Summers have been heating up across the country and Wisconsin is no exception, according to a new analysis from the group Climate Central.

The post Analysis finds summers are heating up nationwide, including in Wisconsin appeared first on WPR.

A solar power array. Advocates say projects that help speed the conversion to clean energy, such as solar power, could be stymied by a U.S. House proposal to repeal clean energy tax credits. (Photo by Evan Houk/Maine Morning Star)

The tax cut legislation that U.S. House of Representatives Republicans are putting together in Washington includes measures that will cost thousands of jobs in Wisconsin and undercut the state’s progress toward cleaner energy, according to environmental and labor advocates.

To help pay for the extension of tax cuts enacted in the first Trump administration, the GOP-led House Ways and Means Committee is proposing to repeal clean energy tax credits, Politico reported this week. The tax credits were among the measures enacted in the 2022 Inflation Reduction Act (IRA).

“These credits are not just numbers on a balance sheet out in Washington D.C,” said Emily Pritzkow, executive director of the Wisconsin Building Trades Council, in an online press conference Wednesday. “They are representing real jobs, real economic growth, and real progress towards Wisconsin’s sustainable energy infrastructure. Since the IRA was signed into law in 2022 we have seen an unprecedented boom in clean energy development in the trades.”

The press conference was hosted by Forward Together Wisconsin, a nonprofit established to inform people about the Biden administration’s infrastructure and climate investments and to defend them.

“We’ve been seeing this real opportunity to drive energy costs down, and I cannot for the life of me understand why people want to reverse that progress,” said former Lt. Gov. Mandela Barnes, president of Forward Together Wisconsin.

In addition to the tax credits that the U.S. House proposal would repeal, President Donald Trump in his second term has frozen federal clean energy grants that were part of the 2022 legislation. Those include grants to establish a network of electric vehicle charging stations — prompting a lawsuit by 15 states, including Wisconsin.

Solar energy investments that have boomed in the last three years are among those that are threatened by the House proposal, according to advocates.

“At a time when billions of dollars are being invested in states that overwhelmingly voted for President Trump, this proposed legislation will effectively dismantle the most successful industrial onshoring effort in U.S. history,” Abigail Ross Hopper, president and CEO of the Solar Energy Industries Association, said in a statement this week.

Since passage of the IRA, Wisconsin has seen $933 million in clean energy and transportation private-sector investments, along with just over $2 billion from federal grants and loans, according to Innovation Policy & Technology, a San Francisco climate change policy think tank. The organization tallied 61 new clean energy and transportation projects that got underway in the state, with 45 manufacturing American-made products.

“Lower investment and higher energy bills due to repealing these federal programs and tax incentives will cost nearly 5,200 Wisconsin jobs in 2030 and more than 6,400 jobs in 2035, compared to current policies,” Innovation Policy & Technology reported.

The advocacy group Climate Power has calculated that without the federal support $5.4 billion for 15 planned Wisconsin clean energy projects could be in jeopardy.

Of those projects, 12 — 80% — are in five congressional districts represented by Republicans, according to Climate Power. Three representatives of those districts — Bryan Steil in the 1st CD, Scott Fitzgerald in the 5th CD and Glenn Grothman in the 6th CD — voted against the IRA in 2022. The other two, Derrick Van Orden in the 3rd CD and Tony Wied in the 8th CD, weren’t in office at the time but publicly opposed the legislation.

John Jacobs, business manager of International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers Local 494 in Southeast Wisconsin, said the clean energy tax credits and related policies have spurred investment and employment for the union’s members.

“I see first-hand how the clean energy tax credits have delivered on their promise, creating good family-sustaining union jobs across Wisconsin,” Jacobs said. “Repealing these tax credits could be devastating to many, but would put thousands of jobs at risk and hurt a growing industry.”

The tax credits were “an investment in America,” he added. The jobs lost if the credits are repealed “translate to economic instability for families across our state.”

The IRA also included a provision that extends the value of the tax credits to nonprofit organizations and government agencies.

Thanks to that benefit, called direct support payment, the Menasha Joint School District in the Fox Valley has qualified for a $4 million reimbursement from the federal government for installing rooftop solar energy and geothermal energy systems in a school currently under construction, said Brian Adesso, the school district’s business services director.

Once the school is complete the district expects to save $159,000 a year on its electric bill, “which is cost savings to local taxpayers and money that can be invested back into the students and staff,” Adesso said at the Forward Wisconsin press conference.

Adesso said the tax credits gave the district “certainty” it needed to be willing to undertake the clean energy additions to the project. Killing the credits would make that choice harder for school districts and impose higher costs on local property taxpayers, he added.

“The bill making its way through Congress takes a sledgehammer to the tax credits,” Addesso said — ending some credits early and attaching “bureaucratic restrictions that could make many of the credits unusable.”

Barnes said Forward Wisconsin Together is calling on Congress to protect the clean energy initiatives. “The people of Wisconsin deserve better,” he said. “The country deserves better. Clean energy as we know is the future, and we have to continue to invest in it.”

A measure passed by the U.S. House Ways and Means Committee allows individual taxpayers such as waiters and waitresses to deduct qualifying tips earned throughout the year, a tax break that would end in 2028. (Getty Photos)

WASHINGTON — House Republicans advanced the tax portion of the “one big, beautiful” reconciliation package early Wednesday, a step forward in permanently extending, and in some cases expanding, the 2017 tax law and temporarily handing President Donald Trump a win on campaign promises like no tax on tips.

The House Committee on Ways and Means voted along party lines to pass the measure, 26-19, after nearly 18 hours of debate that went through the night. Republicans rejected numerous amendments offered by Democrats, including protecting tax credits meant to combat climate change enacted under Democrats’ own 2022 budget reconciliation law, the Inflation Reduction Act.

The marathon debate occurred as the House Committee on Energy and Commerce debated overnight and into Wednesday afternoon over deep budget cuts, including some to Medicaid assistance for low-income individuals, to pay for the cost of tax provisions.

As of now, the massive tax package is estimated to add $3.8 trillion to the budget deficit over 10 years, according to the nonpartisan Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget.

If any temporary expansions in the bill are eventually made permanent, it would add roughly $5.3 trillion to the deficit over the next decade, according to the CRFB. The official congressional budget score has not yet been released.

Overall the bill is “a very, very big tax cut,” said Howard Gleckman, senior fellow at the Tax Policy Center, part of the left-leaning Brookings Institution and Urban Institute. “Much of the benefit will go to higher income people.”

Tax brackets, business breaks would continue

The bill permanently extends the underlying tax provisions passed in 2017 under the GOP-backed bill titled the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act, which is set to expire in 2025.

