SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
world meteorological organization
Why Did DOE Axe $3.7 Billion in Clean Energy Projects Days After a Global Climate Alert?
This is not simply a policy mistake. It’s a calculated abdication of leadership for a fleeting political win.
Jun 02, 2025
On Friday, the U.S. Department of Energy announced the cancellation of 24 clean energy and industrial decarbonization projects. The agency claimed this move would save taxpayers $3.6 billion. But the real cost—economic, environmental, and geopolitical—will be far greater.
The decision came just days after the World Meteorological Organization warned that the planet has a chance of breaching 2°C of warming within five years. Around the same time, Norway’s $1.8 trillion sovereign wealth fund—the largest in the world—projected that climate risk could erase 20% of its U.S. equity holdings. While other nations mobilize to confront escalating threats, the United States—the largest economy on Earth—is retreating. This is not simply a policy mistake. It’s a calculated abdication of leadership for a fleeting political win.
We’ve seen this pattern before. From “beautiful, clean coal” to climate denial in congressional hearings to billions in fossil fuel donations, the Republican Party has long treated climate action as a culture war wedge. Clean energy is no longer debated on the merits—it’s dismissed as “woke,” undermined not out of ideological consistency, but political convenience. Market-based climate solutions could align with core conservative values: competition, energy independence, national security. Instead, Congress continues to treat policy as performance—enabling headlines over outcomes, symbolism over strategy.
The consequences are immediate, and they are devastating.
We didn’t just cancel 24 projects. We canceled momentum. We canceled trust. We canceled a framework that had finally begun to reconnect federal capacity with local ambition.
Tens of thousands of potential jobs vanished overnight. The canceled projects spanned over a dozen states—from Alabama and Texas to California and Massachusetts. Cities like Birmingham, Baytown, Toledo, Zanesville, Modesto, and Holyoke had been preparing for long-overdue industrial upgrades: electrified glass furnaces, carbon-captured cement kilns, regional hydrogen hubs. These weren’t theoretical moonshots. They were shovel-ready projects with partners in place. Economic development agencies were mobilized. Union halls were staffing up. Community colleges had launched clean workforce programs. Then came the call: It’s over.
DOE’s rationale? These projects didn’t offer sufficient return on investment. But no cost-benefit analysis has been released. What we do know: The canceled projects would have reduced over 9 million metric tons of carbon dioxide annually—the equivalent of taking 2 million cars off the road. These weren’t speculative technologies. They targeted sectors like steel, cement, chemicals, and paper—industries where emissions can be reduced, but not without public investment.
This wasn’t just climate policy. These were air quality improvements in neighborhoods with decades of industrial pollution. These were middle-class jobs, modernized infrastructure, and new revenue streams for local governments. They signaled that decarbonization could drive renewal—not austerity. That message mattered, especially in regions where federal support has long felt abstract or nonexistent.
So why cancel them?
Because it made for good optics. Many of the projects were located in red or swing districts. Cutting them allowed Republicans to posture against “wasteful” spending and energize their base. It transformed serious infrastructure investments into political theater. And Congress went along—not out of principle, but out of paralysis.
DOE now says it will redirect resources to long-horizon technologies: fusion, quantum computing, and artificial intelligence. These are important pursuits. But they won’t cut emissions at a cement plant in 2028. They won’t lower energy costs at a food processing facility next year. And they won’t create jobs in Modesto or Toledo.
There’s nothing wrong with moonshots—unless they come at the expense of shovel-ready progress.
Because these projects weren’t paper proposals. Local governments had hired staff. Contractors were preparing bids. Manufacturers were retooling supply chains. Students had enrolled in new clean industry training programs. With no warning, that entire ecosystem has been upended.
That decision undermines more than climate credibility. It erodes trust in governance itself. How can communities build long-term economic development strategies if federal support can be revoked without explanation? Why would private investors stay at the table when the public sector walks away midstream?
Meanwhile, other nations are surging forward. The European Union is investing in clean steel and cement. Canada is building out low-carbon supply chains. Norway is doubling down on green industry. And China is scaling solar, electric vehicles, and hydrogen at unprecedented speed—cementing not only energy dominance but geopolitical power.
For an administration that brands itself “America First,” this is anything but. It is a strategic withdrawal—from economic competitiveness, global leadership, and the industrial future itself. We are ceding the next era of manufacturing—not just to allies, but to adversaries.
And none of this should be surprising. The Trump administration has been explicit about its intent: Strip climate out of agency missions, dismantle regulatory capacity, and discredit climate science. But the deeper failure lies in what Congress has allowed. The legislative branch is no longer functioning as a check on executive excess. It has become a bystander to the dismantling of public purpose.
