Sign In or Create an Account.

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

Sparks

The School Fight Over Climate Change Is Growing

Texas’ Board of Education is voting on whether to “promote’’ fossil fuels in schools.

A teacher and students.
Heatmap Illustration/Getty Images

Fights over school curricula have become issues du jour, and today officials in Texas are voting on what kids in that state will read about climate change in their school textbooks. The problem, according to the AP, is that the textbooks in their current form are “too negative towards fossil fuels.”

Wayne Christian, a member of the Texas Railroad Commission, which oversees oil and gas in the state (you thought it was going to be trains, didn’t you?), is pushing the Texas State Board of Education to “choose books that promote the importance of fossil fuels for energy promotion.” Board member Aaron Kinsey, a Republican and an oil executive himself, seems to like that idea, saying that the photos in textbooks right now are too negative towards oil and gas.

Democrats and educational groups, meanwhile, are trying to push the board in the other direction. The National Science Teaching Association sent a letter to the board urging them not to “allow misguided objections to evolution and climate change impede the adoption of science textbooks in Texas.” Republicans have a majority on the board, however, so the outcome of the vote is fairly easy to predict.

Texas is just the latest state to be embroiled in an argument over how to present climate change to schoolchildren. Back in August, the state of Florida approved the use of videos made by The Prager University Foundation (PragerU) — a conservative group backed by fracking billionaires that pushes out right-wing “educational content” and tried and failed to sue YouTube for restricting its videos — in state classrooms. Kids in that state can now be treated to a teacher playing videos that extol the benefits of coal and plastic, for example, or state that wind and solar power are simply not powerful enough for modern energy needs.

This is all part of a large conservative playbook to push back against “woke” ideas like critical race theory and climate change. In Virginia, Governor Glenn Youngkin created a hotline for parents who detected critical race theory in their kids’ classrooms. An Indiana bill prohibits teachers from discussing "anti-American ideologies,” but doesn’t define what those ideologies are. The so-called “don’t say gay” law in Florida bans classes about sexual orientation or gender identity through third grade. And across the country, conservative activists are wielding book bans to excise content they deem unacceptable.

In an FAQ on its website, PragerU makes clear that it “is not an accredited university, nor do we claim to be.” New Hampshire and Oklahoma have both also approved PragerU content for use in their schools, as a result of intense lobbying by the company. Next in its sights? Texas.

Green

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
Sparks

Offshore Wind Developers Are Now 3 for 3 Against Trump

A third judge rejected a stop work order, allowing the Coastal Virginia offshore wind project to proceed.

Donald Trump and offshore wind.
Heatmap Illustration/Getty Images

Offshore wind developers are now three for three in legal battles against Trump’s stop work orders now that Dominion Energy has defeated the administration in federal court.

District Judge Jamar Walker issued a preliminary injunction Friday blocking the stop work order on Dominion’s Coastal Virginia offshore wind project after the energy company argued it was issued arbitrarily and without proper basis. Dominion received amicus briefs supporting its case from unlikely allies, including from representatives of PJM Interconnection and David Belote, a former top Pentagon official who oversaw a military clearinghouse for offshore wind approval. This comes after Trump’s Department of Justice lost similar cases challenging the stop work orders against Orsted’s Revolution Wind off the coast of New England and Equinor’s Empire Wind off New York’s shoreline.

Keep reading...Show less
Sparks

New York’s Empire Wind Project May Resume Construction, Judge Says

The decision marks the Trump administration’s second offshore wind defeat this week.

Offshore wind.
Heatmap Illustration/Equinor

A federal court has lifted Trump’s stop work order on the Empire Wind offshore wind project, the second defeat in court this week for the president as he struggles to stall turbines off the East Coast.

In a brief order read in court Thursday morning, District Judge Carl Nichols — a Trump appointee — sided with Equinor, the Norwegian energy developer building Empire Wind off the coast of New York, granting its request to lift a stop work order issued by the Interior Department just before Christmas.

Keep reading...Show less
Green
Sparks

How Trump’s Case Against Revolution Wind Fell Apart (Again)

A federal court has once again allowed Orsted to resume construction on its offshore wind project.

Donald Trump and wind turbines.
Heatmap Illustration/Getty Images

A federal court struck down the Trump administration’s three-month stop work order on Orsted’s Revolution offshore wind farm, once again allowing construction to resume (for the second time).

Explaining his ruling from the bench Monday, U.S. District Judge Royce Lamberth said that project developer Orsted — and the states of Rhode Island and Connecticut, which filed their own suit in support of the company — were “likely” to win on the merits of their lawsuit that the stop work order violated the Administrative Procedures Act. Lamberth said that the Trump administration’s stop work order, issued just before Christmas, amounted to a change in administration position without adequate justification. The justice said he was not sure the emergency being described by the government exists, and that the “stated national security reason may have been pretextual.”

Keep reading...Show less
Blue