Donald Trump’s victory in the 2024 election set in motion a race against time by President Biden to safeguard his environmental legacy in his remaining days as president.

But his administration’s stepped-up pace of climate-related announcements will likely mean little once Trump is inaugurated and the Republican-led Congress is seated in January. Mr. Biden’s most recent climate initiatives are all but certain to be short-lived, mostly thanks to an obscure law that tends to come into play every four years.

That law, the Congressional Review Act, allows Congress to kill any regulation issued by a federal agency in the last 60 legislative days with a simple majority vote in the House and Senate and the signature of the president. 

Since Election Day, the Biden administration has announced final rules that include one to dramatically curb methane emissions and another that bans all future coal mining leases on federal lands. Both rules are expected to be rolled back soon after Trump takes office.

Methane is the second most abundant greenhouse gas, after carbon dioxide, but it traps heat in the atmosphere at 28 times the rate of carbon dioxide, the Environmental Protection Agency has observed. On the upside, methane doesn’t remain in the atmosphere for as long as CO2, so cutting methane emissions can have a much quicker, more dramatic impact on lowering greenhouse gases. Human sources of methane emissions include oil and gas systems, landfills, wastewater treatment facilities and a host of other industrial processes.

On Nov. 12, the Biden administration announced a final rule that will charge oil and natural gas companies a hefty fee if they exceed methane emission limits. It’s an effort to encourage these companies to improve their processes to reduce methane leaks.

The EPA estimates that implementing the methane emissions rule would be akin to taking nearly 8 million gas-powered cars off the road for a year. 

The Biden administration also recently blocked all new coal mining leases on public lands, which would affect new leases in Wyoming and Montana, the source of 40% of the nation’s coal. The Associated Press pointed to government analyses that said ending federal leasing would reduce emissions by the equivalent of 293 million tons of carbon dioxide a year, roughly on par with eliminating emissions from 63 million gas-powered cars.

Existing leases would still allow mining in the region to continue for decades. But coal has been losing ground in recent years, as the U.S. has steadily come to rely more on cheap natural gas and renewable energy sources — and less on coal. 

Republican politicians in Wyoming and Montana denounced the ban, and GOP Sen. John Barrasso of Wyoming said in a statement that he’s ready to work with Trump to reverse the ban and other regulations. 

In Trump’s view, fears about climate change are overblown or premature. He’s called it a “hoax” in the past. He opposes clean energy and EV subsidies and has said what America needs to do is “drill, baby drill” — that is, increase traditional oil and gas production in order to bring down energy prices for Americans. This shouldn’t come as a surprise — in his first term, upon taking office, he overturned 100 environmental rules enacted by President Obama. 

During his presidential campaign, Trump promised business-friendly policies that he claimed would halve energy costs in a year by approving new drilling and slashing red tape. 

Some experts doubt that’ll happen. 

“There is no universe in which decisions by the federal government can cause that extent of a reaction from markets,” Jonathan Elkind, senior research scholar at the Center on Global Energy Policy at Columbia University told CBS News. “The oil markets, they are too big, they are too global, and the president of the United States does not have the capability to exert influence that is as strong as that.”

There are still, however, some Biden climate policies that are likely to be out of Trump’s reach. 

Billions in clean energy investment was set aside in the 2022 climate law, the most significant climate change legislation ever signed. But the key to protecting that funding is making sure the money is spent, or allocated, before Inauguration Day, Jan. 20. 

Once the grant money is spent, Trump and Republicans are highly unlikely to be able to claw it back.

“Legally, any obligated fund is safe,” said Christina DeConcini, director of government affairs at World Resources Institute. “If you listen to incoming administration officials, they are saying that they’re going to go after that. I don’t think they’re going to have a legal leg to stand on if it’s been obligated.”

The EPA says it’s learned over the years that the surest way to protect climate policy is to tie a regulation directly to legislation and funding.

In total, about $643.1 billion, or over 93% of funding available, has been obligated, according to a White House official. Billions remain to be spent under the climate law in the next fiscal year, and some Republicans may want to keep the climate spending in their districts and states.

