New legislation would transition more ocean-going container ships to run off electricity instead of diesel while they are docked at Washington ports. Proponents of the bill say implementing more shore power would improve air quality and cut emissions. Ships still need power when they are in port, and often leave engines idling. The diesel fumes have created health problems for nearby Puget Sound residents, including increased risk of cancer and other serious health effects.

Rep, Julia Reed, D-Seattle, introduced the shore power bill, and said both impacted communities and the shipping industry have high incentives to move away from diesel.

"We need both of these partners to kind of work together towards a common goal of creating shore power across Washington state in order to get this to work," she explained.

Reed noted the transition to electric power for Washington's ports will take years to implement and will be expensive, but added the shipping industry is motivated by the high cost of diesel to find alternative fuels, which are already in use in Europe and California.

Georgetown and South Park, two neighborhoods in Southern Seattle, as well as parts of Tacoma face severe health disparities due to the impacts of diesel fuel and other industries. Life expectancy is up to 20 years lower in these areas compared to other parts of the state. Reed says she recognizes this has been an issue for these communities for years.

"I think it's not an accident that a lot of poor browner communities tend to be the ones that are closest to these industrial impacts. And also those communities have been speaking out for themselves," she explained.

Reed said the coast electrification project will be funded in part by the Climate Commitment Act, which was upheld by Washington voters in 2024. The program uses a cap and trade system to help the state meet its goal of reducing greenhouse gas emissions by 95% by 2050.


get more stories like this via email

As oil and gas well sites pop up next to more Colorado neighborhoods, residents are gathering evidence to hold operators accountable for toxic emissions, which are invisible to the naked eye.

Bobbie Mooney, staff attorney for the advocacy group 350 Colorado, a nonprofit organizing tours and training, said using optical gas-imaging technology, everyday Coloradans can now see the single largest source of air pollution along the Front Range with their own eyes.

"We've been in violation of federal health-based standards for over a decade," Mooney pointed out. "Despite a lot of talk and efforts to change rules and regulations, unfortunately we have not seen an improvement in air quality here."

Colorado is the nation's fourth-largest oil and gas producer, and there are currently more than 46,000 active wells, up 25% since 2009, largely due to expanded fracking operations. The Trump administration would like to see the number go up and has promised to roll back regulations in order to achieve its goal of energy dominance.

The American Lung Association's latest State of the Air Report Card gave Colorado's Front Range an "F" for poor air quality due to ground-level ozone and particle pollution.

Mooney noted toxic emissions from oil and gas sites such as benzine pose serious threats to human health at every stage of life.

"Regulations are really the only line of defense that Coloradans have to protect our health and safety from the impacts of oil and gas extraction," Mooney emphasized. "Everything from air pollution to water consumption to habitat destruction."

To get the optical gas imaging camera into the hands of more communities, 350 Colorado has partnered with Earthworks. Mooney added tour participants also get tips on how to let lawmakers know what they saw, and how to push leaders to protect themselves, their family, and their neighbors.

"We also encourage participants to write a public comment," Mooney urged. "To their local county or city, or to the state government agencies, like the Colorado Energy and Carbon Management Commission, or the Department of Public Health and Environment that regulates air quality."


get more stories like this via email

Bad air quality days are a heightened concern as ozone season begins in North Carolina.

Ozone season in the state lasts from March through October, when hot weather increases the prevalence of ground-level ozone.

Rafaella Vaca, education manager for the advocacy group CleanAIRE NC, said there are health effects from poor ozone days.

"Symptoms like shortness of breath, coughing and throat irritation as short term impacts," Vaca explained. "Over time, it can cause inflamed airways and worsen conditions like asthma, bronchitis, emphysema, and also increase your susceptibility to lung infections."

Ground-level ozone forms from chemical reactions between nitrogen oxides and organic compounds emitted from car exhaust, aerosols and manufacturing facilities.

Vaca acknowledged the effects of bad ozone are not often discussed, probably in part because it cannot be seen, even though it contributes to smog.

"It's not emitted directly from car emissions but it forms when pollutants come together in sunlight," Vaca noted. "It's a little bit more of a complicated process."

Vaca emphasized there are ways for people to protect themselves and others, including by driving less and using public transportation more often. People can also check the Air Quality Index and limit activities outside when levels are high.

Vaca argued regulatory agencies like the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality can do more to protect people.

"They need to consider all air emissions and contaminations that can affect your well-being," Vaca urged. "Unfortunately, that's not currently how this system works because each air pollution permit is evaluated as and only one pollution source to consider versus considering all of them at once."

Earlier this month, the Federal Highway Administration stopped new funding for electric vehicle charging stations under the National Electric Vehicle Infrastructure program.

Through the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law, the program allocated $5 billion over five years to all U.S. states, D.C., and Puerto Rico. Michigan was set to receive $110 million for fast-charging stations along key routes.

Chase Attanasio, policy manager for the advocacy group Clean Fuels Michigan, said despite the cuts, EV charging ports expansion plans in the state are affected but not aborted.

"The utility companies in Michigan have been and will continue to invest heavily in EV infrastructure deployments in their service territories that support a variety of different use cases," Attanasio pointed out. "And there are state programs that will continue to support EV charger deployments across the state."

The federal government will allow existing contracts to proceed with reimbursements until new guidance is issued.

There are currently 3,700 public charging stations around the Great Lakes State and the goal is to deploy 100 thousand by 2030. Attanasio believes Michigan has an opportunity to step up and take the lead in the clean mobility sector, despite uncertainties.

"Increasing investments in the clean mobility sectors will show Michigan's commitment to this industry," Attanasio contended. "And its commitment to transitioning and supporting the automotive industry in its transition towards electric vehicles."

The Federal government's initial goal was to increase the total number of public EV charging ports to 500,000 by 2030. Since Congress approved the funding, the current administration may face challenges in stopping the program on its own.