Actions by the Trump administration over the past four years have set us back. But we will not let this administration obliterate 50 years of environmental and public health progress.
The U.S. Interior Department now requires wind and solar projects on federal land to receive personal approval from Secretary Doug Burgum, a move that could delay clean energy development across millions of acres.
A leaked memo shows Interior Secretary Doug Burgum must personally review all federal decisions related to wind and solar energy projects, covering every stage from planning to permitting.
The directive aligns with President Trump’s executive orders prioritizing fossil fuel production and enforcing the phaseout of wind and solar tax credits, with no recognition of wind or solar as energy sources under the national energy emergency declaration.
Interior says the move ensures policy consistency, but critics argue it adds bureaucratic barriers designed to stall renewable energy development on federal lands.
Key quote:
“It absolutely will create so much bureaucratic process that no solar or wind projects are likely to move in a timely and efficient manner, if at all. For an administration so focused on eliminating unnecessary roadblocks, this is a clear attempt to use ‘the process’ to kill projects.”
— Eric Beightel, former executive director of the Federal Permitting Council
Why this matters:
Public lands hold vast untapped potential for renewable energy, offering enough solar and wind capacity to transform how the U.S. powers homes, cities, and industry. But shifting federal policy away from these sources and toward fossil fuels threatens to lock in higher carbon emissions at a time when the climate crisis demands urgent action. Clean energy development also tends to require fewer water resources, emit less air pollution, and pose fewer long-term health risks to nearby communities compared with fossil fuel extraction. Delays in permitting could stall progress in regions rich with sun and wind, limiting access to cleaner, more affordable electricity — especially in rural and underserved areas that stand to benefit most.
The Trump administration has revoked $4 billion in federal funding for California’s long-delayed high-speed rail line between Los Angeles and San Francisco, sparking legal threats from Gov. Gavin Newsom.
Transportation Secretary Sean P. Duffy called the rail effort a “boondoggle” and announced the withdrawal of federal funds, while President Trump claimed on social media that taxpayers were being rescued from a “train to nowhere.”
Newsom condemned the move as illegal and signaled the state may take legal action to defend the project, which he said is nearing its final phase with land acquisition and construction of overpasses and viaducts underway.
Originally approved by voters in 2008 with a $10 billion budget, the project’s cost has ballooned to an estimated $128 billion, with current plans projecting initial service between Merced and Bakersfield by 2030.
Key quote:
“These are legally binding agreements. This is no time for Washington to walk away on America’s transportation future.”
— Ian Choudri, CEO of the California High Speed Rail Authority
Why this matters:
The U.S. remains far behind other industrialized nations in building efficient, lower-emission transportation like high-speed rail. California’s bullet train was meant to be a step toward reducing car traffic and fossil fuel dependence in one of the world’s largest economies. Its promise includes cutting travel times, easing air pollution, and reshaping transit habits across the state. But the project has become a political lightning rod and a symbol of bureaucratic inertia, funding battles, and shifting priorities. If derailed, it could discourage future efforts to invest in clean infrastructure and widen the gap between transportation goals and reality in a warming world.
Air quality across U.S. national parks has improved since the 1990s, but growing wildfire smoke and shrinking federal budgets threaten to reverse those gains.
Air pollution from coal-fired power plants and vehicles has declined, improving visibility in eastern parks like Shenandoah and Great Smoky Mountains.
Wildfires are now the main driver of pollution in western parks, sending fine particles across thousands of miles and reducing air quality in places once considered pristine.
Proposed federal budget cuts would slash the National Park Service’s funds by 38%, jeopardizing air quality monitoring and scientific staffing needed to track and address pollution.
Key quote:
“There were times when you could drive down [Skyline Drive in Shenandoah] and stop at any one of the 40 turnouts and you could not see the valley floor on either side.”
— Bill Wade, former superintendent, Shenandoah National Park
Why this matters:
Many national parks once choked by coal pollution now offer cleaner air and clearer views, but that progress is slipping. Wildfire smoke — often rich in fine particles that harm lungs and hearts — is now the dominant air threat, especially in the West. These tiny particles can travel across state lines, affecting not just visibility but public health, even far from fire zones. At the same time, weakened federal support threatens long-standing air quality monitoring systems that alert the public and guide policy. Without data, regulators can’t target pollution sources or protect fragile ecosystems and the people who visit or live near them.
A recent U.S. Department of Energy report ordered by President Trump promotes coal-fired power as essential to grid reliability, but Virginia clean energy advocates say it overlooks climate risks and mounting financial losses.
The Department of Energy’s report, prompted by President Trump’s executive order, supports continued use of aging fossil fuel plants, including Dominion’s Mount Storm coal plant, which lost $212 million in 2023.
Clean energy advocates argue the report relies on outdated assumptions, ignores input from regional regulators and environmental data, and inflates projected electricity demand tied to speculative data center development.
Critics say the report downplays advances in battery storage, wind, and solar, while omitting fossil fuel system failures during past grid events such as Winter Storm Elliott.
Key quote:
“They have botched their analysis. They’re really off the mark on it.”
