The Trump administration this week publicly dismissed more than 400 scientists and other experts who have started writing the latest national climate assessment report and notified them by email that the scope of the report is being re-evaluated.

The report is stipulated by Congress, and is prepared every four years under the 1990 law. It details the latest science on climate change and also reports on progress in addressing global warming.

Scientists say they fear the Trump administration might try to shut down efforts or attract other authors to write a very different report trying to attack climate science - the path they say will exacerbate disasters in the country amid the warming of humanity to the planet, including more intense heat, barbaric heat waves, barbaric field battles, wild, floods, floods, floods, floods, floods, floods, floods, floods, and rising at sea.

"Climate change puts us all at risk, and we all need this important information to help prepare," said Katharine Hayhoe, a climate scientist at Texas Tech. "With it, the future will become even more dangerous. ”

She noted that despite the legal requirements for assessment, there are no specific requirements for who should write the report or the form to be taken.

“It could end up being a series of long-term myths and false information about climate change,” Hayhoe said. “It could end up being a useless document, not for the purpose of providing American people with the best way to mitigate or adapt to those risks.”

Trump administration officials did not respond to requests for comment.

Participants in the latest study will be released in late 2027 or early 2028 and receive an email informing them that they will be fired.

“Currently, the scope of (report) is being re-evaluated,” e-mail Heidi Roop, Deputy Director of Global Change Research Program Services, United States. “We are now releasing all the roles of current assessment participants.”

It thanks them for their participation and said: “As the plan for assessment is developed, there may be future contributions or opportunities for participation.”

The report is prepared by scientists and experts on voluntary time. They are studying the sixth assessment since the first report was released in 2000.

"The National Climate Assessment is a national treasure," said Costa Samaras, a professor of civil and environmental engineering at Carnegie Mellon University. "It is accessible, supported by the highest level of scientific integrity, and represents the best science for the American people because of how their communities change due to climate change and how they respond. ”

The update to the report takes place at a critical moment as burning fossil fuels and rising greenhouse gases put the earth on track to make the climate warmer and more volatile than humans have experienced. Latest National climate assessmentreleased in 2023, details the latest science on more extreme heat waves, wildfires and other disasters, and says that without deeper emissions and faster adaptive efforts, “severe climate risks to the United States will continue to grow.”

Last year, the United States experienced 27 climate-related disasters, each measuring at least $1 billion in losses - a total of $185 billion, according to the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. Over the past five years, 115 separate activities have cost the community more than $750 billion.

"The national climate assessment helps communities understand how climate affects their population, ecosystems, infrastructure and helps them prepare and adapt to these changes," Samaras said.

He said his team has made good progress in their chapters to take stock of what innovative opportunities the U.S. is reducing greenhouse gas emissions that drive global warming and the country develops industries that help produce clean energy. They have been on board with all the authors – including federal government employees and researchers from academia and nonprofit organizations – and have submitted preliminary drafts for review.

"It's a huge loss," Samaras said. "It's a loss for taxpayers, it's a loss for the community, it's a loss for the environment. Not generating reports basically didn't save us, it's basically didn't save us, maybe it would make us give everything."

Ladd Keith, associate professor of program and associate director of the Thermal Resilience Program at the University of Arizona, also received an email. Keith said he and other contributors were carefully selected to secure a range of scientific expertise and regions.

“If a report is provided to perform Congressional mandates without the expertise of contributors and a rigorous and transparent peer review process, it will further undermine the government’s ability to address the most serious and pressing challenges in our country,” Keith said.

“The hottest decade of the past decade has been the hottest decade, and the United States is experiencing extreme heat, drought, wildfires and flooding growth,” Keith said. “Losing this important source of information will ultimately undermine our nation’s ability to address the impacts of climate change.”

Trump and his administration have repeatedly criticized, undermined, and cut the science about climate change. attempt Supercharged oil and gas drilling And production, the Trump administration has Thousands of government scientists fired and Many grants to support climate research have been canceled.

Federal scientists recently Order not to participate United Nations Intergovernmental Group on Climate Change. In early April, the government Termination of the contract With a consulting company Support technicians In the U.S. Global Change Research Program, the program coordinates the writing of federal research and national climate assessments.

Last year's Conservative Blueprint Project written by Trump's allies in 2025, suggesting the president review and The program's assessment may be rejected.

"The next president should conduct critical analysis and refuse to accept any (U.S. Global Change Research Program) assessments prepared by the Biden administration when needed," the document said.

It believes that national climate assessments and other climate change research programs reduce the scope of presidential decision-making power and federal agencies. It also said that the process should include more different perspectives. Both are topics that were repeatedly published in the first 100 days of the second Trump administration, focusing on revoking environmental regulations and reducing bureaucratic traditional tape festivals in the name of cost savings and greater U.S. energy independence.

“Everything we saw in the first 100 days is causing alarm in terms of climate science,” said Rachel Cleetus, an economist and policy director for scientists’ climate and energy programs. "The motivation is obviously to compare the interests of fossil fuels with the interests of the public. This report is in full public interest, and they are just trying to hide the facts."

Cleetus has been the author of a chapter on how climate change affects the U.S. coast.

Edward Carr, a senior scientist and director of the Center for the Stockholm Institute for Environmental Studies in the United States, said the cancellation of the report is “another effort to remove evidence that can build serious policy debates.”

The Trump administration also recently canceled the writing of a major scientific report Ethnic nature assessmentstarted with the Biden administration.

"The pattern I see in the federal government is just like removing all the ways in which climate change will make it go away, and that's certainly incorrect," said Chris Field, director of the Woods Institute for Environmental Studies at Stanford University.

Field was the author of the Natural Assessment Report before it was put on hold and the author of previous versions of the Climate Assessment.

He said that if the next version of the report is cancelled, the country will lose the latest and authoritative information of the federal government, which has been widely used to provide information to cities, states, planning agencies, flood control agencies, flood control agencies, coastal commissions and agricultural agencies, among others.

Without such information, the country would be less prepared for the ongoing and increasing impacts of climate change, he said.

“It seems like when you drive, the windows are blocked halfway or the headlights aren’t working properly,” Field said. “The ability to make good decisions about the future really depends on the best available information and cut off access to that information, making it harder to get, making life more challenging, uncertain and expensive.”