Cookies help us run our site more efficiently.

By clicking “Accept”, you agree to the storing of cookies on your device to enhance site navigation, analyze site usage, and assist in our marketing efforts. View our Privacy Policy for more information or to customize your cookie preferences.

Accept Deny

GoGreenNation News

Learn more about the issues presented in our films
Show Filters

Harmful Gas Billowing From Texas and New Mexico Comes Mostly From Smaller Leaks, Researchers Say

Huge quantities of methane, a powerful greenhouse gas, are being emitting by oil and gas operators in the 75,000-square-mile Permian Basin straddling Texas and New Mexico

The blob on the satellite image is a rainbow of colors. An analyst digitally sharpens it and there, highlighted in red, is the source: a concrete oil pad spewing methane.In the 75,000-square-mile (194-square-kilometer) Permian Basin straddling Texas and New Mexico, the most productive oil and gas region in the world, huge amounts of the powerful greenhouse gas escape from wells, compressor stations and other equipment.Most efforts to reduce emissions have focused on so-called “super emitters” like the one in the satellite image, which are relatively easy to find with improving satellite imaging and other aerial sensing.Now researchers say much smaller sources are collectively responsible for about 72% of methane emissions from oil and gas fields throughout the contiguous U.S. These have often gone undetected.“It's really (important to) approach the problem from both ends because the high-emitting super emitters are important, but so are the smaller ones,” said James Williams, a post-doctoral science fellow at the Environmental Defense Fund and lead author on a new study that took a comprehensive look at emissions within the nation's oil and gas basins.Addressing methane is important because it accounts for about one third of all greenhouse gas emissions that contribute to climate change.Tackling methane emissions in the Permian is especially challenging because there are more than 130,000 active well sites owned by everyone from family operators to international conglomerates, experts said. Each site can have multiple oil wells.“The Permian is in many ways the most complicated basin in the world; it’s incredibly dense there ... with big, small and everything in between,” said Steve Hamburg, chief scientist at the Environmental Defense Fund.What’s more, pipelines, processing and other activities often are owned by different companies — with tens of thousands of points where methane might escape, either through leaks or intentional venting.An Israeli company that used satellite data and artificial intelligence to look for leaks in Midland County, Texas, the heart of the Permian Basin, found 50 separate plumes emanating from 16 of 30 sites it monitored. Most were bleeding over 4,500 kilograms of harmful gas per hour and five exceeded 10,000, far above the Environmental Protection Agency's super emitter threshold of 100 kg/hr.But the biggest surprise, “was seeing a lot of small emissions in this very crowded place ... so close to each other, so close to an area where people actually live,” said Omer Shenhar, vice president of product at Momentick, which provides satellite-based monitoring to oil and gas companies.Methane traps over 80 times more heat close to the Earth than carbon dioxide does, ton for ton. What’s more, concentrations have almost tripled since pre-industrial times.A powerful new satellite called MethaneSAT that launched this year will be able to detect small emissions over wide areas that other satellites can't. Researchers will also be able to track methane over time in all the world's major oil-producing basins.“We've never had that,” said the EDF's Hamburg, who leads the project.Although the satellite cannot pinpoint those smaller sources, “you don't need to” because operators on the ground can find the sources, Hamburg said.In the U.S., oil and gas companies will be required to routinely look for leaks at new and existing sites, including from wells, production facilities and compressor station under a new EPA rule.The rule also phases out the practice of routinely burning off excess methane, called flaring, and requires upgrading devices that leak methane.States have until 2026 to develop a plan to implement that rule for existing sources.Oil and natural gas companies also would have to pay a federal fee per ton of leaked methane above a certain level under a final rule announced last month by the Biden administration, although the incoming Trump administration could eliminate that. Methane — the primary component of natural gas — is valuable commercially, yet many operators in the Permian regard it as a nuisance byproduct of oil production and flare it because they haven't built pipelines to carry it to market, Duren and Hamburg said. Neither the Permian Basin Petroleum Association nor the U.S. Oil & Gas Association responded to requests for comment.Riley Duren, CEO of the nonprofit Carbon Mapper, who was not involved in the study, said it's always important to tackle super emitters because they have such an outsize impact. They are often fleeting but not always. Some continue for weeks, months or years.“I think ... what percentage of the total comes from a large number of small sources versus super emitters is less important than what do you do with the information,” said Duren. There are “literally thousands and thousands of pieces of equipment and they can blow a leak at any time.”The Associated Press’ climate and environmental coverage receives financial support from multiple private foundations. AP is solely responsible for all content. Find AP’s standards for working with philanthropies, a list of supporters and funded coverage areas at AP.org.Copyright 2024 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.Photos You Should See - Sept. 2024

Climate
CO2
Science

Takeaways From AP's Story on Everglades Restoration Efforts

For decades, largescale engineering projects for development and agriculture drained and partitioned south Florida’s Everglades, a vast wetlands landscape home to endangered and threatened species and a vital source of drinking water for millions of Floridians

EVERGLADES, Fla. (AP) — The Everglades in southern Florida were once about twice the size of New Jersey. Wildlife was abundant and water flowed freely from the Kissimmee River to Lake Okeechobee to the Florida Bay. But decades of engineering projects partitioned and drained the water, invasive species have transformed the land, and pollution from agriculture has impoverished water quality. Today, about half the Everglades original size remains. A massive state-federal project, approved by Congress in 2000 with bipartisan support, aims to undo damages wreaked upon these wetlands. It is projected to cost more than $23 billion and 50 years to complete. More than two decades into it, there are some signs of progress. Wildlife is returning to some areas, regions dominated by the invasive melaleuca tree have dropped 75%, enthusiasm is high as significant projects are finally underway, others gain momentum and funding pours in. But as leaders and agencies race to “get the water right,” there are worries: the projects are billions of dollars over budget and questions remain about whether some will work. Record funding, unprecedented momentum and major projects underway Since 2019, the South Florida Water Management District has completed, broken ground on, or celebrated other milestones on some 70 projects. This year, lawmakers earmarked $1.275 billion, the largest annual amount allocated for the next 12 months of restoration efforts. The water district said they anticipate 12 to 15 years of this pace of construction as long as there's funding. Deemed the flagship project by some is the Everglades Agricultural Area Reservoir Project, which includes a reservoir that will store excess water from Lake Okeechobee and an adjacent engineered wetland that will clean it before it’s discharged. But the reservoir is much smaller than originally planned, and some worry the project won't be large or deep enough to significantly clean water. The Western Everglades Restoration Project had its first groundbreaking in July after decades of advocacy from the Miccosukee Tribe of Indians of Florida. The project's goal is to improve the quantity, quality, timing and distribution of water where the Miccosukee and Seminole tribal lands are. Since sections of the Tamiami Trail started getting elevated, water flows are increasing in the wetlands surrounding the highway, built in 1928 to connect Tampa and Miami. The road cut through the Everglades, acting as a dam and holding back water from ecosystems dependent on it. As parts of the Everglades are rehydrated and habitats reemerge, so are native species such as the wood stork. Wading bird colonies have returned to the Kissimmee River floodplain. Habitats in swamps or shallow lakes called sloughs are increasing in some areas. And flamingos blown in by Hurricane Idalia have stayed in the Everglades. Some scientists have said it is a sign restoration efforts are working.Climate change, urban development and water quality are ongoing challenges in restoration efforts. Sea level rise and salt water intrusion pose threats to biodiversity, drinking water supply, habitats and more, and experts warn that rising temperatures will increase evapotranspiration and decrease water runoff. In a recent report to Congress, a committee of experts acknowledged the enormous challenge of incorporating climate change impacts into restoration efforts. They recommended several actions, including developing a set of climate scenarios that are consistently used across all planning and implementation. Water quality has improved, but pollution from phosphorous remains a concern. Too much has harmed the wilderness' sensitive ecosystem, contributing to toxic algal blooms, oxygen depletion and excessive plant growth. Then there's the people. Florida has undergone decades of rapid population growth, becoming the nations’ fastest-growing state in 2022. Pressure to develop is high. “This is the biggest, most complicated and most expensive ecosystem restoration project in the world,” said Eve Samples, executive director of Friends of the Everglades. “It’s really important that we get it right.” The Associated Press receives support from the Walton Family Foundation for coverage of water and environmental policy. The AP is solely responsible for all content. For all of AP’s environmental coverage, visit https://apnews.com/hub/climate-and-environmentCopyright 2024 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.Photos You Should See - Sept. 2024

Agriculture
Water
Pollution

Social Scientist Dustin Mulvaney Discusses Solar Power, Trump and the Need to Prioritize Environmental Justice

In 2019, the idea of a social scientist who focused on renewable energy and public lands felt like the most thinly sliced of specialties. That was the year the University of California Press published “Solar Power: Innovation, Sustainability, and Environmental Justice” by Dustin Mulvaney. Today, the book is especially relevant. Governments and clean energy advocates […]

The rapid rise of renewable energy has made aspects of his 2019 book on solar power read like ancient history.By Dan GearinoIn 2019, the idea of a social scientist who focused on renewable energy and public lands felt like the most thinly sliced of specialties.

Energy
Government

Ireland Embraced Data Centers That the AI Boom Needs. Now They're Consuming Too Much of Its Energy

Dozens of massive data centers are consuming more electricity than all of the urban homes in Ireland and starting to wear out the warm welcome that brought them here

CLONDALKIN, Ireland (AP) — Dozens of massive data centers humming at the outskirts of Dublin are consuming more electricity than all of the urban homes in Ireland and starting to wear out the warm welcome that brought them here.Now, a country that made itself a computing factory for Amazon, Google, Meta, Microsoft and TikTok is wondering whether it was all worth it as tech giants look around the world to build even more data centers to fuel the next wave of artificial intelligence.Fears of rolling blackouts led Ireland's grid operator to halt new data centers near Dublin until 2028. These huge buildings and their powerful computers last year consumed 21% of the nation’s electricity, according to official records. No other country has reported a higher burden to the International Energy Agency.Not only that, but Ireland is still heavily reliant on burning fossil fuels to generate electricity, despite a growing number of wind farms sprouting across the countryside. Further data center expansion threatens Ireland's goals to sharply cut planet-warming emissions.Ireland is a “microcosm of what many countries could be facing over the next decade, particularly with the growth of AI,” said energy researcher Paul Deane of University College Cork. Dublin’s data center limits Twenty-six-year-old activist Darragh Adelaide lives in a working-class Dublin suburb just across a busy motorway from Grange Castle Business Park, one of Ireland’s biggest data center clusters. It could get even bigger were Adelaide not a thorn in the side of Google’s expansion plans.“It’s kind of an outrageous number of data centers,” Adelaide said. “People have started to make the connection between the amount of electricity they’re using and electricity prices going up.”Ireland has attracted global tech companies since the “Celtic Tiger” boom at the turn of the 21st century. Tax incentives, a highly skilled, English-speaking workforce and the country’s membership in the European Union have all contributed to making the tech sector a central part of the Irish economy. The island is also a node for undersea cables that extend to the U.S., Britain, Iceland and mainland Europe.Nearly all of the data centers sit on the edge of Dublin, where their proximity to the capital city facilitates online financial transactions and other activities that require fast connections. Data center computers run hot, but compared to other parts of the world, Ireland's cool temperatures make it easier to keep them from overheating without drawing in as much water.Still, buildings that for years went mostly unnoticed have attracted unwanted attention as their power demands surged while Irish householders pay some of Europe’s highest electricity bills. Ireland’s Environmental Protection Agency has also flagged concerns about nitrogen oxide pollution from data centers’ on-site generators — typically gas or diesel turbines — affecting areas near Dublin.A crackdown began in 2021, spurred by projections that data centers are on pace to take up one third of Ireland's electricity in this decade. Regulators declared that Dublin had hit its limits and could no longer plug more data centers into its grid. The government urged tech companies to look outside the capital and find ways to supply their own power. “What’s happening in Ireland is the politics of basically what happens when you build too many of these things,” said University College Dublin researcher Patrick Brodie. “Even though people have recognized for a while that data centers are energy hogs, there hasn’t really been so many of these moments where, effectively, Ireland issued a red alert.”Adelaide was a child when Microsoft opened Grange Castle's first data center in 2009, but enormous complexes built by Amazon, Google, Microsoft and other companies have since expanded around the ruined castle that anchors the business park. They have their own modern fortifications of high fences, surveillance cameras and guard houses, and don’t display their corporate logos.In June, Adelaide’s campaign against data centers helped get him elected to a seat on the South Dublin County Council for the leftist People Not Profits Party. The council soon after rejected Google’s plan to build another data center. Google appealed the decision in September.“It was only going to employ around 50 people,” Adelaide said. “It would have been a massive cost to the local area and to Ireland in general with very little benefit, which is kind of how the tax haven system works.”The backlash from Dublin-area local planning authorities — combined with stricter, if sometimes contradictory, guidance from the national government — has frustrated data center developers.One fully-built data center from Texas-based Digital Realty is sitting idle at Grange Castle while it awaits permission to connect to the electricity grid. The company sells space within its data centers for clients such as banks, email providers and social media platforms. It says it lacks a grid connection despite contracting for enough renewable energy to power all of its Irish data centers. “When we look at artificial intelligence, when we look at new technologies coming along the line, the basic requirement for all of those is power infrastructure,” said Dermot Lahey, who directs Digital Realty's data center implementation in Ireland, speaking inside a cavernous empty data hall. Ireland has all the elements to make it a “great home for AI expansion,” he said.“What’s preventing us from being able to leverage that is the fact that the power constraints that we have, or the power moratorium that we have, is greatly impacting our ability to provide space for customers,” Lahey said. Once colder weather sets in, the smoky fragrance of fireplaces burning briquettes of peat lingers over County Offaly, just over an hour’s drive west of Dublin in a region known as the Midlands. It’s places like this where some data center developers, thwarted by Dublin’s constraints, now see opportunity.A report commissioned by County Offaly’s government pitches the bog-dotted region as a place to “create thousands of green jobs” and rival “Dublin, Frankfurt, London, Amsterdam and Paris in being an anchor for data centres powered by renewable energy.”Farmer and conservationist Brian Sheridan, 83, is doubtful. He's seen this region transformed once before, from a vast wetland known as the Bog of Allen to barren pockets of brownfields as people cut away trenches of dense peat soil, or turf – first with spades and later with tractors at an industrial scale to create homegrown fuel.“The bog started disappearing and it wasn't being replaced,” said Sheridan, walking along a boardwalk over carpets of moss and sedges in the now-protected Clara Bog Nature Reserve.Decades of rapid extraction fostered Ireland's energy independence and employed scores of workers in turf-cutting, briquette factories and power plants. But it also polluted the air and devastated a delicate environment. Bogs that naturally trapped large amounts of carbon dioxide were stripped down to the bedrock, contributing to global warming. When burned, peat is dirtier than coal.Ireland has largely banned the sale of peat and shuttered the last remaining peat-fired power plants. But the state-supported company at the helm of peat extraction, Bord na Móna, still controls vast tracts of former bogland. It has refashioned itself as a renewable energy provider, laying down wind turbines and solar farms and partnering with Amazon to build a data center near the village of Rhode.Bord na Móna declined multiple interview requests about its plans, and some residents feel left in the dark.“Bord na Móna, as far as I’m concerned, are a law unto themselves,” Sheridan said. “Now that the turf-cutting is all finished, they should be gone. But it’s still the same Bord Na Móna and they won’t answer questions.”Amazon declined to talk about specific projects and has repeatedly signaled it may shift its new data center investments away from Ireland. But an executive said the company is still working closely with the Irish government and characterized Ireland’s challenges as mostly about transmission — building the infrastructure to get new clean energy where it needs to go.“Ireland has tremendous opportunity for additional renewable energy,” said Kevin Miller, Amazon Web Services’ vice president of global data centers. "However, they also need quite a bit more capacity on the grid to tap into that generation.” Could wind save Ireland's data centers? A tech-driven race is on to harness the region's wind. Backed by a power purchase agreement with Microsoft, the Norwegian wind energy company Statkraft is building nine towering wind turbines in remote former boglands along County Offaly’s eastern edge. Statkraft’s managing director for Ireland, Kevin O’Donovan, said data centers are actually helping to accelerate Ireland’s clean energy transition.“For a lot of the mainland European countries, demand is going down and that’s actually leading to a challenge to roll out renewables,” O’Donovan said. “Whereas in Ireland we have demand that’s increasing because the country is growing economically and obviously a part of that is the data center growth.”On the other side of Offaly, a group of residents who live along the Lemanaghan Bog near the site of a 7th-century monastery are skeptical of such claims. They are opposed to what a proposed Bord Na Móna wind farm will do to its cultural heritage and ecology.KK Kenny took his concerns to Dublin this fall in a meeting with the country’s taoiseach, or prime minister, Simon Harris. Kenny wants to see the bog preserved for biodiversity. He'd be happy to see data center developers follow through with their pledge to look to other European countries.“They say, oh, they’re going to pull out," Kenny said. "That would be a great thing. We can’t sustain them.”Some neighbors of Amazon's proposed data center in Rhode are more open to the idea. One village resident already commutes all the way to Dublin to work at a data center. Another is hoping it will employ people who’d want to buy new homes.“We’re all for change,” said Gerard Whelan. “I’ll get work because I build houses. It’s a domino effect.”At a village pub, the Rhode Inn, Whelan points to a photograph of the old peat-burning power plant where his father worked the control room. Its cooling towers loomed over the village before their demolition two decades ago. Another nearby plant only stopped burning peat a year ago.Data centers were not a top issue for Irish voters who showed up to the polls on Nov. 29. But analysts expect the two center-right parties forming a new coalition government to face industry pressure to ease limits on data center expansion.Ossian Smyth, an outgoing minister of state for the Irish government whose Green Party lost nearly all its parliamentary seats, said it would be a mistake to slow down Ireland's climate commitments. But he also sees the limits on data center growth set by his outgoing government as having resolved most people's concerns.What other countries can learn from Ireland's experience, he added, is to carefully manage the effect of data centers on the stability of the electricity system — and make sure their benefits are much more than income or foreign investment.“Don’t see them as a necessary evil or something that you just have to put up with because it makes money and it gets taxes,” Smyth said.Copyright 2024 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.Photos You Should See - Sept. 2024

Energy
Activism
Climate

Petrochemical plants send millions of pounds of pollutants into waterways each year: Report

Nearly 70 petrochemical companies across the nation, including 30 in Texas, are sending millions of pounds of pollutants into waterways each year due to weak or nonexistent regulations, according to a report published by the watchdog group Environmental Integrity Project.The report analyzed wastewater discharges from petrochemical companies that produce plastics across the U.S., finding that a majority of the facilities had violated Clean Water Act permits and few were punished. In addition, only a few states are regulating some of the hazardous chemicals or substances of concern, and there are currently no limits set from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency for these contaminants in effluent water guidelines for the plastics industry. In the past 30 years, plastic production at petrochemical facilities has skyrocketed. The EPA estimates that plastic production in 1990 was at 17,130 tons, and by 2018 it had doubled, reaching 35,680 tons. Producing these plastics results in industrial wastewater discharges, some of which contain pollutants unregulated by federal wastewater guidelines. If the pollutant does have limits, they have been set by individual states. The report found the following pollutants:Dioxins, recognized as one of the most toxic classes of compounds by the World Health Organization, can be a byproduct of producing plastics like poly-vinyl chloride, or PVC. Out of the 17 facilities that produce PVC, only three have site limits set by states.1,4 dioxane, classified as a potential carcinogen, only had limits set at two facilities.An estimated 9.9 million pounds of nitrogen and 1.9 million pounds of phosphorus (known as nutrient pollution when combined) enter waterways from these plants annually, and can cause toxic algal blooms and fish-killing low-oxygen zones. Only one facility had limits for phosphorus pollution and none had total nitrogen limits. Plastic pellets, known as nurdles, are entering waterways in 27 states. Polyfluoroalkyl substances, or PFAS, are not currently considered in wastewater samples for petrochemical plant permit applications. A majority of the facilities have poor compliance records. Out of the 70 facilities, 83% had violated the Clean Water Act at least once in the last three years (58 facilities violated permits, yet only 8 were penalized). Nearly 40% of the facilities were operating on water pollution control permits that are outdated, “but have been administratively continued by state agencies,” according to the report. Outdated Clean Water Act regulations The Clean Water Act, issued by the EPA in 1972, has historically been enforced through effluent water guidelines. The petrochemical facilities in the report are regulated under a category of guidelines for organic chemicals, plastics and synthetic fibers.“The (plastics) industry has experienced significant, rapid growth in recent decades and is continuing to grow,” lead author of the report and research director at the Environmental Integrity Project, Kira Dunham, told EHN. “But…wastewater discharges are being regulated by standards from over 30 years ago.”This category of guidelines Dunham mentions has not been updated by the EPA since 1993, despite requirements for the agency to “periodically” update guidelines in accordance with technological updates for pollution control.Texas petrochemical pollution With 17 of the 30 facilities in Texas, the Houston area — known as the petrochemical capital of the U.S. — is the number one exporter of petrochemicals in the nation. Nearly one-third of these Texas facilities discharge wastewater into the Houston Ship Channel. Earlier this year, EHN investigated community member concerns about wastewater contamination potentially entering dredge material removed from the channel. Independent analysis from Healthy Port Communities, a collaborative of Houston-based environmental groups, noted high levels of dioxins in the soil surrounding dredge material. “Some of the places touched on in the (Environmental Integrity Project’s) report might have one major facility that has this… pattern of discharging pollutants into waterways,” Kristen Schlemmer, senior legal director of Houston- based water justice group Bayou City Waterkeeper, told EHN. “I don't want to discount that … but it at least makes it clear who you can focus on to address the problem. Whereas in Houston, we have so many different facilities that are polluting into our waterways, that it often just makes it seem like that's normal, and that's just the way things are going to be.” Schlemmer added that these concerns for pollution related to wastewater discharges are heightened by disasters, like this year’s derecho storm and Hurricane Beryl, in which water grows contaminated across large portions of the region. Beyond climate disasters, the Houston region is prone to chemical disasters and the state averages about one chemical release a week based on 2023 data.“I'm hoping through this work to show that this is not normal, and (to) raise the bar in terms of what our expectations are for the facilities that live in our backyards,” Schlemmer said. “If they're not going to comply with the law …I want them to … know that they're going to be facing legal action, either from us or for government regulators.”Earlier this year, the Environmental Integrity Project sued the EPA along with Bayou City Water Keeper, the Center for Biological Diversity and nearly 300 water justice groups in the Waterkeeper Alliance. In the original intent to sue, the group states that the EPA “has failed to perform its mandatory duty under (the Clean Water Act) ... to biennially submit state water quality reports and an analysis thereof … to Congress.”Just last week, the EPA released its biannual preliminary plan for effluent limitations guidelines and the announcement states that the EPA plans to conduct new studies that will clarify the impact of discharges from certain industries on waterways. The plan is open for public comment here.

Nearly 70 petrochemical companies across the nation, including 30 in Texas, are sending millions of pounds of pollutants into waterways each year due to weak or nonexistent regulations, according to a report published by the watchdog group Environmental Integrity Project.The report analyzed wastewater discharges from petrochemical companies that produce plastics across the U.S., finding that a majority of the facilities had violated Clean Water Act permits and few were punished. In addition, only a few states are regulating some of the hazardous chemicals or substances of concern, and there are currently no limits set from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency for these contaminants in effluent water guidelines for the plastics industry. In the past 30 years, plastic production at petrochemical facilities has skyrocketed. The EPA estimates that plastic production in 1990 was at 17,130 tons, and by 2018 it had doubled, reaching 35,680 tons. Producing these plastics results in industrial wastewater discharges, some of which contain pollutants unregulated by federal wastewater guidelines. If the pollutant does have limits, they have been set by individual states. The report found the following pollutants:Dioxins, recognized as one of the most toxic classes of compounds by the World Health Organization, can be a byproduct of producing plastics like poly-vinyl chloride, or PVC. Out of the 17 facilities that produce PVC, only three have site limits set by states.1,4 dioxane, classified as a potential carcinogen, only had limits set at two facilities.An estimated 9.9 million pounds of nitrogen and 1.9 million pounds of phosphorus (known as nutrient pollution when combined) enter waterways from these plants annually, and can cause toxic algal blooms and fish-killing low-oxygen zones. Only one facility had limits for phosphorus pollution and none had total nitrogen limits. Plastic pellets, known as nurdles, are entering waterways in 27 states. Polyfluoroalkyl substances, or PFAS, are not currently considered in wastewater samples for petrochemical plant permit applications. A majority of the facilities have poor compliance records. Out of the 70 facilities, 83% had violated the Clean Water Act at least once in the last three years (58 facilities violated permits, yet only 8 were penalized). Nearly 40% of the facilities were operating on water pollution control permits that are outdated, “but have been administratively continued by state agencies,” according to the report. Outdated Clean Water Act regulations The Clean Water Act, issued by the EPA in 1972, has historically been enforced through effluent water guidelines. The petrochemical facilities in the report are regulated under a category of guidelines for organic chemicals, plastics and synthetic fibers.“The (plastics) industry has experienced significant, rapid growth in recent decades and is continuing to grow,” lead author of the report and research director at the Environmental Integrity Project, Kira Dunham, told EHN. “But…wastewater discharges are being regulated by standards from over 30 years ago.”This category of guidelines Dunham mentions has not been updated by the EPA since 1993, despite requirements for the agency to “periodically” update guidelines in accordance with technological updates for pollution control.Texas petrochemical pollution With 17 of the 30 facilities in Texas, the Houston area — known as the petrochemical capital of the U.S. — is the number one exporter of petrochemicals in the nation. Nearly one-third of these Texas facilities discharge wastewater into the Houston Ship Channel. Earlier this year, EHN investigated community member concerns about wastewater contamination potentially entering dredge material removed from the channel. Independent analysis from Healthy Port Communities, a collaborative of Houston-based environmental groups, noted high levels of dioxins in the soil surrounding dredge material. “Some of the places touched on in the (Environmental Integrity Project’s) report might have one major facility that has this… pattern of discharging pollutants into waterways,” Kristen Schlemmer, senior legal director of Houston- based water justice group Bayou City Waterkeeper, told EHN. “I don't want to discount that … but it at least makes it clear who you can focus on to address the problem. Whereas in Houston, we have so many different facilities that are polluting into our waterways, that it often just makes it seem like that's normal, and that's just the way things are going to be.” Schlemmer added that these concerns for pollution related to wastewater discharges are heightened by disasters, like this year’s derecho storm and Hurricane Beryl, in which water grows contaminated across large portions of the region. Beyond climate disasters, the Houston region is prone to chemical disasters and the state averages about one chemical release a week based on 2023 data.“I'm hoping through this work to show that this is not normal, and (to) raise the bar in terms of what our expectations are for the facilities that live in our backyards,” Schlemmer said. “If they're not going to comply with the law …I want them to … know that they're going to be facing legal action, either from us or for government regulators.”Earlier this year, the Environmental Integrity Project sued the EPA along with Bayou City Water Keeper, the Center for Biological Diversity and nearly 300 water justice groups in the Waterkeeper Alliance. In the original intent to sue, the group states that the EPA “has failed to perform its mandatory duty under (the Clean Water Act) ... to biennially submit state water quality reports and an analysis thereof … to Congress.”Just last week, the EPA released its biannual preliminary plan for effluent limitations guidelines and the announcement states that the EPA plans to conduct new studies that will clarify the impact of discharges from certain industries on waterways. The plan is open for public comment here.

Chemicals
Water
Government

Opinion: Weight-loss drugs are great, but real food still matters

We ultimately also must address the root cause of the global obesity crisis: our broken food system.

Groundbreaking weight-loss drugs like Ozempic and Wegovy have understandably generated a lot of excitement, bringing hope to the hundreds of millions of people grappling with obesity. When combined with a healthier diet and exercise, these drugs, which suppress appetite, deliver an average 10% reduction in body weight that can be sustained for years.With more than two-thirds of adults in the United Kingdom and nearly three-quarters in the United States classified as overweight or obese — a health crisis that costs national economies billions of dollars annually — physicians and policymakers could be forgiven for embracing these drugs as a panacea. President Biden’s administration, for example, recently proposed requiring Medicare and Medicaid to cover the costs of weight-loss drugs, which would expand access for millions of Americans. But addressing obesity requires much more than a technological fix.We ultimately also must address the root cause of the global obesity crisis: our broken food system.The alarming rise in obesity over the past 30 years is not simply a byproduct of higher living standards or more sedentary lifestyles. The primary factor appears to be the transformation of our food environment, which has fundamentally altered both the types of food we consume and our eating habits.In recent years, scientists and health experts have increasingly focused on foods high in fat, sugar and/or salt, which drive unhealthy dietary habits. Companies have reshaped the food system to produce ultraprocessed, hyperpalatable and highly profitable foods, leading people to snack more, eat larger portions and prepare fewer meals themselves. In the U.K., for example, the snack market has boomed while the time spent preparing meals has sharply declined.These changes haven’t just fueled the rapid increase in consumption of salty, fatty, sweet foods. They have also led to a surge in meat consumption, especially in Europe and North America, where meat-heavy diets have become common.Beyond the heightened risk of heart disease and related health conditions, excessive meat consumption has had devastating effects on the climate and biodiversity. Research shows that animal-based foods generate twice the greenhouse gas emissions of plant-based alternatives. Just as health experts urge us to reduce our intake of salt, fat and sugar, climate scientists consistently emphasize the importance of curbing meat and dairy consumption to keep global warming within safe limits.In an effort to prevent a lasting change in people’s eating habits, the meat industry is seeking technological fixes to cut greenhouse emissions. For example, funding for research on cutting farm emissions — such as feed additives designed to reduce methane levels in cows’ burps — has increased markedly.Such solutions are particularly attractive to governments reluctant to introduce measures that influence consumer behavior. Fearful of opposition from the Big Food lobby and wary of accusations of overreach, policies like sugar taxes or meat taxes are deemed political hot potatoes to be avoided at all costs.But the overlapping crises our broken food system is fueling — from the billions of dollars spent each year on diet-related health problems to the environmental degradation pushing our planet to its limits — cannot be wished away or fixed with technological tweaks. Instead, what is needed is a major shift in dietary habits toward foods that nourish both people and the environment.To this end, the Eat-Lancet Commission — comprising the world’s leading nutrition and sustainability experts — advocates consuming a diet rich in fresh fruits and vegetables, whole grains and plant-based proteins while reducing consumption of animal proteins, dairy and sugars. Taken together, these recommendations offer a clear blueprint for ensuring health and sustainability.It is unrealistic to expect consumers — conditioned by food environments designed for profit rather than human or environmental health — to drive this transition on their own. With unhealthy foods widely available and aggressively marketed, many consumers struggle to moderate their food intake, and in some cases they even develop addictive behaviors.Governments and food manufacturers must take proactive measures to reshape these environments, such as expanding the agendas of campaigns planned to take aim at reducing the consumption of salt, fat and sugar to also take aim at meat, thereby encouraging people to eat more plant-based whole foods and meat alternatives.Another potential solution would be to extend some nations’ bans on promotions for unhealthy foods to cover meat products. Requiring food companies to report on the types of food they sell, including salty, fatty and sweet foods and the ratio of plant-based to animal proteins, would also help. These measures would encourage businesses to prioritize healthier, more sustainable options over less nutritious ones.None of this is to suggest that the new generation of weight-loss drugs cannot benefit individuals living with obesity. For those trapped in a cycle of poor health, treatments such as Ozempic and Wegovy could even save lives, and efforts to make these treatments widely available are a welcome step.But it is essential that we recognize that this approach merely interrupts one mechanism of obesity rather than eliminating the underlying pathology. Defusing the time bombs of ill health and environmental catastrophe requires fast, decisive action to remake our dysfunctional food system.Emily Armistead is interim executive director of Madre Brava, a research and advocacy group.

Food
Crisis
Business

US environmental agency fast tracking new PFAS approvals for semiconductors

Hastened reviews of compounds as industry ramps up could increase pollution from likely toxic chemicalsThe Environmental Protection Agency is quietly fast tracking approval of new PFAS “forever chemicals” for use by the semiconductor industry at the same time the agency is publicly touting increased scrutiny of new PFAS and other chemicals.As US semiconductor production ramps up, the hastened reviews could sharply increase pollution containing little-studied PFAS that are likely toxic, accumulative in the environment and contribute to climate change. Continue reading...

The Environmental Protection Agency is quietly fast tracking approval of new PFAS “forever chemicals” for use by the semiconductor industry at the same time the agency is publicly touting increased scrutiny of new PFAS and other chemicals.As US semiconductor production ramps up, the hastened reviews could sharply increase pollution containing little-studied PFAS that are likely toxic, accumulative in the environment and contribute to climate change.Despite the risks, the EPA is “bending over backwards” for the semiconductor industry, said Mike Belliveau, the founder of the Bend The Curve non-profit who has lobbied on toxic chemical legislation.“We’re going to see more and more [PFAS pollution],” he said. “No one is happy that PFAS is in their drinking water or raining down from the air, and EPA’s permitting runs counter to rising scientific and public concern … so tension is mounting.”PFAS are a class of about 15,000 chemicals often used to make products resistant to water, stains and heat. They are called “forever chemicals” because they do not naturally break down, and are linked to cancer, liver problems, thyroid issues, birth defects, kidney disease, decreased immunity and other serious health problems.Semiconductors are essential to electronics used in defense, medical devices, smart phones, clean energy and more, and the Biden administration has spurred the industry’s onshoring with billions in incentives. But the industry is a prolific polluter and a major source of unregulated and unmonitored PFAS, creating tension with Biden’s sweeping plan to rein in PFAS pollution.The controversy represents a confluence of what environmental advocates have said are major deficiencies in PFAS regulation. It’s generating debate over the definition of PFAS, political meddling in EPA decisions, the rapid accumulation of little-studied PFAS and regulators’ black box decision making around chemical safety and approvals.The EPA in early December announced it would strengthen its review of new chemicals as part of the 2016 rewrite of Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA), which are the laws governing the nation’s use of toxic substances.Previously, industry could begin selling a chemical if the EPA didn’t review it within 90 days, resulting in thousands of substances being sold with virtually no review.The law also included a “low volume exemption” that allows chemicals to be sent to market in fewer than 30 days with little scrutiny if they’re used in small amounts and do not put workers’ health at risk – over 600 PFAS were given low volume exemptions in recent decades, including those that were “lethal if inhaled” and “corrosive to the skin”.The 2016 TSCA rewrite eliminated those problems, but the first Trump EPA never implemented the law. The Biden EPA published it in early December, stating the agency “should encourage innovation, while also making sure that new chemistries can be used safely before they are allowed to enter commerce”.“Today, we’ve modernized our chemical reviews and continued to protect people from unsafe new PFAS,” said Michal Freedhoff, an EPA chemical safety administrator.But 40 pages into the rule are two paragraphs that advocates say contradicts the rule’s intent. It points to PFAS’s “critical role” in semiconductor production, and states that the agency “prioritizes” those PFAS and “now reviews these new chemicals in a third of the time compared to other sectors” – or as little as 90 days.The EPA further claims it put in place a “framework” to ensure the chemicals are safe, but the details are unclear. It also justifies the decision in part by claiming that semiconductor PFAS are used in a “closed loop”, meaning they are contained in the facility, do not put workers at risk and are properly disposed of.But advocates say that is untrue. While industry uses robots in many chip making processes, the facilities pump an enormous volume of PFAS waste into water or air. Some capture waste and send it to incinerators that are technologically incapable of fully destroying PFAS, and instead send toxic waste into the air around those facilities.The Biden administration has acknowledged the PFAS waste problem, but still claims the process is “closed loop”.“There is no closed system for PFAS,” Belliveau said.It’s also unclear exactly how the EPA is weighing chemicals’ risks. The agency generally relies on industry science, and in other situations in which it has fast tracked approval of new chemicals, it uses standardized formulas to assess health and environmental risks that seem “designed to get them to ‘yes’,” said Tosh Sagar, an attorney with Earthjustice, which litigates on PFAS issues.If there is health and safety data on the new chemicals, it was developed by industry and largely is legally hidden from the public under confidential business information claims.“It’s innocent until proven guilty and that’s a fundamental problem,” said Lenny Siegel, with Chips Communities United, a group working with industry and the administration to improve environmental safeguards. “If there are safety reports, then show me – the chemicals are going to be in our environment and blood for a long, long time.”While the industry has tried to evade environmental oversight, it is looking for alternatives to PFAS, but development is slow and difficult. Producing semiconductors is a highly complex process and PFAS are essential ingredients used in as many as 1,000 steps at the nanometric level.Recent testing data showed 78,000 parts per trillion (ppt) of PFAS in wastewater from one facility – the EPA legal limit for several common PFAS compounds is 4 ppt.The process also demands the use of fluorinated gases, or PFAS gas, in a range of processes, and their toxicological risks remain largely unknown. But they often turn into TFA, a toxic greenhouse gas that can stay in the atmosphere for 1,000 years. TFA is often found at higher levels than any other PFAS compound in the air, water, and human blood, but independent researchers are only beginning to study it.Meanwhile, the EPA has altered the definition of PFAS in the rule to exclude many gases that are considered PFAS by most public health agencies worldwide, Sagar said. The exclusion has been a priority for the chemical industry and military.Chip makers and the Biden administration have argued that the benefits of onshoring the semiconductor industry outweighs the risks. That may be a point of debate, Siegel said, but he added: “That’s not what the EPA is saying – they’re saying they’re protecting us.“The EPA is not doing their job,” Siegel added.

Chemicals
Climate
Pollution

The Lazy Coffee Drinker’s Dilemma: Billions of Nonrecyclable K-Cups

This story was originally published by Grist and is reproduced here as part of the Climate Desk collaboration. There’s a Keurig machine in some 40 million households in the US. Single-serve coffee brewing systems—which allow consumers to make just one cup of coffee at a time by feeding a pod into a slot and pressing a button—have soared in popularity since […]

This story was originally published by Grist and is reproduced here as part of the Climate Desk collaboration. There’s a Keurig machine in some 40 million households in the US. Single-serve coffee brewing systems—which allow consumers to make just one cup of coffee at a time by feeding a pod into a slot and pressing a button—have soared in popularity since the early 2000s.  Inevitably, this leads to a lot of trash.  Every cup of java brewed creates a conundrum: what to do with the coffee pod that produced it. To start, can it be recycled? The answer, in Keurig’s case, is not really. The company’s single-use coffee pods—also known as K-cups—are made of polypropylene plastic, a material that experts warn is not as recyclable as consumers have been led to think. Two of the country’s largest recycling companies have said they do not accept K-cup pods, and one environmental group calculated that if you lined up all the K-cup pods in the world’s landfills side by side, they would comfortably circle the globe 10 times.  A new coffee pod company claims to have developed a solution to Keurig’s plastic waste problem. Cambio Roasters, which launched in September, offers a Keurig-compatible coffee pod that’s made out of aluminum—which, unlike plastic, is infinitely recyclable. Cambio is led by a team of former Keurig employees, including founder and CEO Kevin Hartley, who was previously a chief innovation officer at Keurig Green Mountain, as the company was formerly known. “This is, in our view, the most exciting innovation in coffee since the K-cup,” said Hartley during a launch-day press call for Cambio.   Experts, however, aren’t sure that Cambio understands just how big of a problem K-cups pose to curbside recycling systems. “Really, plastic is just not a good option,” said Jeremy Pare, a visiting professor of business and environment at Duke University’s Nicholas School of the Environment. But even aluminum, with all its benefits, is “still going to have issues.” Part of the difficulty of creating a truly recyclable packaging option—for just about any consumer good—is the severely fragmented nature of the American recycling landscape. “There are over 10,000 recycling systems in the US,” said Pare, who is also a member of the Plastic Pollution Working Group at Duke’s Nicholas Institute for Energy, Environment, and Sustainability. “And yet, at the same time, only a quarter of the population has access to recycling in the US.” (Pare lives in one such community with no formal recycling program, just outside of Augusta, Maine.) In the US, the question of whether something is recyclable can only accurately be answered on a local level. What really prevents coffee pods, regardless of what they’re made of, from having a second life is their size. Hartley, who left Keurig in 2017, knew consumers wanted a plastic-free K-cup option—and after years of prototypes and testing, he and his team settled on aluminum as an easier-to-recycle alternative. Aluminum is also impervious to oxygen, which causes coffee to lose its flavor over time. “Whenever we brew a cup of coffee, it tastes exactly as the roastmaster intended,” said Hartley.  Cambio isn’t the first single-serve coffee company to opt to ditch plastic or invest in circularity. Nespresso, a popular single-serve coffee company that’s owned by the Nestlé Group, has made its capsules out of aluminum for over 30 years. In 2020, Nespresso announced that its pods would be made of 80 percent recycled aluminum, and it claims its global recycling rate is 32 percent.  But Nespresso pods only work in Nespresso machines. Because Cambio coffee pods are designed to work with Keurig models, Hartley hopes to give consumers what they want “without having to buy a new brewer.” Cambio also allows users to peel back the lid and dump out the grounds before recycling. Nespresso pod lids are difficult to remove, and the company instructs users to recycle their pods as is, grounds and all—but they’re only approved for curbside recycling in New York City and Jersey City, where a designated recycling contractor cleans them out before reprocessing them. (Nespresso consumers can also mail used pods back to the manufacturer for recycling, or drop them off at Nespresso stores.) Unfortunately, swapping plastic for aluminum doesn’t automatically solve K-cup pods’ recyclability crisis, experts say. What really prevents coffee pods, regardless of what they’re made of, from having a second life is their size.  After collection, recyclables are sorted at a facility known as a materials recovery facility, or MRF. MRFs aren’t equipped to collect small items—a common rule of thumb is that they can’t handle anything smaller than a credit card—and so small objects placed in recycling bins often wind up getting sent to landfills. “The K-cups are so small that they fall through” the machinery in many recycling facilities, said Pare. “So other than separating” coffee pods from the waste stream “individually, there’s no good way to recycle them.”  Cambio’s approach to working around this is two-pronged. First, the company says it wants consumers to stack used K-cup pods together — and then pinch them closed — to overcome many recycling facilities’ size requirements. Three or more used K-cup pods should create a piece of aluminum large enough to fit through the machinery at recycling facilities, says Hartley. (These instructions don’t currently appear on Cambio’s packaging or website.) Cambio says it is also developing a device that will make this stacking and pinching of used K-cups easier. “Think of this device as an easy way for consumers to bundle cups together and then toss into their recycling bin,” said Hartley. He added that the company has filed for patents for second-generation Cambio pods that can be “snapped” together after use. Jan Dell, a chemical engineer and an environmental nonprofit founder, said, “I don’t think aluminum pods are a meaningful improvement,” citing their small size as a barrier to being accepted and sorted via curbside recycling systems. “Think of the pods like confetti: impossible to collect back up.” Cambio disagreed with Dell’s characterization of the switch to aluminum, pointing out that currently, essentially no single-use plastic pods are recycled, whereas aluminum can be endlessly recycled. “To Cambio and consumers, these two facts are meaningful.” Hartley also shared that the work of ensuring Cambio’s compatibility with recycling programs across the country is “ongoing.” The company is planning to run tests with MRFs in specific markets “as soon as feasible.” In response to a request for comment, a spokesperson from Keurig Dr Pepper said, “We know our consumers want simplicity and less waste.” They shared that the company has “been lightweighting our pods to reduce the amount of plastic used,” as well as “increasing options for recycling them,” including a soon-to-be-launched program in which customers will be able to mail their used pods to Keurig for recycling. The spokesperson also said the company is “continually exploring” more “sustainable packaging” options.  Dell leads the nonprofit The Last Beach Cleanup, which is focused on fighting plastic pollution. The ultimate solution to Keurig’s plastic footprint, she said, is a product that eliminates “the need to collect anything back from customers,” like a fiber-based pod that can be composted along with the grounds. Keurig is currently testing a plant-based pod format that won’t have any plastic or aluminum, and the company expects it to be certified compostable, according to the Keurig Dr Pepper spokesperson. Hartley said he worked on that product for many years, calling it “an amazing innovation.”  But these coffee pucks, which are not yet available for sale, will require an entirely new machine to run. “It’s going to take a long time before America is going to throw away 40 or 50 million brewers and buy 40 or 50 million new brewers,” said Hartley. He added, referring to his time with Keurig, “I won’t tell publicly how much money we spent to start from zero and have 50 million American households loving their Keurigs. But it’s a big lift, and it takes decades.”  In an interview with the Atlantic in 2015, the inventor of the K-cup said, “I feel bad sometimes that I ever did it.” As the market for single-serve coffee brewers grows, so will its impact on the environment, unless its products are somehow wildly reimagined and redesigned. Keurigs and Nespresso machines are marketed as both convenient and luxurious, a combination that is likely to keep drawing in new market segments.  But eco-conscious coffee brewers can rest easy in the knowledge that you don’t need a Keurig or Nespresso machine to brew one cup of coffee at a time; any coffee maker can be single-serve if you use only the water and coffee grounds you actually need. No pods required—maybe just a filter.  

Climate
Business
Crisis

Why I'm optimistic about cleantech over the next four years

Having spent over 15 years deeply involved in the cleantech industry, I’ve experienced its peaks, valleys, and everything in between. Since Trump’s win, industry insiders and the media have been wallowing in an unusual amount of doom and gloom. Many are concerned about policy uncertainty, shifting market conditions,…

Having spent over 15 years deeply involved in the cleantech industry, I’ve experienced its peaks, valleys, and everything in between. Since Trump’s win, industry insiders and the media have been wallowing in an unusual amount of doom and gloom. Many are concerned about policy uncertainty, shifting market conditions, and the challenges of scaling up technologies that are inherent in our sector.But let me share a contrarian view. I think we’re on the brink of a golden era for renewable energy and clean transportation deployments. In fact, I believe the next four years will redefine our industry in ways we’ve only dreamed of. Here’s why. Renewables + storage will dominate energy economics Lithium-ion battery prices have been falling for years, driven by the expansion of manufacturing and technological innovation. By the end of this decade, renewable energy combined with storage solutions will offer the lowest cost of energy for most hours of the day. This is the inevitable outcome of economies of scale meeting the pressing global need for clean energy.Wind and solar, paired with increasingly cost-effective storage systems, will soon surpass fossil fuels — not just on environmental grounds but on pure economic competitiveness. This shift will transform energy markets, making clean energy the default for businesses, municipalities, and consumers alike. However, there’s an important caveat: Dispatchable sources will still be essential for the foreseeable future.While renewables will meet the majority of our energy needs, delivering consistent energy with these resources will still be a challenge at night or on days when the sun does not shine or the wind does not blow. This is where dispatchable sources like virtual power plants and biogas play a crucial role.Both are gaining traction as reliable, scalable solutions. VPPs aggregate decentralized energy generators and loads, such as demand-response assets, rooftop solar, and batteries, to dial down grid loading in real time. Meanwhile, biogas (in the form of renewable natural gas) offers a carbon-negative, dispatchable energy source that can be ramped up quickly when the grid needs it most. Together, these technologies fill the gaps left by intermittent renewables, ensuring reliability without compromising on sustainability.Then there’s geothermal — which happens to be having a moment.For decades, geothermal energy has been the underrated player in clean energy discussions. That’s changing fast. Recent advances in drilling and heat-extraction technologies are making this underdog both reliable and cost-competitive.Unlike wind and solar, geothermal provides a consistent baseload power supply, regardless of weather conditions. As deployment ramps up, it will solidify its position as a cornerstone of clean energy infrastructure, complementing other renewable sources. EV adoption is speeding up Passenger electric vehicles are no longer just better for the environment — they’re objectively better products. Now that EVs and internal-combustion-engine vehicles have reached cost parity, the tipping point has arrived. Hockey-stick adoption rates are already evident, and the momentum will only accelerate. Meanwhile, Class 5 to 8 vehicles (commercial trucks) are next in line to electrify. Advances in battery technology and increased manufacturing will make these heavy-duty EVs the standard across logistics, freight, and public transit sectors. This isn’t speculative; it’s occurring now, and the trend is unstoppable.

Business
Energy
Technology

New data shows just how bad the climate insurance crisis has become

Two Congressional reports make clear that, with increasingly frequent hurricanes, floods and fires, "the model of insurance as it stands right now isn't working."

Five hurricanes made landfall in the United States this year, causing half a trillion dollars in damages. Flooding devastated mountain towns along the East Coast. Scores of wildfires burned almost 8 million acres nationwide. As such events grow more common, and more devastating, homeowners are seeing their insurance premiums spike — or insurers ditch them all together.  An analysis released Wednesday by the Senate Committee on the Budget found that the rate at which insurance contracts are being dropped rose significantly in recent years, particularly in states most exposed to climate risks. In all, 1.9 million policies were not renewed. “Climate change is no longer just an environmental problem,” Senator Sheldon Whitehouse, a Democrat from Rhode Island, who chairs the budget committee, said at a hearing on the matter Wednesday. “It is an economic threat, and it is an affordability issue that we should not ignore.” For those with insurance, premiums rose 44 percent between 2011 and 2021, and another 11 percent last year, according to a report the congressional Joint Economic Committee also released this week. A Democratic analyst on the Joint Economic Committee, or JEC, who requested anonymity to comment publicly, said, “The model of insurance as it stands right now isn’t working.” Clayton Aldern / Grist The JEC report included a state-by-state breakdown of premium increases and risk ranking based on climate perils. Florida topped the list on both fronts, and saw a whopping $1,272 climb in annual premiums between 2020 and 2023. Michigan saw the smallest increase at $136. No state saw a decrease over that time.  “This isn’t a red or blue state issue,” said the analyst. “It’s widely applicable across the nation.”  Florida also topped the list when it comes to the number of non-renewals, according to the Senate committee report that examined state and county level data. The rate nearly tripled between 2018 and 2023. Nationwide, in 2023, 48 of the top 50 counties — and 82 of the top 100 counties — with the highest rates of non-renewal were either flood-prone, faced elevated wildfire risk, or both. Climate-exacerbated disasters can batter insurance markets because those events create massive financial liabilities for insurance providers, and the companies, called re-insurers, that underwrite them. “Ultimately, all those groups are raising their prices and it’s the homeowners who have to pay in the end,” said Phillip Mulder, an economist and expert on risk and insurance at the Wisconsin School of Business. He was a co-author of the state-level dataset that helped underpin the JEC’s work. Not everyone at the Senate hearing agreed on the role climate change plays in insurance markets.  “The insurance industry is not in the midst of a climate-driven crisis, nor is it about to fall,” Robert Hartwig, an economist and associate professor at the University of South Carolina, told lawmakers. “Climate risk is an important determinant in the cost of insurance, but there has been a tendency, however, to over attribute the impact of climate change when describing the state of insurance markets.” What is clear is that costly natural disasters are becoming more frequent, with the average time between billion-dollar events dropping from four months in 1980 to approximately three weeks today. As those risks grow, some insurers are pulling out states entirely. For example, State Farm and Allstate have left California, and dozens of smaller companies have collapsed or fled Florida and Louisiana.  When that happens, homeowners must turn to government-backed insurers of last resort, which are available in just 26 states and typically cost more than private coverage. Enrollment in those state-run plans have skyrocketed, the JEC report notes, and they now cover more than $1 trillion in assets.  “It all falls on the states,” Rob Moore, director of the Water & Climate Team at the Natural Resources Defense Council, said of the current regulatory set up. “The federal government has very little role to play on the insurance market.” The JEC report outlines a number of steps Congress could take to give itself a greater role in addressing the problem. For example, it highlights the need for more data collection through initiatives like the Wildfire Insurance Coverage Study Act to better understand the problem. It also points to the proposed Shelter Act, which would provide homeowners with a tax credit covering 25 percent of disaster mitigation improvements that bolster their property’s resilience, reduce the risk of catastrophic damage, and, consequently, lower their premiums.  Moore agreed that adapting old homes, and future-proofing new ones, will be key to righting insurance markets. “The real long term problem is we’re trying to ensure structures that were never built for the risks and vulnerabilities that they now face,” he said. “If you want an insurable structure 30 years from now, we have to build it today.” Another shift the report mentions is the possibility of the federal government becoming a re-insurer that backstops climate-stressed insurance markets, something the proposed INSURE Act calls for. France, Japan, and New Zealand have such programs, and the report argues that such a move in the U.S. “could simplify a complicated insurance sector and transfer risks associated with catastrophes to the Federal government.” For now, though, none of those initiatives have progressed in Congress and all of them are sponsored by Democrats. With Republicans taking control of the House, Senate, and presidency, it remains unclear whether the bills have much of a future.  “That’s a question everyone’s thinking about,” the committee analyst said, noting that taking a dollars-and-cents approach could make the issue resonate across the political spectrum. “Wildfires are raging and we’re seeing more and more flooding. This issue isn’t going away.” This story was originally published by Grist with the headline New data shows just how bad the climate insurance crisis has become on Dec 19, 2024.

Climate
Crisis
Government

No Results today.

Our news is updated constantly with the latest environmental stories from around the world. Reset or change your filters to find the most active current topics.

Join us to forge
a sustainable future

Our team is always growing.
Become a partner, volunteer, sponsor, or intern today.
Let us know how you would like to get involved!

CONTACT US

sign up for our mailing list to stay informed on the latest films and environmental headlines.

Subscribers receive a free day pass for streaming Cinema Verde.
Thank you! Your submission has been received!
Oops! Something went wrong while submitting the form.