This means:

• Individual taxpayers would remain in the same tax brackets that were lowered in 2017, and they would continue to see the doubled standard deduction — two of the most costly measures. Additionally, taxpayers will receive a boost up to $2,000 on the standard deduction through 2028.
• Individual brackets would remain at 10%, 12%, 22%, 24%, 32%, 35% and 37%, though the proposal would change how inflation adjustments are calculated, meaning income would be taxed less over time, except for those in the 37% bracket.
• The $2,000 child tax credit, per child, would remain permanent but temporarily increase to $2,500 through 2028. The refundable portion of the credit — meaning how much money taxpayers can get back — would be increased to $1,400, but the amount remains subject to income thresholds, meaning lower income households would receive less of a refund.
• The child tax credit would now only be accessible if the parent submits a Social Security number, as well as a spouse’s if legally married, in addition to the already required Social Security number of each qualifying child.
• On the business side, the corporate tax rate would stay at 21%.
• Business owners who run sole proprietorships, partnerships and S-corporations would see an increase, to 23% up from 20%, in the amount of business income they can deduct from their federal returns, otherwise referred to as the pass-through income deduction.
• Expensing for research and development would be restored through 2029, as well as deductions available to businesses for certain investments, including equipment purchases.

No tax on tips, but only for a few years

Trump promised on the campaign trail to eliminate taxes on tips, Social Security and car loan interest. House Republicans handed him a win in their bill, but only a limited one.

The bill allows individual taxpayers to deduct qualifying tips earned throughout the year, a tax break that would end in 2028. And like the new child tax credit requirement, taxpayers could only take advantage of the deduction by including a Social Security number on their federal tax return as well as their spouse’s SSN, if married.

No taxes on car loan interest would also go into effect through 2028, though taxpayers could only claim it for automobiles that received final assembly in the United States.

Senior citizens with incomes of $75,000 or less, or $150,000 for a married couple, would receive an extra $4,000 discount on taxable income, with the amount decreasing as incomes increase. The tax break would also expire in 2028. The bill does not specify an age for “seniors.”

Highly taxed states still unhappy 

House Republicans raised the cap on the amount of state and local taxes, or SALT, that can be deducted, but not enough to please both GOP and Democratic lawmakers who represent highly taxed states like New York and California.

Under the bill the committee advanced Wednesday morning, taxpayers could deduct up to $30,000 — three times the $10,000 ceiling in the 2017 law — from their federal taxable income. The full cap would apply to those making $400,000 or less in annual income but phases down for higher earners.

Raising the cap is costly and unpopular with lawmakers representing lower tax states.

Republican Reps. Mike Lawler and Nick LaLota of New York, and Rep. Young Kim of California, are threatening to vote no on the House floor if the cap isn’t raised. The House GOP cannot lose more than a handful of votes if all Republicans are present.

House Speaker Mike Johnson of Louisiana told reporters Wednesday he didn’t want to “handicap” negotiations by sharing details publicly and that he was talking to the SALT caucus until 1:30 a.m.

“But I will tell you I’m absolutely confident we’re going to be able to work out a compromise that everybody can live with,” he said.

A ‘tragic indifference’ for poor families

The committee’s party-line approval of the bill drew praise and criticism across organizations representing varying interests of Americans.

Kris Cox, director of federal tax policy for the left-leaning Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, wrote on social media that the temporary child tax credit bump does “zilch” for the roughly 17 million children whose parents do not earn enough money to receive a refund check from the credit.

“But it delivers an additional $500-per-kid to higher-income families,” Cox wrote.

The organization also slammed the bill for going “out of its way to take eligibility from 4.5 million US citizen kids who have at least one parent without an SSN.”

Kristen Crowell, executive director of the advocacy group Fair Share America, said in a statement Wednesday that the bill “shows a tragic indifference to the very real struggles of normal, working people.

“In order to save face in front of their constituents, Republicans are hiding behind misleading claims that everyone will see reductions in their taxes,” Crowell said.

The Natural Resources Defense Council, an environmental protection advocacy organization, estimates that phasing out and altogether eliminating clean energy tax credits would result in higher electricity bills in several states, including Ohio and Pennsylvania, according to an emailed statement.

‘Unshackle the economy’ for businesses

Groups representing businesses across the U.S. praised the House bill as a way to bolster investment and growth opportunities.

Former Republican Ways and Means Chair Kevin Brady of Texas released a statement Wednesday on behalf of the Alliance for Competitive Taxation praising the bill as a path to “unshackle the economy from burdensome taxes and unlock new growth.”

“The bill reported out by the House Ways and Means Committee is an encouraging step in that direction and, if implemented with its major pro-growth proposals intact, will help American businesses and workers compete at home and abroad,” Brady said.

The alliance hailed the extension of the 21% corporate tax rate and urged lawmakers to make permanent the research and development expensing, and capital investment deductions.

Kristen Silverberg, president and chief operating officer of the Business Roundtable, said her organization “applauds Chairman Smith and members of the House Ways and Means Committee for advancing a comprehensive, pro-growth tax bill,” referring to GOP Rep. Jason Smith of Missouri.

“Today’s vote is a critical step forward in securing a more competitive tax system for American businesses and workers,” said Silverberg, whose organization represents 200 CEOs of U.S.-based companies.

What does losing your home in a disaster teach you about life and your community? Two disaster victims share their experiences. Plus, a local Red Cross leader shares some ways you can prepare for disaster.

The post ‘Your whole world changes’: Victims from Wisconsin disasters offer insights on life appeared first on WPR.

President Donald Trump's budget request, released on May 2, 2025, proposes slashing $21 billion in unspent funds from the 2021 bipartisan infrastructure law for renewable energy, electric vehicle charging infrastructure and other efforts to cut climate-warming carbon dioxide emissions.  Shown are solar panels and wind turbines. (Photo by Marga Buschbell-Steeger/Getty Images)

President Donald Trump’s budget request for the next fiscal year proposes deep cuts to renewable energy programs and other climate spending as the administration seeks to shift U.S. energy production to encourage more fossil fuels and push the focus away from reducing climate change.

The budget proposes slashing $21 billion in unspent funds from the 2021 bipartisan infrastructure law for renewable energy, electric vehicle charging infrastructure and other efforts to cut climate-warming carbon dioxide emissions. The request also targets climate research spending and initiatives meant to promote diversity.

“President Trump is committed to eliminating funding for the globalist climate agenda while unleashing American energy production,” a White House fact sheet on climate and environment spending said. The budget “eliminates funding for the Green New Scam.”

