The Choices We Face: Energy for the 21st Century: A Declaration of Guiding Principles by Mark Mills and Scott Tinker. Summary and Review

     I have long been a fan of Texas geologist and energy visionary Scott Tinker. I have also read some of Mark Mill’s writings on energy realism and the resource intensity of EVs. Tinker did some great videos with Switch and Switch On, and I was able to catch a couple episodes of his energy discussion show on PBS. He has been a leader in energy education.

     Meeting society’s energy needs requires physics and economics, they say. They note that balancing energy and materials production with environmental impact is a long-pondered problem and the best solutions involve “trade-offs grounded in informed debate over how to reconcile aspirations with realities.”

“…energy is foundational for civilisation, as a guide for framing civil dialogue and deep thinking around the energy-environment balance, we propose herein nine energy principles, three each in three domains—Economics, Politics, and Science and Technology. These principles are underpinned by the laws of nature, fundamentals of economics, and standards of civil governance, rooted in what history teaches, and what is possible, practical, and reasonable.”

     The authors utilize a smart selection of graphs to show the data behind their conclusions. I will show some of them in this review. The one below shows that our extraction of materials continues to grow, although between 2012 and 2019 there was no growth. 

An outline of the principles is as follows:

I. Guiding Principles: Economics

1. Lifting up those in poverty to alleviate suffering and promote human dignity requires more energy. 

2. Human flourishing requires more energy that is less expensive and more reliable, not less energy that is more expensive and less reliable.

 3. In the pursuit of flourishing, humans continually invent new products and services, all of which necessarily use energy.

 

II. Guiding Principles: Politics

4. Energy security is a top priority for global leaders, revealed in their actions, if not always their words. 

 5. When wealthy economies export energy production, they impose environmental impacts on less-wealthy nations.

 6. Government mandates and/or excessive intrusion in markets stifles energy innovation, options, and freedoms.

III. Guiding Principles: Science and Technology

7. Capturing and delivering energy to society is about inventing, building, and perfecting technologies based on what physics and engineering allow.

8. All society-scale energy systems have environmental trade-offs.

9. The energy available in nature itself is fundamentally unlimited.

 I. Guiding Principles: Economics

1. Lifting up those in poverty to alleviate suffering and promote human dignity requires more energy. 

     The authors emphasize the importance of energy affordability at scale for developing countries. Wealth and energy use are very strongly correlated. This means that in order to reduce poverty we will need more energy, much more. Energy poverty is real and getting out of it is transforming for the energy poor. The authors suggest prioritizing the reduction of energy poverty over CO2 emissions reduction for developing countries. Many, including me, have made a similar argument.

2. Human flourishing requires more energy that is less expensive and more reliable, not less energy that is more expensive and less reliable.

     The authors explain the reliability limitations of wind and solar very well:

“Utility-scale wind and solar require vast areas of land, which makes them inherently more vulnerable to storms and disasters. A more fundamental challenge is converting episodic power to reliable power. Wind and sunlight vary not only with time of day and weather, but also seasonally. To compensate for that, utilities must maintain and operate a conventional grid as backup, and store electricity at society-scales. Either or both of those solutions mean, in effect, utilities need to over-provision grids, which in turn leads to higher capital and operating costs. Reliability is expensive to achieve with episodic power and leads to higher costs to the consumer.”

They compare natural gas – about $200 billion in excess capacity can back up a wind and solar grid but it would take batteries trillions just to provide a few days of backup. In addition to that the power grid would have to be expanded by three to four times.

“Ironically, some of the most “progressive” energy policies— i.e., incentivising and mandating solar, wind, and batteries, and forcing fossil fuels from the market—result in regressive economic impacts.”

3. In the pursuit of flourishing, humans continually invent new products and services, all of which necessarily use energy.

     The authors note the absurdity and impossibility of electrifying everything. They note that high-temperature processes require fossil fuels (though more and more are being electrified). They note the societal value of plastics and fertilizers that require fossil fuel feedstocks. They note that electricity demand will rise as more things are electrified such as EVs and home heating. They note that conservation (choosing to do less) should not be mandated and that efficiency (doing more with less) is great but has limits. They mention the Jevons paradox – the idea that as things become more efficient, they will be used more so overall energy use won’t drop and may rise. While that has been true in the past and where there is a need to do more, that does not always happen. There is proof that energy use is decoupling from population growth and economic growth in developed countries. They don’t mention that, but they should have. However, they are correct to point out that when efficiency increases, energy becomes more affordable, and that has the potential to increase demand where it is needed, in developing countries. Thus the general trend is that efficiency increases tend to increase overall demand. The graph below shows the relationships but again leaves out the decoupling that has been occurring in developed countries.

II. Guiding Principles: Politics

4. Energy security is a top priority for global leaders, revealed in their actions, if not always their words. 

 

     In this section about securing affordable and reliable energy, they tell the story of Germany, whose de-industrialization in recent years has been documented. The German push to shutter nuclear plants and run on expensive and unreliable wind and solar has led to high electricity costs and companies have moved out of the country to survive. They note:

“Germany’s overall primary energy consumption began to fall from around 2006, and today is about 20% below its peak. Solar and wind surpassed coal as Germany’s leading source of electricity, and the fossil fuel share of total primary energy declined from 84% to about 75% today.”

Germany’s economy has been growing much slower than the U.S. since they took up their energy transition push. They have managed to decrease emissions by 20% but at a high cost as they now need to import electricity. They were hit very hard by Russia’s invasion of Ukraine when the Nordstream pipeline was canceled. It was not a good idea in the first place to become dependent on the sinister Russian regime. They were forced to fast-track LNG receiving terminals and get that needed gas from the U.S. and Qatar.

5. When wealthy economies export energy production, they impose environmental impacts on less-wealthy nations.

     I didn’t get this statement at first but what they are referring to is simply the offshoring of emissions by relying on countries like China for minerals, mineral processing, materials, and products. Production of products for export in China involves using coal power (47% of Chinese primary energy) and transporting them with diesel power. The graph below of energy resource dominance shows that the U.S is indeed the dominant producer and refiner of natural gas and oil and China is the dominant producer of many minerals and of mineral processing. They argue correctly that exporting those emissions distorts the emissions realities overall. Of course, proper accounting for offshoring emissions does and should fix this.

