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:
Experts explain what you can do about the smoke engulfing the East Coast and Midwest.
Canadian wildfire smoke has descended upon large swaths of the Midwest and Eastern United States this week, and as of publication tens of millions of Americans are living under air quality alerts warning them not to go outside. As my colleague Jeva Lange writes, the air in New York City today is reminiscent of a time before the Clean Air Act existed.
Wildfires, for the most part, have historically been the purview of the West; East Coasters, accustomed to hurricanes and blizzards, have mostly managed to avoid the fallout from forest fires. That’s not quite so true anymore, and this week’s smoke is a likely preview of how things will work in the future. So how should people react when smoke makes its way to their cities?
To find out, I called up two doctors from Harvard’s T.H. Chan School of Public Health: Francesca Dominici, professor of biostatistics, population, and data science; and Kimberly Humphrey, an emergency physician and a fellow at the school’s Center for Climate, Health, and the Global Environment. I spoke separately to Dominici and Humphrey; our conversations have been combined and edited for length and clarity.
Dominici: I think the way to think about it is not to be overly panicking, but maybe it’s a day to not spend hours outside exercising. For people that have compromised immune systems or existing respiratory or cardiovascular diseases, it would be good to limit outdoor exposure as much as possible. So don't panic but be cautious.
Humphrey: Smoke from wildfires is a complex mixture of things. The thing about wildfires is they can burn anything. If a house is burning, for example, you have really complex mixtures of whatever is in that house that’s going into the air.
The one that we really worry about is the fine particles, which are known as PM 2.5 (i.e. particles smaller than 2.5 micrometers). They’re very little particles that people breathe in which have really significant impacts on heart and lung function, particularly in people who have chronic health conditions. But the impacts are still significant for people who are healthy previously and have no underlying health problems. It can cause coughing, wheezing, difficulty breathing, eye irritation, and short-term issues with lung function, even in people who don’t have any previous problems with their lungs.
Dominici: It’s not like walking by, for example, a construction site. You can see that dust, and those are not small particles. Those are coarse particles that make you cough or sneeze or bring tears to your eyes. That’s actually good, because you’re basically filtering them out. But these small particles, you don’t feel them. They penetrate very deep into the lungs, and then they cause inflammation that makes our immune response less effective.
Dominici: We know that these exposures to high-level fine particulate matter have both an immediate effect and a very acute effect. So we see an increase in, for example, hospital admissions, which go up the same day and the day after. But there have also been lots of studies that have documented that this effect can last for a very long time. We see chronic effects including effects on cognitive function like an exacerbation of dementia and Alzheimer's disease.
Humphrey: The first thing we would say is stay inside, shut your windows, stay away from the smoke, maybe buy an air purifier, exercise indoors.
But one of the tricky things with giving this kind of advice is that wildfire smoke affects people who are from disadvantaged socioeconomic communities more predominantly. And those are often the people that can't do the things that we would recommend to protect their health. For instance, many people have to go out to work or may be sleeping rough or have housing insecurity, and they don't have access to well-structured houses that protect them against wildfire smoke. So there's a real inequity there about the ability for people to follow the advice to keep themselves safe.
Dominici: You can totally take your dog for a walk or your kid to the playground, but if your child has asthma that’s something to watch out for. Maybe don’t spend hours outside, and make sure you have their asthma medications. People with pre-existing conditions should contact their primary-care physicians and discuss if they should potentially change their medication dosage to make sure their exposure to smoke doesn’t exacerbate whatever problem they have.
Humphrey: We’re seeing health impacts at levels below what the EPA recommends as safe levels of PM 2.5 exposure, so when our apps say “sensitive people” it’s probably actually a message for all of us. It’s important, I think, for people who call themselves healthy to understand that you can be a marathon runner and any exposure to wildfire smoke is going to have some kind of impact on you.
Humphrey: It’s very similar to COVID, so cloth masks and surgical masks offer some protection, they’re better than nothing, but they’re not as good as N95 masks. We’d recommend a really high-quality mask like an N95 because it does filter out those very, very tiny particles and offers really good protection.
Humphrey: I think we have the tools. What’s missing is education. So many people have access to air quality data, it’s on an app or on the internet, but they need more education about what to do with it. I’m very, very concerned with the socioeconomic inequities in particular. It’s a lot of the same issues as COVID: All of these issues are really, really hard to solve but are part of this whole piece.
