Fighting through a rip current
It’s immeasurably frustrating that the Supreme Court of the United States has ruled in three cases against the will of the vast majority of citizens, against progress and against reason. Women’s rights and bodily autonomy, and the ability to restrict guns have been under attack for years. We definitely have thoughts on both, but for the purposes of this newsletter we will focus on the big blow to the Environmental Protection Agency's power to regulate emissions delivered last week.
The issue before the court was how the EPA can regulate coal-fired power plants, which are the single largest source of emissions in the US. The opinion stated that under what the court has recently called the "major questions doctrine," neither the EPA nor any other agency may adopt rules that are "transformational" to the economy — unless Congress has specifically authorized such a transformative rule to address a specific problem, like climate change. This ruling will immediately limit environmental protection and is especially regressive given that there were 112 environmental protection rules that were rolled back during the Trump Administration that will likely be interpreted as transformational to the economy — meaning they are on the chopping block in their entirety.
But there’s an interesting dynamic presenting itself despite this ruling: the economic case for climate tech. In 2015 the Obama administration created state by state carbon limits meant to limit coal use that were blocked by the courts, but the coal reduction targets proposed were still met 11 years ahead of schedule simply because coal was no longer cost-competitive with cleaner options.
That’s why we exist. If we can continue to funnel resources to products and services that are better for the planet AND are more profitable, the guiding hand does the work.
We’d like to believe that every administration in every country in the world will support legislation that combats climate change and reduces emissions for the foreseeable future — but that’s sadly not the reality. What we’re working to shape is a world where decisions that are really good for the planet are the clear economic winners — like procuring wind and solar energy to lower bills or purchasing an EV fleet because the lifetime cost of maintenance is so much cheaper. Yes, regulation is still required to make the transition in time, but courts won’t stop the transition from happening as long as we build better stuff, and that’s what our dollars will continue to focus on doing.