Musk has said Tesla will hold a shareholder meeting in November. Photo via Getty Images

Tesla has scheduled an annual shareholder meeting for November, one day after it came under pressure from major shareholders to do so.

Billionaire Elon Musk's company said in a regulatory filing on Thursday that the meeting would be held Nov. 6, but that may prove troublesome because it comes nearly three months after it is required to do so under state law in Texas, where the company is incorporated.

The annual meeting, given Tesla's fortunes this year, has the potential to be a raucous event and it is unclear how investors will react to the delay, which is rare for any major U.S. corporation.

Tesla shares have plunged 27% this year, largely due to blowback over Musk's affiliation with President Donald Trump, as well as rising competition.

The announcement of the meeting comes a day after a group of more than 20 Tesla shareholders sent a letter to the company's board pressing for an annual meeting after receiving no word of one with the deadline just days away.

Many shareholders have been miffed by Musk's participation in the Trump administration this year, saying he needs to focus on his EV company which is facing extraordinary pressures.

“An annual meeting provides shareholders with the opportunity to hear directly from the board about these concerns, and to vote for or against directors, the board’s approach to executive compensation, and other matters of material importance,” the group said in the letter.

The group cited Texas law, which requires companies to schedule annual shareholders meetings within 13 months of the prior annual meeting.

Tesla’s last shareholders meeting was on June 13 of last year, where investors voted to restore Musk’s record $44.9 billion pay package that was thrown out by a Delaware judge earlier that year.

Also on Thursday, Musk that the Grok chatbot will be heading to Tesla vehicles.

“Grok is coming to Tesla vehicles very soon. Next week at the latest,” Musk said on social media platform X, in response to a post stating that Grok implementation on Teslas wasn't announced on a Grok livestream Wednesday.

Grok was developed by Musk’s artificial intelligence company xAI and pitched as an alternative to “woke AI” interactions from rival chatbots like Google’s Gemini, or OpenAI’s ChatGPT.

Shares of Tesla rose 3% at the opening bell after tumbling this week when the feud between Trump and Musk heated up again.

Houston-based Mati Carbon won the global XPRIZE Carbon Removal competition, funded by The Musk Foundation. Photo via LinkedIn.

Houston companies win big at Elon Musk-backed carbon removal competition

xprize winners

Houston-based Mati Carbon has won the $50 million grand prize in the XPRIZE Carbon Removal competition, backed by Elon Musk’s charitable organization, The Musk Foundation.

Mati was selected in 2024 as one of 20 global finalists. The company removes carbon through its Enhanced Rock Weathering (ERW) program that works with agricultural farms in Africa and India.

The 3-year-old startup accelerates the natural process of rock weathering (ERW) by applying pulverized basalt to croplands of partnered smallholder farmers, free of charge. Mati says the farmers it partners with are some of the most vulnerable to the impacts of climate change.

“Winning this XPRIZE competition is an incredible honor and a definitive validation of our research and development, and building out the infrastructure needed to impact millions of farmers while delivering verifiable carbon dioxide removal at a gigaton scale,” Mati Carbon Founder and CEO Shantanu Agarwal, said in a news release. “I couldn’t be prouder, not just of the Mati team, but of our collaborators, research partners and the thousands of smallholder farmers who let us be part of their lives. This XPRIZE recognition will allow us to collaborate with local partners to accelerate the use of enhanced rock weathering across the Global South.”

Mati reports that it plans to use the award to “scale its efforts working with smallholder farmers worldwide.” Apart from the XPRIZE funding, Mati plans to grow its model through the sale of CDR credits. According to the company, it counts Shopify, Stripe, and H&M among its early carbon credit buyers.

“Mati Carbon’s deployments bolster farmers’ livelihoods through improved soil health, reduced agricultural inputs, and increased income at zero cost to them. Mati Carbon’s team has developed a scientifically rigorous approach to monitoring and verification, and excelled across each of XPRIZE’s prize evaluation criteria – operational, sustainability, and cost metrics – giving the XPRIZE judges the highest confidence in Mati Carbon’s solution’s long-term scalability,” the XPRIZE judges wrote.

