Tag: Government programs

New Jersey’s other wind farm developer wants government breaks, too; says project ‘at risk’

[ad_1]

ATLANTIC CITY, N.J. (AP) — A company approved to build New Jersey’s third offshore wind farm says it, too, wants government financial incentives, saying its project and the jobs it would create are “at risk” without the additional help.

Atlantic Shores issued a statement Friday, shortly after New Jersey lawmakers approved a tax break for Danish wind developer Orsted, which has approval to build two wind farms off the state’s coast.

Elaborating on Monday, the Atlantic City-based Atlantic Shores said it has contacted the offices of New Jersey Gov. Phil Murphy, and leaders of the state Senate and Assembly, saying it seeks a “solution that stabilizes all awarded projects.”

The federal government has given the go-ahead for New Jersey’s first offshore wind farm to begin construction.

The CEO of United Airlines is apologizing for jumping on a private plane this week while thousands of his airline’s customers were stranded because their flights got canceled.

A bill to extend internet gambling in New Jersey for another five years is in the hands of Gov. Phil Murphy following its approval by the state Legislature.

A bill to let Danish offshore wind energy developer Orsted keep tax credits that it otherwise would have to return to New Jersey ratepayers was approved by the slimmest of margins in the state Legislature Friday afternoon.

It remains to be seen how the request will be received by lawmakers. The tax bill passed by a single vote Friday.

Atlantic Shores did not say precisely what sort of assistance it wants, and refused to publicly clarify its request, or discuss the likelihood of being able to complete the project with its current financing.

The tax break approved by lawmakers on Friday only applies to Ocean Wind I, the first of Orsted’s two New Jersey projects. It also does not apply to Atlantic Shores.

“To establish a durable, thriving, full-scale offshore wind industry in New Jersey, we need an industry-wide solution, one that stabilizes all current projects including Atlantic Shores Project 1, the largest offshore wind project in the state of New Jersey and third largest project awarded in the United States,” the company said in its Friday statement.

The company did not explicitly say it cannot build and operate its project without further financial aid. But it did hint that outcome is possible without “immediate action.”

“Tens of thousands of real, well-paid and unionized jobs are at risk,” it said. “Hundreds of millions in infrastructure investments will be forgone without a path forward.”

Atlantic Shores is a joint partnership between Shell New Energies US LLC and EDF-RE Offshore Development, LLC.

The company said that while the bill approved Friday — which awaits action by the governor — will help its manufacturing partner EEW American Offshore Structures build the large monopiles that will support Atlantic Shores’ wind turbines, “we need immediate action that also supports the Atlantic Shores Project 1 to keep these commitments within reach.”

The governor’s office declined to comment, and state Senate and Assembly political leadership did not immediately respond to requests for comment Monday.

Lawmakers said the Orsted bill was necessary to help offshore wind projects deal with what they called lingering effects of inflation and the COVID-19 pandemic.

The vote went largely along party lines, with Democrats, who hold the governorship and control both houses of the Legislature, supporting it as necessary to ensure that a source of green energy gets built. Republicans panned it as a wasteful gift to companies whose projects are not economically viable without further costs to ratepayers.

Atlantic Shores said it is competing against “other states and major economies” all vying to build offshore wind projects.

New Jersey energy regulators approved Atlantic Shores’ 1,510 megawatt project in 2021. It would generate enough electricity to power 637,000 homes.

___

Follow Wayne Parry on Twitter at www.twitter.com/WayneParryAC

[ad_2]

Source link

July 3, 2023
Georgia launches Medicaid expansion in closely watched test of work requirements

[ad_1]

ATLANTA — Georgia is offering a new bargain to some adults without health insurance beginning Saturday: Go to work or school and the state will cover you.

But advocates decry the plan, which will insure far fewer people than a full expansion of the state-federal Medicaid program, as needlessly restrictive and expensive.

The program is likely to be closely watched as Republicans in Congress push to let states require work from some current Medicaid enrollees.

Madeline Guth, a senior policy analyst with the Kaiser Family Foundation, said Democratic President Joe Biden’s administration is unlikely to approve work requirements, but a future Republican president could.

“I think there will be a lot of eyes on Georgia,” Guth said.

Georgia is one of 10 remaining states that hasn’t expanded Medicaid eligibility to include individuals and families earning up to 138% of the federal poverty line, or $20,120 annually for a single person and $41,400 for a family of four.

Medicaid expansion was a key part of President Barack Obama’s health care overhaul in 2010, but many Republicans have fought it, including Georgia Gov. Brian Kemp, a Republican.

Instead, Kemp is limiting expanded coverage to adults earning up to 100% of the poverty line — $14,580 for a single person or $30,000 for a family of four. And coverage is only available if able-bodied adults document they are working, volunteering, studying or in vocational rehabilitation for 80 hours per month.

It fits Kemp’s argument, as he tries to drag his party away from former President Donald Trump, that the GOP needs to show tangible conservative achievements for everyday people

“In our state, we want more people to be covered at a lower cost with more options for patients,” Kemp said in his State of the State speech in January.

Those who earn more will remain eligible for subsidized coverage, often with no premium cost, on the federal marketplace. Kemp’s administration argues commercial coverage is better because it pays providers more than state-set Medicaid rates.

The Trump administration ultimately gave permission to 13 states to impose work requirements on some Medicaid recipients. The Biden administration revoked all those waivers in 2021, ruling work isn’t a primary purpose of Medicaid. But Kemp’s administration won a federal court fight last year to preserve Georgia’s plan, in part because it applies to new enrollees and not current Medicaid recipients.

Caylee Noggle, commissioner of the Department of Community Health, told The Associated Press this week that Pathways to Coverage is a “Georgia-specific approach” that could insure up to 100,000 people in its first year.

But 100,000 is far less than the nearly 450,000 uninsured Georgians that the Urban Institute estimates could gain coverage with a full Medicaid expansion.

Others say the nearly $118 million in state money, combined with another $229 million in federal money, isn’t nearly enough to reach that goal. The liberal-leaning Georgia Budget & Policy Institute estimates the funds will cover fewer than 50,000 people.

And state taxpayers will pay much more per person. Partly at the behest of Democratic Georgia Sen. Raphael Warnock, the federal government is offering to pay 95% of any Medicaid expansion for two years and 90% afterward. Instead, refusing federal largesse, Georgia will continuing paying the same 34.2% share the state foots for its existing Medicaid program and spurn extra federal funding that has been pledged.

“The inappropriately named ‘Pathways to Coverage’ will cost Georgia more money and cover fewer people than if the state simply joined 40 other states in expanding Medicaid,” Warnock said in a statement to the AP.

“While state politicians continue playing games with people’s lives, Georgians are dying because they can’t afford the health care they need,” he said.

Noggle and other Georgia officials say working, studying or volunteering leads to improved health, a key argument for why those requirements should be part of a health insurance program.

But those who treat uninsured people say many can’t work because they are in poor health.

“The reason they have their challenges, that they can’t work, is because they’ve got a mental illness or they’ve got a medical illness that is affecting their ability to do that,” said Dr. Reed Pitre, an addiction psychiatrist and interim chief medical officer at Mercy Care, a federally subsidized nonprofit in Atlanta.

Enrolling people in the new program is a priority for Mercy Care, Pitre said, while noting that no one will qualify until a month after they establish compliance with the work requirement.

The Kemp administration anticipates the program will serve people in low-wage jobs who can’t afford employer insurance, as well as students. The state also is redetermining eligibility for 2.4 million adults and children now covered by Medicaid.

Georgia has delayed decisions on people it thinks are ineligible for regular Medicaid but could transfer to the Pathways program, Noggle said.

Either way, once on the new program, people will have to meet activity requirements or lose coverage beginning the following month, which could impact thousands. When Arkansas imposed work requirements in 2018 for some adults, more than 18,000 people lost coverage in less than a year.

Georgia will be different, Noggle argued, saying recipients will only have to certify for the first three months of the year.

“I think we are going to make it as easy as possible as we can for our members to verify their eligibility,” she said.

But only time will tell. Kemp’s expansion plan in Georgia could provide a blueprint for other states and other Republicans looking to require more from those on Medicaid.

[ad_2]

Source link

June 29, 2023
California Assembly Speaker Anthony Rendon is stepping down. He’s not happy about how it happened

[ad_1]

SACRAMENTO, Calif. — Until Monday, only two politicians had lasted at least seven years as speaker of the California Assembly: A U.S. Navy veteran who was so powerful that people called him “Big daddy;” and a lawyer who was so confident he nicknamed himself the “Ayatollah.”

Now, joining Jesse Unruh and Willie Brown is Anthony Rendon, a man with no nickname who online search engines often confuse with the third baseman for the Los Angeles Angels. This week, Rendon quietly surpassed Unruh’s record and became the second-longest serving speaker in state history — just in time for him to step down on Friday.

He’s not happy about how it happened.

For much of last year, with Democratic Gov. Gavin Newsom coasting to re-election, Rendon’s status was the source of much of the political drama in California. Over the summer, Robert Rivas — at the time a mostly unknown chair of the Assembly’s agriculture committee — told Rendon he had enough votes to replace him as speaker.

What followed were months of a layered power struggle that played out across elections in 80 Assembly districts. When all the new members were seated, Rivas still had the votes, and Rendon agreed to give up the speaker’s gavel at the end of June.

Rendon said he was “very, very angry about it” — emotions he would process by running every day. He said Rivas hasn’t asked him for help, and he hasn’t thought about offering it.

“I have hurt feelings with the way things were carried out, for sure,” Rendon said in an interview earlier this month. “I think it was really embarrassing for the institution, the way they acted.”

Democrats control 62 of the Assembly’s 80 seats, leaving Republicans with no say in leadership decisions. Rivas’ transition has been smooth so far as he has hired staff to fill out his office. Asked to respond to Rendon’s comments, Nick Miller, Rivas’ communications director, simply noted Rivas twice convinced the Democratic caucus to unanimously choose him to be the next speaker.

“We thank Anthony Rendon for his leadership,” Miller said.

Rendon lives in Los Angeles with his daughter and wife, who owns a consulting firm that has received money from lobbyist groups. Rendon wasn’t supposed to be in office this long. When he first ran for the state Assembly, term limits only allowed politicians to stay in the Assembly a maximum of six years. On the night that Rendon won his primary, voters agreed to double that limit to 12 years.

Even before term limits, people usually didn’t survive as speaker for more than a few years. The job relies on the changing whims of politicians who are constantly searching for ways to increase their own power and influence.

“They’re all unusual human beings,” said former California Gov. Jerry Brown, who worked with Unruh, Brown and Rendon over his five-decade career in California politics. “These were not ordinary people.”

Unruh and Brown lasted as long as they did by holding their power in a tight grip. Rendon’s power came from a lighter touch. He empowered committee chairs to make their own decisions on bills — a tactic that more than once derailed some priority legislation for Democrats.

