INDIANAPOLIS - Some of Indiana's leaders have voiced outspoken opposition to the Environmental Protection Agency's proposed first-ever limits on carbon pollution from power plants, but a new poll indicates a majority of voters don't share those views.

Melissa Williams, national political director for the Sierra Club, says the group's new post-election poll of voters in six key states finds, regardless of who they supported in the 2014 midterm election, most want congressional action to address climate change.

"Support for this plan is extremely high," says Williams. "It includes large majorities of Independents and many Republicans. It's clear the voters want action on this, and they support the President's plan and that means the Senate should get behind that as well."

The EPA's Clean Power Plan calls for a 20 percent reduction in carbon emissions from power plants by 2030. Indiana's U.S. senators and governor have argued that the regulations are costly, but others have said the new rules would help the economy.

The Department of Energy says Indiana is strong in clean energy manufacturing, renewables and energy-efficiency technologies that support at least 53,000 jobs.

Voters in Colorado, Iowa, Michigan, New Hampshire, North Carolina and Pennsylvania were surveyed. Williams says the results are a solid representation of how various regions of the country feel about action on climate change.

"Of course every state is different," Williams says. "But the numbers across theses states are so consistent that I don't think there's reason to think that it would be markedly different in other places."

In each state polled, Williams says they found at least 63 percent of voters favor candidates who accept the scientific facts about climate change over those who do not. She adds the results send a strong message to Congress.

"Folks who think it's unnecessary are ignoring what's happening around them," Williams says. "Our climate has changed and this is something we don't have a lot of time to wait on."

The public comment period on the EPA's Clean Power Plan ends Dec. 1.


get more stories like this via email

Montana's environmental advocates are criticizing Gov. Greg Gianforte for signing a bill they said will allow the state to ignore the impacts of climate change when developers construct large-scale energy projects such as coal mines and power plants. The measure received a lot of attention during the legislative session, most of it in opposition.

House Bill 971 builds on a decade-old law prohibiting the state from including actual or potential impacts which are "regional, national or global in nature" in environmental reviews of big energy projects.

Anne Hedges, spokesperson for the Montana Environmental Information Center, said the measure is a direct attack on the state's most precious natural resources and leaves them unprotected.

"You're telling the public and you're telling the state their rights don't matter," Hedges asserted. "That they don't really have a right to a clean and healthful environment and the state has no obligation to protect people from the very real dangers of the climate crisis."

The bill prohibits regulators such as the state's environmental quality department from measuring greenhouse-gas emissions and the effects of climate change when they review the overall impacts of large projects such as coal mines and power plants. The bill's supporters argued they are trying to avoid excessive state regulation and contend measuring and regulating greenhouse-gas emissions and other impacts on the climate should be left up to federal laws like the Clean Air Act.

Hedges countered the state understands local issues better than the federal government does, and added the whole purpose of Montana's environmental agencies doing these sorts of studies is to be able to educate residents who live here about the impacts of a major energy project.

"On the land, on the air, water, wildlife, economy, cultural resources, et cetera," Hedges outlined.

Hedges pointed out ultimately, the bill will create longer and more dangerous wildfire seasons, a shrinking snowpack, and reduced stream flows as emissions from power plants add to a warming climate and unstable atmosphere.

A law known as the "Halliburton Loophole" is under growing scrutiny. It exempts oil and gas companies from revealing the chemicals they use in the hydraulic fracking process.

The latest study finds between 2014 and 2021, companies used hundreds of millions of pounds of toxic chemicals - without any governmental oversight.

Another report published last year by scientists and medical organizations says living near fracking sites increases risks for cancer, respiratory diseases, heart problems, birth defects and more.

Leatra Harper, managing director of the Freshwater Accountability Project, explained that the loophole prevents communities from understanding potential harms.

"People need to know what the exposures could be," said Harper. "We need to know what the chemicals are to look for when we find water contamination. And we don't even know how to test for it, because we don't know what to test for."

The Independent Petroleum Association of America and other industry groups argue that fracking poses little to no risk of harmful health effects.

The group FracTracker estimates hydraulically fractured wells produce about 2.3% of the oil and gas output in Ohio.

Harper added that previously proposed federal legislation would have addressed the issue by requiring companies to reveal which chemicals they use in the fracking process.

"There's something called the FRAC Act that has just basically been mothballed," said Harper. "And we need to revive that and fix this problem that started at the federal level, that allowed this industry to take off."

As of 2022, hydraulic fracturing techniques have been used on an estimated 1.7 million wells across the U.S.

Memorial Day is considered the unofficial beginning of summer in the United States, with many Texans keeping an eye on what the weather has in store.

Federal forecasters said there is a 40% chance of a "near-normal" hurricane season for Texas and the rest of the Gulf and East coasts, and are more concerned about what the development of an El Niño could bring.

Brad Pugh, meteorologist at the National Weather Service Climate Prediction Center, said before El Niño's arrival, drought is still a factor for the Southwest.

"The seasonal drought outlook, which is valid through the end of August, calls for persistence of ongoing drought through much of New Mexico and Texas," Pugh reported. "Although we are forecasting improving drought conditions over the northeast Texas panhandle."

The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration is predicting between 12 and 17 named tropical storms will form this season. One to four of those storms could become hurricanes rated Category 3 or higher, with wind speeds of at least 111 miles per hour. Much of Texas is considered vulnerable to the impacts of storms, made worse by rising sea levels.

El Niño is a natural climate pattern, but could send global average temperatures soaring to a record high.

Johnna Infanti, also a meteorologist at the National Weather Service Climate Prediction Center, said the chance for it to develop is about 55%, likely producing the chance for excessive rain and snow starting in the fall.

"So with the El Niño, we expect a transition between the May through July season," Infanti noted. "We're expecting that to form during the May through July season and we're expecting that to persist into winter."

As might be expected because of climate change, NOAA predicts this summer will bring hotter-than-average temperatures across most U.S. states, including Texas.


get more stories like this via email