6. Government mandates and/or excessive intrusion in markets stifles energy innovation, options, and freedoms.

     Their arguments here are pretty good, that too much subsidization and mandates in particular distort markets. There is proof that Americans are not embracing EVs at the rate expected. Personally, I am in favor of robust subsidization but definitely not in favor of mandates. I think a ‘carrots only, no sticks’ approach is best. I think subsidization should be robust mainly to help the poor. They rightly point out that when subsidies and mandates become pervasive, they erode both freedom and choice. They mention future bans on ICE vehicles and current bans on natural gas hookups, as pervasive. I agree.  They also note here that experts have been wrong in GDP forecasts more than they have been right.

III. Guiding Principles: Science and Technology

7. Capturing and delivering energy to society is about inventing, building, and perfecting technologies based on what physics and engineering allow.

     Their argument here is that technological capabilities change as new technologies are discovered and perfected. They use American oil & gas innovation as an example. From 1970s indications that we were nearing peak oil in the U.S. to now where have doubled oil and gas production over the past decade and a half due mainly to high-volume hydraulic fracturing and horizontal drilling advancements, ie. ‘fracking’ is a compelling example that resource recovery can be improved drastically with successful new technologies.

     Here they also argue that EVs are more energy intensive than often realized due to the required critical metals to be extracted. They do acknowledge, however, that breakthroughs in electric motor and battery technologies can reduce that intensity. It appears that will happen in the future at least on a small scale. They call EVs impractical due to the lesser energy density of hydrocarbons. That is still true now but will be less true in the future.

“…the primary growth in EVs will be in dense urban environments. China is the outlier with its enormous state subsidies marbled throughout its industrial ecosystem.”

     They note that understanding technology principles and limitations are important to get an accurate understanding of the big energy picture.

8. All society-scale energy systems have environmental trade-offs.

     Here they argue that trade-offs, negative externalities, and environmental impacts are inherent in all energy systems and are not easy to quantify and especially hard to forecast:

“However, quantifying the cost, or locus, of an externality becomes increasingly difficult and less reliable the farther into the future the impact is felt.”

     They state that the idea of a ‘circular economy’ is unrealistic due to the current high costs of recycling. That is true to some extent but we still need to recycle many things, though often at a lower percentage of the whole.

     They do mention two of the impact issues that arose with fracking, large water volumes to be reinjected back into the ground and the effect of that reinjection inducing small earthquakes. That problem has been partially addressed with technology and has been less prevalent in recent years. Water management remains an important issue in oil & gas development that must be addressed adequately. They also mention the many trade-offs of wind, solar, and hydro energy including minerals and materials requirements, daily and seasonal output fluctuations, droughts affecting hydro production, and seasonal but often unpredictable wind “droughts” affecting wind production.

     They note the significant air quality impacts of fossil fuel combustion but also note that the higher energy density of fossil fuels allows them to reduce impacts in other ways. The graph below shows the land use impacts of different energy sources. This likely does not include the need to overbuild wind and solar and to add battery storage.

     They also note here that the IPCC’s significant climate change impacts are predicted to occur mostly from 2050 onward so the media-fueled attribution of every storm, drought, and wildfire being due to anthropogenic climate change is simply incorrect. They emphasize that acknowledging (and I would add quantifying) all of these trade-offs is important:

“The real impediments to progress are an underlying obliviousness to energy realities and associated denial of trade-offs.”

9. The energy available in nature itself is fundamentally unlimited

     While the above statement is true, there is a huge caveat that technology needs to catch up for us to be able to take advantage of it. We have been chasing nuclear fusion, geothermal, and many other energy technologies for decades without much improvement. There are huge cost hurdles and technological hurdles. They point out that all sources of energy are increasing in use, that we burn more wood for fuel now than we ever have, and that although coal’s share of the mix continues to drop its overall use continues to rise.

“…no source of primary energy—wood, coal, oil, natural gas, uranium, hydropower, solar, wind, geothermal—has yet seen its use decrease, globally.”

     They also note here that it is technology that converts resources into reserves, focusing on oil and gas, noting that we have centuries of supply that is currently considered technically recoverable. However, they don’t mention that economic recoverability will be an important factor. They do acknowledge that future tech may be different, appearing faster or slower than predicted, so that all future recoverability predictions are speculative.

     Their conclusion was weak, I think. They simply note that the fossil fuel-industrial age allowed us to free up our economic power as the share of GDP required for food and fuel dropped immensely. While this is absolutely true and shows how fossil fuels have largely benefitted civilization, it is hardly a key argument for guiding energy principles for the 21^st century. Certainly, we should acknowledge the importance of fossil fuels, but I just think they should not have emphasized that as their conclusion.

 

References:

 

Energy for the 21st Century: A Declaration of Guiding Principles. Mark Mills and Scott Tinker. ARC Research. February 2025. Mark+Mills+and+Scott+Tinker+Energy+for+the+21st+Century.pdf

 

Energy Secretary Chris Wright is Wrong to Call Net Zero Goals ‘Sinister’

     While I generally agree with Chris Wright’s energy assessments and was glad to see him get picked as energy secretary, I disagree with his depiction at the conservative Alliance for Responsible Citizenship forum in London (via video link) of net zero-2050 goals as ‘sinister.’ This is unnecessary demonization. The word ‘sinister’ should remain reserved for terrorists, criminal cartels, and oppressive regimes like Russia, Iran, and North Korea. It should not be used in disagreements about how fast and how much to decarbonize energy systems. I agree with Wright that net zero 2050 pledges and aspirations are likely unrealistic. That could change with technology breakthroughs, but I would not bet on it at present. Wright stated:

“Net zero 2050 is a sinister goal, it’s a terrible goal.”

“It’s both unachievable by any practical means [and] the aggressive pursuit of it — and you’re sitting in a country that has aggressively pursued this goal — has not delivered any benefits, but it’s delivered tremendous costs.”

     I have argued against the demonization of the fossil fuel industry by activists like Bill McKibben and politicized scientists like Michael Mann. I would apply the same argument against demonizing renewable energy and decarbonization efforts. Sure, there are a lot of aspects of these technologies and decarbonization efforts that can be validly argued against, but to call them ‘sinister’ is going too far. That said, there are a few cases where it could be called sinister such as denying poor countries help with developing their own fossil fuel resources due to emissions concerns. However, to call the whole idea of aspiring to reduce emissions with a date goal (achievable or not) sinister is not warranted at all. We have ideas and markets now for things like carbon credit trading and we have new technologies like CO2 capture, utilization, and sequestration that can help us toward that goal whether we can achieve it or not. My view is that no net-zero goal should be mandated. If it is mandated you could call it a terrible policy. It should rather be seen as a voluntary aspiration to help solve a developing societal problem that threatens to increase as time goes on.

