"America First," was not supposed to be "America Alone," but Donald Trump's rudderless foreign policy is emboldening America's enemies, alienating its allies, and undermining key foundations of America's security.
The shíshálh Nation partnered with Renewal Development to relocate 10 houses from Port Moody to their coastal reserve, converting each into two-level homes with local construction crews.
This home rescue model slashes costs and emissions compared to new builds, with Lewis and Chief Joe envisioning up to 77 homes and vibrant community life for elders and children.
With zoning reforms across California, Oregon, Washington, and B.C. set to trigger demolition of thousands of homes, the project offers a scalable, climate-friendly alternative to bulldozing livable houses.
Key quote:
“My goal is to shift the demolition-first paradigm. Renewal is a campaign disguised as a company.”
— Glyn Lewis, Renewal Development
Why this matters:
While policy hawks chase green dreams in committee rooms, the shíshálh are already building it. As cities push for denser housing, this project shows it's not necessary to sacrifice sustainability or community to meet housing demands. Relocating homes instead of demolishing them can lower emissions, reduce landfill waste, and create healthier, more affordable neighborhoods — especially for historically underserved populations.
Michigan has over 24,000 contaminated brownfield sites, many left behind by heavy industry, and advocates see solar energy as a powerful way to reclaim these spaces.
A recent survey found residents overwhelmingly support solar on previously disturbed land — like retired coal plants — over forests or farmland, reflecting broader public health and environmental priorities.
The state is moving forward with a $129 million U.S. Environmental Protection Agency grant to build solar projects on these “orphan” lands, though regulatory gaps, grid delays, and zoning issues remain major hurdles.
Key quote:
“The work now is to chart the near-term future of how Michiganders get their energy. This can be talked about through the lens of climate or the environment, but the public health ramifications are enormous as well."
— Kelly Thayer, senior policy advocate, Environmental Law & Policy Center
Why this matters:
With a $129 million EPA grant in hand, the state is trying to turn remediation potential into reality. That dream still runs into the messy reality of grid bottlenecks, clunky zoning rules, and a regulatory maze that wasn’t built for a clean energy future. But if Michigan can cut through the red tape, these “orphan” lands might finally get their second act — and bring cleaner air, local jobs, and long-overdue investment along with them.
After the deadly Los Angeles wildfires turned homes into chemical-laced rubble, one scientist is using mushrooms and native plants to detoxify the land and rethink how to clean up after disaster.
Environmental toxicologist Danielle Stevenson is pioneering a sustainable cleanup method by planting native fungi and plants that naturally extract toxins from soil scorched by wildfires.
Her technique, trialed successfully on LA brownfields like Taylor Yard, dramatically reduced petrochemical pollution and revived dead zones into thriving ecosystems within a year.
Stevenson’s work challenges conventional “dig and dump” methods that relocate contaminated soil, often untreated, and could spark a broader “mycoeconomy” of fungi-powered environmental repair.
Key quote:
“I’ve seen amazing reductions in contaminants in relatively short times with very few inputs. I really believe in this stuff.”
— Danielle Stevenson, founder of the Centre for Applied Ecological Remediation
Why this matters:
Paired with native plants, these fungi may constitute a new approach to restoration — one that doesn’t rely on hauling toxic soil to another zip code, but on cleaning it where it lies. This is also climate adaptation: With wildfires expected to grow in scale and intensity, bioremediation could offer a cheaper, healthier, and more sustainable way to protect scorched communities from chemical exposure while healing the land. Stay tuned: Stevenson is now working to publish her findings in peer-reviewed journals.
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency has dramatically scaled back enforcement against major polluters, raising fears about the future of public health protections.
In the first three months of Trump’s second term, the EPA has filed no major pollution cases and is initiating around 100 fewer civil enforcement actions per month than during Biden’s last fiscal year.
EPA staff say all major cases were paused in April for review by political appointees, and enforcement is being filtered through a higher bar — effectively granting polluters more leeway.
Several cases finalized under Trump were in fact initiated and negotiated under Biden, further obscuring the administration’s enforcement record.
Key quote:
““The future is grim for environmental protection. The risk will be most felt in overburdened communities, but this will hurt red and blue districts alike. If the EPA cop is not on the beat, then people are going to be harmed.”