Trying to take the grant funding back would mean “potentially taking away benefits to communities, both in terms of public health protections, but also economic benefits,” EPA senior adviser for implementation Zealan Hoover told CBS News. 

And these grants are also far from the most expensive line-items in the climate law. The Energy Department announced almost $18 million for projects that bolster recycling programs, launch residential energy efficiency rebate programs and expand bike lanes and pedestrian walkways, among other projects. The Agriculture Department put $256 million toward the Rural Energy Program for America to expand use of wind, solar, geothermal and small hydropower energy. 

These kinds of projects and the grants are likely to be safe through Trump’s second term. 

contributed to this report.

Painful cramps, nausea and vomiting were some of the symptoms some attendees experienced after attending a food festival held to celebrate Southern California’s best restaurants. 

Mark Kapczynski was one of the 80 people who became sick after a norovirus outbreak. 

“It was pretty painful, probably the most painful experience I have ever had,” he said. 

Kapczynski is still recovering from catching the highly contagious stomach bug at a place he never expected. 

“Certainly never thought it was the 101 event — these restaurants are too good couldn’t possibly be that,” he said.   

Kapczynski said he and his wife attended the Los Angeles times 101 Best Restaurants event earlier this month, a food-tasting festival celebrating what the newspaper’s editors rank are the 101 best places to eat in Southern California. 

“We visited Providence, which I mean they are a world-class restaurant serving fresh oysters and clams with different sauces and I ended up having two plates very quickly,” Kapczynski said. 

Kapczynski said he felt bloated immediately after eating the oysters. By the next day, his symptoms got worse. 

“The abdomen pain has just had just had me curled up in a ball and tremendous chills — just couldn’t get comfortable,” he said. 

Kapczynski isn’t the only one who got sick from eating oysters. The LA County Department of Public Health is now investigating a norovirus outbreak. So far, they have identified 80 cases. Emergency room physician Dr. Ali Jamehdor said the illness isn’t a typical stomach bug. 

“Oysters seem to really hit patients hard when they come into the ER they’re very, very ill,” he said. “Vomiting, diarrhea, significant abdominal cramping and it’s all due to a bug called vibrio. It’s a very specific bacteria that’s specific to oysters and causes an illness that hits people very, very hard.”

Providence, one of LA’s most celebrated restaurants said the oysters came from farms near Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada. Health inspectors at the event signed off on all handling and serving regulations. 

“The nature of norovirus is such that it would be undetectable to the vendor, the restaurant or the health inspectors who were onsite given that norovirus does not affect the appearance, odor or flavor of the shellfish,” the restaurant wrote in a statement. 

The California Department of Public Health issued a statewide alert on Canadian oysters 10 days after the event. The warning said the shellfish could make people sick. 

KCAL News reached out to the LA Times but has not heard back yet. The FDA says people infected with the virus can experience symptoms for 12 to 48 hours.

Leaving Israel is easier, Shira Z. Carmel thinks, by saying it’s just for now. But she knows better.

For the Israeli-born singer and an increasing number of relatively well-off Israelis, the Oct. 7, 2023 Hamas attack shattered any sense of safety and along with it, Israel’s founding promise: to be the world’s safe haven for Jews. That day, thousands of Hamas militants blew past the country’s border defenses, killed 1,200 Israelis and dragged 250 more into Gaza in a siege that caught the Israeli army by surprise and stunned a nation that prides itself on its military prowess. This time, during what became known as Israel’s 9/11, the army didn’t come for hours.

Ten days later, a pregnant Carmel, her husband and their toddler boarded a flight to Australia, which was looking for people in her husband’s profession. And they spun the explanation to friends and family as something other than permanent – “relocation” is the easier-to-swallow term – acutely aware of the familial strain and the shame that have shadowed Israelis who leave for good.

“We told them we’re going to get out of the line of fire for awhile,” Carmel said more than a year later from her family’s new home in Melbourne. “It wasn’t a hard decision. But it was very hard to talk to them about it. It was even hard to admit it to ourselves.”

