Cookies help us run our site more efficiently.

By clicking “Accept”, you agree to the storing of cookies on your device to enhance site navigation, analyze site usage, and assist in our marketing efforts. View our Privacy Policy for more information or to customize your cookie preferences.

93F and no electricity: why some US utilities can cut power despite heatwaves

News Feed
Wednesday, September 25, 2024

Michael Crowley runs his air conditioner nonstop on hot summer days to keep his cat, Arya, comfortable. But when the Richmond, Virginia, chef got home after work on 7 August 2022, it “felt like 100 degrees”. His power was out. He phoned his leasing office and was told his electricity bill was unpaid.Crowley protested, saying his utilities had long been covered by his rent check. But then he learned his building’s new property manager required tenants to pay for power separately – something Crowley said was unclear. No one told him about the delinquent bill, he said.His power remained shut off for three days as the mercury climbed to 93F (34C). The battery-operated fans he bought were no match for the oppressive heat. He filled Arya’s bowl with cool water, but she seemed “a little scared”. He, too, worried that she would get sick.“I was freaking out,” he said. “What was I supposed to do?”Summer electricity disconnections can be not only anxiety-producing but also dangerous. Last summer, one Arizona woman died after her power was cut over a $51 debt.Today, Crowley’s shutoff would be illegal. Amid record heat this June, Virginia banned utility companies from disconnecting services when temperatures reach 92F or higher.But in 27 states, utilities can still disconnect power for non-payment on the hottest days. That includes some of the hottest US states, such as Hawaii and Florida, as well as many that ban shutoffs in the extreme cold.It’s an issue that can have deadly consequences, said Selah Goodson Bell, a campaigner at the national environmental group Center for Biological Diversity. Each year, heatwaves kill more people than any other form of extreme weather.“Summers are getting hotter everywhere and this year will likely be the hottest year in world history,” he said. “States are starting to react and do more to protect [utility] customers. But it’s not nearly enough.”‘Lack of data’It’s difficult to know the national scope of the issue, as utilities in 22 states are not currently required to provide data on shutoffs. This makes it “impossible for policymakers to know which communities are affected and how”, said Goodson Bell.Some utilities collect data on shutoffs, but only one in 10 publicly release that information, said Sanya Carley, who co-directs the Energy Justice Lab at Indiana University.“The lack of data transparency is a major problem,” said Carley, who is also an energy policy expert at the University of Pennsylvania.The available numbers show a troubling trend. According to the Energy Justice Lab’s disconnection tracker, energy utility providers in 2022 shut off power to at least 3 million customers over missed bill payments, and more than 30% of those events happened during summer months.A separate 2023 analysis from the Center for Biological Diversity and the utility watchdog Energy and Policy Institute found that in the first 10 months of 2022, households had their electric power shut off for non-payment more than 1.5m times and their gas shut off 380,000 times, representing a 29% and 76% increase respectively over the previous year. And that’s just in the 30 states on which the researchers could obtain shutoff data.“More people are more concerned about extreme weather dangers,” said Shelby Green, research fellow at Energy and Policy Institute who has spent years fighting utility disconnections. “But in some ways, things might be moving in the wrong direction.”Higher billsOne likely reason for the uptick: rising costs. Monthly electricity bills were on average 2% higher each month in 2021 compared with 2022.Costs appear to have risen even more rapidly this year. One report from the policy organizations the National Energy Assistance Directors Association (Neada) and Center for Energy Poverty and Climate (CEPC) forecast an 8% rise in summer electric bills in 2024 over 2023.The costs of other consumer goods such as groceries have steadily risen across the same time period, meaning some customers are choosing between food and electricity. At the same time, Congress this year cut funding for the Low Income Home Energy Assistance Program by one-third, leading some states to slash utility aid to low-income households.States tend to deplete 80% of the available program funds as bills rise in the winter cold, leaving only 20% for cooling aid in the summer. That’s especially dangerous for low-income Americans who tend to live in poorly insulated homes, which are more expensive to keep at comfortable temperatures. Robin Line, a 65-year-old resident of south central Los Angeles, knows this first-hand.She said the windows in her low-income building are not sealed off, allowing precious cool air to seep through the cracks.