Houston-based Vaulted Deep took home the second-runner-up prize in the competition and $8 million for its organic waste storage process. The company provides permanent carbon storage by injecting nonhazardous organic waste deep underground. It spun off with $8 million in seed funding from Advantek Waste Management Services in 2023.

"Our approach is grounded in geomechanical injection techniques that have been safely deployed globally for decades by our team and predecessors," Omar Abou-Sayed, co-founder and executive chairman of Vaulted, said in a separate release. "XPRIZE recognized that this is a proven approach—already in use, delivering impact, and built on the kind of reliability the industry needs to scale responsibly."

Launched in 2021, the four-year XPRIZE Carbon Removal competition challenged global innovators to deploy scalable solutions for removing carbon dioxide from the atmosphere and oceans. More than 1,300 teams from 88 countries competed. XPRIZE finalists were required to remove at least 1,000 tonnes of CO2 over a one-year demonstration period.

French company NetZero took home the first-runner-up prize of $15 million, and London-based UNDO came in as third-runner-up with a $5 million prize.

Since the announcement of the XPRIZE Carbon Removal competition, the Musk-led Department of Government Efficiency has cut climate funding for agencies, projects and research. While the Musk Foundation sponsored the XPRIZE event, it is not affiliated with the California-based organization, according to the Associated Press.

Tesla sales are down to start the year. Getty Images

Tesla sales tumble 13% as Musk backlash, competition and aging lineup turn off buyers

Tesla Talk

Tesla sales fell 13% in the first three months of the year, another sign that Elon Musk’s once high-flying electric car company is struggling to attract buyers.

The double-digit drop is likely due to a combination of factors, including its aging lineup, competition from rivals and a backlash from Musk’s embrace of right wing politics. It also is a warning that the company’s first-quarter earnings report later this month could disappoint investors.

Tesla reported deliveries of 336,681 globally in the January to March quarter. The figure was down from sales of 387,000 in the same period a year ago. The decline came despite deep discounts, zero financing and other incentives.

Analysts polled by FactSet expected much higher deliveries of 408,000.

Dan Ives of Wedbush said in a note to clients that Tesla is seeing soft demand in the United States and China, as well as facing pressure in Europe.

“The brand crisis issues are clearly having a negative impact on Tesla...there is no debate,” he said.

Ives said that Wall Street financial analysts knew the first-quarter figures were likely to be bad, but that it was even worse than expected, calling them a “disaster on every metric.”

The sales drop came three weeks after President Donald Trump held an extraordinary press conference outside the White House in which he praised Tesla, blasted boycotts against the company and bought a Tesla himself while TV cameras rolled in an effort to help lift sales.

“I don’t like what’s happening to you,” said Trump, before slipping into a red Model S and exclaiming, “Wow. That’s beautiful.”

After falling as much as 6% in early Wednesday, Tesla stock shot up more than 5% in afternoon trading after a report from Politico, citing anonymous sources, that Musk may soon step down from leadership of his Department of Government Efficiency, the cost-cutting group that has led to tens of thousands of federal workers losing their jobs.

Tesla investors have complained the DOGE work has diverted Musk's focus from Tesla, where he is the CEO. On Tuesday, New York City's comptroller overseeing pension funds down $300 million this year on Tesla holdings called for a lawsuit accusing a distracted Musk of "driving Tesla off a financial cliff.”

Tesla’s stock has plunged by roughly half since hitting a mid-December record as expectations of a lighter regulatory touch and big profits with Donald Trump as president were replaced by fear that the boycott of Musk's cars and other problems could hit the company hard.

Analysts are still not sure exactly how much the fall in sales is due to the protests or other factors. Electric car sales have been sluggish in general, and Tesla in particular is suffering as car buyers hold off from buying its bestselling Model Y while waiting for an updated version.

