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.

LISTEN: Mokshda Kaul on making the clean energy transition work for all

News Feed
Wednesday, September 25, 2024

Mokshda Kaul joins the Agents of Change in Environmental Justice podcast to discuss the clean energy transition and how policymakers and other leaders can avoid mistakes of the past.Kaul, a Ph.D. candidate in the sustainable energy program at the School of Sustainability at Arizona State University, also talks about the crucial role of coalitions in a just energy transition.The Agents of Change in Environmental Justice podcast is a biweekly podcast featuring the stories and big ideas from past and present fellows, as well as others in the field. You can see all of the past episodes here.Listen below to our discussion with Kaul and subscribe to the podcast at iTunes or Spotify.Agents of Change in Environmental Justice · Mokshda Kaul on making the clean energy transition work for allTranscript Brian BienkowskiMoksha, how are you doing today?Mokshda Kaul I'm good. How are you, Brian?Brian Bienkowski I'm doing wonderful. I'm a little hot. I turned off my fan so we don't have the background noise. And where are you today?Mokshda Kaul So speaking of hot, I'm in Arizona, so I'm in Phoenix, and I've also turned my fan off. And luckily, my AC is working, so I'm not going to explode into flames, which is always possible in Arizona. So, you know, just saying. But yeah, that's where I am right now, and I'm just really excited to do this actually.Brian Bienkowski Well, I am really excited to talk to you too. Your research and your path there, to me, are fascinating. So I'm so excited to have you on the program. So as you probably know, I like to start at the beginning. So tell me a little bit about your upbringing. Of course, you're not from Arizona originally.Mokshda Kaul yeah. So I moved here for my PhD in 2020 and that was in the middle of the pandemic, by the way, which was quite jarring. There were only those bubble flights operating from the US to India, and it was terrifying for multiple different reasons. And I got got here, and I was again stuck in a room. Instead of being stuck in a room in India, I was stuck in a room in Phoenix. Nothing changed in my life, honestly speaking. But in terms of, like, where I'm from, and coming to Arizona, I'm from Mumbai, which is I think, the world's most densely populated city. So I'm used to having people step on my toes while I'm walking. And I came to Arizona, and I was like, there are no people here. What's wrong with this place? So that was number one for me. And, I mean, being raised in Mumbai, India is a country with so many multitudes. And I'm born and raised in Mumbai, but I come from Kashmir, and I spent my summer vacations, and, like a lot of my time, even, like a few years in my childhood, actually, in this smaller town near Kashmir called Jammu, which is, I would say, like now it's a tier-two city, but back then, maybe it was like a tier-three city, and it was very jarring the difference between Mumbai and Jammu, because Mumbai is the financial capital of India. So you have every amenity you can think of. You have round the clock electricity, and of course, within Mumbai also, we have terrible infrastructure problems, but that's a different story. But juxtaposing that against Jammu, where you'd have blackouts in the middle of summer heat and like summer, like the Phoenix summer, and I used to find it so uncomfortable to sort of when I'd come back to Mumbai to have that feeling of, wait, what is the thing that the people here are doing right, that they don't have to have these blackouts? Like, what? What is it like? Why is there this element of chance and privilege that's deciding who gets to experience these things or not? And I think I was just always very irritated and uncomfortable by it, and I was benefiting from it for all intents and purposes.Brian Bienkowski And so you mentioned that juxtaposition of Kashmir and Mumbai, and I'm wondering if that was kind of where you became aware of the concept of environmental justice, or if that was or if it was something else.Mokshda Kaul So I mean, I'm really glad you point that out, but that's exactly it. I would find it very unsettling. And it's just, if you look at it, I mean, at the same time as I was growing up, I was reading like, Rawlsian theories of justice and trying to understand, like, who decides, who decides that somebody gets something just by virtue of the fact that they were born in a particular city? Like, I don't have anything to do with the fact that I was born in Mumbai. Okay, and I think that the unsettled feeling never left me, and I think that's what they call acknowledging your privilege. And I was just always affected by it. And also in addition to this, India has lot of issues on the grounds of caste and class, and growing up in a space like that, where you... especially in Mumbai, where it's so cosmopolitan and so it's like a melting pot. You see all of it every single day, and you can't be away from your privilege. You can't face away if you really choose to tap into it. So I guess that's where that idea of environmental justice kind of ticked in my brain.Brian Bienkowski And before we get into some of that, some of the energy justice work you've done, and what you're working on now, what is a moment or event that has helped shaped your identity up to this point?Mokshda Kaul It's interesting because I was listening to Maria Jo's podcast the other day, and she said the same thing that I have been thinking about that I don't think it's a particular incident. I think it's these bunch of different things that have come together to this moment of like who I am. First of all, it's obviously my parents' history as being internal refugees and learning from them about how conflict operates at a very young age, like I was, I think, three or four, when I understood that, oh, we are not in our hometown because of this huge issue that happened, and there was violence and there was extremism, and there were two sides to the story at that same time, my parents side and the other side. And I think growing up with that, and then there's actually very funny thing that I remember now that you said defining incidents. I think I had bit of a bleeding heart syndrome since I was a child. I don't know why, but I had this. So I still remember this, because it's, it's like, etched so vividly in my memory. I was in third grade and we had to make posters for something in school. I don't remember what exactly, but my poster was the planet crying because it was hot. And this is 2003 and I remember one of my uncles came home and he made fun of me, and he was like, "This is so stupid. Like, why are you concerned about the environment and the planet?" And I was in tears, because I was like, no, no, we need to care about this. I don't understand why you don't care about this. And I was, I was sad, like, I was heartbroken that people don't care. And so that little child always had that element of, why don't we want to make the world a better place? Like, what's wrong with people?Brian Bienkowski So the world is still crying. Since your picture, unfortunately, we're all we should all be crying. And so you are, you are trying to better the world, and your research focuses on, I'm distilling it down, but the clean energy transition. So first, what drew you to this line of research, and how are you using this economics background that you mentioned to understand the clean energy adoption and policy?Mokshda Kaul Back in 2014 King's College London did this really cool thing where they got professors from King's College to come down to Mumbai and do this really cool summer course. And I did the one on international political economy. And every student, it was very strenuous. They packed a summer school's worth of teaching and practice into like a one and a half week period. So it was so much reading, like this huge binder of – I don't even want to go back to that – but each student had to prepare, like a presentation on a particular topic. And this is big bit of a background. My dad works in oil and gas, and that's very unsettling to me, and I'm sure he's going to listen to this, but so I naturally decide that I want to work on the energy topic, energy presentation for this class. Because I was like, Oh, my dad knows about this. And the day that I had to present, our professor actually did this whole presentation on how the shale oil boom is going to change, like the face of the earth. And my entire presentation actually was about the shale oil boom. So this is like one hour before my presentation, and I'm having a meltdown because I don't know what to talk about anymore, because you just covered everything, and I'm doing this frantic internet search of what do I talk about? And that's how I found out about the energy transition, and that's how I discovered that, oh, renewable energy is a thing. So instead of talking about shale oil, I talked about how we have these other sources of energy which actually don't create the problems that we have with fossil fuels, and they need more investment, of course, in time. But this is 2014 so it was different situation back then. And so that was how I kind of was drawn to the energy transition. It was a very important moment in my life, I would say, and that changed the focus of how I was seeing the world, and that changed the focus of what I wanted to do with the world. And speaking to my background as an economist, I'm trained as an economist. But I come from a very interdisciplinary school, the School of Sustainability here at ASU, and we kind of, my advisor has a political science background, so I incorporate methods from political science and economics, and the way I see it is it kind of helps me translate the world. So I know econ gets a bad rap for the fact that it's been, it's kind of led us to the point we are at in terms of exploiting the environment and all of those things. But I'm surrounded by a bunch of folks in the School of Sustainability who use econ as a tool to sort of address these problems of environmental and climate issues and distribution concerns and equity concerns. And that's how I see econ. I see it as like this toolkit that I can use to understand why do things look the way they do. And then the political science part also adds to it, because it helps me understand why did people decide what they decided. So all in all, I feel like really grateful for the fact that I have this pol-sci + econ situation, because I'm able to understand policies from like, start to finish in a way that what went into the background, why did you think the way you thought when you made this and how did this come about? And then what are the outcomes from it? So from that sense, yeah, these disciplines have helped me just unpack the whole thing as much as I can.Brian Bienkowski I think the economics arguments and studies and the information that comes out when it comes to environmental issues, energy included, are some of the most interesting, in my opinion. So for instance, EHN covers endocrine disrupting chemicals, and we can say till we're blue in the face, you know, they're bad. And they do this, they hijack your hormones, so on and so forth. But a few years ago, someone did an economic impact study that looked at like healthcare costs associated with chemical exposure. And when you start putting dollar amounts to things like this, I feel like you have all that. You have, all of a sudden gotten the attention of a whole other group of people who have, maybe aren't as concerned.Mokshda Kaul AbsolutelyBrian Bienkowski so I, and I'm sure this is the case in clean energy and fossil fuels. So I I always find those kind of economic angles really, really interesting. And you're looking at the role of coalitions in clean energy policy making. So I want to unpack this a little bit. What can you tell us about the importance of coalitions in this space? And do you have some examples?Mokshda Kaul So for this piece on coalitions that I'm working on, first of all, this is more about the political science space of understanding how policies are made. And I think I came from this question of wanting to understand there were these two very interesting climate legislations in the US that I encountered. I'm sure there are many more. One was in New York, which was the CLCPA, the community leadership, climate leadership and community Protection Act. And other was the CEJA, climate and equitable jobs Act in Illinois. And when I looked at both of these, the first things that you see when you like just do a Google search, is the coalitions that led them there. So there was this really intense advocacy by these major environmental coalitions happening on the ground for both of these acts. And I personally, of course, coalitions are an important tool because they bring in that element of procedural justice, because you are actually having representation from the people you seek to create these acts for and create these bills for. But more than that, I also feel like coalitions become this interesting way to create buy in, because if you have people who are actually invested in, let's say, like, reducing energy burdens, putting their words out there, and having people actually respond to it, and that makes its way into legislation, then this person actually feels represented. And then you have, like, buy-in from this person towards protecting the environment. And I think that's like, these are the two legislative examples. But in terms of coalitions themselves, there's the Illinois clean job coalition in Illinois, which was leading the way on seizure and NY renewals, which was leading the way on clcpa. But outside of the environmental coalitions, there are also jfossil-fuel-union-based job coalitions trying to represent this other side of justice in the transition, in the sense that there are fossil fuel labor groups who are trying to advocate for the fact that they need provisions to sort of help them after these fossil fuel plants are closed down to transition into other work. And so there are, there's the Climate Jobs Institute by, I think it's with Cornell, yeah. And they essentially have these affiliates across the country in different states. So there is Climate Jobs New York, there's Climate Jobs,Illinois, and all of these spaces, I mean, these coalitions represent this other side of justice. And again, if you don't have these coalitions doing it, there's nobody who's going to actually speak like represent these people's interests, is my point. So I think coalitions are incredibly important, especially when you think about justice and in the policy making process, not just in like the part where you advocate for your needs, and you just do these die ins, or you do demonstrations, not just that, but also the language that goes into these policies. So that's my perspective, and why I think coalitions are incredibly important. And I don't want to sound biased, but I really love the work that ICJ has been doing and the work that the climate jobs affiliates have been doing, it's, yeah, it's incredible to watch how they are trying to deal with this.Brian Bienkowski So you mentioned this idea of buy in, and perhaps that gets people kind of more interested, more engaged. Most of us have also heard about these incentive programs. You know, just financial incentives for clean energy, whether it's upgrading our inefficient fridge or purchasing solar for our roof. So what kind of impact do these policies have on adoption?Mokshda Kaul So I think my question to your question is, the question is adoption for whom? Because at the end of the day, it is not about... I mean, yes, they increase adoption of like, let's say solar energy or electric vehicles or efficient appliances. But I think the question is not about, Is it leading to a relative increase? But who is it leading to a relative increase for? because, again, econ is amazing for this, but it is. There are. There's so much documented evidence at this point that electric vehicle tax credits, residential solar tax credits, tend to benefit wealthier households, which are from like a higher income status or a higher socioeconomic status in the US, and I'm talking about specifically here. So I think the question is the kind of I mean, speaking, what the kind of impact they have on adoption, I'm sure they're improving adoption. Yes, they are. But I think again, that question about how these policies define who's eligible for them, changes who can apply for them, and changes who can receive these benefits. And just as a simple example, there is this program called the affordable solar program in New York, and it's aimed at low-middle income households. But it's the eligibility criterion is that you need to be an owner-occupied household. So you need to be owning the property you live in. But if you're a program that's trying to cater to low-middle income households, you'd know that most of them are renters. So if you are trying to target LMI households by being an owner-occupied program, you're missing a huge chunk of the target population. So I guess the question that I mean, I'm all for it, I'm all for these programs that encourage adoption, but I feel like, inadvertently, they are encouraging inequities in adoption, and that is a much bigger problem to deal with honestly, because that's impeding a just transition, because there's inequitable access then and again. It's that privileged thing, like, just by virtue of the fact that I own the house that I live in, I can get a tax credit for buying panels, and I can get cheaper electricity, and I can, like, also feel good about saving the environment. But then there's somebody else who actually pays much higher amount in their energy bills, because, you know, the energy burden is higher for lower income classes, and they can't even access solar panels because they're not eligible for such tax credits. And in fact, even funnier is giving tax credit to folks who don't earn enough to fall under a tax bracket you're missing, you're missing a huge chunk of the population. If you're saying this is how we're going to help you, when that's not what they'll use. So, yeah, I'd say I'm always very concerned about trying to see who are these benefits going to when we are encouraging adoption in these ways.Brian Bienkowski Yeah, it's a really good point. There's these kind of baked in inequities, even in, you know, programs and policies that are ostensibly trying to do the right thing, we're still baking in these kind of the same kind of inequities that got us here in the first place. And speaking of that, you know, there's a lot of kind of back and forth in the EV, electric vehicle, space, and I happen to be from Detroit, so I I hear even more about this from my family who everybody worked in or does work in the automotive industry. But we're increasingly see some of the environmental justice implications around mining for the needed metals here. And again, I live in Michigan's Upper Peninsula, and they are trying to reopen old mines up here that have been closed for years. And I don't know if it's necessarily EVs or just kind of electronics at large, but specific to the EVS. Can you talk about this and what it means as EVs become more popular, some of these environmental justice concerns that might pop up or that are popping up.Mokshda Kaul So if you're a Tesla bro and you're listening to this, stop listening right now. But if you're not, go on. I have this whole, again, I have this whole I have a lot of hills that I want to die on eventually, but we'll get there when we get there. So speaking about EVs, again, they're incredibly important if we want to have, like an electrified grid, in the sense that we want that balanced demand curve, so that we can have more clean energy in our energy mix, so that way EVs, yes, 100% important. And of course, reducing, like greenhouse gas emissions that come from tailpipes. I'm all for that thing that I'm not all for is, like you said, the mining aspects of it. So I have not spent as much time looking at the domestic implications of it, and that's something I'm stepping into now, in terms of the US. But if you look at a global picture, we get most of a cobalt from the Democratic Republic of Congo, and a this has been documented by tons of reports by Amnesty International. There's also a book called Cobalt Read by Sid Kara. And there's extensive documentation of how you have child labor, you have unsafe working conditions, the wage rate that they're paid, the laborers are paid at is definitely unfair, it's way below what should be acceptable. And there's also the problem is that as the demand goes up, the fact is that people in DRC, I mean, and I'm just conjecturing from all that I've read, I might be completely wrong if I go to the ground and talk to people, but it's creating that pressure where people think that it's profitable to keep mining cobalt. So they're like little children getting into this business, and they're like, indulging in artisanal mining, which is where you dig in your backyard, kind of a thing, just in very broad terms, but as the demand goes up, it's encouraging this pressure to kind of keep mining that way. And there's no regulation in place to ensure that there is ethical mining. And because of that, you're left with the situation where you are, like, incentivizing this to be done in the wrong way, and you want to keep the price of EVs down so that more people buy it because it's a solution for fighting climate change. So it's the question of, if we were to define this in a just way, if we would have ethical mining practices, who would bear the cost? And I mean, depending on your political leaning, you would have five different answers to the question. To this question, but I guess EVs, yes, good. But how we are getting them is a huge question, and it's not about just about DRC and cobalt. It's about lithium coming from South America, and the kind of questions and issues that it's raised with, like Indigenous farmers and their rights to their land and the water pollution it's creating, and rare earth mining in Myanmar, and that's not just for EVs. That's also for a whole host of clean energy technologies. Rare earths go into panels, they go into wind turbine blades and whatnot. And if you look at these pictures, I think Global Witness to this very heartbreaking report where they showed pictures side by side of areas in Myanmar, which had been like a year back. They had not they were completely untouched, covered in like green cover. And now there's these deep wells with polluted water because they've been indiscriminately mined for rare earth. And there's also, like, the one other