for air and radiation at the EPA under George W. Bush. 

Sam Clovis is Trump's pick for head scientist at the USDA. He has been many things --  Air Force fighter pilot, conservative talk show host, defeated U.S. Senate candidate, co-chair of Trump’s presidential campaign. But one thing not on his resume: scientist. We learn more about why we should be paying attention to what happens with Clovis from Mike Lavender of the Union of Concerned Scientists. Mike focuses on food and environment issues and he’s written that Clovis’s confirmation would be a direct violation of the law and would also risk the safety of our food and water. 

While the world has been paying attention to President Trump's action on immigration and health care, his administration has been steadily reshaping environmental policy. But how far has it gotten? And what can we expect out of Washington in the coming months? 

Increasingly sophisticated climate science is able to tell us a lot more about the role climate change is playing in extreme weather events. But while Hurricane Irma was bearing down on South Florida last week, EPA administrator Scott Pruitt said now is not the time to talk about climate change and its impacts on these terrifying storms. So if not now, when? Ben Kirtman is a professor of atmospheric sciences at the University of Miami’s Rosenstiel School for Marine and Atmospheric Sciences. We caught up with him in Atlanta where he had evacuated from hurricane Harvey. He says now is exactly the time when it’s most important to talk about climate change.

Arlie Russell Hochschild spent five years in some of the most polluted parishes of Louisiana trying to find out why some of the people whose lives have been ravaged by the oil and petrochemical industry are deeply hostile to environmental regulation. She is the author of Strangers in Their Own Land: Anger and Mourning on the American Right.

What is the future of renewable energy under Donald Trump? Are recent gains made by solar and wind in jeopardy? Or is the momentum these industries have gained over the past eight years made them borderline unstoppable. This week on the Trump on Earth podcast we talk with a man who's literally writing the book on this topic. Varun Sivaram has been following following energy policy as the Phillip D. Reed fellow for Science and Technology at the Council on Foreign Relations.  He is the author of the forthcoming book, Taming the Sun: Innovations to Harness Solar Energy and Save the Planet (MIT University Press, February 2018).

Only 11 percent of conservative Republicans say climate scientists understand the causes of climate change very well. So, can anything change their minds? One conservative says ‘yes’. Bob Inglis is a former South Carolina Republican congressman who now heads a group called republicEN.org which aims to promote ‘free market’ solutions to climate change.

The Great Lakes Restoration Initiative funds projects that protect and restore the largest system of fresh surface water in the world. Can it be saved? 

In this episode of Trump on Earth, we talk with environmental justice lawyer Lisa Garcia, who was senior adviser to the administrator for Environmental Justice at the EPA during the Obama Administration. Garcia explains just what environmental justice is, why we need it, and how she plans to keep fighting the good fight in spite of the cuts.

In this episode, we talk with Ann Carlson who for years has been watching the UN climate negotiations that led to the Paris agreement. She’s a professor of Environmental Law and the director of the Emmett Institute on Climate Change and the Environment at UCLA. In her view, pulling out of Paris really isn't doing very much except that it's telling the world what the world should already know.

President Trump’s proposed 2,000-mile long, 30-foot high border wall would obstruct more than just a pretty landscape. It could bring an end to the species that live in the lush coastal grasslands, searing hot deserts, and staggering mountain peaks in the path of the wall. In this episode of Trump on Earth, we team up with a fellow environmental podcast, Generation Anthropocene, as Stanford student Maddy Belin talks with Penn State University Professor Jesse Lasky for their episode entitled “Oh Right, the Animals.”

About one-third of the country is federally-owned. That means it belongs to all of us -- the public. But that also gives the President a lot of power over these places. Today on Trump on Earth, we’re taking a closer look at what’s at stake, and what we can expect next for our public lands. 

Somewhere between 97 and 99 percent of scientists are convinced by the evidence that climate change is real, human caused, and a problem. But at a recent hearing held by the House Committee on Science, Space and Technology, only 25 percent of the witnesses reflected that position: Michael Mann. 

This weekend, thousands of scientists will be marching to protest the Trump administration. On this episode we hear from three of them. 

Last week — to the surprise of no one — Donald Trump issued an executive order to begin dismantling the Clean Power Plan. But the country's keystone rule on climate change isn't dead yet.

Trump’s first months in office have left us with more questions than answers. But on environmental policy, some themes are emerging that will likely shape a lot of what’s to come. In this week’s episode, we dig into three key storylines to watch with Rebecca Leber of Mother Jones and The Atlantic’s Rob Meyer. 

Trump’s big push to rollback federal regulations could impact everything from the price of healthcare to the size and scope of the EPA. It might also leave the USDA and FDA with fewer powers on food safety.

Trumpism may not be the most coherent of political philosophies. But when White House strategist Steve Bannon recently told a crowd of conservative activists that one of their major goals is “deconstruction of the administrative state,” he brought into focus a theme that may very well come to define a large part of the Trump era. In fact, we’re already starting to see it take shape at the Environmental Protection Agency.