Jan 24, 2026
Jean Ambrose
editorial@newsandsentinel.com
I write this column not as a historian or a policy expert, but as someone who lives in a region that has been asked, again and again, to give more than it can. Each morning, when I look out from the ridges where I live in the Mid-Ohio Valley, I am reminded that the places we love are never abstract. They hold our bodies, our memories, our dead. We are part of them, and they are part of us. And they carry the marks of the choices we make about energy.
When I watch what is unfolding in Venezuela, I do not see a distant crisis, but a familiar pattern. Deep beneath Venezuela lie immense oil reserves, and for decades that oil has been treated as that nation’s destiny. Instead of bringing security, it has brought instability, foreign interference, poisoned land, and deep human suffering. Oil promised abundance; it delivered scarcity. Families now face shortages of food and medicine, while rivers and wetlands bear the residue of spills and neglect.
Fossil fuels do not simply power our lives; they reorder them. Where oil and gas dominate, power concentrates. Decisions move farther away from ordinary people. Violence becomes normalized–sometimes suddenly, sometimes slowly. In Venezuela, when oil prices collapsed and political pressure tightened, the social fabric tore. Those with the least power paid the highest price.
History tells me this is not new. In Iran, oil once raised hopes of self-determination. In 1953, when Prime Minister Mohammad Mossadegh sought to reclaim Iran’s oil for its own people, the response from abroad — particularly the United Kingdom, aided by the United States — was swift and devastating. A democratic government was overthrown. Authoritarian rule followed. That wound has never fully healed. Oil again proved itself not a gift, but a trigger for long-lasting conflict.
The United Kingdom’s own rise was fueled first by coal, then by oil. Industrial wealth was built alongside exhausted miners, polluted cities, and colonies stripped of resources. Oil became essential to maintaining global power, binding Britain to faraway lands and conflicts that still shape our world today. Energy did not simply light homes; it lit the fuse of empire.
The great global wars of the 20th Century were, at their core, energy wars. World War I marked the moment when oil became essential to military power. In World War II, entire campaigns turned on access to fuel — Germany’s push toward the Caucasus oil fields, Japan’s expansion into Southeast Asia, and the Allies’ relentless targeting of refineries and supply lines. The oil embargo imposed by the United States and its allies on Japan in 1941, cutting off access to vital fuel supplies, led directly to the attack on Pearl Harbor. Energy scarcity pushed nations toward catastrophic violence. Millions died, in part because oil had become something nations were willing to kill for.
When I think about these histories, I cannot separate them from home. The Mid-Ohio Valley has lived its own version of this story. Coal, oil, and gas arrived with promises of prosperity and security. For some, those promises were briefly real. For many others, they ended in black lung, contaminated water, fractured hillsides, and towns hollowed out once the profits moved on. We were never bombed, but we have lived through slow violence–the kind that settles into lungs and streams and does not leave when the companies do.
Wars fueled by fossil energy are not always fought with guns. Some are fought quietly, over generations. They are wars against health, against land, against the possibility that our children might inherit something whole. Venezuela’s crisis makes visible what is often hidden: when an economy is built on extraction at any cost, suffering follows–through coups, sanctions, displacement, or environmental collapse.
From Venezuela’s oil fields to Iran’s broken democracy, from British imperial power to the oil embargo that helped lead to Pearl Harbor, and down to the creeks and communities where I live, the pattern is the same. The colonial mindset that treated land and people as resources to be controlled has never fully disappeared. Today it is reborn through sanctions, resource grabs, and energy politics that once again decide whose lives are expendable.
A wounded land can only carry so much. I still choose joy in this place — watching birds at the feeder, noticing the light shift on the hills — but that joy carries responsibility. If we want fewer wars, fewer sacrifices of people and places, we must choose energy systems rooted in care rather than conquest.
Sustainable energy fundamentally changes the story because it breaks the link between power and scarcity. Sunlight, wind, and moving water are not finite prizes to be seized or controlled by force; they are widely distributed and locally available. When communities generate energy where they live, the incentive to dominate distant lands and fuel supplies retreats. By decentralizing energy production, sustainable systems weaken the concentration of power that has so often fueled conflict, replacing competition with cooperation and resilience.
Venezuela’s crisis should be read as a warning, not an anomaly. As communities in the Mid-Ohio Valley weigh injection wells, methane hubs, and expanded extraction, we are also choosing what kind of stability we want — and for whom. A just and lasting peace, whether globally or locally, depends on breaking the cycle that links fossil fuels to concentrated power, environmental harm, and conflict, and investing instead in energy systems that sustain people, place, and peace.
***
Jean Ambrose is a member of Mid-Ohio Valley Climate Action, a mother, grandmother, bird watcher, and gardener.
Posted: January 24, 2026 by main_y0ke11
Climate Corner: Fossil fuels, war and home
Jan 24, 2026
Jean Ambrose
editorial@newsandsentinel.com
I write this column not as a historian or a policy expert, but as someone who lives in a region that has been asked, again and again, to give more than it can. Each morning, when I look out from the ridges where I live in the Mid-Ohio Valley, I am reminded that the places we love are never abstract. They hold our bodies, our memories, our dead. We are part of them, and they are part of us. And they carry the marks of the choices we make about energy.
