$4.3B for What? Biden’s Latest Climate Cash Splash

    353
    IB Photography / shutterstock.com
    IB Photography / shutterstock.com

    Here we go again. The Biden administration is doling out a whopping $4.3 billion in climate pollution reduction grants. That’s right, more of your hard-earned tax dollars are going to fund projects across 30 states and one tribe, all in the name of cutting emissions and reducing pollution.

    The big announcement on July 22 claims these grants will bring “community-driven solutions” to tackle the so-called climate crisis, reduce air pollution, and advance environmental justice. Oh, and remember, it’ll also accelerate America’s transition to clean energy through sectors like transportation, electric power, and agriculture. Sounds great on paper, right?

    President Joe Biden, in his usual optimistic style, said, “When I think of climate change, I think about jobs—good-paying, union jobs that put Americans to work, rebuild our nation’s aging infrastructure, and support our transition to a clean energy future.” Sure, Joe, because we’ve seen how well that’s worked out so far.

    The administration insists these grants will deploy technologies and programs to reduce greenhouse gases and other pollutants. They also plan to build infrastructure, housing, and industries that support a clean energy future while supposedly creating jobs and training programs in new industries. If you believe that, I’ve got a bridge to sell you.

    Biden touted that these grants would curb greenhouse gas emissions in Pennsylvania and provide flood-proofing infrastructure in North Carolina. But let’s be real here: does anyone actually think these projects will make a significant dent in climate change, or is this just another cash grab by the government?

    John Podesta, Biden’s senior adviser for international climate policy, chimed in, saying these grants put local governments “in the driver’s seat to develop climate solutions that work for their communities.” Translation: more bureaucracy and red tape, with local officials scrambling to spend federal money on pet projects.

    Take Pennsylvania, for example. The state’s Department of Environmental Protection is set to receive more than $396 million to reduce industrial emissions and fund large-scale decarbonization projects. Governor Josh Shapiro claims this will reduce toxic air pollution, create thousands of jobs, and invest in the energy sector. Forgive the skepticism, but we’ve heard these promises before.

    Over in California, the South Coast Air Quality Management District is getting almost $500 million for electric-charging equipment and zero-emission freight vehicles. Because what California really needs is more funding for electric vehicles when they can’t even keep the lights on during a heatwave.

    Meanwhile, Montana’s Forest, Community, and Working Landscapes Climate Resiliency Project will receive nearly $50 million to improve forest management and expand urban and community forests. These funds are also supposed to mitigate wildfires and coal seam fires. Given Montana’s vast forests, this might be one of the few grants that make sense.

    Nebraska’s Department of Environment and Energy is set to receive over $300 million to promote climate-smart agriculture and reduce agricultural waste. This is great; more money is funneled into farming practices that may or may not actually reduce emissions.

    Let’s not forget the nearly $250 million for electric vehicle-charging infrastructure along the I-95 corridor in New Jersey, Connecticut, Delaware, and Maryland. Clearly, more EV chargers are needed to solve our climate issues.

    Michigan’s Department of Environment, Great Lakes, and Energy will receive almost $130 million to help local and tribal governments accelerate renewable energy projects. They’re aiming for 60% renewable energy sources by 2030. Ambitious, sure, but realistic? Time will tell.

    The Atlantic Conservation Coalition will receive more than $420 million to leverage the carbon sequestration power of natural lands like coastal wetlands and forests. While carbon sequestration is a valid method for reducing atmospheric CO2, the question remains: is it enough to justify the cost?

    White House national climate adviser Ali Zaidi called these grants a way to “supercharge American climate progress.” Yet, with the federal government’s track record, it’s hard not to see this as another expensive waste of time

    So, the question remains: will these billions in grants lead to real progress or just more hot air from the Biden administration? We’ll have to wait and see.