OK, in the Midwest, we’re not supposed to brag. I get it. And those of us in the climate and clean energy movement, we can be a bit of a downer.
But, if you’ll allow me a little transgression, we’re actually making progress; good progress. Maybe it’s not linear. Maybe it’s a little wonky. But the transition to a more equitable and clean energy economy is already gaining traction in Minnesota.
But before we pat ourselves on the back too hard, I should add that there’s still a lot of work to do.
For starters, there’s federal implementation. It may sound boring, but it’s a big opportunity to expand clean energy investments across Minnesota, reaching smaller towns and historically underserved communities. In August, the U.S. Congress passed and President Biden signed the Inflation Reduction Act (IRA), the most significant investment in clean energy in our country’s history. Experts say that when paired with existing and future state actions, the IRA’s $370 billion investment in climate and clean energy could keep us on track to cut greenhouse gas emissions to 50% of 2005 levels by 2030, a critical benchmark in meeting our commitment to the Paris Climate Agreement.
“OK, great,” you may be saying, “But that’s a bunch of climate numbers. What does it mean for me and for Minnesota?”
Well, it’s an opportunity to protect the people and places we love, which is a very Minnesotan thing to do. After all, we’re the state who dedicated our lottery proceeds and our Legacy Amendment dollars to protecting our environment. Stewardship is a part of who we are.
For example, we’re already starting to build warmer, safer, more affordable homes. Minnesota continues to lead the Midwest in energy efficiency, as well as energy innovation. Recent bipartisan victories at the state capitol like the ECO Act and the Natural Gas Innovation Act set a national example by giving our natural gas utilities the flexibility to get creative about decarbonizing our natural gas sector. Their implementation provides opportunities to include everyone, from renters to rural families.
We are already creating more transportation options. Gov. Tim Walz’s Clean Cars Minnesota was a critical first step toward taking on our state’s top source of greenhouse gas emissions. But, just as important, it was a way to make sure Minnesotans aren’t being left behind. We can make sure that every Minnesotan who wants to buy an electric vehicle can do so, while also making sure everyone who wants to ride a bus or take a train has access, especially lower income families and drivers with longer commutes.
We’re already protecting Minnesota consumers. For example, Attorney General Keith Ellison sued Big Oil companies who raked in profits from what you paid at the pump, while lying to you about the climate impacts of their products. Likewise, when homeowners got ripped off by some sketchy solar installers, Ellison prosecuted the bad apples in the bunch.
We’re already restoring farming practices that promote healthier soil and local food. Since 2019, our state legislature has been investing in emerging farmers. It’s another bipartisan effort to get women, veterans, folks with disabilities, and farmers of color back on the land. It means new businesses and fresher food. It’s an opportunity to grow family farms that use healthy soil practices to sequester carbon back underground.
[image_caption]Chris Conry[/image_caption]
The progress our state has made towards our clean energy goals is worth celebrating, but it’s just the beginning. We have the vision, the know-how, and the work ethic to build a better future for our state, along with an unprecedented influx of federal funding to fuel our efforts. But bringing it all together will be the work of a generation. It’s going to take all of us, every town, every utility, every Minnesotan working together to make this vision a reality. I like our odds.
Chris Conry, is the campaign director of Minnesota’s 100% Campaign.
As with almost all positive polls for life, it’s the Dem states where people are safer, better educated, have more affordable life, better life spans, less crime, least poverty…it’s blue states who care about our people, country and environment.
This is all great news for the future. One major problem I see right now is the 2040 Plan in Minneapolis. The city has already lost one lawsuit making the plan illegal due to lack of due diligence in following the laws requiring environmental impact studies. The suit was not complete overall because it only exposed and addressed groundwater contamination. However, another aspect of the plan has been negligently implemented from start to present and continues at a break-neck pace – the so-called “Complete Streets” policy. Taking away car lanes – including creating multiple one-way single lane streets – has resulted in a massive increase in Greenhouse Gases (GHG’s). Slowing and stopping cars more often simply increases the amount of time that they are operating and emitting exhaust. There is no getting around this – just ask Scotty from Star Trek;-). This negates the claim that the plan is about reducing GHG’s. Another major problem with these street designs is they also seriously impede emergency vehicles. This negates the claim that the plan is about “safety”. This overwhelming overhaul of our transportation system was planned in virtual secrecy by hand-picked groups that were guaranteed to be in favor of it. There was zero representation of or input sought from drivers. This is gross negligence not only due to the sheer numbers but even more unjust due to the fact that gas tax is (supposedly) 100% dedicated to building every street in question. Ideally this plan should have been put on the ballot. And there’s no way any legitimate study was done to identify the environmental impact because, knowing physics & math as I do and having 30 years of delivery driving experience in Mpls., I easily deduced the outcome without need of any further evidence than my eyes and experience. Having to sit through a stop light for 3 complete changes due to lack of lanes when previously there were no such delays is about as obvious as it gets. Electric vehicles are on the way but reality dictates that we deal with the here and now. The transition to even more than half the vehicles on the road switching to electric is years away. And trying to force it will likely meet with much resistance. The Complete Streets implementation should be halted immediately pending real, current analysis. Even 50 years from now this policy will never allow for the present or past efficiency in transportation. It’s simply a horrible plan with grave consequences. There’s really zero justification for assessing & over-taxing homeowners (my property taxes just went up over 30% plus a $3000 assessment to replace car lanes with bike lanes on my street) – many, like me, who are already struggling – to oppress drivers. I noticed you didn’t mention the bike lane vs. car lane situation in your article. I’m curious as to why/why not?
