Trump contemplating allowing climate satellites to perish in orbit.
In a move that has raised concerns among climate scientists and political experts, President Donald Trump's fiscal year 2026 budget request omits funding for the Orbiting Carbon Observatories (OCO) climate satellites, which threatens to terminate these critical Earth-observing missions and potentially disrupt ongoing climate research.
The White House has also directed NASA to develop plans to terminate the two OCO missions, one attached to the International Space Station and the other a standalone satellite, both of which provide exceptionally high-quality data on atmospheric carbon dioxide that is vital for tracking greenhouse gas emissions and understanding climate change impacts.
Scientific and political experts highlight that ending these missions prematurely would be catastrophic for climate science, impairing capabilities to forecast and manage climate and weather-related disasters. The discontinuation of the satellite could result in a significant loss of data for scientists, political decision-makers, and farmers.
Congress, particularly the Senate and House appropriations committees, has explicitly rejected the Trump administration's proposed Earth science mission cuts in its FY26 budget request and criticized any attempt to withhold already appropriated funds as illegal impoundment. The Senate proposed a budget that preserves funding for Earth Science missions, including OCO, reflecting scientific consensus on their importance to national interests and environmental monitoring.
However, the fiscal year ends on September 30, and Congress is in recess at times, leaving a potential gap in funding for the OCO satellites. NASA is hoping for a coalition of international partners to continue using the devices in orbit, but this may not be enough to compensate for the loss of American data.
The decision to cut funding for climate observations fits into other measures aimed at cutting or suppressing climate science. Since then, Donald Trump has taken a skeptical approach to climate policy, including the withdrawal from the Paris Climate Agreement at the beginning of his term. Climate scientist Michael Mann of the University of Pennsylvania stated that the principle seems to be that if they stop measuring climate change, it will simply disappear from the American consciousness.
Jonathan Overpeck, a climate scientist at the University of Michigan, stated that the observations provided by satellites like the Orbiting Carbon Observatories are crucial for tackling the increasing impacts of climate change worldwide, including in the US. The discontinuation of the satellite's missions could leave a significant gap in climate data collection, potentially hindering efforts to combat climate change.
NASA's OCO satellites provide crucial observations for understanding and combating climate change globally. The discontinuation of the satellite's missions could be interpreted as an attempt to suppress climate science and awareness, a move that experts warn could have far-reaching implications for the future of climate research and the fight against climate change.
- The community policy regarding the fiscal year 2026 budget request omits funding for the Orbiting Carbon Observatories (OCO) climate satellites, which raises concerns among climate scientists and environmental-science experts about the potential loss of vital Earth-observing missions and data relevant to climate-change research.
- The employment policy within the White House has directed NASA to develop plans to terminate the OCO missions, leaving climate scientists and political decision-makers worried about the impact on ongoing climate research and the subsequent management of climate and weather-related disasters.
- With the Senate proposing a budget that preserves funding for Earth Science missions, including OCO, the environmental-science and policy-and-legislation spheres are closely monitoring the situation, as any funding gap before September 30 could result in the discontinuation of OCO satellites and a significant loss of critical data for scientists, general-news enthusiasts, and farmers.
