Trump’s administration is seeking to end two of NASA’s most advanced climate-monitoring missions: the Orbiting Carbon Observatory (OCO)-2 and OCO-3. The move has sparked strong concerns among scientists, lawmakers, and environmental advocates. The instruments (a free-flying satellite launched in 2014 and an experiment mounted on the International Space Station in 2019) provide the most precise global carbon dioxide measures ever obtained. They also detect the subtle glow of photosynthesis in plants, helping experts monitor drought, assess crop health, and anticipate potential food shortages that could lead to unrest.
The administration’s fiscal year 2026 budget proposal cuts all funding for both missions, which NASA has acknowledged are “beyond their prime mission” yet still fully operational. While this phrase may imply that the missions are obsolete, scientists strongly disagree. In 2023, NASA conducted a formal review of the missions and rated their scientific value as “exceptionally high.” According to David Crisp (a retired NASA scientist who led their development), the instruments are "more sensitive and accurate than any other systems in the world, operating or planned."
The OCO satellites have significantly advanced climate science. Data from these missions has revealed that the Amazon rainforest emits more CO₂ than it absorbs, while boreal forests in Canada, Russia, and regions where permafrost is warming serve as net carbon absorbers. This kind of high-resolution data is critical for verifying international emission reduction efforts, tracking deforestation, and improving climate models. However, if the OCO-2 satellite is decommissioned, it will be intentionally deorbited and destroyed in Earth's atmosphere, cutting off a unique source of environmental intelligence.
It is well known that the Trump administration has targeted environmental projects for cuts, and this is just one example. Similarly, it is moving to end the $7 billion Solar for All program just as it begins delivering affordable solar power to nearly one million low-income families nationwide. Administered by the EPA, the program funds no-cost or low-cost solar and battery installations that lower electricity bills and strengthen grid resilience. Groups like the Georgia Bright Coalition, backed by a $156 million grant, are expanding solar access in the Southeast. However, the EPA is reportedly preparing to terminate funding for all 60 program awardees: a move critics view as part of broader efforts to dismantle climate initiatives from the Biden era.
Budget Cuts and Political Pushback
The termination plans are part of a broader overhaul of NASA’s Earth science portfolio under the Trump administration. The FY26 budget proposes significant cuts to the division, potentially eliminating more than 50 current or planned Earth observation missions, many focused on monitoring environmental changes from space. Critics argue that this reflects President Donald Trump’s history of skepticism toward climate science and his tendency to reduce or eliminate federal climate research. Michael Mann, a climate scientist at Pennsylvania State University, criticized the approach: “The principle seems to be that if we stop measuring climate change, it will just disappear from the American consciousness.”
The future of the OCO missions is now in the hands of lawmakers on Capitol Hill. The House version of the budget aligns with the president’s request to eliminate funding, while the Senate’s version preserves it. With Congress currently in recess, it is uncertain whether a final budget will be passed before the new fiscal year begins on October 1. If no budget is approved, Congress could pass a continuing resolution to maintain current funding levels, though some lawmakers warn that the administration might still delay or withhold funds.
Senator Chris Van Hollen has backed a counter-budget designed to maintain NASA’s scientific missions and has warned against the “politically motivated” dismantling of dozens of programs. Representative Zoe Lofgren has raised legal concerns, noting that canceling missions already funded in the fiscal year 2025 budget could violate federal budget law. Democratic members of Congress have formally warned Acting NASA Administrator Sean Duffy that terminating missions or impounding funds already appropriated by Congress would constitute an illegal act.
Rescue Efforts and Risks to National Preparedness
While political negotiations continue, Crisp and other advocates are exploring backup plans to ensure the satellites remain operational. They are reaching out to Japan, European partners, and private donors who might provide funding for the OCO-3 instrument on the International Space Station. NASA is accepting outside proposals until August 29. However, handing control of U.S. satellites to foreign partners presents legal challenges, and transferring responsibility to private entities is generally considered an inadequate substitute for federally supported operations. "It's a really bad idea to push it off onto private industry or donors," said Crisp.
Operating both satellites costs approximately $15 million per year, a fraction of NASA’s $25.4 billion budget. Scientists argue that the benefits, from improving climate predictions to enhancing food security, far outweigh the expense. Shutting down the OCO missions would mean losing crucial measurements and degrading the nation’s ability to anticipate extreme weather events and respond to climate-driven disasters such as wildfires, floods, hurricanes, and droughts. Experts warn that with climate change accelerating and natural disasters becoming more frequent and severe, the loss of these satellites would leave the United States less prepared, less informed, and weaker in its position as a global leader in climate science. As Crisp put it, “We’re learning so much about this rapidly changing planet. It makes no sense to turn off the very tools that are helping us understand it.”
Contact us to continue the discussion, or to learn more about ClearBlue's Market Intelligence offerings, delivered via Vantage, our carbon intelligence platform.