I’ve only been able to skim it, but I appreciate that the study appears to take seriously communities’ civic obligations around development and role as stewards of their environment.

Another interesting finding was the importance of connecting participation to clear outcomes

Report also emphasized importance of local governments structuring and supporting community leadership

Excited to dig into William Boyd’s new paper “The Tax Struggle and Renewable Power.” 🔌💡

papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers....

lol 🔌💡

www.theguardian.com/us-news/2025...

These provisions in the minerals executive order explicitly requiring DOD officials to court private capital surprised me. Has anyone seen something like this before?

Link to order: www.whitehouse.gov/presidential...

www.sciencedirect.com/science/arti...

For context, some agencies prohibited “inflammatory words” like “disturbed” in early NEPA docs. “These are words used by the Sierra Club, Friends of the Earth, environmentalists, homosexuals, ecologists and other ideological eunuchs opposed to development of mineral resources” one agency wrote.

Oil companies seeking billions in payouts through international arbitration against countries that adopt climate policies

“Simply absurd”

“I cannot overstate just how perverse this is”

In this sense, I appreciate that the article ends by focusing on the work of building trust—the basic work of politics—rather than messaging. This is, to me at least, the fundamental challenge facing environmentalism from political strategy all the way down to policy like permitting reform. 7/7

But bridging this gap will require re-engaging in the political struggle within environmentalism against its racist and exclusionary threads. That means challenging MAHA while acknowledging its shared roots—hard, political work beyond “messaging” and that big greens were not set up to do 6/7

As the article notes, one lesson articulated by Ben Jealous is perhaps a better understanding of environmentalism’s broad political appeal. 5/7

These ideas are behind reforms such as New York’s that match benefit sharing and participation with streamlined permitting. It’s too early to judge, but people seem to be drawing the same conclusions: benefit sharing and inclusive process are most effective.

www.utilitydive.com/news/states-...

This is why at least one review concluded—almost a decade ago—that NIMBYism “is invalid” as an explanation to opposition to wind energy and “should be abandoned altogether” because it confuses the issues and is mostly “used pejoratively.” Rand & Hoen

Environmental/aesthetic concerns are common, but benefits, trust, and fair process are so central that some researchers suggest failures on these issues may cause the opposition that observers mislabel as NIMBYism. See, e.g., Rand & Hoen and Carley

Stokes, et al. "Prevalence and predictors of wind energy opposition in North America" (2023) www.pnas.org/doi/epub/10....

Carley, et al. "Energy infrastructure, NIMBYism, and public opinion: a systematic literature review of three decades of empirical survey literature" (2020)
iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1...

Rand & Hoen, "Thirty years of North American wind energy acceptance research: What have we learned?" (2017)
www.sciencedirect.com/science/arti...

Relying only on EV adoption to reduce oil production and avoid climate catastrophe risks price volatility that, in turn, undermines EV adoption that, in turn, risks price volatility that, in turn, undermines EV adoption that, in turn . . .

Quotes from @gasbuddyguy.bsky.social 2025 outlook