“You can see a half-inch [on the side of] the doors,” she said. “They’re not sealed, they don’t do maintenance, and it’s definitely not weatherized.”In 2023, one in three households cut back on basic needs like medicine or food to afford at least one month’s energy bill, the Neada and CEPC report found. It’s a problem that’s familiar to Line.“You have to shop with only money in mind,” she said. “And you can’t get all the food you want or need every week.”skip past newsletter promotionThe planet's most important stories. Get all the week's environment news - the good, the bad and the essentialPrivacy Notice: Newsletters may contain info about charities, online ads, and content funded by outside parties. For more information see our Privacy Policy. We use Google reCaptcha to protect our website and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.after newsletter promotionUnhoused people try to cool down with chilled water outside the Justa Center on 14 July 2023, in downtown Phoenix. Photograph: Matt York/AP PhotoThough she’s had unpaid bills, Line has “not yet” experienced a shutoff – something she attributes to her constant calls to officials: “I‘ve begged, pleaded and borrowed.”But officials don’t make it easy to contact them or access aid, she said. “It’s really frustrating,” she said.Existing shutoff protectionsExisting summer shutoff protections are often also inadequate, environmental advocates argue.In Arizona, the state with the highest heat casualties each year, privately owned utilities are banned from disconnecting households for overdue bills, but cooperatively and publicly owned utilities are excluded from the moratorium.In Nevada, protections are only triggered when temperatures reach 105F. And in Florida, which has no temperature-based utility disconnection bans, the city of Tallahassee has enshrined protections, which are only triggered when temperatures top 100F for eight hours straight.“That just means the policy has literally never been enacted,” said Green, a Tallahassee resident.Some states and utilities suspend disconnections only when the National Weather Service issues an excessive heat warning. But research shows exposure to lower levels of heat can also be dangerous, especially over the course of many hours.Other utilities impose their own shutoff moratoria from 15 June to 1 October. But that can leave residents vulnerable on unseasonably warm days.“We’re finding that extreme weather is a year-round thing now,” said Carley, adding that ultimately, states should have both forms of shutoff protections.ProgressAcross the country, advocates are working to expand summer shutoff protections. In some places, they’re winning.Maine, like Virginia, this year passed a law preventing shutoffs for non-payment during extreme heat events. Chicago this year banned shutoffs for non-payment when the National Weather Service forecasts temperatures hitting 90F, down from an earlier threshold of 95F.An air-conditioning unit in the lobby of that Amargosa Opera House in Death Valley, California, in August. Photograph: Bridget Bennett/Washington Post via Getty ImagesEfforts to improve transparency are also under way. The federal Energy Information Administration is currently reviewing public comments on a federal utility shutoff survey. If their plan is successful, the agency will require all investor-owned gas and electric utilities in the country to report disconnection data on a monthly basis, with the rollout beginning in spring 2025.Some advocates are calling on the agency to strengthen the survey by collecting additional information about households experiencing shutoffs, including zip codes, to see who is worst affected.Victor Sanchez, executive director of the Los Angeles Alliance for a New Economy, which in 2022 successfully pressured the Los Angeles department of water and power to prohibit disconnections for nonpayment, said that ultimately, “there needs to be more permanent solutions” to protect people from shutoffs.“The question is, what are we doing beyond just extreme weather,” he said. “Access to water and power is not just something that should be preserved during extreme weather events. It should be preserved year-round.”

