US Cultural Revolution: Bonfire of NASA, NOAA, EPA, CDC, & USDA Climate Programs – CleanTechnica

Sign up for daily news updates from CleanTechnica on email. Or follow us on Google News!

---

China’s Cultural Revolution (1966–1976) was a decade-long political campaign led by Mao Zedong to reinforce communist ideology by purging capitalist and traditional elements from Chinese society. One of its most devastating aspects was its assault on science and academia. Universities were shut down, intellectuals were persecuted, and scientific research was deemed bourgeois and counter-revolutionary. Many academics were publicly humiliated, imprisoned, or even killed, and research institutions were dismantled. The long-term impacts were severe: China’s scientific progress stagnated for years, creating a knowledge gap that took decades to recover from. Even today, remnants of the anti-intellectual sentiment and political interference in academia can be traced back to the disruptions of this period.

Both the 2025 Trump administration’s attacks on scientific funding and research freedoms and the Cultural Revolution share a common thread of ideological interference in academia, though they differ in severity and execution. During the Cultural Revolution, scientists and intellectuals were violently persecuted, universities were shut down, and research was labeled as counter-revolutionary, leading to a complete halt in scientific progress.

In contrast, the Trump administration’s cuts to NASA, NOAA, and other research institutions so far represent a more bureaucratic form of suppression, targeting funding and dismantling programs rather than physically persecuting scientists. However, both cases reflect a distrust of intellectualism, a prioritization of political loyalty over expertise, and long-term damage to national scientific progress. While China’s purge created a generational knowledge gap, the U.S. risks ceding global leadership in multiple areas of scientific research and climate science to other nations, likely echoing the stagnation China experienced post-1976.

As I noted when first drawing out this comparison, it extends beyond academia. Just as Mao’s Red Guards enforced ideological conformity through intimidation and violence, Trump’s pardoning of January 6th insurrectionists emboldens a militant, extralegal force that sees itself as the enforcers of his movement. Meanwhile, Trump’s appointees, including Elon Musk in government restructuring, mirror Mao’s reliance on young, untested loyalists to reshape institutions with reckless speed.

The consequences of this strategy—eroding trust in expertise, dismantling regulatory oversight, and alienating global allies—bear striking resemblance to the damage inflicted on China before Deng Xiaoping’s reforms. While China, having learned from its past, is surging ahead in clean energy and technology, the U.S. risks self-sabotage through historical amnesia, repeating the ideological mistakes of the very nation it positions as its primary rival.

That article generically dealt with the impacts of the cuts to the National Institute of Health (NIH), which will force universities to shut entire departments, stop research and leave researchers looking for homes in new countries. In a follow up piece I dealt with the climate research impacts of similar cuts at the National Science Foundation (NSF), which has been a pillar of U.S. scientific advancement since its founding in 1950, shaping research in climate science, artificial intelligence, and national security. Its contributions to climate modeling, renewable energy, and global environmental studies have made it an essential institution for tackling the 21st century’s greatest challenges.

However, under the Trump administration’s second term, the NSF is facing severe cuts and ideological interference. On February 18, 2025, the administration laid off 168 employees—about 10% of NSF’s workforce—with leadership indicating that half of its staff may be eliminated within six months. The administration has also banned climate-related language in government reports, echoing the Orwellian language control tactics of totalitarian regimes.

Beyond NSF, the administration’s broader policies—including restrictions on H-1B visas—are accelerating a brain drain, driving top scientists, engineers, and researchers to institutions abroad. The U.S., once a global leader in attracting talent, now risks losing its edge as other countries step in to welcome displaced experts and fund critical research.

But the attacks on research related to climate change its and solutions don’t stop there. NASA (National Aeronautics and Space Administration) was initially focused on space exploration and aeronautics. However, by the 1960s and 1970s, it became a key player in Earth observation, leveraging satellite technology to study the planet’s climate. The 1972 launch of Landsat-1, the first Earth-observing satellite, marked a turning point, enabling systematic monitoring of land use, ice coverage, and atmospheric changes. In the 1980s, NASA-funded research contributed to the discovery of the ozone hole, and its climate models helped confirm the greenhouse effect’s role in global warming, shaping early U.S. policy discussions on climate change.

Since then, NASA has expanded its climate science efforts through satellite missions and high-resolution climate modeling. The Earth Observing System (EOS), launched in the 1990s, provided critical data on global temperatures, sea level rise, and carbon cycles. Missions such as GRACE (Gravity Recovery and Climate Experiment) and ICESat have revolutionized our understanding of ice loss and ocean circulation. NASA’s Goddard Institute for Space Studies (GISS) has produced some of the most widely cited climate models, while its satellite programs—Aqua, Terra, and OCO-2—continue to provide essential data for climate research worldwide.

In early 2025, the Trump administration initiated significant workforce reductions at NASA, cutting approximately 900 employees—about 5% of the agency’s workforce—through deferred resignation offers. An additional 1,000 probationary employees were slated for termination, though this was temporarily paused following internal deliberations. Despite this brief reprieve, NASA centers have been directed to prepare for further layoffs, contributing to growing uncertainty about the agency’s future.

The cuts come amid broader budget reductions and structural changes, including a push to privatize aspects of NASA’s operations. Key officials, including Associate Administrator Jim Free, have resigned, citing concerns over the agency’s shifting direction. The heavy involvement of Elon Musk in government efficiency efforts and the nomination of private astronaut Jared Isaacman to lead NASA have raised concerns about conflicts of interest, particularly as SpaceX continues to secure major government contracts. With funding constraints, leadership instability, and shifting priorities, key programs like the Artemis moon mission face delays or potential cancellation, threatening to erode NASA’s long-standing leadership in space exploration and climate research.

