SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
To donate by check, phone, or other method, see our More Ways to Give page.
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
Christopher Schuler, christopher.schuler@sierraclub.org
A new study released today by Energy Innovation, a non-partisan energy and climate policy organization, details the devastating effects the policies found within the 900-page conservative playbook would have on our environment and public health.
The report shows that by 2030, compared to currently enacted policy, Project 2025 would result in 1.7 million jobs lost, $320 billion in reduced GDP, more than 2,000 premature deaths from exposure to air pollution, and CO2 emissions of 4,920 MMT.
Project 2025’s framework includes repeal of most provisions of the Inflation Reduction Act and Bipartisan Infrastructure Law, including clean electricity tax credits, zero emission vehicle tax credits, advanced energy manufacturing tax credits, and energy efficiency standards. Project 2025 would also increase oil and gas production and LNG exports, stop EPA from regulating power plant GHGs, and roll back vehicle fuel economy standards.
According to Energy Innovation, this would "more than roll back all the reductions achieved through the historic climate action achieved over the past few years” and would put the United States’ 2030 and 2050 climate targets out of reach.
In response, Sierra Club Executive Director Ben Jealous released the following statement:
“Project 2025 would be an unmitigated disaster for the climate, for our economy, and for the life and livelihood of families across the country. This extreme agenda would not only pollute our clean air and safe drinking water, it will deal a crushing blow to our growing green energy economy, killing good middle class jobs and undoing the monumental gains we’ve made in the past few years. The Sierra Club has fought hard for the progress we’ve made towards a clean and sustainable future. The fight isn’t over and we’re not going back.”
The Sierra Club is the most enduring and influential grassroots environmental organization in the United States. We amplify the power of our 3.8 million members and supporters to defend everyone's right to a healthy world.
(415) 977-5500"Why is Musk doing this?" asked 350.org co-founder Bill McKibben. "My only conjecture is that he hopes the world will become barren enough that we simply have to pony up for his big trip to Mars."
Elon Musk thinks he knows more about climate issues than the entire staff of a major international newspaper, but on Wednesday, experts on the planetary emergency offered the billionaire businessman a reality check.
Responding to a Guardianarticle critical of Monday's glitch- and lie-laden interview of former U.S. President Donald Trump on Musk's X social media platform, Musk proclaimed that "my little fingernail knows more about climate issues than the entire staff of The Guardian."
Bill McKibben, who co-founded the climate action group 350.org, is quoted in that article calling the Musk-Trump interview "the dumbest climate conversation of all time."
Responding to Musk's diss, McKibben said Wednesday on X that he would "be pleased to debate you (or your little fingernail) at any point about why we don't, in fact, have a century to spare in solving this crisis."
Climate scientist Michael Mann, who calls Musk a "climate denier" in the Guardian piece, also weighed in, telling Musk on X that "if you've got a beef, take it up with me."
Some X users noted that once upon a time, Musk—who is the CEO of electric carmaker Tesla—acknowledged the urgency of the climate crisis. In 2018, he said: "Why not go renewable now and avoid [the] increasing risk of climate catastrophe? Betting that science is wrong and oil companies are right, is the dumbest experiment in history, by far."
In an opinion piece published Tuesday by Common Dreams, McKibben noted that after Musk—who endorsed Trump and created a pro-Trump super political action committee—the former president's biggest funder may be fracking billionaire Harold Hamm.
"He took Trump up on his offer that for a billion dollars he'd give the oil industry whatever it wanted, and he's been working the phones ever since," McKibben wrote of Hamm.
Trump returned the favor by calling Hamm "so boring to be with... because all he wants to talk about is oil and gas."
During his first White House run, Trump infamously called climate change "a Chinese hoax." He staffed his administration with climate deniers and rolled back previous administrations' climate policies under the "drill, baby, drill" mantra popularized by former Alaska governor and GOP vice presidential candidate Sarah Palin.
"Why is Musk doing this?" McKibben asked. "Who knows? After all, the success of Tesla has been mostly driven by government subsidy that grows out of the effort to slow the growth of carbon in the atmosphere."
"My only conjecture," McKibben added, "is that he hopes the world will become barren enough that we simply have to pony up for his big trip to Mars."
"We are deeply disappointed in this ruling, but will not be deterred from doing everything in our power to communicate to voters the truth of the Arizona Abortion Access Act," said the campaign behind the ballot measure.
While celebrating that Arizona voters will get to weigh in on an abortion rights ballot measure this November, reproductive rights advocates on Wednesday blasted a state Supreme Court ruling about language in a related informational pamphlet.
Overturning a decision from the Maricopa County Superior Court, the Arizona Supreme Court ruled that Republican legislators' use of "unborn human being" to refer to a fetus in the pamphlet "substantially complies" with the state's impartiality requirements.
"The Arizona Supreme Court today reversed the trial court's well-reasoned ruling and held that the phrase 'unborn human being'—a watchword for anti-abortion advocates with no basis in medicine or science—is somehow impartial or objective," the Arizona for Abortion Access campaign said in a statement.
"This means that Arizona voters won't get to learn about the questions on their ballot in a fair, neutral, and accurate way but will instead be subjected to biased, politically charged words developed not by experts but by anti-abortion special interests to manipulate voters and spread misinformation," the campaign continued.
"We are deeply disappointed in this ruling," the campaign added, "but will not be deterred from doing everything in our power to communicate to voters the truth of the Arizona Abortion Access Act and why it's critical to vote YES to restore and protect access to abortion care this fall."
The Arizona Abortion Access Act is a proposed state constitutional amendment that would prohibit many restrictions on abortions before fetal viability and safeguard access to care after viability to protect the life or health of the patient. The office of Arizona's secretary of state formally certified the proposed ballot measure on Monday.
