The nation’s most polluting coal-burning power plant has asked President Trump to exempt it from stricter limits on hazardous air pollution after the administration recently invited companies to apply for presidential pollution waivers by email.

The aging Colstrip power plant in Colstrip, Mont., emits more harmful fine particulate matter pollution, or soot, than any other power plant in the nation, Environmental Protection Agency figures show. A new rule adopted by the Biden administration in 2023 would have compelled the facility — the only coal plant in the country to lack modern pollution controls — to install new equipment.

Now, the Colstrip plant has applied for a two-year exemption to those rules, according to Montana’s congressional delegation, which backed the request.

The new pollution standard “endangers the economic viability of the plant, which if closed, would undermine the region’s electric grid,” Senator Steve Daines and other members of the delegation wrote in a letter sent on Monday to the E.P.A. administrator, Lee Zeldin. “Without Colstrip, consumers would bear the burden of higher energy costs and grid unreliability, and its closure would stymie economic development in the region.”

Health experts noted that the letter didn’t address the health effects of the fine pollution particles. Numerous studies have shown the particles are small enough to penetrate deep into the lungs and enter the bloodstream, where they can travel to the heart and other organs, increasing mortality from cardiovascular and respiratory diseases.

A 2023 study showed that coal-burning power stations, in particular, emit fine particulates containing sulfur dioxide linked with higher mortality than other types of pollution.

This pollution “can be very damaging to young kids in particular, who have developing lungs,” said Robert Merchant, a pulmonologist in Billings, Mont. The delegation’s letter, he said, shows “a complete indifference to the health harms.”

The Colstrip plant’s request for an exemption from stricter pollution rules came after the E.P.A. told companies last month that they could apply for waivers to major clean-air rules by emailing the agency. The E.P.A. pointed to a section of the Clean Air Act that enables the president to temporarily exempt industrial facilities from new rules if the technology required to meet those rules isn’t available, and if it’s in the interest of national security.

The Trump administration has also announced its intention to roll back a slew of rules entirely, which could eventually mean that plants like the one in Colstrip would not have to meet new pollution standards at all.

The move was part of a wider effort by Mr. Zeldin to steer the agency away from its original role of environmental protection and regulation and toward making energy and cars more affordable.

NorthWestern Energy Group and Talen Energy, which operate the plant along with other minority owners, did not immediately respond to comment.

Any exemption granted by the Trump administration is likely to face legal challenges from environmental groups. In drawing up the new rules, the Biden administration had identified technology already available that would allow the Colstrip facility to meet stricter standards, and that had been widely adopted by other coal plants in the country.

The Biden administration also estimated that the new pollution control technology would cost far less to install than the $500 million the Colstrip plant has said it would take.

“These technologies are available,” said Amanda Levin, director of policy analysis at the Natural Resources Defense Council, an environmental advocacy group, “but Colstrip decided not to invest when every other coal plant in the nation did.”

When lightning strikes a tree in the tropics, the whole forest explodes.

“At their most extreme, it kind of looks like a bomb went off,” said Evan Gora, a forest ecologist at the Cary Institute of Ecosystem Studies in Millbrook, N.Y. Dozens of trees around the one that was struck are electrocuted. Within months, a sizable circle of forest can wither away.

Somehow, a single survivor stands, seemingly healthier than ever. A new study by Dr. Gora, published last week in the journal New Phytologist, reveals that some of the biggest trees in a rainforest don’t just survive lightning strikes. They thrive.

The rainforest in Panama’s Barro Colorado Nature Monument is the perfect place to study whether some trees are immune to lightning. It’s home to the Smithsonian Tropical Research Institute and one of the most closely studied tropical forests in the world. Dr. Gora set out to study whether individual trees in the forest benefit from being struck by lightning. And if they did, does that help the population of the species survive at a larger scale?

Early on, he spent much of his time climbing trees, looking for signs of lightning damage. But making critical observations could be painfully inefficient. Dr. Gora would begin climbing one tree, convinced it was the struck trunk, only to get 50 feet up and see he actually wanted to be up the neighboring tree. Honey bees would also swarm Dr. Gora’s eyes and ears.

“Your entire life is just buzzing,” he said. “It’s horrifying.”

Dr. Gora needed a more efficient way to find struck trees, so he and his collaborators developed a method for monitoring lightning strikes and triangulating their electromagnetic signals. The technique led him more quickly to the right tree, which he could assess using a drone.

From 2014 to 2019, the system captured 94 lightning strikes on trees. Dr. Gora and his team visited sites to see which species had been struck. They were looking for dead trees as well as “flashover points,” where leaves are singed as lightning jumps between trees. From there, the canopy dies back, and the tree eventually dies.

Eighty-five species had been struck and seven survived, but one stood out literally and figuratively: Dipteryx oleifera, a towering species that had been struck nine times, including one tree that had been hit twice and seemed more vigorous. D. oleifera stands about 30 percent taller than the rest of the trees and has a crown about 50 percent larger than others, almost as if it is an arboreal lightning rod.

“It seems to have an architecture that is potentially selecting to be struck more often,” Dr. Gora said.

All the struck D. oleifera trees survived lightning strikes, but 64 percent of other species died within two years. Trees surrounding D. oleifera were 48 percent more likely to die after a lightning strike than those around other species. In one notable die-off, a single strike killed 57 trees around D. oleifera “while the central tree is just happy and healthy,” Dr. Gora said. Lightning also blasted parasitic vines off D. oleifera trees.

The clearing of neighboring trees and choking vines meant struck D. oleifera trees had less competition for light, making it easier to grow and produce more seeds. Computer models estimated that getting struck multiple times could extend the life of a D. oleifera tree by almost 300 years.

Before the study, “it seemed impossible that lightning could be a good thing for the trees,” Dr. Gora said. But the evidence suggests that D. oleifera benefits from each jolt.

“Trees are in constant competition with each other, and you just need an edge relative to whatever is surrounding you,” said Gabriel Arellano, a forest ecologist at the University of Michigan who was not involved in the study.

The physical mechanisms that help trees survive intense lightning strikes remain unknown. Different trees could be more conductive or have architectures that escape damage, Dr. Gora suggested.

While the study was only in Panama, similar patterns have been observed in other tropical forests. “It’s remarkably common,” said Adriane Esquivel Muelbert, a forest ecologist at the University of Birmingham in England who had collaborated with Dr. Gora but was not involved in the study. “It’s quite clear when it happens.”

Climate change is set to increase the frequency and severity of thunderstorms in the tropics. Some trees, it seems, may be better equipped for a stormy future than others.