The White House and the Freezing of NASA's Climate Missions

The White House has issued instructions to NASA to terminate two major space missions focused on climate change.

These instructions include plans to end the Orbiting Carbon Observatory (OCO) missions, which collect vital and widely used data. This data provides oil and gas companies and farmers with detailed information on carbon dioxide distribution and its potential impact on crop health.

Orbiting Carbon Observatory (OCO) Missions

These missions include Orbiting Carbon Observatory 2 (OCO-2), launched on July 2, 2014, and Orbiting Carbon Observatory 3 (OCO-3), installed on the International Space Station on May 4, 2019. Both missions aim to provide high-precision global measurements of atmospheric carbon dioxide, helping scientists identify the sources and emissions of this key greenhouse gas. For more information, you can visit the official NASA website.

One of the observatories is attached to the International Space Station, while the other operates as an independent satellite. If the mission is terminated, the independent satellite will face its final fate by burning up in the atmosphere.

“A giant telescope inside an astronomical observatory” — Source: Pixabay. License: CC0.

The Controversy Over Terminating the Missions

It can be speculated that the Trump administration's motives for terminating these missions are linked to President Donald Trump's strong denial of climate change and his administration's efforts to deal a potentially existential blow to the agency's Science Directorate. The observatories were expected to continue operating for many years to come, according to scientists working on them. A 2023 NASA assessment confirmed that the data they provided was «of exceptionally high quality».

These observatories provide detailed carbon dioxide measurements across different locations, allowing scientists to gain an accurate view of how human activities impact greenhouse gas emissions. David Crisp, a former NASA employee who worked on the OCO instruments, reported that current staff contacted him, and asked him «very sharp questions», indicating that «the only thing that would drive these questions is that someone asked them to put together a termination plan».

Crisp believes that «there is no economic rationale for terminating NASA missions that provide incredibly valuable data», explaining that the cost of maintaining the two observatories is only $15 million annually, a tiny fraction of the agency's $25.4 billion budget. Other scientists who used data from these missions were also questioned about the termination of the missions.

The two observatories are among dozens of space missions facing existential threats in the proposed administration's budget for fiscal year 2026. Countless scientists have expressed outrage at this proposal, arguing that it could lead to the termination of United States leadership in space.

“Statue of Liberty” — Source: Pixabay. License: CC0.

Legislative Response and the Future of Space Science

Lawmakers have since put forward a counter-proposal that would keep NASA's budget roughly in line with this year's budget. Senator Chris Van Hollen (D-MD) stated in a July statement, reported by Bloomberg, that they «rejected cuts that would have gutted NASA science by 47 percent and would have ended 55 working and planned missions». Lawmakers say that canceling Earth observation missions to pursue an anti-science agenda could be a grave mistake, and perhaps even violate laws by exceeding allocated budgets. Representative Zoe Lofgren (D-CA), a member of the House Science, Space, and Technology Committee, clarified that such cuts would be disastrous and severely harm our ability to predict, manage, and respond to severe weather and climate disasters. She added that the Trump administration is imposing the proposed cuts in its fiscal year 2026 budget on already allocated 2025 budget funds, and this «is illegal» in itself.