When I watch what is unfolding in Venezuela, I do not see a distant crisis, but a familiar pattern. Deep beneath Venezuela lie immense oil reserves, and for decades that oil has been treated as that nation’s destiny. Instead of bringing security, it has brought instability, foreign interference, poisoned land, and deep human suffering. Oil promised abundance; it delivered scarcity. Families now face shortages of food and medicine, while rivers and wetlands bear the residue of spills and neglect.
Fossil fuels do not simply power our lives; they reorder them. Where oil and gas dominate, power concentrates. Decisions move farther away from ordinary people. Violence becomes normalized–sometimes suddenly, sometimes slowly. In Venezuela, when oil prices collapsed and political pressure tightened, the social fabric tore. Those with the least power paid the highest price.
History tells me this is not new. In Iran, oil once raised hopes of self-determination. In 1953, when Prime Minister Mohammad Mossadegh sought to reclaim Iran’s oil for its own people, the response from abroad — particularly the United Kingdom, aided by the United States — was swift and devastating. A democratic government was overthrown. Authoritarian rule followed. That wound has never fully healed. Oil again proved itself not a gift, but a trigger for long-lasting conflict.
The United Kingdom’s own rise was fueled first by coal, then by oil. Industrial wealth was built alongside exhausted miners, polluted cities, and colonies stripped of resources. Oil became essential to maintaining global power, binding Britain to faraway lands and conflicts that still shape our world today. Energy did not simply light homes; it lit the fuse of empire.
The great global wars of the 20th Century were, at their core, energy wars. World War I marked the moment when oil became essential to military power. In World War II, entire campaigns turned on access to fuel — Germany’s push toward the Caucasus oil fields, Japan’s expansion into Southeast Asia, and the Allies’ relentless targeting of refineries and supply lines. The oil embargo imposed by the United States and its allies on Japan in 1941, cutting off access to vital fuel supplies, led directly to the attack on Pearl Harbor. Energy scarcity pushed nations toward catastrophic violence. Millions died, in part because oil had become something nations were willing to kill for.
When I think about these histories, I cannot separate them from home. The Mid-Ohio Valley has lived its own version of this story. Coal, oil, and gas arrived with promises of prosperity and security. For some, those promises were briefly real. For many others, they ended in black lung, contaminated water, fractured hillsides, and towns hollowed out once the profits moved on. We were never bombed, but we have lived through slow violence–the kind that settles into lungs and streams and does not leave when the companies do.
Wars fueled by fossil energy are not always fought with guns. Some are fought quietly, over generations. They are wars against health, against land, against the possibility that our children might inherit something whole. Venezuela’s crisis makes visible what is often hidden: when an economy is built on extraction at any cost, suffering follows–through coups, sanctions, displacement, or environmental collapse.
From Venezuela’s oil fields to Iran’s broken democracy, from British imperial power to the oil embargo that helped lead to Pearl Harbor, and down to the creeks and communities where I live, the pattern is the same. The colonial mindset that treated land and people as resources to be controlled has never fully disappeared. Today it is reborn through sanctions, resource grabs, and energy politics that once again decide whose lives are expendable.
A wounded land can only carry so much. I still choose joy in this place — watching birds at the feeder, noticing the light shift on the hills — but that joy carries responsibility. If we want fewer wars, fewer sacrifices of people and places, we must choose energy systems rooted in care rather than conquest.
Sustainable energy fundamentally changes the story because it breaks the link between power and scarcity. Sunlight, wind, and moving water are not finite prizes to be seized or controlled by force; they are widely distributed and locally available. When communities generate energy where they live, the incentive to dominate distant lands and fuel supplies retreats. By decentralizing energy production, sustainable systems weaken the concentration of power that has so often fueled conflict, replacing competition with cooperation and resilience.
Venezuela’s crisis should be read as a warning, not an anomaly. As communities in the Mid-Ohio Valley weigh injection wells, methane hubs, and expanded extraction, we are also choosing what kind of stability we want — and for whom. A just and lasting peace, whether globally or locally, depends on breaking the cycle that links fossil fuels to concentrated power, environmental harm, and conflict, and investing instead in energy systems that sustain people, place, and peace.
***
Jean Ambrose is a member of Mid-Ohio Valley Climate Action, a mother, grandmother, bird watcher, and gardener.
Last Updated: January 21, 2026 by main_y0ke11
Climate Corner: Standard of living – questioned
Jan 17, 2026
Vic Elam
editorial@newsandsentinel.com
Aldo Leopold, a man considered by many as the father of modern conservation wrote, “Like winds and sunsets, wild things were taken for granted until progress began to do away with them. Now we face the question whether a still higher ‘standard of living’ is worth its cost in things natural, wild, and free.” That was around 1949, and I think that if Aldo could fathom what the world has become now, he would consider not only the cost to things natural, wild, and free, but also the welfare of mankind. Aldo’s world was shaped by events closer to his time like the passing of the last passenger pigeon. Once one of the most abundant bird species on earth numbering in the billions, passenger pigeons were reduced to extinction by over-hunting and habitat degradation. No doubt the wholesale forest harvesting that occurred in the MOV and throughout the eastern U.S. contributed mightily to that.
Unlike the Indigenous peoples of this country who respected natural resources and were careful not to use more than needed and act with reciprocity, helping heal the land from which they garnered sustenance; European settlers came to this country and saw a bounty that was theirs to plunder. Forests were cleared, bison were nearly hunted to extinction, the prairies were broken and converted to cropland resulting in the dust bowl era, which also saw severe declines in waterfowl populations. You get the idea.
