 |
|
|
|||||
During his first week in office, President Donald Trump withdrew from the Paris climate agreement, declared an energy emergency, renewed his vow to drill, baby, drill, and began dismantling American climate policy. That has left environmental advocates looking to states to lead the nations efforts to burn fewer fossil fuelsand a report released Wednesday shows there is much more they can do. One of the most powerful tools at each states disposal is the ability to work with utilities to encourage energy efficiency. But the report from the American Council for an Energy-Efficient Economy, or ACEEE, details how only 26 states, along with the District of Columbia, have established a so-called energy-efficiency resource standard, or EERS. These targets, set by legislators or utility regulators, require utilities to implement programssuch as weatherization or rebates on appliancesthat cut energy consumption by a certain amount each year. There is more work that needs to be done, said Jasmine Mah, a senior research analyst at the Council and an author of the report. Since 2012, just three states have added such a standard, while New Hampshire, Ohio, and Iowa repealed theirs in favor of less-ambitious or scaled-back programming. Arizona is also pursuing a rollback. Mah says the report is aimed at state policymakers and regulators, who could shift that tide. We hope that highlighting the positive impacts of having an EERS in place would encourage states to pass a policy, she said. An earlier ACEEE report found that as of 2017, states with an energy-efficiency resource standard saw four times the electricity savings as states without one. In 2023, states with such a plan accounted for about 59% of the U.S. population but 82% of the savings. States arent doing this just because of climate change, said Barry Rabe, a political scientist at the University of Michigan who studies energy and climate politics. There is an economic advantage. Fossil-fuel-friendly Texas, Rabe noted, was the first to adopt an EERS in 1999. But efficiency can become less of a priority when energy supplies are abundant and costs are stable. The decline in interest, Rabe said, has in some degree coincided with the massive increase in natural gas use in the U.S. Still, the Council also found that many states have gone beyond baseline policies and implemented what the report dubs next-generation initiatives that aim to lower greenhouse gas emissions, spur electrification, serve lower-income populations, and reduce consumers financial energy burdens. All but 4 of the 27 states (including D.C.) with an energy-efficiency resource standard have implemented at least one such effort, but only 9 have adopted all of them, leaving plenty of room for growth. We found that low-income targets are the most common complementary goal related to efficiency standards, said Mah. [But] not many states had provisions for energy affordability. The report spotlights five states that have been particularly effective at employing these programs. Illinois has targeted using only clean energy by 2050. Massachusetts aims to install half a million heat pumps by 2030. Michigan mandates that utilities dedicate at least 25% (electric utilities) and 35% (gas utilities) of their energy-efficiency funding to programs serving low-income customers. Utilities in New York and Minnesota have capped the portion of a customers income that can go toward utility costs at 6% and 4%, respectively. President Trumps push to repeal the 2022 Inflation Reduction Act, or IRA, likely wont impact state EERSs because they are generally funded through fees added to utility bills. We see that as probably the best way to bring significant funds, said Justin Brant, the utility program director at the Southwest Energy Efficiency Project. Critics of Arizonas EERS, which was adopted in 2010, point to the $3 billion cost to customers. Utilities should select the most cost-effective energy mix to provide reliable and affordable service, without being constrained by government-imposed mandates that make it more expensive for their customers, said Arizona Corporation Commissioner Nick Myers in a statement last year. But the states largest electric utility found that in 2023, EERS investments reaped about twice as much in returns as was spent. Were saving money for all customers, even those who arent participating, said Brant. The IRA does provide nearly $9 billion for energy-efficiency and electrification programs, almost all of which is distributed via states and could be used on next-generation programs, like those serving low-income households. That money has already been awarded. But the Republican-controlled Congress could roll back federal tax credits for energy efficiency and electrification, which indirectly make it easier for states to achieve their energy-efficiency resource standard and next-generation goals. Brant says he would add another policy to the Councils next-generation wish list for states: programs that encourage customers to spread out the timing of their daily energy use. Lower peak demand means power plants dont need to be as large. And that, he said, will be especially critical as renewable energy becomes an increasing part of the countrys electricity mix. Time shift is not something that this report looked at, he said. I think thats another piece that needs to be prioritized. This article originally appeared in Grist, a nonprofit, independent media organization dedicated to telling stories of climate solutions and a just future. Sign up for its newsletter here.