thing I want to flag is I feel like the world is exploiting the fact that there are a lot of places in the world which are having a breakdown of constitutional mechanisms to protect their citizens. And the rest of the world is kind of like being privy to it and also exploiting it to make these EVs and make them cheaper and, like, have them run the way they run, kind of a thing. So, yeah, I Yes, EVs, but at what cost, is how I'd frame it.Brian Bienkowski And so, just to give you a few more hills, if you want to die, yes, before and we, I do want to get into some of the, you know, some of the optimistic and some of the bright signs you're seeing, but just kind of writ large, you know, we've talked about EVs just just now, and some of the contamination concerns and EJ components we talked about, you know, kind of inequitable distribution of incentives. What are some other environmental and energy justice concerns that you have in clean energy use? Because I think most of us, it's often painted in a very positive light, understandably so, I mean, fossil fuels remain such a big problem for this planet. So but before we get to those, some of those solutions, what are some other concerns you have?Mokshda Kaul I'm actually glad about what you said. I just want to touch on what you said for a second that we need to remember the fact that we need the clean energy transition, but we also need to have a little bit of prudence about how we are doing it, because let's not forget that we are kind of building on the backs of someone at the end of the day. And the question is, who is that someone? who's that like sacrifice zone for this now? because we've had sacrifice zones for fossil fuel production, but we sure are having it for clean energy as well. We just can't pretend that, because it's solving climate change. All's hunky dory. So other questions and like concerns that I have, first of all, I'm very deep in this bit of mining for critical minerals, which are important for the energy transition, not just for EVs. So I have been looking at, who would, you know, sort of shoulder the cost if we were to mine ethically, like, who would pay that cost? And I'm trying to get into that a little bit more lately, and I'm also trying to understand within the US, because there has been the chips act and IRA, which are kind of Inflation Reduction Act, which are encouraging domestic mining. What happens then? Because there are these reports that say that most of the reserves of critical minerals that we need if we are going to mine in the US are located close to Native American territory. So we are starting to recreate a problem we have not solved really in the past. So it becomes another question about that, in terms of the mining issues. And I think the other stuff that I'm honestly concerned about is access to clean energy opportunities. And I know, like a lot of people are working on this, but I'm thinking about electrifying like jobs, clean energy jobs. So who gets access to these and there are certain states which are creating provisions for environmental justice communities to be able to access these jobs. But then, if you're creating provisions to access a job that doesn't have prevailing wage rate, what are you doing and who are you trying to, like pull whose eyes are you trying to pull wool over? Is my question. So I guess, about the quality of jobs, I'm concerned. About, where are these jobs coming up? And I'm, I think the other thing that I'm also been thinking about in terms of EVs is electrifying transport and public transport in general, because EVs aren't accessible to LMI folks. And you're kind of like punishing these people with these vehicles that pollute, and you're finishing them with like higher burdens, because they are having to pay for gas vehicles. But what about electrifying public transport? And I think from in Arizona, especially, you see public trans like the lack in public transport. And I mean, I juxtapose this against India, where in Mumbai, we have brilliant public transport connectivity. So I yeah, that's the other element of public transportation, electrifying it is what I've been thinking about. And the other thing that I've just been toying with lately is clean energy jobs are creating an impact on these fossil fuel workers, where they're being forced to migrate to other places. And I know at the surface it seems like, well, it's just he's this person's just moving for the job. How does it matter? But I'm very curious about what kind of impacts does this have on the worker, their family, their like, emotional health, their like support system, and if they're moving, they're probably moving to like a job that doesn't pay as much. So what's going on there? And I'm trying to understand what are the impacts on migration from clean energy creation and incentives to clean energy production. So those are, like a bunch of things. I have so many. I don't hate the world, but I definitely love finding problems in it. So this is easy for me!Brian Bienkowski Well, let's, let's shift gears. Here we have, we have pointed out the world's problems, and I think you have some ideas on maybe how they cannot be so problematic. So first, you know, what are some ways, when we think about policymakers and others, where they could maybe build some caution into these climate change solutions to ensure that this transition is equitable?Mokshda Kaul I think first of all, I'm going to give a weird answer to this, because I have been working okay, for context, I have been working on two of my dissertation chapters around the clock for the last three months right now. So I'm very deep in a dark place, and it's a good dark place. I love this dark place. But I think the first thing that I'd want to say is we can't deny the technical realities of the energy transition. So I guess making peace with that the fact that we might need natural gas plants, or we might need some form of fossil fuel to transition, or we might need some form of nuclear to transition. So like kind of, I'm not saying being pro these fuels, but accepting the fact that you can't just, you know, snap your fingers and everything's going to be clean. So first of all, I would say that some way that policymakers could build that in is by having that acceptance of the actual system and the energy system itself. And the second thing is, like having these holistic perspectives on the energy transition itself, like I was talking about the Environmental Coalition and the Labor Justice Coalition, right? And if you think about it at the surface, an EJ activist would only see the environmental justice side. We would not want to focus on this is a set of people losing their jobs and and that's that's fair. But. Having that holistic perspective where you're acknowledging these two sides of the story helps, because it's you can build provisions to ameliorate the kind of suffering or the problems that will be created in the process there will be somebody who has to bear the cost of the transition. But the question is, are we building in enough provisions to sort of address that, and are we kind of trying to protect the people who we are going to be exploiting in the process?And the other thing that I think is a little bit personal to me because of the dissertation work and my own research, is the way we define things and policies. I think we need, as like as societ, we need to have clearer definitions of who we seek to benefit. And only when you have these clear definitions of who you seek to benefit can you actually measure if you've been impacting these people or not, like just having these broad, losey-goosey ideas of I have a program that should benefit environmentally disadvantaged communities. What does that mean? Who are you talking about? And that, I think, is a very important aspect as well. And the other thing I want to talk about is, like, humility, because I feel like we will learn a lot from our mistakes as this transition goes on. And I'm hopeful that we will, as policy makers, be able to, like, kind of, you know, take a step back and reflect on what went wrong. For example, bills where they have not built in just transition provisions are they are being able to see how coal communities have lost revenues and have lost have had to, like, do a lot of things in terms of, like, shutting down public schools. So those spaces policy makers can actually have that moment of reckoning and realize that, hey, maybe we made a mistake and we should try to change this the next time. So having that humility, I think, is incredibly important as well. But yeah, those are my high horse comments. So you mentioned the Inflation Reduction Act, and anybody living in the US, whether you know it or not, your community is being touched by this in some way. It was a massive, massive spending bill. Have you seen this approach in the IRA? Have you seen a justice-oriented approach? And if not, where is it lacking? So yes and no, IRA, I mean, I'm so incredibly amazed by it for so many different reasons, like it has this focus on low-middle income communities. It has a focus on electrifying tribal regions. It has that. It has a whole tribal electrification program, and it has like in these tax credits, investment tax credits, and production tax credits for energy communities. So specifically, the communities that have lost revenue due to coal plant closures or coal mine closures, and so they are kind of target like, you know, talking about the right groups of people, and they're targeting the right kind of issues in that sense, like encouraging the production of clean energy in these areas, or workforce development in these spaces. And there's also that whole chunk of Environment and Climate Justice block grants under the IRA, which are meant for specifically disadvantaged communities and community-based organizations in these areas, can apply to these grants for all things from like workforce development to clean energy technology development to climate resilience. It's, I mean, it's a huge set of sources to kind of A), reduce greenhouse gasses, and B), be able to kind of harness the potential of the clean energy transition. So from that perspective, I really like the IRA and the way it's focusing on people who need to be focused on honestly. But again, this is the same thing that I just talked about, the way we define things. So the IRA itself has, it doesn't have, like, a consistent definition of what is disadvantage and what is environmental justice communities or low income communities, like some places, they are using a particular definition based on a particular tax credit. Other places they are not, and even in the environmental justice Block Grant, environmental and climate justice block grant itself, program itself, they have, they say that they will use a definition by the that is being used by the Justice 40. The Council on Environmental Quality has that screen tool where they are basically identifying disadvantaged areas. But they also say that EPA has yet to finalize how we will define disadvantaged communities for this program. So I think that's my one of my icky things that I don't like about it is that when you don't define there is a lot of room for people to sort of exploit and pretend like they're doing good work when they're not. And I mean, of course, it remains to be seen how much people will be able to exploit this, but I think that that is something that makes me very uncomfortable about it. And I also think there is this one aspect of the IRA which is a little interesting. I haven't read a little bit. I haven't read more about it, and I really want to, but it's about how, if, uh. So the Department of Interior, I think, has to give out certain acreage of land in oil and gas leasing for being able to give offshore and onshore wind and solar development rights. So you are encouraging production of oil and gas in a way. And that's, yeah, that's a little I'm still trying to understand. Why has that been said, and why is that being done? Because I'm sure there is some logic somewhere deep inside, and I'm hoping there is, but I think, yeah, that and this definition thing, like, it's the same thing, if, in fact, I mean, sorry about the off-topicness, but the Weatherization Assistance Program that also, like, there was this work done by Dominic Bernard and Tony Reems, and they have actually documented how these programs that are supposed to assist low income households with their energy burdens and alleviate energy party, they don't use a definition at the end of the day about who's energy poor. And because they don't do that, you can't just say anybody falling below 80% of area median income is LMI, because that's not what being energy poor is about. It's about a lot of different facets. So if you choose to define it by this one income based category or criterion, you're not you're not doing a good job first of all. And yes, in that sense, the Justice body tools and this EJ screen, they are kind of holistic in the way they bring in climate burdens and environment burdens. But again, if you don't have a consistent definition throughout an act, there's so much wiggle room to do not good things, is how I'd say it.Brian Bienkowski So it sounds like the IRA has some good aspects to it, and we've we actually talked to Jalan Newsome, I believe, who is on the Council of Environmental Quality. And she talked at length about Justice40 I would encourage listeners to listen to that and then listen to this again. Listen to most response. But you know, outside of the IRA, have you seen, you know, countries, states, municipalities, towns, villages, anything that are embarking on the clean energy transition in a way that you see as equitable and just, and if so, can you talk about it a little bit?Mokshda Kaul So I'm not from Illinois. I have no relationship with Illinois. This is not sponsored by Illinois. I really love CEJA! I think it's really cool. And I know I'm probably missing a chunk of things. And I'm not saying it's perfect. Please, don't get me wrong. I'm just saying that the way they have been able to bring like environmental justice and the provisions for labor justice, like fossil fuel labor justice in together at the same time is incredible, in my opinion! And they have so this is what I meant earlier, when I was saying about job creation, because what they have done is clean energy jobs are going to be created, and they're going to be union jobs. They're going to have prevailing wage standards, and they are also going to be a section of them is going to be devoted only to environmental justice communities. So you are kind of doing that, two words, one stone thing, and I think that's incredible. And the other thing I love, love about CEJA is they did this thing called the "Listen Lead Share" sessions. And I know no one can see this, but has to spark in my eye when I talk about the Listen Lead Share sessions. But the Listen LeadSshare sessions were basically this kind of listening session situation where smaller Bipoc community organizations were leading these listening sessions within Illinois, trying to collect opinions, not just opinion, but experiences and what people want in like an energy justice kind of a way from illinoisians, just to understand what is it that is bothering the people. And I wish I had the link for it, but when the bill actually came out there is he's the head of elevate. I can't remember his name right now. Really love the guy. I don't know why my brain's blanking on it, but he actually read out pieces from these listening sessions where local Illinoisans had cited concerns and what had made its way into the legislation actually, so actual people's opinions were there. And I just, I find that so amazing, like, that's what I mean by accurate representation. And the other thing that I found very cool about CEJA is they have provisions for returning citizens in these clean energy jobs. And that's some that's a, like, a huge chunk of population that we tend to miss when we talk about justice issues. And the reason they had that was because they used to have these zoom based, like, Zoom-Room based sessions where they tried to get people to talk about what's going on. And there was this one guy. He was like a representative. He was a returning citizen himself, and he was a representative for like a group, and he actually was like, You know what, we need provisions from people like me. And they bought that in, and they built that in. So it's incredible the way they have been able to sort of bring this to fruition. I mean, I'm sure implementation stages are you. Infamous for how things go wrong, but in just the way the act is written and the way it was brought together, I am so amazed, and I'm in love.Brian Bienkowski And what is that acronym? You said it's CEJA, What is that acronym? So if people wanted to check it out, yeah,Mokshda Kaul actually, you know what? I'm going to make sure I'm doing this right, because CEJA there was a CEJA proposed by the environment coalition, and then there was a final CEJA that was passed. And those two had different acronyms, but Climate and Equitable Jobs Act is how the bill that actually passed. And yeah, that's the one that was signed by the governor. And give me one second, I want to find the name of the person from Elevate, because he's really important and really cool, certainly, and I think he's like, worth mentioning if anyone's looking just one sec, Delmar. His name is Delmar Gillius, and he works for Elevate, and he was one of the few persons of color who is responsible for, like, actually, legislative negotiations as well. And he was incredible. And, yeah, it has been amazing to talk with all these folks that I've had a chance to talk to. And yes, again, not sponsored by Illinois. I just really love it.Brian Bienkowski Well, it's always nice to end on an optimistic note. And just to keep that theme, we have some fun, some fun, before we get you out of here. And thank you again, so much for this. I love talking to you about I think the energy conversation is so often missing nuance. People want to say "end" fossil fuels yesterday," or they want to say "we need fossil fuels forever," and just having nuance in that conversation is needed if we're going to get anywhere. So before we get out of here, I have a few rapid fire questions where you can just answer with one word or a phrase. My favorite comfort food is, I'llMokshda Kaul I'll have to explain this.Brian Bienkowski Go right ahead.Mokshda Kaul Okay, it's Haak, Rogan Josh and rice. Haak is collard greens. We blanch them. And Rogan Josh is a really spicy lamb curry. And these are all Kashmiri foods. So if any Kashmiri is listening, I'm representing us and and with rice and yogurt, of course, but the Indian kind of yogurt, not the Greek yogurt. I would Oh, my God. Like, I think I'm gonna make it today. I described and I was like, Yeah, well, it's been a while, maybe we should do this today.Brian Bienkowski If I had to try out a job other than my current one, it would beMokshda Kaul writing. I would love to be a fiction writer for the rest of my life.Brian Bienkowski And my dream vacation isMokshda Kaul my current dream vacation is Poland. Because Poland, Poland, however we pronounce it? because I really want to be in a place that has the mountains and the sea and all the history to it. Been wanting to go since before 2020 and now I don't know when will I go,Brian Bienkowski Are you just trying to like, like, like, kiss up to the host here? That is my so I am very, I am very, I never thought anybody would say Poland to that question, so I was supposed to go. And yes, so I am. My grandparents were immigrants from Poland to Detroit and other parts of Michigan. And so I was supposed to go in 2020 or 2021 and it was no, it must have been 2022 because it was right when a Ukraine was invaded, exactly there was, there was this tale of covid. So I waited, and then there was a war that started. So I have not gone because obviously it's so close to Ukraine. And I just, yeah, you know, but we had, we have a lot of genealogy we've done, so I'm trying to sketch out a trip to places where family was and is so very cool.Mokshda Kaul That is so cool! Yeah, I wanted to do this was my I love solo trips, and this was going to be my trip before grad school. But like I said, I started grad school in 2020 so by the time I could book the tickets, the world was shut down. So that was the start of it. And then just being in grad school, I really don't, I don't know if I had the time. And then the war happened, and so I just at that point, I was like, You know what? It's not destined for now. So I guess I'm gonna put it on the back burner.Brian Bienkowski We'll have to stay in touch. Hopefully one of us will get there. Maybe both of us will get there. And so I've been learning the language too, which a Slavic language, is not easy to learn when you are 41 years old. It is not soaking into my brain.Mokshda Kaul That's so interesting, because for Kashmiri, the problem is, it's, it is like from the Indian group of languages. But I don't know, I'm forgetting the word for it, but apparently it sounds a lot like Central American language, Central Asian languages, sorry. So there is, like, a, like, an influx of salvik. And Persian and like, so I have had a lot of friends who are from, like, Central Asia, be like, What did you say? So, like, language is, God. Like, yeah, I am very curious. That's a really cool thing to do, though, because it keeps your brain young. SoBrian Bienkowski it does, yes, it gets that other part of my brain that in music. So moksha. What is the last book that you read for fun? And you do not have to confine yourself to one word or a phrase here.Mokshda Kaul Okay, the last book I read was "Small things like these" by Claire O'keekin, I think what's her name? Very short, very spiffy, very sad. Loved it. And I also listened to audiobooks. So the last audiobook I listened to was Untamed by Glennon Doyle. So yeah, both of those were amazing. And small things like these was just I finished it in a day because it was so well written and so quick. I was like, wow, I need to I'm dropping everything.Brian Bienkowski I love books like that. They are the they are the best. Well, moksha. Thank you so much for your time, for your intelligence, your wit. I really like talking to you about these things and beyond. And just as a side note, you always seem, I know you say you're a pessimist, but you always seem happy and inject humor and lightness, and it's really just lights up a room, and it lit up this call. So thank you so much for being here, and I hope we can have you on again soon.Mokshda Kaul Yeah, thank you so much. This was really wonderful to talk to you.