Still, even bullish financial analysts who earlier downplayed the backlash to Musk’s polarizing political stances are acknowledging that it is hurting the company, something that Musk also recently acknowledged.

“This is a very expensive job,” Musk said at a Wisconsin rally on Sunday, referring to his DOGE role. “My Tesla stock and the stock of everyone who holds Tesla has gone roughly in half."

The protests come as the Austin, Texas electric vehicle maker faces fierce competition from other EV makers offering vastly improved models, including those of BYD. The Chinese EV giant unveiled in March a technology that allows it cars to charge up in just five to eight minutes.

Tesla is expected to report earnings of 48 cents per share for the first quarter later this month, up 7% from a year earlier, according to a survey of financial analysts who the car company by research firm FactSet.

Nearly all of Tesla’s sales in the quarter came from the smaller and less-expensive Models 3 and Y, with the company selling less than 13,000 more expensive models, which include X and S as well as the Cybertruck.

Lawyers for a Tesla shareholder who sued to block the pay package contended that shareholders who had voted for the 10-year plan in 2018 had been given misleading and incomplete information. Photo via cdn.britannica.com

Judge once again rejects Texas-based Tesla's multi-billion-dollar pay package for Elon Musk — now what?

hard no

For a second time, a Delaware judge has nullified a pay package that Tesla had awarded its CEO, Elon Musk, that once was valued at $56 billion.

Last week, Chancellor Kathaleen St. Jude McCormick turned aside a request from Musk's lawyers to reverse a ruling she announced in January that had thrown out the compensation plan. The judge ruled then that Musk effectively controlled Tesla's board and had engineered the outsize pay package during sham negotiations.

Lawyers for a Tesla shareholder who sued to block the pay package contended that shareholders who had voted for the 10-year plan in 2018 had been given misleading and incomplete information.

In their defense, Tesla's board members asserted that the shareholders who ratified the pay plan a second time in June had done so after receiving full disclosures, thereby curing all the problems the judge had cited in her January ruling. As a result, they argued, Musk deserved the pay package for having raised Tesla's market value by billions of dollars.

McCormick rejected that argument. In her 103-page opinion, she ruled that under Delaware law, Tesla's lawyers had no grounds to reverse her January ruling “based on evidence they created after trial.”

What will Musk and Tesla do now?

On Monday night, Tesla posted on X, the social media platform owned by Musk, that the company will appeal. The appeal would be filed with the Delaware Supreme Court, the only state appellate court Tesla can pursue. Experts say a ruling would likely come in less than a year.

“The ruling, if not overturned, means that judges and plaintiffs' lawyers run Delaware companies rather than their rightful owners — the shareholders,” Tesla argued.

Later, on X, Musk unleashed a blistering attack on the judge, asserting that McCormick is “a radical far left activist cosplaying as a judge.”

What do experts say about the case?

Legal authorities generally suggest that McCormick’s ruling was sound and followed the law. Charles Elson, founding director of the Weinberg Center for Corporate Governance at the University of Delaware, said that in his view, McCormick was right to rule that after Tesla lost its case in the original trial, it created improper new evidence by asking shareholders to ratify the pay package a second time.

Had she allowed such a claim, he said, it would cause a major shift in Delaware’s laws against conflicts of interest given the unusually close relationship between Musk and Tesla’s board.

“Delaware protects investors — that’s what she did,” said Elson, who has followed the court for more than three decades. “Just because you’re a ‘superstar CEO’ doesn’t put you in a separate category.”

Elson said he thinks investors would be reluctant to put money into Delaware companies if there were exceptions to the law for “special people.”

What will the Delaware Supreme Court do?

Elson said that in his opinion, the court is likely to uphold McCormick's ruling.

Can Tesla appeal to federal courts?

Experts say no. Rulings on state laws are normally left to state courts. Brian Dunn, program director for the Institute of Compensation Studies at Cornell University, said it's been his experience that Tesla has no choice but to stay in the Delaware courts for this compensation package.