Today the human impact on the environment is enormous and we seem to have forgotten the hard-earned lessons of our country’s youth. We enacted laws intended to protect us from ourselves, but constantly weakening those laws, or providing loopholes, or just flat out ignoring those laws has become commonplace. Some say that deregulation is in the interest of productivity; but the question I would ask is, considering environmental harm, is producing more plastic bottles, or destroying our fresh water supply, or exposing the least among us to toxic air worth more than the cost of our and our environment’s health.
The human body is made up of 50-70% water. When astrophysicists look into the heavens for presence of life, one of the primary conditions they look for is presence or evidence of water. Even in the dryest of deserts life hangs on waiting for that rare presence to burst forth.
In last week’s Climate Corner, Eric talked about the impact from the proliferation of artificial intelligence (AI) data centers in our area. I would like to dig a little deeper into that morass. Many studies have been showing a trend in freshwater declines and a recent study shows those declines increasing at alarming rates, globally. The primary culprit for this is shown to be global warming, but another major component is aquifer extraction and what’s worse is that we are draining crucial water from our aquifers and filling the oceans with it – contributing to sea level rise. Data centers use a huge amount of water for cooling, some more than a million gallons a day. Many reuse the water by running it through cooling towers, but even with those efforts it is hundreds of thousands to more than a million gallons a day. Hydraulic fracturing uses 1.5 million to more than 16 million gallons. One major difference is that “brine” produced by fracking is lost from the freshwater cycle by injection underground. On the other hand, water that has been used by data centers is often diverted into storm water systems and is overwhelming many municipal water treatment facilities. This wastewater contains some or all of the following: heavy metals, corrosion inhibitors, biocides, glycols, PFAS (forever chemicals), elevated Total Dissolved Solids (TDS) and nitrates.
In the state of Ohio, the Ohio EPA is responsible for issuing permits for data center wastewater discharge which has been contentious due to the OEPA’s track record of failure to hold violators accountable. To make things worse OEPA is planning to and received public comments on allowing data centers to discharge water into the state’s lakes and streams. This is occurring already in some states including West Virginia where it is controlled by the West Virginia Department of Environmental Protection – again with a less than stellar track record for adequate monitoring and violator enforcement.
I think that Aldo Leopold would seriously question the benefit of a better ‘standard of living’ at the cost of so much in many of the things we do today. I recommend “A Sand County Almanac” by Aldo Leopold, for some quality reflection on this and many of today’s issues.
***
Vic Elam, is a father, land manager, outdoor enthusiast, and proud member of Mid-Ohio Valley Climate Action (MOVCA).
Posted: January 10, 2026 by main_y0ke11
Climate Corner: Pass the torch
Jan 10, 2026
Giulia Mannarino
editorial@newsandsentinel.com
I feel ancient when I think about being born in the 1900s. Then I remind myself that growing old is a privilege not all people are given. I also remind myself that older does not automatically mean wiser. Although experience is important, no one can deny that aging takes a toll on both mind and body. For this reason, I prefer that the individuals involved in decisions that affect my and my grandchildren’s futures be in the prime of their youth and trained in the most updated knowledge of their specialties. For me, this includes all elected government officials at the federal, state or local level including Special Districts which can be operated by local governments. These provide a particular public service such as drinking water or schools, often with an elected Board. These vary and are defined by state laws. Elected officials of various groups are having to address the consequences caused by a warming Earth. Their decisions will affect the future of the planet and all its species. It just makes sense that younger people, the ones more likely to still be alive in the not too distant future, become more involved in determining what actions should be taken to address this existential world crisis.
By the time the current 119th Congress adjourns in January 2027, if every member stays in office, 140 of the total 541 members will be aged 70 years or older. This group includes the oldest “freshman” Senator ever sworn in, West Virginia’s 73-year-old Jim Justice. Among the several octogenarians, it includes Vermont’s 84-year-old Senator Bernie Sanders. The oldest member of Congress, 91-year-old Senator Chuck Grassley of Iowa, was first elected in 1980. And, on average, our country’s state governors are even older than the current Congress. John F. Kennedy, who had already served 8 years in the Senate, was the youngest elected president at age 43. Theodore Roosevelt was actually the youngest president to serve when, at 42, he became president following William McKinley’s assassination. As someone enjoying retirement, I don’t understand why anyone, especially those who have adequate personal funds, would choose to work past a sensible retirement age. Perhaps love of power or money?
Across all the 50 states, in order to run for a political office, individuals must be registered voters as well as meet certain criteria including residency and minimum age requirements. For some positions this can be as young as 18 years old. No state has a maximum age. An unusual qualification for candidates in West Virginia is that they must have never competed in a duel. Dueling became obsolete after the Civil War, but a few states, including Kentucky, have not repealed dueling laws. Any form of a traditional duel remains a serious crime everywhere in the U.S. Interestingly, in all states but Wisconsin, convicted felons are not prevented from holding the office of governor. Eligible persons, who seek to hold political party positions need to declare their candidacy by filing a “certificate of announcement” by a specified date and time. This required paperwork needs to be filed with a certain government office, such as the Secretary of State or County Clerk. Which government office to file in depends on if the position is to be filled by voters of a single municipality, a single county or more than one county.
