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:
It’s back. It’s better than ever. And it’s going to break your heart.

David Attenborough is not mad, he’s just disappointed.
At 97 years old, the narrator of the Planet Earth series returns to guide us through the nature docuseries’ third installment, which becomes available for U.S. audiences this weekend. Maybe I’d just forgotten how harrowing stories of animal survival can be in the seven years since the release of Planet Earth II, but other reviewers seem to agree: Planet Earth III has an especially melancholic edge.
You can hear it in Attenborough’s narration: “Since Darwin’s time, [Earth] has changed beyond recognition, transformed by a powerful force,” he says in the show’s intro. “Us.”
Do not let that darker tone deter you from watching, though; just take it as a precaution to have a box of tissues handy. Having watched the first two episodes that were made available to the press, I can confirm that Planet Earth III is as breathtaking a viewing experience as the original Planet Earth was when it came out 17 years ago — and maybe, if I dare say, more so.
Sharks vs Seals | Planet Earth III | BBC Earthwww.youtube.com
The first episode, “Coasts,” includes incredibly crisp aerial and underwater footage of sharks ganging up to hunt seals — an instant classic that I watched through my fingers and that belongs alongside the famous iguana vs. snakes scene from Planet Earth II. Ever innovative, the cinematographers also used night-vision cameras to capture lionesses hunting ducks, and somehow managed to track tiny (and alarmingly misnamed) sea angels hunting off the coast of Greenland.
The second episode, though, might be even more astounding. In “Ocean,” a horror story unfolds in a kelp forest off the Pacific Northwest that I narrated with gasps of “oh GOD” and “go go go gogogogogo!” Another segment centers on one of the strangest and most endearing stories of symbiotic “animal friendship” that I’ve ever seen. The episode might also include the smallest animals to ever be featured in an episode of Planet Earth — phytoplankton and zooplankton — and certainly the largest, a 150-foot-long deep-sea siphonophore.
But Attenborough stresses to viewers that “at this crucial time in our history, we must look at the Earth through a new lens.” That lens ultimately turns Planet Earth’s obsessive attention back on us.
In the first episode’s “behind the scenes” segment (which all Planet Earth diehards know not to skip), Attenborough explains why crewmembers decided to step in to save stranded sea turtles, breaking the “no interference” code of nature documentarians. It isn’t some feel-good story: Because of human-caused climate change, the sea is rising over the island where the turtles lay their eggs and researchers might only have 30 or so more years of rescuing turtles before the tiny sandbar is uninhabitable, making any intervention seem agonizingly futile. Similarly, the “Ocean” episode includes a gutting segment about the sea lion bycatch that occurs during commercial fishing. Though the accompanying “behind the scenes” footage also reveals compassionate human intervention, the act involved is so singular and the footage so excruciating that it’s little comfort.
You can’t look away, though. Of what I’ve seen so far, Planet Earth III is making a strong run at being the most staggering installment of the docuseries so far. Shot over five years and in 43 different countries, the season’s remaining six episodes will reportedly feature both familiar landscapes and new friends: “Deserts & Grasslands,” “Freshwater,” “Forests,” “Extremes,” and “Human,” come next, culminating, intriguingly, with an eighth and final episode titled “Heroes.”
Each, I expect, will be another astonishing reminder of what so many of us are fighting for — and of all there is to save.
Log in
To continue reading, log in to your account.
Create a Free Account
To unlock more free articles, please create a free account.
The state has terminated an agreement to develop substations and other necessary grid infrastructure to serve the now-canceled developments.
Crucial transmission for future offshore wind energy in New Jersey is scrapped for now.
The New Jersey Board of Public Utilities on Wednesday canceled the agreement it reached with PJM Interconnection in 2021 to develop wires and substations necessary to send electricity generated by offshore wind across the state. The board terminated this agreement because much of New Jersey’s expected offshore wind capacity has either been canceled by developers or indefinitely stalled by President Donald Trump, including the now-scrapped TotalEnergies projects scrubbed in a settlement with his administration.
“New Jersey is now facing a situation in which there will be no identified, large-scale in-state generation projects under active development that can make use of [the agreement] on the timeline the state and PJM initially envisioned,” the board wrote in a letter to PJM requesting termination of the agreement.