But Rendon occasionally flexed his political muscles publicly, as in 2018 when he famously blocked a bill that would have created a single-payer health care system in California. Supporters of the bill were furious, circulating an image on social media depicting a bear with a knife in its back with “Rendon” written on the blade. But Rendon said the bill was largely symbolic because there was no money to pay for it.

“I hope that set the tone,” Rendon said. “Symbolic stuff is cool. That’s nice. But it’s not what I’m interested in.”

It wasn’t the only controversy Rendon would oversee. In 2017, the #MeToo movement swept through the Capitol, resulting in the resignation of two assemblymen and claims of widespread harassment and inappropriate conduct. Rendon and Senate President Pro Tempore Toni Atkins created a new office to investigate workplace misconduct.

Unlike his predecessors, Rendon did not author bills as speaker, making it tricky to get credit for legislative milestones. But he led the chamber through impactful and complex negotiations, including extending the state’s cap-and-trade program, paying for all 4-year-olds to go to kindergarten for free, and making all low-income Californians eligible for government-funded health insurance regardless of their immigration status.

Much of that work happened during Donald Trump’s presidency, when California political leaders including Rendon cast the state as the chief resister to the Republican’s polices.

His leadership style led to some “rough patches” with other Democratic leaders, including Atkins, she said. But in recent years, Atkins said she and Rendon — who are both termed out of the Legislature at the end of next year — found ways “to support our causes and each other.”

“There’s always a different rhythm and dynamic in the Assembly. He had the rhythm. He understood it,” Atkins said. “His knowledge of how the chamber worked is a “tribute to his style and that it meshed with the members in that House.”

One of those empowered committee chairs was Buffy Wicks, a Democrat from Oakland whom Rendon elevated to lead the influential Assembly Housing Committee. Wicks ran with that power last year, pushing through a bill aimed at opening up much of the state’s commercial land for residential development.

But when Rivas challenged Rendon for speaker last year, Wicks sided with Rivas. It wasn’t personal, she said. Wicks knew that there would have to be a new speaker in 2024, when Rendon terms out.

“You can either choose to sit on the sidelines and have other people decide who that should be … or you decide to jump in and pick a candidate,” she said, adding: “For me, it wasn’t an indictment on Rendon or his leadership. It was about who’s going to be the next speaker.”

Rendon says he plans to stay in office after he steps down as speaker. He’ll author legislation and attend committee hearings, but he won’t attend caucus meetings, he said, because he wants to give Rivas space to lead.

“That kind of minimizes and makes it less weird,” he said.

He’s eyeing a run for state treasurer in 2026, saying his experience crafting budgets in the state Legislature “would be really helpful there.”

“I’ve spent a decade figuring out state politics, state government,” he said. “I think I have a bead on it now.”

[ad_2]

Source link

June 29, 2023
High-speed internet is a necessity, President Biden says, pledging all US will have access by 2030

[ad_1]

WASHINGTON — President Joe Biden on Monday said that high-speed internet is no longer a luxury but an “absolute necessity,” as he pledged that every household in the nation would have access by 2030 using cables made in the U.S.

“These investments will help all Americans,” he said. “We’re not going to leave anyone behind.”

Biden announced that more than $40 billion would be distributed across the country to deliver high-speed internet in places where there’s either no service, or service is too slow.

“But it’s not enough to have access — you need affordability and access,” the president said, adding that his administration is working with service providers to bring down costs on what is now a household utility — like water or gas — but often remains priced at a premium.

With Monday’s announcement, the administration is launching the second phase of its “Investing in America” tour. The three-week blitz of speeches and events is designed to promote Biden’s previous legislative wins on infrastructure, the economy and climate change going into a reelection year. The president and his advisers believe voters don’t know enough about his policies heading into his 2024 reelection campaign and that more voters would back him once they learn more.

Biden’s challenge is that investments in computer chips and major infrastructure projects such as rail tunnels can take a decade to come to fruition. That leaves much of the messaging focused on grants that will be spent over time, rather than completed projects.

The internet access funding amounts depended primarily on the number of unserved locations in each jurisdiction or those locations that lack access to internet download speeds of at least 25 megabits per second download and upload speeds of 3 Mbps. Download speeds involve retrieving information from the internet, including streaming movies and TV. Upload speeds determine how fast information travels from a computer to the internet, like sending emails or publishing photos online.

The funding includes more than $1 billion each for 19 states, with remaining states falling below that threshold. Allotments range from $100.7 million for Washington, D.C., to $3.3 billion for Texas.

Biden said more than 35,000 projects are already funded or underway to lay cable that provides internet access. Some of those are from $25 billion in initial funding as part of the “American Rescue Plan.”

“High-speed internet isn’t a luxury anymore,” he said. “It’s become an absolute necessity.”

More than 7% of the country falls in the underserved category, according to the Federal Communications Commission ‘s analysis.

Sen. Joe Manchin, who Biden called out as a “friend” during today’s announcement, celebrated the $1.2 billion West Virginia will receive to expand service in the rural, mountainous state of around 1.8 million.

U.S. Secretary of Commerce Gina Raimondo joined Manchin at a press conference after Biden’s announcement and said West Virginia’s allotment would be enough money to “finally connect every resident.”

“When I say everyone, I mean everyone,” she said. Raimondo said the reason that hasn’t happened in the past is because it’s expensive to lay fiber in a rural or mountainous area.

“And so the internet providers haven’t done it — it doesn’t make economic sense for them,” she said. “What we’re saying to them now is, ‘With this money, $1.2 billion to connect about 300,000 folks in West Virginia, it is plenty of money to get to everyone.’”

Congress approved the Broadband Equity, Access and Deployment program, along with several other internet expansion initiatives, through the infrastructure bill Biden signed in 2021.

Earlier this month, the Commerce Department announced winners of middle mile grants, which will fund projects that build the midsection of the infrastructure necessary to extend internet access to every part of the country.

States have until the end of the year to submit proposals outlining how they plan to use that money, which won’t begin to be distributed until those plans are approved. Once the Commerce Department signs off on those initial plans, states can award grants to telecommunications companies, electric cooperatives and other providers to expand internet infrastructure.

Under the rules of the program, states must prioritize connecting predominantly unserved areas before bolstering service in underserved areas—which are those without access to internet speeds of 100 Mbps/20 Mbps—and in schools, libraries or other community institutions.

Hinging such a large investment on FCC data has been somewhat controversial. Members of Congress pressed FCC Chairwoman Jessica Rosenworcel about inaccuracies they said would negatively impact rural states’ allotments in particular, and state broadband officials were concerned about the short timeline to correct discrepancies in the first version of the map.

The second version of the map, which was released at the end of May and used for allotments, reflects the net addition of 1 million locations, updated data from internet service providers and the results of more than 3 million public challenges, Rosenworcel, who in the past has been a critic of how the FCC’s maps were developed, said in a May statement.

___

AP reporter Leah Willingham contributed from Charleston, West Virginia.

Harjai, who reported from Los Angeles, is a corps member for The Associated Press/Report for America Statehouse News Initiative. Report for America is a nonprofit national service program that places journalists in local newsrooms to report on undercovered issues.

[ad_2]

Source link

June 26, 2023
High-speed internet is a necessity, President Biden says, pledging all US will have access by 2030

[ad_1]

WASHINGTON (AP) — President Joe Biden on Monday said that high-speed internet is no longer a luxury but an “absolute necessity,” as he pledged that every household in the nation would have access by 2030 using cables made in the U.S.

“These investments will help all Americans,” he said. “We’re not going to leave anyone behind.”

Biden announced that more than $40 billion would be distributed across the country to deliver high-speed internet in places where there’s either no service, or service is too slow.

The United States has flown nuclear-capable bombers to the Korean Peninsula in its latest show of force against North Korea.

Philippine President Ferdinand Marcos Jr. says a request for his country to temporarily host a U.S. immigrant visa processing center for thousands of Afghans faces security and other concerns but is still being considered by his administration.

The United States is about to start the countdown to its 250th anniversary. The buildup begins this July 4 at a Major League Baseball game between the Milwaukee Brewers and the Chicago Cubs at American Family Field in Milwaukee, where the organization created by Congress to oversee the party will ki

The Pell Grant program is about to expand exponentially next month, giving about 30,000 more students behind bars some $130 million in financial aid per year.

“But it’s not enough to have access — you need affordability and access,” the president said, adding that his administration is working with service providers to bring down costs on what is now a household utility — like water or gas — but often remains priced at a premium.

With Monday’s announcement, the administration is launching the second phase of its “Investing in America” tour. The three-week blitz of speeches and events is designed to promote Biden’s previous legislative wins on infrastructure, the economy and climate change going into a reelection year. The president and his advisers believe voters don’t know enough about his policies heading into his 2024 reelection campaign and that more voters would back him once they learn more.

Biden’s challenge is that investments in computer chips and major infrastructure projects such as rail tunnels can take a decade to come to fruition. That leaves much of the messaging focused on grants that will be spent over time, rather than completed projects.

The internet access funding amounts depended primarily on the number of unserved locations in each jurisdiction or those locations that lack access to internet download speeds of at least 25 megabits per second download and upload speeds of 3 Mbps. Download speeds involve retrieving information from the internet, including streaming movies and TV. Upload speeds determine how fast information travels from a computer to the internet, like sending emails or publishing photos online.

The funding includes more than $1 billion each for 19 states, with remaining states falling below that threshold. Allotments range from $100.7 million for Washington, D.C., to $3.3 billion for Texas.

Biden said more than 35,000 projects are already funded or underway to lay cable that provides internet access. Some of those are from $25 billion in initial funding as part of the “American Rescue Plan.”

“High-speed internet isn’t a luxury anymore,” he said. “It’s become an absolute necessity.”

More than 7% of the country falls in the underserved category, according to the Federal Communications Commission ‘s analysis.

Sen. Joe Manchin, who Biden called out as a “friend” during today’s announcement, celebrated the $1.2 billion West Virginia will receive to expand service in the rural, mountainous state of around 1.8 million.

U.S. Secretary of Commerce Gina Raimondo joined Manchin at a press conference after Biden’s announcement and said West Virginia’s allotment would be enough money to “finally connect every resident.”

“When I say everyone, I mean everyone,” she said. Raimondo said the reason that hasn’t happened in the past is because it’s expensive to lay fiber in a rural or mountainous area.

“And so the internet providers haven’t done it — it doesn’t make economic sense for them,” she said. “What we’re saying to them now is, ‘With this money, $1.2 billion to connect about 300,000 folks in West Virginia, it is plenty of money to get to everyone.’”

Congress approved the Broadband Equity, Access and Deployment program, along with several other internet expansion initiatives, through the infrastructure bill Biden signed in 2021.

Earlier this month, the Commerce Department announced winners of middle mile grants, which will fund projects that build the midsection of the infrastructure necessary to extend internet access to every part of the country.

States have until the end of the year to submit proposals outlining how they plan to use that money, which won’t begin to be distributed until those plans are approved. Once the Commerce Department signs off on those initial plans, states can award grants to telecommunications companies, electric cooperatives and other providers to expand internet infrastructure.