The president’s budget request is a wish list for Congress, which controls federal spending, to consider. Even with both chambers of Congress controlled by Republicans who have shown an unusual willingness to follow Trump’s lead on a host of policies, it is best understood as a starting point for negotiations between the branches of government and a representation of the administration’s priorities.

A White House official speaking on background Friday, though, said the Trump administration is exploring ways to exert more control over the federal spending process, including by potentially refusing to spend funds appropriated by lawmakers.

The first budget request of Trump’s second term calls on Congress to cut non-defense accounts by $163 billion to $557 billion, while keeping defense funding flat at $893 billion.

‘Political talking points’

The proposal drew criticism for a focus on culture-war buzzwords, even from groups that are not always inclined to support environment and climate spending.

The request “is long on rhetoric and short on details,” Steve Ellis, president of the nonpartisan budget watchdog Taxpayers for Common Sense, said in a statement.

“This year’s version leans heavily on political talking points—taking aim at so-called ‘woke’ programs and the ‘Green New Scam,’ while proposing a massive Pentagon spending hike to pay for wasteful fantasies like the Golden Dome and diverting military resources to immigration enforcement missions.”

Renewable energy

The administration proposal would roll back funding Trump’s predecessor, Democrat Joe Biden, championed for renewable energy.

It would cancel more than $15 billion from the 2021 infrastructure law “purposed for unreliable renewable energy, removing carbon dioxide from the air, and other costly technologies that burden ratepayers and consumers,” according to the White House fact sheet.

It would also eliminate $6 billion for building electric vehicle charging infrastructure.

“EV chargers should be built just like gas stations: with private sector resources disciplined by market forces,” the fact sheet said.

And it would decrease spending on the Energy Department’s Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy program, which helps private-sector projects secure financing and conducts research on low-carbon energy sources, by $2.5 billion.

In a statement, Rep. Marcy Kaptur, the ranking Democrat on the House Appropriations subcommittee that writes the bill funding energy programs, slammed the cuts to renewable energy programs, saying they would cost consumers and hurt a growing domestic industry.

“The Trump Administration’s proposal to slash $20 Billion from the Department of Energy’s programs — particularly a devastating 74% cut to Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy — is shortsighted and dangerous,” the longtime Ohio lawmaker said. “By gutting clean energy investments, this budget threatens to raise energy prices for consumers, increase our reliance on foreign energy, and stifle American competitiveness. … We must defend the programs that power America’s future — cleaner, cheaper, and made right here at home.”

Diversity

Throughout the request, the administration targets programs out of line with Trump’s ideology on social issues, including those meant to promote diversity.

For energy and environment programs, that includes spending on environmental justice initiatives, which target pollution and climate effects in majority-minority and low-income communities, and organizations “that advance the radical climate agenda,” according to the fact sheet.

Research and grant funding for the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration would be particularly hard hit by the proposal, which would terminate “a variety of climate-dominated research programs that are not aligned with Administration policy of ending ‘Green New Deal’ initiatives, saving taxpayers $1.3 billion.”

The budget also proposes eliminating $100 million from a U.S. Environmental Protection Agency fund dedicated to environmental justice. That funding “enabled a witch hunt against private industry” and “gave taxpayer dollars to political cronies who exploited the program’s racial preferencing policies to advance an anti-oil and gas crusade,” according to the White House.

National Park Service targeted

The budget also proposes cutting $900 million from National Park Service operations, which the administration said would come from defunding smaller sites while “supporting many national treasures.”

The document indicates the administration would prefer to leave responsibility for smaller sites currently under NPS management to states and refocus the federal government on the major parks that attract nationwide and international tourists.

“There is an urgent need to streamline staffing and transfer certain properties to State-level management to ensure the long-term health and sustainment of the National Park system,” according to a budget spreadsheet highlighting major line items in the request.

Despite laws in recent years to boost spending for maintenance at parks, the National Park Service faces a $23.3 billion deferred maintenance backlog, according to a July 2024 report from the nonpartisan Congressional Research Service.

The proposed NPS cut represents the largest single funding change – either positive or negative – of any line item under the Department of Interior, which would receive a funding decrease of more than $5 billion, about 30%, under the proposal.

Jennifer Shutt contributed to this report.

All six U.S. regional climate centers will remain online through a new contract deadline in mid-June.

The post Regional Climate Centers resume operations after funding loss led to closures appeared first on WPR.

The coalition announced its formation on Earth Day, looking to share stories about impacts from climate change in Wisconsin.

The post More than 70 partners in Wisconsin form coalition on Earth Day to promote climate action appeared first on WPR.

Astrophysicist Adam Frank is terrified for our future. He believes the climate crisis will wipe out much of humanity unless we take drastic steps to curb its impact. But he also says there’s an emerging scientific worldview that can help lead us out of this mess.

The post The new science of ‘planetary intelligence’ appeared first on WPR.

Climate, weather and water-related research in Wisconsin and the Great Lakes would take a hit under the Trump administration’s proposal to slash funding for the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration.

The post Wisconsin and Great Lakes research could suffer under proposed cuts to NOAA appeared first on WPR.

“Thermometers don’t care who’s in office,” said Dan Vimont, a professor of Atmospheric and Oceanic Sciences at the University of Wisconsin-Madison. “By undercutting our ability to monitor and assess the current state of our world, we are disadvantaging ourselves economically, and we’re disadvantaging ourselves in our national security as well.” 

The post How cuts impacting a federal climate report could affect Wisconsin’s disaster preparedness appeared first on WPR.

New Poll: American Voters Support Federal Investments in Electric Vehicles Broad, Bipartisan Support for EV Investments and Incentives that Lower Costs, Expand Access, and Help the U.S. Beat China in the Race for Auto Manufacturing WASHINGTON, D.C. – A new bipartisan national poll conducted by Meeting Street Insights and Hart Research finds broad public support …

The post Support for Electric Vehicles appeared first on Alternative Energy HQ.

President Trump is pushing federal agencies to expand timber harvests. He issued an executive order March 1 ordering the secretary of the Department of the Interior, the agriculture secretary and the chief of the United States Forest Service to come up with plans to increase logging, citing a goal to protect “national and economic security.” Trump also increased timber sales during his first term.

The U.S. Forest Service is already set to increase the number of trees it harvests to one of the highest levels since 2019, a result of Biden-era policies. 

But advocates argue that we need trees now more than ever and that this increase in timber harvest doesn’t make sense. The Forest Service is facing a lawsuit challenging the timber target policies that they say put the climate at risk. 

