75% of Americans Say “Nope” to Local Data Center Development, According to Heatmap
Welcome to Instrumental Toplines. What you need to know, why, and what you can look for next.
Jump to Section:
Data Center News • Suppression & Surveillance • Advocacy & Protest • The War Department • Tech & AI • Climate & Environment • Politics & Elections • Messengers & Media
Heatmap: Heatmap Exclusive: 75% of Americans Now Oppose Local Data Center Development
By Robinson Meyer
What?
A new Heatmap Pro poll by Embold Research indicates that 75% of Americans now oppose local data center development, with more than six in ten strongly opposed. This marks a 33-point increase in opposition over the past 12 months, becoming a bipartisan trend across all demographics.
So What?
The rapid, bipartisan collapse in public support for data centers is forcing politicians at all levels to distance themselves from these facilities or implement restrictions. This signifies a potent, emerging civic movement capable of influencing elections and policy around local infrastructure and resource management.
WTF?
Retired Philadelphia Eagles great Jason Kelce starred in an ad advising Americans to mail their urine to AI data centers, claiming they waste water.
Now What?
Further political distancing from data centers by candidates in upcoming elections, the implementation and potential extension of moratoriums like New York's, and the results of mandatory audits such as the one initiated in Texas. Continued restrictions or bans at the local government level should also be monitored.
Axios: Behind the Curtain: The new existential threat to AI
By Jim VandeHei, Mike Allen
What?
Rapidly rising public and political opposition to U.S. data centers is emerging as a significant threat to AI growth and related economic booms. This opposition, stemming from concerns over electricity bills, water use, large developments, and job displacement fears, is causing politicians across the political spectrum to impose new restrictions and retreat from supporting the industry.
So What?
Rapidly shifting public and political sentiment against AI's physical infrastructure due to environmental and economic concerns offers an opportunity for movements to push for more stringent regulations on data center development, ensuring community benefits, environmental protection, and local input. This could curb unchecked growth and challenge the industry's influence.
WTF?
A June Echelon Insights poll found that only 27% of voters would support building an AI data center in their community, placing it dead last among projects tested, including a nuclear power plant.
Now What?
The impact of data center opposition on upcoming governors' races and midterms, potentially leading to more politicians imposing stringent new requirements or blocking projects. Companies like OpenAI and Meta will likely intensify their efforts to court state and local officials with promises of economic benefits and community engagement.
The Washington Post: Pennsylvania will sharply limit data center development, expand review process
By Tim Craig
What?
Pennsylvania Gov. Josh Shapiro signed an executive order on Tuesday that sharply limits data center development by requiring new projects to meet strict guidelines on electricity and water usage and gain local approval. This action reverses some of his previous policies, removes data center projects from a "fast track" program, and administration officials state it will make most new developments "exceptionally difficult" to pursue.
So What?
This move by Governor Shapiro demonstrates that sustained community opposition can pressure political leaders to reverse pro-corporate policies and prioritize environmental concerns and local autonomy. It reinforces the importance of grassroots organizing in shaping land-use decisions and resource management, especially against powerful industry interests.
WTF?
Gov. Shapiro previously supported data center development, including a specific project in Archbald that would cover 14 percent of the town's land with 51 data warehouses and was part of his "fast-track" program, despite local anger.
Now What?
How the new "strictest guardrails in the nation," including requirements for developers to "bring their own power" with 10 percent clean energy and bans on nondisclosure agreements, impact the 20 proposed data center projects with current applications. The effectiveness of local officials, now empowered with greater approval authority, in pushing back against or permitting projects under these new rules will be key.
CRE Daily: Amazon’s $10B Houston Data Center Project Hits Snags
By Jordan B.
What?
Amazon's $10 billion, 3,000-acre data center campus, known as Project Eagle, near Boling, Texas, is facing delays. The project is hampered by a nondisclosure agreement (NDA) signed by Wharton County officials, limiting public information, and new audit requirements from Gov. Greg Abbott for data center power hookups, which are slowing statewide projects.
So What?
