Craig DeLuz: Reevaluating Environmental Regulation: The Balance Between Innovation and Overreach in Climate Policy

03 Sep 2025Craig DeLuz: Reevaluating Environmental Regulation: The Balance Between Innovation and Overreach in Climate Policy

"We must critically assess whether the measures taken in the name of combating climate change are genuinely contributing to environmental improvement or merely serving to restrict economic freedom and personal agency," writes Project 21 Ambassador Craig DeLuz in a commentary published at Sacramento Daily Press.

"It's high time we inject some common sense back into our energy and environmental policies-an approach that respects the lessons of history while also being grounded in the realities of science and economics. As we move forward, the future of American energy should not be dictated by fear, but by understanding, practicality, and the desire for prosperity."

Read Craig's commentary below.

In the wake of the Environmental Protection Agency's recent decision to repeal the 2009 endangerment finding for greenhouse gas emissions, we witness a significant realignment in the ongoing debate over environmental regulation. For years, the Clean Air Act, designed in the 1970s to combat tangible pollutants-like sulfur dioxide and particulate matter-has been stretched beyond its logical application to encompass carbon dioxide, a compound that is produced as naturally as exhaling a breath.

This shift, fueled initially under the Obama Administration, was predicated on a troubling interpretation of regulatory authority that is emblematic of a broader tendency towards overreach by government agencies. It is an unsettling precedent when an agency like the EPA, grounded in public health mandates, extends its purview to regulate a gas that is, in many ways, a normal byproduct of terrestrial life. To suggest that carbon dioxide-an odorless and non-toxic gas at ambient levels-is an existential threat is to trivialize the serious work of environmental stewardship.

Indeed, the ramifications of such regulatory policies have resulted in significant economic burdens. The alleged costs associated with regulating greenhouse gas emissions are estimated to exceed $54 billion annually. This is not merely a budgetary line item; it amounts to over $800 billion over the last decade and a half, representing a staggering misallocation of resources that could be better spent on innovation or adaptation, rather than regulatory compliance.

The recent decision by the EPA, under the leadership of Administrator Lee Zeldin and Energy Secretary Chris Wright, to step back from such expansive interpretations of the Clean Air Act should be welcomed as a necessary correction. The recognition that Congress must explicitly legislate such powers, rather than allow them to be imposed through regulatory fiat, is crucial for maintaining the balance of power that is supposed to exist between governmental branches.

Moreover, the scientific discourse surrounding climate change and greenhouse gases warrants a return to rational discussion grounded in data. Reports commissioned by the Department of Energy have begun to unveil a nuanced understanding of climate impact, challenging the simplistic narrative that climate change is the singular cause of more frequent and severe storms. What we see instead is a need for practical and economically sound approaches to addressing climate phenomena-ones that do not merely serve as instruments for governmental overreach but as pragmatic solutions benefiting the populace at large.

Indeed, the fundamental question before us is what kind of future we envision. Is it one of bureaucratic control, where a select few dictate the terms of acceptable behavior under the guise of environmental righteousness? Or is it one that embraces a diverse energy landscape, where innovations like nuclear energy and advancements in natural gas pave the way for a more sustainable future without crippling our economy?

In continuing this dialogue, we must critically assess whether the measures taken in the name of combating climate change are genuinely contributing to environmental improvement or merely serving to restrict economic freedom and personal agency. It's high time we inject some common sense back into our energy and environmental policies-an approach that respects the lessons of history while also being grounded in the realities of science and economics. As we move forward, the future of American energy should not be dictated by fear, but by understanding, practicality, and the desire for prosperity.

Project 21 Ambassador Craig J. DeLuz has almost 30 years of experience in public policy and advocacy. He hosts a daily news and commentary show called "The RUNDOWN." You can follow him on X at @CraigDeLuz. This was first published at Sacramento Daily Press.