In 27 states, utilities can disconnect power for non-payment on the hottest days, which can have deadly consequences Michael Crowley runs his air conditioner nonstop on hot summer days to keep his cat, Arya, comfortable. But when the Richmond, Virginia, chef got home after work on 7 August 2022, it “felt like 100 degrees”. His power was out. He phoned his leasing office and was told his electricity bill was unpaid.Crowley protested, saying his utilities had long been covered by his rent check. But then he learned his building’s new property manager required tenants to pay for power separately – something Crowley said was unclear. No one told him about the delinquent bill, he said. Continue reading...

Michael Crowley runs his air conditioner nonstop on hot summer days to keep his cat, Arya, comfortable. But when the Richmond, Virginia, chef got home after work on 7 August 2022, it “felt like 100 degrees”. His power was out. He phoned his leasing office and was told his electricity bill was unpaid.

Crowley protested, saying his utilities had long been covered by his rent check. But then he learned his building’s new property manager required tenants to pay for power separately – something Crowley said was unclear. No one told him about the delinquent bill, he said.

His power remained shut off for three days as the mercury climbed to 93F (34C). The battery-operated fans he bought were no match for the oppressive heat. He filled Arya’s bowl with cool water, but she seemed “a little scared”. He, too, worried that she would get sick.

“I was freaking out,” he said. “What was I supposed to do?”

Summer electricity disconnections can be not only anxiety-producing but also dangerous. Last summer, one Arizona woman died after her power was cut over a $51 debt.

Today, Crowley’s shutoff would be illegal. Amid record heat this June, Virginia banned utility companies from disconnecting services when temperatures reach 92F or higher.

But in 27 states, utilities can still disconnect power for non-payment on the hottest days. That includes some of the hottest US states, such as Hawaii and Florida, as well as many that ban shutoffs in the extreme cold.

It’s an issue that can have deadly consequences, said Selah Goodson Bell, a campaigner at the national environmental group Center for Biological Diversity. Each year, heatwaves kill more people than any other form of extreme weather.

“Summers are getting hotter everywhere and this year will likely be the hottest year in world history,” he said. “States are starting to react and do more to protect [utility] customers. But it’s not nearly enough.”

‘Lack of data’

It’s difficult to know the national scope of the issue, as utilities in 22 states are not currently required to provide data on shutoffs. This makes it “impossible for policymakers to know which communities are affected and how”, said Goodson Bell.

Some utilities collect data on shutoffs, but only one in 10 publicly release that information, said Sanya Carley, who co-directs the Energy Justice Lab at Indiana University.

“The lack of data transparency is a major problem,” said Carley, who is also an energy policy expert at the University of Pennsylvania.

The available numbers show a troubling trend. According to the Energy Justice Lab’s disconnection tracker, energy utility providers in 2022 shut off power to at least 3 million customers over missed bill payments, and more than 30% of those events happened during summer months.

A separate 2023 analysis from the Center for Biological Diversity and the utility watchdog Energy and Policy Institute found that in the first 10 months of 2022, households had their electric power shut off for non-payment more than 1.5m times and their gas shut off 380,000 times, representing a 29% and 76% increase respectively over the previous year. And that’s just in the 30 states on which the researchers could obtain shutoff data.

“More people are more concerned about extreme weather dangers,” said Shelby Green, research fellow at Energy and Policy Institute who has spent years fighting utility disconnections. “But in some ways, things might be moving in the wrong direction.”

Higher bills

One likely reason for the uptick: rising costs. Monthly electricity bills were on average 2% higher each month in 2021 compared with 2022.

Costs appear to have risen even more rapidly this year. One report from the policy organizations the National Energy Assistance Directors Association (Neada) and Center for Energy Poverty and Climate (CEPC) forecast an 8% rise in summer electric bills in 2024 over 2023.

The costs of other consumer goods such as groceries have steadily risen across the same time period, meaning some customers are choosing between food and electricity. At the same time, Congress this year cut funding for the Low Income Home Energy Assistance Program by one-third, leading some states to slash utility aid to low-income households.

States tend to deplete 80% of the available program funds as bills rise in the winter cold, leaving only 20% for cooling aid in the summer. That’s especially dangerous for low-income Americans who tend to live in poorly insulated homes, which are more expensive to keep at comfortable temperatures. Robin Line, a 65-year-old resident of south central Los Angeles, knows this first-hand.

She said the windows in her low-income building are not sealed off, allowing precious cool air to seep through the cracks.

“You can see a half-inch [on the side of] the doors,” she said. “They’re not sealed, they don’t do maintenance, and it’s definitely not weatherized.”

In 2023, one in three households cut back on basic needs like medicine or food to afford at least one month’s energy bill, the Neada and CEPC report found. It’s a problem that’s familiar to Line.

“You have to shop with only money in mind,” she said. “And you can’t get all the food you want or need every week.”

skip past newsletter promotion

after newsletter promotion

Unhoused people try to cool down with chilled water outside the Justa Center on 14 July 2023, in downtown Phoenix. Photograph: Matt York/AP Photo

Though she’s had unpaid bills, Line has “not yet” experienced a shutoff – something she attributes to her constant calls to officials: “I‘ve begged, pleaded and borrowed.”

But officials don’t make it easy to contact them or access aid, she said. “It’s really frustrating,” she said.

