bias
Newsletter
Renewable energy faces significant hurdles in Ohio
Renewable energy projects in Ohio face fierce opposition from fossil fuel-backed groups, despite incentives from the Inflation Reduction Act designed to boost solar and wind development across the nation.
In short:
- The Inflation Reduction Act provides substantial tax credits and incentives that have made renewables as affordable as fossil-fuel energy sources. However, developers in Republican-run Ohio remain skeptical about overcoming local regulatory and political obstacles.
- Ohio's 2021 Senate Bill 52 allows local governments to veto solar and wind projects, but not fossil fuel facilities, creating an uneven playing field, green-energy advocates say. The bill is just one example of the organized efforts that have passed 400 local restrictions against wind, solar and other projects in 41 states, according to a 2024 report by Columbia Law School.
- Fossil fuel-backed groups in Ohio are spreading misinformation and lobbying against renewable energy projects, significantly slowing down development.
Key quote:
“Ohio is probably one of the most biased states in terms of its treatment of renewables as this catastrophic thing that needs to be limited and banned.”
— Dave Anderson, policy and communications manager for the Energy and Policy Institute.
Why this matters:
Renewable energy is vital for reducing greenhouse gas emissions and combating climate change. However, opposition and regulatory hurdles in key states like Ohio threaten the pace and effectiveness of this transition, emphasizing the ongoing battle between clean energy and fossil fuel interests.
Keep reading...Show less
Newsletter
Credit: Peggy und Marco Lachmann-Anke/Pixabay
Academics' climate impact studies influenced by meat and dairy funding
A new report highlights the influence of the meat and dairy industries on academic research regarding livestock's climate impact.
In short:
- The study focuses on research centers at the University of California at Davis and Colorado State University, funded largely by the livestock industry, and their efforts to downplay the need for reduced meat and dairy consumption.
- Academics are accused of acting more as industry spokespeople than independent researchers, promoting technological solutions to emissions without advocating for reduced livestock production.
- Significant industry funding, including a $2.9 million donation to UC Davis's CLEAR Center, raises concerns about bias in research and public discourse on livestock's environmental impact.
Key quote:
"The notion that I am downplaying the importance of livestock on climate is absolutely not acceptable to me."
— Frank Mitloehner, UC Davis professor
Why this matters:
This article raises questions about the objectivity of studies critical to our understanding of environmental health and underscores the importance of scrutinizing the sources behind influential research, especially when it concerns public health and climate change policies.
Robyn Alders and Richard Kock argue that it’s time to rethink our food system and acknowledge our responsibilities to renewal of resources and the rights of existence for all life forms on Earth.
Keep reading...Show less
ohiovalleyresource.org
Study shows bias, conflicts of interest among doctors who read black lung x-rays
Researchers found that doctors hired by coal companies to read miners' X-rays returned negative results on black lung 85% of the time.
www.esquire.com
NBC news climate change poll report shows belief is partisan, driven by flawed media coverage
But the report also fell into some of the kind of Both Sides coverage that has made denialism a force in mainstream politics.
thefern.org
FERN interviews Elizabeth Royte: drinking problems: a Kansas farm town confronts a tap-water crisis
Elizabeth Royte, a contributing editor at FERN, writes about the long history of nitrate contamination in the water of Pretty Prairie, Kansas, a farming community just west of Wichita, in the latest issue of Harper's Magazine.
ORIGINAL REPORTING
MOST POPULAR
CLIMATE