The project's secrecy due to an NDA with local officials obstructs residents' ability to understand a significant development in their community. Furthermore, the governor's new regulations and delayed power grid connections highlight the broader tensions between rapid AI-driven expansion of data centers, growing local opposition, and the allocation of critical resources like electricity.
WTF?
Wharton County officials signed a nondisclosure agreement with a consulting firm that has worked with Amazon, making it difficult for concerned residents to learn more about the development.
Now What?
How quickly Amazon secures the remaining county permits and clears any state-level scrutiny to meet its 2027 completion target. Additionally, it will be important to observe the implementation of Gov. Abbott's new audit system by the Electric Reliability Council of Texas and its impact on other data center approvals and the state's broader pipeline.
USA TODAY: AI data center opponents get water use argument all wrong | Opinion
By Dace Potas
What?
This opinion article argues that opposition to AI data centers, based on fears of water use, electricity consumption, and cost, is largely mistaken. It claims data centers provide significant economic benefits like tax revenue and jobs to host communities, while environmental concerns are overstated or addressable through technological shifts and infrastructure improvements.
So What?
The article advocates against local and state regulations restricting data center construction, portraying such measures as "misguided" despite public concern about environmental impact and resource strain. This perspective undermines efforts by communities and progressive movements to assert local control over development and prioritize sustainable resource management over corporate expansion.
WTF?
U.S. data centers account for just 0.14% of the country's annual water consumption, or 449 million gallons a day, while California almond farms use 4.2 billion gallons a day and golf courses use 1.4 billion.
Now What?
Ongoing legislative efforts, such as state-level moratoria and proposed nationwide measures by figures like Sen. Bernie Sanders and Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, related to data center construction. There will also be continued debate over regulations for building energy infrastructure.
What?
The worldwide Data Center Physical Infrastructure (DCPI) manufacturer revenue is projected to grow at a 22% compound annual growth rate from 2025 to 2030, reaching $120 billion, driven primarily by net additions to IT capacity due to AI buildout. Nearly 200 GW of data center capacity is expected to be added through 2030, with thermal management leading segment growth.
So What?
The rapid expansion of data centers, fueled by AI, faces significant constraints including equipment lead times, construction labor, grid interconnection, and community consent, with the first statewide data center moratorium now in force. Community opposition is explicitly cited as a material constraint that is blocking or delaying a meaningful share of announced projects.
WTF?
A "first statewide data center moratorium now in force" is directly impacting market dynamics.
Now What?
How constraints related to equipment lead times, construction labor, grid interconnection, and community consent continue to affect the delivery and siting of new data center projects. The potential for more statewide data center moratoriums or similar policy interventions, alongside shifts in regional growth due to power availability and permitting environments, should also be monitored.
Nevada Current: Ford says he’ll pause data center tax abatements if elected
By Dana Gentry
What?
Democratic gubernatorial candidate Aaron Ford announced he will pause state tax breaks for new data centers if elected governor. He plans to implement stricter rules, including requiring data centers to provide their own water/coolant, pay for their own electricity and infrastructure, and banning water-intensive cooling methods, citing concerns about water drainage, increased energy bills, and a lack of promised jobs and tax revenue.
So What?
This policy proposal addresses the impact of corporate tax abatements on public resources like water and energy, potentially leading to increased utility costs for residents. It represents a potential shift in state economic development strategy away from subsidies for industries perceived as resource-intensive without sufficient public benefit, aligning with concerns about affordability and environmental sustainability.
WTF?
"People really effing hate data centers," Democratic U.S. Senate candidate Abdul El-Sayed of Michigan said while campaigning in July.
Now What?
The immediate next step is the gubernatorial election, as Ford's proposals are contingent on his election. People should watch for further campaigning from Ford and current Governor Lombardo regarding data center policies, and how the issue continues to be framed in the context of state resources and economic development.
Bloomberg: Tech Deploys Charm Offensive to Combat AI Data Center Backlash
By Brody Ford, Josh Saul, Dina Bass and Leonardo Nicoletti
What?
Tech companies are employing a "charm offensive" of marketing, community projects, and concessions to counter widespread local and political opposition to their new AI data center projects across the US and abroad. This shift comes as at least 75 data center projects, valued at about $130 billion, have been blocked or delayed by local resistance in the first three months of this year, often fueled by concerns over resource use and secrecy.
So What?
The growing, bipartisan public pushback against AI data centers forces a critical examination of unchecked corporate expansion and its environmental and social costs. This movement demonstrates how organized civil society and local activism can challenge powerful tech interests, potentially influencing future regulatory frameworks and demanding greater transparency and accountability from industry.
WTF?
During tense planning meetings for Oracle's Project Jupiter, a critic was banned and later arrested for showing up disguised in a mustache.
Now What?
The outcomes of pending legal challenges and political campaigns, such as those initiated by Steve Swope's group in Georgia to overturn zoning decisions and unseat commissioners. Additionally, the largest potential roadblock for Oracle's New Mexico project is state approval for permits to power its massive grid.
By William Tong
What?
In 2024, Texas ranked second nationally with about 23% of residential electricity customers disconnected due to billing and nonpayment issues. Investor-owned utilities in Texas disconnected customers at triple the rate of municipally owned and cooperative utilities, largely due to their differing business strategies which prioritize profit versus customer focus.
So What?
The significantly higher disconnection rates by profit-driven utilities demonstrate how deregulated energy markets can disadvantage lower-income customers and create barriers to essential services for a large portion of the population. This disparity highlights how business models prioritizing shareholder returns can exacerbate energy insecurity and impact basic rights.
WTF?
Texas ranked second in the country for electricity disconnection rates in 2024, with about 23% of residential customers cut off from power due to billing and nonpayment issues throughout the year.
Now What?
The article suggests watching for how investor-owned utilities address their high disconnection rates, possibly through expanded payment assistance, and how municipal and cooperative utilities continue to implement customer-focused financial support and local energy solutions. Future developments will reveal if these differing strategies continue to result in such wide variances in power disconnections.
By Drew Kann
What?
The Georgia Public Service Commission (PSC) voted unanimously to hold hearings on the legality of Houston-based firm VoltaGrid's plans to operate 33 on-site gas-burning engines to power a Serverfarm data center near Atlanta. This decision follows a halt order for unpermitted construction and a petition from the Southern Environmental Law Center, which argues the arrangement violates Georgia's Territorial Electric Service Act and the Cogeneration and Distributed Generation Act.
So What?
This case represents a challenge by civil society groups to a corporate energy generation model, asserting that an on-site gas power plant for a data center potentially violates existing state energy and electricity laws. The outcome will set a precedent for how new energy-intensive developments are regulated, impacting environmental standards and fair application of energy provider rules in Georgia.
WTF?
VoltaGrid had already begun assembly of 33 gas-burning engines for the data center before being ordered to halt construction and cited by state officials for allegedly building without a permit.
Now What?
The case will be assigned to a hearing officer who will gather testimony and hold hearings, then make a recommendation to the five commissioners, who will vote to adopt or reject it. The PSC is expected to set a schedule for these hearings in the coming weeks.
Heatmap: The Data Center Trojan Horse
By Robinson Meyer
What?
In the Wisconsin Democratic gubernatorial primary, David Crowley defeated Francesca Hong despite Hong's anti-data-center platform, with data center bans passing in some areas where Hong still lost. Following his victory, Crowley, who opposes a moratorium but seeks stronger guardrails, faced attacks from Republican nominee Tom Tiffany, who is using the data center issue as a "trojan horse" to restrict clean energy development.
So What?
This scenario demonstrates how opposition to data centers can be strategically co-opted to undermine clean energy development and decarbonization efforts, as the Republican nominee links data centers to renewables as undesirable industrial development. It also highlights how public perception and "vibes" can misrepresent candidates' actual policy stances, potentially splitting progressive movements.
WTF?
Democratic candidate David Crowley, who has been attacked as pro-corporate and not anti-data-center enough, is described as having "stricter policy all along" on some data center fronts, such as requiring 100% renewable energy, than another progressive candidate.
Now What?