Mokshda Kaul joins the Agents of Change in Environmental Justice podcast to discuss the clean energy transition and how policymakers and other leaders can avoid mistakes of the past.Kaul, a Ph.D. candidate in the sustainable energy program at the School of Sustainability at Arizona State University, also talks about the crucial role of coalitions in a just energy transition.The Agents of Change in Environmental Justice podcast is a biweekly podcast featuring the stories and big ideas from past and present fellows, as well as others in the field. You can see all of the past episodes here.Listen below to our discussion with Kaul and subscribe to the podcast at iTunes or Spotify.Agents of Change in Environmental Justice · Mokshda Kaul on making the clean energy transition work for allTranscript Brian BienkowskiMoksha, how are you doing today?Mokshda Kaul I'm good. How are you, Brian?Brian Bienkowski I'm doing wonderful. I'm a little hot. I turned off my fan so we don't have the background noise. And where are you today?Mokshda Kaul So speaking of hot, I'm in Arizona, so I'm in Phoenix, and I've also turned my fan off. And luckily, my AC is working, so I'm not going to explode into flames, which is always possible in Arizona. So, you know, just saying. But yeah, that's where I am right now, and I'm just really excited to do this actually.Brian Bienkowski Well, I am really excited to talk to you too. Your research and your path there, to me, are fascinating. So I'm so excited to have you on the program. So as you probably know, I like to start at the beginning. So tell me a little bit about your upbringing. Of course, you're not from Arizona originally.Mokshda Kaul yeah. So I moved here for my PhD in 2020 and that was in the middle of the pandemic, by the way, which was quite jarring. There were only those bubble flights operating from the US to India, and it was terrifying for multiple different reasons. And I got got here, and I was again stuck in a room. Instead of being stuck in a room in India, I was stuck in a room in Phoenix. Nothing changed in my life, honestly speaking. But in terms of, like, where I'm from, and coming to Arizona, I'm from Mumbai, which is I think, the world's most densely populated city. So I'm used to having people step on my toes while I'm walking. And I came to Arizona, and I was like, there are no people here. What's wrong with this place? So that was number one for me. And, I mean, being raised in Mumbai, India is a country with so many multitudes. And I'm born and raised in Mumbai, but I come from Kashmir, and I spent my summer vacations, and, like a lot of my time, even, like a few years in my childhood, actually, in this smaller town near Kashmir called Jammu, which is, I would say, like now it's a tier-two city, but back then, maybe it was like a tier-three city, and it was very jarring the difference between Mumbai and Jammu, because Mumbai is the financial capital of India. So you have every amenity you can think of. You have round the clock electricity, and of course, within Mumbai also, we have terrible infrastructure problems, but that's a different story. But juxtaposing that against Jammu, where you'd have blackouts in the middle of summer heat and like summer, like the Phoenix summer, and I used to find it so uncomfortable to sort of when I'd come back to Mumbai to have that feeling of, wait, what is the thing that the people here are doing right, that they don't have to have these blackouts? Like, what? What is it like? Why is there this element of chance and privilege that's deciding who gets to experience these things or not? And I think I was just always very irritated and uncomfortable by it, and I was benefiting from it for all intents and purposes.Brian Bienkowski And so you mentioned that juxtaposition of Kashmir and Mumbai, and I'm wondering if that was kind of where you became aware of the concept of environmental justice, or if that was or if it was something else.Mokshda Kaul So I mean, I'm really glad you point that out, but that's exactly it. I would find it very unsettling. And it's just, if you look at it, I mean, at the same time as I was growing up, I was reading like, Rawlsian theories of justice and trying to understand, like, who decides, who decides that somebody gets something just by virtue of the fact that they were born in a particular city? Like, I don't have anything to do with the fact that I was born in Mumbai. Okay, and I think that the unsettled feeling never left me, and I think that's what they call acknowledging your privilege. And I was just always affected by it. And also in addition to this, India has lot of issues on the grounds of caste and class, and growing up in a space like that, where you... especially in Mumbai, where it's so cosmopolitan and so it's like a melting pot. You see all of it every single day, and you can't be away from your privilege. You can't face away if you really choose to tap into it. So I guess that's where that idea of environmental justice kind of ticked in my brain.Brian Bienkowski And before we get into some of that, some of the energy justice work you've done, and what you're working on now, what is a moment or event that has helped shaped your identity up to this point?Mokshda Kaul It's interesting because I was listening to Maria Jo's podcast the other day, and she said the same thing that I have been thinking about that I don't think it's a particular incident. I think it's these bunch of different things that have come together to this moment of like who I am. First of all, it's obviously my parents' history as being internal refugees and learning from them about how conflict operates at a very young age, like I was, I think, three or four, when I understood that, oh, we are not in our hometown because of this huge issue that happened, and there was violence and there was extremism, and there were two sides to the story at that same time, my parents side and the other side. And I think growing up with that, and then there's actually very funny thing that I remember now that you said defining incidents. I think I had bit of a bleeding heart syndrome since I was a child. I don't know why, but I had this. So I still remember this, because it's, it's like, etched so vividly in my memory. I was in third grade and we had to make posters for something in school. I don't remember what exactly, but my poster was the planet crying because it was hot. And this is 2003 and I remember one of my uncles came home and he made fun of me, and he was like, "This is so stupid. Like, why are you concerned about the environment and the planet?" And I was in tears, because I was like, no, no, we need to care about this. I don't understand why you don't care about this. And I was, I was sad, like, I was heartbroken that people don't care. And so that little child always had that element of, why don't we want to make the world a better place? Like, what's wrong with people?Brian Bienkowski So the world is still crying. Since your picture, unfortunately, we're all we should all be crying. And so you are, you are trying to better the world, and your research focuses on, I'm distilling it down, but the clean energy transition. So first, what drew you to this line of research, and how are you using this economics background that you mentioned to understand the clean energy adoption and policy?Mokshda Kaul Back in 2014 King's College London did this really cool thing where they got professors from King's College to come down to Mumbai and do this really cool summer course. And I did the one on international political economy. And every student, it was very strenuous. They packed a summer school's worth of teaching and practice into like a one and a half week period. So it was so much reading, like this huge binder of – I don't even want to go back to that – but each student had to prepare, like a presentation on a particular topic. And this is big bit of a background. My dad works in oil and gas, and that's very unsettling to me, and I'm sure he's going to listen to this, but so I naturally decide that I want to work on the energy topic, energy presentation for this class. Because I was like, Oh, my dad knows about this. And the day that I had to present, our professor actually did this whole presentation on how the shale oil boom is going to change, like the face of the earth. And my entire presentation actually was about the shale oil boom. So this is like one hour before my presentation, and I'm having a meltdown because I don't know what to talk about anymore, because you just covered everything, and I'm doing this frantic internet search of what do I talk about? And that's how I found out about the energy transition, and that's how I discovered that, oh, renewable energy is a thing. So instead of talking about shale oil, I talked about how we have these other sources of energy which actually don't create the problems that we have with fossil fuels, and they need more investment, of course, in time. But this is 2014 so it was different situation back then. And so that was how I kind of was drawn to the energy transition. It was a very important moment in my life, I would say, and that changed the focus of how I was seeing the world, and that changed the focus of what I wanted to do with the world. And speaking to my background as an economist, I'm trained as an economist. But I come from a very interdisciplinary school, the School of Sustainability here at ASU, and we kind of, my advisor has a political science background, so I incorporate methods from political science and economics, and the way I see it is it kind of helps me translate the world. So I know econ gets a bad rap for the fact that it's been, it's kind of led us to the point we are at in terms of exploiting the environment and all of those things. But I'm surrounded by a bunch of folks in the School of Sustainability who use econ as a tool to sort of address these problems of environmental and climate issues and distribution concerns and equity concerns. And that's how I see econ. I see it as like this toolkit that I can use to understand why do things look the way they do. And then the political science part also adds to it, because it helps me understand why did people decide what they decided. So all in all, I feel like really grateful for the fact that I have this pol-sci + econ situation, because I'm able to understand policies from like, start to finish in a way that what went into the background, why did you think the way you thought when you made this and how did this come about? And then what are the outcomes from it? So from that sense, yeah, these disciplines have helped me just unpack the whole thing as much as I can.Brian Bienkowski I think the economics arguments and studies and the information that comes out when it comes to environmental issues, energy included, are some of the most interesting, in my opinion. So for instance, EHN covers endocrine disrupting chemicals, and we can say till we're blue in the face, you know, they're bad. And they do this, they hijack your hormones, so on and so forth. But a few years ago, someone did an economic impact study that looked at like healthcare costs associated with chemical exposure. And when you start putting dollar amounts to things like this, I feel like you have all that. You have, all of a sudden gotten the attention of a whole other group of people who have, maybe aren't as concerned.Mokshda Kaul AbsolutelyBrian Bienkowski so I, and I'm sure this is the case in clean energy and fossil fuels. So I I always find those kind of economic angles really, really interesting. And you're looking at the role of coalitions in clean energy policy making. So I want to unpack this a little bit. What can you tell us about the importance of coalitions in this space? And do you have some examples?Mokshda Kaul So for this piece on coalitions that I'm working on, first of all, this is more about the political science space of understanding how policies are made. And I think I came from this question of wanting to understand there were these two very interesting climate legislations in the US that I encountered. I'm sure there are many more. One was in New York, which was the CLCPA, the community leadership, climate leadership and community Protection Act. And other was the CEJA, climate and equitable jobs Act in Illinois. And when I looked at both of these, the first things that you see when you like just do a Google search, is the coalitions that led them there. So there was this really intense advocacy by these major environmental coalitions happening on the ground for both of these acts. And I personally, of course, coalitions are an important tool because they bring in that element of procedural justice, because you are actually having representation from the people you seek to create these acts for and create these bills for. But more than that, I also feel like coalitions become this interesting way to create buy in, because if you have people who are actually invested in, let's say, like, reducing energy burdens, putting their words out there, and having people actually respond to it, and that makes its way into legislation, then this person actually feels represented. And then you have, like, buy-in from this person towards protecting the environment. And I think that's like, these are the two legislative examples. But in terms of coalitions themselves, there's the Illinois clean job coalition in Illinois, which was leading the way on seizure and NY renewals, which was leading the way on clcpa. But outside of the environmental coalitions, there are also jfossil-fuel-union-based job coalitions trying to represent this other side of justice in the transition, in the sense that there are fossil fuel labor groups who are trying to advocate for the fact that they need provisions to sort of help them after these fossil fuel plants are closed down to transition into other work. And so there are, there's the Climate Jobs Institute by, I think it's with Cornell, yeah. And they essentially have these affiliates across the country in different states. So there is Climate Jobs New York, there's Climate Jobs,Illinois, and all of these spaces, I mean, these coalitions represent this other side of justice. And again, if you don't have these coalitions doing it, there's nobody who's going to actually speak like represent these people's interests, is my point. So I think coalitions are incredibly important, especially when you think about justice and in the policy making process, not just in like the part where you advocate for your needs, and you just do these die ins, or you do demonstrations, not just that, but also the language that goes into these policies. So that's my perspective, and why I think coalitions are incredibly important. And I don't want to sound biased, but I really love the work that ICJ has been doing and the work that the climate jobs affiliates have been doing, it's, yeah, it's incredible to watch how they are trying to deal with this.Brian Bienkowski So you mentioned this idea of buy in, and perhaps that gets people kind of more interested, more engaged. Most of us have also heard about these incentive programs. You know, just financial incentives for clean energy, whether it's upgrading our inefficient fridge or purchasing solar for our roof. So what kind of impact do these policies have on adoption?Mokshda Kaul So I think my question to your question is, the question is adoption for whom? Because at the end of the day, it is not about... I mean, yes, they increase adoption of like, let's say solar energy or electric vehicles or efficient appliances. But I think the question is not about, Is it leading to a relative increase? But who is it leading to a relative increase for? because, again, econ is amazing for this, but it is. There are. There's so much documented evidence at this point that electric vehicle tax credits, residential solar tax credits, tend to benefit wealthier households, which are from like a higher income status or a higher socioeconomic status in the US, and I'm talking about specifically here. So I think the question is the kind of I mean, speaking, what the kind of impact they have on adoption, I'm sure they're improving adoption. Yes, they are. But I think again, that question about how these policies define who's eligible for them, changes who can apply for them, and changes who can receive these benefits. And just as a simple example, there is this program called the affordable solar program in New York, and it's aimed at low-middle income households. But it's the eligibility criterion is that you need to be an owner-occupied household. So you need to be owning the property you live in. But if you're a program that's trying to cater to low-middle income households, you'd know that most of them are renters. So if you are trying to target LMI households by being an owner-occupied program, you're missing a huge chunk of the target population. So I guess the question that I mean, I'm all for it, I'm all for these programs that encourage adoption, but I feel like, inadvertently, they are encouraging inequities in adoption, and that is a much bigger problem to deal with honestly, because that's impeding a just transition, because there's inequitable access then and again. It's that privileged thing, like, just by virtue of the fact that I own the house that I live in, I can get a tax credit for buying panels, and I can get cheaper electricity, and I can, like, also feel good about saving the environment. But then there's somebody else who actually pays much higher amount in their energy bills, because, you know, the energy burden is higher for lower income classes, and they can't even access solar panels because they're not eligible for such tax credits. And in fact, even funnier is giving tax credit to folks who don't earn enough to fall under a tax bracket you're missing, you're missing a huge chunk of the population. If you're saying this is how we're going to help you, when that's not what they'll use. So, yeah, I'd say I'm always very concerned about trying to see who are these benefits going to when we are encouraging adoption in these ways.Brian Bienkowski Yeah, it's a really good point. There's these kind of baked in inequities, even in, you know, programs and policies that are ostensibly trying to do the right thing, we're still baking in these kind of the same kind of inequities that got us here in the first place. And speaking of that, you know, there's a lot of kind of back and forth in the EV, electric vehicle, space, and I happen to be from Detroit, so I I hear even more about this from my family who everybody worked in or does work in the automotive industry. But we're increasingly see some of the environmental justice implications around mining for the needed metals here. And again, I live in Michigan's Upper Peninsula, and they are trying to reopen old mines up here that have been closed for years. And I don't know if it's necessarily EVs or just kind of electronics at large, but specific to the EVS. Can you talk about this and what it means as EVs become more popular, some of these environmental justice concerns that might pop up or that are popping up.Mokshda Kaul So if you're a Tesla bro and you're listening to this, stop listening right now. But if you're not, go on. I have this whole, again, I have this whole I have a lot of hills that I want to die on eventually, but we'll get there when we get there. So speaking about EVs, again, they're incredibly important if we want to have, like an electrified grid, in the sense that we want that balanced demand curve, so that we can have more clean energy in our energy mix, so that way EVs, yes, 100% important. And of course, reducing, like greenhouse gas emissions that come from tailpipes. I'm all for that thing that I'm not all for is, like you said, the mining aspects of it. So I have not spent as much time looking at the domestic implications of it, and that's something I'm stepping into now, in terms of the US. But if you look at a global picture, we get most of a cobalt from the Democratic Republic of Congo, and a this has been documented by tons of reports by Amnesty International. There's also a book called Cobalt Read by Sid Kara. And there's extensive documentation of how you have child labor, you have unsafe working conditions, the wage rate that they're paid, the laborers are paid at is definitely unfair, it's way below what should be acceptable. And there's also the problem is that as the demand goes up, the fact is that people in DRC, I mean, and I'm just conjecturing from all that I've read, I might be completely wrong if I go to the ground and talk to people, but it's creating that pressure where people think that it's profitable to keep mining cobalt. So they're like little children getting into this business, and they're like, indulging in artisanal mining, which is where you dig in your backyard, kind of a thing, just in very broad terms, but as the demand goes up, it's encouraging this pressure to kind of keep mining that way. And there's no regulation in place to ensure that there is ethical mining. And because of that, you're left with the situation where you are, like, incentivizing this to be done in the wrong way, and you want to keep the price of EVs down so that more people buy it because it's a solution for fighting climate change. So it's the question of, if we were to define this in a just way, if we would have ethical mining practices, who would bear the cost? And I mean, depending on your political leaning, you would have five different answers to the question. To this question, but I guess EVs, yes, good. But how we are getting them is a huge question, and it's not about just about DRC and cobalt. It's about lithium coming from South America, and the kind of questions and issues that it's raised with, like Indigenous farmers and their rights to their land and the water pollution it's creating, and rare earth mining in Myanmar, and that's not just for EVs. That's also for a whole host of clean energy technologies. Rare earths go into panels, they go into wind turbine blades and whatnot. And if you look at these pictures, I think Global Witness to this very heartbreaking report where they showed pictures side by side of areas in Myanmar, which had been like a year back. They had not they were completely untouched, covered in like green cover. And now there's these deep wells with polluted water because they've been indiscriminately mined for rare earth. And there's also, like, the one other thing I want to flag is I feel like the world is exploiting the fact that there are a lot of places in the world which are having a breakdown of constitutional mechanisms to protect their citizens. And the rest of the world is kind of like being privy to it and also exploiting it to make these EVs and make them cheaper and, like, have them run the way they run, kind of a thing. So, yeah, I Yes, EVs, but at what cost, is how I'd frame it.Brian Bienkowski And so, just to give you a few more hills, if you want to die, yes, before and we, I do want to get into some of the, you know, some of the optimistic and some of the bright signs you're seeing, but just kind of writ large, you know, we've talked about EVs just just now, and some of the contamination concerns and EJ components we talked about, you know, kind of inequitable distribution of incentives. What are some other environmental and energy justice concerns that you have in clean energy use? Because I think most of us, it's often painted in a very positive light, understandably so, I mean, fossil fuels remain such a big problem for this planet. So but before we get to those, some of those solutions, what are some other concerns you have?Mokshda Kaul I'm actually glad about what you said. I just want to touch on what you said for a second that we need to remember the fact that we need the clean energy transition, but we also need to have a little bit of prudence about how we are doing it, because let's not forget that we are kind of building on the backs of someone at the end of the day. And the question is, who is that someone? who's that like sacrifice zone for this now? because we've had sacrifice zones for fossil fuel production, but we sure are having it for clean energy as well. We just can't pretend that, because it's solving climate change. All's hunky dory. So other questions and like concerns that I have, first of all, I'm very deep in this bit of mining for critical minerals, which are important for the energy transition, not just for EVs. So I have been looking at, who would, you know, sort of shoulder the cost if we were to mine ethically, like, who would pay that cost? And I'm trying to get into that a little bit more lately, and I'm also trying to understand within the US, because there has been the chips act and IRA, which are kind of Inflation Reduction Act, which are encouraging domestic mining. What happens then? Because there are these reports that say that most of the reserves of critical minerals that we need if we are going to mine in the US are located close to Native American territory. So we are starting to recreate a problem we have not solved really in the past. So it becomes another question about that, in terms of the mining issues. And I think the other stuff that I'm honestly concerned about is access to clean energy opportunities. And I know, like a lot of people are working on this, but I'm thinking about electrifying like jobs, clean energy jobs. So who gets access to these and there are certain states which are creating provisions for environmental justice communities to be able to access these jobs. But then, if you're creating provisions to access a job that doesn't have prevailing wage rate, what are you doing and who are you trying to, like pull whose eyes are you trying to pull wool over? Is my question. So I guess, about the quality of jobs, I'm concerned. About, where are these jobs coming up? And I'm, I think the other thing that I'm also been thinking about in terms of EVs is electrifying transport and public transport in general, because EVs aren't accessible to LMI folks. And you're kind of like punishing these people with these vehicles that pollute, and you're finishing them with like higher burdens, because they are having to pay for gas vehicles. But what about electrifying public transport? And I think from in Arizona, especially, you see public trans like the lack in public transport. And I mean, I juxtapose this against India, where in Mumbai, we have brilliant public transport connectivity. So I yeah, that's the other element of public transportation, electrifying it is what I've been thinking about. And the other thing that I've just been toying with lately is clean energy jobs are creating an impact on these fossil fuel workers, where they're being forced to migrate to other places. And I know at the surface it seems like, well, it's just he's this person's just moving for the job. How does it matter? But I'm very curious about what kind of impacts does this have on the worker, their family, their like, emotional health, their like support system, and if they're moving, they're probably moving to like a job that doesn't pay as much. So what's going on there? And I'm trying to understand what are the impacts on migration from clean energy creation and incentives to clean energy production. So those are, like a bunch of things. I have so many. I don't hate the world, but I definitely love finding problems in it. So this is easy for me!Brian Bienkowski Well, let's, let's shift gears. Here we have, we have pointed out the world's problems, and I think you have some ideas on maybe how they cannot be so problematic. So first, you know, what are some ways, when we think about policymakers and others, where they could maybe build some caution into these climate change solutions to ensure that this transition is equitable?Mokshda Kaul I think first of all, I'm going to give a weird answer to this, because I have been working okay, for context, I have been working on two of my dissertation chapters around the clock for the last three months right now. So I'm very deep in a dark place, and it's a good dark place. I love this dark place. But I think the first thing that I'd want to say is we can't deny the technical realities of the energy transition. So I guess making peace with that the fact that we might need natural gas plants, or we might need some form of fossil fuel to transition, or we might need some form of nuclear to transition. So like kind of, I'm not saying being pro these fuels, but accepting the fact that you can't just, you know, snap your fingers and everything's going to be clean. So first of all, I would say that some way that policymakers could build that in is by having that acceptance of the actual system and the energy system itself. And the second thing is, like having these holistic perspectives on the energy transition itself, like I was talking about the Environmental Coalition and the Labor Justice Coalition, right? And if you think about it at the surface, an EJ activist would only see the environmental justice side. We would not want to focus on this is a set of people losing their jobs and and that's that's fair. But. Having that holistic perspective where you're acknowledging these two sides of the story helps, because it's you can build provisions to ameliorate the kind of suffering or the problems that will be created in the process there will be somebody who has to bear the cost of the transition. But the question is, are we building in enough provisions to sort of address that, and are we kind of trying to protect the people who we are going to be exploiting in the process?And the other thing that I think is a little bit personal to me because of the dissertation work and my own research, is the way we define things and policies. I think we need, as like as societ, we need to have clearer definitions of who we seek to benefit. And only when you have these clear definitions of who you seek to benefit can you actually measure if you've been impacting these people or not, like just having these broad, losey-goosey ideas of I have a program that should benefit environmentally disadvantaged communities. What does that mean? Who are you talking about? And that, I think, is a very important aspect as well. And the other thing I want to talk about is, like, humility, because I feel like we will learn a lot from our mistakes as this transition goes on. And I'm hopeful that we will, as policy makers, be able to, like, kind of, you know, take a step back and reflect on what went wrong. For example, bills where they have not built in just transition provisions are they are being able to see how coal communities have lost revenues and have lost have had to, like, do a lot of things in terms of, like, shutting down public schools. So those spaces policy makers can actually have that moment of reckoning and realize that, hey, maybe we made a mistake and we should try to change this the next time. So having that humility, I think, is incredibly important as well. But yeah, those are my high horse comments. So you mentioned the Inflation Reduction Act, and anybody living in the US, whether you know it or not, your community is being touched by this in some way. It was a massive, massive spending bill. Have you seen this approach in the IRA? Have you seen a justice-oriented approach? And if not, where is it lacking? So yes and no, IRA, I mean, I'm so incredibly amazed by it for so many different reasons, like it has this focus on low-middle income communities. It has a focus on electrifying tribal regions. It has that. It has a whole tribal electrification program, and it has like in these tax credits, investment tax credits, and production tax credits for energy communities. So specifically, the communities that have lost revenue due to coal plant closures or coal mine closures, and so they are kind of target like, you know, talking about the right groups of people, and they're targeting the right kind of issues in that sense, like encouraging the production of clean energy in these areas, or workforce development in these spaces. And there's also that whole chunk of Environment and Climate Justice block grants under the IRA, which are meant for specifically disadvantaged communities and community-based organizations in these areas, can apply to these grants for all things from like workforce development to clean energy technology development to climate resilience. It's, I mean, it's a huge set of sources to kind of A), reduce greenhouse gasses, and B), be able to kind of harness the potential of the clean energy transition. So from that perspective, I really like the IRA and the way it's focusing on people who need to be focused on honestly. But again, this is the same thing that I just talked about, the way we define things. So the IRA itself has, it doesn't have, like, a consistent definition of what is disadvantage and what is environmental justice communities or low income communities, like some places, they are using a particular definition based on a particular tax credit. Other places they are not, and even in the environmental justice Block Grant, environmental and climate justice block grant itself, program itself, they have, they say that they will use a definition by the that is being used by the Justice 40. The Council on Environmental Quality has that screen tool where they are basically identifying disadvantaged areas. But they also say that EPA has yet to finalize how we will define disadvantaged communities for this program. So I think that's my one of my icky things that I don't like about it is that when you don't define there is a lot of room for people to sort of exploit and pretend like they're doing good work when they're not. And I mean, of course, it remains to be seen how much people will be able to exploit this, but I think that that is something that makes me very uncomfortable about it. And I also think there is this one aspect of the IRA which is a little interesting. I haven't read a little bit. I haven't read more about it, and I really want to, but it's about how, if, uh. So the Department of Interior, I think, has to give out certain acreage of land in oil and gas leasing for being able to give offshore and onshore wind and solar development rights. So you are encouraging production of oil and gas in a way. And that's, yeah, that's a little I'm still trying to understand. Why has that been said, and why is that being done? Because I'm sure there is some logic somewhere deep inside, and I'm hoping there is, but I think, yeah, that and this definition thing, like, it's the same thing, if, in fact, I mean, sorry about the off-topicness, but the Weatherization Assistance Program that also, like, there was this work done by Dominic Bernard and Tony Reems, and they have actually documented how these programs that are supposed to assist low income households with their energy burdens and alleviate energy party, they don't use a definition at the end of the day about who's energy poor. And because they don't do that, you can't just say anybody falling below 80% of area median income is LMI, because that's not what being energy poor is about. It's about a lot of different facets. So if you choose to define it by this one income based category or criterion, you're not you're not doing a good job first of all. And yes, in that sense, the Justice body tools and this EJ screen, they are kind of holistic in the way they bring in climate burdens and environment burdens. But again, if you don't have a consistent definition throughout an act, there's so much wiggle room to do not good things, is how I'd say it.Brian Bienkowski So it sounds like the IRA has some good aspects to it, and we've we actually talked to Jalan Newsome, I believe, who is on the Council of Environmental Quality. And she talked at length about Justice40 I would encourage listeners to listen to that and then listen to this again. Listen to most response. But you know, outside of the IRA, have you seen, you know, countries, states, municipalities, towns, villages, anything that are embarking on the clean energy transition in a way that you see as equitable and just, and if so, can you talk about it a little bit?Mokshda Kaul So I'm not from Illinois. I have no relationship with Illinois. This is not sponsored by Illinois. I really love CEJA! I think it's really cool. And I know I'm probably missing a chunk of things. And I'm not saying it's perfect. Please, don't get me wrong. I'm just saying that the way they have been able to bring like environmental justice and the provisions for labor justice, like fossil fuel labor justice in together at the same time is incredible, in my opinion! And they have so this is what I meant earlier, when I was saying about job creation, because what they have done is clean energy jobs are going to be created, and they're going to be union jobs. They're going to have prevailing wage standards, and they are also going to be a section of them is going to be devoted only to environmental justice communities. So you are kind of doing that, two words, one stone thing, and I think that's incredible. And the other thing I love, love about CEJA is they did this thing called the "Listen Lead Share" sessions. And I know no one can see this, but has to spark in my eye when I talk about the Listen Lead Share sessions. But the Listen LeadSshare sessions were basically this kind of listening session situation where smaller Bipoc community organizations were leading these listening sessions within Illinois, trying to collect opinions, not just opinion, but experiences and what people want in like an energy justice kind of a way from illinoisians, just to understand what is it that is bothering the people. And I wish I had the link for it, but when the bill actually came out there is he's the head of elevate. I can't remember his name right now. Really love the guy. I don't know why my brain's blanking on it, but he actually read out pieces from these listening sessions where local Illinoisans had cited concerns and what had made its way into the legislation actually, so actual people's opinions were there. And I just, I find that so amazing, like, that's what I mean by accurate representation. And the other thing that I found very cool about CEJA is they have provisions for returning citizens in these clean energy jobs. And that's some that's a, like, a huge chunk of population that we tend to miss when we talk about justice issues. And the reason they had that was because they used to have these zoom based, like, Zoom-Room based sessions where they tried to get people to talk about what's going on. And there was this one guy. He was like a representative. He was a returning citizen himself, and he was a representative for like a group, and he actually was like, You know what, we need provisions from people like me. And they bought that in, and they built that in. So it's incredible the way they have been able to sort of bring this to fruition. I mean, I'm sure implementation stages are you. Infamous for how things go wrong, but in just the way the act is written and the way it was brought together, I am so amazed, and I'm in love.Brian Bienkowski And what is that acronym? You said it's CEJA, What is that acronym? So if people wanted to check it out, yeah,Mokshda Kaul actually, you know what? I'm going to make sure I'm doing this right, because CEJA there was a CEJA proposed by the environment coalition, and then there was a final CEJA that was passed. And those two had different acronyms, but Climate and Equitable Jobs Act is how the bill that actually passed. And yeah, that's the one that was signed by the governor. And give me one second, I want to find the name of the person from Elevate, because he's really important and really cool, certainly, and I think he's like, worth mentioning if anyone's looking just one sec, Delmar. His name is Delmar Gillius, and he works for Elevate, and he was one of the few persons of color who is responsible for, like, actually, legislative negotiations as well. And he was incredible. And, yeah, it has been amazing to talk with all these folks that I've had a chance to talk to. And yes, again, not sponsored by Illinois. I just really love it.Brian Bienkowski Well, it's always nice to end on an optimistic note. And just to keep that theme, we have some fun, some fun, before we get you out of here. And thank you again, so much for this. I love talking to you about I think the energy conversation is so often missing nuance. People want to say "end" fossil fuels yesterday," or they want to say "we need fossil fuels forever," and just having nuance in that conversation is needed if we're going to get anywhere. So before we get out of here, I have a few rapid fire questions where you can just answer with one word or a phrase. My favorite comfort food is, I'llMokshda Kaul I'll have to explain this.Brian Bienkowski Go right ahead.Mokshda Kaul Okay, it's Haak, Rogan Josh and rice. Haak is collard greens. We blanch them. And Rogan Josh is a really spicy lamb curry. And these are all Kashmiri foods. So if any Kashmiri is listening, I'm representing us and and with rice and yogurt, of course, but the Indian kind of yogurt, not the Greek yogurt. I would Oh, my God. Like, I think I'm gonna make it today. I described and I was like, Yeah, well, it's been a while, maybe we should do this today.Brian Bienkowski If I had to try out a job other than my current one, it would beMokshda Kaul writing. I would love to be a fiction writer for the rest of my life.Brian Bienkowski And my dream vacation isMokshda Kaul my current dream vacation is Poland. Because Poland, Poland, however we pronounce it? because I really want to be in a place that has the mountains and the sea and all the history to it. Been wanting to go since before 2020 and now I don't know when will I go,Brian Bienkowski Are you just trying to like, like, like, kiss up to the host here? That is my so I am very, I am very, I never thought anybody would say Poland to that question, so I was supposed to go. And yes, so I am. My grandparents were immigrants from Poland to Detroit and other parts of Michigan. And so I was supposed to go in 2020 or 2021 and it was no, it must have been 2022 because it was right when a Ukraine was invaded, exactly there was, there was this tale of covid. So I waited, and then there was a war that started. So I have not gone because obviously it's so close to Ukraine. And I just, yeah, you know, but we had, we have a lot of genealogy we've done, so I'm trying to sketch out a trip to places where family was and is so very cool.Mokshda Kaul That is so cool! Yeah, I wanted to do this was my I love solo trips, and this was going to be my trip before grad school. But like I said, I started grad school in 2020 so by the time I could book the tickets, the world was shut down. So that was the start of it. And then just being in grad school, I really don't, I don't know if I had the time. And then the war happened, and so I just at that point, I was like, You know what? It's not destined for now. So I guess I'm gonna put it on the back burner.Brian Bienkowski We'll have to stay in touch. Hopefully one of us will get there. Maybe both of us will get there. And so I've been learning the language too, which a Slavic language, is not easy to learn when you are 41 years old. It is not soaking into my brain.Mokshda Kaul That's so interesting, because for Kashmiri, the problem is, it's, it is like from the Indian group of languages. But I don't know, I'm forgetting the word for it, but apparently it sounds a lot like Central American language, Central Asian languages, sorry. So there is, like, a, like, an influx of salvik. And Persian and like, so I have had a lot of friends who are from, like, Central Asia, be like, What did you say? So, like, language is, God. Like, yeah, I am very curious. That's a really cool thing to do, though, because it keeps your brain young. SoBrian Bienkowski it does, yes, it gets that other part of my brain that in music. So moksha. What is the last book that you read for fun? And you do not have to confine yourself to one word or a phrase here.Mokshda Kaul Okay, the last book I read was "Small things like these" by Claire O'keekin, I think what's her name? Very short, very spiffy, very sad. Loved it. And I also listened to audiobooks. So the last audiobook I listened to was Untamed by Glennon Doyle. So yeah, both of those were amazing. And small things like these was just I finished it in a day because it was so well written and so quick. I was like, wow, I need to I'm dropping everything.Brian Bienkowski I love books like that. They are the they are the best. Well, moksha. Thank you so much for your time, for your intelligence, your wit. I really like talking to you about these things and beyond. And just as a side note, you always seem, I know you say you're a pessimist, but you always seem happy and inject humor and lightness, and it's really just lights up a room, and it lit up this call. So thank you so much for being here, and I hope we can have you on again soon.Mokshda Kaul Yeah, thank you so much. This was really wonderful to talk to you.