Advocates say the agency should protect mature forests with trees such as red oaks, which play a crucial role in storing and sequestering carbon. A single tree can store as much as 28,000 pounds of CO2 in its lifetime, the equivalent of annual emissions from generating electricity for one to two American homes.

The Forest Service routinely logs in national forests – it’s part of its standard management plan. In a 2022 report to Congress, the agency said it would increase logging in the east, south and Pacific Northwest. The eastern and southern regions, covering all national forests from the Mississippi River to the Atlantic, have historically been logged the most. 

The pandemic disrupted the agency’s plan to increase timber harvests. The agency is increasing its harvest to 4 billion board feet in 2026, said Spencer Scheidt, staff attorney at the Southern Environmental Law Center. That’s “enough lumber to circle the globe more than 30 times,” according to the law firm. 

How timber targets work

National Forest Service spokesperson Wade Muehlhof said in an email that the service has stepped up its forest management efforts over the last 15 years. But the volume sold on the private market has fluctuated.

Muehlhof said reducing wildfire risk has contributed to the increase in the number of acres logged, but a decrease in volume sold. Other factors causing the timber targets to decrease recently included “increased operating costs, litigation, wildfire, flat budgets, and reduced capacity.”

The Forest Service was established by Congress to provide timber for the nation’s benefit and was later directed to broaden its management scope to include additional multiple uses and benefits.

Each year, the Forest Service’s Washington office assigns timber targets to its nine regional offices. It's then handed down to individual national forest units, which then develop projects to meet those goals. The national forests then set up timber sales to private companies.

But as the world warms, and the impacts of climate change worsen, advocates say the Forest Service has never “accounted for the aggregate carbon effects of actions taken to fulfill its timber targets,” according to the complaint in the lawsuit.

Muehlhof confirmed the agency “does not account for the aggregate carbon effects of actions when setting its timber targets because it upholds a carbon stewardship posture and does not manage for carbon.”

Advocates pointed out that the Forest Service has a legal obligation under the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) to assess the environmental impacts of its projects. NEPA has twin aims, requiring agencies to consider the environmental impacts of proposed actions and inform the public of how those impacts factored into their decisions. 

But many Forest Service projects receive exclusions, allowing certain projects to skip the more in-depth environmental reviews because they’re considered to have little or no impact on the environment.

Three Forest Service projects named in the lawsuit, including national forests in the east and south, have gone through environmental assessment per NEPA, which requires assessing carbon effects of proposed projects. But advocates said the Forest Service failed to comply with the federal regulation because it underestimated the carbon effects of these projects when setting timber targets.

Forests store carbon

Trees are an incredibly effective carbon sink, removing CO2 from the air and sequestering it for generations, if left alone. Hardwood trees – such as oak and hickory, commonly found in many states east of the Mississippi River – typically store more carbon than softwoods, like pine.

Recent research shows that aging forests in the region have great potential for carbon storage, which can increase even further as they mature.

Most forests in the Central Hardwoods Region, which stretches from Missouri to West Virginia, are second-growth, having been logged at least once over the past two centuries. Only a handful of these forests are truly old-growth, with trees older than 150 years and minimal human disturbance over the last several decades.

During westward expansion, the Midwest experienced significant deforestation as settlers, farmers and logging companies cleared forestlands over several decades. This clearance was driven by the need for agricultural land, timber resources and urban development, leading to profound changes in the region’s landscape.

“Even the large, mature forests you see today in the Ozarks are not the original forests that existed 200 years ago,” said Michael Bill, Missouri’s state forester.

Older forests capture CO2 more slowly, but are crucial for carbon storage and continue to play a significant role in locking up carbon as they grow.

Advocates are concerned that old-growth forests will be at risk if timber targets increase. Josh Kelly, resilient forests director for MountainTrue, an environmental organization based in North Carolina and one of the plaintiffs in the lawsuit against the Forest Service, explained that the targets are measured by volume rather than acres and could effectively encourage cutting older, bigger trees, which store the most carbon.

The Biden administration proposed amending all forest land management plans in 2024 to protect old-growth forests across the entire National Forest System, which spans 43 states. The proposed plan, called the National Old-Growth Amendment, aimed to prohibit commercial logging on nearly 25 million acres of old growth. But ProPublica found it has allowed the Bureau of Land Management to cut old-growth trees at a faster rate than the previous decade.

The Forest Service withdrew from the plan in January, and environmentalists see an opportunity to protect old forests but remain cautious, given the likelihood that the Trump administration will continue to increase timber sales. Forest Service Chief Randy Moore said in a statement that the agency has gained “important insights that can help to guide our future stewardship of these special forests.”

Ryan Talbott, conservation advocate for WildEarth Guardians, said increased timber targets contradict the plan to protect old-growth forests. “On the one hand, you’re telling the public we’re going to protect and recruit old growth, and then on the other, you’re telling … the regions we need to increase logging,” he said.

“This is a really easy way to actually combat the climate crisis if we just allow trees to grow and continue to grow and not cut them,” Talbott added.

About two-thirds of the carbon storage in forests happens underground, not in the trees, research shows. But when trees are cut down, the carbon gradually reenters the atmosphere.

Too much emphasis on cutting timber

MountainTrue advocate Kelly said the Forest Service puts too much emphasis on cutting timber. The main problem is that “it’s elevated above other goals, and it’s something that forest leadership is evaluated on in their performance reviews annually,” he said, adding he believes some of the organization's records requests to the Forest Service support this. The Forest Service did not respond to this claim. 

MountainTrue’s goal isn’t to stop timber harvest, but to ensure a “balance” between logging and the risk of exacerbating climate change, Kelly said.

He said the lawsuit only applies to the east and south regions under the Forest Service, adding that “some of the timber harvests happening out west (are) legitimate and needed to reduce wildfire risk.” In the complaint, the plaintiffs asked the court to stop the Forest Service from offering any more timber sales for fiscal year 2024 in the eastern and southern regions “excluding harvests necessary to mitigate wildfire risks.”

In a response to the lawsuit in May, the Forest Service didn’t address the concerns about carbon storage and sequestration; instead, it claimed that the legal challenges didn’t target any specific, final decisions made by the government that the court can review.

Caroline Pufalt, with the Missouri chapter of the Sierra Club, said excessive logging can greatly affect wildlife habitats because it changes how much sunlight an area is exposed to and how quickly water flows through the land. Trees act as natural water regulators. Their roots help to absorb and retain water, allowing it to slowly seep into the ground rather than running off immediately.

“If you were an amphibian … standing around on the forest floor and knew where your little wet areas were likely to be, they would not be there again for … a good number of years,” she said.

