Sign In or Create an Account.

By continuing, you agree to the Terms of Service and acknowledge our Privacy Policy

Climate

Brazil’s Displacement Fears

On the Biden administration’s carbon removal investments, the climate refugees of Brazil, and more

Wednesday sunrise.
Heatmap Illustration/Getty Images

Current conditions: More storms and possible tornadoes are forecast to hit Texas and the Plains, where millions of people are still without power • Cyclone Remal, the first tropical storm of the season, killed at least 23 people in India and Bangladesh • Brazilian authorities are investigating up to 800 suspected cases of waterborne illness following unprecedented flooding over the past month.

THE TOP FIVE

1. Biden administration invests in carbon removal

The Department of Energy on Tuesday gave $1.2 million to companies competing for a chance to sell carbon removal credits to the federal government. These 24 semifinalists, which were each awarded $50,000, include nine direct air capture projects, seven biomass projects, five enhanced rock weathering projects, and three marine-based projects. Up to 10 of them will be offered federal contracts amounting to $30 million. “The Department of Energy hopes that by selecting 24 companies that have been vetted by government scientists, it’s sending a signal to the private sector that there are at least some projects that are legitimate,” Heatmap’s Emily Pontecorvo writes, referencing struggles in the broader carbon credits marketplace.

2. Brazil floods leave some permanently displaced

Weeks of deadly flooding in Brazil displaced hundreds of thousands of people. Many of them now are — or will become — climate refugees. Residents of the cities devastated by the floodwaters are now rethinking how to live alongside the increasingly unpredictable rains. As climate refugees, they join the survivors of other climate disasters in recent years and the millions more who are expected to follow in their footsteps over the coming decades. “Brazil is not going to be a one-off,” Andrew Harper, a senior official at the U.N. High Commission for Refugees, told The Washington Post. “What we are seeing is the start of something that will become more frequent and more extreme and lead to more people left vulnerable, with no choice but to move to a safer location.”

3. New satellite will study clouds and climate

SpaceX launched the EarthCARE (Earth Cloud, Aerosol, and Radiation Explorer) satellite, a joint project between the European Space Agency and the Japanese Aerospace Exploration Agency, on Tuesday in a mission that will study the impact that clouds have on the climate. The satellite, which has been 20 years in the making, will use four instruments, including radar and imaging systems, to measure clouds’ altitude, structure, and movement. The mission will take place at a relatively low orbit and is expected to last at least three years. Researchers hope the data it collects will lead to improvements both in long-term climate modeling and short-term weather forecasting.

4. Supreme Court to hear San Francisco’s case against the EPA

The Supreme Court will hear a lawsuit brought by the city and county of San Francisco against EPA Clean Water Act discharge regulations. Lawyers representing San Francisco argued in their petition that the federal regulations — which prohibit violations “of any applicable water quality standard” rather than setting numerical pollution limits — are too vague. “These prohibitions effectively tell permit holders nothing more than not to cause ‘too much’ pollution,” the petition said. The EPA argued in response that the requirements are meant to keep permits in line with regional and state discharge standards. “Those standards, in turn, establish specific limits to which petitioner’s discharges must conform,” the EPA’s brief said. In recent years, the conservative Supreme Court has ruled against the EPA in high-profile cases.

5. Poll: Voters favor climate accountability

Almost two-thirds of U.S. voters want oil companies to ”be held legally accountable for their contributions to climate change,” The Guardian reported Tuesday. A poll conducted by consumer advocacy nonprofit Public Citizen and progressive polling firm Data for Progress found that 62% of voters — including 84% of Democrats, 59% of independents and 40% of Republicans — supported the idea. Asked about their stance on “criminal charges being filed against oil and gas companies to hold them accountable for deaths caused by their contributions to climate change,” 49% expressed support and 38% said they were opposed. A growing number of states, counties, and cities are suing major oil companies for climate damages. “These national findings show these cases may be able to earn popular support, particularly in blue jurisdictions,” Grace Adcox, senior climate strategist at Data for Progress, told The Guardian.

THE KICKER

A five-bedroom house in Rodanthe, North Carolina, has become the sixth house along its stretch of seashore to fall into the ocean in the past four years as coastal erosion increasingly threatens homes built near the water.

Yellow

You’re out of free articles.

Subscribe today to experience Heatmap’s expert analysis 
of climate change, clean energy, and sustainability.
To continue reading
Create a free account or sign in to unlock more free articles.
or
Please enter an email address
By continuing, you agree to the Terms of Service and acknowledge our Privacy Policy
Energy

The EPA’s Backdoor Move to Hobble the Carbon Capture Industry

Why killing a government climate database could essentially gut a tax credit

Lee Zeldin.
Heatmap Illustration/Getty Images

The Trump administration’s bid to end an Environmental Protection Agency program may essentially block any company — even an oil firm — from accessing federal subsidies for capturing carbon or producing hydrogen fuel.

On Friday, the Environmental Protection Agency proposed that it would stop collecting and publishing greenhouse gas emissions data from thousands of refineries, power plants, and factories across the country.

Keep reading...Show less
Blue
Adaptation

The ‘Buffer’ That Can Protect a Town from Wildfires

Paradise, California, is snatching up high-risk properties to create a defensive perimeter and prevent the town from burning again.

Homes as a wildfire buffer.
Heatmap Illustration/Getty Images

The 2018 Camp Fire was the deadliest wildfire in California’s history, wiping out 90% of the structures in the mountain town of Paradise and killing at least 85 people in a matter of hours. Investigations afterward found that Paradise’s town planners had ignored warnings of the fire risk to its residents and forgone common-sense preparations that would have saved lives. In the years since, the Camp Fire has consequently become a cautionary tale for similar communities in high-risk wildfire areas — places like Chinese Camp, a small historic landmark in the Sierra Nevada foothills that dramatically burned to the ground last week as part of the nearly 14,000-acre TCU September Lightning Complex.

More recently, Paradise has also become a model for how a town can rebuild wisely after a wildfire. At least some of that is due to the work of Dan Efseaff, the director of the Paradise Recreation and Park District, who has launched a program to identify and acquire some of the highest-risk, hardest-to-access properties in the Camp Fire burn scar. Though he has a limited total operating budget of around $5.5 million and relies heavily on the charity of local property owners (he’s currently in the process of applying for a $15 million grant with a $5 million match for the program) Efseaff has nevertheless managed to build the beginning of a defensible buffer of managed parkland around Paradise that could potentially buy the town time in the case of a future wildfire.

Keep reading...Show less
Spotlight

How the Tax Bill Is Empowering Anti-Renewables Activists

A war of attrition is now turning in opponents’ favor.

Massachusetts and solar panels.
Heatmap Illustration/Library of Congress, Getty Images

A solar developer’s defeat in Massachusetts last week reveals just how much stronger project opponents are on the battlefield after the de facto repeal of the Inflation Reduction Act.

Last week, solar developer PureSky pulled five projects under development around the western Massachusetts town of Shutesbury. PureSky’s facilities had been in the works for years and would together represent what the developer has claimed would be one of the state’s largest solar projects thus far. In a statement, the company laid blame on “broader policy and regulatory headwinds,” including the state’s existing renewables incentives not keeping pace with rising costs and “federal policy updates,” which PureSky said were “making it harder to finance projects like those proposed near Shutesbury.”

Keep reading...Show less
Yellow