Regardless of a candidate’s age or whether it is a federal, state or local position, running for any political office can be daunting, confusing and difficult. And, funds for campaign expenses need to be raised. The major political parties are interested in, willing and able to help potential candidates. Some positions may be part-time and can be held by persons that have additional employment while others require full-time hours. The salaries and per diem for political positions vary widely across our region. Hopefully, politics will never again be corrupted by racism or sexism but ageism makes sense. All levels of government need to transition to a new generation of leadership. Whether federal, state or local, more young people need to be politically involved in decisions being made about the future of our warming planet. The Post War and Boomer generations need to step aside because it’s past time for them to pass the torch of public service to the Millennials and Gen Zs
Posted: January 3, 2026 by main_y0ke11
Climate Corner: Data centers taking pages from coal baron playbook
Jan 3, 2026
Eric Engle
editorial@newsandsentinel.com
“Data Centers and bitcoin mines are remaking rural America the same way coal once did. They move into weak regulatory terrain, rewrite the rules in their favor, drain the resources that communities rely on and send the value somewhere else.”
This quote is from a piece in Salon titled “Data centers are West Virginia’s new strip mines: The Mountain State is experiencing a data center boom–and using the old coal playbook” by Sean Carlton. I read the piece recently on Facebook, where it was shared by Tucker United – a group of Tucker County residents and their supporters opposing data center buildout in their breathtaking home. Tucker United describes themselves as “a coalition of Tucker County residents and allies that demand the power to shape our future and protect our community, families, natural resources, and economy.”
“Data centers are the same kind of extraction,” says Carlton, “only this time the corporations are hiding them behind fences, nondisclosure agreements and a lot of glossy PR about ‘upcycling’ coal mines and powering the future.” “Strip mining used to at least throw a few hundred jobs at a county while it hollowed everything else out,” Carlton continues. “Now, West Virginia is trading away water, land, noise and grid capacity for a workforce small enough to fit inside a school bus.”
According to Noman Bashir, Computing and Climate Impact Fellow at MIT Climate and Sustainability Consortium (MCSC) and a postdoc in the Computer Science and Artificial Intelligence Laboratory (CSAIL), “The demand for new data centers cannot be met in a sustainable way. The pace at which companies are building new data centers means the bulk of the electricity to power them must come from fossil fuel-based power plants.”
Power consumption by U.S. data centers is expected to more than double by 2030, according to projections by the Pew Research Center using data from the International Energy Agency’s base case scenario, to 426 terawatt-hours per year. A report earlier this year by the consumer advocacy group Public Citizen found that “Residents’ electricity costs in some data center-dense areas have surged over 250% in just five years. At PJM — the world’s largest power market [West Virginia is in PJM] — capacity auction prices spiked 800% in 2024, in part due to data center growth. That same year, consumers across seven PJM states paid $4.3 billion more in electricity costs to cover data centers’ new transmission infrastructure.”A report by CNBC earlier this month shared findings from a separate watchdog report showing that “PJM’s 65 million consumers will pay a total of $16.6 billion to secure future power supplies needed to meet demand from AI data centers from now until 2027, approximately $255 per person on average.” That’s just from AI-related data centers, not separate data centers for cryptocurrency or cloud computing.
Data centers use massive amounts of water for cooling and create high demand for fracked gas (fracking being a process that causes permanent loss of enormous quantities of water from the water table that can never be made potable again, at least on human timescales). With passage of House Bill 2014 earlier this year in the WV Legislature, municipalities and counties will be deprived of the vast majority of tax revenue data centers in West Virginia generate in their backyards.
Data centers are a driving force behind Governor Patrick Morrisey’s “50 by 50” energy initiative, whereby Morrisey wants West Virginia to produce 50 gigawatts of electricity by 2050, 35 gigawatts more than the 15 gigawatts the state produces today, driven almost exclusively by coal and gas. This initiative is ludicrous on its face regardless of what sources the electricity would come from–which I made clear in comments I offered to the state’s Office of Energy recently–but to focus almost entirely on coal and gas, with a bone thrown to extremely expensive nuclear, is completely asinine.
The focus of energy policy in West Virginia should be twofold: 1) Generation by cleaner, safer, healthier and far cheaper renewables–especially solar, wind and hydro–with multiple storage operations to solve for intermittency; and 2) maximization of energy efficiencies across our built environments (residential, commercial and industrial) and deployment of smart grid technologies and other demand management systems. We need community solar solutions and assistance for households and rental property owners who have suitable properties to help them with the upfront costs of going solar and relying less on the grid or even going off grid with home energy storage options.
Generations of West Virginians sacrificed everything to power civilization and build the modern world. Our people have given enough. We shouldn’t have to continue being the same extraction colony and sacrifice zone we’ve been since June 20, 1863, so delusional bitcoin investors can feel like they’re doing something futuristic and special and so AI can continue becoming the next technological Frankenstein’s monster. Mountaineers deserve better.
***
Eric Engle is board president of Mid-Ohio Valley Climate Action.
Posted: December 27, 2025 by main_y0ke11
Climate Corner Reimagining economic development in the Mid-Ohio Valley
Dec 27, 2025
George Banziger
editorial@newsandsentinel.com
t a recent meeting of the Marietta Area Chamber of Commerce, I posed the following question to Brian Chavez, who represents the 30th Ohio Senate District and is chairman of the Ohio Senate Energy Committee: “What economic benefit does the injection-well industry (which pumps millions of barrels of production waste from hydraulic fracturing) present to Washington County, and how would you assess the economic cost/benefit ratio of this industry for our region?”