Tesla has moved its legal headquarters to Texas. Does that matter?

The company could try to reconstitute the pay package and seek approval in Texas, where it may expect more friendlier judges. But Dunn, who has spent 40 years as an executive compensation consultant, said it's likely that some other shareholder would challenge the award in Texas because it's excessive compared with other CEOs' pay plans.

“If they just want to turn around and deliver him $56 billion, I can't believe somebody wouldn't want to litigate it,” Dunn said. “It's an unconscionable amount of money.”

Would a new pay package be even larger?

Almost certainly. Tesla stock is trading at 15 times the exercise price of stock options in the current package in Delaware, Morgan Stanley analyst Adam Jonas wrote in a note to investors. Tesla's share price has doubled in the past six months, Jonas wrote. At Monday’s closing stock price, the Musk package is now worth $101.4 billion, according to Equilar, an executive data firm.

And Musk has asked for a subsequent pay package that would give him 25 percent of Tesla's voting shares. Musk has said he is uncomfortable moving further into artificial intelligence with the company if he doesn't have 25 percent control. He currently holds about 13 percent of Tesla's outstanding shares.

Texan Elon Musk stands to benefit from the next president. Photo via cdn.britannica.com

Election results buoy stock at Texas-based Tesla

seeing dollar signs

Shares of Tesla soared Wednesday as investors bet that the electric vehicle maker and its Texas-based CEO Elon Musk will benefit from Donald Trump’s return to the White House.

Tesla stands to make significant gains under a Trump administration with the threat of diminished subsidies for alternative energy and electric vehicles doing the most harm to smaller competitors. Trump’s plans for extensive tariffs on Chinese imports make it less likely that Chinese EVs will be sold in bulk in the U.S. anytime soon.

“Tesla has the scale and scope that is unmatched,” said Wedbush analyst Dan Ives, in a note to investors. “This dynamic could give Musk and Tesla a clear competitive advantage in a non-EV subsidy environment, coupled by likely higher China tariffs that would continue to push away cheaper Chinese EV players.”

Tesla shares jumped 14.8% Wednesday while shares of rival electric vehicle makers tumbled. Nio, based in Shanghai, fell 5.3%. Shares of electric truck maker Rivian dropped 8.3% and Lucid Group fell 5.3%.

Tesla dominates sales of electric vehicles in the U.S, with 48.9% in market share through the middle of 2024, according to the U.S. Energy Information Administration.

Subsidies for clean energy are part of the Inflation Reduction Act, signed into law by President Joe Biden in 2022. It included tax credits for manufacturing, along with tax credits for consumers of electric vehicles.

Musk was one of Trump’s biggest donors, spending at least $119 million mobilizing Trump’s supporters to back the Republican nominee. He also pledged to give away $1 million a day to voters signing a petition for his political action committee.

In some ways, it has been a rocky year for Tesla, with sales and profit declining through the first half of the year. Profit did rise 17.3% in the third quarter.

The U.S. opened an investigation into the company’s “Full Self-Driving” system after reports of crashes in low-visibility conditions, including one that killed a pedestrian. The investigation covers roughly 2.4 million Teslas from the 2016 through 2024 model years.

And investors sent company shares tumbling last month after Tesla unveiled its long-awaited robotaxi at a Hollywood studio Thursday night, seeing not much progress at Tesla on autonomous vehicles while other companies have been making notable progress.

Tesla began selling the software, which is called “Full Self-Driving,” nine years ago. But there are doubts about its reliability.

The stock is now showing a 16.1% gain for the year after rising the past two days.

The Washington Post reported that Musk worked illegally in the country while on a student visa. Photo by Justin Sullivan/Getty Images

Texas EV entrepreneur Elon Musk called out over published report that he once worked in the US illegally

he said, he said

President Joe Biden slammed Elon Musk for hypocrisy on immigration after a published report that the Tesla CEO once worked illegally in the United States. The South Africa-born Musk denies the allegation.