So, yeah, that was a bad choice of word, Chris.

 

References:

 

Energy secretary blasts ‘sinister’ zero carbon emissions goal. Zack Budryk. The Hill. February 17, 2025. Energy secretary blasts ‘sinister’ zero carbon emissions goal

Seaweed Farming for Carbon Storage: As Viable as Other Blue Carbon Habitat Reconstruction Methods According to New Research

     Blue carbon habitat reconstruction by planting seagrasses and mangrove trees is an established way to increase marine uptake of CO2 and has been incorporated into lots of projects that generate carbon credits. A new study in Nature Climate Change concludes that seaweed farming is another method that is competitive with the other blue carbon methods. Seaweed farming has long been a viable carbon sequestration method. I first read about it in Tim Flannery’s 2015 book Atmosphere of Hope.

     Most seaweed farming, or kelp farming, occurs in the waters of Southeast Asia. Consumption of different kinds of seaweed is most common there. According to Wikipedia:

“The largest seaweed-producing countries as of 2022 are China (58.62%) and Indonesia (28.6%); followed by South Korea (5.09%) and the Philippines (4.19%). Other notable producers include North Korea (1.6%), Japan (1.15%), Malaysia (0.53%), Zanzibar (Tanzania, 0.5%), and Chile (0.3%). Seaweed farming has frequently been developed to improve economic conditions and to reduce fishing pressure.”

Global production was over 35 million tons in 2019, according to the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO). The U.S. produces about 23,000 tons with most coming from Alaska and Maine waters. In the U.S. farmers grow various types of seaweed which include dulse, bull kelp, ribbon kelp, and sugar kelp. They are used in sushi, salsas, sauces, salads, seasonings, and other food products.

     Seaweed is also cultivated for extracting its polysaccharides, including alginate, agar, and carrageenan, gelatinous substances known as hydrocolloids or phycocolloids. Hydrocolloids are used as food additives as gelling agents, emulsifying, thickening, and water retention. Like seagrasses and mangroves, seaweed also provides habitat.

     Seaweed farming has both positive and negative impacts but many of the negative impacts can be easily mitigated. Mangroves may be cut down for stakes, many seaweed farms are placed atop seagrass meadows, and the removal of eelgrass to plant seaweed has negative effects on water quality. Seaweed farms may also introduce or aid in the establishment of invasive species. The positive benefits include feeding humans, feeding livestock, creating biofuels, slowing climate change, and providing crucial habitat for marine life. Seaweed farming has a much lower impact than other aquaculture and land agriculture. It can also increase biodiversity and decrease ocean acidity. According to the NOAA, seaweeds pull more greenhouse gas from the water than salt marshes, eelgrass, and mangroves combined based on biomass. Seaweeds also consume nitrogen and phosphorous. Thus, constructing seaweed farms near ocean dead zones can help use up the excess nutrients. The NOAA is working to restore lost bull kelp areas in Puget Sound.

     According to Wikipedia:

“One way for seaweed farming to scale at terrestrial farming levels is with the use of ROVs, which can install low-cost helical anchors that can extend seaweed farming into unprotected waters.”

ROVs, or remotely operated underwater vehicles, are submersibles typically used in the offshore oil & gas industry.

     A large team of international researchers from multiple disciplines worked on the Nature Climate Change paper.  According to Phys.org:

“The work involved analyzing data collected by operators of 20 seaweed farms around the world. The researchers note that the farms they studied ranged in age from 2 to 300 years old and that they ranged in size from 1 to 15,000 hectares.”

The researchers noted that there was more carbon sequestered below older seaweed farms as would be expected. They also found that the average amount of carbon buried below all the farms studied was about twice that of sediment beds located near the farms.

“The researchers suggest that seaweed farming, especially in places where sediments naturally build up, can sequester carbon at rates near to those of some coastal environments, such as mangrove forests.”

     The U.N. and others have noted that more research is needed on quantifying the effectiveness of seaweed farming and this is a great step in that direction. The abstract of the paper is below:

Abstract

“Seaweed farming has emerged as a potential Blue Carbon strategy, yet empirical estimates of carbon burial from such farms remain lacking in the literature. Here, we quantify carbon burial in 20 seaweed farms distributed globally, ranging from 2 to 300 years in operation and from 1 to 15,000 ha in size. The thickness of sediment layers and stocks of organic carbon accumulated below the farms increased with farm age, reaching 140 tC ha−1 for the oldest farm. Organic carbon burial rates averaged 1.87 ± 0.73 tCO2e ha−1 yr−1 in farm sediments, twice that in reference sediments. The excess CO2e burial attributable to the seaweed farms averaged 1.06 ± 0.74 CO2e ha−1 yr−1, confirming that seaweed farming in depositional environments buries carbon in the underlying sediments at rates towards the low range of that of Blue Carbon habitats, but increasing with farm age.”

 

References:

 

Seaweed farms show potential for carbon storage that gets better with age. Bob Yirka. Phys.org. January 24, 2025. Seaweed farms show potential for carbon storage that gets better with age

Carbon burial in sediments below seaweed farms matches that of Blue Carbon habitats. Carlos M. Duarte, Antonio Delgado-Huertas, Elisa Marti, Beat Gasser, Isidro San Martin, Alexandra Cousteau, Fritz Neumeyer, Megan Reilly-Cayten, Joshua Boyce, Tomohiro Kuwae, Masakazu Hori, Toshihiro Miyajima, Nichole N. Price, Suzanne Arnold, Aurora M. Ricart, Simon Davis, Noumie Surugau, Al-Jeria Abdul, Jiaping Wu, Xi Xiao, Ik Kyo Chung, Chang Geun Choi, Calvyn F. A. Sondak, Hatim Albasri, …Pere Masque. Nature Climate Change volume 15, pages180–187 (2025). Carbon burial in sediments below seaweed farms matches that of Blue Carbon habitats | Nature Climate Change

Seaweed farming. Wikipedia. Seaweed farming - Wikipedia

Seaweed Aquaculture. NOAA Fisheries. Seaweed Aquaculture | NOAA Fisheries

New York and New England Need More Natural Gas Pipeline Capacity

     Despite their reticence and disdain for fossil fuels, New York and the New England region in general are dependent on natural gas, especially in cold snaps. 2022’s winter storm Elliott exemplified that need when the system nearly failed. This issue should have been addressed previously, but former governor Cuomo was against addressing it and now current governor Hochul is being told that it is necessary and recently approved a pipeline expansion to address natural gas capacity for New York City. According to the Washington Examiner:

“Gov. Kathy Hochul (D-NY) approved the expansion of the Iroquois natural gas pipeline despite it being "inconsistent" with the state’s greenhouse gas emission limits.”