Mokshda Kaul joins the Agents of Change in Environmental Justice podcast to discuss the clean energy transition and how policymakers and other leaders can avoid mistakes of the past.


Kaul, a Ph.D. candidate in the sustainable energy program at the School of Sustainability at Arizona State University, also talks about the crucial role of coalitions in a just energy transition.

The Agents of Change in Environmental Justice podcast is a biweekly podcast featuring the stories and big ideas from past and present fellows, as well as others in the field. You can see all of the past episodes here.

Listen below to our discussion with Kaul and subscribe to the podcast at iTunes or Spotify.


Agents of Change in Environmental Justice · Mokshda Kaul on making the clean energy transition work for all

Transcript 


Brian Bienkowski

Moksha, how are you doing today?

Mokshda Kaul

I'm good. How are you, Brian?

Brian Bienkowski

I'm doing wonderful. I'm a little hot. I turned off my fan so we don't have the background noise. And where are you today?

Mokshda Kaul

So speaking of hot, I'm in Arizona, so I'm in Phoenix, and I've also turned my fan off. And luckily, my AC is working, so I'm not going to explode into flames, which is always possible in Arizona. So, you know, just saying. But yeah, that's where I am right now, and I'm just really excited to do this actually.

Brian Bienkowski

Well, I am really excited to talk to you too. Your research and your path there, to me, are fascinating. So I'm so excited to have you on the program. So as you probably know, I like to start at the beginning. So tell me a little bit about your upbringing. Of course, you're not from Arizona originally.

Mokshda Kaul

yeah. So I moved here for my PhD in 2020 and that was in the middle of the pandemic, by the way, which was quite jarring. There were only those bubble flights operating from the US to India, and it was terrifying for multiple different reasons. And I got got here, and I was again stuck in a room. Instead of being stuck in a room in India, I was stuck in a room in Phoenix. Nothing changed in my life, honestly speaking. But in terms of, like, where I'm from, and coming to Arizona, I'm from Mumbai, which is I think, the world's most densely populated city. So I'm used to having people step on my toes while I'm walking. And I came to Arizona, and I was like, there are no people here. What's wrong with this place? So that was number one for me. And, I mean, being raised in Mumbai, India is a country with so many multitudes. And I'm born and raised in Mumbai, but I come from Kashmir, and I spent my summer vacations, and, like a lot of my time, even, like a few years in my childhood, actually, in this smaller town near Kashmir called Jammu, which is, I would say, like now it's a tier-two city, but back then, maybe it was like a tier-three city, and it was very jarring the difference between Mumbai and Jammu, because Mumbai is the financial capital of India. So you have every amenity you can think of. You have round the clock electricity, and of course, within Mumbai also, we have terrible infrastructure problems, but that's a different story. But juxtaposing that against Jammu, where you'd have blackouts in the middle of summer heat and like summer, like the Phoenix summer, and I used to find it so uncomfortable to sort of when I'd come back to Mumbai to have that feeling of, wait, what is the thing that the people here are doing right, that they don't have to have these blackouts? Like, what? What is it like? Why is there this element of chance and privilege that's deciding who gets to experience these things or not? And I think I was just always very irritated and uncomfortable by it, and I was benefiting from it for all intents and purposes.

Brian Bienkowski

And so you mentioned that juxtaposition of Kashmir and Mumbai, and I'm wondering if that was kind of where you became aware of the concept of environmental justice, or if that was or if it was something else.

Mokshda Kaul

So I mean, I'm really glad you point that out, but that's exactly it. I would find it very unsettling. And it's just, if you look at it, I mean, at the same time as I was growing up, I was reading like, Rawlsian theories of justice and trying to understand, like, who decides, who decides that somebody gets something just by virtue of the fact that they were born in a particular city? Like, I don't have anything to do with the fact that I was born in Mumbai. Okay, and I think that the unsettled feeling never left me, and I think that's what they call acknowledging your privilege. And I was just always affected by it. And also in addition to this, India has lot of issues on the grounds of caste and class, and growing up in a space like that, where you... especially in Mumbai, where it's so cosmopolitan and so it's like a melting pot. You see all of it every single day, and you can't be away from your privilege. You can't face away if you really choose to tap into it. So I guess that's where that idea of environmental justice kind of ticked in my brain.

Brian Bienkowski

And before we get into some of that, some of the energy justice work you've done, and what you're working on now, what is a moment or event that has helped shaped your identity up to this point?

Mokshda Kaul

It's interesting because I was listening to Maria Jo's podcast the other day, and she said the same thing that I have been thinking about that I don't think it's a particular incident. I think it's these bunch of different things that have come together to this moment of like who I am. First of all, it's obviously my parents' history as being internal refugees and learning from them about how conflict operates at a very young age, like I was, I think, three or four, when I understood that, oh, we are not in our hometown because of this huge issue that happened, and there was violence and there was extremism, and there were two sides to the story at that same time, my parents side and the other side. And I think growing up with that, and then there's actually very funny thing that I remember now that you said defining incidents. I think I had bit of a bleeding heart syndrome since I was a child. I don't know why, but I had this. So I still remember this, because it's, it's like, etched so vividly in my memory. I was in third grade and we had to make posters for something in school. I don't remember what exactly, but my poster was the planet crying because it was hot. And this is 2003 and I remember one of my uncles came home and he made fun of me, and he was like, "This is so stupid. Like, why are you concerned about the environment and the planet?" And I was in tears, because I was like, no, no, we need to care about this. I don't understand why you don't care about this. And I was, I was sad, like, I was heartbroken that people don't care. And so that little child always had that element of, why don't we want to make the world a better place? Like, what's wrong with people?

Brian Bienkowski

So the world is still crying. Since your picture, unfortunately, we're all we should all be crying. And so you are, you are trying to better the world, and your research focuses on, I'm distilling it down, but the clean energy transition. So first, what drew you to this line of research, and how are you using this economics background that you mentioned to understand the clean energy adoption and policy?

