AUGUSTA, Maine – Five years after industry, labor and policy groups gathered to create new clean-car rules, the EPA is now taking a U-turn.

On Thursday, the EPA announced a proposed rule that would freeze fuel-efficiency standards to hold them to 2020 levels. It rolls back an Obama-administration requirement to increase the fuel standard to 54 mpg by 2025.

The EPA contends the standards were set too high, and some manufacturers say they are bad for business. But, as the owner of a chain of car dealerships in Maine, Adam Lee says that's not the case.

"The last five years, we've sold more cars than have ever been sold in the history of the auto industry," he says. "It's not just because, but it coincides with these new standards. They're better cars, they're more fuel efficient. It clearly has not dampened sales."

According to the Union of Concerned Scientists, while more efficient vehicles cost slightly more, the gas savings outweigh the costs by an average of nearly $3,000 per Maine household by 2030.

Supporters of lowering the emission standards also argue that competition is a better driver of fuel-economy innovation than government regulations.

Lee counters that the rules are needed to keep the U.S. globally competitive.

"We need those manufacturers to keep doing research and building better vehicles like they have been doing," he stresses. "And if they stop because the standards are reversed, it would be bad for us as a business, and for this country."

And he notes that Maine joined several other states this year in suing the EPA to preserve the standards.

"All of those states want to have cleaner cars and cleaner air," he adds. "Those states should have a right to have a stricter standard. If they want to roll them back, then states such as Maine are going to say, 'No, we want this stricter standard.'"

The standards are estimated to increase Gross Domestic Product by up to $30 billion by 2030, creating 650,000 full-time jobs, including 2,900 in Maine.


get more stories like this via email

Warmer winters and prolonged drought have turned Colorado forests into a budworm and beetle buffet, according to a new report from Colorado State University, and the thousands of acres of dead and dying trees left in their wake pose wildfire risks.

Dan West, entomologist for the Colorado State Forest Service, said four of the last five years have seen below-average precipitation, which is a problem because trees need water to produce resin, which they use to fight off insects.

"When we have significantly below or below-average precipitation, you couple that with warmer than average temperatures, it's really hard to be a tree in Colorado," West explained. "A lot of these bark beetles are just taking advantage of that."

Between 2023 and 2024, western spruce budworms increased their feasting grounds to 217,000 acres, up 15,000 acres from the previous year. The mountain pine beetle population continues to grow along the Front Range, in Gunnison County and in the southwest corner of the state. Bark beetles, the state's deadliest because they kill entire trees, have devoured 27,000 acres in places such as Rocky Mountain National Park and the San Juan and San Isabel national forests.

Warmer winters due to the burning of fossil fuels have taken away a key tree defense: deep freezes. West noted Colorado has not seen below-average winter temperatures in more than three decades.

"Maybe in my parents' generation or grandparents' generation, we used to calculate in overwinter mortality of bark beetles," West pointed out. "We pretty much don't do that anymore. The temperatures really never reach that overwintering cold temperature that can cause bark beetle mortality."

West added trees and insects naturally coexist in ecosystems and bark beetles act as sanitizers of the forest by recycling nutrients but with entire forests weakened, trees become low-hanging fruit.

"As these outbreaks continue over a number of years, we've got a lot of standing dead trees," West observed. "A cigarette, a campfire, a lightning strike -- whatever the spark may be -- that then has a lot of fuel to be able to burn through."

The Comanche 3 coal-fired power plant in Pueblo, Colo., is set to close in just six years -- and community leaders, regulators, and Xcel are considering plans to replace the unit's energy and economic contributions.

A new Energy Innovation report suggests that an industrial-scale energy park that harnesses wind, solar, and battery storage would check all the boxes.

Michelle Solomon, electricity policy manager with the nonpartisan think tank Energy Innovation, said the energy park would create some 300 permanent, high-paying jobs in plant operations, engineering, and more.

"The energy park could generate up to $40 million in annual tax revenue for Pueblo," said Solomon, "which is really important because they depend on this tax revenue that they're getting from Comanche right now -- for things like schools and libraries, things that the community can't afford to lose."

Comanche's connection to the power grid would allow the energy park to meet rising demand locally and in places like Colorado Springs and Denver.

A separate proposal calls for replacing Comanche with a small modular nuclear reactor, an energy source that does not emit carbon but remains controversial.

Tribal lands have been repeatedly targeted as radioactive waste dumps, and many still remember nuclear disasters at Three Mile Island, Chernobyl, and Fukushima.

Wind and solar are now the cheapest source for electricity - and Solomon said unlike nuclear-reactor or natural-gas plant projects, ratepayers would share startup costs with onsite manufacturers, who get guaranteed low-cost energy to produce fertilizer, hydrogen, and more.

"That could be used at any type of industry that's using heat," said Solomon. "So, that could be a steel plant, a cement plant, anything that's using heat for manufacturing."

Solomon said speed is also important for getting economic benefits flowing back into the community. The energy park could break ground before 2030, years earlier than other options.

"They are also the types of resources that can come online more quickly," said Solomon. "When the coal plant retires, the community can't wait a decade for a new resource to come online."

Trenton is set to become home to the region's largest battery storage facility but federal policy changes might change how it's funded.

The DTE Trenton Channel Energy Center would use clean energy tax credits from the Inflation Reduction Act but proposed federal cuts threaten the tax credits.

The plant is expected to store enough energy to power 40,000 homes for a day, create union jobs and help offset the area's economic loss from the 2022 closure of the Trenton Channel Power Plant.

James Harrison, director of renewable energies for the Utility Workers Union of America, said he has three generations of family history at the Trenton plant and is concerned about the potential effects of the proposed cuts.

"They're going to probably move forward with projects," Harrison explained. "The difference is going to be whether or not ratepayers are going to be on the hook to pay for that, or whether or not there's an opportunity to utilize tax credits to offset the cost to ratepayers."

In Michigan alone, more than 100 utility-scale projects are in development which could use the tax incentives. Those who want to eliminate the tax credits said the energy sector should compete without federal aid, arguing tax breaks add to the national debt and unfairly favor certain industries.

The Trenton facility is expected to start operations in mid-2026. The battery storage facility is also expected to generate more tax revenue than the former coal plant, which would benefit schools and public services in the Trenton/Wayne County area.

Harrison shared how his family history at the plant site colors his personal feelings about the new facility.

"I've been in the power industry almost 50 years," Harrison noted. "It's nice to see that the very first power plant that I worked at is being repurposed with modern technology to do the very same kind of job that original plant had provided to the community."

Some Republican lawmakers support keeping certain clean energy tax credits, citing their benefits for jobs and local economies. The Trenton project is also expected to contribute to Michigan's efforts to meet its renewable energy targets of using 60% clean energy by 2030, and 100% by 2040.


get more stories like this via email