“The move came as Con Edison proposed a 13% hike in gas rates for New York residents as it faces limits on the amount of natural gas it can pull from the pipeline.”

“The natural gas system could fail under certain circumstances,” John Howard, a former commissioner of the state Public Service Commission, told the New York Post. “Safety and reliability can’t be compromised.”

Perhaps that state is beginning to realize that transitioning to renewables is not as easy as it imagined. Offshore wind has faced delays, and financial difficulties, and now faces a “pause” by the Trump administration. The state and the general region still rely on burning high-emissions fuel oil when pipeline capacity becomes inadequate to deliver enough natural gas during cold snaps. This triggers air quality alerts.

“As a condition of the permits, Iroquois will invest $5 million in mitigation efforts to address greenhouse gas emissions and make investments to reduce environmental burdens within disadvantaged communities, such as a heat pump program and EV charging stations,” the spokesperson told the outlet. “This investment is in addition to other measures Iroquois will implement to minimize emissions.”

“A report from the state Public Service Commission found that Con Edison and National Grid “were barely able to provide adequate supply” during the 2022 Winter Storm Elliott, emphasizing the need to expand and diversify the state’s gas supply resources.”

​​“Had the weather been colder, the utilities would likely have been unable to avoid thousands and potentially millions of gas outages,” the report said. “The Winter Storm Elliott event thus demonstrates the risks associated with over-reliance on CNG [compressed natural gas].”

“In 2023, the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission issued a report sharing how important it is for New York and other Northeast states to boost their gas energy infrastructure.”

Con Edison noted that 63% of its energy comes from natural gas. A vast supply of natural gas is just over the border in the Marcellus shale fields of Susquehanna County, Pennsylvania. Trump recently vowed to build the canceled Williams Constitution pipeline that would bring this gas into the New York and New England region and lower natural gas prices for constituents. The situation is such that pipelines going to New England have to go through New York and New York has had no problem blocking pipelines for itself and its neighbors. I agree with Trump on this one. In this case, devotion to addressing climate change has gone too far as it threatens potentially catastrophic system failure and assures high gas and electricity costs for the region. Bloomberg reported:

“President Donald Trump vowed to complete the long-stalled Constitution Pipeline that would transport natural gas to New York, saying it could slash energy prices in northeastern US states by as much as 70%.”

“We are going to get this done, and once we start construction, we’re looking at anywhere from nine to 12 months, if you can believe it,” Trump told reporters Friday after signing an executive order on energy in the Oval Office. “It will bring down the energy prices in New York and in all of New England by 50, 60, 70%.”

Many doubt that the savings will be that high but there will be savings. Williams abandoned the pipeline project in 2020 due to pushback from New York’s environmental agency about water quality concerns. Trump tried and failed to get this project approved during his first term. All approvals were in place but blocked only by New York state’s water quality concerns. Trump said he would evoke eminent domain if the project continued to be blocked but hoped he would not have to do that. He expects to meet with impacted governors soon. This is a practical project that can really help the region and never should have been blocked. The situation is rather simple. A region is starved for natural gas but can’t get it even though one of the largest natural gas fields in the world is nearby and ready to provide the gas and a pipeline company is ready to build. New York’s extreme climate ambitions should not block common sense solutions for its residents and for its landlocked neighbors. It is unfair to them.

 

 

References:

Hochul approves pipeline expansion to boost capacity as Con Ed threatens rate hike. Elaine Mallon, Washington Examiner. February 18, 2025. Hochul approves pipeline expansion to boost capacity as Con Ed threatens rate hike

Trump Vows Completion of Constitution Pipeline For New Yorkers. Jennifer A. Dlouhy. February 14, 2025. Trump Vows Completion of Constitution Pipeline For New Yorkers

The Importance of Environmental Protection and Expertise: Science and Policy Should Be Integrated but Separate

     As a new government administration takes hold in the U.S., one that can be unpredictable and distrustful of regulatory policy, we all should remind ourselves that public and environmental health are important. Much of the science is quite settled on what is harmful and what is not. Safety and contaminant limits might move up and down according to changes in perceived risk. Perceived risk is affected by many things other than science including media, public opinion, one’s psychological tendencies, past associations, one’s neurobiology (amygdala system), and the policy positions of one’s political affiliations.

Tom Nichols and the Death of Expertise

     Tom Nichols, in an article in The Atlantic, suggests that the DOGE firings are really a war on expertise. That may be the case as there is little doubt that MAGA people seem to distrust experts. Sometimes, as with COVID, he concedes that some of that is warranted. He seems to suggest that DOGE is leveraging that distrust and outrage to justify firings. We should remember that firings are common when administrations change and the government is reorganized, but the chaotic methods of DOGE have laid bare their own lack of expertise and manufactured outrage with the Gaza condom gaffe and the ‘150-year-olds getting social security’ gaffe. Downsizing government is one thing, but overemphasizing ideology and policy positions about things like DEI, LGBTQ issues, and other culture war issues in that reorganization, has not been the norm in the past. However, one could also argue that the previous administration had more ideological hires to support policy positions so a reversal is warranted.

     Nichols studies expertise and the title of his Atlantic article and of his book 2017 book, updated to a 2^nd edition in 2024, is The Death of Expertise: The Campaign Against Established Knowledge and Why It Matters, argues as have others that Musk has no auditing expertise. He says that distrust of and turning away from expertise is driven by two social ills: narcissism and resentment. He charges Musk with attempting to portray wealth as competence. He sees Trump’s grievance-based politics as evidence of resentment against apolitical experts, which he says people like Musk and Trump see as contemptible “elites.” Nichols says that we will soon find out that we need experts in all aspects of public service. I wonder if he is right. The recent firing and rehiring or seeking to rehire important nuclear, military, public health, and EPA personnel is a result of the chaotic and aggressive way the current downsizing purge is being done.  

“The first step in containing the damage is to see Trump’s and Musk’s goals for DOGE clearly: It is a project rooted in resentful arrogance, and its true objective is not better government, but destruction.”

The book description explains that the abandonment of expertise is due to:

“…the openness of the internet, the emergence of a customer satisfaction model in higher education, the transformation of the news industry into a 24-hour entertainment machine, and importantly, the election of Donald Trump. Paradoxically, the increasingly democratic dissemination of information, rather than producing an educated public, has instead created an army of ill-informed and angry citizens who denounce intellectual achievement. When ordinary citizens believe that no one knows more than anyone else, democratic institutions themselves are in danger of falling either to populism or to technocracy or, in the worst case, a combination of both.”