Mokshda Kaul

Back in 2014 King's College London did this really cool thing where they got professors from King's College to come down to Mumbai and do this really cool summer course. And I did the one on international political economy. And every student, it was very strenuous. They packed a summer school's worth of teaching and practice into like a one and a half week period. So it was so much reading, like this huge binder of – I don't even want to go back to that – but each student had to prepare, like a presentation on a particular topic. And this is big bit of a background. My dad works in oil and gas, and that's very unsettling to me, and I'm sure he's going to listen to this, but so I naturally decide that I want to work on the energy topic, energy presentation for this class. Because I was like, Oh, my dad knows about this. And the day that I had to present, our professor actually did this whole presentation on how the shale oil boom is going to change, like the face of the earth. And my entire presentation actually was about the shale oil boom. So this is like one hour before my presentation, and I'm having a meltdown because I don't know what to talk about anymore, because you just covered everything, and I'm doing this frantic internet search of what do I talk about? And that's how I found out about the energy transition, and that's how I discovered that, oh, renewable energy is a thing. So instead of talking about shale oil, I talked about how we have these other sources of energy which actually don't create the problems that we have with fossil fuels, and they need more investment, of course, in time. But this is 2014 so it was different situation back then. And so that was how I kind of was drawn to the energy transition. It was a very important moment in my life, I would say, and that changed the focus of how I was seeing the world, and that changed the focus of what I wanted to do with the world. And speaking to my background as an economist, I'm trained as an economist. But I come from a very interdisciplinary school, the School of Sustainability here at ASU, and we kind of, my advisor has a political science background, so I incorporate methods from political science and economics, and the way I see it is it kind of helps me translate the world. So I know econ gets a bad rap for the fact that it's been, it's kind of led us to the point we are at in terms of exploiting the environment and all of those things. But I'm surrounded by a bunch of folks in the School of Sustainability who use econ as a tool to sort of address these problems of environmental and climate issues and distribution concerns and equity concerns. And that's how I see econ. I see it as like this toolkit that I can use to understand why do things look the way they do. And then the political science part also adds to it, because it helps me understand why did people decide what they decided. So all in all, I feel like really grateful for the fact that I have this pol-sci + econ situation, because I'm able to understand policies from like, start to finish in a way that what went into the background, why did you think the way you thought when you made this and how did this come about? And then what are the outcomes from it? So from that sense, yeah, these disciplines have helped me just unpack the whole thing as much as I can.

Brian Bienkowski

I think the economics arguments and studies and the information that comes out when it comes to environmental issues, energy included, are some of the most interesting, in my opinion. So for instance, EHN covers endocrine disrupting chemicals, and we can say till we're blue in the face, you know, they're bad. And they do this, they hijack your hormones, so on and so forth. But a few years ago, someone did an economic impact study that looked at like healthcare costs associated with chemical exposure. And when you start putting dollar amounts to things like this, I feel like you have all that. You have, all of a sudden gotten the attention of a whole other group of people who have, maybe aren't as concerned.

Mokshda Kaul

Absolutely

Brian Bienkowski

so I, and I'm sure this is the case in clean energy and fossil fuels. So I I always find those kind of economic angles really, really interesting. And you're looking at the role of coalitions in clean energy policy making. So I want to unpack this a little bit. What can you tell us about the importance of coalitions in this space? And do you have some examples?

Mokshda Kaul

So for this piece on coalitions that I'm working on, first of all, this is more about the political science space of understanding how policies are made. And I think I came from this question of wanting to understand there were these two very interesting climate legislations in the US that I encountered. I'm sure there are many more. One was in New York, which was the CLCPA, the community leadership, climate leadership and community Protection Act. And other was the CEJA, climate and equitable jobs Act in Illinois. And when I looked at both of these, the first things that you see when you like just do a Google search, is the coalitions that led them there. So there was this really intense advocacy by these major environmental coalitions happening on the ground for both of these acts. And I personally, of course, coalitions are an important tool because they bring in that element of procedural justice, because you are actually having representation from the people you seek to create these acts for and create these bills for. But more than that, I also feel like coalitions become this interesting way to create buy in, because if you have people who are actually invested in, let's say, like, reducing energy burdens, putting their words out there, and having people actually respond to it, and that makes its way into legislation, then this person actually feels represented. And then you have, like, buy-in from this person towards protecting the environment. And I think that's like, these are the two legislative examples. But in terms of coalitions themselves, there's the Illinois clean job coalition in Illinois, which was leading the way on seizure and NY renewals, which was leading the way on clcpa. But outside of the environmental coalitions, there are also jfossil-fuel-union-based job coalitions trying to represent this other side of justice in the transition, in the sense that there are fossil fuel labor groups who are trying to advocate for the fact that they need provisions to sort of help them after these fossil fuel plants are closed down to transition into other work. And so there are, there's the Climate Jobs Institute by, I think it's with Cornell, yeah. And they essentially have these affiliates across the country in different states. So there is Climate Jobs New York, there's Climate Jobs,Illinois, and all of these spaces, I mean, these coalitions represent this other side of justice. And again, if you don't have these coalitions doing it, there's nobody who's going to actually speak like represent these people's interests, is my point. So I think coalitions are incredibly important, especially when you think about justice and in the policy making process, not just in like the part where you advocate for your needs, and you just do these die ins, or you do demonstrations, not just that, but also the language that goes into these policies. So that's my perspective, and why I think coalitions are incredibly important. And I don't want to sound biased, but I really love the work that ICJ has been doing and the work that the climate jobs affiliates have been doing, it's, yeah, it's incredible to watch how they are trying to deal with this.

Brian Bienkowski

So you mentioned this idea of buy in, and perhaps that gets people kind of more interested, more engaged. Most of us have also heard about these incentive programs. You know, just financial incentives for clean energy, whether it's upgrading our inefficient fridge or purchasing solar for our roof. So what kind of impact do these policies have on adoption?

Mokshda Kaul

So I think my question to your question is, the question is adoption for whom? Because at the end of the day, it is not about... I mean, yes, they increase adoption of like, let's say solar energy or electric vehicles or efficient appliances. But I think the question is not about, Is it leading to a relative increase? But who is it leading to a relative increase for? because, again, econ is amazing for this, but it is. There are. There's so much documented evidence at this point that electric vehicle tax credits, residential solar tax credits, tend to benefit wealthier households, which are from like a higher income status or a higher socioeconomic status in the US, and I'm talking about specifically here. So I think the question is the kind of I mean, speaking, what the kind of impact they have on adoption, I'm sure they're improving adoption. Yes, they are. But I think again, that question about how these policies define who's eligible for them, changes who can apply for them, and changes who can receive these benefits. And just as a simple example, there is this program called the affordable solar program in New York, and it's aimed at low-middle income households. But it's the eligibility criterion is that you need to be an owner-occupied household. So you need to be owning the property you live in. But if you're a program that's trying to cater to low-middle income households, you'd know that most of them are renters. So if you are trying to target LMI households by being an owner-occupied program, you're missing a huge chunk of the target population. So I guess the question that I mean, I'm all for it, I'm all for these programs that encourage adoption, but I feel like, inadvertently, they are encouraging inequities in adoption, and that is a much bigger problem to deal with honestly, because that's impeding a just transition, because there's inequitable access then and again. It's that privileged thing, like, just by virtue of the fact that I own the house that I live in, I can get a tax credit for buying panels, and I can get cheaper electricity, and I can, like, also feel good about saving the environment. But then there's somebody else who actually pays much higher amount in their energy bills, because, you know, the energy burden is higher for lower income classes, and they can't even access solar panels because they're not eligible for such tax credits. And in fact, even funnier is giving tax credit to folks who don't earn enough to fall under a tax bracket you're missing, you're missing a huge chunk of the population. If you're saying this is how we're going to help you, when that's not what they'll use. So, yeah, I'd say I'm always very concerned about trying to see who are these benefits going to when we are encouraging adoption in these ways.

Brian Bienkowski

Yeah, it's a really good point. There's these kind of baked in inequities, even in, you know, programs and policies that are ostensibly trying to do the right thing, we're still baking in these kind of the same kind of inequities that got us here in the first place. And speaking of that, you know, there's a lot of kind of back and forth in the EV, electric vehicle, space, and I happen to be from Detroit, so I I hear even more about this from my family who everybody worked in or does work in the automotive industry. But we're increasingly see some of the environmental justice implications around mining for the needed metals here. And again, I live in Michigan's Upper Peninsula, and they are trying to reopen old mines up here that have been closed for years. And I don't know if it's necessarily EVs or just kind of electronics at large, but specific to the EVS. Can you talk about this and what it means as EVs become more popular, some of these environmental justice concerns that might pop up or that are popping up.

Mokshda Kaul

So if you're a Tesla bro and you're listening to this, stop listening right now. But if you're not, go on. I have this whole, again, I have this whole I have a lot of hills that I want to die on eventually, but we'll get there when we get there. So speaking about EVs, again, they're incredibly important if we want to have, like an electrified grid, in the sense that we want that balanced demand curve, so that we can have more clean energy in our energy mix, so that way EVs, yes, 100% important. And of course, reducing, like greenhouse gas emissions that come from tailpipes. I'm all for that thing that I'm not all for is, like you said, the mining aspects of it. So I have not spent as much time looking at the domestic implications of it, and that's something I'm stepping into now, in terms of the US. But if you look at a global picture, we get most of a cobalt from the Democratic Republic of Congo, and a this has been documented by tons of reports by Amnesty International. There's also a book called Cobalt Read by Sid Kara. And there's extensive documentation of how you have child labor, you have unsafe working conditions, the wage rate that they're paid, the laborers are paid at is definitely unfair, it's way below what should be acceptable. And there's also the problem is that as the demand goes up, the fact is that people in DRC, I mean, and I'm just conjecturing from all that I've read, I might be completely wrong if I go to the ground and talk to people, but it's creating that pressure where people think that it's profitable to keep mining cobalt. So they're like little children getting into this business, and they're like, indulging in artisanal mining, which is where you dig in your backyard, kind of a thing, just in very broad terms, but as the demand goes up, it's encouraging this pressure to kind of keep mining that way. And there's no regulation in place to ensure that there is ethical mining. And because of that, you're left with the situation where you are, like, incentivizing this to be done in the wrong way, and you want to keep the price of EVs down so that more people buy it because it's a solution for fighting climate change. So it's the question of, if we were to define this in a just way, if we would have ethical mining practices, who would bear the cost? And I mean, depending on your political leaning, you would have five different answers to the question. To this question, but I guess EVs, yes, good. But how we are getting them is a huge question, and it's not about just about DRC and cobalt. It's about lithium coming from South America, and the kind of questions and issues that it's raised with, like Indigenous farmers and their rights to their land and the water pollution it's creating, and rare earth mining in Myanmar, and that's not just for EVs. That's also for a whole host of clean energy technologies. Rare earths go into panels, they go into wind turbine blades and whatnot. And if you look at these pictures, I think Global Witness to this very heartbreaking report where they showed pictures side by side of areas in Myanmar, which had been like a year back. They had not they were completely untouched, covered in like green cover. And now there's these deep wells with polluted water because they've been indiscriminately mined for rare earth. And there's also, like, the one other thing I want to flag is I feel like the world is exploiting the fact that there are a lot of places in the world which are having a breakdown of constitutional mechanisms to protect their citizens. And the rest of the world is kind of like being privy to it and also exploiting it to make these EVs and make them cheaper and, like, have them run the way they run, kind of a thing. So, yeah, I Yes, EVs, but at what cost, is how I'd frame it.

Brian Bienkowski

And so, just to give you a few more hills, if you want to die, yes, before and we, I do want to get into some of the, you know, some of the optimistic and some of the bright signs you're seeing, but just kind of writ large, you know, we've talked about EVs just just now, and some of the contamination concerns and EJ components we talked about, you know, kind of inequitable distribution of incentives. What are some other environmental and energy justice concerns that you have in clean energy use? Because I think most of us, it's often painted in a very positive light, understandably so, I mean, fossil fuels remain such a big problem for this planet. So but before we get to those, some of those solutions, what are some other concerns you have?

Mokshda Kaul

I'm actually glad about what you said. I just want to touch on what you said for a second that we need to remember the fact that we need the clean energy transition, but we also need to have a little bit of prudence about how we are doing it, because let's not forget that we are kind of building on the backs of someone at the end of the day. And the question is, who is that someone? who's that like sacrifice zone for this now? because we've had sacrifice zones for fossil fuel production, but we sure are having it for clean energy as well. We just can't pretend that, because it's solving climate change. All's hunky dory. So other questions and like concerns that I have, first of all, I'm very deep in this bit of mining for critical minerals, which are important for the energy transition, not just for EVs. So I have been looking at, who would, you know, sort of shoulder the cost if we were to mine ethically, like, who would pay that cost? And I'm trying to get into that a little bit more lately, and I'm also trying to understand within the US, because there has been the chips act and IRA, which are kind of Inflation Reduction Act, which are encouraging domestic mining. What happens then? Because there are these reports that say that most of the reserves of critical minerals that we need if we are going to mine in the US are located close to Native American territory. So we are starting to recreate a problem we have not solved really in the past. So it becomes another question about that, in terms of the mining issues. And I think the other stuff that I'm honestly concerned about is access to clean energy opportunities. And I know, like a lot of people are working on this, but I'm thinking about electrifying like jobs, clean energy jobs. So who gets access to these and there are certain states which are creating provisions for environmental justice communities to be able to access these jobs. But then, if you're creating provisions to access a job that doesn't have prevailing wage rate, what are you doing and who are you trying to, like pull whose eyes are you trying to pull wool over? Is my question. So I guess, about the quality of jobs, I'm concerned. About, where are these jobs coming up? And I'm, I think the other thing that I'm also been thinking about in terms of EVs is electrifying transport and public transport in general, because EVs aren't accessible to LMI folks. And you're kind of like punishing these people with these vehicles that pollute, and you're finishing them with like higher burdens, because they are having to pay for gas vehicles. But what about electrifying public transport? And I think from in Arizona, especially, you see public trans like the lack in public transport. And I mean, I juxtapose this against India, where in Mumbai, we have brilliant public transport connectivity. So I yeah, that's the other element of public transportation, electrifying it is what I've been thinking about. And the other thing that I've just been toying with lately is clean energy jobs are creating an impact on these fossil fuel workers, where they're being forced to migrate to other places. And I know at the surface it seems like, well, it's just he's this person's just moving for the job. How does it matter? But I'm very curious about what kind of impacts does this have on the worker, their family, their like, emotional health, their like support system, and if they're moving, they're probably moving to like a job that doesn't pay as much. So what's going on there? And I'm trying to understand what are the impacts on migration from clean energy creation and incentives to clean energy production. So those are, like a bunch of things. I have so many. I don't hate the world, but I definitely love finding problems in it. So this is easy for me!

Brian Bienkowski

Well, let's, let's shift gears. Here we have, we have pointed out the world's problems, and I think you have some ideas on maybe how they cannot be so problematic. So first, you know, what are some ways, when we think about policymakers and others, where they could maybe build some caution into these climate change solutions to ensure that this transition is equitable?

Mokshda Kaul

I think first of all, I'm going to give a weird answer to this, because I have been working okay, for context, I have been working on two of my dissertation chapters around the clock for the last three months right now. So I'm very deep in a dark place, and it's a good dark place. I love this dark place. But I think the first thing that I'd want to say is we can't deny the technical realities of the energy transition. So I guess making peace with that the fact that we might need natural gas plants, or we might need some form of fossil fuel to transition, or we might need some form of nuclear to transition. So like kind of, I'm not saying being pro these fuels, but accepting the fact that you can't just, you know, snap your fingers and everything's going to be clean. So first of all, I would say that some way that policymakers could build that in is by having that acceptance of the actual system and the energy system itself. And the second thing is, like having these holistic perspectives on the energy transition itself, like I was talking about the Environmental Coalition and the Labor Justice Coalition, right? And if you think about it at the surface, an EJ activist would only see the environmental justice side. We would not want to focus on this is a set of people losing their jobs and and that's that's fair. But. Having that holistic perspective where you're acknowledging these two sides of the story helps, because it's you can build provisions to ameliorate the kind of suffering or the problems that will be created in the process there will be somebody who has to bear the cost of the transition. But the question is, are we building in enough provisions to sort of address that, and are we kind of trying to protect the people who we are going to be exploiting in the process?And the other thing that I think is a little bit personal to me because of the dissertation work and my own research, is the way we define things and policies. I think we need, as like as societ, we need to have clearer definitions of who we seek to benefit. And only when you have these clear definitions of who you seek to benefit can you actually measure if you've been impacting these people or not, like just having these broad, losey-goosey ideas of I have a program that should benefit environmentally disadvantaged communities. What does that mean? Who are you talking about? And that, I think, is a very important aspect as well. And the other thing I want to talk about is, like, humility, because I feel like we will learn a lot from our mistakes as this transition goes on. And I'm hopeful that we will, as policy makers, be able to, like, kind of, you know, take a step back and reflect on what went wrong. For example, bills where they have not built in just transition provisions are they are being able to see how coal communities have lost revenues and have lost have had to, like, do a lot of things in terms of, like, shutting down public schools. So those spaces policy makers can actually have that moment of reckoning and realize that, hey, maybe we made a mistake and we should try to change this the next time. So having that humility, I think, is incredibly important as well. But yeah, those are my high horse comments. So you mentioned the Inflation Reduction Act, and anybody living in the US, whether you know it or not, your community is being touched by this in some way. It was a massive, massive spending bill. Have you seen this approach in the IRA? Have you seen a justice-oriented approach? And if not, where is it lacking? So yes and no, IRA, I mean, I'm so incredibly amazed by it for so many different reasons, like it has this focus on low-middle income communities. It has a focus on electrifying tribal regions. It has that. It has a whole tribal electrification program, and it has like in these tax credits, investment tax credits, and production tax credits for energy communities. So specifically, the communities that have lost revenue due to coal plant closures or coal mine closures, and so they are kind of target like, you know, talking about the right groups of people, and they're targeting the right kind of issues in that sense, like encouraging the production of clean energy in these areas, or workforce development in these spaces. And there's also that whole chunk of Environment and Climate Justice block grants under the IRA, which are meant for specifically disadvantaged communities and community-based organizations in these areas, can apply to these grants for all things from like workforce development to clean energy technology development to climate resilience. It's, I mean, it's a huge set of sources to kind of A), reduce greenhouse gasses, and B), be able to kind of harness the potential of the clean energy transition. So from that perspective, I really like the IRA and the way it's focusing on people who need to be focused on honestly. But again, this is the same thing that I just talked about, the way we define things. So the IRA itself has, it doesn't have, like, a consistent definition of what is disadvantage and what is environmental justice communities or low income communities, like some places, they are using a particular definition based on a particular tax credit. Other places they are not, and even in the environmental justice Block Grant, environmental and climate justice block grant itself, program itself, they have, they say that they will use a definition by the that is being used by the Justice 40. The Council on Environmental Quality has that screen tool where they are basically identifying disadvantaged areas. But they also say that EPA has yet to finalize how we will define disadvantaged communities for this program. So I think that's my one of my icky things that I don't like about it is that when you don't define there is a lot of room for people to sort of exploit and pretend like they're doing good work when they're not. And I mean, of course, it remains to be seen how much people will be able to exploit this, but I think that that is something that makes me very uncomfortable about it. And I also think there is this one aspect of the IRA which is a little interesting. I haven't read a little bit. I haven't read more about it, and I really want to, but it's about how, if, uh. So the Department of Interior, I think, has to give out certain acreage of land in oil and gas leasing for being able to give offshore and onshore wind and solar development rights. So you are encouraging production of oil and gas in a way. And that's, yeah, that's a little I'm still trying to understand. Why has that been said, and why is that being done? Because I'm sure there is some logic somewhere deep inside, and I'm hoping there is, but I think, yeah, that and this definition thing, like, it's the same thing, if, in fact, I mean, sorry about the off-topicness, but the Weatherization Assistance Program that also, like, there was this work done by Dominic Bernard and Tony Reems, and they have actually documented how these programs that are supposed to assist low income households with their energy burdens and alleviate energy party, they don't use a definition at the end of the day about who's energy poor. And because they don't do that, you can't just say anybody falling below 80% of area median income is LMI, because that's not what being energy poor is about. It's about a lot of different facets. So if you choose to define it by this one income based category or criterion, you're not you're not doing a good job first of all. And yes, in that sense, the Justice body tools and this EJ screen, they are kind of holistic in the way they bring in climate burdens and environment burdens. But again, if you don't have a consistent definition throughout an act, there's so much wiggle room to do not good things, is how I'd say it.