We didn’t just cancel 24 projects. We canceled momentum. We canceled trust. We canceled a framework that had finally begun to reconnect federal capacity with local ambition. We walked away from thousands of jobs, millions of tons in emissions cuts, billions in co-investment—and a fragile sense of possibility.
And we did it for a press cycle. To placate donors. Fully aware of the consequences.
The cost won’t just be measured in carbon. It will be measured in time lost, in broken partnerships, in shuttered training programs and shelved contracts. And in the widening distance between the future we could build—and the one we keep choosing instead.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Scientists Warn Major Glaciers Won't 'Survive This Century,' With Grave Impacts for Billions
"Preservation of glaciers is not just an environmental, economic, and societal necessity," said one expert. "It's a matter of survival."
Mar 21, 2025
Scientists on Friday spent the United Nations' World Water Day and first-ever World Day for Glaciers warning about how fossil fuel-driven global warming melts ice across the planet, endangering freshwater resources and causing seas to rise, with implications for ecosystems, economies, and billions of people.
In a Friday statement, World Meteorological Organization Secretary-General Celeste Saulo pointed to a publication that the U.N. agency released earlier this week: "WMO's State of the Global Climate 2024 report confirmed that from 2022-224, we saw the largest three-year loss of glaciers on record."
"Seven of the 10 most negative mass balance years have occurred since 2016," Saulo continued. "Preservation of glaciers is not just an environmental, economic, and societal necessity. It's a matter of survival."
The WMO report was followed by the Friday launch of a 174-page document from the United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) that stresses how "billions of people depend on the fresh water that flows from increasingly fragile mountain environments."
"As the water towers of the world, mountains are an essential source of fresh water for (irrigated) agriculture, power generation, industry, and large and growing populations—in the mountains and also downstream," the report details. "Generally, due to higher precipitation and lower evaporation, mountains supply more surface runoff per unit area than lowlands, providing 55-60% of global annual freshwater flows."
The document, The United Nations World Water Development Report 2025—Mountains and glaciers: Water towers, notes that "major cities that have been critically dependent on mountain waters include Addis Ababa, Barcelona, Bogotá, Jakarta, Kathmandu, La Paz, Lima, Los Angeles, Melbourne, Mexico City, New Delhi, New York, Quito, Rio de Janeiro, and Tokyo."
"Globally, up to two-thirds of irrigated agriculture may depend on mountain waters," the report states, "while the number of people in lowlands that strongly depend on water from mountains increased worldwide from around 0.6 billion in the 1960s to some 1.8 billion in the 2000s. An additional 1 billion people in the lowlands benefit from supportive mountain runoff contributions."
"Most of the world's glaciers, including those in mountains, are melting at an accelerated rate worldwide," the publication adds. "Combined with accelerating permafrost thaw, declining snow cover, and more erratic snowfall patterns... this will have significant and irreversible impacts on local, regional, and global hydrology, including water availability."
“The 21st of March 2025 is being celebrated as the first-ever World Day for Glaciers. ‘Celebrate’? Yes, we should celebrate glaciers and their crucial role in sustaining life on Earth for future generations,” says @iceblogger.bsky.social. Great stats here on the importance of glaciers 🧊
[image or embed]
— Covering Climate Now (@coveringclimatenow.org) March 21, 2025 at 8:31 AM
The UNESCO publication follows the international Glacier Mass Balance Intercomparison Exercise (GlaMBIE) team's study, published in the journal Nature last month, showing that glaciers have lost an average of 273 billion metric tons of ice annually since 2000.
That figure "amounts to what the entire global population consumes in 30 years, assuming three liters per person and day," Michael Zemp, a professor at Switzerland's University of Zurich and director of the World Glacier Monitoring Service who co-led the GlaMBIE study, explained at the time.
Zemp pointed to that finding and others on Friday, noting that from 2000-23, glacier melt caused global seas to rise 18 mm or about 0.7 inches. He said, "This might not sound much, but it has a big impact: Every millimeter [of] sea-level rise exposes an additional 200,000 to 300,000 people to annual flooding."
In a U.N. video, experts also highlighted parts of the globe that are particularly impacted by melting glaciers. Zemp explained that in "the European Alps, we are one of the regions that is most affected by climate change. Warming is about double the global average, and indeed, glaciers in the Alps are one of the most suffering around the world."
"We have lost, since 2000, almost 40% of the remaining ice. And that means under current melt rates, glaciers will not survive this century in the Alps," he warned.