     One reviewer of Nichol’s book noted a tidbit of wisdom from his Mom:

"Nobody knows it all like a know nothing."

 

The Role of Experts

     Our modern form of anti-intellectualism that sometimes elevates superstition over logical analysis is not the same as pragmatic common sense which emphasizes good judgment. For example, RFK Jr.’s views on vaccines and bioengineering are not based on sound scientific judgment.

     As others have noted, including Alex Epstein in his book The Moral Case for Fossil Fuels, the role of experts is debatable. Epstein sees the role of experts as advisors. Certainly, science expertise does not translate to policy expertise. Scientists are not experts on policy. Scientists focus on science, not on the social, cultural, political, and environmental impacts of science and technology. Thus, I would agree with Epstein that science and policy should remain separated. Science and policy should, however, be integrated, with policy aligning to the best science if possible. If they differ, it must be for adequate and justifiable reasons.  

 

Deregulation: Not Always Against Environmental Protection

     No one can deny that notions like public health and environmental protection are important. Musk’s moronic calls to remove all regulations and Trump’s obsession with the numbers of regulations certainly indicate a lack of respect for expertise. Extreme libertarians may have a similar disdain for rules. But, as Stephen Pinker noted, there is a reason there are no successful socialist nor libertarian countries. The U.S. understood the value of environmental protection when air pollution was out of control and rivers were on fire and Nixon created the EPA. China understood it when Beijing and other cities were choked with smog. Of course, too much and too detailed regulation and regulation that is too expensive is not desirable and Biden was decidedly pro-regulation and prone to overreach, overfunding climate activism, environmental justice, and DEI.  The environmental rollbacks thus far have been fairly predictable. The removal of the LNG pause was a good move as the motivation for the pause was, perhaps ironically, biased science, or science not based on consensus. Getting back out of the Paris Accord was perfectly predictable as Trump asserted his disdain for the international climate change mitigation effort. The U.S. funding commitment will again be put up by Democrat billionaire Michael Bloomberg. As David Brooks recently pointed out, there are many liberal billionaires. However, recent analysis suggests that billionaire donations to Republicans were nearly three times that donated to Democrat candidates. Apparently, that was not the case 10 years ago when donations were more balanced.

     Backtracking on ESG initiatives and climate disclosure is also not unexpected. Many companies will continue voluntarily to address those issues. Legislating is not necessary and backtracking likely won’t cause environmental harm. Even France is considering blocking EU ESG requirements as too cumbersome.

 

Expectations for Trump EPA

     The Trump administration is expected to delegate more environmental authority to states, particularly in enforcement. The effects of this will likely vary by state as some states are more able to do this than others. Investigations will take longer in states less prepared to deal with them.

     The current freezes on federal grants, including regulatory grants, are affecting people and holding up projects. I recently interviewed for a county-level job and was told that they are not certain when or even if the job will be available pending the unfreezing of federal grant money. Money Talks News noted that air monitoring projects approved last year are on hold due to the freeze.

“Recently implemented EPA rules targeting dangerous carcinogens like ethylene oxide may be at risk of reversal or delayed enforcement. Last year, the EPA adopted stricter regulations requiring facilities nationwide to conduct air monitoring for ethylene oxide and add equipment reducing emissions by 90%.”

     Superfund site cleanup is expected to be slowed down. Environmental justice cases are expected to be delayed. Fenceline monitoring programs are in limbo. More than 100 new fenceline air monitoring requirements may be affected. Money Talks News explains:

“The fence-line monitoring requirement, set to take effect next year, would measure up to six toxic gases and make the data publicly available online. Previous similar requirements for oil refineries successfully reduced benzene emissions, demonstrating the effectiveness of transparent monitoring.”

“Without these monitoring systems, communities may remain in the dark about what chemicals are crossing from industrial properties into residential areas. Property investors should consider environmental monitoring availability when evaluating locations for long-term investment.”

They also note that the financial burden for remediation projects may shift back to taxpayers from “polluter pays” taxation for Superfund site cleanup reinstated by the Biden administration as part of the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law as there may be repeals.

     Staffing reductions are expected to make environmental investigation timelines longer. Some have noted that the current delays in many of these projects are unprecedented. Some projects have been more or less scrapped or at least expected long delays. These include more detailed investigations and rules development for emerging contaminants.

     Some changes in EPA grants are warranted. For example, new EPA head Lee Zeldin noted that $2 billion was given as part of the $20 billion "gold bar scheme" according to DOGE. The Washington Examiner notes:

“The $20 billion in grants doled out by the Biden administration with funds from the Inflation Reduction Act were found "parked" in an outside financial institution in a bid to give the grant money out without oversight, according to EPA Administrator Lee Zeldin.”

The group Power Forward Communities was to receive the money for renewable energy and electrification.

“The group said it would spend the grant to provide "needed capital to transform the marketplace for heat pumps, heat pump water heaters, induction stoves, solar panels, home battery systems, EV chargers, and wiring and weatherization upgrades."

Power Forward Communities is a coalition of groups in league with Rewiring America, a group associated with activist engineer Saul Griffith, and has a goal to “electrify everything.” Stacy Abrams serves as senior counsel for the coalition.

 

References:

 

Toxic Takeover: 7 EPA Shifts Under Trump That Could Poison Your Water and Air. MTN Staff. Money Talks News. February 19, 2025. Toxic Takeover: 7 EPA Shifts Under Trump That Could Poison Your Water and Air

The Death of Government Expertise: Why Trump and Musk are on a firing spree. Tom Nichols. The Atlantic. February 17, 2025. The Death of Government Expertise - The Atlantic

The Death of Expertise: The Campaign against Established Knowledge and Why it Matters 2nd Edition. Tom Nichols. March 2024. Book Description. Amazon. The Death of Expertise: The Campaign against Established Knowledge and Why it Matters: Nichols, Tom: 9780197763834: Amazon.com: Books

Why Most Billionaires Still Favor Donald Trump and the Republicans | Opinion, David Faris. October 11, 2024. Why Most Billionaires Still Favor Donald Trump and the Republicans | Opinion - Newsweek

$2 billion in ‘gold bars’ sent from EPA to Abrams-linked climate organization: Lee Zeldin. Jack Birle, Washington Examiner, February 20, 2025. $2 billion in ‘gold bars’ sent from EPA to Abrams-linked climate organization: Lee Zeldin