Since Mr. Chavez did not really answer my question, I attempted to answer it at the Dec.18 meeting of the Washington County Commissioners. The costs of this industry are huge: risks to the water aquifers, increased seismic activity, air and water pollution, and trucks labeled “brine,” plying our state and county roads bearing their toxic and radioactive brew. The benefits — a few jobs for brine haulers who are taking great risks to their own health in dealing with the dangerous material. If there are any benefits of the larger industry of high-pressure hydraulic fracturing, i.e., fracking, very little of it comes to Washington County and the Mid-Ohio Valley.
But what actually are the benefits of the fracking industry to the larger area of northern Appalachia (West Virginia, eastern Kentucky, western Pennsylvania and the 32 counties of Ohio within the Appalachian region)?
Although fossil-fuel interests have promised economic growth, and jobs in the region as a result of the fracking boom, the strategic economic triad of natural gas, petrochemicals and hydrogen, are actually dragging down northern Appalachia, according to a recent study by the Ohio River Valley Institute (2025). The expansion of natural gas extraction has not delivered on its promise of jobs and economic development.
The growth in production of natural gas in northern Appalachia has not translated into job growth; income growth in this region lags the U.S. by over 30%. The gas-producing areas of Ohio, West Virginia and Pennsylvania are getting poorer, older and less populated relative to the rest of the U.S., according to this ORVI report. In the 30 counties of this tri-state region that produce natural gas, jobs declined by 1%, while nationally they grew by14%, and population declined by 3% (it grew by 10% nationally). Meanwhile, the ARCH2 hydrogen hub, the Appalachian manifestation of a national initiative to produce hydrogen mainly from methane (i.e., natural gas), is moribund. A third of ARCH2’s projects and developers have dropped out, ARCH2’s effort to replace them failed, the only ARCH2 project to advance to the construction phase recently declared bankruptcy and laid off its workers, and ARCH2’s managers have not updated its website or responded to inquiries since last spring.
The group ReImagine Appalachia, which focuses on sustainable economic development and good-paying jobs, has offered an alternative to the extractive fossil-fuel industries, which have exploited Appalachia for decades — first with timber and coal and then with oil and gas. RA has provided a document called “Appalachian Manufacturing Action Plan,” which provides compelling models for economic development rooted in the manufacturing infrastructure of the region and our highly capable, hard-working labor force. Among these ideas are: repurposing retired coal-fired power plants (an approach already being pursued by the Southeast Ohio Port Authority), the manufacture of wind-turbine parts, investing in applied research to derive rare-earth metals from coal ash, producing wood-binding layers and “ecobricks” for construction materials, growing hemp (absent the THC) as an alternative to plastics, producing bioplastics from algae and mushroom roots, researching and improving battery technology (as is being done in Ravenswood). The traditional model of manufacturing — that is, the linear model, where a raw material is extracted, shipped to a manufacturer and the waste discarded — should be replaced by a circular model, where raw materials are recycled, reclaimed, repurposed and reused. The latter model is actually being realized in western Pennsylvania and in Morganton, North Carolina, where an “industrial commons” has been established.
The proliferation of data centers in Ohio and throughout the country requires a tremendous amount of energy. Natural gas will not be sufficient to provide this voracious appetite for electricity. Renewable sources like wind and solar will be needed to complement this energy need — an all-of-the above approach to energy. And manufacturing will be needed to provide the supplies and equipment in the form of wind turbines, solar panels and attendant items. Appalachian industries can help to provide these important resources for the economic development of the 21st century.
***
George Banziger, Ph.D. was a faculty member at Marietta College and an academic dean at three other colleges. He is a member of the Green Sanctuary Committee of the First Unitarian Universalist Society of Marietta, of Citizens Climate Lobby, and a contributor to Mid-Ohio Valley Climate Action team.
Posted: December 20, 2025 by main_y0ke11
Climate Corner: Make energy policy boring again
Dec 20, 2025
Griffin Bradley
editorial@newsandsentinel.com
Over the last decade, I would venture to guess that Americans have heard more about energy policy than ever before. One party’s moonshot solution to climate contrasted with the other party’s appeal to traditional energy systems. The outcome is always the same: division, vitriol, and ultimately a tit-for-tat repeal of existing policy every few years that puts America back at square one.
Here’s the deal: policy has become more of a cultural flashpoint than an actual solution to a problem. In the not-too-distant past, politics and policy making were boring. It was a necessary task for civil society that didn’t receive much fanfare. Now, it seems that everyone has a pet issue, ideology, or, God forbid, a “favorite politician”who they are willing to go to the mat for.
But on the policy front, these ways of thinking do no good. The best policy is a boring one. One that is built on proven technology, implements steady regulation, and supports infrastructure that makes little to no headlines. And this is especially true for the energy industry who relies on policy and regulatory consistency more than most.
To be clear, “boring” in this sense doesn’t mean slow or unambitious. A boring policy can still build a strong industry and support reliability. But incrementalism, redundancies, and repetition are what make it happen. Many strong examples of this exist in the energy space, especially in Appalachia. Rural electrification, infrastructure build out, and the development of new industries top the list.