— Gary Jonesi, former top EPA enforcement attorney and director of CREEDemocracy
Why this matters:
For frontline communities — especially those already choking on refinery fumes or watching industrial runoff trickle into local waterways — the scaling back of enforcement has serious consequences. Environmental enforcement protects communities from harmful pollution that can cause cancer, respiratory disease, and neurological damage, among other acute and chronic health problems. The federal pullback could leave millions at risk while letting industry operate without accountability.
Seventeen states have filed a lawsuit against the Trump administration for halting billions in federal funding intended to expand the national electric vehicle charging infrastructure.
The Trump administration ordered a stop to electric vehicle charger funding from the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law, blocking an estimated $3.3 billion already distributed.
Attorneys general from California, Colorado, and Washington argue that only Congress has the authority to revoke this funding, calling the move unlawful.
Some states, like New York, report that hundreds of millions are now withheld, while projects face continued delays due to contracting and permitting hurdles.
Key quote:
“These funds were going to be used to shape the future of transportation.”
— Rob Bonta, California's attorney general
Why this matters:
Electric vehicle infrastructure is a cornerstone of reducing transportation-related emissions, which are a major source of air pollution and greenhouse gases. Without reliable public charging access, especially in rural areas or for those without private garages, EV adoption slows. Fossil fuel combustion in cars and trucks contributes to smog, respiratory illness, and climate change. Rolling back funding undercuts not only U.S. efforts to curb emissions, but also threatens jobs tied to clean energy expansion and cedes technological leadership to countries like China.
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, under Administrator Lee Zeldin, is downsizing staff to 1980s levels despite decades of added environmental responsibilities and growing public health challenges.
Administrator Lee Zeldin is implementing a plan to cut EPA staffing to Reagan-era levels, even as the agency faces expanded duties regulating pollutants, climate emissions, and chemical safety.
Critics argue the cuts will hamper EPA’s capacity to protect air, water, and public health, especially as staff reassigned from research and climate programs are unavailable to meet increasing demands.
The restructuring includes eliminating key science offices and scaling back climate initiatives, with some staffers warning of an “extinction event” for EPA’s climate work.
Key quote:
“They don’t want to have a scientist focused in a single area where they can really build their expertise and ensure the highest quality risk assessments.”
— Betsy Southerland, former EPA Office of Science and Technology director
Why this matters:
The EPA has long served as the nation’s frontline defense against air and water pollution, toxic chemicals, and emerging threats like climate change and PFAS contamination. Since the 1980s, the agency’s mandate has expanded dramatically to keep pace with scientific discoveries and evolving public health risks. Today, EPA not only enforces traditional pollution controls but also grapples with complex, cross-cutting issues such as greenhouse gas emissions, endocrine-disrupting chemicals, cybersecurity threats to water infrastructure, and hazardous “forever chemicals.” Staffing cuts of the magnitude proposed by the Trump administration could delay or derail enforcement actions, permit reviews, chemical safety evaluations, and responses to environmental disasters. The decision to shrink or eliminate scientific divisions risks undermining evidence-based policymaking.
The Trump administration plans to shut down research led by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) into pollution from satellites and rockets that is tied in part to Elon Musk’s expanding space ventures.
The administration aims to halt two NOAA projects studying how metals and other emissions from spacecraft accumulate in the stratosphere, potentially harming the ozone layer and climate stability.
Critics argue the cuts, justified by officials as removing “woke ideology,” will benefit Musk’s SpaceX and Starlink, which dominate satellite launches and could face future regulations stemming from such research.
Scientists warn that with 100,000 satellites expected in orbit within a decade, unchecked pollution could disrupt stratospheric chemistry and temperature regulation, yet little independent monitoring will remain if the projects end.
Key quote:
“These programs are under attack because they come up against strong commercial interests, and commercial interests that want to destroy the programs for their own personal gain.”
— Tim Whitehouse, executive director of Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility
Why this matters:
Rocket launches and satellite operations introduce pollutants — including aluminum, black carbon, and nitrogen oxides — into the stratosphere, an atmospheric layer critical to shielding Earth from harmful solar radiation and maintaining climate balance. As the commercial space race accelerates, thousands of new satellites from companies like SpaceX and Amazon could exponentially increase this pollution. The aluminum particles, in particular, pose dual threats: While they might reflect sunlight and cool the planet, they could also disrupt the delicate chemistry that governs stratospheric temperature and ozone health. Without federal research, understanding these impacts will fall largely to the industries driving the pollution — a clear conflict of interest.
