Independent Initiative Aims to Preserve Climate Data Amidst Federal Cutbacks
In response to substantial reductions in government science and research funding, a collective of former U.S. federal workers has revitalized a previously discontinued climate website. This initiative seeks to maintain a steady flow of crucial climate information, especially as the current administration intensifies its curtailment of publicly funded scientific endeavors.
Experts are increasingly concerned that the United States is relinquishing its prominent position in global climate research. This concern arises from the elimination of approximately 100,000 federal science agency positions and significant cuts to weather and ocean monitoring budgets. However, a determined group of former government employees has secured funding to ensure the nation remains informed about the escalating realities of a warming planet.
The platform, Climate.us, was developed by individuals who previously worked on the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration's (NOAA) Climate.gov website. Its primary goal is to re-establish access to “accurate, accessible, and scientifically rigorous” climate information, thereby raising public awareness about critical issues such as heatwaves, severe storms, and sea-level rise.
The effort to preserve information from the original government website began after its project was dismantled through job terminations and funding cuts in early 2025, shortly after President Donald Trump commenced his second term. President Trump has previously dismissed climate change as a “scam and a hoax.” Climate.gov, which garnered around 15 million page views in 2024 and was experiencing consistent growth, was subsequently redirected to a different NOAA site managed by political appointees perceived as adverse to climate action.
Rebecca Lindsey, managing director of Climate.us, emphasized the importance of their work, stating, “Trusted climate information should not disappear when politics change.” Lindsey informed DW that the popularity of the former Climate.gov site clearly indicated that people in the U.S. “do want unbiased, trustworthy information about climate. They're interested in it. They're concerned about it.”
Expansion of Climate.us and Community Support
Initially launched in 2025 to archive content from the former government site, Climate.us is now expanding to offer new material. This includes news articles, personal narratives, expert blogs, data visualizations, reports on climate indicators, and educational resources for classrooms. Scientists are volunteering their time to verify the accuracy of the content, and the website is sustained by thousands of small donations from both within the U.S. and internationally.
Lindsey, who lost her position at Climate.gov in February 2025, expressed her appreciation for international support. “It's just so heartening to get this outreach from other countries because I'm aware that other nations would have every right to think, well, America, you've shot yourself in the foot,” she commented. The relaunch of Climate.us is part of a broader movement to safeguard access to scientific data and knowledge amidst the Trump administration’s reductions in public science funding.
Jules Barbati-Dajches of the Union of Concerned Scientists warned that these cuts, including a proposed $1.6 billion (€1.464 billion) reduction from NOAA in the upcoming federal budget, risk the U.S. losing “hundreds of years of collective expertise in a variety of areas” and pose a “threat to innovation.”
Impact of Federal Workforce Reductions
The federal workforce has seen an approximate 12% reduction under the current administration, with science agencies accounting for roughly 40% of these losses, according to the Partnership for Public Service. Between September 2024 and February 2026, federal science agencies shed nearly 118,000 employees. Concurrently, grant funding for environmental research and innovation, including studies on how chemicals and heat affect human health, plummeted by 79%.
Brandon Lardy, data director at the Partnership for Public Service, noted that the impact is evident in abruptly canceled contracts and suddenly closed research facilities. This leaves communities vulnerable to issues such as contaminated water and air, extreme weather events, and the spread of infectious diseases carried by insects whose habitats are expanding due to rising temperatures. Lardy added, “That also obviously has impacts on communities and their long-term health and well-being.” Approximately 10,000 of those who departed the government workforce in 2025 held PhDs in STEM or health-related fields.
Barbati-Dajches underscored the importance of specialized expertise, stating, “When I think about sitting down in the dentist chair or boarding a plane, I want someone with the expertise to do their job and to do it well, right? It's the same thing with thousands of experts in the federal government who specialize in environmental toxicants, epidemiology, and meteorology. We need experts in these positions to help keep us safe.”
The Future of Federal Scientists and Scientific Leadership
Rebecca Lindsey, who served as editor of Climate.gov for over a decade before her termination, initially grappled with the loss of health insurance and the uncertainty of her next career move. Despite the stress, she and others felt a strong vocational calling to establish Climate.us. “It was something that we felt really mattered to the country and to the public. And we felt proud of being involved in it,” she explained.
However, Lindsey expressed deep concern for younger scientists, highlighting that certain essential scientific functions, such as regulating the nuclear industry or protecting fisheries, are typically performed by the government and are not profitable for the private sector. She questioned the long-term implications: “What happens when young people say, I can't trust that if I study this thing, that I could go to work for the government and have a job in this field?”
The Partnership for Public Service has observed that some former federal scientists remain unemployed, while others have transitioned to state or local government, or other organizations. A subset is even contemplating leaving the country. A Nature poll indicated that 75% of 1,600 U.S. scientists were considering seeking employment abroad. Lardy, whose parents were lifelong federal workers, remarked, “The brain drain is a real concern. We're hearing reports of scientists in particular leaving to go to Canada or China or the EU, and that obviously is concerning when it comes to the US's ability to be a leader in the scientific space.”
While some pushback has occurred, with federal lawmakers rejecting significant funding cuts to science agencies earlier in the year and the administration reversing a decision to dismantle a deep-sea monitoring system, Lardy cautioned that even with reversals, “it will take generations to fix a lot of the damage that's been done” and to “convince young people that government is a viable and attractive option for them to build their careers.”
Source: Original Article