Global Greening: Boreal, Temperate and Tropical Vegetation Reaches Record in 2020

     A new paper in Remote Sensing of Environment shows that global vegetation reached a record high in 2020. The increase in vegetation is due to increased CO2 in the atmosphere which aids plant growth. While the overall effects of increased atmospheric CO2 are decidedly negative, there are some important positive effects that need to be considered. One might ask the question that if we were able to decrease atmospheric CO2 to 350ppm or even lower as many activists advocate, what would the effects be on plant growth and food production? There is little doubt that the effects would be negative. I wrote about global greening in 2023. I noted then that NASA satellite data indicated that a quarter to a half of Earth’s vegetated lands have had increases in leaf volume on trees and other plants since 1980 and more is expected as atmospheric CO2 continues to rise. It is hard to argue that drawing down atmospheric CO2 won’t be catastrophic for food production. The evidence suggests that it could be. In the past, we never had to grow so much food because we had a much smaller population. Fossil fuels, with all their detriments, have enabled us to increase our population and have also enabled us to produce more food to feed that population.

     For the study, researchers, led by Yulong Zhang from Duke University, analyzed satellite data from 2001 to 2020. The study utilized machine learning and ecological simulations. The researchers attributed the positive changes to CO2, global warming, and reforestation efforts.

     They found that temperate and cold regions, including boreal forests, benefited the most from global warming extending growing seasons. More tree planting and better agricultural management in China and India. The more modest greening  increases in tropical regions were attributed mainly to increased local rainfall.

     Plants absorb CO2 through photosynthesis. They also contribute to atmospheric moisture through transpiration, which aids cloud formation and precipitation regulation. The researchers used the Leaf Area Index to quantify vegetation. Techno-Science explains:

“The Leaf Area Index (LAI) is a measure used to quantify vegetation density. It represents the total leaf surface area per unit of ground area, thus providing an indication of the amount of vegetation present in a given area.”

     The researchers advocate for more and better vegetation monitoring, arguing in the paper’s abstract below that there is a need for a better understanding of the year-to-year changes in greening since there is great year-to-year variability. There is a need to better quantify each variable’s influence on global greening. In addition to LAI, the researchers utilized other remote sensing data including Enhanced Vegetation Index (EVI) and Solar-Induced Fluorescence (SIF) as indicated below.

“To evaluate global greening status, we utilized three groups of remote sensing-based vegetation indices (VI), including Enhanced Vegetation Index (EVI), Solar-induced Fluorescence (SIF) and leaf area index (LAI). EVI is designed to enhance vegetation signals in high biomass regions while reduce soil and atmospheric background influences (Huete et al., 2002), making it especially effective in areas where traditional indices like normalized difference vegetation index may saturate and fail to…{sorry, it was a snipett}.

    

 

 

Abstract

Terrestrial vegetation is a crucial component of Earth's biosphere, regulating global carbon and water cycles and contributing to human welfare. Despite an overall greening trend, terrestrial vegetation exhibits a significant inter-annual variability. The mechanisms driving this variability, particularly those related to climatic and anthropogenic factors, remain poorly understood, which hampers our ability to project the long-term sustainability of ecosystem services. Here, by leveraging diverse remote sensing measurements, we pinpointed 2020 as a historic landmark, registering as the greenest year in modern satellite records from 2001 to 2020. Using ensemble machine learning and Earth system models, we found this exceptional greening primarily stemmed from consistent growth in boreal and temperate vegetation, attributed to rising CO2 levels, climate warming, and reforestation efforts, alongside a transient tropical green-up linked to the enhanced rainfall. Contrary to expectations, the COVID-19 pandemic lockdowns had a limited impact on this global greening anomaly. Our findings highlight the resilience and dynamic nature of global vegetation in response to diverse climatic and anthropogenic influences, offering valuable insights for optimizing ecosystem management and informing climate mitigation strategies.

     The study utilized remote sensing via satellite, machine learning, and Earth system modeling.

     The researchers also noted that the overall trend since 2000 was one of increasing greening, noting:

“…a long-term greening trend since the early 2000s (Piao et al., 2020). This consistent pattern suggests a robust resilience and adaptability of global vegetation.”

They also noted that the 2020 peak was mostly due to tropical rainfall increases but also that the temperate and boreal increases are more long-term, continuous, and more associated with atmospheric CO2 increases.

     I will end this post the same way I ended my previous post on the subject:

‘So, like it or not, higher atmospheric CO2 and a bit of warming leading to slightly longer growing seasons probably do allow us to produce more food.’

 

 

References:

 

Earth greener than ever in 2020: an ecological surprise. Adrien. Techno-Science,net. February 19, 2025. Earth greener than ever in 2020: an ecological surprise 🌿

Earth's record-high greenness and its attributions in 2020. Yulong Zhang, Jiafu Mao, Ge Sun, Qinfeng Guo, Jeffrey Atkins, Wenhong Li, Mingzhou Jin, Conghe Song, Jingfeng Xiao, Taehee Hwang, Tong Qiu, Lin Meng, Daniel M. Ricciuto, Xiaoying Shi, Xing Li, Peter Thornton, and Forrest Hoffman. Remote Sensing of Environment. Volume 316, 1 January 2025, 114494. Earth's record-high greenness and its attributions in 2020 - ScienceDirect

De-Risking and Scaling Up New Energy Technology: Lawrence Livermore Lab Scientists Tackle Challenges

     Scaling up new energy technologies is often where they end up failing, failing to cross the so-called “valley of death.” While many of these new technologies seem promising, it is typically scale-up costs and logistics that end up sinking them. Despite government support and “moon shots” to speed up tech development, the bottom line is if they can’t scale up in a way that makes them economically competitive with existing technologies, then they will likely fail.

     Scientists at Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory (LLNL) and collaborators noted in a new paper in Nature Chemical Engineering, that early de-risking can be improved. According to TechXplore, the researchers concluded that modeling by multidisciplinary teams can improve scale-up.

“…early assessments of technology–market fit and how the physics governing system performance evolves with scale can de-risk technology development and accelerate deployment.”

"By bringing together technical risk assessments, scaled physics modeling, data analysis and in situ experimentation within multidisciplinary teams, new technologies can be invented, developed and deployed on a shorter timetable with greater probability of success," said LLNL scientist Andrew Wong, a co-first author of the paper.

     They developed the Laboratory Risk Assessment and Mitigation Protocol (L-RAMP) to assess risks for technologies that have achieved proof-of-concept demonstrations. The model addresses barriers along the chain of research, development, demonstration, and deployment (RDD&D). Wong also noted that better early modeling can help to avoid later pitfalls that perhaps should have been predicted:

"Advancing through technology scale-up can happen much faster and more reliably when all of the potential pitfalls have been evaluated up front."