Brian Bienkowski

So it sounds like the IRA has some good aspects to it, and we've we actually talked to Jalan Newsome, I believe, who is on the Council of Environmental Quality. And she talked at length about Justice40 I would encourage listeners to listen to that and then listen to this again. Listen to most response. But you know, outside of the IRA, have you seen, you know, countries, states, municipalities, towns, villages, anything that are embarking on the clean energy transition in a way that you see as equitable and just, and if so, can you talk about it a little bit?

Mokshda Kaul

So I'm not from Illinois. I have no relationship with Illinois. This is not sponsored by Illinois. I really love CEJA! I think it's really cool. And I know I'm probably missing a chunk of things. And I'm not saying it's perfect. Please, don't get me wrong. I'm just saying that the way they have been able to bring like environmental justice and the provisions for labor justice, like fossil fuel labor justice in together at the same time is incredible, in my opinion! And they have so this is what I meant earlier, when I was saying about job creation, because what they have done is clean energy jobs are going to be created, and they're going to be union jobs. They're going to have prevailing wage standards, and they are also going to be a section of them is going to be devoted only to environmental justice communities. So you are kind of doing that, two words, one stone thing, and I think that's incredible. And the other thing I love, love about CEJA is they did this thing called the "Listen Lead Share" sessions. And I know no one can see this, but has to spark in my eye when I talk about the Listen Lead Share sessions. But the Listen LeadSshare sessions were basically this kind of listening session situation where smaller Bipoc community organizations were leading these listening sessions within Illinois, trying to collect opinions, not just opinion, but experiences and what people want in like an energy justice kind of a way from illinoisians, just to understand what is it that is bothering the people. And I wish I had the link for it, but when the bill actually came out there is he's the head of elevate. I can't remember his name right now. Really love the guy. I don't know why my brain's blanking on it, but he actually read out pieces from these listening sessions where local Illinoisans had cited concerns and what had made its way into the legislation actually, so actual people's opinions were there. And I just, I find that so amazing, like, that's what I mean by accurate representation. And the other thing that I found very cool about CEJA is they have provisions for returning citizens in these clean energy jobs. And that's some that's a, like, a huge chunk of population that we tend to miss when we talk about justice issues. And the reason they had that was because they used to have these zoom based, like, Zoom-Room based sessions where they tried to get people to talk about what's going on. And there was this one guy. He was like a representative. He was a returning citizen himself, and he was a representative for like a group, and he actually was like, You know what, we need provisions from people like me. And they bought that in, and they built that in. So it's incredible the way they have been able to sort of bring this to fruition. I mean, I'm sure implementation stages are you. Infamous for how things go wrong, but in just the way the act is written and the way it was brought together, I am so amazed, and I'm in love.

Brian Bienkowski

And what is that acronym? You said it's CEJA, What is that acronym? So if people wanted to check it out, yeah,

Mokshda Kaul

actually, you know what? I'm going to make sure I'm doing this right, because CEJA there was a CEJA proposed by the environment coalition, and then there was a final CEJA that was passed. And those two had different acronyms, but Climate and Equitable Jobs Act is how the bill that actually passed. And yeah, that's the one that was signed by the governor. And give me one second, I want to find the name of the person from Elevate, because he's really important and really cool, certainly, and I think he's like, worth mentioning if anyone's looking just one sec, Delmar. His name is Delmar Gillius, and he works for Elevate, and he was one of the few persons of color who is responsible for, like, actually, legislative negotiations as well. And he was incredible. And, yeah, it has been amazing to talk with all these folks that I've had a chance to talk to. And yes, again, not sponsored by Illinois. I just really love it.

Brian Bienkowski

Well, it's always nice to end on an optimistic note. And just to keep that theme, we have some fun, some fun, before we get you out of here. And thank you again, so much for this. I love talking to you about I think the energy conversation is so often missing nuance. People want to say "end" fossil fuels yesterday," or they want to say "we need fossil fuels forever," and just having nuance in that conversation is needed if we're going to get anywhere. So before we get out of here, I have a few rapid fire questions where you can just answer with one word or a phrase. My favorite comfort food is, I'll

Mokshda Kaul

I'll have to explain this.

Brian Bienkowski

Go right ahead.

Mokshda Kaul

Okay, it's Haak, Rogan Josh and rice. Haak is collard greens. We blanch them. And Rogan Josh is a really spicy lamb curry. And these are all Kashmiri foods. So if any Kashmiri is listening, I'm representing us and and with rice and yogurt, of course, but the Indian kind of yogurt, not the Greek yogurt. I would Oh, my God. Like, I think I'm gonna make it today. I described and I was like, Yeah, well, it's been a while, maybe we should do this today.

Brian Bienkowski

If I had to try out a job other than my current one, it would be

Mokshda Kaul

writing. I would love to be a fiction writer for the rest of my life.

Brian Bienkowski

And my dream vacation is

Mokshda Kaul

my current dream vacation is Poland. Because Poland, Poland, however we pronounce it? because I really want to be in a place that has the mountains and the sea and all the history to it. Been wanting to go since before 2020 and now I don't know when will I go,

Brian Bienkowski

Are you just trying to like, like, like, kiss up to the host here? That is my so I am very, I am very, I never thought anybody would say Poland to that question, so I was supposed to go. And yes, so I am. My grandparents were immigrants from Poland to Detroit and other parts of Michigan. And so I was supposed to go in 2020 or 2021 and it was no, it must have been 2022 because it was right when a Ukraine was invaded, exactly there was, there was this tale of covid. So I waited, and then there was a war that started. So I have not gone because obviously it's so close to Ukraine. And I just, yeah, you know, but we had, we have a lot of genealogy we've done, so I'm trying to sketch out a trip to places where family was and is so very cool.

Mokshda Kaul

That is so cool! Yeah, I wanted to do this was my I love solo trips, and this was going to be my trip before grad school. But like I said, I started grad school in 2020 so by the time I could book the tickets, the world was shut down. So that was the start of it. And then just being in grad school, I really don't, I don't know if I had the time. And then the war happened, and so I just at that point, I was like, You know what? It's not destined for now. So I guess I'm gonna put it on the back burner.

Brian Bienkowski

We'll have to stay in touch. Hopefully one of us will get there. Maybe both of us will get there. And so I've been learning the language too, which a Slavic language, is not easy to learn when you are 41 years old. It is not soaking into my brain.

Mokshda Kaul

That's so interesting, because for Kashmiri, the problem is, it's, it is like from the Indian group of languages. But I don't know, I'm forgetting the word for it, but apparently it sounds a lot like Central American language, Central Asian languages, sorry. So there is, like, a, like, an influx of salvik. And Persian and like, so I have had a lot of friends who are from, like, Central Asia, be like, What did you say? So, like, language is, God. Like, yeah, I am very curious. That's a really cool thing to do, though, because it keeps your brain young. So

Brian Bienkowski

it does, yes, it gets that other part of my brain that in music. So moksha. What is the last book that you read for fun? And you do not have to confine yourself to one word or a phrase here.

Mokshda Kaul

Okay, the last book I read was "Small things like these" by Claire O'keekin, I think what's her name? Very short, very spiffy, very sad. Loved it. And I also listened to audiobooks. So the last audiobook I listened to was Untamed by Glennon Doyle. So yeah, both of those were amazing. And small things like these was just I finished it in a day because it was so well written and so quick. I was like, wow, I need to I'm dropping everything.

Brian Bienkowski

I love books like that. They are the they are the best. Well, moksha. Thank you so much for your time, for your intelligence, your wit. I really like talking to you about these things and beyond. And just as a side note, you always seem, I know you say you're a pessimist, but you always seem happy and inject humor and lightness, and it's really just lights up a room, and it lit up this call. So thank you so much for being here, and I hope we can have you on again soon.

Mokshda Kaul

Yeah, thank you so much. This was really wonderful to talk to you.

Read the full story here.
Photos courtesy of

Ohio’s largest utility pushes to slash rooftop solar compensation

Ohio’s largest utility wants to slash compensation for rooftop solar owners — which would affect not only future investments but also thousands of regulated utility customers who have already installed panels on their homes based on existing rules. Later this year, the Public Utilities Commission of Ohio will decide…

The Citizens Utility Board of Ohio, Interstate Gas Supply, the Retail Energy Supply Association, Solar United Neighbors, the Ohio Environmental Council, and the Environmental Law & Policy Center have all filed formal replies with the PUCO, urging regulators to reject AEP’s arguments and to keep the current net-metering rules in place for all ratepayers. AEP’s Ohio media relations office wrote via email, ​“Under net metering, a portion of the distribution-related charges are essentially shifted to other customers when the charges are calculated only for the net portion of the electricity delivered,” because infrastructure costs ​“are designed to be spread across the customers the system was built to serve.” The company did not respond to Canary Media’s request for data showing how it or other regulated utilities would be hurt by net metering for customers who pick competitive energy suppliers or take part in community aggregation programs. The company has come after net metering before — and ultimately lost. More than a decade ago, AEP took its arguments to limit net metering to the Ohio Supreme Court. The court ultimately dismissed that case after the PUCO released new rules that generally favored the company. A year after hearing lawyers’ arguments urging it to reconsider those rules, however, the commission changed course. The current policy, adopted in December 2018, requires regulated utilities to compensate all rooftop solar customers for excess power, but it does not allow credit for distribution charges or for any avoided capacity charges. AEP’s gambit to change the rules now surprised advocates for renewable energy, such as Mryia Williams, Ohio program director for Solar United Neighbors. ​“The PUCO staff had already concluded that net-metering rules are working as intended, and they didn’t think any changes needed to be made,” she said, referring to a Nov. 5 administrative law judge’s order in the rules docket. The utility has not offered any data or other detailed assessment to justify its proposed changes, Williams said. And many rooftop solar owners relied on the current regulations when calculating whether to make the investment. ​“Everybody is just wanting to make sure that what’s already been promised is continued,” she said. Plus, rooftop solar customers already pay for equipment to feed excess power to the utility. Levying distribution costs for electricity that customers wind up feeding back to the grid would, in effect, charge them for supplying the utility with distributed energy. Other energy suppliers don’t have to pay that expense, so it shouldn’t be something utilities can charge residents for either, said Nat Ziegler, manager of community solutions for Power a Clean Future Ohio. Moreover, reducing net-metering compensation and limiting who can get it would discourage more people from adding rooftop solar, said Joe Flarida, executive director for Power a Clean Future Ohio. “More generation on the grid will help limit the amount of price increases we’re seeing,” Flarida explained. ​“Certainly, if we can encourage more distributed energy, that would offset the amount of added power we need on the grid.” Power a Clean Future Ohio is among the hundreds of groups and individuals who filed public comments with the PUCO, in addition to the formal party filings. That level of response represents a big change from a decade ago, Rutschilling said, noting increased interest in rooftop solar over the past few years. People’s electricity bills have already jumped dramatically as grid operators like PJM have sounded the alarm about needing more electricity to meet demand from data centers, increased electrification, and other factors. And results of the most recent auction will almost certainly increase costs even more. A bill introduced last fall would declare it state policy to ​“ensure affordable, reliable, and clean energy security,” with ​“clean energy” specified as meaning electricity from nuclear or natural gas, with no reference at all to renewables. But any new nuclear power requires years of review, and even with expedited permitting, Rutschilling noted, orders for new natural gas plant turbines have lag times of several years. “We need as much generation as possible,” he said. ​“We need to have things like distributed energy.” { if ($event.target.classList.contains('hs-richtext')) { if ($event.target.textContent === '+ more options') { $event.target.remove(); open = true; } } }" >

Low on energy? A new understanding of rest could help revitalise you

There is a state of relaxation that few of us spend much time in, but which comes with profound well-being benefits. With healthier ageing, reduced risk of disease and feeling more energised all on offer, here's how to get there