Category:
E-Commerce
In an executive order Monday, President Donald Trump demanded a full-scale review of the Federal Emergency Management Agency and requested a report proposing structural changes within the next 180 days. The move comes after he made repeated calls for getting rid of the nations backstop against natural disasters during his first few days as president. “FEMA has turned out to be a disaster, Trump said in North Carolina on Friday while on a multistate tour to areas still recovering from the effects of last years Hurricane Helene and the ongoing wildfires near Los Angeles. I think we recommend that FEMA go away.” Inside the agency, FEMAs staff is bracing for the worst. We all got PTSD here in Puerto Rico the first time around. [We’re] just praying we dont get so much as a bad rain in the next four years, says Denise, a FEMA employee who requested to be identified only by her middle name. I was expecting BS, but not this fast. Residents of Watsonville temporarily living in FEMA trailers a year after the Loma Prieta earthquake in California, circa 1990 [Photo: Eric Luse/The San Francisco Chronicle/Getty Images] FEMA was established in 1979 in its current form, but traces its roots back to 1803 with congressional authorization of aid to the city of Portsmouth, New Hampshire, following a severe fire that threatened the national economy. Today, FEMA aid is available only after local jurisdictions have depleted their own ability to respond to an emergency and specifically request it. Even then, the request must be approved by Congress. FEMA is currently managing the response and recovery for at least 192 disaster declarationsincluding fires, floods, landslides, tornadoes, hurricanes, and winter storms. In 2023, FEMAs budget totaled nearly $30 billion, including activities in every state, tribal entity, and Puerto Rico. Trumps moves to limit FEMAs scope appear to be rooted in political retribution. His executive order alleges FEMA staff have selectively administered hurricane aid based on political affiliationa false rumor that the president himself helped spread during the Helene aftermath, and which the agency has worked hard to debunk. That same allegation resulted in multiple physical threats to FEMA workers last year in North Carolina and Tennessee. The chairman of the Republican National Committee was one of the first people named as a member of the FEMA review panel that Trump tasked with deciding the agencys future. Routing FEMA funds directly through the White House, as Trump suggested over the weekend, would further politicize federal disaster aid, especially since states that historically have received the most FEMA funds are those along the Gulf Coast that supported him in the last election. Trump has also threatened conditioning federal wildfire aid to California on the state passing more restrictive voter ID laws. Moves like this are unheard of in recent U.S. history, and have prompted bipartisan anger in response. California has given more to the recovery of other states than any other state in the union, said Democratic Senator Adam Schiff. You do not want to go down this road. A civilian search and rescue team member, left, gives a hand to a member of NY Task Force One, a FEMA urban search and rescue team, as they hike along the Broad River in the aftermath of Hurricane Helene. [Photo: Sean Rayford/Getty Images] Shifting to the states While on his trips to North Carolina and California last week, Trump speculated that he could ultimately abolish FEMA entirely and turn disaster management directly over to the states, which would then be able to delegate response and recovery efforts to nonprofits. According to an analysis by Samantha Montano, an emergency management professor at Massachusetts Maritime Academy, this would result in “a less effective, less efficient, and less equitable emergency management system, which means it makes all of us less safe. Without question, we would see higher death tolls, greater physical damage, and immense economic impacts.” Even if Trump and Congress maintain current levels of federal disaster aid, without FEMA states wouldn’t have adequate infrastructure to administer that aid to affected households. Multistate disasterslike most hurricaneswould likely have a haphazard response without FEMAs coordination and could completely overwhelm small states, territories, and tribal nations. Workers for FEMA put a temporary roof on a home damaged by Hurricane Katrina in Waveland, Mississippi. [Photo: Spencer Platt/Getty Images] Emergency management experts consulted by Fast Company said a diminished federally coordinated disaster response would compound the growing risks that Americans already face from climate change. Even adjusting for inflation, the annual number of billion-dollar disasters in the United States has doubled in just the past 10 years. That will continue to grow for the foreseeable future as rising temperatures fuel stronger storms. Withholding federal aid could deal a crushing blow to any area that has suffered a severe disaster, says Edie Schaffer, a retired emergency planning manager for the city and county of San Francisco. It would also prolong recovery, which in some instances could have consequences far beyond the area where the disaster occurred. A case in point: Reporting from the Tampa Bay Times indicates that the twin 2024 hurricane disasters of Helene and Milton generated $247 million of additional expenses for debris collection and disposal in the St. Petersburg area aloneabout 30% of the citys annual operating budget. FEMA has already committed to covering $200 million of those expenses, but reimbursements could now be delayed. A state or local area left to address the impacts of disasters alone would likely have to shift funding from other projects to help with response and recovery efforts, says Schaffer, noting that as a last resort, cities and states may need to turn to selling bonds to cover any expense shortfalls. President Trump throws paper towels into a crowd at a food and supply distribution event following Hurricane Maria in Guaynabo, Puerto Rico, in 2017. [Photo: Mandel Ngan/AFP/Getty Images] Trump and FEMA The interim FEMA administrator, Cameron Hamilton, is a former Navy SEAL with no previous disaster management experience, but he is a Trump loyalista further sign that the president is likely to politicize federal disaster response in his second term. Aside from the COVID-19 pandemic, the botched federal response to Hurricane Maria in Puerto Rico in 2017 was one of Trumps largest first-term failures, according to emergency response experts. Studies show that Marias impact was worsened by the slow response. A Biden-era report issued by the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights found that the initial aid package to Puerto Rico was 16 times smaller than aid to Texas after Hurricane Harveywhich happened a few weeks before Maria. A 2018 report from George Washington University found that delays in disaster response likely elevated mortality rates in Puerto Rico after Maria. Theres also evidence that a similar effect happened in North Carolina during Trumps first term, with Hurricanes Matthew and Florence. In both cases, bureaucratic delays in federal aid made subsequent disasters worse. While in office, Trump accused George Washington University researchers of being part of a ploy by Democrats to make him look as bad as possible, and he repeatedly falsely inflated the amount of aid he had distributed to Puerto Rico. A deeper issue is that FEMA also coordinates with states and local governments on disaster prevention and works to maintain and update planning documents for dozens of disaster typesfrom hazmat spills to nuclear warthat use the best available science. Should that work also be curtailed, it would greatly magnify the burden of future disasters. A report from the U.S. Chamber of Commerce says that every dollar invested in disaster prevention yields $13 of avoided damages and improved economic activity. A FEMA disaster recovery center in Pasadena, California, on January 17, 2025 [Photo: Jill Connelly/Bloomberg/Getty Images] If the U.S. fixed its infrastructure, building codes, and [addressed] climate change, [FEMA] might not be as necessary, says Denise. A lot of us who [do] work facing the public are survivors from previous large disasters who were hired to work locally and then stayed at the agency. Fortunately, a potential FEMA backup is already in place should Trump ultimately disband or dramatically downsize the agency. The Emergency Management Assistance Compact is a nationwide mutual aid agreement among all 50 states and territories that was formed in 1996. California Governor Gavin Newsom used the agreement to send response staff to Florida even before Hurricane Helene made landfall there. Cooperation among states wont free up any federal funding, but could help reduce the chances that any one state gets overwhelmed.