Eventually, Pufalt said National Forests should “forget about the timber target” and focus on managing forests based on ecological principles. While timber production would still occur, it would be balanced with ecological considerations, potentially resulting in reduced timber yields but healthier, more resilient forests.

This story is a product of the Mississippi River Basin Ag & Water Desk, an independent reporting network based at the University of Missouri in partnership with Report for America, with major funding from the Walton Family Foundation. Wisconsin Watch is a member of the network. Sign up for our newsletters to get our news straight to your inbox.

The Forest Service is cutting down more trees despite their ability to capture carbon is a post from Wisconsin Watch, a non-profit investigative news site covering Wisconsin since 2009. Please consider making a contribution to support our journalism.

Peat bogs sequester a massive amount of the Earth’s carbon dioxide. But even as scientists work to better understand bogs’ sequestration, the wetlands are under threat.

On a cold winter afternoon, naturalist and educator Mary Colwell guided visitors on a chilly tour of the Volo Bog Natural Area in northern Illinois. 

Crouching down from a boardwalk that runs through the wetland, Colwell pointed to one of the stars of the tour: sphagnum moss. With her encouragement, the group touched the little branch-like leaves of the pale green moss growing at the base of a nearby tree.

“Then in warmer weather, this is so soft,” Colwell said. “It’s unreal.”

Bog ecosystems are some of the most efficient carbon storage ecosystems in the world. They cover just 3% of the Earth’s surface, yet hold up to 30% of global carbon.

The bog’s keystone species, sphagnum moss, plays a key role in its storage capacity. Sphagnum acts like a sponge — it holds up to 20 times its weight in water.

“Sphagnum moss itself is incredible,” Colwell noted. “It’s very slow-growing.”

It grows so slowly, in fact, that it can take thousands and thousands of years for a peat bog to develop. Volo Bog started to form from a glacial lake more than 6,000 years ago. It’s still encroaching on the center of the lake, called the “eye” of Volo Bog.

But while bog ecosystems provide habitat, filter water and store carbon, they have been disappearing for decades. Wisconsin has lost half of its wetlands. In Illinois, more than 90% of wetlands have been lost. There are about 110 million acres in the United States, with more than half in Alaska — but nearly 70% have been drained and developed over the past 100 years. 

Unlocking sphagnum moss’s secrets 

Scientists think sphagnum moss may hold important lessons about carbon dioxide sequestration, but there’s much they don’t know. 

Sona Pandey is the principal researcher at the Danforth Plant Science Center in the St. Louis suburbs and is part of a team researching sequestration and bogs. 

“The first time I saw a peat moss under the microscope I just literally fell in love with it,” Pandey said. “That’s the only way to describe it. It’s beautiful to look at.”

Pandey’s research team is growing moss in a lab, studying its DNA, and trying to figure out how it is threatened by climate change — and how it could be a solution. 

Moss excels at storing carbon. It thrives in waterlogged, acidic conditions. It doesn’t decompose, acting almost like a giant mat of living carbon. 

But when it’s threatened, that carbon has to go somewhere. The main threat to bogs – draining for development and agriculture – exposes these waterlogged species to air, which kick-starts the decomposition process from microbes. 

“It is a possibility that all the carbon which is stored in peat bogs at the moment will be released to the atmosphere,” Pandey said, noting how it will become a greenhouse gas.

She said if we understand these mosses on a microscopic level, scientists and conservationists can better protect and restore them on a larger scale. Her research could lead to making informed decisions about which species would be more successful to reintroduce as part of potential restoration projects.

Protecting what’s left 

Historically, bogs have been undervalued, often drained to make land more usable.

Trisha Atwood, an associate professor and ecosystem ecologist at Utah State University, said people are slowly beginning to see them in a new light.

“There has been substantial changes in people’s perception of these wetlands just because they don’t typically hit people’s top 10 most beautiful places,” Atwood said. “Governments are starting to realize that they have these other benefits.”

While forests and forest soil often get attention for their carbon sequestration, Atwood said wetlands are even more important, storing 30 to 50 times faster and at a higher rate than other systems.

“They’re like no other ecosystem on Earth,” she said.

Even as some aspects of wetlands are seen as more valuable, a 2023 Supreme Court decision rolled back most existing protections for these ecosystems. The Sackett v. The EPA decision ruled that the Clean Water Act doesn’t protect wetlands that aren’t continuously connected to bigger bodies of water. The decision has been criticized for putting ecosystems, like bogs, at risk. 

Rebecca Hammer is an attorney for the freshwater ecosystems team at the Natural Resources Defense Council, an environmental advocacy group. She said peat bogs are particularly affected by the Sackett decision because they are mostly isolated from larger bodies of water.

“They generally begin their life as a lake that doesn’t have a drainage or connection to another water body, which allows vegetation and plant material to collect,” she said, “and the sphagnum mosses that grow there to collect over 1000s of years.”

About half of U.S. states have existing legal protections for wetlands, but these ecosystems in 24 states are left without any protections, legal or otherwise.

There are bogs scattered throughout the Mississippi River basin all the way down to the coast. 

Hammer said the decision could have a near-permanent effect on bogs.

“When peat bogs are destroyed or polluted, affected by development, we lose all of those benefits,” she said. “We really can’t replicate peat bogs. They take thousands of years to form. So once they’re gone, they’re gone.”

Colwell, who takes visitors on tours at the Volo Bog, says more needs to be done to protect what’s left. 

“We’re trying to restore these natural systems,” she said, “and when we restore them, they can increase the amount of CO2 that they will take.”

This story is a product of the Mississippi River Basin Ag & Water Desk, an independent reporting network based at the University of Missouri, of which Wisconsin Watch is a member, in partnership with Harvest Public Media, a collaboration of public media newsrooms in the Midwest. Sign up for Wisconsin Watch’s newsletters to get our news straight to your inbox.

Bogs hold a climate solution through carbon capture, but many have been drained is a post from Wisconsin Watch, a non-profit investigative news site covering Wisconsin since 2009. Please consider making a contribution to support our journalism.

A new study builds on previous research that shows winters on the Great Lakes are growing shorter due to climate change.

The Great Lakes have been losing an average of 14 days of winter conditions each decade since 1995 due to warming air temperatures, according to the study published in the peer-reviewed journal Environmental Research Letters.

The study’s lead author, Eric Anderson, an environmental engineering professor with the Colorado School of Mines, said researchers arrived at their findings by examining ice conditions and surface water temperatures.

“We do see that winter time — whether you think about it in terms of ice or think about in terms of really cold water temperatures — we’re just seeing less days where those conditions exist,” Anderson said.

