Zeldin and lawmakers who spoke on Tuesday praised the original MATS rule, portraying the 2024 update as an overreach by the Biden administration that imposed undue costs on the fossil fuel industry. (“We’re not eliminating MATS,” Zeldin said. “We’re proposing to revise it.”) But the coal industry and red states fought hard against the implementation of the original rule, experts who spoke to WIRED point out.
“They do not want to have increased mercury pollution hung around their neck,” Julie McNamara, an associate director of policy with the Climate & Energy program at the Union of Concerned Scientists, says. “Mercury is a potent neurotoxin that affects the most vulnerable. When coal plants finally installed pollution controls, we had massive mercury pollution reductions and incredible benefits associated with that. I think that’s why they want to try and keep the mantle of protecting public health and interest, while trying to make it seem like these were just radical amendments.”
The rollbacks are part of a larger attack on the EPA’s ability to regulate carbon dioxide as a pollutant, and part of an administration-wide effort to divorce climate science from policy. Earlier this year, Zeldin said that the agency would look to target the endangerment finding, a key determination made by the EPA in 2009 that defined greenhouse gases as dangerous to public health and welfare. That move—outlined in Project 2025—raised public objections even from fossil fuel industry groups like the American Petroleum Institute and the Edison Electric Institute, which represents utility companies.
Killing the endangerment finding would require clearing a much higher legal bar than rolling back power plant regulations. The proposed rules will be open for public comment, with the agency stating a final rule should be issued by the end of the year; experts who spoke with WIRED say that they expect this latest move to be challenged in court. However, they all emphasized the fact that the proposal is above and beyond even what the first Trump administration attempted to do in eliminating climate regulations in its first term.
“This is a very big deal, that the EPA is attempting to sideline itself,” McNamara says. “This is saying, ‘We do not believe that we should regulate carbon emissions from power plants.’ If you can’t justify regulating power plants, then you can’t justify regulating oil and gas emissions.”
Meanwhile, the planet keeps getting hotter. Figures from Mauna Loa Observatory on Hawaii released quietly by NOAA last week show that May had a monthly average of 430.2 parts per million (ppm), the first time in recorded history that seasonal averages of CO2 exceeded 430 ppm, and 3.5 ppm higher than last year’s May average. This reading comes on the heels of similarly-sobering figures the agency downplayed in April showing the largest-ever jump in atmospheric carbon dioxide concentrations between 2023 and 2024.
“Another year, another record,” Ralph Keeling, director of the Scripps CO2 Program, said in a release on the May numbers. “It’s sad.”
Source link
#EPA #Roll #Emissions #Controls #Power #Plants
![xAI fired an engineer who raised alarms about Grok safety, new lawsuit claims | TechCrunch
A former engineer at Elon Musk’s xAI has filed suit against the company and its parent SpaceX claiming he was fired for raising concerns about AI safety.
Devin Kim, who left xAI in September 2025, filed the suit in a California state court on Tuesday. The complaint comes days before SpaceX is set to join the public markets in what’s shaping up to be the largest IPO in history.
According to the lawsuit, which TechCrunch has viewed, Kim became a prominent voice for AI safety while working on Grok, xAI’s AI chatbot. He allegedly complained repeatedly about xAI’s failure to prioritize safety in Grok’s development, a product that has since come under fire for a range of safety and behavioral issues. In particular, Kim was concerned with the possibility that Grok could foment discrimination and help spread information about weapons of mass destruction.
“Grok, of course, proved Mr. Kim right by engaging in spectacular displays of online hatred and vitriol, with the model likening itself to Hitler (‘MechaHitler’),” the lawsuit reads. “Following the Hitler debacle, Mr. Kim worked to re-evaluate Grok’s political bias and discriminatory tendencies.”
September was my last month at xAI! I joined as one of the first members of the post-training team in 2024 and eventually led research tooling, where we built some of the world’s best systems to accelerate Grok’s development.On my first day, I was at the whiteboard with @ibab…— Devin Kim (@devindkim) October 3, 2025
A few months after Kim departed xAI, Grok made headlines again when the chatbot was used to flood X — Musk’s social media platform that also falls under the xAI umbrella — with nonconsensual sexual imagery.
The lawsuit also positions Kim as a whistleblower who was concerned about xAI’s alleged disregard for AI safety as “unlawful” in areas such as internet regulation, consumer protection and unfair business practices, and arms and explosives regulation, among others.
xAI and SpaceX did not immediately respond to requests for comment.
Kim’s focus on AI safety predates his time at xAI. While working at Scale AI, Kim worked on early safety AI initiatives, like leading a project that produced training data for AI to train systems to detect harmful content and comply with governance policies. Last week, the nonprofit Center for AI Safety, which focuses on AI risks, named Kim as its president.
Interestingly, the lawsuit doesn’t implicate Musk himself as a reason for a lack of safety. Rather, Kim’s lawyers describe Musk as having directed xAI to follow the law and implement appropriate safety and testing processes. Instead the claim targets Kim’s supervisor, xAI co-founder Jimmy Ba — who left the company earlier this year — saying that Ba ignored Musk’s directives and retaliated against Kim for pushing for safeguards, in an effort to “silence his repeated complaints about AI safety and biases.”