The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) was established in 1970 under President Richard Nixon, merging several agencies, including the Weather Bureau, the Coast and Geodetic Survey, and the National Marine Fisheries Service. Created to study and protect the oceans, atmosphere, and coasts, NOAA became a key federal agency for weather forecasting, climate monitoring, and environmental stewardship. Since its inception, NOAA has played a critical role in tracking hurricanes, studying ocean currents, and advancing atmospheric science, providing essential data for public safety and environmental management.

NOAA’s work on climate change has been pivotal. In the 1980s and 1990s, NOAA supported research confirming the link between carbon dioxide emissions and global warming, contributing data to early Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) reports. The agency has been instrumental in measuring rising global temperatures, tracking sea level rise, and monitoring Arctic ice loss through programs like the Global Monitoring Laboratory and the National Centers for Environmental Information. NOAA’s satellites, ocean buoys, and climate models provide some of the most detailed records of Earth’s changing climate. Over the years, its research has shaped climate policies, disaster preparedness, and international climate agreements, reinforcing its role as a cornerstone of scientific integrity and global environmental leadership.

The 2025 Trump administration initiated significant budget cuts to the NOAA, proposing a 30% reduction in its budget and plans to halve its workforce. These cuts, aligned with the administration’s Project 2025 initiative, aim to minimize government involvement in climate change policy and consider privatizing key NOAA functions, including weather forecasting services. Such reductions threaten the quality and availability of critical weather forecasting and climate research services, potentially compromising public safety and economic activities that depend on accurate environmental data.

The administration has also directed NOAA to suspend all international engagements, effectively halting collaborations with foreign scientists and participation in global climate assessments. This directive undermines NOAA’s role in international climate initiatives and diminishes the United States’ influence in global environmental policy discussions. The combination of domestic budget cuts and withdrawal from international cooperation not only hampers NOAA’s ability to conduct comprehensive climate research but also isolates the U.S. scientific community from critical global collaborations, potentially hindering collective efforts to address climate change.

The new Trump administration has removed or restricted access to several key U.S. climate data sets and online resources, undermining transparency and environmental research. The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has deleted the EJScreen tool, which mapped pollution burdens alongside socioeconomic data, crucial for environmental justice initiatives. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) has taken down the Social Vulnerability Index and the Environmental Justice Index, which identified communities most at risk from environmental disasters and pollution.

In addition to agency-level removals, Data.gov has lost approximately 3,000 datasets, many related to climate and environmental monitoring. These cuts significantly impact scientific research, disaster preparedness, and policy-making, restricting access to crucial climate information for universities, public agencies, and advocacy groups. Organizations and individuals have launched large-scale data mirroring initiatives, working to archive and preserve vital information on external servers to ensure continued access for scientists, policymakers, and the public.

The Administration has also directed the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) to remove climate change-related content from its websites, including vital data sets, interactive tools, and funding information essential for farmers and researchers. This action has significantly disrupted the agricultural community, as access to climate data is crucial for making informed decisions about crop management, irrigation practices, and long-term sustainability strategies. The sudden removal of these resources has left many farmers without the necessary information to adapt to increasingly volatile weather patterns and environmental challenges.

In response to the data purge, several organizations have filed a lawsuit against the USDA. The lawsuit alleges that the removal of climate-related information violates federal laws, such as the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA), by unlawfully restricting public access to critical resources. Farmers argue that the absence of this information hampers their ability to implement climate-smart practices and secure necessary funding for conservation efforts, thereby threatening their livelihoods and the broader food system. The legal action seeks to compel the USDA to restore the deleted content and prevent further removals, emphasizing the indispensable role of accessible climate data in supporting the agricultural sector.

The Trump administration’s recent freeze on USDA funding has left many farmers in financial uncertainty. Programs such as the Rural Energy for America Program (REAP), which provides grants for renewable energy projects, have been halted, affecting farmers who had invested in equipment like solar panels with the expectation of reimbursement. For instance, Hugh Lassen of Intervale Farm in Maine installed solar panels anticipating an $8,000 grant, which is now in jeopardy due to the funding freeze.

Additionally, mass layoffs within the USDA have disrupted essential services and support for the agricultural community. The termination of approximately 1,200 employees from the Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) has jeopardized critical technical assistance for farmers and ranchers, potentially disrupting efforts to mitigate soil erosion and maintain sustainable agricultural practices.

The Trump administration’s tariffs on major trading partners, including China, Canada, and Mexico, have placed significant economic pressure on U.S. farmers. Retaliatory tariffs from these countries are reducing demand for American agricultural exports, leading to lower commodity prices and shrinking farm revenues. Many farmers who previously relied on stable export markets now face financial uncertainty, struggling to find alternative buyers for their crops and livestock. In addition, global competitors, such as Brazil, have stepped in to replace U.S. exports, raising concerns that American farmers may permanently lose key markets.

At the same time, inflationary pressures from tariffs will exacerbate these challenges by driving up the cost of essential inputs such as fertilizer, fuel, and machinery. Higher tariffs on imported goods will contribute to increased costs for farm equipment and supplies, squeezing already thin profit margins.

In America’s most farming-dependent counties, Trump received an average of 77.7% of the vote in November of 2024. Voter regret must be high, as it is with the rising number of Trump supporters who are publicly expressing anger over being laid off by the man they thought would only hurt other people.

As the climate crisis deepens and its impacts on the USA and other countries become more severe annually, the Trump Administration is undertaking an ideological purge aimed at virtually all academics, but especially ones that have anything to do with climate change and social justice. The parallels to Mao’s devastating Cultural Revolution are chilling, and the United States and the world will pay the price.