Existing shutoff protections

Existing summer shutoff protections are often also inadequate, environmental advocates argue.

In Arizona, the state with the highest heat casualties each year, privately owned utilities are banned from disconnecting households for overdue bills, but cooperatively and publicly owned utilities are excluded from the moratorium.

In Nevada, protections are only triggered when temperatures reach 105F. And in Florida, which has no temperature-based utility disconnection bans, the city of Tallahassee has enshrined protections, which are only triggered when temperatures top 100F for eight hours straight.

“That just means the policy has literally never been enacted,” said Green, a Tallahassee resident.

Some states and utilities suspend disconnections only when the National Weather Service issues an excessive heat warning. But research shows exposure to lower levels of heat can also be dangerous, especially over the course of many hours.

Other utilities impose their own shutoff moratoria from 15 June to 1 October. But that can leave residents vulnerable on unseasonably warm days.

“We’re finding that extreme weather is a year-round thing now,” said Carley, adding that ultimately, states should have both forms of shutoff protections.

Progress

Across the country, advocates are working to expand summer shutoff protections. In some places, they’re winning.

Maine, like Virginia, this year passed a law preventing shutoffs for non-payment during extreme heat events. Chicago this year banned shutoffs for non-payment when the National Weather Service forecasts temperatures hitting 90F, down from an earlier threshold of 95F.

An air-conditioning unit in the lobby of that Amargosa Opera House in Death Valley, California, in August. Photograph: Bridget Bennett/Washington Post via Getty Images

Efforts to improve transparency are also under way. The federal Energy Information Administration is currently reviewing public comments on a federal utility shutoff survey. If their plan is successful, the agency will require all investor-owned gas and electric utilities in the country to report disconnection data on a monthly basis, with the rollout beginning in spring 2025.

Some advocates are calling on the agency to strengthen the survey by collecting additional information about households experiencing shutoffs, including zip codes, to see who is worst affected.

Victor Sanchez, executive director of the Los Angeles Alliance for a New Economy, which in 2022 successfully pressured the Los Angeles department of water and power to prohibit disconnections for nonpayment, said that ultimately, “there needs to be more permanent solutions” to protect people from shutoffs.

“The question is, what are we doing beyond just extreme weather,” he said. “Access to water and power is not just something that should be preserved during extreme weather events. It should be preserved year-round.”

Read the full story here.
Photos courtesy of

The Climate Impact of Owning a Dog

My dog contributes to climate change. I love him anyway.

This story originally appeared on Grist and is part of the Climate Desk collaboration.I’ve been a vegetarian for over a decade. It’s not because of my health, or because I dislike the taste of chicken or beef: It’s a lifestyle choice I made because I wanted to reduce my impact on the planet. And yet, twice a day, every day, I lovingly scoop a cup of meat-based kibble into a bowl and set it down for my 50-pound rescue dog, a husky mix named Loki.WIRED's Guide to How the Universe WorksYour weekly roundup of the best stories on health care, the climate crisis, new scientific discoveries, and more. Until recently, I hadn’t devoted a huge amount of thought to that paradox. Then I read an article in the Associated Press headlined “People often miscalculate climate choices, a study says. One surprise is owning a dog.”The study, led by environmental psychology researcher Danielle Goldwert and published in the journal PNAS Nexus, examined how people perceive the climate impact of various behaviors—options like “adopt a vegan diet for at least one year,” or “shift from fossil fuel car to renewable public transport.” The team found that participants generally overestimated a number of low-impact actions like recycling and using efficient appliances, and they vastly underestimated the impact of other personal decisions, including the decision to “not purchase or adopt a dog.”The real objective of the study was to see whether certain types of climate information could help people commit to more effective actions. But mere hours after the AP published its article, its aim had been recast as something else entirely: an attack on people’s furry family members. “Climate change is actually your fault because you have a dog,” one Reddit user wrote. Others in the community chimed in with ire, ridiculing the idea that a pet Chihuahua could be driving the climate crisis and calling on researchers and the media to stop pointing fingers at everyday individuals.Goldwert and her fellow researchers watched the reactions unfold with dismay. “If I saw a headline that said, ‘Climate scientists want to take your dogs away,’ I would also feel upset,” she said. “They definitely don’t,” she added. “You can quote me on that.”Loki grinning on a hike in the Pacific Northwest. Photograph: Claire Elise Thompson/Grist

COP30’s biofuel gamble could cost the global food supply — and the planet

What was once considered a climate holy grail comes with serious tradeoffs. The world wants more of it anyway.

