Arizona is ground zero for the 2024 election, but also sits on the front lines of the climate crisis, as the state has seen another year of record-breaking temperatures. One organization says the two issues go hand in hand.

Chispa Arizona executive director Vianey Olivarría said many state and local races in Arizona will have direct impacts on how state leaders not only manage environmental challenges, but also preserve democracy. She contended that Arizona isn't taking full advantage of the natural resources at its disposal.

"When we talk about clean energy, democracy and the future of Arizona, that's what we are talking about," she said. "It's a future where this heat is going to get worse, the pollution is going to get worse - that means that our ability to survive will highly depend on our ability to produce electricity."

She added that voters will get to choose candidates vying for three seats on the Arizona Corporation Commission, which has significant power over the state's energy decisions. Olivarría contended that the commission's current members have been voting against the interest of ratepayers and the environment, and siding with utilities.

The commission has said it strives to deliver reliable, cost-effective energy. But just last month, the conservative-leaning commission approved two gas-powered plants.

While the Corporation Commission is supposed to play a significant role in fighting climate change, Olivarría said state legislative races can also make a difference.

"And that is a space that for a long time has become a very 'right-wing' space," she said. "There have been bills in the state Legislature that would take climate change out of our education systems, out of public schools - just talking about it, acknowledging it."

Olivarría said she wants lawmakers to visit the communities disproportionately affected by the urban heat island effect, in which the built environment and a lack of tree canopy makes them more vulnerable to hot weather. Since time is running short before Nov. 5, she reminded folks to vote in person on Election Day, or take their mail-in ballot to a secure dropbox or polling location.

With President Joe Biden in Baltimore today to talk about infrastructure and the climate crisis, the state is in the process of finalizing a new set of energy-use goals for large buildings.

Estimates indicate Maryland's buildings account for around a third of the state's greenhouse gas emissions. To reach goals set under the 2022 Climate Solutions Now Act, the Maryland Department of the Environment has developed energy performance standards for buildings 35,000 square feet and larger.

Veronique Bugnion, CEO of the Maryland-based consulting firm ClearlyEnergy, said performance standards are needed to help cities and states reach climate goals.

"Codes and code improvements are great but there's only so many new buildings being built, and there's an awful lot of existing building stock," Bugnion pointed out. "To tackle the emissions of the existing buildings, new tools were required and that's where building performance standards came from."

There are around 9,000 affected buildings across the state.

Starting next year, building owners will begin reporting energy use to the Maryland Department of the Environment. In 2030 buildings will have to begin meeting interim standards with net-zero emissions set to be required in 2040. Exemptions are available for historic buildings and schools among others.

Bugnion noted one of the virtues of performance standards is allowing flexibility for building owners.

"It really doesn't tell them what to do, it tells them what standard to meet and the standards gradually get more stringent over time," Bugnion explained. "So the first couple years, the expectation is buildings will find ways to do some of the obvious things. But over time, the writing is on the wall that as systems age out, they're going to need to replace them with much more efficient systems."

The department anticipates building owners will eventually convert existing heating and cooling systems to high efficiency electric options such as heat pumps. The energy use data reported next year will be used to calculate Energy Use Intensity Standards which are set to be adopted in 2027.


get more stories like this via email

A new report grades utilities based on their commitment to transitioning away from fossil fuels.

The Sierra Club has graded utilities on their climate pledges since 2021 in its Dirty Truth report.

It finds marginal improvements nationwide, with utilities only committed to retiring 30% of their coal generation by 2030.

Director of the Sierra Club Idaho chapter Lisa Young said one troubling trend is that some utilities claiming to clean up their power generation are simply switching from coal to natural gas.

"Knowing that our ultimate goal and what we need to be doing to address the climate crisis is not replacing one fossil fuel with another," said Young, "but replacing fossil fuels with 100% clean, renewable energy."

The report graded two utilities in Idaho, giving Idaho Power a 'C' grade and PacifiCorp a 'B' grade.

While it operates in fewer parts of Idaho, PacifiCorp serves a large swath of the West - including parts of California, Oregon, Utah, Washington and Wyoming.

Idaho Power and PacifiCorp own a coal-fired power plant in Wyoming, with PacifiCorp in control of two-thirds of the plant.

Young said the utilities planned to convert the plant to gas power, which would have had some slight benefits in the long run.

But PacifiCorp changed its mind this year and said it would continue using coal, deciding to install carbon capture technology instead.

"That's why Idaho Power gets a bad score in this report, because PacifiCorp - the co-owner - is making these poor decisions about continuing to burn coal past 2030," said Young, "and it's impacting Idaho Power and all of us as the customers and everyone in the region."

Young said Idaho Power should push PacifiCorp away from coal.

"Even though it's not the majority owner and this other utility, PacifiCorp, has most of the final say in what's going to happen with that coal plant," said Young, "Idaho Power does have an opportunity here and a point of leverage to really try to shut that coal plant down, and to stop burning coal at that plant."

She also noted that Idaho Power should not put any barriers in the way of rooftop solar so that households can also be part of the renewable energy change.

Southwestern Pennsylvania is a major U.S. hotspot for gas extraction through fracking, but new polling reveals overwhelming public support for tighter industry oversight.

More than four in ten Pennsylvanians told pollsters they'd support an outright ban on fracking.

Sean O'Leary, senior researcher at the Ohio River Valley Institute, said the poll was conducted to assess voters' attitudes toward the fracking industry.

Multiple questions were asked about what could be done to minimize or reduce some of the impacts of fracking.

"And what we found was that, across the board, across a variety of different measures," said O'Leary, "more than 90% of all Pennsylvanians supported increased efforts in those regards."

O'Leary points to a recent University of Pittsburgh study that found significant health risks associated with living near fracking sites.

The poll shows 86% of Pennsylvanians are broadly concerned about water, and 82% about air pollution.

Nearly eight in ten say they worry about the effects of pollution on their family's and community's health. And more than four in ten believe fracking has negative effects on air and water quality.

O'Leary said voters in Pennsylvania are still generally supportive of the natural gas industry.

But he said he believes that's the result of what he called "a widespread misunderstanding" that fracking is vital to Pennsylvania's economy.

He contended fracking has led to a net loss of jobs and population in some counties, causing significant economic loss to these regions.

"The other thing that I think a lot of people are not aware of is that in Pennsylvania, in just the last four years, the fracking industry has laid off 40% of its workforce," said O'Leary. "Four out of every 10 workers in fracking have lost their jobs."

He said early industry-funded studies predicted fracking would create around 250,000 jobs in Pennsylvania.

But recent data show it's been fewer than 20,000, or less than one-percent of the state's total workforce.