Under the rules of the program, states must prioritize connecting predominantly unserved areas before bolstering service in underserved areas—which are those without access to internet speeds of 100 Mbps/20 Mbps—and in schools, libraries or other community institutions.

Hinging such a large investment on FCC data has been somewhat controversial. Members of Congress pressed FCC Chairwoman Jessica Rosenworcel about inaccuracies they said would negatively impact rural states’ allotments in particular, and state broadband officials were concerned about the short timeline to correct discrepancies in the first version of the map.

The second version of the map, which was released at the end of May and used for allotments, reflects the net addition of 1 million locations, updated data from internet service providers and the results of more than 3 million public challenges, Rosenworcel, who in the past has been a critic of how the FCC’s maps were developed, said in a May statement.

___

AP reporter Leah Willingham contributed from Charleston, West Virginia.

Harjai, who reported from Los Angeles, is a corps member for The Associated Press/Report for America Statehouse News Initiative. Report for America is a nonprofit national service program that places journalists in local newsrooms to report on undercovered issues.

[ad_2]

Source link

June 26, 2023
Tribal activists oppose Nevada mine key to Biden’s clean energy agenda as ‘green colonialism’

[ad_1]

OROVADA, Nevada — Just 45 miles (72 kilometers) from the Fort McDermitt Indian Reservation where Daranda Hinkey and her family corral horses and cows, a centerpiece of President Joe Biden’s clean energy plan is taking shape: construction of one of the largest lithium mines in the world.

As heavy trucks dig up the earth in this remote, windswept region of Nevada to extract the silvery-white metal used in electric-vehicle batteries, the $2.2 billion project is fueling a backlash. “No Lithium. No mine!″ proclaims a large hand-painted sign in Hinkey’s front yard.

The Biden administration says the project will help mitigate climate change by speeding the shift away from fossil fuels. But Hinkey and other opponents say it is not worth the costs to the local environment and people.

Similar disputes are taking place around the world as governments and companies advancing renewable energy find themselves battling communities opposed to projects that threaten wildlife, groundwater and air quality.

Hinkey, 25, is a member of the Fort McDermitt Paiute and Shoshone Tribe and a leader of a group known as People of Red Mountain — named after the scarlet peak that overlooks her house. The group says that in addition to environmental impacts, the Thacker Pass mine would desecrate a site where the U.S. Cavalry massacred their ancestors after the Civil War.

“Lithium mines and this whole push for renewable energy — the agenda of the Green New Deal — is what I like to call green colonialism,″ Hinkey said. “It’s going to directly affect my people, my culture, my religion, my tradition.”

Protests near the mining site have flared up for more than two years, and the project has sparked legal challenges, including an appeal that a federal court will hear this month.

Hinkey had hoped Interior Secretary Deb Haaland — the first Native American Cabinet member — might rally to the side of opponents. But that has not happened.

Haaland, whose department oversees Thacker Pass, said that while she supports the right to peaceful protests, her agency is in favor of the mine because “the need for our clean energy economy to move forward is definitely important.”

The project was approved in the waning days of the Trump administration but is central to Biden’s goal for half of all new vehicles sold in the U.S. to be electric by 2030. Lithium batteries are also used to store wind and solar power.

Haaland told The Associated Press that when her agency inherits a project from a previous administration, “It’s our job to make sure we’re doing things according to the science, to the law.”

Hinkey sees her activism as a continuation of her leadership on basketball teams in high school and in college, where she guided her Southern Oregon Raiders to a 20-win season as a senior point guard.

“Corporations are scared of an educated Indian,″ said Hinkey, who hopes to become a teacher. Her athletic experience, education and tribal background make her “someone who can stand up against them,″ she said.

Hinkey said she is especially disappointed because she voted for Biden and expected his administration to slow down the project that was fast-tracked under President Donald Trump. She and other tribal members “feel very lost, very shoved underneath the carpet,″ Hinkey said.

The project does have the support of some leaders of Hinkey’s tribe, who point to the promise of jobs and development on a reservation where unemployment is far above the national average.

“This could help our tribe,″ said Fort McDermitt Tribal Chairman Arlo Crutcher, who recently went to Washington with company executives to meet with the Interior Department. Still, he is skeptical about how many jobs will go to impoverished tribe members.

Lithium Americas, the Canadian company that is developing the project, signed an agreement with the Fort McDermitt tribe — the closest to the mine among more than two dozen federally recognized tribes and bands in Nevada — to ensure local hiring, job training and other benefits. It also agreed to build a community center that includes a preschool and playground for the reservation, where close to half the population lives in poverty.

The October 2022 agreement “is a testament to our company’s commitment to go beyond our regulatory requirements and to form constructive relationships with the communities closest to our projects,″ Lithium Americas President and CEO Jonathan Evans said in a statement. General Motors has pledged $650 million to help develop Thacker Pass, which holds enough lithium to build 1 million electric vehicles annually.

Opponents, including other tribes and environmental groups, argue that the U.S. Bureau of Land Management, an Interior Department agency, violated at least three federal laws in approving the mine.

BLM Director Tracy Stone-Manning defended her agency’s actions, saying the Biden administration allowed construction to begin “because the proposal is solid, and the country needs that lithium.”

The National Historic Preservation Act requires tribal consultation in all steps of a project on or near tribal land. But Hinkey and other mine opponents say the mine was hastily approved when tribal governments were largely shut down due to the COVID-19 pandemic.

In its 2021 decision approving the project, the agency said it wrote letters in late 2019 to at least three tribes — including Fort McDermitt — inviting comments. Two online meetings were conducted in August 2020, but no objections were raised by the end of an environmental review in December 2020, the agency said.

Michon Eben, historic preservation officer for the Reno-Sparks Indian Colony, said the agency’s actions fell far short of genuine consultation.

“This is the biggest (lithium) mine in the country — and there’s 28 federally recognized tribes and bands in the state of Nevada that all have relationships — and you only send a letter to three tribes? There’s something wrong with that,″ Eben said.

“The consultation kind of skipped us,” said Gary McKinney, a spokesman for People of Red Mountain and a member of the nearby Duck Valley Shoshone-Paiute Tribe. “Nobody knew about the lithium. They taped a notice on the door and called that” adequate notice,” he said.

Asked about those claims, Stone-Manning replied: “I regret if people feel that way. I can’t control how people feel.″

In an interview near the mine site, where workers were installing a water pipeline, McKinney said the project will cause irreparable damage. The mine will require large amounts of water, and conservationists say groundwater and soil could become contaminated with heavy metals. The area is also a nesting ground for the dwindling sage grouse.

“The water will be lower. Life will be scared away,” he said. “Our culture, our sacred sites will be gone. We’re facing the annihilation of our identity.″

He and other opponents say the BLM office in Nevada failed to assess the project’s likely impact on the massacre site near Sentinel Rock, which juts above sagebrush and high grass used by roaming cattle herds.

“What happens to those who were massacred and buried here?” Eben said in an interview at Sentinel Rock.

The exact location of the massacre, where federal soldiers killed at least 31 Paiute men, women and children, is unknown, although it is generally recognized to be within a few miles of the mine. Tribes call the site Peehee Mu’huh, or “Rotten Moon” in the Paiute language.

A federal judge in February said construction could begin while also ruling that BLM violated federal law regarding disposal of mine waste. Conservationists have appealed, and the San Francisco-based 9th Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals scheduled oral arguments for June 26.

Eben said she is putting her faith in Haaland, a member of New Mexico’s Laguna Pueblo.

“From one Native woman to another, what I am going to say is, ‘Please come and walk this land with us. Come and listen to our side of the story, our oral histories. A massacre did occur here. … Our people were killed.’”

And, she added, “you can’t mine your way out of a climate crisis.”

___

Associated Press writers Scott Sonner in Reno, Nevada and Susan Montoya Bryan in Albuquerque, New Mexico contributed to this story.

__

Associated Press climate and environmental coverage receives support from several private foundations. See more about AP’s climate initiative here. The AP is solely responsible for all content.

[ad_2]

Source link

June 20, 2023
Oakland Athletics move to Las Vegas in flux as Nevada Legislature adjourns

[ad_1]

CARSON CITY, Nev. — A plan to help build a stadium for the Oakland Athletics in Las Vegas is in flux after Nevada lawmakers adjourned their four-month legislative session.

The future of the contentious bill is now uncertain after the Democratic-controlled Legislature did not advance it before the midnight deadline as Monday turned to Tuesday. The proposal could potentially be considered in a special legislative session at a date to be determined later, where lawmakers would later vote on it.

Lawmakers also failed to pass one of the five major budget bills that included over $1 billion to fund capital improvement projects that fund state public works and construction, which would also likely be considered for a special session. The measure faltered in the Senate as they ran out of time for a second vote after party disagreements lasted until the midnight deadline.

In a statement at 1 a.m., Republican Gov. Lombardo said he would call a special session later Tuesday morning, where he would set the agenda for legislative priorities.

Now, the timeline is murky for a bill that has revived the national debate over public funding for private sports stadiums — a measure that could add to Las Vegas’ growing sports scene amid concerns and skepticism among economists about minimal benefits for a hefty public price tag.

The bulk of the public funding for the $1.5 billion retractable roof stadium would come from $380 million in public assistance, partly through $180 million in transferable tax credits and $120 million in county bonds — taxpayer-backed loans, to help finance projects and a special tax district around the stadium. Backers have pledged the district will generate enough money to pay off those bonds and interest.

The A’s would not owe property taxes for the publicly owned stadium and Clark County, which includes Las Vegas, also would contribute $25 million in credit toward infrastructure costs.

Also potentially under consideration in the special session is a major film tax credit bill that would involve up to $190 million annually for at least 20 years to recruit major film studios to Las Vegas. Sony has announced it would commit a $1 billion expansion in Las Vegas with a competitive deal.

Senate Minority Leader Heidi Seevers Gansert indicated a special session could come soon in a statement early Monday morning.

“The Senate Republicans fully support Governor Lombardo and await his call for a special session to find common ground solutions for Nevadans,” she said.

The disagreements over the capital improvement project to the exclusion of charter schools from a handful of capital funds and pay initiatives that also went to public schools.

Democratic Speaker Steve Yeager’s office canceled a scheduled press conference moments after midnight, when the Legislature failed to pass the fifth budget bill. In a statement, he said legislative Republicans “have once again put politics before policy” by not passing the capital improvements project.

The late-night conflicts came after lawmakers shuffled from room to room on Monday, hosting last-minute conference committees where they agreed on amendments to dozens of bills as the midnight deadline approached. Oftentimes committees would meet 10 minutes in advance and would last for as short as two minutes. The Legislature advanced dozens of bills to Lombardo’s desk, who now has 10 days to sign or veto them.

For four months, Democratic leaders in the State and Assembly fought the new Republican governor on policy issues ranging from taxes and budgets to schools and crime.