First the plant stalk is harvested, shredded, and crushed. The extracted juice is then combined with bacteria and yeast in large bioreactors, where the sugars are metabolized and converted into ethanol and carbon dioxide. From there, the liquid is typically distilled to maximize ethanol concentration, before it is blended with gasoline.  You know the final products as biofuels — mostly made from food crops like sugarcane and corn, and endorsed by everyone from agricultural lobbyists to activists and billionaires. Biofuels were developed decades ago to be cheaper, greener alternatives to planet-polluting petrol. As adoption has expanded — now to the point of a pro-biofuel agenda being pushed this week at COP30 in Belém, Brazil — their environmental and food accessibility footprint has remained a source of fierce debate.  The governments of Brazil, Italy, Japan, and India are spearheading a new pledge calling for the rapid global expansion of biofuels as a commitment to decarbonizing transportation energy.  Though the text of the pledge itself is vague, as most COP pledges tend to be, the target embedded in an accompanying International Energy Agency report is clear: expand the global use of so-called sustainable fuels from 2024 levels by at least four times, so that by 2035, sustainable fuels cover 10 percent of all global road transport demand, 15 percent of aviation demand, and 35 percent of shipping fuel demand. By Friday, the last official day of COP30, at least 23 countries have joined the pledge — while Brazilian delegates have been working “hand in hand with industry groups” to get language backing biofuels into the final summit deal.  “Latin America, South East Asia, Africa — they need to improve their efficiency, their energy, and Brazil has a model for this [in its rollout of biofuels],” Roberto Rodrigues, Brazil’s special envoy for agriculture at the summit, said on a COP panel last weekend. As of the time of this story’s publication, the pro-biofuel language hadn’t made it into the latest draft text that outlines the main outcome of the summit released Friday — although it appears the summit could end without a deal.  Read Next At COP30 in Brazil, countries plan to armor themselves against a warming world Zoya Teirstein Though scientists continue to experiment with utilizing other raw materials for biofuels — a list which includes agricultural and forestry waste, cooking oils, and algae — the bulk of feedstocks almost exclusively come from the fields. Different types of food crops are used for different types of biofuels; sugary and starchy crops, such as sugar cane, wheat, and corn, are often made into ethanol; while oily crops, like soybeans, rapeseed, and palm oil, are largely used for biodiesel.  The cycle goes a little like this: Farmers, desperate to replace cropland lost to biofuel production, raze more forests and plow up more grasslands, resulting in deforestation that tends to release far more carbon than burning biofuels saves. But as large-scale production continues to expand, there may be insufficient land, water, and energy available for another big biofuel boom — prompting many researchers and climate activists to question whether countries should be aiming to scale these markets at all. (Thomson Reuters reported that global biofuel production has increased ninefold since 2000.) Biofuels account for the vast majority of “sustainable fuels” currently used worldwide. An analysis by a clean transport advocacy organization published last month found that, because of the indirect impacts to farming and land use, biofuels are responsible globally for 16 percent more CO2 emissions than the planet-polluting fossil fuels they replace. In fact, the report surmises that by 2030, biofuel crops could require land equivalent to the size of France. More than 40 million hectares of Earth’s cropland is already devoted to biofuel feedstocks, an area roughly the size of Paraguay. The EU Deforestation-Free Regulation, or EUDR, cites soybeans among the commodities driving deforestation worldwide. “While countries are right to transition away from fossil fuels, they also need to ensure their plans don’t trigger unintended consequences, such as more deforestation either at home or abroad,” said Janet Ranganathan, managing director of strategy, learning, and results at the World Resources Institute in a statement responding to the Belém pledge. She added that rapidly expanding global biofuel production would have “significant implications for the world’s land, especially without guardrails to prevent large-scale expansion of land dedicated to biofuels, which drives ecosystem loss.” Other environmental issues found to be associated with converting food crops into biofuels include water pollution from fertilizers and pesticides, air pollution, and soil erosion. One study, conducted a decade ago, showed that, when accounting for all the inputs needed to produce different varieties of ethanol or biodiesel — machinery, seeds, water, electricity, fertilizers, transportation, and more — producing fuel-grade ethanol or biodiesel requires significantly more energy input than it creates.  