The lawsuit portrays Ba as someone who vehemently opposed AI safety measures, allegedly telling Kim at one point “AI will kill us all anyway,” and who was instead driven by a mission to make xAI the first to reach superintelligence.
“In one instance in or around August 2025, Mr. Ba attempted to thwart EU safety regulations during the release of Grok Code 1, misrepresenting aspects of the model in order to avoid legally required testing,” the complaint says. “Mr. Ba indicated that he would rather release an unsafe model than a poor-performing one. Mr. Musk ultimately had to intervene.”
According to the lawsuit, Kim intended to give a presentation of his findings the week of September 15, 2025, but Ba called him into a meeting and told him they should “go [their] separate ways” without providing a satisfactory reason.
TechCrunch has reached out to Ba for comment.
Kim is seeking compensatory and punitive damages, as well as a declaratory judgment that xAI and SpaceX’s conduct was unlawful.
When you purchase through links in our articles, we may earn a small commission. This doesn’t affect our editorial independence.#xAI #fired #engineer #raised #alarms #Grok #safety #lawsuit #claims #TechCrunchai safety,devin kim,Grok,SpaceX,xAI](https://i3.wp.com/techcrunch.com/wp-content/uploads/2026/03/grok-getty.jpg?resize=1200%2C800&ssl=1 "xAI fired an engineer who raised alarms about Grok safety, new lawsuit claims | TechCrunch
A former engineer at Elon Musk’s xAI has filed suit against the company and its parent SpaceX claiming he was fired for raising concerns about AI safety.
Devin Kim, who left xAI in September 2025, filed the suit in a California state court on Tuesday. The complaint comes days before SpaceX is set to join the public markets in what’s shaping up to be the largest IPO in history.
According to the lawsuit, which TechCrunch has viewed, Kim became a prominent voice for AI safety while working on Grok, xAI’s AI chatbot. He allegedly complained repeatedly about xAI’s failure to prioritize safety in Grok’s development, a product that has since come under fire for a range of safety and behavioral issues. In particular, Kim was concerned with the possibility that Grok could foment discrimination and help spread information about weapons of mass destruction.
“Grok, of course, proved Mr. Kim right by engaging in spectacular displays of online hatred and vitriol, with the model likening itself to Hitler (‘MechaHitler’),” the lawsuit reads. “Following the Hitler debacle, Mr. Kim worked to re-evaluate Grok’s political bias and discriminatory tendencies.”
September was my last month at xAI! I joined as one of the first members of the post-training team in 2024 and eventually led research tooling, where we built some of the world’s best systems to accelerate Grok’s development.On my first day, I was at the whiteboard with @ibab…— Devin Kim (@devindkim) October 3, 2025
A few months after Kim departed xAI, Grok made headlines again when the chatbot was used to flood X — Musk’s social media platform that also falls under the xAI umbrella — with nonconsensual sexual imagery.
The lawsuit also positions Kim as a whistleblower who was concerned about xAI’s alleged disregard for AI safety as “unlawful” in areas such as internet regulation, consumer protection and unfair business practices, and arms and explosives regulation, among others.
xAI and SpaceX did not immediately respond to requests for comment.
Kim’s focus on AI safety predates his time at xAI. While working at Scale AI, Kim worked on early safety AI initiatives, like leading a project that produced training data for AI to train systems to detect harmful content and comply with governance policies. Last week, the nonprofit Center for AI Safety, which focuses on AI risks, named Kim as its president.
Interestingly, the lawsuit doesn’t implicate Musk himself as a reason for a lack of safety. Rather, Kim’s lawyers describe Musk as having directed xAI to follow the law and implement appropriate safety and testing processes. Instead the claim targets Kim’s supervisor, xAI co-founder Jimmy Ba — who left the company earlier this year — saying that Ba ignored Musk’s directives and retaliated against Kim for pushing for safeguards, in an effort to “silence his repeated complaints about AI safety and biases.”
The lawsuit portrays Ba as someone who vehemently opposed AI safety measures, allegedly telling Kim at one point “AI will kill us all anyway,” and who was instead driven by a mission to make xAI the first to reach superintelligence.
“In one instance in or around August 2025, Mr. Ba attempted to thwart EU safety regulations during the release of Grok Code 1, misrepresenting aspects of the model in order to avoid legally required testing,” the complaint says. “Mr. Ba indicated that he would rather release an unsafe model than a poor-performing one. Mr. Musk ultimately had to intervene.”
According to the lawsuit, Kim intended to give a presentation of his findings the week of September 15, 2025, but Ba called him into a meeting and told him they should “go [their] separate ways” without providing a satisfactory reason.
TechCrunch has reached out to Ba for comment.
Kim is seeking compensatory and punitive damages, as well as a declaratory judgment that xAI and SpaceX’s conduct was unlawful.
When you purchase through links in our articles, we may earn a small commission. This doesn’t affect our editorial independence.#xAI #fired #engineer #raised #alarms #Grok #safety #lawsuit #claims #TechCrunchai safety,devin kim,Grok,SpaceX,xAI")
Post Comment