Also on Monday, a widely-supported program that would allow the state to buy back and retire groundwater rights in diminished basins died after not receiving a hearing in the Senate finance committee. It comes after the state overallocated water rights decades ago, in-part leading to a scramble for how to save groundwater water quickly. The program would have been one of the most expansive among western states, and backers wanted at least $5 million to start the program.

Lombardo also became the first governor in the nation to veto a medical aid in dying bill, which would have allowed patients with a terminal illness, under particular circumstances, to self-administer life-ending medication under certain circumstances. It would follow other states recently adopting this measure, including Oregon, Washington and California. The bill has now gone through the Legislature five times without passing.

Another bill that died in the state Senate was baby bonds legislation that would have established trust funds for children born into Medicaid, and parental leave for state workers. That was a top priority for Democratic treasurer Zach Conine.

___

Stern is a corps member for the Associated Press/Report for America Statehouse News Initiative. Report for America is a nonprofit national service that places journalists in newsrooms. Follow Stern on Twitter: @gabestern326.

[ad_2]

Source link

June 6, 2023
Debt limit deal is in place, but budget deficit is still a multi-decade challenge for US government

[ad_1]

WASHINGTON — Even with the new spending restraints in the debt limit deal that cut borrowing by $1.5 trillion, the U.S. government’s deficits are still on course to keep climbing to record levels over the next few decades.

The projections are a sign that the two-year truce between President Joe Biden and House Speaker Kevin McCarthy, R-Calif., might be only a pause before a far more wrenching set of showdowns over the federal budget. The Congressional Budget Office said Tuesday that the agreement would reduce spending by $1.3 trillion and interest payments by $188 billion over 10 years. But that sum is too modest to fully offset the growing costs of Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid.

Both Biden and McCarthy ruled out any cuts to Social Security and Medicare, two programs that benefit older voters, before their teams even began their budget talks. That omission reflects the politics around two popular programs as Democrats and Republicans prepare for next year’s presidential election.

It also means the agreement finalized on Sunday keeps the risk of ever-escalating debt on the table, setting up the possibility of another bruising battle when the debt limit needs to be raised again in 2025.

“You should think of this as one step,” said Marc Goldwein, senior vice president at the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget. “The question is, can they take the next step after that?”

Lawmakers know there are difficult choices ahead and that the only way through them likely involves some combination of deep spending cuts, broad tax hikes and major changes to the retirement income and health care programs that consume an ever-growing share of federal spending.

Mandatory spending — which includes Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid — already account for the majority of government spending. That category is equal in size to 14% of U.S. gross domestic product, and the CBO expects it will grow to 15.6% by 2023. By contrast, discretionary spending was 6.5% of gross domestic product last year and was already projected to fall to 6% within 10 years.

Goldwein said he’s optimistic that leaders in both parties will find ways to reduce the growth in spending for health care programs. Social Security will also face a reckoning as its trust fund will be unable to pay out full benefits within a decade.

But some budget experts saw the deal as more focused on optics than sustainability.

“This debt limit agreement is shaking out to be a political face-saving deal without much substance in terms of changing the U.S. debt trajectory,” said Romina Boccia, director of budget and entitlement policy at the libertarian Cato Institute.

The agreement, which still has to be approved by Congress, would hold discretionary spending essentially flat for the coming year, while allowing increases for military and veterans accounts. Spending growth would be capped at 1% for 2025, essentially a cut given the likely rate of inflation.

Some Democratic allies see the deal as problematic because it cedes ground to Republicans who want to use the debt limit fight as an opportunity to press their policy aims, despite the risk of a default.

“Looking forward, we must find a path to abolish the debt ceiling and end the absurd debt ceiling hostage-taking that Republicans engage in when they can use it as a bludgeon against a Democratic president,” said Sharon Parrott, president of the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, a liberal think tank.

Other economic analysts took issue with GOP suggestions that the U.S. was already hamstrung by debt, even though investors continue, for the moment, to buy Treasury notes. While total federal debt — including money the government owes itself — exceeds $31 trillion, the U.S. economy possesses more than $143 trillion worth of non-financial assets in a sign that the current debt loads are manageable.

“It is simply not true that the United States is broke and on the verge of a debt and deficit crisis,” said Joe Brusuelas, chief economist at the consultancy RSM U.S.

But even if there isn’t an immediate reckoning over debt, there is a long-term problem that the talks purposefully ignored. The president challenged Republicans to shield Social Security and Medicare from cuts at his State of the Union address in February. GOP lawmakers jeered him for suggesting they would dare to cut the programs, leading Biden to declare, “We’ve got unanimity.”

Biden specifically hailed the bipartisan agreement on Sunday for protecting Social Security and Medicare, while saying the agreement that must pass the House and Senate would prevent a possibly catastrophic default that could occur on June 5.

“This is a deal that’s good news,” the president said, “for the American people.”

Yet House members received a specific briefing in March indicating that entitlement programs would drive up the debt. CBO director Phillip Swagel gave a presentation showing that publicly held debt would more than double to 195% of gross domestic product in 2053. The key challenge is that an aging population means that programs for older people have costs that exceed tax revenues.

Swagel provided 17 policy options for reducing the debt, six of which were tax hikes that could raise trillions of dollars over 10 years. Tax increases have been a nonstarter with Republicans, while Democrats have generally shied away from reductions to benefits.

His slide deck included this warning: “The longer action is delayed, the larger the policy changes would need to be.”

[ad_2]

Source link

May 30, 2023
Debt ceiling deal: What’s in, what’s out of the bill to avert US default

[ad_1]

WASHINGTON — The details of the deal between President Joe Biden and House Speaker Kevin McCarthy were released Sunday in the form of a 99-page bill that would suspend the nation’s debt limit through 2025 to avoid a federal default while limiting government spending.

The Democratic president and Republican speaker are trying to win over lawmakers to the plan in time to avert a default that would shake the global economy. But Congress will be scrutinizing and debating the legislation, which also includes provisions to fund medical care for veterans, change work requirements for some recipients of government aid and streamline environmental reviews for energy projects.

McCarthy said the House will vote on the legislation Wednesday, giving the Senate time to consider it before June 5, the date when Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen said the United States could default on its debt obligations if lawmakers did not act in time.

Some hardline conservatives have expressed early concerns that the compromise does not cut future deficits enough, while Democrats have been worried about proposed changes to work requirements in programs such as food stamps.

With the details of the deal now clear, here’s what’s in and out:

TWO-YEAR DEBT LIMIT SUSPENSION, SPENDING LIMITS

The agreement would keep nondefense spending roughly flat in the 2024 fiscal year and increase it by 1% the following year, as well as suspend the debt limit until January 2025 — past the next presidential election.

For the next fiscal year, the bill matches Biden’s proposed defense budget of $886 billion and allots $704 billion for nondefense spending.

The bill also requires Congress to approve 12 annual spending bills or face a snapback to spending limits from the previous year, which would mean a 1% cut.

The legislation aims to limit federal budget growth to 1% for the next six years, but that provision would not be enforceable starting in 2025.

Overall, the White House estimates that the plan would reduce government spending by at least $1 trillion, but official calculations have not yet been released.

VETERANS CARE

The agreement would fully fund medical care for veterans at the levels included in Biden’s proposed 2024 budget blueprint, including a fund dedicated to veterans who have been exposed to toxic substances or environmental hazards. Biden sought $20.3 billion for the toxic exposure fund in his budget.

UNSPENT COVID MONEY

The agreement would rescind about $30 billion in unspent coronavirus relief money that Congress approved through previous bills. It claws back unobligated money from dozens of federal programs that received aid during the pandemic, including rental assistance, small business loans and broadband for rural areas.

The legislation protects pandemic funding for veterans’ medical care, housing assistance, the Indian Health Service, and some $5 billion for a program focused on rapidly developing the next generation of COVID-19 vaccines and treatments.

IRS FUNDING

Republicans targeted money that the IRS was allotted last year to crack down on tax fraud. The bill bites into some IRS funding, rescinding $1.4 billion.

WORK REQUIREMENTS

The agreement would expand work requirements for the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, formerly known as food stamps — a longtime Republican priority. But the changes are pared down from the House-passed debt ceiling bill.

Work requirements already exist for most able-bodied adults between the ages of 18 and 49. The bill would phase in higher age limits, bringing the maximum age to 54 by 2025. But the provision expires, bringing the maximum age back down to age 49 five years later, in 2030.

Democrats also won some new expanded benefits for veterans, homeless people and young people aging out of foster care. That would also expire in 2030, according to the agreement.

The agreement would also make it slightly harder for states to waive work requirements for SNAP for certain individuals. Current law allows states to issue some exemptions to the work rules on a discretionary basis, but limits how many people can be exempted. The agreement would lower the number of exemptions that a state can issue and curb states’ ability to carry over the number of exemptions they can hand out from month to month.

The agreement would also make changes to the Temporary Assistance to Needy Families program, which gives cash aid to families with children. While not going as far as the House bill had proposed, the deal would make adjustments to a credit that allows states to require fewer recipients to work, updating and readjusting the credit to make it harder for states to avoid.

SPEEDING UP ENERGY PROJECTS

The deal puts in place changes in the National Environmental Policy Act for the first time in nearly four decades that would designate “a single lead agency” to develop and schedule environmental reviews, in hopes of streamlining the process. It also simplifies some of the requirements for environmental reviews, including placing length limitations on environmental assessments and impact statements.

Agencies will be given one year to complete environmental reviews, and projects that are deemed to have complex impacts on the environment will need to be reviewed within two years.

The bill also gives special treatment to the Mountain Valley Pipeline — a West Virginia natural gas pipeline championed by Sens. Joe Manchin and Shelley Moore Capito — by approving all its outstanding permit requests.

STUDENT LOANS

Republicans have long sought to reel back the Biden administration’s efforts to provide student loan relief and aid to millions of borrowers during the coronavirus pandemic. While the GOP proposal to rescind the White House’s plan to waive $10,000 to $20,000 in debt for nearly all borrowers failed to make it into the package, Biden agreed to put an end to the pause on student loan repayment.

The pause in student loan repayments would end in the final days of August.

The fate of student loan relief, meanwhile, will be decided at the Supreme Court, which is dominated 6-3 by its conservative wing. During oral arguments in the case, several of the justices expressed deep skepticism about the legality of Biden’s plan. A decision is expected before the end of June.

WHAT’S LEFT OUT

House Republicans passed legislation last month that would have created new work requirements for some Medicaid recipients, but that was left out of the final agreement. The idea faced stiff opposition from the White House and congressional Democrats, who said it would lead to fewer people able to afford food or health care without actually increasing the number of people in the workforce.

Also absent from the final deal is the GOP proposal to repeal many of the clean energy tax credits Democrats passed in party-line votes last year to boost the production and consumption of clean energy. McCarthy and Republicans have argued that the tax breaks “distort the market and waste taxpayer money.”

The White House has defended the tax credits as resulting in hundreds of billions of dollars in private-sector investments, creating thousands of manufacturing jobs in the U.S.

[ad_2]

Source link

May 28, 2023
Lenny Kravitz, Billie Eilish set for Global Citizen’s ‘Power Our Planet’ show for climate financing

[ad_1]

Music superstars Lenny Kravitz, Billie Eilish and H.E.R. will team with advocacy nonprofit Global Citizen for a free concert in front of the Eiffel Tower designed to convince world leaders to take further action against climate change.

“Power Our Planet: Live in Paris” is set for June 22 to coincide with the Summit for a New Global Financial Pact, a gathering of the world’s political and business leaders to help developing nations finance sustainability projects.

Global Citizen CEO Hugh Evans says the summit is an opportunity for governments and global banks to collaborate to jump start climate projects stalled by the COVID-19 pandemic. He hopes “Power Our Planet” will encourage leaders to take advantage of that opportunity and provide the $16.7 billion in outstanding climate financing promised in 2009 to lower-income countries. He is also seeking to advance reforms at the World Bank to make up to $1 trillion in additional financing available.

“Global leaders and democratically elected governments really only respond to the momentum of their people and summits like this can come and go,” Evans told The Associated Press. “If it doesn’t achieve its goal, we’re going to miss the window this year to make the climate negotiations the success, which is even more important after last year’s complete failure in Egypt.”

The Eiffel Tower event is part of the Global Citizen initiative, announced last month at the Global Citizen NOW conference in New York, supporting Barbados Prime Minister Mia Mottley’s call to rewrite the rules of global development banks and relieve the debts of lower-income countries to increase funding for climate adaptation projects.

Global Citizen has shown for years, especially with its A-list concerts in New York’s Central Park, that it can generate action by having cultural leaders mobilize their supporters. And artists like Kravitz plan to motivate fans to “act today to save tomorrow.”

“The next generation are inheriting a planet that’s being devastated by climate change,” Kravitz said in a statement. “We have the power to change things with our voices and our actions.”

French President Emmanuel Macron supports the Global Citizen event, citing the need for “a world with more solidarity.”

“Crises are multiplying and the number of those who place their hope in peace and multilateralism will only grow if we, as a global community, demonstrate that we are there to help the most vulnerable,” Macron said in a statement. “Because there will be no climate transition worldwide if we don’t fight for more justice and equity.”

Major philanthropic organizations — including the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, Rockefeller Foundation, Rotary International, and Open Society Foundations – as well as the public-private partnership Gavi, The Vaccine Alliance, will also support the effort.

“Power Our Planet: Live in Paris,” which will also include performances from Finneas, Jon Batiste, and Ben Harper, will be livestreamed on Global Citizen’s social media platforms, while Amazon Music will host the livestream on its Twitch channel.

_____

Associated Press coverage of philanthropy and nonprofits receives support through the AP’s collaboration with The Conversation US, with funding from Lilly Endowment Inc. The AP is solely responsible for this content. For all of AP’s philanthropy coverage, visit https://apnews.com/hub/philanthropy.

[ad_2]

Source link

May 23, 2023
Will Biden’s hard-hat environmentalism bridge the divide on clean energy future?

[ad_1]

WASHINGTON — When John Podesta left his job as an adviser to President Barack Obama nearly a decade ago, he was confident that hundreds of miles of new power transmission lines were coming to the Southwest, expanding the reach of clean energy throughout the region.

So Podesta was shocked to learn last year, as he reentered the federal government to work on climate issues for President Joe Biden, that the lines had never been built. They still hadn’t even received final regulatory approval.

“These things get stuck and they don’t get unstuck,” Podesta said in an interview with The Associated Press.

Podesta is now the point person for untangling one of Biden’s most vexing challenges as he pursues ambitious reductions in greenhouse gas emissions. If the president cannot streamline the permitting process for power plants, transmission lines and other projects, the country is unlikely to have the infrastructure needed for a future powered by carbon-free electricity.

The issue has become an unlikely feature of high-stakes budget talks underway between the White House and House Republicans as they try to avoid a first-ever default on the country’s debt by the end of the month.

Whether a deal on permitting can be reached in time is unclear, with Republicans looking for ways to boost oil drilling and Democrats focused on clean energy. But its mere presence on the negotiating table is a sign of how political battle lines are shifting. Although American industry and labor unions have long chafed at these kinds of regulations, some environmentalists have now grown exasperated by red tape as well.

That represents a stark change for a movement that has been more dedicated to slowing development than championing it, and it has caused unease among longtime allies even as it creates the potential for new partnerships. Still, this transformation is core to Biden’s vision of hard-hat environmentalism, which promises that shifting away from fossil fuels will generate blue-collar jobs.

“We have to start building things again in America,” Podesta said. “We got too good at stopping things, and not good enough at building things.”

What gets built, of course, is the question that’s the central hurdle for any agreement.

The issue of permitting emerged last year during negotiations with Sen. Joe Manchin, a West Virginia Democrat who was a key vote for the Inflation Reduction Act, far-reaching legislation that includes financial incentives for clean energy.

Manchin pushed a separate proposal that would make it easier to build infrastructure for renewable energy and fossil fuels. His focus has been the Mountain Valley Pipeline, which would carry natural gas through his home state.

Republicans called the legislation a “political payoff.” Liberal Democrats described it as a “dirty side deal.” Manchin’s idea stalled.

Nonetheless, Elizabeth Gore, senior vice president for political affairs at the Environmental Defense Fund, said the senator “gets a lot of credit for really elevating this.”

“It was his effort that really put this issue on the map,” she said.

Since then, the Capitol has been awash in proposals to alleviate permitting bottlenecks. House Republicans passed their own as part of budget legislation last month, aiming to increase production of oil, natural gas and coal. Sen. Tom Carper, D-Del., recently introduced another proposal geared toward clean energy.

“I think there is a path forward,” Gore said, describing all the ideas “as stepping stones.”

Neil Bradley, executive vice president of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, was also optimistic.

“The hurdle isn’t whether people think it’s a good idea or not,” he said. “The hurdle is getting the details worked out.”

Despite broad interest in permitting changes, reaching a deal will likely involve trade-offs that are difficult for Democrats and environmentalists to stomach.

Republicans want to see more fossil fuels and, now that they control the House, no proposal will advance without their consent. But too many concessions to Republicans in the House could jeopardize support in the Democratic-controlled Senate.

Biden has frustrated environmentalists by approving Willow, an oil drilling project in an untouched swath of Alaskan wilderness. After Podesta finished a speech on permitting at a Washington think tank this month, activists rushed to block his vehicle with a white banner that said “end fossil fuels” in bold black letters.

Podesta argues that it’s impossible to immediately phase out oil and gas, and he said the status quo won’t suffice when it comes to building clean energy infrastructure. He points to federal data analyzed by the Brookings Institution that found permitting transmission lines can take seven years, while natural gas pipelines take less than half that time.

He was circumspect when asked about where the negotiations may lead.

“There is bipartisan interest in the topic,” Podesta said. “Where any of that ends, I can’t predict.”

A deal could bolster Biden’s political coalition by easing tension between between environmentalists and labor unions, which have often been frustrated by objections to projects that would lead to jobs.

“They’ve unnecessarily taken food off the table of my members,” said Sean McGarvey, president of the North America’s Building Trades Unions.

The relationship with environmentalists “could turn into an alliance depending on how this process ends,” he said, but “we’ve got to do some good business to see if we’re inviting each other for barbecues and crab picks.”

Other factions of the green movement have already expressed frustration.

Brett Hartl, government affairs director for the Center for Biological Diversity, said the administration made a mistake by allowing Manchin’s proposal to be a starting point. The White House, he said, “negotiated away the game at the beginning and put the football on the 2-yard line.”

He also criticized Podesta’s approach to permitting.

“He’s dogmatically saying that environmentalists are the problem here,” he said. “It’s easy to caricature environmental legislation as the boogeyman.”

Historians trace the American regulatory system to a backlash against massive infrastructure initiatives in the middle of the 20th century, such as the interstate highway system and a series of dams. The projects raised concerns about environmental impacts and left local communities feeling steamrolled. More fears about ecological damage were sparked by an oil spill off the coast of Santa Barbara, California, and fires on the polluted Cuyahoga River in Ohio.

The result was the National Environmental Policy Act, signed by President Richard Nixon in 1970 to require federal agencies to consider the environmental ramifications of their decisions. State-level laws, such as the California Environmental Quality Act, proliferated at the same time.

“We have a system that works for what it was designed to do,” said Christy Goldfuss, chief policy impact officer at the Natural Resource Defense Council. “What we’re looking at doing is optimizing that system for the future we need. And that’s a fundamentally different conversation than anything we’ve had before.”

“It’s an incredibly difficult shift to make for the environmental movement,” she added. “And I don’t think everybody is going to make it. Some organizations are going to continue to stand in the way of development.”

And what about that transmission lines in the Southwest that Podesta was counting on?

The goal is to span about 520 miles, carrying electricity from a series of turbines in New Mexico that’s being billed as the largest wind project in the hemisphere. The lines were rerouted to satisfy the Department of Defense, which tests weapons in the area, but local conservationists still say that natural habitats will be threatened by construction.

On Thursday, nearly two decades after the initial proposal, the federal government announced it had approved the project.

[ad_2]

Source link

May 20, 2023
California governor seeks to speed up water, clean energy projects delayed by lawsuits, permits

[ad_1]

SACRAMENTO, Calif. — California Gov. Gavin Newsom on Friday pledged to fast-track hundreds of billions of dollars’ worth of construction projects throughout the state, including a pair of large water endeavors that have languished for years amid permitting delays and opposition from environmental groups.

For the past decade, California officials have pursued the water projects in the drought-prone state. One would construct a giant tunnel to carry large amounts of water beneath the natural channels of the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta to drier and more populous Southern California.

The other would be a massive new reservoir near the tiny community of Sites in Northern California that could store more water during deluges — like the series of atmospheric rivers that hit the state earlier this year — for delivery to farmers.

But neither project has been built, despite promises from multiple governors and legislative leaders. Environmental groups have sued to block the tunnel project, arguing it would decimate threatened species of fish, including salmon and the Delta smelt. The Sites Reservoir is still trying to acquire necessary permits to begin construction.

Newsom is seeking a slew of changes to make it much faster for these projects to gain the required permits and approvals. Other projects that could be eligible include solar, wind and battery power storage; transit and regional rail; road maintenance and bridge projects; semiconductor plants; and wildlife crossings along Interstate 15, Newsom’s office said. His efforts to speed projects would not apply to building more housing.

One key proposal is to limit the amount of time it takes to resolve environmental lawsuits to about nine months. Newsom said his administration is “not looking to roll over anybody,” including what he called the “fierce champions” of environmental stewardship.

“I mean, nine months, you can have a kid, OK? I mean that’s a long time,” Newsom said Friday while visiting the site of a future solar farm in Stanislaus County.

