Recent court rulings have raised significant questions about the formation and operation of a Department of Energy (DOE) advisory body informally referred to as the “Climate Working Group.” A U.S. District Court found that the group violated the Federal Advisory Committee Act (FACA), a law requiring transparency, balanced representation, and public accountability for federal advisory committees.
The case has drawn attention because several individuals associated with the group have ties to the CO₂ Coalition, a nonprofit organization known for challenging key elements of the mainstream scientific consensus on climate change. The analysis was relied upon by the Trump administration in overturning the Endangerment Finding — a move used by the EPA to roll back major climate and pollution regulations.
Donald J. Trump has repeatedly voiced skepticism toward climate science and taken concrete actions to undermine climate research and policy. He has publicly called climate change a "hoax," the "greatest scam of all time," and “bullshit,” reflecting a long-standing pattern of dismissing mainstream scientific consensus.
In a major address to the United Nations General Assembly on September 23, 2025, President Trump delivered a comprehensive rejection of global climate efforts, labeling climate change the "greatest con job ever perpetrated on the world." Key claims from this speech included:
Beyond rhetoric, Trump took significant steps to dismantle climate science and regulatory frameworks at the federal level, particularly through the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the National Institutes of Health (NIH). Among the most consequential actions was the repeal of the 2009 Endangerment Finding, which legally designated greenhouse gases as a threat to public health and enabled regulation of emissions. These actions have had lasting effects on U.S. climate policy, weakening federal oversight, slowing renewable energy development, and reducing the country’s ability to respond to the accelerating climate crisis.
Trump’s tenure illustrates the intersection of political ideology, personal branding, and science denial, with consequences that extend far beyond domestic policy into global environmental governance.
Trump has been widely criticized for white nationalist rhetoric and is also well-documented for his connections to Jeffrey Epstein, a known ecofascist. Ecofascists understand the physics of climate change, with the short-term upper limit of warming estimated around +9°C. Their goal, alarmingly, is to push humanity toward that upper bound as a means of drastically reducing the global population—particularly targeting vulnerable regions in the Global South.
Chris Wright (born January 15, 1965) is an American businessman and politician currently serving as the 17th U.S. Secretary of Energy (DOE).
Before entering government, Wright was a prominent executive in the fossil fuel industry:
The U.S. District Court ruled that the DOE’s formation of the “Climate Working Group” violated FACA requirements. Under FACA, federal advisory committees must:
According to the court, the group did not meet these standards and operated without sufficient public oversight. The report produced by the group was reportedly referenced in efforts related to reconsideration of the Endangerment Finding.
The group was coordinated by Travis Fisher and included five researchers known for publicly questioning aspects of prevailing climate models and projections:
The CO₂ Coalition is a nonprofit organization advocating a reassessment of carbon dioxide’s role in climate change and opposing certain regulatory approaches.
These overlapping affiliations have raised concerns regarding ideological alignment and potential lack of viewpoint diversity in the DOE advisory process.
The Climate Working Group (CWG) is closely tied to the Heartland Institute through shared personnel, institutional advocacy, and a unified mission to challenge mainstream climate science.
Investigative reports describe the CWG as an extension of a “climate denial machine” funded by groups like Heartland, aiming to influence federal policy. Heartland claimed influence at the "highest level" during the CWG’s formation.
Following the CWG’s dissolution, members (led by Judith Curry) launched ClimateWorkingGroup.com. Court-mandated disclosures revealed the group tailored their report to provide a legal basis for repealing the 2009 Endangerment Finding.
Under the Trump administration, Bradley promoted CWG work via IER and MasterResource, using the report to justify repealing the Endangerment Finding and reducing fossil fuel restrictions. His professional relationship with DOE Secretary Chris Wright further amplified CWG influence.
Investigations reveal intersections between elite networks, climate denial, and ecofascist ideologies:
In a series of July 2016 emails with Joscha Bach, a German philosopher and AI researcher, Jeffrey Epstein raised climate change in the context of a broader discussion about cognition and race. In one exchange, Epstein wrote:
“Maybe climate change is a good way of dealing with overpopulation — the earth’s forest fire. Potentially a good thing for the species.”
The statement reflects a willingness to frame climate-driven catastrophe as a population-level corrective rather than a humanitarian crisis.
In other emails, Epstein circulated material promoting climate misinformation.
In December 2016, he sent theoretical physicist Lawrence Krauss a YouTube video titled “Nobel Laureate Smashes the Global Warming Hoax,” featuring Ivar Giaever, a Nobel Prize–winning physicist whose expertise was unrelated to climate science and who had publicly denied mainstream climate findings.
Krauss responded: “So you are listening to an old Nobel laureate whose expertise has nothing to do with this, who has never studied this in detail, built models, done experiments.”
Epstein replied:
“i liked the argument that more co2 is good for plants?”
This echoes a common climate denial talking point that isolates the fertilization effect of CO₂ while ignoring well-documented countervailing harms — including heat stress, drought intensification, soil degradation, extreme weather, and nutrient dilution in crops.
In a later exchange, Epstein asked:
“is the south pole getting colder and more ice?”
Krauss responded that the West Antarctic Ice Sheet was melting at an unprecedented rate — consistent with peer-reviewed observations showing accelerating ice mass loss in parts of Antarctica despite regional variability.
The released files also reference interactions between Epstein and prominent public figures involved in climate policy debates.
According to reporting, Bjørn Lomborg met with Epstein in September 2012 regarding philanthropic investments. A spokesperson for Lomborg’s Copenhagen Consensus Center stated that no funding was received and no further contact occurred.
Climate scientist Michael Mann has argued that certain policy commentators use concern for economic development in the Global South to justify continued fossil fuel dependence, despite the disproportionate vulnerability of those regions to climate impacts.
Emails also show Epstein receiving and circulating opinion pieces critical of mainstream climate science. In 2014, Nathan Myhrvold forwarded Epstein a Wall Street Journal op-ed by Steven Koonin titled “Climate Science Is Not Settled,” calling it “a good summary.” Koonin later participated in a Department of Energy report that downplayed aspects of climate risk.
The files further mention connections to individuals and entities linked to fossil-fuel-dependent states, underscoring how climate narratives circulate within networks that include financiers, technologists, policy commentators, and actors tied to petrostates.
This convergence suggests that some climate inaction may result from ideological indifference, not only profit motives.
Policy actions influenced by the CWG and allied networks have foreseeable harms for children and vulnerable populations:
These impacts raise potential civil liability, federal civil rights issues, and, in systemic cases, international crimes against humanity.
The DOE Climate Working Group case highlights the dangers of ideologically motivated, opaque advisory networks shaping federal policy. Ensuring transparency, accountability, and diversity in scientific advisory processes is critical to protect human health, vulnerable populations, and future generations.
RESOURCES: