Solving the climate crisis isn’t just about cutting carbon emissions. It’s about protecting people from harm.
Styrofoam’s demise is here — and it’s all thanks to dead shrimp
Oops, not really about climate, but it's all connected...
4.6 Billion Years On, the Sun Is Having a Moment
In the past two years, without much notice, solar power has begun to truly transform the world’s energy system. By Bill McKibben An encouraging article.
A recent pilot in Massachusetts showed a 20% reduction in energy costs, and around a 60% decrease in carbon emissions for residents on the system.
Millions of single-family homes are underused, on spacious lots. Refitting them for “roommate houses” or backyard cottages could make a difference.
Monte Anderson opened a broom closet in his kitchen and pointed to a door handle near a mop and a trash can. Somewhere on the other side lay one small solution to America’s affordable housing crisis.
Mr. Anderson is a developer who rehabs commercial and residential buildings in and around Dallas, including the ranch-style house where he lives, for now, with three kind-of-sort-of roommates. The 2,400-square-foot home has been split into four studio apartments. Each has an outdoor entrance, but also connects to another unit through a door like the one in his kitchen closet.
The connecting doors are locked and hidden because they’re designed to not be used. The main reason for their existence is that they allow Mr. Anderson to claim he lives in a single-family home, in accordance with local zoning codes, when in reality the home contains four apartments in a country that needs more of them.
“This is a suburban retrofit,” Mr. Anderson, 66, said during the tour.
Economists estimate that America needs between four million and eight million more homes. Their prescription is to build a lot of new houses and apartment complexes. It’s a remedy that politicians from both parties agree with in principle, but that is bound to take decades to accomplish.
It takes money to buy land, time to secure permits. In the meantime, construction costs have exploded. That’s why most new homes tend to be luxury rentals or higher-cost houses, rather than something a person with a middle or lower income can afford. Those lower-cost units, however, are the ones in the shortest supply.
This imbalance has turned policymakers and entrepreneurs like Mr. Anderson toward a large and underappreciated market: the 145 million or so homes that already exist.
About two-thirds of America’s housing stock consists of single-family homes. Apartment buildings are essentially banned from large swaths of major metropolitan areas, where most of the land is zoned for low-density neighborhoods. Mr. Anderson is trying to find a loophole by guiding single-family homes toward a new, multifamily life.
There was a time when big houses were what the United States needed. When Mr. Anderson’s house was built in the 1970s, American mothers had more than three children on average, according to the Pew Research Center.All of his projects are scattered around Dallas and its suburbs, a region where he has spent his entire life. But within that area, Mr. Anderson stays on the move, often taking residence in whatever new thing he has just built. For a while, he lived in a boutique hotel, then moved to an apartment complex he had redeveloped. Now he’s in the chopped-up house.
“Sometimes I have to do it for financial reasons, but mostly I do it to see what I’ve done right and what I’ve done wrong,” Mr. Anderson said. “To do the experiment, I have to live in it.”
The units in the roommate house rent for $1,800, including utilities. At that price, it’s not affordable for low-income tenants. But he is providing a haven for a 27-year-old woman who works in an assisted-living facility, a 70-year-old bookkeeper and Mr. Anderson’s 20-year-old granddaughter, who is a real estate agent. And to his way of thinking, the building itself stands for something: a proof of concept for a way of living.
Today that’s shifted: People are marrying at older ages or not at all, having fewer children (an average of two for mothers in 2020, according to Pew) and increasingly living with other adults in their families. The result is a housing mismatch in which older people live in big houses with empty bedrooms while single adults and families with few children are looking for smaller, more affordable places.
“The roommate house” — Mr. Anderson’s name for his chopped-up ranch home — is designed for this new world. A serial rehabber, Mr. Anderson has taken on strip malls, a movie theater and a former wax paper plant that now contains some 70 small businesses, including a microbrewery, a boxing gym and a mishmash of artisans who sell things like jewelry and housewares.
All of his projects are scattered around Dallas and its suburbs, a region where he has spent his entire life. But within that area, Mr. Anderson stays on the move, often taking residence in whatever new thing he has just built. For a while, he lived in a boutique hotel, then moved to an apartment complex he had redeveloped. Now he’s in the chopped-up house.
“Sometimes I have to do it for financial reasons, but mostly I do it to see what I’ve done right and what I’ve done wrong,” Mr. Anderson said. “To do the experiment, I have to live in it.”
The units in the roommate house rent for $1,800, including utilities. At that price, it’s not affordable for low-income tenants. But he is providing a haven for a 27-year-old woman who works in an assisted-living facility, a 70-year-old bookkeeper and Mr. Anderson’s 20-year-old granddaughter, who is a real estate agent. And to his way of thinking, the building itself stands for something: a proof of concept for a way of living.
Over the past decade, cities and states around the country have tried to encourage ideas like Mr. Anderson’s by making it easier to add rental units to existing structures. Some have passed laws that allow backyard homes and garage and basement units. Others encourage homeowners to subdivide their lots and sell a portion for development.
The goal is to add housing in existing neighborhoods without creating too much disruption — or stirring up residents who don’t like change. In many cases, the efforts have yielded more significant results than attempts to rezone entire cities or add apartment buildings to streets of single-family houses.
Consider California, home of the nation’s biggest affordability crisis. Since 2016, state legislators have proposed a blizzard of housing laws, from forcing suburbs to allow multifamily housing to stripping cities of land-use authority if they don’t approve housing more quickly. Yet when you look at the number of units that have been built since the Legislature started focusing on housing, the humble backyard cottage — an “accessory dwelling unit” in the jargon of city planners — is the main bright spot.
In 2016, before California passed several laws making A.D.U.s easier to build, local governments permitted about 1,000, which in a state of 40 million people is basically zero. In 2023, the state permitted about 23,000, while the number of new single-family homes and apartment buildings remained essentially flat.
The A.D.U. laws created an entrepreneurial boomlet — a literal cottage industry that helps homeowners get permits, build units and use software to identify suitable lots. Phil Levin, a Bay Area technology executive who has become an evangelist for communal living, recently started Live Near Friends, a company that helps people identify plots whose size and regulations are ideal for multiple families to live on.
Ben Bear is the chief executive of BuildCasa, an Oakland company founded in 2022 to take advantage of new California laws that allow homeowners to subdivide their property and sell their backyards for development. The company is a hybrid real estate play that develops some properties but mostly acts as a broker that connects other developers with homeowners who want to add units.
Mr. Bear estimates that the state could add millions of units this way while unlocking billions in value for homeowners. So far, he said, many of his customers are parents who split their lots to build homes for their adult children or are aging homeowners in search of income.
“It’s boomers who bought a long time ago and have paid off their homes and own the biggest lots,” he said.
Mr. Anderson, in Dallas, sometimes rents his rooms through PadSplit, an Atlanta-based company that is essentially a roommate version of Airbnb: Its software platform connects tenants looking for rooms with homeowners looking for renters.
Living arrangements have always shifted with culture and the economy. During World War II, another grinding housing shortage prompted Americans to carve up homes and create rooming hotels in major cities. The shortage eased during the postwar building boom, as developers mass-built the modern suburbs, often with modest two- and three-bedroom houses.
At the same time, the composition of households shifted from multigenerational groupings toward a mix of nuclear and single-parent households. That trend has started to reverse.
In a new book, “Doubled Up,” Hope Harvey, a professor of public policy at the University of Kentucky, documents how high rents, the precarious job market and the need to care for older parents or young children have made multigenerational households far more common.
This shift is most prevalent among lower-income households and reflects yawning inequality and a fraying safety net, along with the housing shortage. But the trend has moved steadily up the income ladder as rent and home prices have escalated.
“The housing market is so expensive, the child care market is so expensive, that these families feel that to pursue their goals they have to double up,” Dr. Harvey said in an interview.
These are usually economic decisions: Dr. Harvey said most of the people she had talked to for her book described living in someone else’s home as a temporary arrangement. Most people don’t want to deal with grating annoyances like sharing a living room, or immediately cleaning up dishes because they live with a neat freak. Some don’t like never being alone.
Mr. Anderson said his roommate house was designed with this aversion to togetherness in mind. He bought the house for $300,000 when it was borderline uninhabitable — a wrecked kitchen, drained pool, leaking roof — and spent about $1 million renovating it. He also added a backyard house that looks onto a resurfaced pool. A wooden deck, gravel walkways and cactus landscaping give the grounds a midcentury desert vibe.
“It’s not exactly where I want to live myself,” he said. “Although I kind of like it.”
Including the apartment Mr. Anderson currently lives in, the rents would bring in a little over $9,000 a month, which is just enough to cover the mortgage and expenses.
Why build something with so little financial upside? Mr. Anderson’s hope, he said, is that the project will inspire others and show cities that multifamily living can coexist in single-family neighborhoods. This, he argued, would bring in more tax revenue, raise real estate values and possibly inspire others to hire his company to develop more homes like his.
Plus, while the paltry returns might not entice Wall Street, he said, “it’s a financial winner if you have an elderly parent who can live here instead of assisted living.”
As we walked through a newly vacant unit — a consultant who used to live there moved to North Carolina — Mr. Anderson said his aim is to create a happy medium with lower-cost units and a sense of community. But that community only works because people can keep the doors closed and ignore each other.
Conor Dougherty covers housing and development, focusing on the rising costs of homeownership. He is based in Los Angeles.
A version of this article appears in print on May 8, 2025, Section B, Page 1 of the New York edition with the headline: ‘Roommate Houses’ Could Turn a Crisis Into a Cottage Industry.
Fuel savings and affordability collide in the attic.
(This title is a bit misleading; they are just at the start of this)
(tragedy or opportunity?)
Plug-and-play panels blossom in Europe. Here’s why they haven’t stateside.
(Some rare good news!)
Following: Two articles looking ahead to Donald Trump's possible impact on climate change this time around, and what we can do. Don't read the first one if you are bothered by extremely partisan writing!
No, the Fight for the Climate Isn’t “Over”
Coldplay Beats Emissions Targets for World Tour
(Another band setting an example of climate activism!)
This monthly periodical covers "green energy" stories around northern New England and upstate New York. It is available online and on paper in the 4 states it covers. In Maine, you can find it in Norway at CEBE, and apparently also at the Parsonsfield Town Hall and in Fryeburg at Spice and Grain, as well as many coastal towns. It will also be at the Common Ground Fair.
(It is important for us to hear (read) about others' inspiring actions! They can spark ideas for our own actions, and encourage us because we are not working in a vacuum.)
Underpinned by a transition to renewable energy and materials, the circular economy is a resilient system that is good for business, people, and the environment.
Scientists unearth a consequence of solar panels in the Sahara
A giant solar farm sounds perfect, right? Not quite.
(This is an interesting exercise called "backward planning" that can help us meet goals.)
(Click here to read this article within this website, or use the link.)
Written by Jessie Van Amburg
Finding optimism has motivated me to fight like hell to protect the planet.
As a Girl Scout, I learned to always leave a place nicer than I found it. During my days as a troop member, the maxim primarily applied to camping sites, but now, as an adult, it feels relevant on a much larger scale. Being mindful of those who come after you, and ensuring that you leave a world for them to enjoy, seems like a big part of being a human being.
As an adult, though, the “Girl Scout Way” has long felt inaccessible in that broader application. Thanks to the human-made climate crisis, the global temperature is rising, glaciers and ice sheets are shrinking, and so-called “once in a lifetime” storms seem to happen on a regular basis. Yet most days, it feels like the people in charge—officials we vote into office to govern such matters—aren’t doing anything to stop it. Frustration related to this inaction used to keep me up at night, grinding my teeth, and doomscrolling through my newsfeed. If the most powerful people in the world don’t care, I thought, or can’t get anything done, then what hope do the rest of us have on our own?
I’m not alone in my climate anxiety, also called ecoanxiety—a concept that was popularized in the early ‘90s—which the American Psychological Association (APA) defines as a “chronic fear of environmental doom.” A 2021 study published in The Lancet Planetary Health found that 59 percent of people aged 16 to 25 around the globe were “very or extremely worried” about climate change. And a survey conducted by the APA in 2020 found that 67 percent of U.S. respondents were “extremely or somewhat anxious” about the impact of climate change.
“[Feeling this way] is normal,” says Robert Feder, MD, a psychiatrist, member of the Climate Psychiatry Alliance, and the APA representative to the Medical Society Consortium on Climate and Health. “People are very concerned about [climate change] and worried about their futures and the futures of their family and the world in general.” He stresses that climate anxiety is not an illness or disorder, but rather a healthy reaction to the state of the world.
Unfortunately, this worry can cause many of the hallmark symptoms of an anxiety disorder, like panic attacks, difficulty sleeping, shortness of breath, and ruminating thoughts. If left unaddressed, Dr. Feder says a person’s climate anxiety can develop into depression, causing feelings of hopelessness and despair. That rang true for me—until last summer.
Photo / Jackson Van Amburg
My perspective started to change last July when I got a message from my friend Veekas: “We’re starting a climate justice group!” he shared in our group chat with other friends. “If you’re interested in learning more, come to our house on Wednesday evening!” I had never been involved in any kind of community organizing before. But what could it hurt to go try?
The icebreaker activity at that first meeting—which consisted of about 15 people gathered on Veekas’s back porch—was to share what brought you there today. I felt a little bit like I was back in Girl Scouts as we went around in a circle, talking, one by one, about our fears for the planet, our collective disdain of Senator Joe Manchin (who at the time, had just tanked a huge spending bill because it contained provisions for fighting climate change), and our desire for a better world.
I’m tired of standing on the sidelines and feeling powerless. I want to do something with this anger.
“I’m angry,” I said when it was my turn. “I’m tired of standing on the sidelines and feeling powerless. I want to do something with this anger.” A chorus of nods and snaps greeted me from the rest of the group. For the first time in a long time, I felt a little bit lighter. I’m not alone.
In subsequent weeks, our little group evolved rapidly. We named ourselves—Beacon Climate Action Now (BCAN), since most of us were based in Beacon, New York—and settled on our core mission as a politically engaged, progressive group centering climate justice and community care.
We sketched out visions of a green future on the back of old pieces of poster board, welcomed in dozens of new members, and debated about the focus of our first campaign. By August, we landed on the answer: Petitioning the city of Beacon to pass legislation that would ban fossil-fuel hookups in new construction. Thirty percent of New York’s carbon emissions come from buildings, so by ending fossil-fuel use in new buildings, we’d significantly cut back on future state emissions.
From there, we mobilized. I knocked on neighbors’ doors in 90℉ heat to try and get petition signatures, I led a smaller committee to put together fact sheets about natural gas, and I talked to community members at the farmers’ market about our campaign. I was suddenly spending my weekends canvassing or brainstorming strategy with my friends over walks by the river. But it didn’t feel like work. It was fun.
Photo / Jackson Van Amburg
Engaging in climate activism single-handedly transformed my outlook on this existential issue—and it currently helps me better manage my anxiety around it all. I can’t pinpoint exactly when the shift happened, but I’m grateful for it.
This outcome didn’t surprise Dr. Feder, who wrote a research-based guide for therapists in 2022 to help people with climate anxiety. “One of the primary things that people ended up reporting about as being helpful was getting involved in some sort of purposeful action to make a difference,” he says.
The “why” is multifaceted, though. For starters, doing this work has connected me to experts and advocates who have taught me about the solutions alongside the vast problems that previously felt insurmountable to me.
Basically, I’ve learned that the climate crisis is not a “closed case,” as Dr. Feder puts it. “We try to help [people] see that the situation is probably not as catastrophic as they’re seeing it,” he says, “that there are things that are happening that are good.” In my case, better understanding the fixes—like electrification and regenerative agriculture, to name a few—makes the huge crisis seem a bit more approachable, and gives me some hope for the future.
Being a member of BCAN has also helped me feel less isolated, which Dr. Feder says is a critical part of addressing climate anxiety. My husband and I didn’t know anyone when we moved from Brooklyn to Beacon in 2020. Joining the group has not only introduced me to so many new friends, but also provided us a natural outlet to hang out and connect with each other. That social support alone is crucial for my mental health. “The fact that you're working together on something with an endpoint goal involves an inherent hope,” adds Dr. Feder. Hope, he says, is kryptonite to climate anxiety.
And wow, is hope powerful. In October, BCAN organized a free festival to support our campaign. We had live music, performed by group members; a raffle with prizes donated by local businesses; a climate-themed story hour for kids; and an interactive trivia game to educate folks about the benefits of gas-free buildings. It was so much work to pull together, with very little lead time, and absolutely no money. But seeing hundreds of people show up on that beautiful fall day completely took my breath away. People actually wanted to turn out and make change on a scary issue—and we showed them it could be fun and healing to do so. I rode the high I felt following the event for weeks.
Breaking down my feelings of climate anxiety further were the tangible results to our efforts we were seeing. At the end of March, our city council unanimously passed one of the most ambitious municipal electrification bills in the nation, banning fossil fuels in new construction and major renovations starting in 2024. That bill started as a mere idea in my friend’s backyard, and was championed by a group of 50 volunteers, many of whom had no prior organizing experience. It might also help push the state to pass its own version, making the impact on state-wide emissions even greater. If that’s not proof of the power of collective action, I don’t know what is.
If this all sounds appealing to you (and I hope it does), there are a few places where you can start getting involved.
First, look up local chapters of national organizations that you like and see if they have meetings you can join. Some great options include Food and Water Watch (which focuses on safe food and water), the Climate Justice Alliance (which centers addressing inequality), Sunrise Movement (which is geared toward young people) and 350.org (which targets the fossil fuel industry).
There may also be independent groups in your area more targeted to your community’s needs. Examples include LA Forward Action and East Yard Communities in Los Angeles, We Act or NYC Environmental Justice Alliance in New York City, or regional organizations like Midwest Environmental Justice Network or the Southeast Climate and Energy Network. Other groups also focus on specific populations most affected by the climate crisis, like the Indigenous Climate Resilience Network and the National Black Environmental Justice Network.
Educate yourself about what your city government offers in the realm of climate activism, such as climate-themed community forums or committees focused on environmental policy ideas. Attending city council meetings could be a good starting point to see what’s in progress (if anything) and where there might be opportunities to contribute or make change.
Photo / Veekas Ashoka
If you’re not finding an existing group doing what you’d like to do in your community, you could always gather with friends and acquaintances and build your group from the ground up. You might be surprised what you can accomplish. Take BCAN, which now boasts over 50 members and is crafting a climate-justice policy platform and endorsement process for this year’s municipal elections. We also recently joined New York Renews, a coalition of hundreds of smaller climate justice groups, in order to tap into and support larger state-wide initiatives.
Even Dr. Feder has taken to activism to address his own eco-anxiety as a member of groups including 350NH (the New Hampshire affiliate of 350) and No Coal No Gas. Organizing with others to take action on the climate crisis has “basically given me a feeling that there are ways of intervening in the situation that have possibilities for success,” he says. “[Organizing] gives you a sense of real action about it.”
Yes, I am very aware that it will be a long fight to make the changes that need to be made. And yes, there are days where caring about the Earth—and climate justice—feels like you're chipping away at a boulder with a toothpick while everyone else denies that the boulder is even that big.
But ultimately, I am choosing to have faith in a better world rather than accepting the fate that seemingly has been handed to us through decades of inaction. Being optimistic about that fate motivates me to fight like hell to protect my future and that of everyone I love—even on the most difficult, frustrating days. So if you’re overwhelmed thinking about how to leave the world a better place, take this step with me. You’re not alone.
Production Credits
Designed by Natalie Carroll
https://www.wellandgood.com/community-activism-climate-anxiety/
Get Your Petroleum Off My Body
The Great Last Gasp of the Great Salt Lake
Climate Change Is Turning Outdoor Athletes Into Some of Our Planet’s Fiercest Advocates
As Microplastics Amass, Our Planet’s Plastic Problem Is Getting Personal
Food Waste Is One of the Most Actionable Issues We Can Tackle in the Fight Against Climate Change
(Click here to read this article within this website, or use the link.)
Census tracts around the country will be prioritized for federal support as their residents contend with impacts of climate change and other natural hazards.
Rikers Island in the Bronx, New York, made the list due to its extreme vulnerability to flooding. Lincoln, Wyoming, was selected because of its high avalanche risk. And the danger of both earthquakes and drought propelled part of Alameda, California, to federal attention.
The three places are among 483 census tracts nationwide that the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) designated Wednesday as Community Disaster Resilience Zones, giving them prioritized access to federal funding to strengthen their defenses against climate impacts and other hazards. In all, the designated tracts cover about 2 million people living in rural, urban and suburban areas.
BloombergGreenHong Kong Shuts Down City After Heaviest Rainfall Since 1884Lotus Unleashes Emeya, a Porsche Panamera-Like Electric SedanLeadership Doubts Threaten Fortescue Founder’s Green ReinventionWhy India Is Such a Pivotal Front in the Global Climate Fight
“These designations will help ensure that the most at-risk communities are able to build resilience against natural hazards and extreme weather events, which are becoming increasingly intense and frequent due to climate change,” FEMA Administrator Deanne Criswell said in a written statement.
Each of the 50 states and the District of Columbia has at least one community in the initial set of designations, made available in advance exclusively to Bloomberg Green. Unsurprisingly, California, Texas and Florida — large states that regularly experience hurricanes and wildfires — have the highest number of zones per state, with 51, 35 and 32, respectively.
California, Texas and Florida have the most census tracts earmarked for increased federal support
Source: Federal Emergency Management Agency
Harris County, Texas, whose county seat is Houston, has the most resilience zones of any single US county at 14. Houston was devastated by flooding from Hurricane Harvey in 2017. Roughly 16% of people in the county live below the poverty line, according to the US Census.
To compile the list, FEMA said it looked at 18 different natural risk factors, ranging from flooding to extreme heat to hailstone damage. The agency also considered socioeconomic factors that can impact a community’s disaster resilience.
Read More: FEMA Index Offers Closer Look at Social Risks in Disaster Resilience
FEMA made the designations following a law passed last year that instructed the agency to identify areas at high risk from natural hazards. The list of 483 zones announced today will be expanded later this year and again in 2024. Designation lasts five years.
Victoria Salinas, associate administrator for resilience at FEMA, said the designation should allow local governments to take a more holistic approach to climate-related threats, rather than pursuing one-off projects. A community threatened by extreme heat could, for example, open a cooling center and combine it with setting aside more parkland or building a microgrid to power air conditioners if the larger grid fails.
Salinas said the program will bring consistency to the still-evolving field of climate adaptation and disaster risk mitigation. While each community will need to tailor its responses to unique circumstances, having the designation will enable them all to access a “common methodology, approach and partnership structure to help them make a giant leap forward” in preparing for climate risks.
Officials also hope it will encourage other players, such as philanthropies and private companies, to target investments in these areas. The goal, said Salinas, is “to catalyze resilience-building in a concentrated amount of time.”
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2023-09-06/nearly-500-us-communities-named-resilience-zones-by-fema?utm_campaign=news&utm_medium=bd&utm_source=applenews&leadSource=uverify%20wall
Across the country, local governments are accelerating their efforts to cut greenhouse gas emissions, in
some cases bridging partisan divides. Their role will become increasingly important.
(Click here to read this article within this website, or use the link if you subscribe to the New York Times.)
By Maggie Astor
July 1, 2022 Updated 11:33 a.m. ET
Legislators in Colorado, historically a major coal state, have passed more than 50 climate-related laws
since 2019. The liquor store in the farming town of Morris, Minn., cools its beer with solar power. Voters
in Athens, Ohio, imposed a carbon fee on themselves. Citizens in Fairfax County, Va., teamed up for a
year and a half to produce a 214-page climate action plan.
Across the country, communities and states are accelerating their efforts to fight climate change as
action stalls on the national level. This week, the Supreme Court curtailed the Environmental Protection
Agency’s authority to limit greenhouse gas emissions from power plants, one of the biggest sources of
planet-warming pollution — the latest example of how the Biden administration’s climate tools are
getting chipped away.
During the Trump administration, which aggressively weakened environmental and climate protections,
local efforts gained importance. Now, experts say, local action is even more critical for the United States
— which is second only to China in emissions — to have a chance at helping the world avert the worst
effects of global warming.
This patchwork approach is no substitute for a coordinated national strategy. Local governments have
limited reach, authority and funding.
But as the legislative and regulatory options available in Washington, D.C., become increasingly
constrained, “States are really critical to helping the country as a whole achieve our climate goals,” said
Kyle Clark-Sutton, manager of the analysis team for the United States program at RMI, a clean energy
think tank. “They have a real opportunity to lead. They have been leading.”
New York and Colorado, for example, are on track to reduce electricity-related emissions 80 percent or
more by 2030, compared with 2005 levels, according to new state scorecards from RMI.
By removing partisan politics from community discussions about climate policy, it’s sometimes possible
to reach a consensus that’s been difficult to achieve on a national level.
That is what happened in Morris, a city of about 5,000 in Minnesota, not far from the South Dakota
border. There, the University of Minnesota Morris campus leans left politically, while surrounding
farming communities lean right. But both communities broadly support — and have helped to shape —
the “Morris Model,” which calls for reducing energy consumption 30 percent by 2030, producing 80
percent of the county’s electricity locally by 2030 (thus guaranteeing it comes from renewable sources)
and eliminating landfill waste by 2025.
“We’ve never focused on climate as being the thing to talk about, because you don’t have to,” said Blaine
Hill, the city manager, noting the benefits of lower energy bills and more local economic activity from
the locally produced power. “You can go around that and just start working on stuff.”
Morris has solar panels on its community center, library, liquor store and city hall. It has installed an
electric-vehicle charging station at the grocery store and is working on a composting program. The
university has solar panels on poles, high enough for cows to graze underneath, and two wind turbines.
The University of Minnesota’s West Central Research and Outreach Center uses wind energy to create
fertilizer for crops that grow beneath the turbines — circumventing the traditional, emissions-intensive
process of making fertilizer, which is normally derived from petroleum.
Mike Reese, the director of renewable energy at the research center, said it didn’t matter that he had
political disagreements with Troy Goodnough, the sustainability director at the University of Minnesota
Morris.
“Troy is on the more liberal side, I’m on the more conservative side,” Mr. Reese said. “But we also share
the same philosophies when it comes to changing climate, resiliency, but especially on generating
wealth and making our community better for the next generations.”
Mr. Goodnough said the campus often helped demonstrate technologies that were later adopted by the
city. That’s helped residents to consider options they might have otherwise dismissed.
“I have people coming up to me and going: ‘Hey, how did you do that solar system on your roof?’” Mr.
Hill said. “‘That looks kind of cool.’”
One advantage of community strategies is that they can be tailored to the needs of the local economy —
in the case of Morris, farming.
Phoenix, a sprawling, hot and car-dependent city, has focused on electric-vehicle adoption and
mitigating the effects of life-threatening heat waves.
The city has allocated $6 million to plant trees in primarily low-income neighborhoods. It has installed
40 miles of cool pavement, which can lower nighttime temperatures. And it has a plan to bring 280,000
electric vehicles to city roads by 2030.
The city council committee that developed that plan includes elected officials as well as representatives
of utilities, auto manufacturers and environmental justice groups. It hosted one meeting between
housing developers — who were reluctant to install electric vehicle charging stations in new buildings —
and representatives from Ford and General Motors. Councilwoman Yassamin Ansari said the session
seemed to help the developers realize that installing chargers was in line with market trends.
As conversations move from the municipal to state level, they tend to grow more partisan.
Colorado passed sweeping climate legislation only after Democrats gained control of both houses of the
legislature in 2018. Gov. Jared Polis, a Democrat, was elected that year on a platform of achieving 100
percent clean energy in the state by 2040, and the linchpin — 2019’s H.B. 1261, which called for reducing
emissions 90 percent below 2005 levels by 2050 — passed with no Republican support.
But outside the state legislature, that law and dozens of follow-up laws drew support from some unlikely
places.
KC Becker, who was the speaker of the Colorado House from 2019 to 2021, said meetings with unions
representing oil and gas workers were “a huge part of getting something passed.” (Ms. Becker, now a
regional administrator for the E.P.A., spoke in her capacity as a former legislator, not on behalf of the
agency.) One enticement: the creation of an Office of Just Transition to help fossil fuel workers find new
jobs. Lawmakers allocated $15 million to it this year.
Colorado’s largest electricity providers, Xcel Energy and the Tri-State Generation and Transmission
Association Inc., were also on board. Both plan to close their last coal plants in the state by 2030.
Between Mr. Polis’s election and inauguration, Xcel voluntarily pledged to reduce its carbon emissions
80 percent by 2030. Lawmakers subsequently offered an incentive for other utilities: If they filed a plan
that met the same mark, the state air commission would not further regulate their 2030 emissions.
“The vast majority of them ended up going beyond what the rules require,” said Will Toor, the executive
director of the Colorado Energy Office. “It created a dynamic where everybody could declare victory.”
Colorado still has substantial work to do. RMI found that, while it was on track to meet its 2030
reduction target in the electricity sector, current policies would reduce its total emissions only 33
percent by 2030 — short of the 50 percent it has pledged. (That projection does not account for some
recent legislation.)
The gap is in sectors like buildings and transportation, where it is harder to reduce emissions “because
it takes a multitude of individual households making decisions to purchase an electric car or an electric
stove or just more efficient appliances,” said Stacy Tellinghuisen, the climate policy manager for Western
Resource Advocates, a nonprofit that works in Colorado and six other states.
The climate plan in Fairfax County, Va., is unusual in part because it was produced by several dozen
community members instead of county officials. In most cases, programs like these come from the top
down.
One goal of the plan, approved in September, is to educate county residents about environmentally
friendly choices they can make. Other plans include solar panels on county buildings and an electric bus
pilot program.
“If the community’s not on board, you’re not going to accomplish anything other than to write a beautiful
plan and have it sit on the shelf and collect dust,” said Jeffrey C. McKay, the chairman of the county
board of supervisors.
A group of more than 50 residents heard from experts, examined data, debated and voted on
recommendations. The document identified 12 broad strategies in five areas: buildings and energy
efficiency, energy supply, transportation, waste, and natural resources. The strategies were broken into
37 recommended actions and scores of narrower “activities.”
Deb Harris, senior director for climate planning at the consulting firm ICF, said Fairfax County was an
example not of a specific model every community should adopt, but rather of tailoring a process to a
community. Fairfax is affluent and highly educated, with engaged residents able to spend months
hashing out policy, she said.
In many other places, money and resources are major constraints.
“The fact that there’s not financial support coming to help this work is the main impediment,” said
Marianne MacQueen, a council member in Yellow Springs, Ohio, which uses 80 percent renewable
electricity and is trying to create a plan for reductions in other sectors. “Our staff is so stretched.”
In the absence of much federal action, the task of helping local governments act on climate is falling to
independent groups.
Yellow Springs is working with Power a Clean Future Ohio, a nonprofit that doesn’t charge local
governments. “The desire to do it and the actual executing on it is a whole different thing,” said Joe
Flarida, the group’s executive director. Local governments have so many immediate concerns, like road
repairs and public safety, that “climate goals will fall down on that list if you don’t find a way to close
that gap for them.”
When the gap does close, it can be powerful.
In Athens, a college town in Ohio, 76 percent of voters agreed in 2018 to pay a carbon fee of 0.2 cents per
kilowatt-hour of electricity use, creating around $100,000 in annual revenue for renewable energy
projects. A study of Athens’s greenhouse gas emissions found that, per capita, they were among the
lowest in the state.
“We talk about states being the laboratories of democracy, and I think the same is likely true of local
jurisdictions,” said Ms. Tellinghuisen, of Western Resource Advocates. “States can create these
templates or examples and demonstrate to the federal government that progress is really possible.”
The right trees, planted in the right locations, could store 205 gigatons of carbon dioxide.
Follow-up: Ithaca, New York, set ‘totally crazy’ climate goals. Here’s what happened next.
Ithaca, New York, launched a Green New Deal five years ago. The city’s journey shows the promise and pitfalls of municipal action on climate change.
(Click here to read this article within this website, or use the link if you subscribe to the New York Times.)
Guest Essay
Aug. 26, 2022
Credit...Tara Anand By Justin Gillis and Hal Harvey
Mr. Gillis and Mr. Harvey are the authors of the forthcoming book “The Big Fix: 7 Practical Steps to Save Our Planet.”
Three months after taking office as America’s 46th president, Joe Biden made a solemn pledge to the world: He declared that the United States, which is more responsible for the climate crisis than any other nation, would cut its greenhouse gas emissions in half by 2030 from their 2005 peak.
The big climate law that Congress just enacted will go a long way toward meeting Mr. Biden’s goal. Coupled with other policies and with trends in the marketplace, it is expected to cut emissions by something like 40 percent.
But the law — even assuming it survives Republican attacks and defunding attempts over the coming years — does not fully redeem Mr. Biden’s pledge. How can America get the rest of the way toward meeting his 50 percent goal?
The answer is in all of our hands. Many of us are already trying to help as best we can, perhaps by nudging the thermostat a degree or two, by driving or flying less or by eating differently. These actions are useful, but they are not enough. The public must make the transition from green consumers to green citizens and devote greater political energy to pushing America forward in its transition to a clean economy.
How? The answers may be as close as your city hall or county commission. Your local school board — yes, the school board — has some critical decisions to make in the next few years. Opportunities to make a difference abound in your state Capitol.
The reason the public needs to speak up is simple. What Congress just did was, in a nutshell, to change the economics of clean energy and clean cars, using the tax code to make them more affordable. But it did not remove many of the other barriers to the adoption of these technologies, and a lot of those hurdles are under the control of state and local governments.
Consider this: Every school day, millions of Americans put their children on dirty diesel buses. Not only are the emissions from those buses helping to wreck the planet on which the children will have to live, but the fumes are blowing into their faces, too, contributing to America’s growing problem with childhood asthma.
It is now possible to replace those diesel buses with clean, electric buses. Has your school board made a plan to do so? Why isn’t every parent in America marching down to school district headquarters to demand it? Electric buses are more expensive right now, but the operating costs are so much lower that the gap can be bridged with creative financing. A school board that is not thinking hard about this and making plans for the transition is simply not doing its job.
Here is another example. The power grid in your state is under the control of a political body known as a public utilities commission or public service commission. It has the legal authority to tell electric companies what power plants they are allowed to build and what rates they can charge. By law, these boards are supposed to listen to citizens and make decisions in the public interest, but the public rarely weighs in.
We once needed special state laws to push utilities toward renewable energy, but Congress just changed the ground rules. With wind and solar farms becoming far more affordable, every utility in America now needs to re-examine its spreadsheet on how it will acquire power in the future. The public utility commissions supervise this process, and they are supposed to ensure that the utilities build the most affordable systems they reasonably can.
Opinion Conversation The climate, and the world, are changing. What challenges will the future bring, and how should we respond to them?
But too many utilities, heavily invested in dirty energy, still see clean energy as a threat. They are going to drag their feet, and they will ply their influence with state government to try to get away with it. Citizens need to get in the faces of these commission members with a simple demand: Do your jobs. Make the utilities study all options and go for clean power wherever possible.
One more example: The conversion to electric cars has begun, but as everyone knows, we still don’t have enough places to charge them, especially for people on long trips. State governments can play a major role in alleviating this bottleneck. Under Gov. Jared Polis in Colorado, the state is investing hundreds of millions of dollars to build charging stations, with poor neighborhoods included. Other states can do the same, and citizens need to speak up to demand it.
If you live in a sizable city or county, your local government is probably slowing down the automotive transition, too. These governments buy fleets of vehicles for their workers, and this year most of them will once again order gasoline-powered cars. Why? Because that’s what they’re used to doing. Citizens need to confront the people making these decisions and jolt them from their lethargy.
The two of us have been working on the climate problem for decades. We have never been as hopeful as we are today that America will finally shake off its intransigence and seize the future. We should all be grateful to the Congress that just enacted this new law, to President Biden for leading on the issue and especially to the young people who are so urgently demanding change. They have a moral right to inherit a livable world.
But no law is self-executing. The forces resisting change are still powerful. They are at work across the nation, fomenting lies and confusion wherever clean energy is discussed. We need a citizenry so engaged on this issue that it stands up to counter the disinformation — not just in Washington, but in every city hall, every school board, every state house and every utility commission.
Justin Gillis and Hal Harvey are the authors of “The Big Fix: 7 Practical Steps to Save Our Planet,” which will be published on Sept. 20. Mr. Gillis is a former environmental reporter for The Times. Mr. Harvey is the chief executive of Energy Innovation, a San Francisco organization that analyzes climate policy.
More on green politics
Why Republicans Turned Against the Environment
What does climate change look like around the world?
From “Postcards From a World on Fire,” these 193 stories show how climate change is reshaping reality.
What should our leaders be doing?
Al Gore, the 45th vice president of the United States, finds reasons for optimism in the Biden presidency.
What are the worst climate risks in your country?
Select a country, and we'll break down the climate hazards it faces.
Where are Americans suffering most?
Our maps, developed with experts, show where extreme heat is causing the most deaths in the U.S.
More on the green transition
The Green Transition Is Happening Fast. The Climate Bill Will Only Speed It Up.
Greening Your Home Will Be Cheaper, but Expect Growing Pains
The Times is committed to publishing a diversity of letters to the editor. We’d like to hear what you think about this or any of our articles. Here are some tips. And here’s our email: letters@nytimes.com.
The percentage of households burning home heating oil is the highest in the country. Yet no other state is adopting climate-friendly heat pumps as fast.
(Click here to read this article within this website, or use the link if you subscribe to the New York Times.)
By Cara Buckley
Published March 2, 2024Updated March 8, 2024
It may have been a warmer than usual winter in Maine, but that doesn’t mean it hasn’t gotten mighty cold. In mid-January in Farmingdale, a town outside Augusta where Kaylie McLaughlin lives, the temperature dipped to 6 degrees Fahrenheit. “The kind of cold that hurts,” she said.
But this winter, Ms. McLaughlin’s bungalow is toasty, thanks to two heat pumps she installed to replace her oil furnace. “I’m just so comfortable,” said Ms. McLaughlin, a pharmaceutical sales representative. She’s also saving money, no longer paying $400 every four weeks for an oil delivery.
Unlike a space heater, a heat pump extracts heat from outside air, even in subzero temperatures, and then runs it through a compressor, which makes it even hotter, before pumping it indoors. In the summer, it can operate in reverse, pulling heat from inside a building and pumping it outside, cooling the indoor spaces.
In 2023 heat pumps outsold gas furnaces in the United States for the second year running, a climate win. Electrical heat pumps are the cheapest and most energy-efficient way to heat and cool homes, and they do not emit the carbon pollution that is overheating the planet.
No state has adopted them faster than Maine.
That northeastern place of hardy types and snowbound winters is quickly going electric, installing electric heat pumps three times faster than the national average, according to Rewiring America, a nonprofit that promotes widespread electrical adoption. Last September, Maine met its goal of installing 100,000 heat pumps in households two years ahead of schedule, and is aiming to install another 175,000 by 2027.
Maine’s rapid adoption is being spurred by a combination of state rebates on top of federal incentives and a new cadre of vendors and installers, as well as mounting frustrations over the high cost of heating oil.
Subscribe to The Times to read as many articles as you like.
Cara Buckley is a reporter on the climate team at The Times who focuses on people working toward climate solutions. More about Cara Buckley
A version of this article appears in print on March 3, 2024, Section A, Page 18 of the New York edition with the headline: Maine Warms Quickly To Electric Heat Pumps.
Drought, climate change, and Western megafires have many Mainers wondering.