— Frank Rambo, executive director of Horizon Climate Initiative
Why this matters:
How the U.S. powers its electric grid has far-reaching consequences for both climate stability and public health. Coal-fired plants like Mount Storm are among the country’s largest sources of carbon emissions, driving climate change and worsening air quality. These plants also emit pollutants that contribute to respiratory illness, heart disease, and premature death — especially in nearby communities. Meanwhile, fossil fuel infrastructure is vulnerable to extreme weather, as seen during Winter Storm Elliott, when natural gas systems froze and failed. Virginia’s electricity grid is under added pressure from a booming data center industry, which risks locking in high emissions unless the region transitions to clean, efficient power. As federal policy shifts, these choices will have enduring impacts on energy prices, insurance rates, and the pace of climate disruption.
The Trump administration has announced plans to eliminate protections for roadless areas in national forests, including Alaska’s Tongass, potentially opening millions of acres of wilderness to logging and development.
On June 23, Agriculture Secretary Brooke Rollins said the Trump administration would seek to repeal the 2001 Roadless Rule, which bans road-building in 58.5 million acres of national forest land, including 9.37 million acres of the Tongass National Forest.
Roadless areas in the Tongass support old-growth trees, carbon storage, native salmon runs, and endangered wildlife like the Alexander Archipelago wolf, while also underpinning sustainable industries like fishing and tourism.
Critics say roads destroy habitats, enable clear-cutting, and cost taxpayers billions through subsidies and deferred maintenance, while providing little economic return from timber sales.
Key quote:
“The Tongass isn’t a renewable resource — you can’t replant ancient trees or restore what’s been lost to greed.”
— Hunter McIntosh, president of The Boat Company
Why this matters:
The Tongass National Forest is one of the planet’s last intact temperate rainforests, acting as a critical carbon sink and home to rich biodiversity, including five species of Pacific salmon and centuries-old trees. Road-building in these wildlands fragments ecosystems, fuels erosion, and pollutes rivers relied on by fish and people alike. Logging roads open the door to extractive industries that degrade water quality and accelerate habitat loss. As climate change pressures mount and native species decline, preserving such areas becomes essential not just for wildlife and local communities, but also for climate resilience. Public opinion has repeatedly favored protection over exploitation.
BlackRock and Blackstone are seeking to acquire utilities in Minnesota, New Mexico, and Texas to profit from the electricity needs of expanding data centers, raising concerns from consumer advocates about rate hikes and service reliability.
BlackRock aims to buy Minnesota Power, serving 150,000 customers, but a state judge advised regulators to reject the deal, citing the firm’s focus on profit over public interest.
Blackstone plans to acquire TXNM Energy, which serves 800,000 customers in New Mexico and Texas, positioning itself to support clean energy projects and new data center development.
Consumer advocates argue that private equity ownership could drive up rates and degrade service quality, as firms may load utilities with debt and prioritize investor returns.
Key quote:
“The nonpublic evidence reveals the partners’ intent to do what private equity is expected to do — pursue profit in excess of public markets through company control.”
— Megan J. McKenzie, administrative law judge
Why this matters:
As tech companies race to build power-hungry data centers across the country, utilities are becoming more attractive to Wall Street investors looking for stable, high-return assets. But this shift raises red flags for everyday consumers. Utilities, historically public-service providers with regulated rates, may operate differently under private equity control. Critics warn that financial engineering could trump service quality, leaving residents with soaring energy bills and fewer safeguards. At the same time, electricity demand is climbing again after a decade-long plateau — driven by electric vehicles, AI servers, and climate adaptations. With much of the U.S. grid aging and vulnerable, who owns and operates these systems — and how they’re incentivized — has direct implications for energy affordability, climate resilience, and public accountability.
A plan to replace a coal-fired furnace at an Ohio steel mill with cleaner hydrogen technology has stalled after the Trump administration withdrew key federal support.
Cleveland-Cliffs suspended a $1.6 billion hydrogen-powered furnace project in Middletown, Ohio, citing weakened federal support and unfavorable economic conditions under the Trump administration.
The project, backed by $500 million in Biden-era funding, promised to cut a million tons of greenhouse gas emissions annually and create 1,350 jobs.
Middletown residents, long exposed to industrial pollution, now face continued health risks and economic stagnation, with pollution already linked to premature deaths and high asthma rates.
Key quote:
“It’s a setback that they are saying they are going to abandon the hydrogen part of this project, as it is the most exciting part of it.”
— Hilary Lewis, steel director at Industrious Labs
Why this matters:
Hydrogen energy holds promise as a cleaner fuel for heavy industry, a sector that remains one of the largest contributors to greenhouse gas emissions. Projects like the one in Middletown could drastically reduce pollution in frontline communities where steel mills and factories operate near homes and schools. These areas often report higher rates of asthma, heart disease, and shortened life spans — direct consequences of industrial emissions. When policies shift and clean energy support is pulled, those living closest to polluting facilities bear the brunt. Middletown’s experience reflects a larger national struggle to support economic revival in manufacturing towns while transitioning away from fossil fuels. Without long-term investment, the communities most harmed by pollution are left behind again.