Dominici: In a certain way, COVID has been a wake-up call. We are much more cautious about what’s in our air. I think it’s always important to keep in mind that when we’re talking about the health effects, we have to really understand that they’re a manifestation of the climate crisis. It’s not something we’re going to see in the future. It’s something that’s happening right now.
Read more about wildfire smoke:
The World's Wildfire Models Are Getting Torched
Log in
To continue reading, log in to your account.
Create a Free Account
To unlock more free articles, please create a free account.
Current conditions: Dangerous flash flooding could hit the south-central United States today, with some areas facing the potential for 8 inches of rain in 12 hours • The U.N. is warning countries in Northwest Africa that weather conditions are favorable to locust swarms• Temperatures in parts of Pakistan today will approach 122 degrees Fahrenheit, the global record for April.
After 100 days in office, President Trump has the lowest job approval rating of any president at this point in their tenure in the past 80 years. “Chaos, uncertainty, ‘we don’t know yet.’ These are words I’ve heard more during Donald Trump’s first 100 days back in the White House than I’ve heard at any other time as a reporter,” my colleague Emily Pontecorvo writes for Heatmap (something I can vouch for, too). From his slashing of the federal workforce to regulatory rollbacks to his unpopular tariffs and targeted attacks on “climate” in every form, Trump is reshaping the economic and policy environment from the top down.
Emily put together five charts yesterday to help visualize the impact of Trump’s second term to date. Some of the most striking takeaways include:
You can read Emily’s full story — with charts! — here.
Emily also reviewed the first draft of the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee’s budget, which was released on Tuesday. “Remember, the name of the game for Republicans is to find ways to pay for Trump’s long list of tax cuts,” she writes. In the proposed budget, the Transportation Committee puts forward one new revenue-generating program — an annual fee of $200 on electric vehicles and $20 on conventional gas-powered cars to pay into the Highway Trust Fund — plus a list of “rescissions” of unobligated funds from the Inflation Reduction Act. That list includes efforts to claw back more than $1.7 billion for improving the efficiency of government buildings, as well as whatever remains of the $3.2 billion allocated to the Federal Highway Administration to promote improved walkability and transportation access, along with five other key IRA grant programs. But “this is just a first pass,” Emily reminds us, “and this is all subject to change.”
COP30 President André Corrêa do Lago warned that as the U.S. retreats from the fight against global warming, it will become increasingly difficult to persuade other countries to commit to the energy transition. Speaking at the BloombergNEF Summit in New York, approximately six months out from COP30 in Belém, Brazil, Corrêa do Lago stressed that “There is obviously some that say ‘God, how am I going to convince my people to lower emissions when the richest country isn’t doing the same.’”
It is unclear what sort of delegation the U.S. will send to COP30, given the Trump administration’s severing of global climate research and its exit from the Paris Climate Agreement. China, meanwhile, has announced its intention to commit to stricter climate goals ahead of the November meetings in Brazil. “China is demonstrating an absolute conviction that it's the right way to go,’’ Corrêa do Lago said.
Ford’s director of electrified propulsion engineering announced on LinkedIn that the company has made a significant breakthrough in battery technology, the Detroit Free Press reports. “This isn’t just a lab experiment,” the director, Charles Poon, wrote. “We’re actively working to scale [Lithium Manganese Rich] cell chemistry and integrate them into our future vehicle lineup within this decade.” LMR replaces commonly used nickel and cobalt with manganese, which Poon says costs less and helps approach “true cost parity with gasoline vehicles” as well as “higher energy density” that “translates to greater range, allowing our customers to go further on a single charge.”
Many companies have made advances in LMR, which is not a new technology, but Ford clarified in comments to the Free Press that it has overcome some of the technical challenges of LMR, like voltage decay, while “not sacrificing energy density.” Still, Ford was short on details, leaving some skeptical of the supposed revolution in battery technology. Sam Fiorani, vice president of global vehicle forecasting at AutoForecast Solutions, thinks Ford “found a workaround, but this is far from a breakthrough,” according to Autoevolution. “However, such efforts are welcome as carmakers try to push the envelope of current battery technology.”
The largest bank in Canada, the Royal Bank of Canada, announced on Tuesday that it is “retiring” its sustainable finance goals and will not disclose its findings on how its high-carbon energy financing compares with its low-carbon energy financing, according to the Canadian Press. Per RBC, the move is due to regulatory changes, including Canada’s Competition Act, which was designed to prevent corporate greenwashing by requiring climate reporting to be backed by internationally recognized measures,The Globe and Mailexplains.