Category:
E-Commerce
Digital transformation is the most important investment that organizations can make to drive enterprise value. Thats according to 68% of 1,600 business leaders surveyed by Deloitte. And while I largely agree with their thinking, I would take things one very important step further. In my six years as CEO of Argyle, a technology company whose existence hinges on other organizations willingness to digitally transform their income verification process, I have learned this: A transformation that prioritizes the needs, skills, and experiences of the humans operating the technology being adopted is the key to long-term success. Consider the users Some call it taking a human-centered approach. I call it common sense. The point of automating business processes is to improve performance and drive efficiencies that allow humans to focus on tasks they do best. So it stands to reason that setting a digital transformation strategy in a vacuum and imposing technology on employees will fail at best, and backfire at worst. I say this with experience. In our earliest days at Argyle, we were heads down building out an infrastructure that didnt previously exist. We focused on the functionality of our platform and its output because we had to get to market and prove we had a viable product. In the process, we considered the needs of the businesses that would buy our products, but lacked the resources or bandwidth to prioritize every potential users experience. As a result, we managed to successfully sell our technology, but struggled to attain the adoption rates we considered indicative of true success. As we matured, we learned better and amassed the resources we needed to do something about it. Now we know that widespread digital transformation only happens when people value and trust new technologies enough to change their behavior. And change is hard. Prioritize people in your digital transformation According to Accenture research, 80% of organizations intend to implement transformational change in the future. Meanwhile, 95% of organizations have undergone at least two or more transformations in the past three years. At the same time, most organizations arent exactly optimistic about the transformation process or its projected outcomes. Only 30% feel confident about their change capabilities, and 30% anticipate their transformation efforts having a significant impact on performance. Thats depressing. But its not unsolvable. McKinsey research has shown that prioritizing people is one thing organizations that have undergone successful digital transformations have in common. They dont lose sight of the fact that their efforts are in service of their employees performance and that success depends on their enthusiastic adoption of any new technologies introduced. 4 ways to put people first In practice, putting people first means taking employees into consideration at every stage of a digital transformation journey. Here are four ways to do that. Tedious work: When deciding where to focus your efforts, for example, you could start with the tasks and processes that employees find the most tedious or frustratingthe ones that stand most in the way of them getting to do the work they enjoy or derive value from. It also entails being realistic about the extent of technological change your team can reasonably handle in its current state. Solicit input: When evaluating solutions, a human-centered approach could mean inviting employees to participate in a pilot program and soliciting their input. And it should mean working with technology vendors that proactively anticipate your employees’ needs in their solutions design. Beyond that, vendors should also be willing, able, and agile enough to customize their solution to further meet your operational demands and team preferences. This goes a long way in eliminating or minimizing the disruptions and frustrations that could breed confusion among employees or trigger their resistance. Communications: At implementation, prioritizing people means devising a concerted rollout strategy that effectively communicates the change being instituted, why its being instituted, and its timelineerring on the side of overcommunication, if theres any doubt. McKinseys research showed that companies that proved successful at their automation efforts were seven times more likely to formally engage their communications team at the implementation stage. Thoughtful, team-wide training is also key and should be deeply supported, if not actively co-managed, by the technology vendor. Track and evaluate: And finally, digital transformation ought not to be a set-it-and-forget-it initiative. You should plan on regularly evaluating technology solutions with employee input in order to quickly identify and fix issues affecting adoption and performance. This will also allow you to successfully absorb, communicate, and provide training on upgrades as they become available. At Argyle, in order for us to lead our own slice of the digital transformation, we now consider and account for the human element of transformation as much as the technology itself. We know that our collective progress depends on the receptivity of the people operating our productsand that depends on our willingness to see them, hear them, and account for them in all of our decisions. We encourage all technology leaders to follow suit. Shmulik Fishman is founder and CEO of Argyle.
Category:
E-Commerce
All news |
||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||