Still, some environmental groups were furious. Barbara Barrigan-Parrilla, executive director of the advocacy group Restore the Delta, said Newsom “wants to do away with standard environmental protections to build the Delta tunnel.”

“We have never been more disappointed in a California governor than we are with Governor Newsom,” she said. “How is perpetuating environmental injustice, which harms public and environmental health, really any different than red state governors perpetuating social injustice in their states, which Governor Newsom likes to criticize vigorously?”

Newsom says California has hundreds of billions of dollars to spend on infrastructure projects over the next decade, the result of voter-approved bonds, bountiful budget surpluses during the pandemic and an influx of federal cash from President Joe Biden’s infrastructure bill.

But he said the state is often too slow to approve those projects and that the federal money is “going to other states that are moving more aggressively.” Newsom said his proposals could shorten how long it takes to build projects by more than three years.

His office said the legislation would allow various state agencies, including the Department of Transportation, to more quickly approve projects and issue permits. Newsom also signed an executive order on Friday creating what he called an “infrastructure strike team” to identify fast-track projects.

Jerry Brown, executive director of the Sites Project Authority that is overseeing the new reservoir, said he thinks Newsom’s proposals could allow construction to start a year early, saving about $100 million.

“That saves a lot of money and gets a lot of jobs in the pipeline,” he said.

Newsom wants the legislation to be part of the state’s budget, which must be passed before the end of June. That means, if approved, it could take effect sooner and would only require a majority vote of the Democratic-controlled Legislature.

Toni Atkins, a Democrat from San Diego and the leader of the state Senate, said “the climate crisis requires that we move faster to build and strengthen critical infrastructure,” adding that lawmakers will “ensure we can do so responsibly, and in line with California’s commitment to high road jobs and environmental protection.”

Some Republicans cheered Newsom’s proposal, with Republican Senate Leader Brian Jones saying the governor “is finally taking action.” Others were more skeptical, with Assembly Republican Leader James Gallagher saying Democrats in the Legislature are the biggest obstacle to Newsom’s proposals.

“Gavin Newsom loves to brag that he can ‘jam’ Democratic lawmakers. Let’s see it,” Gallagher said. “Republicans are ready to work with him towards real reforms.”

[ad_2]

Source link

May 19, 2023
California governor seeks to speed up water, clean energy projects delayed by lawsuits, permits

[ad_1]

SACRAMENTO, Calif. — California Gov. Gavin Newsom on Friday pledged to fast-track hundreds of billions of dollars’ worth of construction projects throughout the state, including a pair of large water endeavors that have languished for years amid permitting delays and opposition from environmental groups.

For the past decade, California officials have pursued the water projects in the drought-prone state. One would construct a giant tunnel to carry large amounts of water beneath the natural channels of the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta to drier and more populous Southern California.

The other would be a massive new reservoir near the tiny community of Sites in Northern California that could store more water during deluges — like the series of atmospheric rivers that hit the state earlier this year — for delivery to farmers.

But neither project has been built, despite promises from multiple governors and legislative leaders. Environmental groups have sued to block the tunnel project, arguing it would decimate threatened species of fish, including salmon and the Delta smelt. The Sites Reservoir is still trying to acquire necessary permits to begin construction.

Newsom is seeking a slew of changes to make it much faster for these projects to gain the required permits and approvals. Other projects that could be eligible include solar, wind and battery power storage; transit and regional rail; road maintenance and bridge projects; semiconductor plants; and wildlife crossings along Interstate 15, Newsom’s office said. His efforts to speed projects would not apply to building more housing.

One key proposal is to limit the amount of time it takes to resolve environmental lawsuits to about nine months. Newsom said his administration is “not looking to roll over anybody,” including what he called the “fierce champions” of environmental stewardship.

“I mean, nine months, you can have a kid, OK? I mean that’s a long time,” Newsom said Friday while visiting the site of a future solar farm in Stanislaus County.

Still, some environmental groups were furious. Barbara Barrigan-Parrilla, executive director of the advocacy group Restore the Delta, said Newsom “wants to do away with standard environmental protections to build the Delta tunnel.”

“We have never been more disappointed in a California governor than we are with Governor Newsom,” she said. “How is perpetuating environmental injustice, which harms public and environmental health, really any different than red state governors perpetuating social injustice in their states, which Governor Newsom likes to criticize vigorously?”

Newsom says California has hundreds of billions of dollars to spend on infrastructure projects over the next decade, the result of voter-approved bonds, bountiful budget surpluses during the pandemic and an influx of federal cash from President Joe Biden’s infrastructure bill.

But he said the state is often too slow to approve those projects and that the federal money is “going to other states that are moving more aggressively.” Newsom said his proposals could shorten how long it takes to build projects by more than three years.

His office said the legislation would allow various state agencies, including the Department of Transportation, to more quickly approve projects and issue permits. Newsom also signed an executive order on Friday creating what he called an “infrastructure strike team” to identify fast-track projects.

Jerry Brown, executive director of the Sites Project Authority that is overseeing the new reservoir, said he thinks Newsom’s proposals could allow construction to start a year early, saving about $100 million.

“That saves a lot of money and gets a lot of jobs in the pipeline,” he said.

Newsom wants the legislation to be part of the state’s budget, which must be passed before the end of June. That means, if approved, it could take effect sooner and would only require a majority vote of the Democratic-controlled Legislature.

Toni Atkins, a Democrat from San Diego and the leader of the state Senate, said “the climate crisis requires that we move faster to build and strengthen critical infrastructure,” adding that lawmakers will “ensure we can do so responsibly, and in line with California’s commitment to high road jobs and environmental protection.”

Some Republicans cheered Newsom’s proposal, with Republican Senate Leader Brian Jones saying the governor “is finally taking action.” Others were more skeptical, with Assembly Republican Leader James Gallagher saying Democrats in the Legislature are the biggest obstacle to Newsom’s proposals.

“Gavin Newsom loves to brag that he can ‘jam’ Democratic lawmakers. Let’s see it,” Gallagher said. “Republicans are ready to work with him towards real reforms.”

[ad_2]

Source link

May 19, 2023
Sign of the times? History marker for communist draws anger

[ad_1]

CONCORD, N.H. — A historical marker dedicated to a New Hampshire labor activist who championed women’s rights and was a founder of the American Civil Liberties Union — but who also joined the Communist Party and was sent to prison — has draw objections from Republican officials and scrutiny from the governor.

Known as “The Rebel Girl” for her fiery speeches, Elizabeth Gurley Flynn was born in Concord in 1890. A green and white Historical Highway Marker dedicated to her, one of 278 across the state, was unveiled Monday near her birthplace.

In addition to her rights activism, the marker also says she joined the Communist Party in 1936 and was sent to prison in 1951. She was one of many party members prosecuted “under the notorious Smith Act,” the marker says, which forbade any attempts to advocate, abet or teach the violent destruction of the U.S. government.

Flynn later chaired the Communist Party of the United States and she died in Moscow during a visit in 1964, at age 74. She was cremated, and her ashes were taken on a “flower-decked bier” to Red Square during a funeral tribute, according to Associated Press accounts at the time.

Republican Gov. Chris Sununu is calling for a review of the state’s historical marker program.

“This is a devout communist,” said Joseph Kenney, a Republican member of the Executive Council, at a regular meeting Wednesday. “We are the ‘Live Free or Die’ state. How can we possibly promote her propaganda, which still exists now through this sign in downtown Concord?”

David Wheeler, a Republican who’s also part of a five-member Executive Council that votes on state contracts and Sununu’s department appointees, said he wanted the council to have more oversight of the historical marker process.

Sarah Stewart, the commissioner for the Department of Natural and Cultural Resources, said at the meeting that the marker program is very popular “because it’s initiated at the local level. There is no state top-down effort to populate the state with historical highway markers.”

There are “many potentially controversial” markers, Stewart said. “The purpose of them is not to commemorate heroes. The purpose is to provide a snapshot that the local community feels is of historic value.”

Any person, municipality or agency can suggest a marker as long as they get 20 signatures from New Hampshire residents. Supporters must draft the marker’s text and provide footnotes and copies of supporting documentation, according to the state Division of Historical Resources. The division and a historical resources advisory group evaluate the criteria.

The sign was approved last year by the Concord City Council following a recommendation from the marker program, which is jointly administered by the Historical Resources Division and the Transportation Department. It currently stands at the edge of a parking lot near the county courthouse.

Flynn is “one of the most significant radical leaders of the twentieth century,” the marker’s supporters said in a letter to City Council last year. The sign also notes Flynn’s support for women’s voting rights and for access to birth control.

Historical markers run the gamut, telling stories about the last living Revolutionary War soldier, poets and painters who lived nearby, long-lost villages and contemporary sports figures.

“We’re going to review the whole process,” Sununu said at Wednesday’s meeting.

“I completely agree with the sentiment here,” the governor said, adding, “It’s the state marker. You can’t say we don’t have any responsibility in terms of what it says and where it goes.”

Stewart, the natural and cultural resources commissioner, sent a letter Thursday to Concord’s mayor saying the city can “reevaluate your approval of this marker,” New Hampshire Public Radio reported. Mayor Jim Bouley did not immediately respond to a phone message seeking comment Friday.

One marker from 2011 that was brought up during Wednesday’s meeting celebrates the 50th anniversary of the “Betty and Barney Hill incident,” during which the couple reported a close encounter with a UFO. Their experience was described in a best-selling book, a television movie, and numerous speaking engagements.

“The UFO one I’m gonna live with,” said Kenney, the Executive Council member. “That’s a funny story.”

___

Associated Press researcher Rhonda Shafner in New York contributed to this story.

[ad_2]

Source link

May 5, 2023
Brazil’s Lula in Shanghai on visit to boost ties with China

[ad_1]

BEIJING — Brazilian President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva was in the Chinese financial hub of Shanghai on Thursday as he looks to boost ties with the South American giant’s biggest trade partner and win political support for attempts to mediate the conflict in Ukraine.

Lula arrived late Wednesday and is due to meet with his Chinese counterpart Xi Jinping in Beijing on Friday before concluding his visit on Saturday.

The Brazilian government says the sides are expected to sign at least 20 bilateral agreements during Lula’s trip, underscoring the improvement in relations following a rocky patch under predecessor Jair Bolsonaro.

In Shanghai, Lula will also attend the official swearing in of close adviser and former Brazilian president Dilma Rousseff as head of the Chinese-backed New Development Bank.

The institution posits itself as an alternative to the International Monetary Fund and World Bank that are controlled mainly by the U.S. and its Western allies. It is focused on the so-called BRICS group of developing nations made up of Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa.

Established more than seven years ago, the bank has approved 99 loan projects totaling more than $34 billion, mainly for infrastructure projects, according to China’s Foreign Ministry.

Much of that credit has gone to Brazil for projects such as a metro system in the business capital of Sao Paulo.

During his meeting with Xi, Lula is expected to discuss trade, investment, reindustrialization, energy transition, climate change and peace agreements, according to the Brazilian government.