Today is the first-ever #WorldGlaciersDay! Glaciers provide water for millions of people, regulate sea levels, and support biodiversity. Yet glaciers are disappearing at an alarming rate. #ClimateAction is key to protecting them & supporting those who rely on glaciers. www.un.org/en/observanc...
[image or embed]
— IngerAndersen.bsky.social (@ingerandersen.bsky.social) March 21, 2025 at 9:57 AM
Scientists are also concerned about the Hindu Kush in the Himalayas, which are often called the "third pole because they hold a lot of water resources," WMO's Sulagna Mishra said in the video. "Here, more than 120 million farmers in the downstream areas are impacted directly because of the melting of the glaciers."
"So, when there are a lot of floods, for example, happening because of melting of glaciers, the livelihoods are changed, people tend to migrate from one place to another," she continued. "So when you ask me how many people are actually impacted, it's really everyone."
As Carbon Briefreported Friday:
Dr. Aditi Mukherji—the director of the climate change, adaptation, and mitigation impact action platform of the CGIAR—tells Carbon Brief that the report is an important call for more "adaptation efforts and funding."
She says that mountain-dwelling communities are "already quite vulnerable due to their remote location and other developmental deficits" and are "increasingly losing their way of life due to no fault of theirs."
However, in some parts of the world, especially the United States, such calls face the pro-fossil fuel agenda of polluting companies and right-wing policymakers that are working to quash the movement for a just transition to clean energy by any means necessary.
Keep ReadingShow Less
'Never Happened Before': WMO Finds Past 10 Years Have Been 10 Hottest on Record
"While a single year above 1.5°C of warming does not indicate that the long-term temperature goals of the Paris agreement are out of reach, it is a wake-up call," wrote the secretary-general of the World Meteorological Organization.
Mar 19, 2025
A report released by the World Meteorological Organization on Tuesday found that not only was 2024 the warmest year in a 175-year observational period, reaching a global surface temperature of roughly 1.55°C above the preindustrial average for the first time, but each of the past 10 years was also individually the 10 warmest on record.
"That's never happened before," Chris Hewitt, the director of the WMO's climate services division, of the clustering of the 10 warmest years all in the most recent decade, toldThe New York Times.
All told, the agency's State of the Global Climate 2024adds new details to the public's understanding of a planet that is getting steadily warmer thanks to human-caused greenhouse gas emissions.
2024 clearly surpassed 2023 in terms of global surface temperature. 2023 recorded a temperature of 1.45°C above the average for the years 1850-1900, which is used to represent preindustrial conditions, according to the report.
The report from the WMO, a United Nations agency, includes "the latest science-based update" on key climate indicators, such as atmospheric carbon dioxide, ocean heat content, and glacier mass balance. Many of these sections report grim milestones.
In 2023, the atmospheric concentration of carbon dioxide reached the highest levels in the last 800,000 years, for example, and in 2024, ocean heat content reached the highest level recorded in the over half-century observational period, topping the previous heat record that was set in 2023.
As of 2023, two other greenhouse gases, methane and nitrous oxide, also reached levels unseen in the last 800,000 years.
"Over the course of 2024, our oceans continued to warm, sea levels continued to rise, and acidification increased. The frozen parts of Earth's surface, known as the cryosphere, are melting at an alarming rate: glaciers continue to retreat, and Antarctic sea ice reached the second-lowest extent ever recorded. Meanwhile, extreme weather continues to have devastating consequences around the world," wrote WMO Secretary-General Celeste Saulo in the introduction to the report, which drew its findings from data drawn from dozens of institutions around the world.
"While a single year above 1.5°C of warming does not indicate that the long-term temperature goals of the Paris agreement are out of reach, it is a wake-up call that we are increasing the risks to our lives, economies and the planet," wrote Saulo.
In 2015, 196 party countries signed on to the agreement to pursue efforts "to limit the temperature increase to 1.5°C above preindustrial levels." According to the United Nations, going above 1.5ºC on an annual or monthly basis doesn't constitute failure to reach the agreement's goal, which refers to temperature rise over decades.
There are multiple methods that aim to measure potential breaches of 1.5°C over the long term, according to the report. The "best estimates" of current global warming based on three different approaches put global temperatures somewhere between 1.34°C and 1.41°C compared to the pre-industrial period.
The report also details the damage brought on by a number of extreme weather events last year, including Hurricanes Helene and Milton in the United States, and Cyclone Chido, which impacted the French territory of Mayotte.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular