You’re out of free articles.
Log in
To continue reading, log in to your account.
Create a Free Account
To unlock more free articles, please create a free account.
Sign In or Create an Account.
By continuing, you agree to the Terms of Service and acknowledge our Privacy Policy
Welcome to Heatmap
Thank you for registering with Heatmap. Climate change is one of the greatest challenges of our lives, a force reshaping our economy, our politics, and our culture. We hope to be your trusted, friendly, and insightful guide to that transformation. Please enjoy your free articles. You can check your profile here .
subscribe to get Unlimited access
Offer for a Heatmap News Unlimited Access subscription; please note that your subscription will renew automatically unless you cancel prior to renewal. Cancellation takes effect at the end of your current billing period. We will let you know in advance of any price changes. Taxes may apply. Offer terms are subject to change.
Subscribe to get unlimited Access
Hey, you are out of free articles but you are only a few clicks away from full access. Subscribe below and take advantage of our introductory offer.
subscribe to get Unlimited access
Offer for a Heatmap News Unlimited Access subscription; please note that your subscription will renew automatically unless you cancel prior to renewal. Cancellation takes effect at the end of your current billing period. We will let you know in advance of any price changes. Taxes may apply. Offer terms are subject to change.
Create Your Account
Please Enter Your Password
Forgot your password?
Please enter the email address you use for your account so we can send you a link to reset your password:
On Biden’s big announcement, Montana’s climate case, and the murder hornet
Current conditions: Temperatures across western states are between 10 and 20 degrees Fahrenheit above seasonal averages • A temple in Thailand collapsed after unrelenting heavy rain • It’s hot and humid on the remote Caribbean island of Sombrero, where a lizard that was facing extinction six years ago has made a remarkable comeback thanks to conservation efforts.
In one of his last major environmental moves before leaving office, President Biden today announced a new climate plan for the United States that includes tougher emissions targets.
All countries under the Paris Agreement are required to submit updated climate plans – or nationally determined contributions (NDC) – by February of next year. While the new goal is an improvement, it is “at the lower bound of what the science demands and yet it is close to the upper bound of what is realistic if nearly every available policy lever were pulled,” said Debbie Weyle, U.S. acting director of the World Resources Institute. “Assertive action by states and cities will be essential to achieving this goal.” The Climate Action Tracker project calculates that the U.S. must cut total emissions by at least 62% below 2005 levels by 2030 to be compatible with a goal of limiting warming to 1.5 degrees Celsius. President-elect Trump is expected to take the U.S. out of the Paris Agreement once again.
The Montana Supreme Court yesterday handed a win to a group of 16 youth climate activists, upholding a lower court’s ruling in the landmark Held V. Montana case that the state was violating residents’ constitutional right to a clean environment by permitting fossil fuel projects without considering the climate consequences. The state had argued that its greenhouse gases were a drop in the bucket compared to global emissions, with negligible effects on the climate, but in a 6-1 ruling, the justices disagreed and affirmed the lower court’s decision. “Montana’s right to a clean and healthful environment and environmental life support system includes a stable climate system,” chief justice Mike McGrath wrote.
Get Heatmap AM directly in your inbox every morning:
The Environmental Protection Agency this week gave the green light for California to enforce its ban on sales of new gas-powered cars by 2035. About a dozen other states, plus some major automakers, adhere to California’s strict vehicle emission standards, so the decision could have broad implications. But it also is likely to be revoked by the incoming Trump administration, and a long court battle could ensue.
A new report from a group of leading climate tech and microgrid development firms examined the feasibility of using off-grid solar and storage to provide clean power for AI data centers. It found solar microgrids would cost nearly the same as using off-grid natural gas turbines, could be built on a shorter timeline as opposed to rolling out new grid connections, and are “enormously scalable.” “We found that there is enough available land in the southwest U.S. alone that is close to roads and gas pipelines to build 1,200 gigawatts of offgrid solar microgrid data center capacity, far more than will be needed for the foreseeable future,” said Zeke Hausfather, lead climate researcher at Stripe. Here’s a look at the varying “time to operation” estimates from the report:
And speaking of data centers, Oklo, a nuclear startup chaired by Open AI’s Sam Altman, has secured a 20-year agreement to supply power to data center operator Switch Inc. Under the deal, Oklo will build small modular reactors that can supply up to 12 gigawatts of electricity and come online by 2030. Caveat: The Financial Timesnoted that the deal “is non-binding and the company’s technology is years from production.”
President-elect Trump’s advisers are telling him to let federally funded critical minerals projects go ahead without environmental reviews, Reutersreported. Nixing the review process currently required under the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) could speed up mining projects and help cut U.S. dependence on China for critical minerals used in clean tech like electric vehicles, but it could also allow developers to ignore climate change and environmental justice considerations.
The invasive “murder hornet” has been eradicated from the U.S.
Karen Ducey/Getty Images
Log in
To continue reading, log in to your account.
Create a Free Account
To unlock more free articles, please create a free account.
And more of this week’s top renewable energy fights across the country.
1. Otsego County, Michigan – The Mitten State is proving just how hard it can be to build a solar project in wooded areas. Especially once Fox News gets involved.