How Republican nominee Tom Tiffany, if elected governor, might use his authority to appoint members to the Wisconsin Public Service Commission to implement his long-standing preferences to restrict clean energy development and potentially favor coal.
Vox: The strange politics of the AI backlash
By Eric Levitz
What?
The general election for Wisconsin governor between Republican Tom Tiffany and Democrat David Crowley has become a flashpoint for the national debate over data centers. Both candidates are publicly adopting anti-data center rhetoric, accusing the other of being a "shill for Big Tech," despite their past stances or actual policy similarities.
So What?
How anti-tech populism can drive political narratives, even when candidates' substantive policy differences are narrow or their own constituents (like labor unions for Democrats) benefit from the criticized developments. It shows the pressure on politicians to align with growing public sentiment against hyperscale development, despite economic benefits for some communities.
WTF?
A new hyperscale data center in Port Washington, Wisconsin, is expected to add between $1.3 and $1.8 billion in property value to a city whose entire existing valuation is scarcely over $1 billion.
Now What?
People should watch whether data centers remain a central issue in the governor's race, given they are not a top-tier concern for most voters, and if candidates fully commit to their populist rhetoric regarding data center subsidies and regulation.
Minnesota Reformer: Union members, activists defiant in the face of federal surveillance
By Madison McVan
What?
Unions, progressive organizations, and churches were subjects of a wide-ranging surveillance operation by the Department of Homeland Security during "Operation Metro Surge," involving secret financial record acquisition and undercover agents attending meetings. Leaders of these organizations held a press conference to condemn the surveillance and express defiance, while 15 individuals have been federally indicted for conspiracy to impede or assault federal agents.
So What?
Federal surveillance tactics, including infiltration and financial monitoring, used against labor unions, racial justice groups, environmental organizations, and churches, linking these actions to indictments against activists. This highlights a potential governmental effort to suppress or intimidate collective action and dissent, shifting focus from alleged misconduct by federal agents mentioned in the article.
WTF?
Marcia Howard, president of Minneapolis Federation of Educators Local 59, said being on the U.S. Department of Justice's diagram of organizations accused of forming part of a wide-ranging conspiracy to impede and assault federal agents was "Kinda chic."
Now What?
Whether Target and other Minnesota-based corporations respond to calls to use their political power to demand accountability for federal agents’ actions during Operation Metro Surge. The legal proceedings for the 15 indicted individuals and potential further revelations from defense attorneys are also important to follow.
The Daily Blog: ICE invent new ways to be cruel
By Martyn Bradbury
What?
White House border czar Tom Homan defended Immigration and Customs Enforcement's (ICE) plan to equip officers with gloves that deliver painful electric shocks. It also details ICE's infiltration of the youth-led Sunrise Movement, including undercover agents attending meetings, issuing subpoenas for financial records, and attempting to entice an organizer into confrontational tactics, alongside the arrest of three Oglala Sioux Tribe members in Minneapolis.
So What?
The described actions, including the proposed use of electric shock devices by law enforcement and the documented infiltration and attempted provocation of a non-violent protest group, suggest a governmental effort to suppress dissent and potentially undermine civil liberties. These tactics could deter legitimate protest and disproportionately affect marginalized communities, raising concerns about the right to peaceful assembly.
WTF?
White House border czar Tom Homan defended ICE's plan to give officers gloves that deliver painful electric shocks.
Now What?
The potential deployment of electric shock gloves by ICE officers and continued governmental surveillance or infiltration of protest movements, particularly those engaging in aggressive but non-violent tactics.
WJHL: ICE pitches legal insurance to help shield local officers who make immigration arrests
By RYAN J. FOLEY
What?
U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) is proposing a plan to subsidize liability insurance for state and local officers trained and deputized to enforce federal immigration laws, such as those in 287(g) partnerships. This plan aims to shield officers from potential financial consequences if accused of on-duty misconduct and to remove a hurdle that has made some local police departments reluctant to join ICE partnerships.
So What?
This proposal could further insulate officers from personal accountability for alleged misconduct, potentially increasing incidents that violate people's rights by removing financial disincentives for local departments to participate in ICE's immigration enforcement programs. It suggests an effort to expand and solidify federal immigration enforcement capabilities by shifting potential liability away from local officers.
