Trump administration moves to shut down NASA carbon monitoring missions
In a controversial move that has alarmed climate scientists and researchers worldwide, the Trump administration has proposed ending funding for NASA’s most advanced carbon monitoring missions—just as climate data becomes more crucial than ever.
The fiscal year 2026 federal budget put forward by the administration eliminates financial support for two pivotal projects: the Orbiting Carbon Observatory-2 (OCO-2) and its successor instrument, OCO-3, which is currently mounted on the International Space Station. These missions, known for delivering the most precise, space-based carbon dioxide measurements, have helped reshape global understanding of greenhouse gas emissions.
According to NASA officials, the missions are “beyond their primary lifespan,” but leading climate scientists strongly disagree with the proposed defunding. They argue that ending these programs is akin to turning off the world’s most sensitive alarm system just as the fire begins to rage.
“These satellites are still in excellent health and continue to deliver invaluable data on Earth’s carbon cycle,” said David Crisp, the retired NASA scientist who led both OCO missions. “If they’re shut down now, the world will lose its best tools for tracking CO₂ emissions.”
Satellites That See the Invisible
Launched in 2014, OCO-2 was designed to study carbon dioxide concentrations across the planet with unprecedented resolution. Its follow-up, OCO-3, launched in 2019, took this a step further by adding the capability to monitor plant health and photosynthesis using a phenomenon called solar-induced fluorescence—the faint “glow” that plants emit during photosynthesis.
Together, these instruments have tracked everything from carbon emissions in megacities to the Amazon rainforest’s troubling shift from carbon sink to carbon source. Their data has helped identify hotspots of CO₂ pollution and monitor how vegetation responds to droughts, deforestation, and climate change.
“We’ve never had this level of detail from space before,” said Jonathan Overpeck, a climate scientist and dean at the University of Michigan. “Losing these eyes in the sky now is extremely shortsighted.”
A Political Flashpoint
This isn’t the first time climate science has become entangled in U.S. politics. The Trump administration has long been skeptical of climate change initiatives and previously rolled back environmental regulations, exited the Paris Agreement (later rejoined by President Biden), and cut funding to climate-related programs.
This latest move to eliminate carbon-monitoring missions has sparked concern both within the U.S. and abroad. Climate experts argue that the United States, as one of the world’s largest polluters, has a responsibility to maintain its scientific leadership in tracking emissions—not withdraw from it.
The House of Representatives has signaled agreement with the administration’s budget proposal, but the Senate has shown interest in preserving the missions. With Congress now on recess, the future of these programs may hinge on either a last-minute stopgap measure or intense political negotiations in September.
Meanwhile, legal experts warn that defunding missions that still have money appropriated for them may cross legal lines. Congressional Democrats have hinted at possible legal action if the shutdown proceeds without due process.
Scientists Push for Alternatives
With the funding clock ticking down to September 30, scientists and mission supporters are exploring ways to keep the satellites operational. NASA has issued a call for external proposals—opening the door for international partnerships, private sector involvement, or academic collaborations to step in and manage OCO-3.
“This data doesn’t just benefit the U.S.,” said Michael Mann, a prominent climatologist. “The global climate community depends on these readings to assess how well countries are keeping their emissions promises. It’s a critical accountability tool.”
Transferring control of a space-based instrument, however, is no simple matter. There are logistical, legal, and diplomatic hurdles to overcome—especially if the transfer crosses national boundaries.
For now, NASA will continue to operate the missions through the end of the fiscal year. But without renewed funding or a successful external partnership, the satellites may go dark.
Global Ramifications
Ending the OCO missions doesn’t just affect scientists—it could weaken global efforts to combat climate change. Data from OCO-2 and OCO-3 has been used in international climate reports, national emissions verification, and food security assessments.
The instruments have helped detect subtle shifts in crop productivity, forecast droughts, and even track carbon release from wildfires—all vital for planning and adaptation.
“This decision could have a ripple effect far beyond Washington,” said Crisp. “It’s not just a blow to science—it’s a blow to climate action, public safety, and global cooperation.”
While other space agencies, such as those in Europe and Japan, also operate carbon-monitoring satellites, none match the precision and frequency of data that NASA’s missions provide. And with the climate crisis accelerating, redundancy in data gathering isn’t a luxury—it’s a necessity.
Conclusion
As the Trump administration moves to terminate NASA’s premier carbon-monitoring missions, the global scientific community faces a critical loss. The decision has reignited debates over the role of science in public policy, the politicization of climate data, and the future of U.S. leadership in environmental research.
With just weeks left before funding runs out, the fate of the Orbiting Carbon Observatories hangs in the balance. What is clear, however, is that silencing these tools at a time of intensifying climate challenges would not just set back science—it could set back humanity’s fight for a livable future.