Research has already found the Great Lakes are losing ice cover at a rate of about 5 percent each decade for a total loss of 25 percent between 1973 and 2023. Those changes are occurring as the region has seen among the greatest increases in average winter temperatures over the past 50 years.

The study builds on that research by focusing on changes in water temperatures during the winter months. Anderson noted only Lake Erie typically sees heavy ice cover each winter, whereas the other Great Lakes often see areas of open water.

Winter is typically a blind spot for researchers due to difficulties in obtaining measurements when there’s less ice cover on the lakes. For the study, they relied largely on satellite data, as well as several monitoring stations, to examine how mixing of the lakes from top to bottom may be changing during the winter. Typically, the lakes tend to mix in the fall and spring when temperatures are the same at the top and bottom.

Winter days on the Great Lakes are being lost to spring and fall

During the summer, the surface of the lakes is warmer and the bottom is colder. In the winter, the opposite is true.

The study’s co-author, Craig Stow, said the reason for that is the maximum density of water is 4 degrees Celsius or about 39 degrees Fahrenheit. Stow, who is a scientist with NOAA’s Great Lakes Environmental Research Lab, said researchers found there’s been an increase in the number of spring and fall days in the lakes.

“The winter days are being lost to those spring and fall times where the temperatures are essentially the same from the very top to the very bottom,” Stow said.

Stow said that means the lakes are staying warmer in the fall and warming up earlier in the spring.

Winter days on the lakes were defined as days with ice cover or having surface temperatures of less than 2 degrees Celsius. The loss of winter days was found over nearly the entire area of lakes Superior, Huron and Erie. In lakes Michigan and Ontario, the loss of winter days was primarily along the shorelines and bays.

“We saw decreases in ice cover in areas where you tend to see large amounts of ice, so Green Bay and up near Beaver Island and Straits of Mackinac,” Anderson said. “We didn’t see big decreases in ice for the rest of the lake, so you didn’t have a lot of coastal ice loss along the eastern side of Wisconsin or down near Chicago.”

However, researchers did see a loss of colder temperatures in open waters around the southern shoreline of Lake Michigan, shifting to more days that had temperatures like spring or fall.

Lake Superior didn’t lose as many ice days as lakes Huron or Erie because it doesn’t see as much ice cover in the middle of the lake. 

“It was losing some number of days with coastal ice, particularly along the Wisconsin shoreline of Superior in the western end there,” Anderson said.

Even so, he said the lake experienced a big shift to temperatures closer to what one might expect in the spring and fall out in open waters.

Anderson and Stow said the changes could have implications for the Great Lakes in terms of extended periods when algal blooms may occur, the duration of shipping seasons, effects on the food web and the $7 billion fishing industry.

“We looked at a couple decades here of  change that we see you’re losing a half a month of what we used to think about being the winter,” Anderson said. “That’s really important for the chemistry of the lake. It could be important for the biology of the lake.”

Researchers say questions remain about whether the loss of winter days may stay the same or accelerate, which is one of the things they hope to examine in the future.

This story was originally published by WPR.

Study finds winter days on the Great Lakes growing shorter due to climate change is a post from Wisconsin Watch, a non-profit investigative news site covering Wisconsin since 2009. Please consider making a contribution to support our journalism.

Flood control along the Mississippi River is a central piece of a newly passed federal law — work that advocates believe is critical as the river basin sees more frequent and severe extreme weather events due to climate change. 

The Water Resources Development Act (WRDA) is passed by Congress every two years. It gives authority to the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers to undertake projects and studies to improve the nation’s water resources. 

Signed into law Jan. 4, this year’s package includes studies on increased flooding in the upper basin, flood mitigation measures throughout the river system, ecological restoration, and a $6 billion floodwall in Louisiana. 

The Mississippi River is managed in large part by the Army Corps, so it often features prominently in the bill, with a dual aim of making the river more suitable for shipping and restoring environmental degradation from flooding, nutrient pollution and climate change. 

Kirsten Wallace, executive director of the Upper Mississippi River Basin Association, called this year’s WRDA “a pretty special one.” She said it contained wins for many of the diverse stakeholders along the river, including shippers, environmental advocates, riverfront communities and federal and state agencies — who don’t always agree. 

Advocates lauded the law’s emphasis on nature-based solutions. In a press release, Stephanie Bailenson, policy team lead for The Nature Conservancy, said, “Since 2016, Congress has directed the corps to consider natural and nature-based solutions alongside or instead of traditional infrastructure. This latest act continues that trend.”

But all of these projects are only promised because funding doesn’t come until later, when Congress appropriates it. Many projects authorized in previous versions of the law are still unfunded, according to the Congressional Research Service.

Here’s what will affect the river in the Water Resources Development Act of 2024: 

Study of flood risk on the upper Mississippi River

The law authorizes a large-scale study of flooding on the Upper Mississippi River System, which includes the Mississippi River from its headwaters to where it meets the Ohio River at Cairo, Illinois, as well as the Illinois River and portions of some smaller tributaries.

The upper river has seen two major floods in the last few years: one in 2022 and one in 2019, which lasted for months and caused billions of dollars in damage. 

The study’s chief goal: figuring out how to reduce flood risk across the entire river system, instead of relying on municipalities to try to solve flooding problems themselves, which can sometimes have impacts downstream. North of St. Louis, for example, levees constrain the river to protect communities and valuable farmland from flooding — and some levee districts have raised those levees higher, safeguarding themselves but effectively pushing floodwaters faster downstream. 

“This plan allows more of a comprehensive way for levee districts to improve what they currently have … in a way that doesn’t put them in a position to be adversarial or just impose risk somewhere else,” Wallace said. 

She said the study will be a challenge, but that levee districts are eager for solutions as flood risks and heavier rainfall increase. 

Once the study receives funding, it will be led by the Army Corps’ St. Louis District, Wallace said. It’ll solicit input from cities, towns and ports along the river, recreators, the shipping industry and federal environmental agencies like the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and the U.S. Geological Survey. 

Flood projects for cities from the headwaters to the delta 

Cities and towns along the river could get help for the localized effects of flooding too, thanks to several projects authorized by the law. Upstream, that includes La Crosse, Wisconsin, which will enter into an agreement with the Army Corps to study the role of the city’s levees, which were constructed around the river’s record flood in 1965. 

“We have to have an eye on maintaining what we’ve got and looking toward the future and whatever conditions the river might undergo to be prepared as best we can,” said Matthew Gallager, the city’s director of engineering and public works. “Because obviously, nature is going to win.” 