WTF?
The article cites "arrests made through such programs jumped to an average of 3,000 per month in the first two months of 2026" under President Trump's second term, compared to "a monthly average of 250 in 2024 under President Joe Biden," despite the article's own posted and updated dates also being in 2026.
Now What?
The industry feedback requested by ICE by Thursday, and for clarity on the proposed timeline for launching the program and its estimated cost. Further discussions between ICE and groups like the National Sheriffs’ Association on how the plan will work are also to be expected.
What?
Congressmembers Delia C. Ramirez, Jim McGovern, and Ayanna Pressley, joined by 23 colleagues, sent a letter to U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio and Secretary of the Treasury Scott Bessent. The letter demands an end to Trump Administration policies that persecute political dissent, specifically policies deploying the State and Treasury Departments against "far-left networks" and the implementation of National Security Presidential Memorandum-7 (NSPM-7) targeting "domestic terrorism and organized political violence." They also requested the release of all communications regarding NSPM-7's implementation.
So What?
This congressional inquiry challenges the alleged "weaponization of the security apparatus of the state to suppress political dissent," which is described as a direct assault on constitutional rights and democratic governance. It highlights efforts to oppose policies that define political opposition as an "existential threat," degrade civil liberties, and expand state surveillance against civil society.
WTF?
Despite investigations and analysis establishing that right-wing attacks account for the vast majority of fatalities from domestic terrorism, the memorandum (NSPM-7) ignores all mention of right-wing extremism.
Now What?
The Administration's response to the demand to withdraw the policy, abandon plans to export the NSPM-7 framework, and cease targeting political speech and civil society. Additionally, it remains to be seen if the requested communications between State, Treasury, Homeland Security, Justice, and the White House regarding NSPM-7 are released.
Defector: The Crazy Thing About “Woke 1” Was How It Was Exploited
By Mychal Denzel Smith
What?
Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, echoed by City Councilman Chi Ossé, dismissed an earlier period of radical political movement, referred to as "Woke 1," as "crazy" during an interview on ABC's This Week. This statement occurred as Ocasio-Cortez declined to endorse a fellow Democratic Socialists of America member who had previously supported police and prison abolition, and the author critiques this dismissal as empowering right-wing narratives and abandoning the movement's origins.
So What?
This "evolution" by progressive politicians, who benefited from earlier radical movements, risks legitimizing right-wing narratives that weaponize terms like "woke" against Black political expression and broader progressive goals. It signals a potential strategic capitulation to conservative distortions by de-emphasizing "identity politics" in pursuit of broader electoral appeal, potentially alienating the foundational activist bases.
WTF?
The article notes that Thomas Chatterton Williams, described as having made a "crusade against 'wokeness'" through "awful" books, finds something agreeable about the concept of "Woke 2."
Now What?
Whether progressive politicians continue to distance themselves from "Woke 1" ideas and "identity politics" in pursuit of a "Woke 2" approach focused on "New Deal-style political ambitions." This suggests observing if the perceived path to higher office involves abandoning more radical progressive aims for broader electoral appeal.
The New Humanitarian: US funding cuts fuel child recruitment into Haiti’s armed groups
By Jess DiPierro Obert
What?
In January 2025, President Donald Trump's executive orders froze 80% of US-funded programs in Haiti, dismantling USAID and gutting the Inter-American Foundation. These cuts eliminated vital peace and development initiatives, including job training and violence prevention, leading to a tripling of child recruitment into armed groups in 2025, with children now comprising half of Haitian gang members.
So What?
This report highlights how the cessation of US foreign aid for peacebuilding and development directly contributes to escalating human rights crises, such as the forced recruitment of children into armed groups, by eliminating critical support systems and leaving communities vulnerable. It underscores the destructive impact of militarized security solutions, like drone strikes, that fail to address root causes and undermine local efforts to foster peace and offer alternatives to violence.
WTF?
A national commission for disarmament, demobilisation, and reintegration (DDR) was created but given no funding, leading the agency to put out banners urging fighters to lay down their weapons with no steps to follow and a phone number that didn't work.