Here’s where America has gone wrong on energy policy in recent years. Both parties — yes, both of them — have pushed a narrative of constant shaming of one another and instituted bans on proposed solutions they deem irresponsible or unworkable. Meanwhile, the public has grown skeptical, not just of the ideas but also the process. Delays in policy implementation stall progress, causing projects to never materialize. By the time solutions pass the administrative and regulatory smell test, a newly elected political majority repeals the original policy. Sound familiar? Example: the Inflation Reduction Act.
So, what’s the solution? If every policy is a potential political football, is there a way to actually move forward? Enter: the boring policy framework. For energy policy, this might mean focusing less on discovering new silver bullets and more on effective and efficient deployment of proven technologies. Grid modernization, building electrification, increased energy efficiency, and demand-response — all policy solutions that are proven to lower emissions, improve reliability, and save ratepayers money.
The best part? Debates around these issues are a snoozefest for everyday Americans — and that’s the point. Boring policies attract little attention and bluster, making them durable and, when the results are displayed in plain English, hard to demonize.
The goal of policymaking should not be to get some political “win,” but to create lasting policy that benefits as many stakeholders as possible without creating a shift in everyday practices. For energy policy, that means a transition to cleaner solutions that are barely noticeable. And the outcome? Steadier energy bills, cleaner, quieter power plants, and, maybe the best part, less talk about politics.
If you want strong policy that lasts, stop trying to make it exciting and start making it inevitable.
***
Griffin Bradley is a lifelong Wood County resident, a graduate of West Virginia University, and a contributing author for Mid-Ohio Valley Climate Action.
Posted: December 13, 2025 by main_y0ke11
Climate Corner: COP 30 – not all the news was bad
Dec 13, 2025
Rebecca Phillips
editorial@newsandsentinel.com
If you paid any attention at all to COP 30, the United Nations Climate Change Conference held last month in Belem, Brazil, you probably know about what didn’t happen: the United States refused to send an official delegation, petro-states led by Saudi Arabia and Russia fought to protect their fossil fuel interests, and the final set of recommendations issued by the conference failed to include a roadmap for the elimination of fossil fuels.
But COP 30 was not the total failure some in the media have claimed. True, we are not where we need to be, and the government and business interests of countries like the U.S., Russia, and Saudi Arabia are largely to blame. Yes, our country has renounced the scientific consensus and allied itself with authoritarian petro-states rather than the world’s democracies. We are in danger of overshooting 1.5 degrees of warming. The world is still in deep trouble.
And yet, the news is not all dire. In our absence, 195 countries negotiated an agreement that, if fully implemented, will go a long way toward easing the climate crisis and helping communities cope.
The final agreement opens with a recognition that a “clean, healthy, and sustainable environment” is a human right. It further recognizes the land rights of Indigenous people and calls for intergenerational equity in the development of climate policy. In other words, the signatories recognize that the people most affected by climate change — the young and those who live close to the land — should have a say.
Acknowledging that some degree of climate change is inescapable and that nations and communities will have to adapt, a major focus of the conference was on building resilience. One outcome was the Global Goal on Adaptation, which lists a set of 59 indicators of community resilience. These indicators include water security, food systems, infrastructure resilience, and the reach of early warning systems, all essential for human thriving in our world of extreme weather.
Perhaps most important, the conference approved a framework for a just transition mechanism and a plant on funding that transition. This means that those communities and individuals whose livelihoods depend on fossil fuels or carbon-intensive industries will have both financial and technical assistance for developing a clean energy economy.
Another initiative with great potential is the Tropical Forests Forever Facility, a financing mechanism that would turn forest conservation into an investment. The idea behind it is that more is to be gained by helping countries maintain their standing forests than by replanting after deforestation. The process is complicated, but the World Resources Institute offers a good explanation on its website (https://www.wri.org/insights/financing-nature-conservation-tropical-forest-forever-facility). Protecting these carbon sinks and biodiversity hotspots is one of the most effective methods of carbon sequestration.
In addition to the final agreement, there were other positive outcomes. The COP 30 Action Agenda is a framework that unites and organizes actions taken by a range of national and local governments, businesses, and civil society organizations, recognizing that all levels and sectors need to work together. At the Local Leaders Forum, 14,000 cities, states, and regions formally committed to climate action. In addition, 77 countries and the European Union have committed to local/national collaboration on climate issues.
Essentially, COP 30 focused on the “people” aspects of the fight against climate change. While the scientific facts and technical possibilities must underlie all climate action, this year’s COP centered people, especially those who are most affected by climate change because of their age, income, location, or occupation. While it is disappointing (and for me as a U.S. citizen, frankly embarrassing) that our government has chosen to deny the existence of climate change and instead continues to exacerbate the problem, it is heartening to know that at least most other countries are willing to work together to create a better future for all of us.
**
Rebecca Phillips is an emeritus professor at WVU Parkersburg and a member of Mid-Ohio Valley Climate Action.
Posted: December 6, 2025 by main_y0ke11
Climate Corner: Time to pass Ohio River Basin Restoration Act
Dec 6, 2025
Charlise Robinson
editorial@newsandsentinel.com
For generations, the Ohio River has been the pulse of our region. It powers our economy, supplies drinking water to millions, supports thriving communities, and defines who we are. Yet despite its immense, the Ohio River Basin has long lacked dedicated federal investment these great American waters deserve. Congress now has a historic opportunity to change that by passing the Ohio River Basin Restoration Act (H.R. 5966).