By backing off its target, RBC is abandoning a $500 billion commitment to sustainable finance this year. The bank previously exited the Net-Zero Banking Alliance, a global initiative spearheaded by Mark Carney, who was elected to a term as prime minister earlier this week. While “campaigners worry banks are seizing on a shift in the political climate, particularly under U.S. President Donald Trump, to dilute commitments to act quickly on decarbonising their portfolios” — per Reuters — RBC said it has not abandoned its intentions of addressing climate change and that it should be considered the “bank of choice” for the energy transition.
A startup in Switzerland is installing removable solar panels in the unused space between train tracks. The company, Sun-Ways, says that if it installs panels across the entire 3,300 miles of the Swiss rail network, it could generate one billion kilowatt-hours of solar power per year, equivalent to approximately 2% of the nation’s electricity needs.
Rob and Jesse talk with Texas energy expert Doug Lewin.
Texas is one of the country’s biggest producers of zero-emissions energy. Last year, the Lone Star State surpassed California to become the country’s No. 1 market for utility-scale solar. More solar and batteries were added to the Texas grid in 2024 than any other energy source, and the state has long dominated in onshore wind.
But that buildout is now threatened. A new tranche of bills in the Texas House and Senate could impose punitive engineering requirements on wind, solar, and storage plants — even those already in operation — and they could send the state’s power bills soaring.
Doug Lewin is the founder and CEO of Stoic Energy Partners in Austin, Texas. He writes the Texas Energy and Power Newsletter, and he is the host of the Energy Capital podcast. On this week’s episode of Shift Key, Jesse and Rob talk with Doug about how Texas became a clean energy powerhouse, how it has dealt with eye-watering demand power growth, and why a handful of bills in the Texas statehouse could break its electricity market. Shift Key is hosted by Robinson Meyer, the founding executive editor of Heatmap, and Jesse Jenkins, a professor of energy systems engineering at Princeton University.
Subscribe to “Shift Key” and find this episode on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, Amazon, or wherever you get your podcasts.
You can also add the show’s RSS feed to your podcast app to follow us directly.
Here is an excerpt from our conversation:
Robinson Meyer: What is the menagerie of legislation here that folks need to understand? What should they be following?
Doug Lewin: There’s a couple of different flavors of this. There’s a bunch of them that are just right up, they’re on a level like 1A, 1B, 1C, 1D — they’re all major, major problems that if any of them passed, the cost for all consumers in Texas would go up. And this is something that I think is starting to set in at the legislature right now — that members are starting to think about, what does this vote look like? If I actually take this vote and power prices go up 20%, 50%, 80%, what have I just done? That’s starting to set in.
But I would say one of them that is the most pernicious — and I think you’re going to see this around the country as a lot of the national groups start talking about it more and more — is firming requirements on renewables and assigning them to individual projects, or even individual developers across their portfolios. Because as you guys know, and I think most of your listeners know, but legislators don’t necessarily know yet — they’re getting an education in real time right now — you don’t firm for individual resources. You firm for a system, right? That is far more economically efficient. '
And we should talk about the right level of how many backups we need. Those conversations have been going on for years, and they continue to go on in Ercot stakeholder forums and at the Public Utility Commission. But to require every resource to have its own backup, you create, as I heard one witness at one of the hearings say, you’ve got a thousand mini Ercots, right? Everybody’s gotta have their own backup. That is an insane way to run an energy system.
Meyer: Can you just describe what exactly you mean by — like, what would it mean to firm up solar? What do these bills actually require?
Lewin: One of them actually requires solar to have full, 24-hour, round the clock backup. So like, forget the fact that solar has meant so much for Texas in the summertime. We had no conservation alerts last year, 2024, the sixth hottest summer in the history of the state. Not only did we not have any blackouts or energy emergencies, not even a conservation alert, all summer long. Because that 30 gigawatts, when it’s hottest, when it’s 105 degrees [Fahrenheit] and all those air conditioners are cranking all around Texas — we love our air conditioning — solar is just perfectly suited for that. But no, you would have to back it up around the clock.
Music for Shift Key is by Adam Kromelow.
The Transportation and Infrastructure Committee released a budget proposal that attempts to claw back nearly $9 billion in grants.
The House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee released the first draft of its portion of Trump’s big budget bill on Tuesday, and it includes the first official swipe at the Inflation Reduction Act of the months-long process ahead.
Remember, the name of the game for Republicans is to find ways to pay for Trump’s long list of tax cuts. The budget framework Congress passed two weeks ago assigned eleven House committees to craft proposals that would each raise or reduce revenue by a specific amount to accomplish Trump’s agenda.
