Sign In or Create an Account.

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

Sparks

7,000 Pages of New State Climate Plans, in 1 Helpful Chart

There is a theme here.

Solar panels.
Heatmap Illustration/Getty Images

Late last year, I wrote about an overlooked but potentially transformative program in the Inflation Reduction Act called the Climate Pollution Reduction Grants. Administered by the Environmental Protection Agency, it offered all 50 states, plus D.C. and Puerto Rico, an initial $3 million each for climate policy planning, spurring many states to develop emissions-cutting strategies for the first time. Later, cities and states will be able to apply for competitive grants from a $4.6 billion fund to implement elements of their plans.

States that accepted the planning money — i.e. all of them except Iowa, South Dakota, Florida, Wyoming, and Kentucky — agreed to submit an inventory of their greenhouse gas emissions and a list of actions they would prioritize to the EPA by March 1. All together, the plans ran to nearly 7,000 pages, which are now available on the EPA’s website for anyone to peruse. While I haven’t yet had a chance to read through them all myself, a new high-level analysis of the plans by the nonprofits Evergreen Collaborative, RMI, and Climate XChange shows where most states said they would focus their efforts.

The groups counted the number of “priority measures” listed in each plan and tracked the source of greenhouse gases each measure would address. By far the most prominent climate problem states want to tackle, with 186 measures across the plans, is transportation. As transportation is now the largest source of U.S. emissions, and states have a lot of influence over the biggest drivers of vehicle emissions, this is a good sign.

For example, Texas said that in the near term, it could build electric vehicle chargers and hydrogen fueling stations, introduce lower-emissions support equipment at its airports, and use more sustainable jet fuel. In the longer term, out to 2050, it could expand programs to deploy zero-emissions medium- and heavy-duty trucks and decarbonize its ports. West Virginia said it would try to reduce vehicle miles traveled, a measure of how much people drive, by implementing programs to get people on bikes and increasing transit options.

Every single plan included measures to reduce emissions from buildings, with some focused on basic energy efficiency upgrades and others that mention switching from fossil fuel heating to electric heat pumps. The biggest gap the analysis identified concerned industrial emissions, which only 27 of the plans included measures to address. About a quarter of U.S. climate pollution comes from industry, much of which is considered “hard to abate” — although, solutions are emerging.

Some states that had yet to develop comprehensive climate plans, like Texas, listed dozens of broad measures. Others that were further along listed just a handful of specific ones. New York, for example, included just nine priority actions that it wanted to use the forthcoming implementation grants for.

Another theme that emerged was a lack of regulatory measures in the plans, which focused more on incentives and voluntary action. That may be due to the wealth of federal funding to create “carrots” versus sticks, or because the states interpreted the planning grant as an opportunity to focus on “shovel-ready” projects that will make them better candidates for the competitive implementation grants.

Though there’s no requirement to implement these plans, the prospect of additional funding from the EPA to carry them out means that many of the measures could actually happen. The states participating are home to 90% of the U.S. population, and the same fraction of U.S. emissions. Applications for implementation grants were due April 1.

Green
Emily Pontecorvo profile image

Emily Pontecorvo

Emily is a founding staff writer at Heatmap. Previously she was a staff writer at the nonprofit climate journalism outlet Grist, where she covered all aspects of decarbonization, from clean energy to electrified buildings to carbon dioxide removal.

Sparks

Why the Vineyard Wind Blade Broke

Plus answers to other pressing questions about the offshore wind project.

A broken wind turbine.
Illustration by Simon Abranowicz

The blade that snapped off an offshore turbine at the Vineyard Wind project in Massachusetts on July 13 broke due to a manufacturing defect, according to GE Vernova, the turbine maker and installer.

During GE’s second quarter earnings call on Wednesday, CEO Scott Strazik and Vice President of Investor Relations Michael Lapides said there was no indication of a design flaw in the blade. Rather, the company has identified a “material deviation” at one of its factories in Gaspé, Canada.

Keep reading...Show less
Green
Sparks

Trump’s Suspicious Pivot on EVs

Elon Musk pledged a huge campaign donation. Also, Trump is suddenly cool with electric vehicles.

Trump’s Suspicious Pivot on EVs

Update, July 24:Elon Musk told Jordan Peterson in an interview Monday evening that “I am not donating $45 million a month to Trump,” adding that he does not belong to the former president’s “cult of personality.” Musk acknowledged, however, that helped create America PAC to promote “meritocracy and individual freedom,” and that it would support Trump while also not being “hyperpartisan.”

When former President Donald Trump addressed a crowd of non-union autoworkers in Clinton Township, Michigan, last fall, he came with a dire warning: “You’re going to lose your beautiful way of life.” President Biden’s electric vehicle transition, Trump claimed, would be “a transition to hell.”

Keep reading...Show less
Yellow
Sparks

Wind Is More Powerful Than J. D. Vance Seems to Think

Just one turbine can charge hundreds of cell phones.

J.D. Vance.
Heatmap Illustration/Getty Images

It’s a good thing most of us aren’t accountable for every single silly thing we’ve ever said, but most of us are not vice presidential running mates, either. Back in 2022, when J.D. Vance was still just a “New York Times bestselling author” and not yet a “junior senator from Ohio,” much less “second-in-line to a former president who will turn 80 in office if he’s reelected,” he made a climate oopsie that — now that it’s recirculating — deserves to be addressed.

If Democrats “care so much about climate change,” Vance argued during an Ohio Republican senator candidate forum during that year, “and they think climate change is caused by carbon emissions, then why is their solution to scream about it at the top of their lungs, send a bunch of our jobs to China, and then manufacture these ridiculous ugly windmills all over Ohio farms that don’t produce enough electricity to run a cell phone?”

Keep reading...Show less
Blue