Now What?
Whether UNICEF's significantly unfunded humanitarian appeal for Haiti attracts new donors or if organizations find alternative funding to fill the gap left by US cuts. Additionally, observe if effective transitional justice or DDR mechanisms, currently described as "stillborn" or unfunded, gain traction amidst the government's prevailing security approach.
The Washington Post: Elon Musk posted, and she lost her job. Now, she seeks to clear her name.
By Meryl Kornfield and Brianna Sacks
What?
A senior FEMA official, Mary Comans, was fired in February 2025 after Elon Musk publicly blamed her on X for allegedly allowing unlawful payments to New York City for immigrant housing. A judge has since ruled that Comans was unlawfully fired and is entitled to a name-clearing hearing, a decision the government is currently appealing. Comans' attorneys state she had no role in authorizing the payments, which a U.S. DOGE Service aide had explicitly endorsed.
So What?
This case demonstrates how prominent public figures' social media posts can be weaponized to discredit and lead to the wrongful termination of federal employees, particularly amid politically charged governmental restructuring. The ruling for a name-clearing hearing establishes a potential precedent for due process for federal workers publicly attacked and unfairly dismissed, highlighting the need for protections against politically motivated firings.
WTF?
After Mary Comans helped coordinate the recovery of approximately $80 million in funds and was thanked by FEMA’s acting administrator for the work, she was told the next morning she had been fired and had about 15 minutes to leave the building.
Now What?
The government is currently appealing the judge's decision that Mary Comans was unlawfully fired and is entitled to a name-clearing hearing. It is also suggested that more name-clearing hearings could become common for other federal employees who are fired and publicly attacked by administration officials.
NPR: 'Profits won.' The child safety trial against Meta kicks off in federal court
By John Ruwitch
What?
A landmark federal trial began in Oakland, California, pitting Meta Platforms against four states alleging the company designed its platforms (Instagram, Facebook) to be addictive to minors, misled the public about these harms, and violated child privacy laws. Meta denies the claims, asserting it has strong protections for teens and states are misrepresenting its data and efforts.
So What?
This trial represents a significant challenge to corporate power, seeking to hold a major tech company accountable for product design allegedly harmful to young people's mental health and privacy, rather than just user-generated content. A successful outcome could set a precedent for corporate responsibility similar to past tobacco litigation, potentially reshaping public discussion and company behavior regarding digital product safety.
WTF?
An initial estimate of potential penalties is as high as $1.4 trillion — roughly the entire value of Meta's equity on the Nasdaq.
Now What?
The continuation of witness testimony, whether Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg will be called to testify, and the ultimate outcome of the six-week trial. Any ruling against Meta is expected to be appealed, potentially reaching the Supreme Court.
Grist: US Army Corps approves a pipeline project it knows harms Indigenous lands
By Vivian La
What?
The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers issued a key federal permit for Enbridge Energy's plan to replace a 4-mile segment of the Line 5 pipeline with a new one buried in a tunnel under the Straits of Mackinac in Michigan. This approval, fast-tracked under a "national energy emergency" executive order, came despite the Army Corps acknowledging permanent adverse impacts on wetlands, vegetation, land use, and cultural resources, and amid strong opposition from tribal nations who say it violates treaty rights.
So What?
This decision reveals a federal agency's willingness to prioritize fossil fuel infrastructure and a declared "national energy emergency" over its own acknowledged environmental destruction and established tribal treaty rights. It sets a concerning precedent for bypassing thorough consultation and undermining Indigenous sovereignty, potentially impacting future environmental and cultural protections across Indian Country.
WTF?
The Army Corps approved the project despite stating that "tunnel construction would have permanent adverse impacts on wetlands, vegetation, land use, and cultural resources."
Now What?
Enbridge still needs state permits to begin tunnel construction, with a decision on a wastewater discharge permit expected from the Michigan Department of Environment, Great Lakes, and Energy before the end of September. Lawyers working with Michigan tribes are exploring legal options to challenge the Army Corps’ federal permit.