Downriver, Louisiana secured the largest project authorization within the law. To protect communities in St. Tammany Parish, a county north of Lake Pontchartrain, Louisiana, plans to build a $5.9 billion levee and floodwall system totaling 18.5 miles in length to protect over 26,000 structures, most of which are family homes. 

The St. Tammany Flood Risk Management Project is slated to receive $3.7 billion in federal funding. The other 35% will come from non-federal sponsors, such as the Louisiana Coastal Protection and Restoration Authority (CPRA). 

“By authorizing the St. Tammany project for construction, Congress recognizes again the national importance of Louisiana and that CPRA can work with the federal government to execute a multi-billion coastal protection project successfully,” said CPRA Chairman Gordy Dove.

The law also authorizes a federal study of the Lake Pontchartrain Storm Surge Reduction Project, a component of Louisiana’s Coastal Master Plan meant to protect nine parishes bordering the lake. The Army Corps will investigate whether the proposed project to reduce flood risk is in the federal interest. 

Other approved flood control projects will be funded along the lower Mississippi River and its tributaries, including the Ouachita River in Louisiana. Several counties in Mississippi will also receive funding to improve environmental infrastructure, such as water and wastewater systems. 

Near Memphis, the bill authorizes the Hatchie-Loosahatchie Ecosystem Restoration project, which covers a 39-mile stretch of the lower Mississippi River. The project aims to manage flood risks while also restoring and sustaining the health, productivity and biological diversity of the flyway. 

In New Orleans, a study was authorized to investigate ecosystem restoration and water supply issues, such as the mitigation of future saltwater wedges that threaten drinking water and wetlands at the very end of the Mississippi River. 

More support for the Upper Mississippi River Restoration program 

The law also increases the amount of money Congress can give to the Upper Mississippi River Restoration program, which funds habitat restoration activities and scientific research on the upper river. 

Congress increased the money it can direct to the research part of the program by $10 million, bringing the total the program can get to $100 million annually. 

The funding boost “really is a recognition of the value of the science … the understanding that has improved about how the system is functioning over the last three decades,” said Marshall Plumley, the Army Corps’ regional manager for the program. 

If given extra funding, Plumley said program staff want to use it to better understand the effects of the increased amount of water that has flowed through the river in recent years. That increase, partly attributed to wetter conditions due to climate change, is changing the river’s floodplain habitats, including forests and backwater areas. 

A change to how new water infrastructure gets funded

The Mississippi River functions as a water superhighway, transporting around $500 million tons of goods each year. Infrastructure to keep shipping running smoothly is costly, and one adjustment in WRDA 2024 is aimed at shifting the burden of those costs. 

Taxpayers have been funding inland waterway infrastructure for nearly two centuries, but in 1978 Congress established the Inland Waterways Trust Fund, which requires the private shipping industry to pitch in. 

Today, the trust fund’s coffers are filled by a 29-cent per gallon diesel tax on commercial operators that use the Mississippi River and other inland waterways, adding up to about $125 million per year in recent years. New construction — like wider, more modern locks and dams on the upper river — is paid for through a public-private partnership: the private dollars in the fund, and federal dollars allocated by Congress. 

Until recently, the private dollars covered 35% of new construction costs, and federal dollars covered 65%. The new WRDA adjusts that to 25% and 75%, respectively. 

Advocates for the shipping industry have long believed taxpayers should have a bigger hand in funding construction because it’s not just shippers who benefit from an efficient river. 

The balance in the trust fund “always limits” construction that can happen in a given year, said Jen Armstrong, director of government relations for the Waterways Council. 

“We can’t afford to have projects take three decades or two decades to complete,” Armstrong said, “because we have other locks that are deteriorating.” 

Armstrong said she believes shifting more of the cost to the federal government will accelerate those projects. 

Not everyone supports the cost share change, however, including American Rivers, which has opposed the creation of new locks on the upper Mississippi in favor of helping the river revert to more natural processes. 

Kelsey Cruickshank, the group’s director of policy and government relations, called it “a disappointing development that continues to give short shrift to the incredible ecosystem of the world’s third-largest freshwater river system.”

This story is a product of the Mississippi River Basin Ag & Water Desk, an editorially independent reporting network based at the University of Missouri School of Journalism in partnership with Report For America and funded by the Walton Family Foundation. Wisconsin Watch is a member of the network. Sign up for our newsletter to get our news straight to your inbox.

New federal law addresses climate extremes and flooding along Mississippi River is a post from Wisconsin Watch, a non-profit investigative news site covering Wisconsin since 2009. Please consider making a contribution to support our journalism.

As a major contributor to global carbon dioxide (CO₂) emissions, the transportation sector has immense potential to advance decarbonization. However, a zero-emissions global supply chain requires re-imagining reliance on a heavy-duty trucking industry that emits 810,000 tons of CO₂, or 6 percent of the United States’ greenhouse gas emissions, and consumes 29 billion gallons of diesel annually in the U.S. alone.

A new study by MIT researchers, presented at the recent American Society of Mechanical Engineers 2024 International Design Engineering Technical Conferences and Computers and Information in Engineering Conference, quantifies the impact of a zero-emission truck’s design range on its energy storage requirements and operational revenue. The multivariable model outlined in the paper allows fleet owners and operators to better understand the design choices that impact the economic feasibility of battery-electric and hydrogen fuel cell heavy-duty trucks for commercial application, equipping stakeholders to make informed fleet transition decisions.

“The whole issue [of decarbonizing trucking] is like a very big, messy pie. One of the things we can do, from an academic standpoint, is quantify some of those pieces of pie with modeling, based on information and experience we’ve learned from industry stakeholders,” says ZhiYi Liang, PhD student on the renewable hydrogen team at the MIT K. Lisa Yang Global Engineering and Research Center (GEAR) and lead author of the study. Co-authored by Bryony DuPont, visiting scholar at GEAR, and Amos Winter, the Germeshausen Professor in the MIT Department of Mechanical Engineering, the paper elucidates operational and socioeconomic factors that need to be considered in efforts to decarbonize heavy-duty vehicles (HDVs).

Operational and infrastructure challenges

The team’s model shows that a technical challenge lies in the amount of energy that needs to be stored on the truck to meet the range and towing performance needs of commercial trucking applications. Due to the high energy density and low cost of diesel, existing diesel drivetrains remain more competitive than alternative lithium battery-electric vehicle (Li-BEV) and hydrogen fuel-cell-electric vehicle (H2 FCEV) drivetrains. Although Li-BEV drivetrains have the highest energy efficiency of all three, they are limited to short-to-medium range routes (under 500 miles) with low freight capacity, due to the weight and volume of the onboard energy storage needed. In addition, the authors note that existing electric grid infrastructure will need significant upgrades to support large-scale deployment of Li-BEV HDVs.