Read Next ‘Everyone is exhausted’: First week of COP30 marked by frustration with slow progress Bob Berwyn, Inside Climate News Nonetheless, it’s not a shock to see Brazil betting big on biofuels at COP30. In Brazil, biofuels make up roughly a quarter of transportation fuels — a remarkably high proportion compared to most other countries. And that share, dominated by sugarcane ethanol, is still on an upward climb, with the Belém pledge evidence of the country’s intended trajectory.  A spokesperson from Brazil’s foreign affairs ministry told The Guardian that the “proponents of the pledge (which include Japan, Italy, India, among others) are calling upon countries to support quadrupling production and use of sustainable fuels — a group of gaseous and liquid fuels that include e-fuels, biogases, biofuels, hydrogen and its derivatives.” They added that the goal is based on the new IEA report that underscores the production increase as necessary to aggressively reduce emissions. That report suggests that if current and proposed national and international policies are implemented and fully legislated, global biofuel use and production would double by 2035. “The word ‘sustainable’ is not used lightly, neither in the report nor in the pledge,” the spokesperson said.  The issue, of course, is in how emissions footprints of something like ethanol fuel production are even measured. Much like many other climate sources, scientists argue that tracking greenhouse gas emissions linked to ethanol fuel should account for emissions at every stage — production, processing, distribution, and vehicle use. Yet that isn’t often the case: in fact, a 2024 paper found that Brazil’s national biofuel policy does not account for all direct and indirect emissions in its calculation.  The exclusions are evident of a larger trend, according to University of Minnesota environmental scientist Jason Hill. “Overall, either those studies have not included [direct and indirect emissions], or they found ways to spread those impacts over anticipated production, decades, centuries, or so forth, that tend to dilute those effects. So the accounting methods aren’t really consistent with what the best science shows,” said Hill, who studies the environmental and economic consequences of food, energy, and biofuel production.  In short: More biofuels means either more intensive agriculture on a smaller share of available cropland, which has its own detrimental environmental effects, or expansion of cropland, and the land-use emissions and environmental impacts that can carry. “Biofuel production today is already a bad idea. And doubling [that] is doubling down on an existing problem,” said Hill.  Read Next COP30 has big plans to save the rainforest. Indigenous activists say it’s not enough. Frida Garza & Miacel Spotted Elk Moreover, diverting crops like corn and soybeans from dinner plates to fuel tanks doesn’t just spark brutal competition for land and resources, it can also spike food prices and leave the world’s most vulnerable populations with less to eat.  A 2022 analysis of the U.S. Renewable Fuel Standard, the world’s largest biofuel program, found that it has led to increased food prices for Americans, with corn prices rising by 30 percent and other crops such as soybean and wheat spiking by around 20 percent. This then set off a domino effect: Increasing annual nationwide fertilizer use by up to 8 percent and water quality degradants by up to 5 percent. The carbon intensity of corn ethanol produced under the mandate has ended up at least equaling the planet-polluting effects of gasoline.  “Biofuel mandates essentially create a baseline demand that can leave food crops by the wayside,” says Ginni Braich, a data scientist at the University of Colorado Boulder who has worked as a senior advisor to government clean technology and emission reduction programs. That’s because of the issue with supply and demand of food crops — higher competition for feedstocks hikes up the prices of food, feed, and farming inputs.  When there are biofuel mandates, which the IEA report underlying the Belém pledge recommends, demand remains inelastic — no matter the changes in yields, growing and weather conditions, prices, or markets. Say there is a huge drought that decimates crop yields, as one example, the baseline demand of biofuels still needs to be met despite depleted food stocks. In terms of supply, increasing growing area for biofuels typically means less area available to grow food crops — which can cause prices to surge alongside supply shortages, and spike costs of seed, inputs, and land. Nutritional implications should also be taken into account, according to Braich. Not only do people’s diets tend to shift when food gets more costly, but cropping patterns are already revealing adverse shifts in dietary diversity, which could be exacerbated by a further concentration on fewer crops. The Belém pledge, and Brazil’s intention to lead a global expansion of the biofuels market, does not bode well for people’s food accessibility nor for the future of the planet, warns Braich.  “It seems quite paradoxical for Brazil to promote the large-scale expansion of biofuels and also be seen as a protector of forests,” she said. “Is it better than decarbonization and fossil fuel divestment rhetoric without actual transition pathways? Yes, but in a lot of ways it is also greenwashing.” This story was originally published by Grist with the headline COP30’s biofuel gamble could cost the global food supply — and the planet on Nov 21, 2025.

