National Environmental Museum to Close as Visitor Numbers Fail to Meet Expectations

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has announced the closure of the National Environmental Museum and Education Center, a project launched during the Biden administration, citing minimal visitor engagement and significant operational costs.

Background of the Museum

The museum, located within the William Jefferson Clinton Federal Building in Washington, D.C., opened its doors in May 2024. At the time, it was established to showcase the country’s environmental protection efforts and educate the public on related issues.

Details on Visitor Statistics

According to the EPA, the facility attracted less than 2,000 external visitors from May 2024 to February 2025. Despite being free for visitors, the operating costs averaged approximately $315 per external visitor, leading to concerns about its sustainability.

Financial Implications

Building the museum required an investment of around $4 million taxpayer dollars, complying with Smithsonian standards. Annual operational costs are reported to exceed $600,000, which consists of various expenses including:

• $123,766 in cleaning and landscaping
• $37,899 for audio-visual maintenance
• $54,292 in artifact storage
• $8,900 for magnetometer maintenance
• $46,000 for x-ray maintenance
• $123,000 in utilities
• $207,326 for security personnel

Statements from Leadership

Lee Zeldin, the current EPA Administrator, referred to the museum as a “pet project” of the Biden administration, emphasizing that it failed to present a balanced view of environmental efforts across different political administrations. He stated, “The Biden administration chose to curate the museum with a massive gap of recognition between 2014 and January 20, 2021,” highlighting a perceived bias in the exhibits.

In contrast, former EPA Administrator Michael S. Regan described the museum as an essential record of the nation’s environmental progress, emphasizing its educational value during the ribbon-cutting ceremony last year.

Future of Environmental Education

The decision to close the museum has been welcomed by some who view it as a prudent use of taxpayer dollars. The Functional Government Initiative remarked that the funds could instead be redirected toward the EPA’s primary mission: protecting public health and the environment. Rod Law, Communications Director for the initiative, criticized the museum as a misallocation of resources, stating, “There is something ironic about the EPA wasting money on a museum about itself when it is supposed to be focused on toxic waste.”

The Bigger Picture

Since assuming office, Administrator Zeldin has initiated various cost-cutting measures at the EPA, including terminating grants previously allocated by the Biden administration for climate and clean energy projects. The closure of the museum aligns with a broader effort to streamline operations within federal agencies.

As the EPA navigates its future, it remains to be seen how it will balance public engagement with fiscal responsibility in promoting environmental education.