While the hydrogen-powered drivetrain has a significant weight advantage that enables higher cargo capacity and routes over 750 miles, the current state of hydrogen fuel networks limits economic viability, especially once operational cost and projected revenue are taken into account. Deployment will most likely require government intervention in the form of incentives and subsidies to reduce the price of hydrogen by more than half, as well as continued investment by corporations to ensure a stable supply. Also, as H2-FCEVs are still a relatively new technology, the ongoing design of conformal onboard hydrogen storage systems — one of which is the subject of Liang’s PhD — is crucial to successful adoption into the HDV market.

The current efficiency of diesel systems is a result of technological developments and manufacturing processes established over many decades, a precedent that suggests similar strides can be made with alternative drivetrains. However, interactions with fleet owners, automotive manufacturers, and refueling network providers reveal another major hurdle in the way that each “slice of the pie” is interrelated — issues must be addressed simultaneously because of how they affect each other, from renewable fuel infrastructure to technological readiness and capital cost of new fleets, among other considerations. And first steps into an uncertain future, where no one sector is fully in control of potential outcomes, is inherently risky. 

“Besides infrastructure limitations, we only have prototypes [of alternative HDVs] for fleet operator use, so the cost of procuring them is high, which means there isn’t demand for automakers to build manufacturing lines up to a scale that would make them economical to produce,” says Liang, describing just one step of a vicious cycle that is difficult to disrupt, especially for industry stakeholders trying to be competitive in a free market. 

Quantifying a path to feasibility

“Folks in the industry know that some kind of energy transition needs to happen, but they may not necessarily know for certain what the most viable path forward is,” says Liang. Although there is no singular avenue to zero emissions, the new model provides a way to further quantify and assess at least one slice of pie to aid decision-making.

Other MIT-led efforts aimed at helping industry stakeholders navigate decarbonization include an interactive mapping tool developed by Danika MacDonell, Impact Fellow at the MIT Climate and Sustainability Consortium (MCSC); alongside Florian Allroggen, executive director of MITs Zero Impact Aviation Alliance; and undergraduate researchers Micah Borrero, Helena De Figueiredo Valente, and Brooke Bao. The MCSC’s Geospatial Decision Support Tool supports strategic decision-making for fleet operators by allowing them to visualize regional freight flow densities, costs, emissions, planned and available infrastructure, and relevant regulations and incentives by region.

While current limitations reveal the need for joint problem-solving across sectors, the authors believe that stakeholders are motivated and ready to tackle climate problems together. Once-competing businesses already appear to be embracing a culture shift toward collaboration, with the recent agreement between General Motors and Hyundai to explore “future collaboration across key strategic areas,” including clean energy. 

Liang believes that transitioning the transportation sector to zero emissions is just one part of an “energy revolution” that will require all sectors to work together, because “everything is connected. In order for the whole thing to make sense, we need to consider ourselves part of that pie, and the entire system needs to change,” says Liang. “You can’t make a revolution succeed by yourself.” 

The authors acknowledge the MIT Climate and Sustainability Consortium for connecting them with industry members in the HDV ecosystem; and the MIT K. Lisa Yang Global Engineering and Research Center and MIT Morningside Academy for Design for financial support.

A new study on behalf of Milliken has identified the top U.S. states for sustainable energy production. The rapid rise of the sustainable energy sector worldwide has been one of the most important technological and economic stories of recent years. Continued urgency to mitigate the impact of climate change has spurred governments and companies to speed the transition …

The post States With the Most Businesses Focused on Sustainable Energy appeared first on Alternative Energy HQ.

Climate anxiety affects nearly half of young people aged 16-25. Students like second-year Rachel Mohammed find hope and inspiration through her involvement in innovative climate solutions, working alongside peers who share her determination. “I’ve met so many people at MIT who are dedicated to finding climate solutions in ways that I had never imagined, dreamed of, or heard of. That is what keeps me going, and I’m doing my part,” she says.

Hydrogen-fueled engines

Hydrogen offers the potential for zero or near-zero emissions, with the ability to reduce greenhouse gases and pollution by 29 percent. However, the hydrogen industry faces many challenges related to storage solutions and costs.

Mohammed leads the hydrogen team on MIT’s Electric Vehicle Team (EVT), which is dedicated to harnessing hydrogen power to build a cleaner, more sustainable future. EVT is one of several student-led build teams at the Edgerton Center focused on innovative climate solutions. Since its founding in 1992, the Edgerton Center has been a hub for MIT students to bring their ideas to life.

Hydrogen is mostly used in large vehicles like trucks and planes because it requires a lot of storage space. EVT is building their second iteration of a motorcycle based on what Mohammed calls a “goofy hypothesis” that you can use hydrogen to power a small vehicle. The team employs a hydrogen fuel cell system, which generates electricity by combining hydrogen with oxygen. However, the technology faces challenges, particularly in storage, which EVT is tackling with innovative designs for smaller vehicles.

Presenting at the 2024 World Hydrogen Summit reaffirmed Mohammed’s confidence in this project. “I often encounter skepticism, with people saying it’s not practical. Seeing others actively working on similar initiatives made me realize that we can do it too,” Mohammed says.

The team’s first successful track test last October allowed them to evaluate the real-world performance of their hydrogen-powered motorcycle, marking a crucial step in proving the feasibility and efficiency of their design.

MIT’s Sustainable Engine Team (SET), founded by junior Charles Yong, uses the combustion method to generate energy with hydrogen. This is a promising technology route for high-power-density applications, like aviation, but Yong believes it hasn’t received enough attention. Yong explains, “In the hydrogen power industry, startups choose fuel cell routes instead of combustion because gas turbine industry giants are 50 years ahead. However, these giants are moving very slowly toward hydrogen due to its not-yet-fully-developed infrastructure. Working under the Edgerton Center allows us to take risks and explore advanced tech directions to demonstrate that hydrogen combustion can be readily available.”

Both EVT and SET are publishing their research and providing detailed instructions for anyone interested in replicating their results.

Current methods used to process hydrogen into a usable fuel are cost-prohibitive, but several new innovations are promising to open the door to cost-competitive green hydrogen. Hydrogen is well positioned to be the fuel of the future. However, a commercially viable transition to green hydrogen – the environmentally friendly version of the fuel – seems …

The post Fueling the Future: Unlocking Low-Cost Green Hydrogen appeared first on Alternative Energy HQ.