“It is our communities that are being harmed and hurt.”
HOUSTON — Climate activists expressed concern that discussions behind closed doors at the nation’s largest energy conference, CERAWeek by S&P Global, will further contribute to environmental health risks.
As energy executives and political leaders across the nation convened for the conference in Houston, Texas this week to discuss the future of energy, representatives from the Gulf Coast, Rio Grande Valley, Ohio River Valley, and Cancer Alley highlighted the fossil fuel industry's impact in their communities.
A federal judge sharply criticized the Environmental Protection Agency for canceling $20 billion in climate grants without providing evidence of misconduct, but she did not indicate whether she would intervene immediately.
EPA administrator Lee Zeldin canceled Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund grants, including $7 billion for Climate United Fund, prompting lawsuits from affected groups.
Judge Tanya Chutkan questioned whether the agency followed proper procedures, emphasizing the lack of evidence supporting the cancellations.
Climate United warned that without access to funds, it would begin furloughing workers and defaulting on commitments by the end of the week.
Key quote:
"I can cite cases all day long, but you have to have some kind of evidence or proffer to back it up."
— Judge Tanya Chutkan, U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia
If the courts uphold the cancellations, it could set a precedent that makes it easier for current and future administrations to undo previously approved climate policies. That could introduce new uncertainty into the clean energy sector, where businesses and investors rely on government incentives and funding to drive development. It could also complicate efforts to meet emissions reduction targets, both at the national level and for individual states that have set ambitious climate goals of their own.
Breakthrough Energy, the climate organization funded by Bill Gates, is downsizing its U.S. policy team and European operations as it pivots away from influencing government policy.
Breakthrough Energy laid off dozens of employees, including its U.S. policy team, European unit, and partnership staff.
The shift comes as Gates recalibrates his climate efforts under a Trump administration that has rolled back federal clean energy support.
Gates is now emphasizing private-sector clean energy investments rather than direct policy influence.
Key quote:
“Bill Gates remains as committed as ever to advancing the clean energy innovations needed to address climate change.”
— Spokesperson for Bill Gates
Why this matters:
Bill Gates' decision to scale back his climate policy influence comes at a precarious moment for environmental efforts in the United States. With President Trump doubling down on fossil fuel expansion and stripping back federal climate initiatives, private philanthropy has been one of the few counterweights to these rollbacks. The retreat of a key private player like Gates could signal a broader realignment in climate funding.
With federal support dwindling, the burden falls more heavily on private entities and state-level efforts. But without high-profile figures like Gates pressing for systemic change, the influence of climate-conscious philanthropy could diminish. The result may be a funding gap that makes it even harder to counteract the administration’s aggressive fossil fuel policies.
A Virginia judge has paused the state’s court-ordered return to the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative (RGGI) while Gov. Glenn Youngkin appeals the decision, delaying millions in climate and flood-preparedness funding.
A Floyd County judge ruled Virginia does not have to rejoin RGGI while Youngkin's appeal proceeds, extending the legal battle potentially for years.
RGGI had generated about $830 million for Virginia since 2021, with funds directed toward energy efficiency and flood preparedness programs.
Environmental groups argue Youngkin's withdrawal was illegal and has already led to increased emissions and lost funding for clean energy initiatives.
Key quote:
“Unfortunately, we also know that Helene will not be the last disaster we face in Virginia.”
— Emily Steinhilber, Environmental Defense Fund
Why this matters:
RGGI is a multi-state effort to cut carbon emissions by requiring power producers to buy pollution allowances, with proceeds funding climate resilience projects. Virginia’s withdrawal has already led to higher emissions and halted funding for flood preparedness. With severe weather becoming more frequent, the loss of these funds could leave vulnerable communities unprotected. Youngkin’s opposition — calling RGGI a "tax" — puts the program’s future at risk, especially as the state’s leadership may change following upcoming elections.
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency plans to scale back protections for wetlands, aligning with a 2023 Supreme Court decision that limited federal authority over U.S. waterways.
EPA Administrator Lee Zeldin said the agency will implement new, more predictable rules on which waterways the Clean Water Act covers, responding to concerns from farmers and industry groups.
The Supreme Court’s Sackett v. EPA ruling found that federally protected wetlands must be directly adjacent to a permanent waterway, a shift that significantly narrows previous protections.
Environmental groups warn that the rollback will lead to more pollution and habitat loss, particularly in drier regions already facing water scarcity.
Key quote:
"They are going to continue to find ways to change the Clean Water Act to weaken public safeguards."
— Julian Gonzalez, senior legislative counsel at Earthjustice
Why this matters:
Wetlands help filter pollutants, prevent flooding, and provide critical wildlife habitat. Reducing federal oversight could allow more development and pollution in sensitive areas, potentially affecting water quality and increasing flood risks. States with stronger protections may maintain stricter rules, but others could see significant environmental degradation. This change reflects a broader trend of limiting federal environmental regulations in favor of state and industry control.
Residents returning to areas scorched by recent Los Angeles wildfires may be exposed to harmful air, water, and soil contaminants, as researchers detect high levels of toxic compounds in burn zones.
Scientists are tracking long-term health risks from wildfire pollution, detecting volatile organic compounds and ultrafine particles linked to cancer and respiratory disease.
Federal cleanup efforts remove surface soil but do not retest for lingering contaminants, raising concerns as rebuilding stirs up ash and toxins.
Researchers will monitor affected residents for a decade, studying potential links to heart disease, cancer, and respiratory issues.
Key quote:
“People are going back into their homes and living in a toxic soup.”
— Michael Jerrett, environmental health scientist at the University of California, Los Angeles
Why this matters:
Wildfires are not just immediate threats; they leave behind toxic pollution that can persist for years. Burned homes, vehicles, and vegetation release dangerous chemicals into the air, soil, and water, increasing long-term health risks. Fine particles from fires can travel miles, affecting people far beyond burn zones. Inhaling these pollutants has been linked to heart disease, lung conditions, and even cognitive decline. Despite the well-documented dangers, federal monitoring of post-fire contamination is often inconsistent, leaving many communities without clear data on what they’re breathing or the safety of their land.
Without comprehensive testing, residents may unknowingly move back into areas where toxins persist. This raises questions about how governments and health agencies track and respond to these invisible threats. As wildfires become more frequent and intense due to climate change, understanding the full scope of their impact will be critical to protecting public health.
The U.S. added more solar energy capacity in 2024 than any other power source in over two decades, even as the new energy secretary and former President Trump attack renewables.
A new industry report shows that the U.S. added about 50 gigawatts of solar power in 2024, outpacing all other energy sources.
Energy Secretary Chris Wright and former President Trump have dismissed solar and wind as unreliable and costly, vowing to roll back Biden-era climate policies.
Despite political opposition, solar and battery storage are expected to dominate new grid capacity in 2025, driven by the growing power demands of AI and data centers.
Key quote:
“There’s wild agreement that in order to do that, we have to have enough electricity, and there are facts that show that the fastest way to do that and the cheapest way to do that is through the deployment of solar and storage.”
— Abigail Ross Hopper, president and CEO of the Solar Energy Industries Association
Why this matters:
In the real world, where the grid is struggling to keep up with demand, solar and battery storage are proving to be the most cost-effective way to meet America’s growing energy appetite. Even as fossil fuel advocates push back, the economics are making the case: solar isn’t just winning — it’s becoming indispensable.
Prisons, jails and detention centers are placed in locations where environmental hazards such as toxic landfills, floods and extreme heat are the norm.