The goal is faster and more reliable RDD&D and more successful deployments. The team utilized L-RAMP for LLNL projects in electrolyzer, membrane, capsule, battery and characterization technologies, with external commercial partners. A diverse and multidisciplinary approach aided by AI/machine learning is the emerging paradigm of the modeling, as TechXplore notes:

"AI is useful in process monitoring and control, defect detection and mitigation, accelerating complementary physics-based simulations and modeling via surrogate models, and multimodal data processing that can be integrated into the techno-economic evaluation," Giera said. "I anticipate more of these AI-centric capabilities are possible with increasing technical maturity of the physical technologies."

     The paper's authors also emphasize that along with technical challenges, there are market challenges that must be addressed since those are what cause many of the endeavors to ultimately fail. Thus, more and better integration with existing industries and markets would be beneficial to improving technology scale-up. Climate technology and industrial decarbonization are the main areas where this is needed. The authors emphasize that market fit is a key factor in whether these technologies will succeed or not.

     The abstract of the paper and some modeling graphics are shown below.

 

Abstract

Avoiding the worst effects of climate change depends on our ability to scale and deploy technologies faster than ever before. Scale-up has largely been the domain of industrial research and development teams, but advances in modeling and experimental techniques increasingly allow early-stage researchers to contribute to the process. Here we argue that early assessments of technology market fit and how the physics governing system performance evolves with scale can de-risk technology development and accelerate deployment. We highlight tools and processes that can be used to assess both these factors at an early stage. By bringing together technical risk assessments, scaled physics modeling, data analysis and in situ experimentation within multidisciplinary teams, new technologies can be invented, developed and deployed on a shorter timetable with greater probability of success.

 

References:

 

Accelerating climate technologies through the science of scale-up. Thomas Moore, Andrew A. Wong, Brian Giera, Diego I. Oyarzun, Aldair E. Gongora, Tiras Y. Lin, Wenqin Li, Tracie Owens, Du Nguyen, Victoria M. Ehlinger, Aditya Prajapati, Seung Whan Chung, Pratanu Roy, Joshua DeOtte, Nicholas R. Cross, Alvina Aui, Youngsoo Choi, Maxwell Goldman, Hui-Yun Jeong, Congwang Ye, Amitava Sarkar, Eric B. Duoss, Christopher Hahn & Sarah E. Baker. Nature Chemical Engineering volume 1, pages731–740 (2024). Accelerating climate technologies through the science of scale-up | Nature Chemical Engineering

Ramping up the scale of climate and energy technology: Experts recommend technical risk assessment strategies. Ashley Piccone. TechXplore. January 7, 2035. Ramping up the scale of climate and energy technology: Experts recommend technical risk assessment strategies

H2Ohio: A Collaborative Approach to Improving Ohio’s Water Quality and Wastewater Quality

     Ohio has many water quality issues including agricultural runoff, construction stormwater runoff, urban stormwater runoff, acid mine drainage, sewer overflows, septic system failures, nutrient accumulation and harmful algal blooms, sedimentation, industrial wastewater, road salt runoff, low head dams, and more. The state also has an integrated water quality strategic initiative that involves coordination between different state departments, federal agencies, and county agencies. This is a great approach to integrated regional water quality improvement that is yielding substantial results. 

     The state of Ohio launched its clean water strategy, known as H2Ohio, in 2019. The goal is to improve water quality throughout the state, including in rivers, groundwater, wastewater, and wetlands. Several state, regional, and local agencies are involved in the effort including the Ohio Dept. of Natural Resources (ODNR), Ohio EPA, Ohio Dept. of Agriculture (ODA), the Lake Erie Aquatic Research Network, and county Soil and Water Districts.

     It seems like this collaborative statewide, multiple-agency approach is working to improve water quality throughout the state. It is a smart way to address water quality degradation, soil erosion, and other issues.

 

Wetlands Projects

     Wetlands are a key component of the initiative since they can slow water flow and allow nutrients to settle, which can help reduce nutrient loading into larger waterways and thereby reduce the chances for harmful algal blooms. They can also help in treating acid mine drainage in a similar manner by capturing water with high metals loading, allowing it to be treated for pH imbalances, metals, and managing sedimentation.

     Ohio Governor Mike DeWine recently noted that the initiative can especially help in the Lake Erie Basin which is adjacent to a lot of Ohio farmland.

“We’re excited to celebrate this important milestone of more than 200 H2Ohio wetland projects,” DeWine said. “Science and data tell us that improving Ohio’s water quality will take time, but over the long run, we know that every H2Ohio wetland will contribute to preventing algal blooms and keeping Ohio’s waterways clean.”

     ODNR director Mary Mertz noted:

“I’m thrilled to see these H2Ohio wetland projects throughout the entire state of Ohio and the impact each and every single one has when it comes to water quality,” Mertz said. “These projects have also done so much for the Buckeye State with preserving the natural beauty and environment for plant life and wildlife.”

     Wetlands provide natural filtration, capture and reduce runoff effectively, offer some carbon storage (but also release methane to the atmosphere), and provide habitat for many species.

 

Conservation Ditches

     In the Western Lake Erie Basin adjacent to Ohio’s main agricultural area conservation ditches are built to control nutrient and sediment runoff. Conservation ditches slow water flow and store water, reduce erosion, and vegetated benches along the ditches utilize nutrients. Downstream sediment and nutrient loads are reduced. Conservation ditches can also help to control flooding in fields prone to flooding. This program began in 2022, and interest is growing. The following graphic shows some stats for the program.

Riparian Buffers: Forested Stream Banks

      Another approach to soil and water conservation is riparian buffers, or forested stream banks which provide filtration of migrating nutrients, sediment, and pesticides that flow in shallow subsurface water.

“Studies show that forested buffers remove 200-800% more nitrogen than non-forested buffers.”

Riparian buffers are also strongly associated with higher water quality, more stable stream banks, and significant habitat improvement, for both aquatic habitats and habitats along the banks. Water temperature reduction in summer is another benefit.

 

Documenting and Removing Lead Water Pipes

     Ohio EPA director Anne Vogel noted some other particulars, including mapping and replacement of lead water pipes:

"Across the state, Governor DeWine’s H2Ohio program funds vital infrastructure that expands access to safe, affordable water and fuels economic growth. To date, the program has provided funding to over 115 communities to identify, map, and replace lead service lines so that fewer Ohio children are exposed to lead in their drinking water. We are also using this funding to upgrade drinking and wastewater systems statewide.

