More than 85 scientists have published a lengthy joint critique of a recent Energy Department report that downplayed the effects of climate change, calling it riddled with “pervasive problems.”

“It’s full of omissions. It’s full of simple errors. It’s full of cherry-picking citations,” said Andrew Dessler, professor of atmospheric science at Texas A&M University and lead author of the new analysis totaling more than 450 pages.

The Trump administration report, published at the end of July, disputed the link between global warming and more severe, frequent extreme weather events and argued that a rising level of carbon dioxide helps crops grow. Its five authors, researchers who question the scientific consensus on climate change, were chosen by Energy Secretary Chris Wright to form an agency climate working group.

“Rather than engaging with the full body of climate science,” the report “highlights isolated findings that, when removed from context, give the misleading impression that rising CO2 levels are broadly beneficial,” according to Becca Neumann, an associate professor of civil and environmental engineering at the University of Washington who contributed to the critique.

The 141-page Energy Department report appeared almost in tandem with the Environmental Protection Agency’s proposal to rescind the 2009 endangerment finding — the bedrock of many U.S. greenhouse gas regulations. The EPA’s proposed rule cites a draft of the report multiple times.

Compiling the publication took four months, a faster and less onerous process than what formal scientific reviews go through, the authors of the new analysis write. Comprehensive reports generally take several years to produce, involving hundreds of experts, thousands of source studies and multiple rounds of public review — as spelled out in a Office of Management and Budget rule governing Highly Influential Scientific Assessments.

The Energy Department’s goal is for the report to promote “open and transparent dialogue around climate science,” said Ben Dietderich, the agency’s press secretary and chief spokesperson.

Two authors of the report said they welcome the response it has provoked. Steven Koonin, a senior fellow at Stanford University’s Hoover Institution, said he hadn’t yet read the scientists’ response in detail, but “it looks to be exactly the kind of discussion I’d hope the CWG (Energy’s Climate Working Group) report would catalyze.”

Judith Curry, a professor emerita at Georgia Tech, in a blog post called the critique a “laudable effort,” but said her initial view was that it “didn’t land any strong punches” on her team’s report.

After releasing the report on July 29, the Energy Department opened it to public comment for a period ending Tuesday. Dessler said he and his collaborators have submitted their critique. Agency officials expect to review and engage with substantive comments, Dietderich said. EPA’s proposal to revoke the endangerment finding is open to comment through Sept. 22 and has received nearly 80,000 responses so far.

_____

©2025 Bloomberg L.P. Visit bloomberg.com. Distributed by Tribune Content Agency, LLC.