China is Brazil’s biggest export market, each year buying tens of billions of dollars worth of soybeans, beef, iron ore, poultry, pulp, sugar cane, cotton and crude oil. Brazil is the biggest recipient of Chinese investment in Latin America, according to Chinese state media, although Lula has spoken against outright Chinese ownership of Brazilian companies.

One of the agreements Lula will sign in China will be for construction of the sixth satellite built under a binational program that will monitor biomes such as the Amazon rainforest.

China also recently ended a ban on Brazilian beef imposed in February following the discovery of an atypical case of mad cow disease.

Politically, the left-leaning Lula’s visit is a sign of Brazil’s reemergence in global relations since he replaced Bolsonaro in January.

The often-abrasive right-wing populist and members of his family at times caused friction with Chinese authorities on issues from the origins of the COVID-19 pandemic to controversial telecommunications company Huawei. Bolsonaro was a noted admirer of right-wing nationalists and showed little interest in international affairs or travel abroad.

Lula, who will visit a Huawei research center in Shanghai on Thursday, made trips to Argentina and Uruguay in January and the U.S. in February, signaling the importance he gives to international affairs, experts said. He toured the world during his first presidency from 2003-2010, particularly in his second term, when he visited dozens of countries, and has visited China twice before.

A key piece of Lula’s outreach abroad is his proposal that Brazil and other developing countries, including China, mediate peace over Ukraine. However, his suggestion that Ukraine cede Crimea as a means to forge peace has angered Kyiv and its closest backers.

China has also sought to play a role in ending the conflict, though in a manner highly supportive of Moscow. It has refused to condemn the invasion, criticized economic sanctions on Russia and accused the U.S. and NATO of provoking the conflict.

Russia and China declared a “no limits” relationship in a joint statement last year and Xi reaffirmed the closeness of ties by meeting with President Vladimir Putin Moscow last month.

A Chinese peace proposal presented in February contains aspects in common with Lula’s, such as ceasing hostilities and starting negotiations, but says nothing about the return of Ukrainian territory seized by Russia and its separatist allies.

[ad_2]

Source link

April 13, 2023
California to keep paying Walgreens despite abortion dispute

[ad_1]

SACRAMENTO, Calif. — California’s Medicaid program will continue to pay Walgreens about $1.5 billion each year despite Democratic Gov. Gavin Newsom declaring last month the state was done doing business with the pharmacy giant after it indicated it would not sell abortion pills by mail in some states.

“California won’t be doing business with @Walgreens — or any company that cowers to the extremists and puts women’s lives at risk. We’re done,” Newsom tweeted March 6.

He then ordered his administration not to renew a $54 million contract with the company to provide prescription medication to the state’s prison system.

But cutting ties with Walgreens wasn’t as clear cut as the governor first indicated. Walgreens has a much more lucrative connection to California’s Medicaid program — the joint federal and state health insurance program for people who are disabled or have low incomes. Federal law says Medicaid patients have the right to fill prescriptions from any willing and qualified provider.

That includes Walgreens.

Last year, California’s Medicaid program paid the company more than $1.5 billion. The California Department of Health Care Services said California will continue to comply with that law, Kaiser Health News reported.

“California has no intention of taking any action that would violate federal Medicaid requirements, or that could undermine access for low-income individuals,” said Tony Cava, spokesman for the California Department of Health Care Services.

Anthony York, spokesman for the governor, also told Kaiser Health News that the Newsom administration had invited Walgreens to apply again for the $54 million contract the state chose not to renew last month.

“Tweeting is not policy,” York told the news outlet.

York said Friday the Walgreens contract was not renewed but that the company “may seek future procurement opportunities.”

This is not the first time Newsom has made a splashy announcement without first working out all of the details behind it. At the beginning of the pandemic, the Newsom administration quickly signed a contract to purchase masks and other personal protective equipment, frustrating some lawmakers who did not know the details.

“This is something that politicians bump up against all the time,” said Jessica Levinson, a law professor at Loyola Marymount University who focuses on politics and elections. “They want to say something strong and big and bold and splashy, and the devil is in the legal details.”

Newsom’s spat with Walgreens began after the company indicated it would not distribute abortion pills by mail in some conservative states. That pill, mifepristone, when combined with another pill, will end a pregnancy. It’s been approved since 2000 in the U.S. for use up to the 10th week of pregnancy. Today, more than half of all abortions in the U.S. are done this way, according to the Guttmacher Institute, a research group that supports abortion rights.

Several states have taken steps to restrict mifepristone, after the U.S. Supreme Court struck down federal abortion protections last year. Earlier this year, attorneys general in 20 states, mostly with Republican governors, warned Walgreens it could face legal consequences if it distributed mifepristone in their states. Walgreens responded by saying it would not distribute mifepristone in states where it is not legal to do so.

On Friday, Walgreens spokesperson Fraser Engerman referred questions to Newsom’s office. But Engerman reiterated the company’s position about abortion pills.

“Walgreens plans to dispense mifepristone in any jurisdiction where it is legally permissible to do so,” Engerman said. “Once we are certified by the FDA, we will dispense this medication consistent with federal and state laws. Providing legally approved medications to patients is what pharmacies do, and is rooted in our commitment to the communities in which we operate.”

Newsom’s former chief of staff, Ann O’Leary, represented Walgreens in discussions with the Newsom administration over the issue last month, Politico reported.

[ad_2]

Source link

April 7, 2023
Alaska oil plan opponents lose 1st fight over Willow project

[ad_1]

JUNEAU, Alaska — Environmentalists lost the first round of their legal battle over a major oil project on Alaska’s petroleum-rich North Slope on Monday as a judge rejected their requests to halt immediate construction work related to the Willow project, but they vowed not to give up.

The court’s decision means ConocoPhillips Alaska can forge ahead with cold-weather construction work, including mining gravel and using it for a road toward the Willow project. Environmentalists worry that noise from blasting and road construction could affect caribou.

U.S. District Court Judge Sharon Gleason said she took into account support for the project by Alaska political leaders — including state lawmakers and Alaska’s bipartisan congressional delegation. She said she also gave “considerable weight” to the support for Willow by an Alaska Native village corporation, an Alaska Native regional corporation and the North Slope Borough, while also recognizing that project support among Alaska Natives is not unanimous.

Environmental groups and an Alaska Native organization, Sovereign Iñupiat for a Living Arctic, had asked Gleason to delay construction related to Willow while their lawsuits are pending. They ultimately want Gleason to overturn the project’s approval, saying the U.S. Bureau of Land Management failed to consider an adequate range of alternatives.

Gleason said the construction work that ConocoPhillips Alaska plans for this month is “substantially narrower in scope than the Willow Project as a whole,” and the groups did not succeed in showing it would cause irreparable harm before she makes a decision on the merits of the cases.

Rebecca Boys, a company spokesperson, said ConocoPhillips Alaska appreciates the backing it has received from those “who recognize that Willow will provide meaningful opportunities for Alaska Native communities and the state of Alaska, and domestic energy for America.”

To prevent the worst of climate change’s future harms, including even more extreme weather, the head of the United Nations recently called for an end to new fossil fuel exploration and for rich countries to quit coal, oil and gas by 2040.

A ConocoPhillips Alaska executive, Stephen Bross, warned in court documents that an order blocking construction could make it “impossible” for the project to begin production by Sept. 1, 2029, and the company risks having its leases expire if the unit hasn’t produced oil by then.

One of the suits, filed by Earthjustice on behalf of numerous environmental groups, says the government analyzed an inadequate range of alternatives “based on the mistaken conclusion that it must allow ConocoPhillips to fully develop its leases.” It also says the environmental review underlying Willow’s approval didn’t assess the full climate consequences of authorizing the project because it didn’t analyze greenhouse gas emissions from other projects in the region that could follow.

The Willow project is in the northeast portion of the National Petroleum Reserve-Alaska, where there has been debate over how much of the region should be available to oil and gas development.

The Biden administration in 2022 limited oil and gas leasing to just over half the reserve, which is home to polar bears, caribou, millions of migratory birds and other wildlife. There are multiple exploration and development projects within 50 miles (80 kilometers) of the Willow project, including other discoveries being pursued by ConocoPhillips Alaska, the state’s largest oil producer.

The other lawsuit, filed by Trustees for Alaska on behalf of Sovereign Iñupiat for a Living Arctic and environmental groups, said federal agencies failed to take a “hard look at the direct, indirect and cumulative impacts” of the Willow project and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service failed to address impacts to polar bears, a threatened species under the Endangered Species Act.

Bridget Psarianos, lead staff attorney with Trustees for Alaska, said in a statement that Gleason’s decision is “heartbreaking for all who want to protect local communities and prevent more devastating climate impacts in the Arctic and around the world. We will do everything we can to protect the region while the merits of our case get heard.”

Erik Grafe, deputy managing attorney for Earthjustice in Alaska, said while this round of legal challenges “did not produce the outcome we had hoped for, our court battle continues.”

Justice Department lawyers had argued that last month’s decision by the Biden administration approving Willow was “based in science and consistent with all legal requirements.” They also said the environmental review thoroughly analyzed emissions related to the use of oil produced by the project and called the analysis sought by Earthjustice overreaching.

State political leaders, including Republican Gov. Mike Dunleavy, and labor unions have touted Willow as a job creator, expected to produce up to 180,000 barrels of oil a day. That’s significant, because major existing fields are aging and the flow of oil through the trans-Alaska pipeline is a fraction of what it was at its peak in the late 1980s.

Many Alaska Native leaders on the North Slope and groups with ties to the region have argued that the project is economically vital for their communities. Nagruk Harcharek, president of the Voice of Arctic Iñupiat, whose members include leaders from across much of the North Slope, called Gleason’s decision “another step forward for Alaska, Alaska Native self-determination, and for America’s energy security.”

But some Alaska Native leaders in the community closest to the project, Nuiqsut, have expressed concerns about impacts to their subsistence lifestyles and worried that their voices haven’t been heard.

Using the oil that Willow would produce over the 30-year life of the project would emit roughly as much greenhouse gas as the combined emissions from 1.7 million passenger cars over the same period. Climate activists say the project flies in the face of President Joe Biden’s pledges to cut carbon emissions and move to clean energy.

The administration has defended the decision on Willow and the president’s climate record. Interior Secretary Deb Haaland, who opposed Willow when she was a New Mexico congresswoman, last month called the project a “difficult and complex issue” involving leases issued by prior administrations. She said there was “limited decision space” and the administration had “focused on how to reduce the project’s footprint and minimize its impacts to people and to wildlife.”

Global demand for crude is expected to continue rising, according to industry analysts and the U.S. Energy Information Administration.

[ad_2]

Source link

April 3, 2023
Do Adani’s woes matter for India’s clean energy transition?

[ad_1]

BENGALURU, India — When the bidders for India’s multibillion-dollar incentive to make solar components were announced in early March, the absence of corporate behemoth Adani Group was conspicuous.

