Trump is rolling back over 80 environmental regulations. Here are five big changes you might have missed in 2019

President Donald Trump has taken historically unprecedented action to roll back a slew of environmental regulations that take care of air, water, land and public health from climate change and fossil fuel pollution.

The administration has targeted with regard to 85 environmental rules, according to Harvard Law School’s rollback tracker.

Existing environment regulations are meant to check greenhouse gas emissions, protect land and animals from oil and gas drilling and development, as well as limit pollution and toxic overindulgence runoff into the country’s water. The administration views many of them as onerous to fossil fuel companies and other principal industries.

However, the consequences of eliminating these regulations include more premature deaths from pollutants and record levels of climate change-inducing greenhouse gas emissions, according to research from the NYU Law School.

Here are five major environmental rollback excuses of 2019 that highlight the administration’s efforts to loosen restrictions on methane emissions, power plants and automobile tailpipes, as grandly protections for endangered animals and clean water in the U.S.

The Trump administration in August announced plans to significantly weaken regulation on climate-changing methane emissions. If adopted, the superintendence would no longer have to require oil and gas companies to implement technology to monitor and fix methane leaks from facilities and cookings. The rule would also open debate on whether the Environmental Protection Agency can regulate methane as a pollutant.

Methane is unsafe because large amounts of it is escaping from oil and gas sites across the country and accelerating global warming. Methane squares have soared since 2007, with natural gas production as a primary suspect.

The Trump EPA argued that the offer will save the oil and gas industry $17 million to $19 million annually in compliance costs and remove “unnecessary” weigh downs.

By the agency’s calculations, the rollback would increase methane emissions by 370,000 tons over roughly five years. Scientists and environmental recommends called the proposal an “assault” on the environment and a major setback in the fight against climate change.

The EPA in September repealed a noteworthy Obama-era clean water regulation that curbed the amount of pollution and chemicals in the country’s rivers, lakes, series and wetlands.

The repeal allows polluters to discharge toxic substances into waterways without a permit, which could significantly injure the country’s sources of safe drinking water and habitats for wildlife. The Obama-era rule had aimed to protect 60% of the state’s water bodies from contamination and keep drinking water safe for about one-third of the country.

The repeal is a win for some grangers and rural landowners who no longer need a permit to use pesticides and fertilizers that could run off into water or are restricted from some ilks of plowing and planting.

EPA Administrator Andrew Wheeler said the rollback would allow farmers to “spend less opportunity and money determining whether they need a federal permit and more time building infrastructure.” The administration also spars that the repeal would promote economic growth and minimize regulatory uncertainty.

The Trump administration said in August it would change the rules for the Endangered Species Act, making it harder to protect wildlife from damoclean swords of human development and global warming.

The new rules make it easier to take out protections for threatened animals and plants and approve federal agencies to conduct economic assessments when deciding whether to protect a species from things relish construction projects in a critical habitat. The rules also remove tools used by scientists to predict future iniquity to species from climate change.

The administration said the changes would make the legislation more efficient and let up burdens on landowners and companies.

Revealing the cost of protecting wildlife could open new threats to endangered species and territories. Since it was signed into law 45 years ago, the Endangered Species Act has been credited with rescuing species correspondent to the bald eagle, grizzly bear, Florida manatee and humpback whale.

Attorneys general in 17 states father sued the Trump administration over the changes.

The Trump administration in June implemented a rule that last wishes as keep coal-powered plants open longer, replacing an Obama-era climate effort to reduce planet-warming carbon dioxide emissions and continuing the direction’s efforts to ease regulatory burdens for the coal industry.

The so-called Affordable Clean Energy rule gives states profuse power to decide how to control emissions and less authority to the federal government in setting emissions standards. One of the administration’s aspirations is to allow coal power plants a chance to remain in business despite the rise in other forms of energy origination such as natural gas and solar.

In response, 29 cities and states sued the EPA’s replacement of the Obama administration’s Clean Power Contemplate, arguing it extends U.S. dependence on coal power and blocks states from pursuing clean energy production.

The for fear that b if could reach the U.S. Supreme Court, setting up major implications for efforts to mitigate climate change. If the court favors the Trump direction, the rule would weaken the ability of future administrations to regulate pollution from power plants and global warming.

The White House this year also prepared to eliminate an Obama-era regulation in place to reduce automobile emissions that help to global warming. The administration argues that the rollback is necessary for economic and safety reasons, though environmentalists say consumers wish spend billions more in fuel costs and accelerate climate change.

Four of the world’s largest automakers countered in July by striking a deal with California to reduce vehicle emissions. California and 13 other states contract to continue enforcing the stricter rule, a move that could split the country’s auto market and set up a financial trouble for automakers.

Later in September, the administration barred California from setting its own emissions standards, which officials said pleasure give people access to cheaper and safer vehicles. The state has set tougher emissions standards that essentially control the industry to begin unveiling zero-emissions vehicles and battery-electric and hydrogen-powered cars.

California and 22 other states declined to challenge the administration’s decision, setting up a legal fight that could reach the Supreme Court.

WATCH: The economics behind foundry millions and millions of trees