A New York bill would make polluters pay for climate change damage the state endured.

The Climate Change Superfund Act requires companies who've contributed to climate change to bear some costs of necessary infrastructure investments for New York to adapt to climate change.

Data show over the last 40 years, the state has endured at least 85 "billion-dollar disasters." The most substantial was Hurricane Sandy, costing the state around $43 billion.

Asm. Anna Kelles, D-Ithaca, a co-sponsor of the bill described how enforcement of the bill would work.

"From technology, we now know that we can directly assess the greenhouse gas emissions that were attributable to each of the major polluters," Kelles pointed out. "We can measure that and we can assess a fee based on their relative contribution to the greenhouse gas emissions that we're seeing. "

The intent is to make it part of the 2025 budget. Companies likely to be held accountable by this bill are opposing it. New York is not alone in considering this kind of legislation. Vermont is taking up a similar bill after record flooding last July caused about $1 billion in damage taxpayers would be responsible for. The bill awaits action in a New York Assembly's environmental committee.

While the bill mostly targets oil companies, it may also be applied to other companies.

Bob Cohen, policy and research director for Citizen Action of New York, said implementing the measure goes beyond the environmental harms companies are responsible for.

"It's not just a matter that they contribute to climate change, they've engaged in a multi-decade-long campaign to lie about the consequences of climate change," Cohen alleged. "I think It's comparable to the tobacco companies leading up to the 1960s."

Research shows companies like Exxon knew as far back as the 1950s fossil fuels were causing climate change.

A new report questions the sustainability of biofuels.

Biofuels, or ethanol, are produced from fermented sugars and starches found in corn and sugarcane. The Indiana Corn Marketing Council reported the state produces more than 1 billion gallons of ethanol every year.

Data from the World Resources Institute study shows the ethanol industry causes land use change and displaces food production. Additional figures revealed biofuels can weaken communities and harm water quality and wildlife habitats.

Tim Phelps, spokesperson for The Indiana Ethanol Producers Association, touted its benefits.

"Ethanol has been an enormous success story for the United States and most specifically here in Indiana," Phelps contended. "It's helping our engines run cooler. It's helping them run cleaner. It's reducing the price at the pump. It's reducing our reliance on foreign oil, and it's reducing harmful greenhouse gas emissions."

He noted nearly half of Indiana's annual corn crop is initially processed at an ethanol facility where the grain is converted to high-protein animal feed and corn oil. In 2023, 43% of Indiana's corn crop went into the state's ethanol production, according to the council.

The study pointed out the costs of producing biofuel are picked up by taxpayers. Another observation is more biofuel production means higher food prices and widens the gap between disadvantaged and marginalized groups and startup farmers.

Phelps sees the bigger economic picture of an industry he argued is vital to Indiana's economy, especially for Hoosier farmers in rural communities.

"These facilities are economic development engines that today support 35,000 jobs and 19,000 farms just in Indiana," Phelps pointed out. "By coming into one of these communities, an ethanol plant creates demand and boosts local grain prices for farmers."

E15, frequently sold as Unleaded 88, is made of 15% ethanol and 85% gasoline. In April, the Environmental Protection Agency gave approval for year-round sales in Indiana and surrounding states.

As the Trump administration considers a major overhaul of the nation's leading disaster relief agency, a new poll finds the majority of Americans think the government should help affected communities in Wyoming and across the U.S.

The May poll from Pew Research Center showed more than 75% of Americans said it is a good idea for the government to set stricter building standards for new constructions in places at high risk of extreme weather, including floods, major wildfires and droughts. And it found 64% think government should provide financial assistance for communities to rebuild after an event.

Brian Kennedy, senior researcher at the center, said support for the ideas crosses party lines.

"Large shares of Democrats and Republicans say that it's a good idea to set stricter building standards in these communities," Kennedy reported. "Similarly, majorities say it's a good idea for the government to provide financial assistance for people in high-risk areas to rebuild."

Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem is considering renaming or reforming the Federal Emergency Management Agency, after she ended the Building Resilient Infrastructure and Communities program in April.

According to the National Centers for Environmental Information, there were 27 climate disasters in the U.S. which each caused at least $1 billion in damages last year, making it the fourth-costliest year on record.

Survey respondents were more split on other approaches. Half of Democrats agreed the government should help cover the rising cost of homeowners insurance in those places, while fewer than a third of Republicans agreed. Regardless of party affiliation, Kennedy noted most people who have experienced extreme weather at least somewhat connect it to climate change.

"When we look at this data and what we've seen over the past several years is the broad patterns in that you see large shares of Americans say, 'Hey, climate change has contributed at least a little,'" Kennedy observed.

He added the questions are relatively new ones for Americans to be considering and he expects to have more data in the future.


get more stories like this via email

As Michigan aims to support 2 million electric vehicles by 2030, the new "Equitable EV Action Plan Framework" could help local leaders with the transition.

The framework was developed by the University of California-Berkeley's Center for Law, Energy and the Environment, and partners -- including the nonprofit advocacy group Michigan Clean Cities. The plan outlines steps local governments can take to build EV infrastructure and improve accessibility, particularly in underserved communities.

Jeffrey Hoang, communications and engagement associate for Michigan Clean Cities, shared insights about the plan in a recent Clean Fuels Michigan webinar.

"The focus of this framework is ensuring that community voice and impact is prioritized with these plans," Hoang explained. "To actually receive public input on where EV charges, EVSC should be placed within the city. So, actually going out to residents and just asking."

The framework recommends first identifying key agencies and staff involved, then those agencies can decide which action steps matter most for their community and how they should be prioritized. Still, many EV critics contend affordability is a big issue for everyday families, even with tax credits.

Backers said the plan helps cities plan for an EV future, not just for personal vehicles but rideshare services, e-bikes and e-scooters. It recommended outreach and funding strategies for transit projects along with examples of successful pilot programs.

Hoang added the framework can be viewed as a resource, connecting people to other helpful resources.

"There's so much knowledge and great experience and expertise throughout the industry," Hoang observed. "It provides quick access, you know just a quick 'control-F,' search for whatever kind of resource that you might need."

The framework highlighted the need for collaboration among local departments, such as planning, transportation and public works to ensure EV access is implemented effectively and equitably.