The campaign to get the measure on the ballot garnered national attention earlier this year, when the Arizona Supreme Court upheld an 1864 abortion ban that includes no exceptions for pregnancies resulting from rape or incest. Although Democratic Arizona Gov. Katie Hobbs signed legislation to repeal the ban less than a month later, reproductive rights advocates have continued to emphasize the importance of passing the amendment.
Arizona is one of several states where reproductive freedom measures are—or soon could be—on the ballot in November. Rights advocates have increasingly pushed and succeeded in passing such measures since the U.S. Supreme Court's right-wing supermajority reversedRoe v. Wade two years ago, which set off a fresh wave of GOP efforts to enact state abortion bans.
The battle over the Arizona pamphlet is connected to a broad push by the anti-choice movement to ultimately end abortion care by recognizing fetuses and embryos as people with legal protections and rights.
This strategy has even influenced the latest Republican Party platform, which says that "we believe that the 14th Amendment to the Constitution of the United States guarantees that no person can be denied life or liberty without due process, and that the states are, therefore, free to pass laws protecting those rights."
The platform was finalized last month, shortly before the Republican nominee, former President Donald Trump, announced U.S. Sen. JD Vance (R-Ohio) as his running mate—a decision that further stoked fears of what a GOP victory in November would mean for abortion rights at the federal level.
Trump and Vance are set to face Democratic Vice President Kamala Harris and Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz, who have strong support from reproductive rights groups. Planned Parenthood Action Fund president Alexis McGill Johnson recently declared that they "are the only people we can trust to ensure that everyone has the freedom to make decisions about their own bodies."
"This historic milestone marks a significant win for clean energy advocates, for ratepayers, and for people and communities across the country," said one climate leader.
U.S. climate advocates this week are celebrating new federal data that show wind and solar have generated more power than coal during the first seven months of 2024 and are on track to do so for the entire calendar year.
"This is the kind of news we like to see!" Food & Water Watch said of the data on social media Tuesday. "Ensuring a livable climate for all depends on us making a swift and just transition to clean energy like wind and solar."'
The group shared reporting from E&E News, which noted that "the milestone had been long expected due to a steady stream of coal plant retirements and the rapid growth of wind and solar. Last year, wind and solar outpaced coal through May before the fossil fuel eventually overtook the pair when power demand surged in the summer."
"Renewables' growth has been driven by a surge in solar production over the last year," the news outlet continued. "The 118 terawatt-hours generated by utility-scale solar facilities through the end of July represented a 36% increase from the same time period last year, according to preliminary U.S. Energy Information Administration figures. Wind production was 275 TWh, up 8% over 2023 levels. Renewables' combined production of 393 TWh outpaced coal generation of 388 TWh."
Sierra Club executive director Ben Jealous said in a statement Wednesday that "wind and solar energy has long been the most cost-effective choice for utilities, but now it has also outpaced coal generation as the top source of energy, further demonstrating that clean energy is critical to a reliable and affordable grid."
"This historic milestone marks a significant win for clean energy advocates, for ratepayers, and for people and communities across the country that simply want to breathe clean air, drink safe water, and worry less about climate disasters like floods and wildfires," Jealous continued.
"For decades, the Sierra Club has fought to move America Beyond Coal and onto a clean, reliable, and affordable grid," he added. "To date, the Beyond Coal campaign has secured the retirement of 385 coal plants and counting, and on August 16th, we celebrate the two-year anniversary of the Inflation Reduction Act, which made historic investments in clean energy and clean energy jobs. Together, families across the country are saving money, enjoying good paying jobs, breathing clean air, and drinking safe water."
Along with celebrating the federal legislation signed in 2022 by President Joe Biden, Sierra Club highlighted a state law signed the previous year by Democratic Illinois Gov. JB Pritzker.
"Illinoisans should be proud of the work we've done to close our largest coal plants and leverage the power of clean energy to drive economic growth while reducing pollution that's harmful to public health and our planet," said Jack Darin, director of the Sierra Club's state chapter. "Thanks to the Climate and Equitable Jobs Act of 2021, Illinois workers are now building the clean energy that is replacing old, dirty fossil fuels and bringing a brighter future to communities across our state."
Celebrations over the "major power milestone" come as Americans prepare for a November presidential election in which Democratic Vice President Kamala Harris and Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz—who are endorsed by a range of climate groups—are set to face former Big Oil-backed former Republican President Donald Trump and U.S. Sen. JD Vance (R-Ohio).
During an April event in Florida, Trump told fossil fuel executives that if they invested just $1 billion into his campaign, he would gut the Biden-Harris administration's climate regulations. The Washington Postreported Tuesday that billionaire Continental Resources founder then "called other oil executives and encouraged them to attend fundraisers and open their wallets."
While Hamm is reportedly sharing Big Oil's priorities with the Trump-Vance team, their approach can be summed up by a phrase they've said on the campaign trail: "drill, baby, drill."
Although the Republican candidates have tried to distance themselves by the Heritage Foundation-led Project 2025, the right-wing policy agenda—crafted by many Trump allies—has also alarmed climate campaigners.
Noting the new energy data, Antonia Juhasz, a senior researcher on fossil fuels at Human Rights Watch, said Tuesday: "This transformation is due in large part to federal government policy which has specifically incentivized renewable energy development and deployment and increased regulation on the harms of fossil fuels. All of which are specifically targeted for removal in Project 2025."
As Common Dreamsreported earlier Wednesday, an analysis from the think tank Energy Innovation shows that a GOP administration implementing the Project 2025 plan would increase U.S. greenhouse gas emissions by 2.7 billion metric tons by 2030 compared to the current trajectory.