Wind energy backers are not taking this lying down. “We cannot fault the Sherrill Administration for making this decision today, but this must only be a temporary setback,” Robert Freudenberg of the New Jersey and New York-focused environmental advocacy group Regional Plan Association, said in a statement released after the agreement was canceled.
I chronicled the fight over this specific transmission infrastructure before Trump 2.0 entered office and the White House went nuclear on offshore wind. Known as the Larrabee Pre-Built Infrastructure, the proposed BPU-backed network of lines and electrical equipment resulted from years of environmental and sociological study. It was intended to connect wind projects in the Atlantic Ocean to key points on the overall grid onshore.
Activists opposed to putting turbines in the ocean saw stopping the wires as a strategy for delaying the overall construction timelines for offshore wind, intensifying both the costs and permitting headaches for all state and development stakeholders involved. Some of those fighting the wires did so based on fears that electromagnetic radiation from the transmission lines would make them sick.
The only question mark remaining is whether this means the state will try to still proceed with building any of the transmission given rising electricity demand and if these plans may be revisited at a later date. The board’s letter to PJM nods to the future, asserting that new “alternative pathways to coordinated transmission” exist because of new guidance from the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission. These pathways “may serve” future offshore wind projects should they be pursued, stated the letter.
Of course, anything related to offshore wind will still be conditional on the White House.
The opinion covered a host of actions the administration has taken to slow or halt renewables development.
A federal court seems to have struck down a swath of Trump administration moves to paralyze solar and wind permits.
U.S. District Judge Denise Casper on Tuesday enjoined a raft of actions by the Trump administration that delayed federal renewable energy permits, granting a request submitted by regional trade groups. The plaintiffs argued that tactics employed by various executive branch agencies to stall permits violated the Administrative Procedures Act. Casper — an Obama appointee — agreed in a 73-page opinion, asserting that the APA challenge was likely to succeed on the merits.
The ruling is a potentially fatal blow to five key methods the Trump administration has used to stymie federal renewable energy permitting. It appears to strike down the Interior Department memo requiring sign-off from Interior Secretary Doug Burgum on all major approvals, as well as instructions that the Interior and the Army Corps of Engineers prioritize “energy dense” projects in ways likely to benefit fossil fuels. Also struck down: a ban on access to a Fish and Wildlife Service species database and an Interior legal opinion targeting offshore wind leases.
Casper found a litany of reasons the five actions may have violated the Administrative Procedures Act. For example, the memo mandating political reviews was “a significant departure from [Interior] precedent,” and therefore “required a ‘more detailed justification’ than that needed for merely implementing a new policy.” The “energy density” permitting rubric, meanwhile, “conflicts” with federal laws governing federal energy leases so it likely violated the APA, the judge wrote.
What’s next is anyone’s guess. Some cynical readers may wonder whether the Supreme Court will just lift the preliminary injunction at the administration’s request. It’s worth noting Casper had the High Court’s penchant for neutralizing preliminary injunctions in mind, writing in her opinion, “The Court concludes that the scope of this requested injunctive relief is appropriate and consistent with the Supreme Court’s limitations on nationwide injunctions.”
Fights over AI-related developments outnumber those over wind farms in the Heatmap Pro database.
Local data center conflicts in the U.S. now outnumber clashes over wind farms.
More than 270 data centers have faced opposition across the country compared to 258 onshore and offshore wind projects, according to a review of data collected by Heatmap Pro. Data center battles only recently overtook wind turbines, driven by the sudden spike in backlash to data center development over the past year. It’s indicative of how the intensity of the angst over big tech infrastructure is surging past current and historic malaise against wind.
Battles over solar projects have still occurred far more often than fights over data centers — nearly twice as many times, per the data. But in terms of megawatts, the sheer amount of data center demand that has been opposed nearly equals that of solar: more than 51 gigawatts.
Taken together, these numbers describe the tremendous power involved in the data center wars, which is now comparable to the entire national fight over renewable energy. One side of the brawl is demand, the other supply. If this trend continues at this pace, it’s possible the scale of tension over data centers could one day usurp what we’ve been tracking for both solar and wind combined.