“That wealthiest man in the world turned out to be an illegal worker here. No, I’m serious. He was supposed to be in school when he came on a student visa. He wasn’t in school. He was violating the law. And he’s talking about all these illegals coming our way?” Biden said while campaigning on Saturday in Pittsburgh at a union hall.

The Washington Post reported that Musk worked illegally in the country while on a student visa. The newspaper, citing company documents, former business associates and court documents, said Musk arrived in Palo Alto, California in 1995 for a graduate program at Stanford University "but never enrolled in courses, working instead on his startup. ”

Musk wrote on X in reply to a video post of Biden’s comments: “I was in fact allowed to work in the US." Musk added, “The Biden puppet is lying.”

Investors in Musk’s company, Zip2, were concerned about the possibility of their founder being deported, according to the report, and gave him a deadline for obtaining a work visa. The newspaper also cited a 2005 email from Musk to his Tesla co-founders acknowledging that he did not have authorization to be in the U.S. when he started Zip2.

According to the account, that email was submitted as evidence in a now-closed California defamation lawsuit and said that Musk had applied to Stanford so he could stay in the country legally.

Musk is today the world’s richest man. He has committed more than $70 million to help Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump and other GOP candidates win on Nov. 5, and is one of the party's biggest donors this campaign season. He has been headlining events in the White House race’s final stretch, often echoing Trump's dark rhetoric against immigration.

Trump has pledged to give Musk a role in his administration if he wins next month.

There was no immediate response to messages left with X and Tesla seeking Musk’s comment.

Ad Placement 300x100
Ad Placement 300x600

CultureMap Emails are Awesome

New Gulf Coast recycling plant partners with first-of-kind circularity hub

now open

TALKE USA Inc., the Houston-area arm of German logistics company TALKE, officially opened its Recycling Support Center earlier this month.

Located next to the company's Houston-area headquarters, the plant will process post-consumer plastic materials, which will eventually be converted into recycling feedstock. Chambers County partially funded the plant.

“Our new recycling support center expands our overall commitment to sustainable growth, and now, the community’s plastics will be received here before they head out for recycling. This is a win for the residents of Chambers County," Richard Heath, CEO and president of TALKE USA, said in a news release.

“The opening of our recycling support facility offers a real alternative to past obstacles regarding the large amount of plastic products our local community disposes of. For our entire team, our customers, and the Mont Belvieu community, today marks a new beginning for effective, safe, and sustainable plastics recycling.”

The new plant will receive the post-consumer plastic and form it into bales. The materials will then be processed at Cyclyx's new Houston Circularity Center, a first-of-its-kind plastic waste sorting and processing facility being developed through a joint venture between Cyclix, ExxonMobil and LyondellBasell.

“Materials collected at this facility aren’t just easy-to-recycle items like water bottles and milk jugs. All plastics are accepted, including multi-layered films—like chip bags and juice pouches. This means more of the everyday plastics used in the Chambers County community can be captured and kept out of landfills,” Leslie Hushka, chief impact officer at Cyclyx, added in a LinkedIn post.

Cyclyx's circularity center is currently under construction and is expected to produce 300 million pounds of custom-formulated feedstock annually.

Houston quantum simulator research reveals clues for solar energy conversion

energy flow

Rice University scientists have used a programmable quantum simulator to mimic how energy moves through a vibrating molecule.

The research, which was published in Nature Communications last month, lets the researchers watch and control the flow of energy in real time and sheds light on processes like photosynthesis and solar energy conversion, according to a news release from the university.

The team, led by Rice assistant professor of physics and astronomy Guido Pagano, modeled a two-site molecule with one part supplying energy (the donor) and the other receiving it (the acceptor).

Unlike in previous experiments, the Rice researchers were able to smoothly tune the system to model multiple types of vibrations and manipulate the energy states in a controlled setting. This allowed the team to explore different types of energy transfer within the same platform.