Iran's Capital Has Run Out of Water, Forcing It to Move

The decision to move Iran’s capital is partly driven by climate change, but experts say decades of human error and action are also to blame

November 21, 20252 min readIran's Capital Is Moving. The Reason Is an Ecological CatastropheThe move is partly driven by climate change, but experts say decades of human error and action are also to blameBy Humberto Basilio edited by Claire CameronA dry water feature in Tehran on November 9, 2025 TTA KENARE/AFP/Getty ImagesTehran can no longer remain the capital of Iran amid a deepening ecological crisis and acute water shortage.The situation in Tehran is the result of “a perfect storm of climate change and corruption,” says Michael Rubin, a political analyst at the American Enterprise Institute.“We no longer have a choice,” Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian reportedly told officials on Friday.On supporting science journalismIf you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.Instead, Iranian officials are considering moving the capital to the country’s southern coast. But experts say the proposal does not change the reality for the nearly ten million people who live in Tehran, who are now suffering the consequences of a decades-long decline in water supply.Since at least 2008, scientists have warned that unchecked groundwater pumping for the city and for agriculture was rapidly draining its aquifers. The overuse did not just deplete underground reserves—it destroyed them, as the land compressed and sank irreversibly. One recent study found that Iran’s central plateau, where most of the country’s aquifers are located, is sinking by more than 35 centimeters each year. As a result, the aquifers lose about 1.7 billion cubic meters of water annually as the ground is permanently crushed, leaving no space for underground water storage to recover, says Darío Solano, a geoscientist at the National Autonomous University of Mexico.“We saw this coming,” says Solano.Other major cities like Cape Town, Mexico City, Jakarta and parts of California are also facing day zero scenarios as they sink and run out of water.This is not the first time Iran’s capital has moved. Over the centuries, it has shifted many times, from Isfahan to Tabriz to Shiraz. Some of these former capitals still thrive while others exist only as ruins, says Rubin. But this marks the first time the Iranian government has moved the capital because of an ecological catastrophe.Yet, Rubin says, “it would be a mistake to look at this only through the lens of climate change.” Water, land and wastewater mismanagement and corruption have made the crisis worse, he says. If the capital moves to the remote Makran coast in the south, it could cost more than $100 billion dollars. The region is known for its harsh climate and difficult terrain, and some experts have doubts about its viability as a national center. Relocating a capital is often driven more by politics than by environmental concerns, says Linda Shi, a social scientist and urban planner at Cornell University. “Climate change is not the thing that is causing it, but it is a convenient factor to blame in order to avoid taking responsibility” for poor political decisions, she says.It’s Time to Stand Up for ScienceIf you enjoyed this article, I’d like to ask for your support. Scientific American has served as an advocate for science and industry for 180 years, and right now may be the most critical moment in that two-century history.I’ve been a Scientific American subscriber since I was 12 years old, and it helped shape the way I look at the world. SciAm always educates and delights me, and inspires a sense of awe for our vast, beautiful universe. I hope it does that for you, too.If you subscribe to Scientific American, you help ensure that our coverage is centered on meaningful research and discovery; that we have the resources to report on the decisions that threaten labs across the U.S.; and that we support both budding and working scientists at a time when the value of science itself too often goes unrecognized.In return, you get essential news, captivating podcasts, brilliant infographics, can't-miss newsletters, must-watch videos, challenging games, and the science world's best writing and reporting. You can even gift someone a subscription.There has never been a more important time for us to stand up and show why science matters. I hope you’ll support us in that mission.

Join us to forge
a sustainable future

Our team is always growing.
Become a partner, volunteer, sponsor, or intern today.
Let us know how you would like to get involved!

CONTACT US

sign up for our mailing list to stay informed on the latest films and environmental headlines.

Subscribers receive a free day pass for streaming Cinema Verde.
Thank you! Your submission has been received!
Oops! Something went wrong while submitting the form.