Climate.us has emerged to restore and update trusted climate resources after federal site removals, offering public, teacher, and policymaker access to clear, science-vetted information.

After being dismissed from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration in February, Rebecca Lindsey worried the public-facing climate library she helped build over 15 years would disappear. She had served as lead writer, editor, and most recently program manager for Climate.gov, a NOAA site that translated climate research into accessible visuals, explainers, and teaching tools.

Within months, the remaining staff supporting Climate.gov were eliminated and the site was shuttered, according to former team members, in a move officials said complied with an executive order on “restoring gold standard science.” Lindsey said the loss meant teachers, community leaders, and policymakers no longer had a go-to hub for understanding climate science, and federal researchers lost a vital window into the public’s most pressing questions.

By late summer, former team members chose to rebuild independently. The result, Climate.us, launched late last month with a nongovernmental domain and a mission not only to preserve past materials but to keep them current with new visuals, features, and Q&As reviewed by scientists. Lindsey said the team is continually tracking what researchers consider most valuable to explain. In its first two weeks, Climate.us drew about 800,000 page views, compared with roughly 1 million monthly on the legacy site, according to Lindsey.

Climate.us and the broader erosion of public climate information

Since President Donald Trump took office a second time, several of the clearest federal resources on a warming planet have disappeared. The National Climate Assessments, congressionally mandated every four years, vanished last summer. In December, the Environmental Protection Agency removed at least 80 webpages on climate causes, indicators, and impacts. The EPA’s page on the causes of climate change no longer lists human activity as a direct driver and now emphasizes natural processes, a shift experts called misleading. One watchdog described the changes as an “all-out assault on climate information.”

Beyond the federal government

With gaps widening, scientific groups are moving to safeguard data and research outside federal control. Leaders argue responsibility must be shared among civil society, NGOs, and research organizations so that vital datasets are not vulnerable to political shifts.

The American Geophysical Union has launched a global effort to harden environmental datasets against threats such as political interference, convening about 100 experts worldwide. It is also working with the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change to keep U.S. scientists engaged in assessments and, with the American Meteorological Society, has invited manuscripts to continue the momentum that would have supported a sixth National Climate Assessment, aiming to publish a special climate collection across peer-reviewed journals.

Former federal researchers are also rebuilding projects elsewhere. Adam Smith, who led NOAA’s tracking of billion-dollar weather and climate disasters before the program ended last year, has reestablished the effort at Climate Central using the same methods and data. He said the work helps quantify the economic toll of extreme weather for businesses, policymakers, and the public. The project is expanding to document $100 million-plus disasters back to 1980.

Recreating Climate.gov’s public library at Climate.us required fundraising skills the team did not previously need. They crowdsourced and sought philanthropic support, rebuilt broken links, and pursued independent scientific reviews. Some experts declined to be named due to concerns about publicity or retaliation. Lindsey now leads the revived site with three full-time staff, compared with about eight at NOAA, saying it feels like starting over.

Advocates warn that while these stopgaps are essential, nonprofits, universities, and independent teams cannot match the federal government’s reach. Public recognition and trust also pose challenges, and philanthropy can be unpredictable. Climate Central now prominently notes that its disaster-tracking work continues NOAA’s dataset with the same methods and lead scientist to improve clarity and trust.

From rescue to reform

Data advocates say the current moment exposes longstanding weaknesses in U.S. information policy. They argue for stronger laws that require agencies to preserve and provide access to data, along with improved congressional oversight and enforcement. Experts caution that public-facing platforms are only as strong as the behind-the-scenes infrastructure that supports them, which can hinge on a single veteran staffer or decades-old partnerships.

As organizations reinforce the plumbing of environmental data, many no longer assume stable government backing. The concern is global, they note, and it underscores the need to ensure that critical scientific information remains resilient regardless of political winds.

Some Hawaii advocates have raised similar concerns about public transparency and oversight in environmental decisions, as seen when the Red Hill water waste tops 5 billion gallons on Oahu, underscoring how access to reliable data can shape local accountability debates.