2. Atlantic County, New Jersey – Opponents of offshore wind in Atlantic City are trying to undo an ordinance allowing construction of transmission cables that would connect the Atlantic Shores offshore wind project to the grid.
3. Benton County, Washington – Sorry Scout Clean Energy, but the Yakima Nation is coming for Horse Heaven.
Here’s what else we’re watching right now…
In Connecticut, officials have withdrawn from Vineyard Wind 2 — leading to the project being indefinitely shelved.
In Indiana, Invenergy just got a rejection from Marshall County for special use of agricultural lands.
In Kansas, residents in Dickinson County are filing legal action against county commissioners who approved Enel’s Hope Ridge wind project.
In Kentucky, a solar project was actually approved for once – this time for the East Kentucky Power Cooperative.
In North Carolina, Davidson County is getting a solar moratorium.
In Pennsylvania, the town of Unity rejected a solar project. Elsewhere in the state, the developer of the Newton 1 solar project is appealing their denial.
In South Carolina, a state appeals court has upheld the rejection of a 2,300 acre solar project proposed by Coastal Pine Solar.
In Washington State, Yakima County looks like it’ll keep its solar moratorium in place.
And more of this week’s top policy news around renewables.
1. Trump’s Big Promise – Our nation’s incoming president is now saying he’ll ban all wind projects on Day 1, an expansion of his previous promise to stop only offshore wind.
2. The Big Nuclear Lawsuit – Texas and Utah are suing to kill the Nuclear Regulatory Commission’s authority to license small modular reactors.
3. Biden’s parting words – The Biden administration has finished its long-awaited guidance for the IRA’s tech-neutral electricity credit (which barely changed) and hydrogen production credit.
A conversation with J. Timmons Roberts, executive director of Brown University’s Climate Social Science Network
This week’s interview is with Brown University professor J. Timmons Roberts. Those of you familiar with the fight over offshore wind may not know Roberts by name, but you’re definitely familiar with his work: He and his students have spearheaded some of the most impactful research conducted on anti-offshore wind opposition networks. This work is a must-read for anyone who wants to best understand how the anti-renewables movement functions and why it may be difficult to stop it from winning out.
So with Trump 2.0 on the verge of banning offshore wind outright, I decided to ask Roberts what he thinks developers should be paying attention to at this moment. The following interview has been lightly edited for clarity.
Is the anti-renewables movement a political force the country needs to reckon with?
Absolutely. In my opinion it’s been unfortunate for the environmental groups, the wind development, the government officials, climate scientists – they’ve been unwilling to engage directly with those groups. They want to keep a very positive message talking about the great things that come with wind and solar. And they’ve really left the field open as a result.
I think that as these claims sit there unrefuted and naive people – I don’t mean naive in a negative sense but people who don’t know much about this issue – are only hearing the negative spin about renewables. It’s a big problem.
When you say renewables developers aren’t interacting here – are you telling me the wind industry is just letting these people run roughshod?
I’ve seen no direct refutation in those anti-wind Facebook groups, and there’s very few environmentalists or others. People are quite afraid to go in there.
But even just generally. This vast network you’ve tracked – have you seen a similar kind of counter mobilization on the part of those who want to build these wind farms offshore?
There’s some mobilization. There’s something called the New England for Offshore Wind coalition. There’s some university programs. There’s some other oceanographic groups, things like that.
My observation is that they’re mostly staff organizations and they’re very cautious. They’re trying to work as a coalition. And they’re going as slow as their most cautious member.
As someone who has researched these networks, what are you watching for in the coming year? Under the first year of Trump 2.0?
Yeah I mean, channeling my optimistic and Midwestern dad, my thought is that there may be an overstepping by the Trump administration and by some of these activists. The lack of viable alternative pathways forward and almost anti-climate approaches these groups are now a part of can backfire for them. Folks may say, why would I want to be supportive of your group if you’re basically undermining everything I believe in?
What do you think developers should know about the research you have done into these networks?
I think it's important for deciding bodies and the public, the media and so on, to know who they’re hearing when they hear voices at a public hearing or in a congressional field hearing. Who are the people representing? Whose voice are they advancing?
It’s important for these actors that want to advance action on climate change and renewables to know what strategies and the tactics are being used and also know about the connections.
One of the things you pointed out in your research is that, yes, there are dark money groups involved in this movement and there are outside figures involved, but a lot of this sometimes is just one person posts something to the internet and then another person posts something to the internet.
Does that make things harder when it comes to addressing the anti-renewables movement?
Absolutely. Social media’s really been devastating for developing science and informed, rational public policymaking. It’s so easy to create a conspiracy and false information and very slanted, partial information to shoot holes at something as big as getting us off of fossil fuels.
Our position has developed as we understand that indeed these are not just astro-turf groups created by some far away corporation but there are legitimate concerns – like fishing, where most of it is based on certainty – and then there are these sensationalized claims that drive fears. That fear is real. And it’s unfortunate.
Anything else you’d really like to tell our readers?
I didn’t really choose this topic. I feel like it really got me. It was me and four students sitting in my conference room down the hall and I said, have you heard about this group that just started here in Rhode Island that’s making these claims we should investigate? And students were super excited about it and have really been the leaders.