Sign In or Create an Account.

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

Culture

The U.S. Open Climate Protest Was Annoying. It Also Worked.

Why I changed my mind about the disruption to the tennis tournament.

A tennis protest.
Heatmap Illustration/Getty Images

For a protest to work, it has to be understood.

By this metric, the protesters who interrupted the women’s singles semifinal of the U.S. Open on Thursday night — including one man who glued his bare feet to the floor of Arthur Ashe stadium — had, at least at first, failed. More than 10 minutes into the protest, even after Coco Gauff and Karolina Muchova had left the court to wait out the interruption, retired tennis legend Chris Evert, commentating for ESPN, wondered what the people yelling wanted. “Maybe they’re drunk,” she mused.

Once the protesters’ purpose (and shirts reading “end fossil fuels”) became clear, I couldn’t help but be confused. This U.S. Open has been a famously miserable experience for players and spectators alike, thanks to stifling temperatures that have driven players to take cold showers mid-match and shove courtside tubes blowing cold air down their shirts. The impacts of climate change on tennis couldn’t be clearer than they already are, I figured. Why force the players and spectators to feel those impacts for longer by interrupting a match?

So I came into work on Friday feeling fully opposed to the protest. “Those shirts are going to do it,” I sarcastically texted a friend. “We fixed climate change, everybody.”

And then I saw the Coco Gauff video.

“I believe in climate change,” Gauff said at a press conference after the match. “I 100% believe there are things we could do better.”

Extinction Rebellion, the group behind the protest, said in a press release they weren’t trying to protest against the sport of tennis or even against the emissions that had brought players and spectators to the tournament — instead, they wanted to bring people’s attention to the urgency of climate change.

Gauff’s reaction proves they succeeded. Before the protest, players had complained, often, about the heat. Daniil Medvedev, winner of the 2021 U.S. Open and third seed in the men’s draw this year, turned to a camera at one point during his match against Andrey Rublev to mutter a warning that a player would die. The weather was top of mind for everyone. But climate change? Up until the Gauff interview, the phrase had barely, if ever, come up.

The protestors were annoying (“kick them out,” spectators chanted as police and medical personnel tried to figure out how to remove the man who had glued his feet to the ground; “[expletive] right off, glue boy,” I texted my friend). But for players like Gauff, who at 19 years old is only just at the start of her career, the threat of climate change is too real to ignore, and far more disturbing than a momentary interruption of play.

“Moments like this are history-defining moments,” Gauff said after the match. “If that’s what they felt they needed to do to get their voices heard, I can’t really get upset at it.”

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

All the Nuclear Workers Are Building Data Centers Now

There has been no new nuclear construction in the U.S. since Vogtle, but the workers are still plenty busy.

A hardhat on AI.
Heatmap Illustration/Getty Images

The Trump administration wants to have 10 new large nuclear reactors under construction by 2030 — an ambitious goal under any circumstances. It looks downright zany, though, when you consider that the workforce that should be driving steel into the ground, pouring concrete, and laying down wires for nuclear plants is instead building and linking up data centers.

This isn’t how it was supposed to be. Thousands of people, from construction laborers to pipefitters to electricians, worked on the two new reactors at the Plant Vogtle in Georgia, which were intended to be the start of a sequence of projects, erecting new Westinghouse AP1000 reactors across Georgia and South Carolina. Instead, years of delays and cost overruns resulted in two long-delayed reactors 35 miles southeast of Augusta, Georgia — and nothing else.

Keep reading...Show less
Blue
Q&A

How California Is Fighting the Battery Backlash

A conversation with Dustin Mulvaney of San Jose State University

Dustin Mulvaney.
Heatmap Illustration

This week’s conversation is a follow up with Dustin Mulvaney, a professor of environmental studies at San Jose State University. As you may recall we spoke with Mulvaney in the immediate aftermath of the Moss Landing battery fire disaster, which occurred near his university’s campus. Mulvaney told us the blaze created a true-blue PR crisis for the energy storage industry in California and predicted it would cause a wave of local moratoria on development. Eight months after our conversation, it’s clear as day how right he was. So I wanted to check back in with him to see how the state’s development landscape looks now and what the future may hold with the Moss Landing dust settled.

Help my readers get a state of play – where are we now in terms of the post-Moss Landing resistance landscape?

Keep reading...Show less
Yellow
Hotspots

A Tough Week for Wind Power and Batteries — But a Good One for Solar

The week’s most important fights around renewable energy.

The United States.
Heatmap Illustration/Getty Images

1. Nantucket, Massachusetts – A federal court for the first time has granted the Trump administration legal permission to rescind permits given to renewable energy projects.

  • This week District Judge Tanya Chutkan – an Obama appointee – ruled that Trump’s Bureau of Ocean Energy Management has the legal latitude to request the withdrawal of permits previously issued to offshore wind projects. Chutkan found that any “regulatory uncertainty” from rescinding a permit would be an “insubstantial” hardship and not enough to stop the court from approving the government’s desires to reconsider issuing it.
  • The ruling was in a case that the Massachusetts town of Nantucket brought against the SouthCoast offshore wind project; SouthCoast developer Ocean Winds said in statements to media after the decision that it harbors “serious concerns” about the ruling but is staying committed to the project through this new layer of review.
  • But it’s important to understand this will have profound implications for other projects up and down the coastline, because the court challenges against other offshore wind projects bear a resemblance to the SouthCoast litigation. This means that project opponents could reach deals with the federal government to “voluntarily remand” permits, technically sending those documents back to the federal government for reconsideration – only for the approvals to get lost in bureaucratic limbo.
  • What I’m watching for: do opponents of land-based solar and wind projects look at this ruling and decide to go after those facilities next?

2. Harvey County, Kansas – The sleeper election result of 2025 happened in the town of Halstead, Kansas, where voters backed a moratorium on battery storage.

Keep reading...Show less
Yellow