Scientists Rebuke U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Climate Report as Flawed and Misleading
On July 23, 2025, the DOE released a report challenging the 2009 Endangerment Finding, quickly followed by an EPA proposal to rescind it. Within days, more than 85 scientists issued a 439-page rebuttal, while Carbon Brief flagged over 100 false or misleading claims. VX News highlights how this fight over climate science carries urgent stakes for California, where worsening droughts and wildfires show the dangers are already real.
Editor’s Note: VX News curates critical intersections of science, policy, and community impact. This feature connects the Department of Energy’s recent climate report, the swift scientific rebuttal it sparked, and the implications for California and beyond.
On July 23, 2025, the U.S. Department of Energy’s (DOE) Climate Working Group (CWG) released a 140-page report titled A Critical Review of Impacts of Greenhouse Gas Emissions on the U.S. Climate. Commissioned by the Trump administration and produced in just two months by five researchers handpicked by Energy Secretary Chris Wright, the report sought to undercut the scientific foundation of the 2009 Endangerment Finding, the legal basis for federal regulation of greenhouse gas emissions from vehicles, power plants, and other sources.
Less than a week later, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) formally proposed rescinding the Endangerment Finding. Central to the agency’s case was the DOE CWG’s new analysis, which argued that carbon dioxide–induced warming may be “less damaging economically than commonly believed” and that “excessively aggressive mitigation policies could prove more detrimental than beneficial.”
But scientists swiftly condemned the DOE report as deeply flawed. VX News gives voice to how, within days, more than 85 experts assembled a chapter-by-chapter rebuttal, while independent fact-checkers identified over 100 false or misleading statements in the DOE document.
A Grassroots Rebuttal
The scientific pushback emerged almost instantly. After the DOE report’s release, Texas A&M atmospheric scientist Andrew Dessler asked on social media whether anyone was coordinating a response. No one had—so he took the lead, and within hours, volunteers signed on. More than 85 scientists from the U.S., Europe, Asia, Australia, and Canada contributed, and Rutgers climate scientist Robert Kopp later joined as co-editor.
In a 439-page report, entitled A Critical Review of Impacts of Greenhouse Gas Emissions on the U.S. Climate, the review dismantles the DOE analysis chapter by chapter, concluding that its claims—including the absence of trends in extreme weather, the supposed broad benefits of carbon dioxide, and the dismissal of climate risks—are “either misleading or fundamentally incorrect.”
For Californians, the stakes are evident in the growing toll of drought and wildfire. In a separate document, contributing author Emily Williams underscores how the DOE report’s denial of worsening fire and drought conditions directly contradicts both science and lived experience:
“The DOE CWG report is misleading at best and dangerous at worst. For instance, take the sections on drought and wildfire. The report largely argues that droughts and wildfires haven’t gotten any worse. This is blatantly false. Tell that to the people in Paradise or Altadena in California who lost loved ones to some of the deadliest fires California has seen. Tell that to the farmers and ranchers across the western US who have had their livelihoods threatened by years of drought.”
Throughout the report, Williams points to peer-reviewed evidence showing that human-caused climate change has intensified droughts and fire weather, contributing to larger burned areas across the West. “To ignore the breadth of academic literature on this topic is dangerous,” she added.
Fact-checking the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)
On August 13, 2025, Carbon Brief published an interactive fact-check (updated August 22) drawing on dozens of climate scientists. Breaking the DOE CWG’s 140-page document into sections and marking individual claims as either false (red) or misleading (orange), each flagged statement is paired with commentary and citations from subject-matter experts, many of whom were the original authors of the studies DOE cited. The tool allows readers to:
Jump to specific chapters of the DOE report via a dropdown menu.
Read scientists’ responses line by line, with links to the underlying research.
See how often DOE authors relied on their own prior work or misquoted others.
Download the full set of responses as a PDF for offline reading.
In total, experts identified over 100 false or misleading statements across the DOE document. The visualization makes clear, at a glance, how heavily the report leans on selective evidence while misrepresenting or ignoring a broader body of climate science.
Conclusion
At VX News, our mission is to connect science to the policy debate and to the lived experiences of communities on the front lines. From the wildfires of Paradise and Altadena to the drought-stricken farms of the West, Californians already know that climate change is not an abstract question of economics or politics, but a present danger. The controversy over the DOE report is a reminder that the stakes are not theoretical—they are unfolding in real time, in real places.
Sixteen years after the Endangerment Finding, the research confirming the dangers of greenhouse gas emissions has only grown stronger. As the administration pushes to roll back climate protections, the rapid mobilization of more than 85 experts to produce a 439-page rebuttal in just weeks underscores the urgency—and the stakes—of this debate.
Further Reading
DOE Response Site (Texas A&M)
Full Report + Quotes from Authors
Carbon Brief's Interactive Fact-check
Media Coverage → New York Times + NPR