“By adjusting the interactions between the donor and acceptor, coupling to two types of vibrations and the character of those vibrations, we could see how each factor influenced the flow of energy,” Pagano said in the release.

The research showed that more vibrations sped up energy transfer and opened new paths for energy to move, sometimes making transfer more efficient even with energy loss. Additionally, when vibrations differed, efficient transfer happened over a wider range of donor–acceptor energy differences.

“The results show that vibrations and their environment are not simply background noise but can actively steer energy flow in unexpected ways,” Pagano added.

The team believes the findings could help with the design of organic solar cells, molecular wires and other devices that depend on efficient energy or charge transfer. They could also have an environmental impact by improving energy harvesting to reduce energy losses in electronics.

“These are the kinds of phenomena that physical chemists have theorized exist but could not easily isolate experimentally, especially in a programmable manner, until now,” Visal So, a Rice doctoral student and first author of the study, added in the release.

The study was supported by The Welch Foundation,the Office of Naval Research, the National Science Foundation CAREER Award, the Army Research Office and the Department of Energy.

The EPA is easing pollution rules — here’s how it’s affecting Texas

In the news

The first year of President Trump’s second term has seen an aggressive rollback of federal environmental protections, which advocacy groups fear will bring more pollution, higher health risks, and less information and power for Texas communities, especially in heavily industrial and urban areas.

Within Trump’s first 100 days in office, his new Environmental Protection Agency administrator, Lee Zeldin, announced a sweeping slate of 31 deregulatory actions. The list, which Zeldin called the agency’s “greatest day of deregulation,” targeted everything from soot standards and power plant pollution rules to the Endangerment Finding, the legal and scientific foundation that obligates the EPA to regulate climate-changing pollution under the Clean Air Act.

Since then, the agency froze research grants, shrank its workforce, and removed some references to climate change and environmental justice from its website — moves that environmental advocates say send a clear signal: the EPA’s new direction will come at the expense of public health.

Cyrus Reed, conservation director of the Lone Star Chapter of the Sierra Club, said Texas is one of the states that feels EPA policy changes directly because the state has shown little interest in stepping up its environmental enforcement as the federal government scales back.

“If we were a state that was open to doing our own regulations there’d be less impact from these rollbacks,” Reed said. “But we’re not.”

“Now we have an EPA that isn’t interested in enforcing its own rules,” he added.

Richard Richter, a spokesperson at the state’s environmental agency, Texas Commission on Environmental Quality, said in a statement that the agency takes protecting public health and natural resources seriously and acts consistently and quickly to enforce federal and state environmental laws when they’re violated.

Methane rules put on pause

A major EPA move centers on methane, a potent greenhouse gas that traps heat far more efficiently than carbon dioxide over the short term. It accounts for roughly 16% of global greenhouse gas emissions and is a major driver of climate change. In the U.S., the largest source of methane emissions is the energy sector, especially in Texas, the nation’s top oil and gas producer.

In 2024, the Biden administration finalized long-anticipated rules requiring oil and gas operators to sharply reduce methane emissions from wells, pipelines, and storage facilities. The rule, developed with industry input, targeted leaks, equipment failures, and routine flaring, the burning off of excess natural gas at the wellhead.

Under the rule, operators would have been required to monitor emissions, inspect sites with gas-imaging cameras for leaks, and phase out routine flaring. States are required to come up with a plan to implement the rule, but Texas has yet to do so. Under Trump’s EPA, that deadline has been extended until January 2027 — an 18-month postponement.

Texas doesn’t have a rule to capture escaping methane emissions from energy infrastructure. Richter, the TCEQ spokesperson, said the agency continues to work toward developing the state plan.

Adrian Shelley, Texas director of the watchdog group Public Citizen, said the rule represented a rare moment of alignment between environmentalists and major oil and gas producers.

“I think the fossil fuel industry generally understood that this was the direction the planet and their industry was moving,” he said. Shelley said uniform EPA rules provided regulatory certainty for changes operators saw as inevitable.

