President Joe Biden is facing pushback from some key political allies on core elements of his climate plans. The administration is sinking billions of dollars into capturing carbon pollution and storing it underground, while working to produce and secure the minerals needed to run cars, trucks and, well, everything on electricity. But these twin policies have placed Biden at odds with the environmental justice and labor advocates who helped elect him. Carbon capture vs. social justice? Environmentalists say the administration’s focus on capturing carbon (both from the air and from power plants) could give the fossil fuel industry political cover to continue burning oil, natural gas and coal — instead of phasing them out. They also argue that huge investments in transporting and storing carbon dioxide underground may not be reconcilable with Biden’s pledges to protect communities of color already overburdened by pollution, Allison Prang writes. They say pipelines could rupture, and that carbon capture could justify the continued operation of facilities that pollute disadvantaged neighborhoods. The arguments are gaining traction in some communities. The Deep South Center for Environmental Justice and the Alliance for Affordable Energy persuaded the New Orleans City Council to oppose underground carbon storage last year. Elsewhere in Louisiana, activists are trying to delay the permitting of a pipeline that would carry carbon to storage facilities. Critical mineral critics: Labor groups say the administration’s plan to craft mineral trade deals with some countries could stall domestic mining and production of critical minerals — and cost workers thousands of jobs, Brian Dabbs writes. The debate is yet another complication for the administration’s effort to secure minerals like lithium for electric vehicle batteries and other clean energy technology. Last year’s climate law requires the government to place a priority on developing a domestic supply chain for critical minerals, the bulk of which are now processed in China. That has angered trading partners in places such as Europe, where leaders have said the policy is isolationist and violates trade agreements. To ease those concerns, and speed up EV deployment, the administration has proposed facilitating mineral trade deals with 20 partner countries. But that is angering labor groups and Republican lawmakers, along with environmental groups that point to the risks of mining. This week, the administration moved to expedite the review and approval of a manganese and zinc mine in southern Arizona, setting up a standoff with an environmental group concerned about the fate of vulnerable species in the Patagonia Mountains, Hannah Northey writes.
| 
No comments:
Post a Comment