The Transportation Committee proposal contains one new revenue-generating program, placing a $200 annual fee on electric vehicles and $100 fee on hybrid vehicles, alongside a $20 fee on conventional cars. The money would go into the Highway Trust Fund, which is currently financed mostly by the gas tax — and which, of course, EV owners don’t pay.
But the draft also includes a list of “rescissions” of unobligated funds from seven IRA grant programs. While the Biden administration awarded the vast majority of the money allocated to the programs listed, in many cases the recipients never reached a final project agreement with the government. That means a lot of the funding can, in fact, be clawed back.
Take the first item on the list, the Alternative Fuel and Low Emissions Aviation Technology Program. The IRA allocated $291 million for grants to support producing sustainable aviation fuel and developing low-emission aviation technologies, and the Biden administration awarded the full amount to 36 recipients in August of last year. It’s not clear how many reached final project agreements with the Federal Aviation Administration, however. A quick scan of the government’s database of awards is missing a $25.7 million grant to oil giant BP to produce sustainable aviation fuel at its refinery in Washington State, but it does include the full obligation of $240,000 to the City of Atlanta to conduct a study on deploying SAF at Hartsfield-Jackson Airport.
Grants aren’t always logged in USASpending.gov in a timely manner, so it’s possible BP does have an agreement in place. Among the other awardees that I could not find listed in the database were World Energy, which was awarded nearly $22 million to install infrastructure enabling Los Angeles International Airport to get deliveries of SAF, and Buckeye Terminals, which got $24 million to upgrade four SAF storage facilities in the midwest. Republicans tend to support biofuels, so it’s somewhat surprising they went after this program — especially since $291 million is chump change on the scale of a multi-trillion-dollar budget.
We know a bit more about the second item on the list, the Neighborhood Access and Equity Grant Program. This one allocated just over $3.2 billion to the Federal Highway Administration to award state and local governments with grants to improve walkability and transportation access, to mitigate transportation-related pollution in disadvantaged communities, and to improve transportation equity. The advocacy group Transportation for America found that of the nearly 100 awards the Biden administration announced from this program in 2023, totaling more than $3.1 billion, only 25 projects may have reached a final project agreement, per USASpending.gov. The group says this means it’s possible that nearly the entire $3 billion is up for grabs.
Other funding targeted includes more than $3.3 billion across three allocations to the General Services Administration to improve the efficiency of government buildings, prioritize lower-carbon building materials, and invest in other “emerging and sustainable” building solutions. The Government Accountability Office published a well-timed report about these three programs today, noting that while 99% of the money has been awarded, only half has been obligated, leaving more than $1.7 billion for Congress to take back.
Lastly, the proposal lists $2 billion in grants for states and local governments to use low-carbon materials in road projects. The Department of Transportation awarded $1.8 billion of the money to 39 states last year, although again, it's unclear how many of these awards have been obligated.
Having said all that, let’s assume for a moment that the full amount allocated to each of the programs was available to Congress to claw back. That would come to just under $9 billion of the $10 billion of deficit reductions the Transportation and Infrastructure Committee is required to find under the special rules governing the budget bill.
But the draft bill also contains huge amounts of new spending, including allocating more than $20 billion to the United States Coast Guard for border security and $15 billion for upgrades to Air Traffic Control systems. The nonprofit Union of Concerned Scientists estimates that the new fees on EVs and other vehicles could raise between $7 and $33 billion over the lifetime of the bill, which is not enough to pay for all of that. (They also note that it would barely make up for the more than $200 billion deficit in the Highway Trust Fund.) So if Republicans want to keep those provisions, they may have to find more cuts. They’ll likely have to find more anyway, depending on how much of the IRA money has been obligated.
I’ll leave you with a reminder that I’ll be repeating ad nauseam over the next few weeks or months as Congress hammers out its budget bill: This is just a first pass, and this is all subject to change. The Transportation and Infrastructure Committee will be holding a markup of the proposal on Wednesday, where it will debate each line and make changes before voting on whether to advance it.
Most of the Inflation Reduction Act programs come under the aegis of the Energy and Commerce and Ways and Means committees, neither of which have published any bill text yet. But we’ll be here for you when they do.
Editor’s note: This story has been updated to remove a reference to Gevo, a sustainable aviation fuel producer, which told Heatmap that it declined its awarded grant due to changed business priorities. It has also been update to include the Union of Concerned Scientists’ revenue estimate.