France 24: US moves to open vast tracts of pristine forests to logging
What?
The Trump administration proposed a rule change on Tuesday, August 18, 2026, to open 44 million acres of wild forest to road construction and logging by rescinding the 2001 Roadless Area Conservation Rule. This proposal aims to return decision-making for development in "inventoried roadless areas," primarily across 10 Western states, to local officials for forest management and timber harvesting.
So What?
This move matters as it would remove protections from vast public lands, threatening habitats for species like grizzly bears and lynx, and potentially increasing wildfire risk despite claims of fire prevention. It also contradicts a recent survey indicating that 77 percent of likely voters prioritize conserving national forests and roadless lands.
WTF?
Agriculture Secretary Brooke Rollins asserted the previous rule prevented "vital management work" to curb wildfires, yet a nationwide study cited in the article found wildfire ignition was nearly four times more likely within 50 meters of roads compared to roadless areas.
Now What?
Legal challenges from conservation groups are expected to arise against the proposed rule. People should also watch for specific developments regarding the Tongass National Forest in Alaska, as it was explicitly mentioned in the draft rule.
DeSmog: Inside the Struggle to Dismantle America’s Greenhouse Gas Data
By Rachel Santarsiero
What?
The Trump administration plans to repeal the federal Greenhouse Gas Reporting Program (GHGRP) and overhaul the methane reporting rule known as Subpart W. While publicly advocating for the preservation of the broader GHGRP, the oil and gas industry has been privately pushing to weaken Subpart W, fearing that Biden-era revisions would force them to report significantly higher methane emissions. New documents obtained through FOIA detail this industry effort to loosen reporting requirements while maintaining the overarching system for its own strategic benefits.
So What?
This dual strategy by the fossil fuel industry aims to manipulate public perception and regulatory outcomes by preserving a data framework while undermining its integrity. Such actions could lead to a significant undercounting of U.S. greenhouse gas emissions, obstructing effective climate policy and potentially harming U.S. companies' standing in international markets with stricter climate disclosure requirements.
WTF?
An email unearthed by a 2024 Congressional investigation revealed that API's "The Environmental Partnership" program, aimed at reducing methane emissions, had a "true purpose" described by a BP executive as: "The hope – but far from the certainty – is to stave off future regulation."
Now What?
The EPA is expected to propose its final rule on the Greenhouse Gas Reporting Program "any day," and separately, a rule overhauling oil and gas methane pollution disclosure requirements. People should monitor these upcoming proposals to assess the extent of exemptions and weakened reporting, and watch for details regarding the potential development of a voluntary "Open GHGRP" program by the University of Texas at Austin.
@greenpeaceuk A study shows that a billionaire's investments create a million times more carbon pollution per year than a regular worker's entire lifestyle. To put that into perspective, an individual from the top 50 richest people on Earth burns through more carbon in a quick 90-minute window than an average person will emit during their whole life.
♬ som original - ᴊʟᴢɪɴ
NPR: ABC and Disney sue FCC, alleging First Amendment violations
By David Folkenflik
What?
The ABC network and its corporate parent, The Walt Disney Co., sued the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) in federal court, alleging the Trump administration violated their First Amendment free speech rights. They claim the FCC launched investigations and challenged broadcast licenses in retaliation for ABC's news coverage, late-night satire, and talk show views, seeking to appease President Trump.
So What?
This case raises significant concerns about potential government censorship and the use of state power to punish or suppress disfavored expression by a major media outlet. It challenges the independence of a regulatory body like the FCC when faced with a president's public calls to strip licenses from a network critical of his administration.
WTF?
Ironically, ABC had previously paid $16 million to settle a defamation case filed by Trump as a private citizen in December 2024, involving remarks by anchor George Stephanopoulos, after Trump had won a return to the White House but before his inauguration.
Now What?
The FCC Chairman indicated the agency will continue to follow the facts and law regarding the license renewals, suggesting a decision is still pending. Other media outlets are closely watching this confrontation, and President Trump's private lawsuits against other news organizations like The Wall Street Journal, The New York Times, and the BBC are ongoing.