Thousands of Israelis have left the country since Oct. 7, 2023, according to government statistics and immigration tallies released by destination countries such as Canada and Germany. There’s concern about whether it will drive a “brain drain” in sectors like medicine and tech. Migration experts say it’s possible people leaving Israel will surpass the number of immigrants to Israel in 2024, according to Sergio DellaPergola, a statistician and professor emeritus of Hebrew University in Jerusalem.

Thousands of Israelis have opted to pay the financial, emotional and social costs of moving out since the Oct. 7 attack, according to government statistics and families who spoke to The Associated Press in recent months after emigrating to Canada, Spain and Australia.

Israel’s population continues to grow toward 10 million people. But it’s possible that 2024 ends with more Israelis leaving the country than coming in. That’s even as Israel and Hezbollah reached a fragile ceasefire along the border with Lebanon and Israel and Hamas inch toward a pause in Gaza.

Israel’s Central Bureau of Statistics estimated in September that 40,600 Israelis departed long-term over the first seven months of 2024, a 59% increase over the same period a year earlier, when 25,500 people left. Monthly, 2,200 more people departed this year than in 2023, the bureau reported.

The Israeli Ministry of Immigration and Absorption, which does not deal with people leaving, said more than 33,000 people have moved to Israel since the start of the war, about on par with previous years. The interior minister refused to comment for this story, a spokesperson said.

Other clues, too, point to a notable departure of Israelis since the Oct. 7 attacks. Gil Fire, deputy director of Tel Aviv Sourasky Medical Center, said some of its star specialists with fellowship postings of a few years in other countries began to waver about returning.

“Before the war, they always came back and it was not really considered an option to stay. And during the war, we started to see a change,” he said. “They said to us, ‘We will stay another year, maybe two years, maybe more.'”

Fire says it’s “an issue of concern” enough for him to plan in-person visits with these doctors to try to draw them back to Israel.

Michal Harel, who moved with her husband to Toronto in 2019, said that almost immediately after the attacks, the phone began ringing – with other Israelis seeking advice about moving to Canada. On Nov. 23, 2023, the couple set up a website to help Israelis navigate moving, which can cost at least 100,000 Israeli shekels, or about $28,000, Harel and other Israeli relocation experts said.

Not everyone in Israel can just pack up and move overseas. Many of those who have made the move have foreign passports, jobs at multinational corporations or can work remotely. People in Gaza, where local health officials say more than 45,000 people have been killed, have even less choice. Harel reported that the site has received views from 100,000 unique visitors and 5,000 direct contacts in 2024 alone.

Aliya – the Hebrew term for used for immigration, literally the “ascent” of Jews into Israel – has always been part of the country’s plan. But “yerida” – the term used for leaving the country, literally the “descent” of Jews from Israel to the diaspora, emphatically has not.

A sacred trust and a social contract took root in Israeli society. The terms go – or went – like this: Israeli citizens would serve in the military and pay high taxes. In exchange, the army would keep them safe. Meanwhile, it’s every Jew’s obligation to stay, work and fight for Israel’s survival.

“Emigration was a threat, especially in the early years (when) there were problems of nation-building,” said Ori Yehudai, a professor of Israel studies at Ohio State University and the author of “Leaving Zion,” a history of Israeli emigration. “People still feel they have to justify their decision to move.”

Shira Carmel says she has no doubt about her decision. She’d long objected to Netanyahu’s government’s efforts to overhaul the legal system, and was one of the first women to don the blood-red “Handmaid’s Tale” robes that became a fixture of the the anti-government protests of 2023. She was terrified as a new mom, and a pregnant one, during the Hamas attack. This was not the life she wanted.

Meanwhile, Australia beckoned. Carmel’s brother had lived there for two decades. The couple had the equivalent of a green card due to Carmel’s husband’s profession. Basic logic, she says, pointed toward moving. They were able to catch a free flight out on seven hours’ notice.

And yet, Carmel recalls the frenzied hours before the flight out in which she said to her husband in the privacy of their bedroom: “My God, are we really doing this?”

They decided not to decide. They packed lightly. But weeks in Australia became months, and the couple decided to have the baby there. They told their families back in Israel that they were staying “for now.”

“We don’t define it as ‘forever,'” Carmel said on Tuesday. “But we are for sure staying for the foreseeable future.”