It happens every new year. Party time is over, and it is time to brace yourself for the predictable onslaught of health advice. Most of it will involve doing more of something that you already know is good for you. More exercise. More cooking from scratch. More wholesome, mindful hobbies. It is no wonder so many of us fall off the wellness wagon before the month is out. No matter how sage the advice, who has the time and energy to do more of anything? If this sounds familiar, it might come as good news that scientists have come up with a more appealing alternative – one that still promises to increase your chances of staying healthy for longer, but involves doing less, not more. Or, more precisely, that involves perfecting the art of doing, physiologically speaking, as little as possible. This unusual, yet deeply effective, twist on the New Year’s resolution hinges on mastering a physiological state that many of us spend few of our waking hours in. It is called deep rest – a way of being in which signals between the body and brain align on one fundamental fact: that all is well and there is absolutely nothing to worry about. In essence, it is the polar opposite of stress. Deep rest is a state where the body can take a break from fighting and fleeing, instead regrouping and catching up with some much-needed maintenance and repair. And while it might take some trial and error to find your personal off switch, the evidence is accumulating that the payoffs could be huge: healthier ageing, reduced risk of disease and more energy to spend on something other than maintaining an ambient panic response. Alexandra Crosswell is a psychologist at the University of California, San Francisco, who, along with a group of her colleagues, proposed the idea of deep rest in early 2024. She is aware the term may sound familiar to some. Andrew Huberman, a Stanford neuroscientist turned wellness influencer, has widely promoted what he calls “non-sleep deep rest” on his podcast and social media channels. But, says Crosswell, the two aren’t quite the same. “The difference between how we define deep rest and how Huberman describes non-sleep deep rest is that his is a relaxation practice and ours is a psycho-physiological state,” says Crosswell. “Deep rest is beyond relaxation – it’s a coordinated shift of the whole nervous, endocrine and immune system into an overall state of safety signalling.” Stressing out It is a truth, universally acknowledged, that if one thing could transform human health, it would be an antidote to stress. Problematic stress is a centuries-old issue that people have been complaining about since at least the industrial revolution. The things that generation struggled with – the cost of living, the pressures of work and family and an unsettling change in the pace of life – are still as relevant today as they were then. What’s new is that these very human concerns are layered on top of an underlying current of unease fuelled by 24-hour access to awareness of global crises, many of which seem frighteningly out of our control. There are signs that all of this is taking a serious toll. According to a 2022 survey of over 3000 US adults, more than a quarter of respondents said stress made it difficult to function in daily life. Meanwhile, chronic stress has been linked to soaring rates of everything from depression and anxiety to cardiovascular disease, high blood pressure, infectious diseases and some cancers. It is a major factor in the epidemic of tiredness and fatigue and is linked to accelerated ageing and an increased risk of all-cause mortality from middle age onwards. Yet despite an overwhelming consensus that too much stress is bad for our health, it has proved difficult to pin down exactly why, which has made it difficult to know how to go about fixing the problem. The big picture is clear enough and, arguably, pretty obvious. “ While a stress response is on the go, the body takes a break from less urgent processes like digestion, reproduction, maintenance and repair “ Stress is draining because, whether the threat is physical or psychological, mounting a stress response requires a huge investment of the body’s resources. In experiments, a short bout of psychological stress increased volunteers’ energy expenditure by up to 67 per cent above their resting metabolic rate. Other studies suggest that about a third of this energy is spent on fuelling the rise in heart rate, with the rest accounted for by the cost of producing stress hormones and inflammation. Once the stress hormones are circulating in the body, they have knock-on effects on the cell’s metabolism. The stresses of modern life leave many of us feeling depletedCorbis via Getty Images Human cells that are chronically exposed to stress hormones in the lab have been found to burn through energy 60 per cent faster, age faster and die younger. The whole process gobbles up so much energy that, while an active stress response is on the go, the body takes a break from less urgent processes like digestion, reproduction, maintenance and repair. The stress response is an example of a process called allostasis, or “stability through change”. Allostasis is different from the more familiar process of homeostasis, which describes how we regain balance after one or more biological processes have been knocked off course by environmental change. In allostasis, though, the adjustments don’t happen after change, but in advance, based on the brain’s predictions about what is likely to happen next (like identifying a possible incoming threat) and how best to adapt (like by flooding your system with hormones as part of the fight or flight response.) “Your brain is predictively regulating your body,” says Lisa Feldman Barrett, a neuroscientist at Northeastern University in Boston. “Your body is [then] sending signals back to your brain about the sensory conditions of the body and the sensory consequences of allostasis.” How the brain regulates the body Recently, a group of neuroscientists, including Feldman Barrett, have argued that allostasis isn’t just a side project for the brain; rather, it is its main function and number one priority. In this view, thinking, feeling and action all work in service of allostasis, helping the brain reach its goals by motivating us to do whatever is necessary to balance the books and stay alive. This new view of the brain puts a spin on the challenge of tackling the epidemic of stress, says Karen Quigley, also at Northeastern University, who, along with her colleague Feldman Barrett, proposed the idea in a 2025 paper in the journal Neuron. “If you start from the biology and try to understand this important and critical role for a brain managing its energy budget, then you start to think about concepts like stress slightly differently,” says Quigley. Thinking of toxic stress as allostasis gone awry helps explain why the expense of chronic or repeated stress takes its toll on our health. Allostatic states, like stress, are supposed to be temporary. In short bursts, the investment is worthwhile when you need to run, fight or think your way out of a crisis. But given that most modern threats aren’t actually likely to lead to your demise, much of the time, the investment is metabolic overkill. And given that daily hassles are a part of life – a survey of US adults reported an average of three or more stressful events a day – there is often little time to recover before the next thing hits the fan. The result is tension, fatigue and an increased risk of poor health, as the body continues to sideline maintenance and repair in a misguided attempt to be ready for anything. Your internal ‘off switch’ Ironically, there is some evidence that constantly being in “a little bit on” state makes the body less efficient at responding to acute stress, so when we actually need our fight or flight system, it’s as worn out as we are. In better news, the fact that allostatic states are temporary by nature raises the possibility that if we can find the right bodily switch, we can change the signal, and the accompanying allostatic state, to one where all is well and biological bankruptcy isn’t an immediate concern. “It may be that you can create a ‘system reset’ partly by enhancing signals that current resources are sufficient,” says Quigley. This is where the idea of deep rest comes in. Crosswell and her colleagues set out to explore why contemplative practices like prayer, chanting, meditation, yoga and qigong (a practice involving flowing, coordinated movements) have positive effects on physical health and mental well-being, reducing self-reported levels of stress and improving markers of physical health such as blood pressure and inflammation. Bringing together a team of researchers spanning neuroscience, physiology and cellular metabolism, the idea was to identify the special sauce in these practices. They concluded that the beneficial effects of contemplative practices come from the way they put a spanner in the physiology of the stress response. “These practices put the organism in a state of lower energy demand,” says Martin Picard, a mitochondrial psychobiologist at Columbia University who collaborated with Crosswell on the research. When the brain gets the memo, he says, it starts to be generous with its resources. “Instead of wasting your energy making cortisol and speeding up your heart rate, you have this energy pool that’s available for restoration,” he says. Studies suggest that contemplative practices do indeed reduce energy consumption. Mindful practices like qigong can help you enter a state of deep restVCG/VCG via Getty Images Research dating back to the 1970s found that during transcendental meditation, metabolic rate dropped by 40 per cent compared with when the same volunteers were sitting quietly without meditating. Studies of regular yoga practitioners have also found that they consume up to 15 per cent less energy at rest than non-practitioners and have lower resting heart rate and blood pressure and lower levels of circulating stress hormones. As to what exact mechanism is behind the effect, Crosswell and her colleagues speculate that one thing these interventions have in common is – by accident or design – that they tend to involve slow, deep breathing. Deep breathing, particularly at or around 6 breaths per minute, activates stretch-sensitive sensors in the chest, which activate parasympathetic activity in the vagus nerve (see “Breathing your way to deep rest“, below). The parasympathetic nervous system controls the so-called rest-and-digest response, which is the polar opposite of fight or flight. When parasympathetic activity is high, heart rate, blood pressure and other signs of arousal are low, and the body gets on with all the internal housekeeping that it has been keeping on hold. “ With prayer and mindfulness and other deep rest practices, you’re moving your mind away from worrying about the future into this present moment “ The shift to parasympathetic dominance, combined with the meditative element of these practices, might be enough to persuade the brain that there is no longer any threat, and to stand down, says Crosswell. “With prayer and mindfulness and other deep rest practices, you’re moving your mind away from worrying about the future into this present moment,” she says. Assuming that the here and now feels safe, this adds a second positive signal for the brain to factor into its budgeting – what Crosswell calls a “present moment sufficiency mindset” or “that right now, I have all the energy I need”. A woman rests in a flotation tank, another way of sinking into a state of profound restnya Semenoff/The Denver Post via Getty Images) A 2025 study on using a mindfulness intervention seems to back up this idea that deep rest makes a measurable difference. Those who did 10 sessions of an hour-long mindful breathing and stretching-based practice had higher levels of healthy metabolic markers in the blood and lower levels of those associated with disease risk. A comparison group whose participants underwent relaxation training showed no such changes. This precise prescription wouldn’t work for everyone, however; for some, meditation might evoke a stress response, for example. Different options include paced breathing, particularly hitting those apparently crucial 6 breaths per minute, or simply spending time with a loved one who makes you feel safe. As social creatures, our brains are wired to factor in how much support we have to deal with life’s ups and downs. Its power as an antidote to stress may even explain why close, supportive relationships are linked to better health and longer lifespan, says Quigley. “Humans are really critical allostatic supports for one another,” she says. “Social support is an important allostatic regulator.” Social connection A good way to super-charge social support – or to mimic it if you don’t happen to have a loved one to hand – involves activating skin-based sensory nerves that are thought to have evolved to solidify social bonds. Known as C-tactile afferent fibres, these fire most enthusiastically when stroked slowly and gently at close to body temperature. Experiments into the effects of this “affective touch” have shown that it not only feels pleasant and calming to people of all ages, but it also leads to a drop in heart rate and other markers of parasympathetic activity, even when applied during a stressful experience. Research suggests that a soft-bristled brush stimulates these nerves almost as well as a loving caress from an actual human. A team of researchers at Cornell University in New York state are even trialling a wearable device that has shown promise in early tests as a stress-buster. But the paramount message, says Crosswell, is that there is no single route to deep rest. Some people find meditation more stressful than calming, while others find affective touch ticklish or rage-inducing. What’s important is to seek out something that makes you feel warm, safe and calm from the inside. The ultimate state of deep rest, of course, is sleep, a time when the energy savings of being still and breathing more deeply allow the body to flush out the brain and make repairs to the body. It is possible that, for anyone short on sleep, adding deep rest to waking hours could help make up the shortfall. As for how much you need to neutralise the effects of stress, the answer is: it varies. “I wish I could say how many minutes is enough,” says Crosswell. Even so, with growing evidence that deep rest is a state worth making time for, the best advice right now is to find where you feel safe and spend as much time in it as possible, basking in the knowledge that you are investing in your long-term health. Breathing your way to deep rest Smartphones and watches, with their constant flurry of updates and notifications, seem like the antithesis of a calm, stress-free existence. But for anyone keen to find their own deep rest state, they do have their uses. One marker of stress regulation that comes as standard in most smart watches is heart rate variability (HRV) – a measure of the tiny variations of the time between successive heartbeats that is used as a marker of overall physiological stress, and of how efficiently the body is managing its resources. Different devices use slightly different measures, and what counts as healthy varies by age, but a higher HRV is generally considered healthier. An HRV below 25 millisends (ms), for example, has been linked to a greater risk of cardiovascular disease and depression. A tried and tested way to boost HRV is via resonance breathing biofeedback, in which slow breathing at around 6 breaths per minute causes two of the body’s key heart-rate regulating reflexes to synchronise so that each boosts the activity of the other. The net result is a boost to the parasympathetic (rest and digest) arm of the nervous system. Some research suggests that when practised regularly, HRV biofeedback trains the body to recover more efficiently after stress. While HRV biofeedback works best when both blood pressure and heart rate are measured in the lab, apps exist that offer breathing exercises based on real-time measurements of HRV. I spent a four-week period self-experimenting using one such app, combined with a chest-mounted heart rate monitor. Week one was spent logging my baseline average HRV. During week two, I did 20 minutes of resonance breathing biofeedback a day, and in the third week, I took a break from daily training. For the final week, I returned to training. The results were clear: during the biofeedback weeks, my average daily HRV, measured on my Apple Watch, came in at between 55 and 60 ms (at the healthy end of normal for my age), more than 10 ms above the just-about-healthy baseline I established in week one. The effects seemed to spill over during my week off, with my average HRV staying higher than average, before returning to the high 50s in my final week of training. This was encouraging, but the training is quite time-consuming. So I was keen to try an even easier alternative. According to its website, the Nurosym vagus nerve stimulator has been shown to significantly increase HRV and improve other markers of stress. The device attaches via a clip to the hard flap of cartilage at the front of the ear, where a branch of the vagus nerve runs close to the surface. I used the device (lent to me by the company) three times, for up to 20 minutes, at the same time of day as I had previously done my breathing practice. The results were… mixed. The stimulation either led to no change in HRV, a slight decrease (55 ms before, 48 ms after), or a very slight increase (45 ms before, 48 ms during, 51 ms after). Confused, I contacted Julian Koenig, a psychobiologist and member of the international consensus group on transcranial vagus nerve stimulation research. He points out that my results are about as consistent as what has been found in various studies on the subject. Yet while results vary, the study the company refers to on its website, published in 2022, is something of an outlier in the field in showing an increase in HRV with stimulation. “That’s why we did [a] meta-analysis,” says Koenig. So far, he says, the published results of the consensus group’s ongoing “live” meta-analysis have shown “no effects on heart rate or HRV” during short-term stimulation. And while there is still much to learn about what, if anything, these devices can do for health, he says that, for now, “if the goal is to increase HRV, deep breathing is one of the best and cheapest options”.

What ‘data center alley’ portends for America’s AI-powered future

As data centers hurtle to the forefront of the national debate over artificial intelligence (AI) and energy costs, northern Virginia offers a preview of the political fights that will play out in communities across the country seeking to cash in on the booming industry. Virginia is the unofficial data center capital of the world, with...

As data centers hurtle to the forefront of the national debate over artificial intelligence (AI) and energy costs, northern Virginia offers a preview of the political fights that will play out in communities across the country seeking to cash in on the booming industry.  Virginia is the unofficial data center capital of the world, with more than half of the world’s internet traffic running through hundreds of facilities in Loudoun and Fairfax counties, generating some 74,000 jobs and $9.1 billion for the state’s economy each year.  But the sprawling data centers are also transforming the landscape and gobbling up massive amounts of water and electricity, leading state politicians to grapple with how to regulate and monitor the rapid development — without alienating the powerful interests backing the projects, from tech giants to local leaders and labor unions.  It’s a delicate balance that’s quickly moving to the center of a national conversation about how to execute on the Trump administration’s push to rapidly expand the country’s AI infrastructure.  Policymakers across the country are watching Virginia’s efforts closely, said Michael Villa, an analyst at 10a Labs, the AI company behind the Data Center Watch Project. “They look up to Northern Virginia because [they] are the ones with more experience and where this dynamic has been working for longer,” he told The Hill.  Your data is ‘in a building in Ashburn’ Northern Virginia has been a hot spot for data centers stretching back to the 1990s, due to its proximity to the nation’s capital and surrounding metro areas, land affordability, tax breaks and local ordinances clearing the way for construction.  The demand for the data centers — massive facilities that house computers, servers, and other IT systems that process and store online data — has steadily increased over the years and is set to explode amid the global race for computing power.  “Everybody doesn’t really realize that your data isn’t just out there, your photos are not just wandering in the ether,” said Trinity Mills, a conservation advocacy coordinator at the Loudoun Wildlife Conservancy. “They’re in a building in Ashburn.” It’s a frustrating reality for people living next to these buildings, who point to higher energy bills and increased noise in their neighborhoods.  Tracy Fowle, a 57-year-old lifelong resident of Loudoun County, said the emergence of data centers in her community is driving her out.  “Well, it’s certainly very depressing, such so that I’m going to be leaving the area…We are going to put our house on the market next year,” Fowle told The Hill. “We’ve lived here since 2006, but this is not a comfortable place for me anymore.”  “The power lines, the growth of the data centers [and] the construction doesn’t stop. It is just ongoing. And I would rather have something more peaceful in my backyard,” she added.  With Homeowner Associations (HOAs) unable to slow the construction, she said residents have three choice: “grin and bear it,” move someplace else or band together to force political action. Energy costs: A major flashpoint The impact on energy costs, amid a growing focus on “affordability” under Trump, is particularly prickly for developers. The three states with the largest concentration of data centers saw a surge in utility bills as of August, compared to the same time last year. Illinois saw a 16 percent increase, Virginia followed at 13 percent and Ohio at 12 percent, according to a report from CNBC, well above the 6 percent average national increase in electricity prices.  Some of the largest data centers are expected to consume as much electricity as a city of more than half a million people, Ali Fenn, president of Lancium, a company that secures land and power for data centers in Texas, told CNBC. Dan Dorio, vice president of state policy at the Data Center Coalition (DCC), a membership organization for the industry, said the jury is still out on the impact of these projects on regional energy costs.  He pointed to a University of California, Berkeley study that found states with the highest “load growth” in electricity demand saw reductions in real prices from 2019 to 2024, “whereas states with contracting loads generally saw prices rise.” “The industry is leaning in to be a responsible, [responsive] partner in the communities where they operate to help answer questions about the development, to work with those local leaders, those local infrastructure providers, to ensure that these projects are going to be economic value to the community,” Dorio said. Over 300 data centers across northern Virginia used nearly two billion gallons of water in 2023, while Loudoun County alone used 900 million, according to a study by the Environmental and Energy Study Institute. Along with using substantial amounts of water to cool off servers, data centers depend on back-up diesel generators that pollute the air 200-600 times more than natural gas-fired power plants, according to a study conducted by University of California, Riverside.  Emissions are projected to cost the public health care system more than $20 billion come 2028, with disadvantaged communities being more susceptible, according to the study.  Uphill fight to impose guardrails The financial benefits of data centers for local coffers are undeniable.  Revenue generated from data centers accounts for over a third of Loudoun’s tax base, bringing the county over $1 billion this year, and has reduced residential property taxes by 48 cents per $100 of value, according to a Loudoun County spokesperson.  However, Buddy Rizer, executive director for economic development in Loudoun County, said the county is slowing down applications because of energy constraints.  “We’re toward the end of our growth for data centers,” he said.  But Rizer doesn’t expect the national demand to slow down anytime soon. “I don’t know what the alternative is, unless everyone’s going to stop using the internet,” he said.   Given the economic boon, lawmakers have been cautious in crafting new regulations.  Virginia House Del. Ian Lovejoy, a Republican who represents a district in northern Virginia, introduced legislation to place a land buffer between data centers and residential areas, spurred by data centers sharing property lines with homes and elementary schools in his district.  He has found support from Del. Shelly Simonds (D), who plans to introduce her own legislation tracking water usage by the facilities in the state. Both Simonds and Lovejoy said that bills to regulate the centers have been hard to pass due to some indifference from colleagues representing southern Virginia and opposition from local politicians on county boards that support the developments.  “There’s a rising awareness that the data centers are contributing to higher energy costs across the state,” said Simonds, who represents a southern Virginia district.  State legislators managed to pass some legislation to regulate the industry earlier this year, only to have it shot down by Virginia Gov. Glenn Youngkin, a Republican.  Youngkin vetoed the bill in November that would’ve required developers to perform a land assessment of proposals that are within 500 feet of homes and schools, looking at ground and surface water resources in the area and potential interference with historic sites.  “While well-intentioned, the legislation imposes a one-size-fits-all approach on communities that are best positioned to make their own decisions,” he said in explaining the veto.  “Virginia is the data center capital of the world, and we should not enact legislation to allow other states to pass us by nor to restrict local government from developing data centers based on their community’s specific circumstances,” Youngkin continued.  Powerful forces meet growing resistance Prominent data center operators have also courted Virginia lawmakers on both sides of the aisle.  A Business Insider review of filings earlier this year found that the DCC donated around $165,000 to state lawmakers between last year’s November elections and the start of the January legislative session.  The group donated $25,000 to Youngkin, who last month announced two data center developments from Vantage and CleanArc Data Centers, collectively valued at $5 billion. The incoming Democratic administration of Gov.-elect Abigail Spangerger and Lt. Gov.-elect Ghazala Hashmi has proposed working with the legislature to force data centers to “pay their fair share” for electricity, to ensure that consumers don’t see inflated energy bills.  But data centers have faced limited resistance at the state level, due in part to an unusual alliance between big business and labor unions, said Lovejoy, the Republican state legislator.  “You have the business community, and you have the labor unions who really, really enjoy these types of projects,” he said. “So you have sort of this bond between two opposing forces that are usually opposed to one another, all swimming in the same direction for once.” However, voices of opposition are seeing increasing success across the country.  At least 16 data center projects, including nine in Virginia, have been blocked or delayed as local opposition mounts to the developments, according to a new study, which also found growing opposition from local politicians in both parties.   Brennan Gilmore, executive director of environmental group Clean Virginia, said that mounting successful opposition now was especially important because the “worst impacts are still to come.” Gilmore warned of projections that energy costs would double or even triple if the current trajectory in data centers continued.  “Virginia is expected to bear the burden of building out the infrastructure to support that level of demand, a build out that took 100 years to get to our current level, in an extraordinarily collapsed time frame,” he said. “So essentially we have an energy crisis on the horizon.”  Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.

The Environmental and Human Rights Costs of China’s Clean Energy Investments Abroad

Chinese companies have pledged hundreds of billions of dollars in clean energy manufacturing investments overseas, but the projects are having significant social, environmental, and human rights impacts.

This story originally appeared on Inside Climate News as part of its Planet China series and is part of the Climate Desk collaboration.The audience sat patiently through the presentations about the cluster of battery factories going up nearby. They listened to descriptions of the hazardous chemicals the plants will use, their huge water withdrawals and energy demands.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. When it came time for questions, people began shifting in their chairs and standing up, making the cramped room feel even smaller.What if the chemicals leak, one woman asked. What’s in it for the politicians in their “velvet chairs,” another demanded. A third warned it would be just like the Soviet era, when iron and steel plants left a polluted legacy.Then a woman began to tear up as she told the 50 or so people who had gathered in a community center on a cold, dark evening that the factories’ smokestacks and hazardous materials were about a mile from her daughter’s kindergarten.“Please stand up for yourselves,” she said, urging the audience to spread the word.The Chinese battery giant Contemporary Amperex Technology Co., or CATL, is nearing completion on what could be one of Europe’s largest electric vehicle battery factories. The industrial park where it is located, outside Debrecen, Hungary’s second-largest city, also hosts several other manufacturers of battery parts and supplies. At least two of those are owned by Chinese companies, one by a South Korean firm. Another Chinese-owned battery factory is being built on the other side of the city.The surge of construction is part of a nationwide frenzy, prompted by Prime Minister Viktor Orbán’s goal to make Hungary a leading battery manufacturer. To reach this target, Orbán has looked primarily to Beijing. Chinese companies have announced or built at least 18 EV and battery-related projects in Hungary so far, $17 billion in pledged investments, according to data compiled by the Net Zero Industrial Policy Lab at Johns Hopkins University.While the factories could position Hungary in the center of Europe’s transition off fossil fuels, they have prompted a backlash from residents worried about their impacts on public health and the environment.“Everyone will get their fair share of this stew,” said Éva Kozma, who leads the Mikepércs Mothers for the Environment Association, a citizen activist group that hosted the event. Kozma helped form the group after CATL announced its plans in 2022 and has since been highlighting the risks posed by battery development, identifying pollution events and scrutinizing the factories’ permits.

