Remember that Inflation Reduction Act?
In 2022, a democratic-led effort in Congress managed to pass what could be argued to be their crown climate achievement: The Greenhouse Gas Reduction Act, included as part of the Inflation Reduction Act. The bill was put forth as a means to begin to meaningfully act upon the impending climate crisis, incentivizing green energy sources and climate-resistant infrastructure investments.
An important component of the Greenhouse Reduction Act was the Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund, dubbed the 'Green Bank'. It's a multibillion-dollar fund for initiatives meant to aid developers, nonprofits, and aid groups with their respective missions.
Oftentimes, these organizations used the money to fund projects meant to make communities more resilient to the effects of climate change and put forth climate justice for the disadvantaged. Where conventional banks and investors will overlook these underprivileged communities, the Green Bank would offer grants to them to cover the costs of adaptation.
It had handed out $20 billion in grants in the years prior to Trump's takeover, primarily to banks and coalitions who have a mission of providing aid, in the form of money and lending, to local and state initiatives for implementing green energy and climate resilience solutions. Such coalitions are important, since green initiatives might not otherwise have the funding to get off the ground.
Now, remember that Lee Zeldin guy, head of the EPA?
Yeah, the guy who didn't think that government money should be used for climate change initiatives? He intends to uphold his beliefs. He has recently declared that the EPA will attempt to retrieve the congressionally-allocated funding from the eight grant recipients. He claimed the nonprofits were "far-left activist groups" and that he considered the allocated funds to be wasteful. This comes amidst a federal obsession with 'efficiency' and cutting what they view to be 'wasteful' spending, which has already targeted many helpful, life-saving programs and administrations.
Kentucky, Missouri, Idaho, and a number of other states are all suffering under the flooding and snow brought about by a recent stream of winter storms- the sixth within two months according to the Weather Channel. The Los Angeles wildfires are still fresh in victim's minds.
Cutting costs in the present means they will skyrocket in the future
If the EPA were to retract the allocated grants, it could pull the rug out from under efforts to make communities more resistant to weather extremes that are only becoming more prevalent. Without such resistance, damage done by severe weather events is almost certain to be much worse, when it otherwise may have been preventable, or at least able to be mitigated.
Zeldin and the larger Trump administration may be trying to be stingy about their government spending habits, but it's almost guaranteed that the cost of becoming climate-resilient and moving to renewables will be dwarfed by the costs of rebuilding and migrating in the face of unfettered climate change.
Luckily, Zeldin's vow to revoke the Green Bank grants is yet to happen. He will try to direct the coalitions to return the money, but it is yet to be seen if he has the authority to do so. The Green Bank funding is congressionally allocated, and with Congress' power of the purse protected under the constitution itself, Zeldin will face significant legal challenges the whole way down. After all, a single man in a position of federal authority is not meant to be able to withhold or change aspects of a Congressionally-authorized budget. Let's hope that holds true.
I posted several weeks ago when Zeldin was recently appointed and shared my thoughts and predictions about what he may attempt but I did not predict that he would do something as cruel as pull funding from vulnerable communities after that grant was already allocated! This administrations obsession with "wasteful" spending is insane, especially since its only going towards tax breaks for the rich!
ReplyDeleteZeldin's intentions reflect a broader federal push for budget cuts, the legal challenges he may encounter in attempting to reverse congressionally allocated funds could ultimately protect these vital resources for climate adaptation.
ReplyDeleteIt seems like we are moving in the wrong direction with budget cuts for the Green Bank. Making sure that people who are working on solution to climate change get fund is key.
ReplyDeleteTrue, unfortunately the funds and government support lie with the alternatives (I.E.oil companies).
DeleteThe lies are extremely detrimental and they waste valuable time.
DeleteZeldin vow not coming into effect yet is a good thing for now since it's only a matter of time before it does unless we do something we need the green bank.
ReplyDeleteI think this year and next year with sporadic harsher storms is either going to change people minds about the horrors awaiting us, or solidify their ignorance. It is unbelievable to me that money is being cut from the EPA, storms are worse than ever, and now state park employees are being fired by the thousands.
ReplyDeleteThese grants seem so helpful for climate action and resilience. It was no surprise to me that the new administration doesn't want funds going to this.
ReplyDeleteIt is so beyond disheartening to see this. It is scary to be left hoping that the hinges of a piecemeal legal and legislative system will curtail disproportionate power. It is ironic too that a lot of states listed in need of these green initiatives are predominately red states.
ReplyDeletePrecisely. I think it comes down to a fundamental lack of education about climate change, and a seed of mistrust of the scientific facts, as republicans are statistically less likely to hold a diploma or secondary education. It's deeply unfortunate because those who vote in favor of curbing climate solutions will indeed need such funding.
DeleteAlthough I'm bitter about red state's refusal to accept progress, I also feel bad about what will come upon them as a result.
It is unfortunate to see how our federal agencies are consistently attempting to pull funding away from already vulnerable populations and I am hopeful that Zeldin will not be successful in revoking these grants.
ReplyDeleteI find these actions are becoming increasingly tone deaf to the reality of all Earth citizens. How can one look at the climate realities in front of them and not think funding climate damage mitigation projects, or scientific research, important? People don't deserve to die to a negligent government. I don't think this is a matter of left and right, it is merely life or death. The Green Bank grants are an essential stepping stone to more world saving projects, and I like always, am very worried and sad.
ReplyDeleteI agree, climate change is definitely a bipartisan issue, in that it will not care about political affiliations when the impacts come. But the states that stand to see climate change's worst impacts- Arizona, Texas, Louisiana, Florida, Alabama, to name a few- tend to vote for those who'd rather embrace the comfort of fossil fuels and climate denial. Which is both ironic and saddening.
DeleteI still want there to be efforts to preserve people's livelihoods in red states, they deserve it as much as anyone else. So I hope that education and outreach efforts bear fruit in such vulnerable states, and that their lawmakers wake up to the reality that faces them and their constituents.
Our government could definitely use a lesson in team work and compassion for others. That might allow them to recognize how their actions impact other people. We will hope for the best.
ReplyDeleteOne can only hope that congress and the courts will hold back the garbage this admin and it's appointed leaders are pushing. The mass cutting of environmental spending, especially right now, is one of the biggest crimes against humanity ever committed.
ReplyDeleteHey Ayla, great post! It’s concerning to see climate funding at risk. Do you think legal challenges will block Zeldin’s move?
ReplyDeleteI think, should the lawsuits rise up and judges take a look at the constitution, the answer should, in theory, be clear. The power to allocate funding on a federal level is supposed to lie soundly on Congress.
DeleteHowever, there's still some uncertainty. The funding for the Green Bank was specifically set aside as part of the bill for the purpose of awarding to companies. But the EPA may be in charge of deciding who specifically receives the grants, so it'll depend on the terms and agreements of grant awarding.
To sum it up: Legal challenges will at least slow Zeldin's efforts, but there's still a possibility that he has the authority to revoke funding depending on judge rulings.
This move could undermine efforts to make communities more resilient to climate change.
ReplyDeleteUsing political stereotypes as a means to make decisions to cut back on climate resiliency efforts is completely unprofessional. I am concerned with the Trump administration and other politicians like Zeldin will only make matters worse to where future generations will be left with a huge mess to clean up when it could be avoided now.
ReplyDeleteIt is scary to think of how federal funding supports oil and coal companies when things like solar, water, and wind are the key aspects for the future. I'd never heard of a green bank before reading this article, and it was very informative.
ReplyDelete