The group — which set up a gigantic factory to make solar equipment in 2016, more than tripled its capacity to make solar panels since 2017 and have begun making silicon materials needed to convert the sun rays to electricity — was expected to “bid in a large way,” said Chiranjeev Saluja, the managing director of Premier Energies, an Indian solar components manufacturer.

The absence is another indication of the holding pattern the group has been in since U.S. short-selling firm Hindenburg Research alleged in late January that the businesses had engaged in fraud and stock price manipulation. Spooked investors dumped tens of billions of dollars in shares, while the company’s purported proximity to Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi has dominated politics in past weeks.

The group has a considerable stake in India’s clean energy future: Adani’s renewable energy ambitions account for 10% of the country’s clean energy goals. But some analysts say the group’s woes won’t hurt India’s energy transition, especially in the medium and long term. And with a big government-favored player like Adani forced to scale down, companies that were reluctant to bid for clean energy projects in India are likely to step up now, leading to a more competitive market and bigger investments in green energy in India, market watchers say.

The Adani Group, led by founder Gautam Adani, influences the lives of millions in India. It builds roads and runs airports, operates some of its biggest ports, makes defense equipment, and sells cooking oil.

More recently, the tycoon who made his fortune betting on coal in an energy-starved nation in the 1990s and remains the largest private developer of new fossil fuel projects in India, had set his eyes on becoming its biggest renewable energy player by 2030.

The group has a clean energy portfolio of over 20 gigawatts of renewable energy, including 10 gigawatts of solar power, accounting for about 5% of clean energy nationwide. Its renewable energy portfolio is spread across 12 Indian states and includes one of the world’s largest solar power plants in the southern state of Tamil Nadu. Last September, Gautam Adani said the group would invest $70 billion in clean energy projects by 2032.

What appears to have changed, at least in the short term, is the group’s ability to raise funds for its ambitious expansion plans.

Adani is still working on existing renewables projects but not those in the pipeline. France’s TotalEnergies paused a $4 billion investment plan to develop green hydrogen with the Adani Group. It’s also not bid for any new projects since the Hindenburg report.

But India’s power minister R. K. Singh dismissed concerns in February that the stock for Adani’s green companies along with the rest of his portfolio plummeting could affect the country’s green ambitions in any way.

Vinay Rustagi, managing director at the renewable energy consultancy Bridge to India, agrees that long-term effects will be minimal, but said there may be short-term hits. And there may be benefits to opening space for other companies, said Tim Buckley, director of Australia-based Climate Energy Finance who has been tracking the Adani Group’s growth for decades.

Buckley said there are other Indian companies interested in investing in renewable energy and now there could be an acceleration of India’s transition to cleaner energy. India is the largest emitter of planet-warming gases behind China, the U.S. and the EU, and aims to produce 450 gigawatts of renewable energy by 2030. That would require that a little more than half of India’s total installed capacity be clean by the end of the decade.

But Adani Group’s continuing interest in new fossil fuel projects put the Indian government under pressure to deliver a fossil fuel agenda and “less pressure to deliver on renewables,” said Buckley.

“At the end of the day, it’s about removing the biggest single private developer of new fossil fuel projects in India, reducing their impact on the political system and democracy in India,” he said.

The company has consistently aligned itself with India’s national priorities and was an early mover into sectors like hydrogen or storing power that were important for the government. Since the report, India’s opposition parties have demanded a probe into the company and questioned Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s proximity to Gautam Adani.

Outside of the Adani Group, major Indian clean energy companies like Renew power, Tata power, Greenko energy holdings and the government-funded National Thermal Power Corporation are aggressively increasing their renewable energy capacity.

Analysts say India’s renewables market is also attractive for foreign investors given the enormous potential for fast growth. The country needs to build 35 to 40 gigawatts of renewable energy capacity each year to meet its 2030 targets.

With so many players keen to invest in India, Rustagi said any ripple effects of the Adani ordeal on the sector will “likely be temporary.”

___

Ghosal reported from New Delhi, India.

___

Follow Sibi Arasu on Twitter at @sibi123 and Aniruddha Ghosal at @aniruddhg1

___

Associated Press climate and environmental coverage receives support from several private foundations. See more about AP’s climate initiative here. The AP is solely responsible for all content.

[ad_2]

Source link

March 27, 2023
Florida mayor resigns over fund distribution concerns

[ad_1]

CLEARWATER, Fla. — A Florida mayor turned in his resignation during a tense budget meeting and said he made the quick decision due to concerns over the direction his colleagues were taking with city funds.

Clearwater’s Mayor Frank Hibbard called for a five-minute recess Monday and made the announcement afterward. Before the recess, the council had been discussing how to pay for a $250 million shortfall for about 30 projects, the Tampa Bay Times reported.

Hibbard had pushed back against spending $90 million for a new city hall and municipal services complex while his four colleagues said was their top priority for the city of Clearwater, which has a population of about 116,000 people and is 23 miles (37 kilometers) from Tampa on Florida’s Gulf Coast.

He called his resignation one of the toughest decisions he’s had to make.

“I’m not a quitter, but I’m not the right leader for this council anymore and I’m concerned where the city is going, because this is simple math and we’re not doing very well on the test,” Hibbard said.

Council member Kathleen Beckman’s mouth was agape as Hibbard spoke. She then reconvened the budget workshop and urged her colleagues to carry on despite being “shell-shocked,” the Times reported.

After leaving the meeting, Hibbard told the Times he made the decision on the spot.

He called his wife, Teresa, who he said asked if he could live with the decision. “I’m not going to have a choice,” he told the newspaper when asked the same question.

“This is so out of character for me … I don’t do things lightly,” Hibbard said. “I don’t want to criticize the council, but it’s an overall vision for where the city is going and being fiscally responsible. We talk about affordability and everything else, but we’re not doing the things that continue to keep a cap on costs.”

Hibbard was in the last year of his four-year term, and had already announced he would not seek reelection. He had previously served as mayor from 2004 to 2012, and took office again in March 2020, just as the global pandemic was beginning.

After the budget meeting, the city’s attorney told the council he wanted to speak with Hibbard to confirm his intentions before they discussed replacing him.

By that time, Hibbard had already cleared out his office.

[ad_2]

Source link

March 21, 2023
Major oil project approval intensifies Alaska Natives’ rift

[ad_1]

ANCHORAGE, Alaska — The Biden administration’s approval this week of the biggest oil drilling project in Alaska in decades promises to widen a rift among Alaska Natives, with some saying that oil money can’t counter the damages caused by climate change and others defending the project as economically vital.

Two lawsuits filed almost immediately by environmentalists and one Alaska Native group are likely to exacerbate tensions that have built up over years of debate about ConocoPhillips Alaska’s Willow project.

Many communities on Alaska’s North Slope celebrated the project’s approval, citing new jobs and the influx of money that will help support schools, other public services and infrastructure investments in their isolated villages. Just a few decades ago, many villages had no running water, said Doreen Leavitt, director of natural resources for the Inupiat Community of the Arctic Slope. Housing shortages continues to be a problem, with multiple generations often living together, she said.

“We still have a long ways to go. We don’t want to go backwards,” Leavitt said.

She said 50 years of oil production on the petroleum-rich North Slope has shown that development can coexist with wildlife and the traditional, subsistence way of life.

But some Alaska Natives blasted the decision to greenlight the project, and they are supported by environmental groups challenging the approval in federal court.

The acrimony toward the project was underscored in a letter dated earlier this month written by three leaders in the Nuiqsut community, who described their remote village as “ground zero for industrialization of the Arctic.” They addressed the letter to Interior Secretary Deb Haaland, a member of New Mexico’s Laguna Pueblo and the first Native American to lead a Cabinet department.

They cited the threat that climate change poses to caribou migrations and to their ability to travel across once-frozen areas. Money from the ConocoPhillips project won’t be enough to mitigate those threats, they said. The community is about 36 miles (58 kilometers) from the Willow project.

“They are payoffs for the loss of our health and culture,” the Nuiqsut leaders wrote. “No dollar can replace what we risk….It is a matter of our survival.”

But Asisaun Toovak, the mayor of Utqiaġvik, the nation’s northernmost community on the Arctic Ocean, told the AP that she jumped for joy when she heard the Biden administration approved the Willow project.

“I could say that the majority of the people, the majority of our community and the majority of the people were excited about the Willow Project,” she said.

Willow is in the National Petroleum Reserve-Alaska, a vast region on Alaska’s resource-rich North Slope that is roughly the size of Maine. It would produce up to 180,000 barrels of oil a day, the use of which would result in at least 263 million tons (239 million metric tons) of greenhouse gas emissions over 30 years, according to a federal environmental review.

The Sovereign Iñupiat for a Living Arctic, Sierra Club and other groups that sued Tuesday said Interior officials ignored the fact that every ton of greenhouse gas emitted by the project would contribute to sea ice melt, which endangers polar bears and Alaska villages. A second lawsuit seeking to block the project was filed Wednesday by Greenpeace and other environmental groups.

For Alaska Natives to reconcile their points of view with one another, it will take discussions. “We just continue to try to sit at the table together, break bread and meet as a region,” said Leavitt, who also is the secretary for the tribal council representing eight North Slope villages.

“I will say the majority of the voices that we heard against Willow were from the Lower 48,” she said of the contiguous U.S. states, excluding Alaska and Hawaii.

ConocoPhillips Alaska said the $8 billion project would create up to 2,500 jobs during construction and 300 long-term jobs, and generate billions of dollars in royalties and other revenues to be split between the federal and state governments.

The project has had widespread support among lawmakers in the state. Alaska’s bipartisan congressional delegation met with Biden and his advisers in early March to plead their case for the project, and Alaska Native lawmakers also met with Haaland to urge support.

Haaland visited the North Slope last fall, just hours after state Rep. Josiah Aullaqsruaq Patkotak, a whaling captain along with his brother on their father’s whaling crew, harvested a roughly 40-ton (36-metric tons) bowhead whale and spent hours pulling it on the ice from the Arctic Ocean at Utqiaġvik. He left the ice around 7 a.m. to be ready to meet with Haaland just two hours later.

For him, the juxtaposition of those activities on the same day underscored the dual life led by Alaska Natives on the North Slope and highlights the choices that communities make every day for their survival.

“That’s the walk our leaders have to walk,” said Patkotak, an independent who supported Willow. “We maintain our culture and our lifestyle and our subsistence aspect where we’re one with the land and animals, and the very next hour you may be having to conduct yourself, you know, in a manner that you’re playing the Western world’s game.”

He invited Haaland to view the bowhead whale that they harvested, but when Patkotak couldn’t provide a street name of where she would go, her security didn’t allow it. “Well, it’s on the ice, there are no street names,” he said.

Patkotak met again with Haaland this month in Washington, D.C., where he extended an invitation to leaders in the White House to visit Utqiagvik, “because it’s our duty to tell our story so that we’re able to strike that balance of both worlds.

“That’s a reality for us,” he said.

___

Brown reported from Billings, Montana.

[ad_2]

Source link

March 16, 2023