Reed, the Sierra Club conservation director, said the delay of methane rules means Texas still has no plan to reduce emissions, while neighboring New Mexico already has imposed its own state methane emission rules that require the industry to detect and repair methane leaks and ban routine venting and flaring.

These regulations have cut methane emissions in the New Mexico portion of the Permian Basin — the oil-rich area that covers West Texas and southeast New Mexico — to half that of Texas, according to a recent data analysis by the Environmental Defense Fund. That’s despite New Mexico doubling production since 2020.

A retreat from soot standards

Fine particulate matter or PM 2.5, one of six pollutants regulated under the Clean Air Act, has been called by researchers the deadliest form of air pollution.

In 2024, the EPA under President Biden strengthened air rules for particulate matter by lowering the annual limit from 12 to 9 micrograms per cubic meter. It was the first update since 2012 and one of the most ambitious pieces of Biden’s environmental agenda, driven by mounting evidence that particulate pollution is linked to premature death, heart disease, asthma, and other respiratory illnesses.

After the rule was issued, 24 Republican-led states, including Kentucky and West Virginia, sued to revert to the weaker standard. Texas filed a separate suit asking to block the rule’s recent expansion.

State agencies are responsible for enforcing the federal standards. The TCEQ is charged with creating a list of counties that exceed the federal standard and submitting those recommendations to Gov. Greg Abbott, who then finalizes the designations and submits them to the EPA.

Under the 9 microgram standard, parts of Texas, including Dallas, Harris (which includes Houston), Tarrant (Fort Worth), and Bowie (Texarkana) counties, were in the process of being designated nonattainment areas — which, when finalized, would trigger a legal requirement for the state to develop a plan to clean up the air.

That process stalled after Trump returned to office. Gov. Greg Abbott submitted his designations to EPA last February, but EPA has not yet acted on his designations, according to Richter, the TCEQ spokesperson.

In a court filing last year, the Trump EPA asked a federal appeals court to vacate the stricter standard, bypassing the traditional notice and comment administrative process.

For now, the rule technically remains in effect, but environmental advocates say the EPA’s retreat undermines enforcement of the rule and signals to polluters that it may be short-lived.

Shelley, with Public Citizen, believes the PM2.5 rule would have delivered the greatest health benefit of any EPA regulation affecting Texas, particularly through reductions in diesel pollution from trucks.

“I still hold out hope that it will come back,” he said.

Unraveling the climate framework

Beyond individual pollutants, the Trump EPA has moved to dismantle the federal architecture for addressing climate change.

Among the proposals is eliminating the Greenhouse Gas Reporting Program, which requires power plants, refineries, and oil and gas suppliers to report annual emissions. The proposal has drawn opposition from both environmental groups and industry, which relies on the data for planning and compliance.

Colin Leyden, Texas state director and energy lead at the nonprofit Environmental Defense Fund, said eliminating the program could hurt Texas industry. If methane emissions are no longer reported, then buyers and investors of natural gas, for example, won’t have an official way to measure how much methane pollution is associated with that gas, according to Leyden. That makes it harder to judge how “clean” or “climate-friendly” the product is, which international buyers are increasingly demanding.

“This isn’t just bad for the planet,” he said. “It makes the Texas industry less competitive.”

The administration also proposed last year rescinding the Endangerment Finding, issued in 2009, which obligates the EPA to regulate climate pollution. Most recently, the EPA said it will stop calculating how much money is saved in health care costs as a result of air pollution regulations that curb particulate matter 2.5 and ozone, a component of smog. Both can cause respiratory and health problems.

Leyden said tallying up the dollar value of lives saved when evaluating pollution rules is a foundational principle of the EPA since its creation.

“That really erodes the basic idea that (the EPA) protects health and safety and the environment,” he said.

___

This story was originally published by The Texas Tribune and distributed through a partnership with The Associated Press.