“my property taxes just went up over 30% plus a $3000 assessment to replace car lanes with bike lanes on my street”
No they didn’t, that’s just a lie.
The city of Minneapolis has mechanisms in place so nobody’s property taxes go up past a certain threshold percentage, and that threshold ain’t 30%.
Those are my property tax FACTS! Want to see the documentation? If you know of any way I can get them reduced I’m all ears. And the assessment is also a FACT. ALSO DOCUMENTED. The level of denial from bike lane proponents is ASTOUNDING! Show me FACTUAL proof that increased emissions due to taking away car lanes has been debunked and I’ll show you wishful thinking, ill-conceived obfuscated, vague “conjecture” and “theories” based on a Utopian dream that will never materialize. Show me data from a verified source that used actual real scientific method to be produced of what GHG’s were in 2000 and what they are now as regards the implementation timing of taking away car lanes. Every time I bring this fact up the bike proponents either clam up or refer me to studies that don’t support their assertions without assuming that everyone will happily stop driving and other impossible mitigating factors coming true. This is a house of cards built on sand and when it shakes out there will be more legal action. And, yes, the city LOST the lawsuit against the 2040 Plan. The only thing ongoing is their appeal which they will also lose because they never did the due diligence to support their actions. The court simply gave in to their whining that it would cost the city too much money in penalties if they stopped the plan right now – which was, frankly, judicial incompetence. The bike lane impact is another glaring example of that and will, on its own, be proven detrimental to the environment.
The USA and Minnesota use fossil fuels for over 80% of it energy as of now. The fact that major metropolitan areas cannot be run on green energy and the price of natural gas, fuel oil and the actual energy we use is going up dramatically. Tell the people in New England when their fuel oil supply is gone this winter that “it is a good thing”.
Everybody understands you will need fossil fuels for the foreseeable future. Having it be affordable should be goal number one to help the consumer. This rush to make the world “green” is good but it will take time. Germany who said their solar and wind was ready to take on a more significant role in powering the country just brought back multiple coal fired plants. Germany saw “green” energy output was going to be sorely lacking once it turned cold. While technology tries to catch up with demand in the green energy sector, please do something about the price of fossil fuel for the consumer now!
Suspect, the same argument could have been made as the country transitioned from coal to fuel oil and or Natural Gas, (yes Joe I was alive then) from oil burning lamps to electricity. From horses to cars, etc. etc. etc. etc. Joe why don’t you also dis-the transition from crank up telephones and land lines, to mobile phones and the internet? How about the transition to computers, the change from tube radios to transistors, the change from telegraph to radio? Solar works, wind power works, whats your beef? Didn’t you ever see those windmills all over the prairie and farm lands where folks used them to pump their water? Did you dis them as well? Actually if you knew anything about electrical grid reliability you would know that more smaller distributed power is (more) reliable than single large power plants! The fuel for solar and wind is (Free) evidently you are stead fast against the, free fuel, free market? Your preference appears for folks to be forever locked into the fossil fuel industry monopoly! Just keep throwing out that shade as we we use our intellect and the free market to transition to less polluting, more reliable, less costly power sources.
The perfect encapsulation of conservative hypocrisy. For EVERY other issue, pain is the only motivational influence (so long as it’s inflicted on others). Social Security, Medicare, welfare, education, really any shared economic or social need, the answer is always sacrifice, cuts, and less, less, less. THIS issue, where the pain might be felt by they themselves, the answer is “Let’s not be hasty, let’s just incentivize, we wouldn’t dream of causing too much hardship!”. If it weren’t so utterly transparent and mindlessly obvious, it might be funny.
Matt, not totally sure of what you’re saying or your point. The fact is solar/wind CANNOT support any more than 15-20% of our energy ( fossil fuels support the rest) we need as Americans. It will be years before this changes. Consumers need affordable heating options for the winter. Natural gas, fuel oil and electricity costs are up 15-20% or more. That is another tax on their pocketbook.
Does nobody care how much our electricity costs, or how reliable it is?
Does nobody care whether or not Earth will sustain the human population, or that resource limitation will cause war on a global scale within the next decade? Which problem seems more dire to you?
Inventories of diesel, gasoline and heating oil are down to historically low levels. If we were to go to war tomorrow (Russia/China/S.Korea/Iran) we would have 25 days worth of fuel. Then what?
Well DT as an old military guy as well, you were on the submarines with the nuclear option weren’t you? And with over 300 Mil weapons in the streets of America, you actually think the Chinese or Russians, North Korean’s would overtake the country, not to sound stupid, but you righties hate the lefties, are you suggesting you righties would cuddle up with those folks? Seems as much as you folks hate the “D” side of the equation even though its only 1/10 of 1 degree, I have a tough time you folks would turn on the lefties for those ultra right autocrats! Don’t you think its time for us folks to work together and not against one another?
The only people we’d be going to war with are conservatives, and since you lot can’t walk more than a block without getting winded, sounds like the perfect situation for us.
“We can make sure that every Minnesotan who wants to buy an electric vehicle can do so”
Should we start with food, housing, employment, and some healthcare first? If we hand out $50,000 checks to everyone, do we have to pay for their home (if they have one) charging stations too?