This bill takes the right approach. It creates a dedicated, EPA-led Ohio River Restoration Program, modeled after successful initiatives like those in the Great Lakes and Chesapeake Bay. A coordinated federal program can provide the scale, funding, and long-term commitment that protect communities while strengthening ecosystems. The need for restoration in the Ohio River basin is not just an environmental issue; it’s an economic one. Healthier waterways attract businesses, boost outdoor recreation, expand tourism, and support good jobs.
We must contact our state representatives today to ask them to support H.R. 5966. The Ohio River has carried out the weight of our region’s history; it should not have to shoulder the burden of neglect any longer. More than 25 million people depend on the waters of the Ohio River Basin. This is a call to action, asking Congress to pass H.R.5966 without delay. Our communities deserve a cleaner, healthier, and more resilient Ohio River Basin, and this bill is our best chance to make it happen.
***
Charlise Robinson is Ohio River Coordinator, WV Rivers.
Posted: November 29, 2025 by main_y0ke11
Climate Corner: West Virginia residents deserve answers
Nov 29, 2025
Randi Pokladnik
editorial@newsandsentinel.com
Residents of West Virginia are seeking answers to their questions about proposed data centers/ power plants in their communities. These include a 500-acre data center in Tucker County, the 150-acre ammonia plant and 200,000-square-foot data center which are part of the Adams Fork Energy project on the Logan-Mingo county line, and the Bioenergy with Carbon Capture and Storage (BECCS) project in Mason County. The center proposed in Mason County will “include a power plant, hydrogen production facility, carbon dioxide storage facility, and data center complex.”
There are no federal regulations concerning data centers. However, “in April, Gov. Patrick Morrisey signed House Bill 2014, a law designed to ease in-state data center development in part by prohibiting counties and municipalities from enforcing or adopting regulations that limit creation, development, or operation of any certified microgrid district or high-impact data center project.” Morrisey hailed HB 2014 as the economic development highlight of the West Virginia Legislature’s 2025 regular legislative session.
Unlike politicians, citizens in the state are not convinced that these centers will bring significant economic prosperity to the region. There has been a sharp increase nationally in communities’ resistance to host a data center. Data Center Watch, a company that tracks data center opposition, found from May 2024 to March 2025, local opposition had blocked or delayed a total of $64 billion in data center projects, with six blocked entirely and 10 delayed. From March to June of 2025, $98 billion worth of projects were blocked or delayed. There were over 1,600 citizen comments and most were against the gas turbine-powered data center operation in Tucker County.
Citizens are worried about several issues when it comes to data centers: increases in energy costs, increases in water usage, exposure to toxic substances, and loss of jobs due to Artificial Intelligence (AI). Some projections show that data center energy consumption could double or triple by 2028, accounting for up to 12% of U.S. electricity use. About 56 percent of the electricity used to power data centers is sourced from fossil fuels, and for our region, that will mean more fracking for methane gas. Significant amounts of water are needed for cooling purposes. “A study by the International Energy Agency estimates for illustration that a 100-megawatt U.S. data center would consume roughly the same amount of water as 2,600 households.” Additionally, these data centers also use large quantities of PFAS-gas or f-gas chemicals in the cooling phase and in manufacturing some semiconductors. These compounds have been linked to cancer, birth defects, decreased immunity, high cholesterol, kidney disease, and a range of other serious health problems. Finally, citizens fear job losses as AI takes over many entry level positions. “Anthropic CEO Dario Amodei said in a May Axios interview that AI could eliminate half of all entry-level, white-collar jobs within the next five years.”
President Trump is considering an executive order directing the Justice Department to override local regulations and state control of data centers and AI.
The project in Mason County is a “Bioenergy with Carbon Capture and Storage,” and will span 2300 acres when completed and will be powered by burning wood chips. The air permit states 106 tons of wood chips per hour will be combusted. The first question that might come to mind is what trees will be cleared to supply 106 tons per hour? Possibly from the Wayne National Forest which is located just across the river in Ohio.
The air permit for Mason County, which has already been submitted to the West Virginia Department of Environmental Protection, shows the levels of hazardous air pollutants will be 24 tons per year. This plant, as well as the Mingo County facility, will be employing carbon dioxide capturing technology. According to a review of the permit for the Mason County plant, “The carbon capture unit has the potential to emit VOC and volatile organic hazardous air pollutants (HAPS) from the carbon capture unit. These HAPs emissions are in the form of nitrosamines, acetaldehyde, and formaldehyde.” These compounds are classified as probable human carcinogens.
Carbon capture and sequestration is a relatively new technology used to sequester carbon dioxide emissions. The carbon dioxide will be collected via an absorption process, compressed, and then injected into Class VI injection wells. Since these wells will be off-site, pipelines will be used to transport the supercritical fluid from the Mason site to the wells.
Currently, the United State Environmental Protection Agency is responsible for permitting Class VI wells. However, West Virginia is one of a few states that has applied for and received primacy to regulate Class VI wells at the state level. Part of the application process requires documented proof that public participation activities were solicited prior to submission of the permit application.