Inside the North Carolina GOP’s decade-long push to seize power from state’s Democratic governors

GOP lawmakers have passed law after law stripping powers from Democratic governors

In November 2024, Democrat Josh Stein scored an emphatic victory in the race to become North Carolina’s governor, drubbing his Republican opponent by almost 15 percentage points. His honeymoon didn’t last long, however. Two weeks after his win, the North Carolina legislature’s Republican supermajority fast-tracked a bill that would transform the balance of power in the state. Its authors portrayed the 131-page proposal, released publicly only an hour before debate began, as a disaster relief measure for victims of Hurricane Helene. But much of it stripped powers from the state’s governor, taking away authority over everything from the highway patrol to the utilities commission. Most importantly, the bill eliminated the governor’s control over appointments to the state elections board, which sets voting rules and settles disputes in the swing state’s often close elections. Ignoring protesters who labeled the bill a “legislative coup,” Republicans in the General Assembly easily outvoted Democrats, then overrode the outgoing Democratic governor’s veto. The maneuver culminated a nearly decade-long effort by Republican legislators, who have pushed through law after law shrinking the powers of North Carolina’s chief executive — always a Democrat during that time frame — as well as the portfolios of other executive branch officials who are Democrats. Over that period, lawmakers have attempted to transfer control or partial control of at least 29 boards, entities or important executive powers. In most cases, they succeeded. As a result, Republicans now hold increased sway not only over North Carolina’s election board, but also over its schools, building codes, environmental regulations, coastal development, wildlife management, utilities, cabinet appointments and more. All had previously been under control of the governor. “This is not what people voted for,” said Derek Clinger, a senior counsel at the State Democracy Research Initiative, an institute at the University of Wisconsin Law School, who has studied the events in North Carolina. Stein, as well as all of North Carolina’s living former governors — Republicans and Democrats alike — have blasted the legislature’s erosion of gubernatorial authority as a violation of the state’s constitutionally enshrined separation of powers. “You should not be able to make the laws and then control who enforces them — just ask any fourth grader about the three branches of government,” Stein said in a statement to ProPublica. Lawmakers’ actions “throw the will of the voters into the trash can,” he added. Initially, governors had some success using separation-of-powers arguments in lawsuits filed to challenge efforts to strip their powers. Even majority-Republican courts ruled in their favor, declaring laws that shifted authority directly from the governor to the legislature were unconstitutional. More recently, though, legislators have found a loophole, writing laws that move traditional gubernatorial powers to elected executive branch officials who are Republicans. Since 2023, when the GOP won majorities on the state’s appellate courts, judges have increasingly rejected lawsuits aimed at blocking such legislation. The North Carolina GOP’s effort to rein in executive power at the state level stands in sharp contrast to the Trump administration’s efforts to expand such power federally. Before the Supreme Court, for example, the administration has argued for a “unitary executive” theory that would allow the president near-total control over personnel. North Carolina Republican legislative leaders didn’t respond to interview requests or detailed emailed questions from ProPublica about the power shifts. In the past, Republicans have defended whittling down Democratic governors’ authority by pointing to similarly partisan moves by Democrats decades ago, though these were on a much smaller scale. Current and former lawmakers also say the power shifts reflect the vision of North Carolina’s founders, who deliberately made the state’s governor weak and its legislature strong to prevent abuses suffered under British rule. “It’s never been co-equal, never will be, never intended to be,” said Paul Stam, who was the lame-duck Republican speaker pro tempore of the House when the General Assembly began its push to weaken the governor in 2016. Republicans also dispute the notion that voters oppose reducing governors’ authorities. “The people voted for a strong Republican majority in the legislature,” Sam Hayes, the former general counsel for North Carolina’s speaker of the House, said in an interview. “That role can involve reassigning the powers of the executive branch.” After lawmakers took away the governor’s power to appoint the election board’s members, Hayes became its director. The board’s new Republican majority has handed control over North Carolina’s county election boards to conservatives, some of whom have moved to eliminate early voting sites favored by Democrats. In recent years, states including Wisconsin, Michigan and Kentucky have waged similar battles over separation of powers. In almost all cases, Republican-dominated legislatures have stripped powers from Democrats elected to statewide offices. Still, North Carolina’s example has been particularly notable, critics say. According to a scholarly review by Clinger, the General Assembly’s power grabs in 2016 and 2024 are the most expansive in recent American history. Collectively, lawmakers have brought the powers of the state’s chief executive to a low ebb, said Christopher Cooper, a political scientist at Western Carolina University. In 2010, the textbook “Politics in the American States” ranked the institutional powers of North Carolina’s governor the third-weakest in the nation. By 2024, they ranked dead last. “Soon,” Cooper said of the legislature, “they’re not going to have anything left to take.” When the battles over the election board began in 2016, the joke among Republican lawmakers was that to get things done on elections policy, “you either need the Northern Hammer or the Sweet Southern Stammer.” The Northern Hammer was Bob Rucho, a famously blunt senator originally from Massachusetts. The Sweet Southern Stammer was David Lewis, a genial Republican House member from rural North Carolina with a speech impediment and an uncommon mastery of election law. The self-deprecating Lewis, a farmer and tractor salesman by trade, had helped design the gerrymandering strategies that, starting in 2010, handed Republicans long-term control of the legislature even in election cycles when Democrats won a majority of statewide offices. The importance of controlling the election board — and the potential disastrousness of not controlling it — was clear in the 2016 gubernatorial race, a close contest between Republican Gov. Pat McCrory and his Democratic challenger, Roy Cooper. The board makes decisions that can affect election outcomes in myriad ways, such as deciding where and for how long early voting takes place. It picks the state’s election director and members of county election boards, which maintain voter registration lists and operate voting sites. It arbitrates postelection challenges from losing candidates. As governors historically had, McCrory had appointed the five board members who oversaw the 2016 race, choosing three from his party and two from the opposing party as state law directed. But the panel and its professional staff still operated with considerable independence. After McCrory challenged his 10,000-vote loss to Cooper, alleging widespread voter fraud, the board — led by McCrory’s picks — voted against his protests, effectively ending the race. When Republican legislators launched their first effort to seize control of the board soon after, senior staffers figured it was payback for not helping McCrory. “I viewed it as retaliation for the board not having played a partisan enough role,” said Katelyn Love, who was then an attorney for the board and went on to become its general counsel. Lewis, who left the legislature in 2020, said he and other lawmakers were convinced that once appointment power passed to Cooper, he’d “stack the board” against Republicans. “In certain parts of the state,” he said, “elections really do come down to two or three votes, or a small percentage of votes, and we had no confidence” that Cooper’s appointees “would just treat us fairly.” Republican legislative leaders called a special session, proposing multiple bills that redirected powers from the governor, often to the legislature itself. “We said, ‘You know what: We’re the legislature and we decide who appoints who,’” Lewis recalled. “Instead of letting Roy do it, why don’t we put folks in place that kind of support the way we see things?” Lawmakers targeted not only the elections board, but also Cooper’s ability to hire and fire more than 1,000 political appointees in state government and to choose members of the state’s Industrial Commission, which handles matters such as worker safety claims. They took aim at some positions in part because they came with big paychecks, Lewis acknowledged; a seat on the Industrial Commission pays more than $160,000, for example. “The truth is, a lot of the importance of some of these positions is who gets to appoint whose friends to the board,” Lewis said. “It’s kind of considered a plum job.” The election board measure was framed as making oversight more bipartisan. Indeed, it increased the number of board members to eight and required even numbers of Republican and Democratic appointees. But the governor controlled only four of those seats. The legislature appointed the other four. Also, in even-numbered years — those when federal elections are held — the law required the board’s chair to be “a member of the political party with the second-highest number of registered affiliates.” At the time, that meant a Republican. Since the chair shaped what matters were taken up and had other bureaucratic influence, this gave the party an edge. Lewis insisted the restructured board was designed to even the scales — between the parties and between the governor and the legislature. “If one side can block the other, then bad things don’t happen,” he said. “And if both sides can work together, you can get a more positive resolution.” Less than two weeks after McCrory conceded, the legislature quickly forced through the changes, despite protests so intense they led to numerous arrests. Cooper quickly filed a court challenge, arguing that the law violated the state’s constitution and stymied his ability to enact his policies. The separation of powers is explicitly enshrined in North Carolina’s constitution, which declares, “The legislative, executive, and supreme judicial powers of the State government shall be forever separate and distinct from each other.” Democrats also made the case that the new, evenly split election board was intended to produce gridlock that effectively favored Republicans, keeping in place the election director chosen by McCrory’s board and blocking steps that required majority approval, such as establishing early voting sites. In March 2017, a trial court struck down most of the legislative changes, including those affecting the elections board, ruling they illegally robbed the governor of executive authority. Lewis and other Republican leaders went back to the drawing board. Small groups of election specialists and legislative aides met early in the morning or late at night, surviving on food from Bojangles, the much-loved fried-chicken-and-biscuits chain. They sketched out priorities and drafted legislative language on whiteboards, then waited for the opportune moment to introduce a bill. According to Lewis and other Republicans, they were determined to find a winning formula, no matter how many shots it took. “We felt like we had every right to do that because the constitution invested the legislature with defining the responsibilities” of the governor, Lewis said. A month after the trial court rejected lawmakers’ first stab at breaking the governor’s grip on the elections board, the legislature tried again. It passed another law that altered the board in much the same ways as the first, expanding it to eight members, for example. But this time, instead of giving the legislature half the appointments, the law directed the governor to make all of them — from lists provided by the chairs of the state’s Democratic and Republican parties. Cooper, calling the measure the “the same unconstitutional legislation in another package,” swiftly filed another legal challenge. For almost a year, as the case wound through the courts, he refused to make appointments under the proposed rules. The board’s professional staff kept up with administrative tasks but struggled to find workarounds for responsibilities handled by board members. They went to court on multiple occasions to get judges to rule on election protests and challenges in the board’s absence. “It was very disruptive and chaotic, and a drain on the agency’s limited resources,” Love said. In January 2018, the state Supreme Court struck down the legislature’s second attempt at taking over the elections board. The third came two months later, when lawmakers passed a bill that resurrected many elements of the previous one, but with a few new tweaks. In this version, the governor chose the board’s eight members — four Republicans and four Democrats — from lists submitted by each party, plus an additional tie-breaking member, unaffiliated with either party, from nominees provided by the new board. Despite these differences, the outcome was much the same: another lawsuit from Cooper and, eventually, another loss in court. Republican legislators realized they were likely to lose the case, so they also decided to try a strategy that took the issue out of the hands of the court system, Lewis said. They put a constitutional amendment on the November 2018 ballot that proposed removing the governor’s power to choose election board members and giving that authority to the legislature. “You put your idea out for the people,” Lewis said. If “they vote for it, then it’s no longer unconstitutional.” Of the six constitutional changes on the ballot that year, the election board proposal and one other — an amendment altering who picked judges to fill empty or added court seats — targeted traditional gubernatorial powers. The measures were hotly contested, attracting about $18 million in spending by groups for and against them. Lewis said that Republican internal polling showed clear support for the amendments, but the final tallies showed a notable divide: Voters passed four of the measures but rejected the two that stripped powers from the governor by roughly 2 to 1. At the end of 2018, Republicans temporarily waved the white flag, passing a law that returned the governor’s control over the election board. In 2020, Lewis relinquished his longtime role as the House’s election policy point man after pleading guilty to charges related to using campaign funds for personal expenses, including rent. He then resigned. Today, Lewis sells cars in a small town on North Carolina’s swampy southeastern coast and does occasional political consulting. Looking back, he still believes he did the right thing. “I was following the will of the voters that gave us the majority in the legislature to do these things.” Over the next few years, the elections board made one critical decision after another in close or disputed elections, underscoring its importance. In one instance, it called a new election in a congressional race tainted by an illegal scheme to fraudulently collect and fill out mail-in ballots. Republican legislative leaders bided their time, waiting for another opportunity to launch a takeover. Karen Brinson Bell, chosen as the state’s election director in May 2019 by Cooper’s appointees, said lawmakers never let her forget the tenuousness of her position. “I knew from the day I started that my days were numbered,” she said. “I was never naive to the fact that there would likely be other attempts to change the makeup of the board.” Bell said that at a December 2022 meeting held by the National Conference of State Legislatures in West Virginia, Warren Daniel, a Senate Republican who worked on election matters, told her that he and his colleagues planned to take over the board and to reduce early voting. (Daniel didn’t respond to ProPublica’s questions about the incident.) In October 2023, the moment Bell had long expected finally arrived. The legislature’s Republican supermajority introduced a new bill to remake the election board. It shifted control over appointments to the General Assembly’s majority and minority leaders and put some of the board’s administrative functions under the secretary of state. On decisions where the board’s four Republicans and four Democrats deadlocked, the law gave Republicans a decided advantage. If members couldn’t agree on an executive director, for example, the legislature’s majority leaders would choose one. If the board couldn’t agree on a plan for expanded early voting (championed by Democrats), then each county would have just one early voting site, the minimum required by law. The measure was similar to its predecessors, but the courts that would decide its legality were vastly different. Since the demise of the previous election board law, Republicans had won 14 appellate court races in a row and held majorities on the state’s higher courts. The Supreme Court’s chief justice, Paul Newby, had made it clear he saw no legal impediment to whittling down the governor’s portfolio, writing a sharp dissent to a ruling that struck down an earlier attempt to limit gubernatorial power. In February 2024, a trial court issued a decision that reframed the debate over the constitutionality of gubernatorial power transfers. This time, the case didn’t involve the election board. It dealt instead with a law that used a variety of mechanisms to strip away Gov. Roy Cooper’s control over seven other entities that managed everything from coastal resources to building codes. A three-judge panel found three of the seven transfer schemes legal because power passed from the governor to another elected executive branch member. “While the Governor is the chief executive, other elected officers who are members of the Council of State are also vested with executive power,” the judges wrote. Michael Gerhardt, a constitutional law professor at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill who studies issues related to separation of powers, was aghast, saying the decision reflected partisanship rather than sound legal analysis. The court was “ignoring the fact that the governor was actually elected” and “allowing the state legislature to transfer some of his authority to Republican officials,” he said. Mitch Kokai, a senior political analyst at the conservative John Locke Foundation, argued the panel’s finding was consistent with North Carolina’s history of splitting executive power among multiple executive branch officials. He dismissed Gerhardt’s comments as partisan “sour grapes.” “The Democrats are losing, and they don’t like the fact that the Republicans are winning, so they’re casting doubt on what the conservative courts are saying,” he said. The ruling didn’t affect the October 2023 election board measure, which hadn’t been implemented, blocked by a separate trial court decision. But after Stein’s double-digit win in the 2024 governor’s race, Republican lawmakers again used a legislative session ostensibly about hurricane relief to introduce a new, superseding measure that would finally put the election board under their party’s control. It used a power transfer strategy similar to the ones that had won court approval the previous February, placing election board appointments in the hands of Dave Boliek, a Republican newly elected to the executive branch office of state auditor. Boliek could choose three of the board’s five members from his own party, giving Republicans their long-sought majority. No other state auditor in America manages elections and Boliek had no experience doing so, but he expressed enthusiasm about taking on the job. “Governor Josh Stein doesn’t have any experience supervising elections either,” Boliek told ProPublica in an email exchange. “Leading a public office requires a willingness to learn and serve — and I’m a quick study.” In the same law, legislators also redirected Stein’s authority to make appointments to an array of other boards and entities and stripped powers from other newly elected Democrats, including the lieutenant governor, attorney general and superintendent of public instruction. Stein sued to prevent the changes from taking effect, but in May, the Newby-led Supreme Court declined to block Boliek’s takeover of the election board. Although litigation continues, he has started transforming election oversight, both statewide and locally, in ways that would be hard to undo. Some of Boliek’s board members have long histories in Republican politics and efforts to tilt state elections in the party’s favor. The new chair, Francis De Luca, had led a conservative institute that sued to contest McCrory’s loss in the 2016 race for governor. (De Luca didn’t respond to ProPublica’s request for comment.) Another new Republican member was Rucho, the so-called Northern Hammer who’d worked on election policy with Lewis. The new board will be fair, he promised. “My goal is to level the playing field so that everyone is playing by the same rules,” he said. Bell’s replacement as election director, Hayes, has overhauled the board’s 60-member staff, though historically it’s been nonpartisan and largely remained when new leadership took over. Since Hayes took charge, at least nine staffers have left or been placed on leave, according to interviews and published reports. At the same time, the board has added seven new political appointees, many of whom have close ties to Republican politicians. “It’s a nonpartisan shop shifting to a partisan shop,” said one staff member who asked not to be identified, fearing retaliation. Hayes insisted the board remains nonpartisan and described the changes in staff as “nothing out of the ordinary.” He described his goals as “repairing relationships with the General Assembly” and working to “honor the letter and spirit of the law.” “If we do that,” he said, “I believe that we will rebuild trust in elections here.” Under Hayes’ leadership, the board also moved swiftly to settle a lawsuit filed against it earlier this year by the U.S. Justice Department, agreeing to require tens of thousands of voters to provide missing registration information or risk not having their ballots count in state races, voter advocacy groups say. Bell had opposed taking such steps. Hayes said he settled the suit with the “intent of honoring federal law” and to clean up the state’s voter rolls, which Republicans argue have been badly mismanaged. The new leadership has also taken steps that could limit early voting locations in the state, especially those in Democratic strongholds. Boliek hired longtime Republican operative Dallas Woodhouse, who has advocated for restricting early voting, to fill a newly created role partly focused on early voting. In October, Woodhouse emailed Republican board chairs directing them to consider moving polling sites out of urban areas, where there are more Democrats, to “areas that are outside of urban cores,” where Republicans tend to hold the majority. So far, conservative majorities in at least eight counties have moved to limit early voting sites or weekend hours sought by Democrats. At least two have rejected sites near universities, including a site near a historically Black college. In an interview, Boliek told ProPublica there was no plan to reduce early voting sites in areas that lean Democratic. He later explained in an email that Woodhouse “simply answered inquiries from board chairs.” Hayes communicates with Cleta Mitchell, a lawyer who tried to help Trump overturn the 2020 election, and Woodhouse regularly attends video calls held by the North Carolina chapter of Mitchell’s national organization, the Election Integrity Network. Boliek said Woodhouse talks to a variety of organizations from across the political spectrum, adding,“I don’t think people should be concerned.” He said the board was dedicated to making “it easy to vote and hard to cheat in North Carolina.” Hayes said Mitchell and other network leaders aren’t “receiving special access to me or treatment from this office” and that he talks to people on both sides of the aisle. All told, Republican legislators have successfully transferred power over 17 of the 29 boards, entities and important executive prerogatives they’ve targeted since 2016, a ProPublica review showed. In addition to the election board, the governor has lost control or partial control over a dozen entities, including the state’s Environmental Management Commission and its Utilities Commission. Stein told ProPublica that state residents have suffered, in the form of weakened environmental protections and rising energy costs. Rucho, the Northern Hammer, argues the power transfers have actually improved life in the state. “You have to change the way the system works, if the system is not working,” he said. “This was a real good remedy to make these boards work on behalf of the people.” Longtime observers say they have deepening concerns about the erosion of the separation of powers in North Carolina. Bob Orr, a former Republican state Supreme Court justice, said that if power grabs by Republican legislators continue to be upheld by the state’s Republican-majority courts, it will threaten democracy in the state. “Really, what can people do?” said Orr, who left the Republican Party because of how it changed under Trump. “A legislature that is literally unchecked with gerrymandered districts and a presumption of constitutionality for everything they do in the courts — that is a danger to democracy because they can change the system regardless of the will of the people.” The post Inside the North Carolina GOP’s decade-long push to seize power from state’s Democratic governors appeared first on Salon.com.

Suggested Viewing

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.