“Ohio EPA is responsible for protecting human health and the environment for all Ohioans, and we look forward to continued investment in all parts of the H2Ohio program and the resulting water quality improvements in Ohio rivers, homes, and communities."

 

Road Salt Runoff

H2Ohio’s Chloride Reduction Grant Program, a collaboration between the Ohio EPA and Ohio Dept of Transportation (ODOT), offers grants to communities to help them improve road salt storage and handling to reduce salt runoff into Ohio streams, rivers, lakes, and groundwater.  A total of $1.7 million has been awarded to municipalities, townships, and counties for equipment and upgrades to salt storage facilities. A second round of grant funding is expected to be awarded in Fall 2024. The project can help with purchasing brine mixing, or brine making for local road salt facilities.

 

Low Head Dam Removal

     Many old low head dams in the state have outlived their usefulness. These dams result in undesirable effects such as oxygen depletion, trapped sediment, and interrupted fish migration. One dam on the Great Miami River has been modified to allow fish passage. Aging dams are more likely to fail, resulting in flooding. They can impede water flow, creating a ponding effect that disrupts some fish species and causes low oxygen levels on the upstream side which can harm fish and other aquatic species. They can impede navigation and recreation. The circular currents just below these dams have become known as “drowning machines” as many people have been killed, typically kayakers.

 

Replacing and Upgrading Failing Household Sewage Treatment Systems and Overflowing Sewer Systems

     Funding in the form of grants is issued to county health departments for fixing failing household sewage treatment systems. The state estimates that nearly a third of these throughout the state are experiencing some level of failure. Elevated levels of coliform bacteria in streams are one measure of the problem. This type of bacteria includes E. coli and along with other pathogens, presents a danger to nearby drinking water sources and aquatic species.

     The grants predominantly help low-income families get their HSTSs up to code. I have worked a bit on assessing HSTSs and determining who might qualify for such grants. Often it is the soil quality and depth of soil water tables that determines whether a system will fail or not.  Usage and effluent loading rates affect the likelihood of failure. Some systems can be repaired but many need to be replaced.

 

Improving River Health, Aquatic Species Surveying, Litter Cleanup, and Sampling for Emerging Contaminants

     The Ohio EPA and the ODNR are sampling rivers throughout the state to assess reiver health, surveying aquatic species presence and proliferation, and sampling both water and fish for emerging contaminants, namely PFAS/PFOS.

“ODNR is surveying those same 151 large river locations for freshwater mussels, a group of organisms in decline around the U.S. that are excellent indicators of water quality. This robust survey will set a baseline for long-term mussel populations monitoring in our large rivers and may provide valuable information for populations recovery efforts.”

     The H2Ohio project is also involved with litter cleanup along the state’s rivers. Single-use plastics and scrap tires are two of the main issues.

 

Upgrading Drinking Water and Wastewater Infrastructure

     In terms of costs these upgrades are probably the most expensive. They are also very necessary as they can affect drinking water quality. These projects include equipment grants for drinking water infrastructure, extension of water service to new areas, water line replacement, and sewer service extension projects.

“In 2023, Ohio EPA awarded more than 250 communities across the state a total of $1 million in grants for equipment needed to maintain their public drinking water infrastructure. The grants cover distribution system equipment such as mobile leak detectors, line locators, valve exercisers, flow meters, hydrant condition assessors, pressure monitors, and training to use the equipment. In 2024, A second round of grants were awarded to over 250 communities for a total of $2.2 million.”

 

Conservation Reserve Enhancement Program (CREP)

     This program began as the Lake Erie Conservation Reserve Enhancement Program and then was extended to watersheds in areas with high agricultural use.  

“Through this program, H2Ohio Rivers aims to capture 60,000 acres to install CREP practices, such as grassland buffers, forested riparian buffers, and drainage water management practices. CREP has been successfully used in Ohio since the early 2000s to enhance up to 137,000 acres in the Lake Erie and Scioto watersheds.”

“Participants receive financial incentives from the USDA to voluntarily enroll environmentally sensitive cropland or pastureland in contracts for a period of 15 years. In return for annual rental payments that average approximately $154 per acre, participants can convert the land to native grasses, trees and other conservation vegetation.”

 

Ohio Department of Agriculture’s Watershed Program and Conservation Action Project

     ODA’ s Conservation Action Project (CAP) is exploring the precision application of phosphorus and other phosphorus management practices. CAP was established in 2021 and is a collaboration of ODA, farmers, soil and water conservation districts, agronomists, and agricultural consultants. They are involved in long-term water quality research projects. The Watershed Program includes the development of detailed Regional Watershed Plans. It also develops Non-Point Source-Implementation Strategy (NPS-IS) plans for agricultural and stormwater runoff management.

“This year ODA dedicated funding to research and demonstration sites to challenge traditional phosphorus management practices by showing how reduced phosphorus applications maintain yield and crop productivity. CAP is currently managing nine research plots and has released four reports detailing their conservation research. The group is also leading outreach efforts to producers, sharing its research results with the agricultural community and hosting field days for farmers to discuss reduced phosphorus application, cover crops, and soil health.”

     Projects include:

“…conservation programming for grazing and livestock lands across the southeast portion of the state, solutions for equine manure storage in the northeast, and targeted implementation for phosphorus load reduction in the Western Lake Erie Basin.”

The program offers nutrient management training to farmers.

     H2Ohio also involves modeling, monitoring, and analysis of edge-of-field data to measure the continuing decrease of phosphorus runoff throughout the state.

     Encouraging and assisting in the utilization of best management practices for addressing agricultural runoff and soil erosion is also a major H2Ohio focus.

     A summary of H2Ohio project funding by agency is shown below.

 

References:

 

Improving Ohio’s Water and Wastewater Infrastructure. H2Ohio. Improving Ohio’s Water and Wastewater Infrastructure

H2Ohio Accomplishments for Fiscal Year 2024. H2Ohio. Ohio.gov. H2Ohio-FY24-Report-Final.pdf

More than 200 wetlands are now complete or in progress in Ohio. Jane Imbody. Mansfield News Journal. February 14, 2025. More than 200 wetlands are now complete or in progress in Ohio

H2Ohio: Ohio’s Strategy for Clean Water. H2Ohio | Ohio.gov

Dam Removal on Big Indian Creek: Removing low-head dams promotes habitat and recreation safety. The Nature Conservancy. December 24, 2019. Low Head Dam Removal