Carbon dioxide, a known asphyxiant, is a dense gas and considered to be hazardous by the OSHA Hazard Communications Standard (29 CFR). It is physiologically active, and affects circulation and breathing. It can accumulate in topographically low areas under conditions of low wind and can travel large distances when released from a ruptured pipeline. It is injected at 1000 psi and can expand to 500 times its volume when exposed to atmospheric pressures. This was evidenced in the pipeline rupture in Satartia, Miss., which sent 45 people to the hospital. How will the mostly volunteer fire departments in West Virginia be able to handle a pipeline break or a leaking Class VI well?
Once again, the communities of West Virginia are being targeted by big out-of-state industries that will make money at the expense of the environment and citizens’ health. Sadly, as usual, the state politicians are welcoming data centers and new power plants which means more extraction and water usage with a promise of questionable local jobs.
***
Randi Pokladnik, Ph.D., of Uhrichsville, is a retired research chemist who volunteers with Mid Ohio Valley Climate Action. She has a doctorate degree in environmental studies and is certified in hazardous materials regulations.
Posted: November 22, 2025 by main_y0ke11
Climate Corner: Bird migration about more than just the seasons
Nov 22, 2025
Dawn Hewitt
editorial@newsandsentinel.com
Just about every morning, I walk my dogs past Oak Grove Cemetery in Marietta. By far the most numerous birds I encounter are vultures, both turkey and black. It is not unusual for me to see more than 100 vultures warming themselves in the morning sun on their favorite trees. I appreciate these neighbors of mine, and am grateful for the important work they do cleaning up wildlife fatalities. Turkey vultures, the adults of which have featherless red heads, are more numerous by far. They have been residents of this region for as long as bird record-keeping has existed. Black vultures, with featherless black heads, are relative newcomers. That species is most abundant in Central and South America, but they historically have been denizens of southern states, from eastern Texas through Florida.
Since 1990 or so, however, black vultures have been undergoing a northward range expansion. I’ve witnessed this. Thirty years ago, black vultures were a rare and exciting find anywhere in the Midwest. Each year, they inched northward. I’ve been birding the vicinity of Marietta’s Oak Grove Cemetery for more than a decade, and I’ve seen the number of black vultures increase each year, from an occasional few to a reliable dozen or more. In 2002, they were found to be nesting in Connecticut for the first time; by 2020, they began nesting in Vermont. Black vultures weren’t found on the Parkersburg Christmas Bird Count until 2017, when two were reported, but since 2020, they’ve been found every year. Last year Parkersburg CBC birders found 35. I counted 40 in Oak Grove Cemetery a few weeks ago, and 20 on Nov. 13, just after the wintry spell.
Birds are incredibly adaptable. It is normal for birds to change their breeding and wintering locales as population numbers expand and contract, habitat changes (both favorably and unfavorably), disease spreads, etc. In recent decades, however, range expansion for many bird species has trended northward. Researchers say climate change is a factor, and not just for black vultures. Carolina chickadees–the species resident in the Mid-Ohio Valley–are expanding their range northward, too, at a rate of 0.7 miles per year, according to the Cornell Lab of Ornithology. Black-bellied whistling ducks are year-round residents of the coastal Southeast and in the summer, historically found only as far north as the Lower Mississippi Valley. They were a rarity in Ohio, but since 2020 have been reported with increasing frequency here. Four were spotted in Wood County, West Virginia, in June 2024, a first for the Mid-Ohio Valley.
Why are historically southern bird species moving north? Because warmer temperatures mean that regions farther north are now suitable habitat. In the case of black vultures recently showing up on the Parkersburg Christmas Bird Count, later winters encourage them to stay close to their breeding range, delaying their winter vacation.
Similarly, ruby-throated hummingbirds historically winter in southern Mexico and Central America, with a few holdovers in southern and central Florida. But for the past two decades, ruby-throats have overwintered in Georgia, the Carolinas, and even Virginia. Even more startling, Anna’s hummingbird, which historically was a year-round resident of Southern California and northwestern Mexico, now nests and overwinters in southern Alaska!
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency used Christmas Bird Count data to study winter distribution changes of 305 widespread North American bird species, and found that the average mid-December to early January center of abundance moved northward by more than 40 miles between 1966 and 2013. Of the 305 species studied, 48 moved northward by more than 200 miles.
Such bird-nerdy information is exciting to serious birders like me, but it’s not good news. Warmer, earlier springs — which most of us hope for — pose problems for insect-dependent birds that winter in Central and South America but breed in North America, such as warblers and vireos. In response to early warm weather, trees leaf out earlier, so insects emerge earlier, but many northbound species time their journey based on increasing day length. They have no way of knowing that the insect emergence that fuels their journeys has peaked earlier than it has historically. Still, since 1990, migratory bird species have been arriving in North America each spring about two days earlier per decade, researchers have determined.
According to bird guru Kenn Kaufman, “Climate change is already underway, and speeding up. It will shake up bird distributions in major ways. … [C]onservationists will have to pay even more attention to all birds across all landscapes, to be alert to what we can do to help species survive.”
It’s an exciting time to be a birder. Unfortunately, excitement is not always a good thing. By the way, Mountwood Bird Club’s Christmas Bird Count, in and around Parkersburg, will be on Dec. 20. To participate, contact Jason White at whitej4427@yahoo.com.
***
Dawn Hewitt, of Marietta, is managing editor for BWD Magazine, and a co-author of Bird Watching for Dummies, second edition.
Find Mid-Ohio Valley Climate Action on the following social media:
Check out our Facebook group and join a conversation
Recent Posts
Recent Comments
Archives
Categories
Meta