Former U.S. Environmental Protection Agency officials are condemning the agency’s new leadership for trying to claw back billions from the Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund, calling waste claims the current administrator, Lee Zeldin, lobbed a “smokescreen” to justify dismantling climate programs the Trump administration opposes.
At the heart of the dispute is the Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund (GGRF), established under the Inflation Reduction Act to fast-track deployment of clean energy technologies and reduce greenhouse gas emissions, particularly in low-income and disadvantaged communities.
Its three main components include the National Clean Investment Fund, with $14 billion in competitive grants to attract private financing for climate projects, the Clean Communities Investment Accelerator that provides $6 billion to community lenders, ensuring clean energy funding reaches low-income and underserved areas and the $7 billion Solar for All program for expanding solar access, lowering energy costs and making renewable power affordable.
On Feb. 12, Zeldin posted a video message on X, saying he was taking immediate action to claw back GGRF funds. Calling it reckless spending, Zeldin called for his office to cancel its agreement with the bank that was holding the grant money, cutting off the mechanism put in place for disbursement of funds. Zeldin claimed the grants were rushed out with “no real accountability” and cited “hidden-camera video” from the right-wing group Project Veritas that allegedly showed mismanagement.
Former high-level agency officials say that’s not true.
The Treasury Department has long relied on private banks as financial agents, a practice dating back to the 1800s, said Zealan Hoover, EPA’s former director of implementation. In an interview with Inside Climate News, he said that Citibank was chosen for the Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund because it was the best fit for handling the program’s financial structure.
“The relationship with Citibank is between the Treasury and Citibank,” he said, emphasizing that the EPA partnered with the Treasury Department to ensure proper oversight. Any assertions that the agency had never done this before, he added, are “a bit misleading.” Congress specifically directed the EPA to fund nonprofit financing institutions that could leverage private capital.
Hoover said EPA has the authority to freeze transactions at Citibank if fraud exists but pointed out that no such notice has been issued by the new administration. “The fact that they have not issued such a notice to Citibank itself calls the bluff here. They don’t have evidence of fraud,” he said, describing the move as part of a broader effort to dismantle programs under the guise of accountability.
The money in question had already moved into grantees’ accounts, Hoover said, adding that Zeldin was trying to claw back money that was legally disbursed.
“They’ve not substantiated any allegations of fraud,” he said.
David Cash, a former EPA regional administrator for New England, dismissed the administration’s move as reckless, emphasizing that the funds were already working in communities.
“All $20 billion is already out of the Treasury and in the hands of lending institutions,” Cash said. “What they’re trying to do is claw back money that has already started flowing into clean energy investments. That’s different from freezing funds that are still in federal accounts.”
By April 2024, recipients of the $20 billion from the National Clean Investment Fund and the Clean Communities Investment Accelerator had already been selected. The funds are meant to finance solar installations, energy-efficient retrofits and small-business sustainability upgrades.
Some of the most significant investments went into the agriculture sector, where energy costs and efficiency are critical to economic survival, said Meg McCollister, a former regional administrator for Iowa, Kansas, Missouri and Nebraska, calling it a landmark moment for rural communities.
“We had a $307 million award that went to the Nebraska Department of Energy and Environment,” McCollister said. “That was the largest direct investment in climate-smart agriculture in the agency’s history. And Gov. Jim Pillen celebrated it with us.” Pillen is a Republican.
She rejected the notion that GGRF was a partisan initiative, arguing that funding sustainable agriculture isn’t about politics but about securing the country’s food supply.
“We’re talking about an investment in the people who feed this country. This is not about making a political investment. It’s about making an investment in families and communities and the people who feed us.”
“This is part of a broader attack on climate and energy funding.”
— David Cash, former EPA regional administrator
“This was one of the most rigorous funding processes I’ve ever been involved in,” Cash said. “The Inflation Reduction Act mandated this program, and it went through an intense public comment period. Lawmakers, state and local governments, the clean energy sector and the finance industry all weighed in. It was built to be as effective as possible in getting dollars to communities that need them most.”
Because these grants were designed to leverage private capital, Cash said, the $20 billion in public funding was expected to attract more than $100 billion in private investment, multiplying its impact across industries.
So why kill it? Cash offered the answer. “This is a direct threat to the fossil fuel industry,” he said. “This program reduces reliance on oil and gas, strengthens energy security and lowers costs for working families. That’s why they want it gone.”
Both Hoover and Cash agreed that the attack on the Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund is not happening in isolation.
“This is part of a broader attack on climate and energy funding,” Cash said. “EPA, the Department of Energy, the Department of Transportation—they’re all being hit with similar freezes and clawbacks.”
“I don’t think legally they can claw it back,” Cash said. “But that’s not stopping them from trying.”
About This Story
Perhaps you noticed: This story, like all the news we publish, is free to read. That’s because Inside Climate News is a 501c3 nonprofit organization. We do not charge a subscription fee, lock our news behind a paywall, or clutter our website with ads. We make our news on climate and the environment freely available to you and anyone who wants it.
That’s not all. We also share our news for free with scores of other media organizations around the country. Many of them can’t afford to do environmental journalism of their own. We’ve built bureaus from coast to coast to report local stories, collaborate with local newsrooms and co-publish articles so that this vital work is shared as widely as possible.
Two of us launched ICN in 2007. Six years later we earned a Pulitzer Prize for National Reporting, and now we run the oldest and largest dedicated climate newsroom in the nation. We tell the story in all its complexity. We hold polluters accountable. We expose environmental injustice. We debunk misinformation. We scrutinize solutions and inspire action.
Donations from readers like you fund every aspect of what we do. If you don’t already, will you support our ongoing work, our reporting on the biggest crisis facing our planet, and help us reach even more readers in more places?
Please take a moment to make a tax-deductible donation. Every one of them makes a difference.
Thank you,
Aman Azhar
Reporter, Washington, D.C.
Aman Azhar is a Washington, D.C.-based journalist who covers environmental justice for Inside Climate News with focus on Baltimore-Maryland area. He has previously worked as a broadcast journalist and multimedia producer for the BBC World Service, VOA News and other international news organizations, reporting from London, Islamabad, the United Arab Emirates and New York. He holds a graduate degree in Anthropology of Media from University of London’s School of Oriental and African Studies (SOAS) and an MA in Political Science from the University of the Punjab, and is the recipient of the Chevening scholarship from the UK government and an academic scholarship for graduate studies from the Australian government.
