Artificial Intelligence (AI) has the potential to transform how we approach environmental remediation. The use of AI is still in its infancy, but as it develops it is expected to offer powerful tools that improve efficiencies and deliver more cost-effective site cleanup strategies.
AI in Environmental Remediation: Current Uses
AI technologies have already shown promising results in a variety of environmental remediation related areas:
Aerial Imagery and Feature Identification: AI-driven tools are being used to analyze aerial images to automatically identify features like construction sites or environmental hazards. These tools significantly reduce the time required for manual image analysis, helping to more quickly detect potentially contaminated areas and evolving site conditions.
Predictive Modeling and Optimization: AI’s ability to process large datasets makes it ideal for predictive modeling. AI can analyze historical data to predict the spread of contamination, help optimize remediation techniques, and anticipate potential challenges before they arise.
Process-Level Improvements: Traditional remediation methods often rely on databases and spreadsheet models, but AI can build on these models to deliver higher-level insights. AI can automate data collection and analysis, optimize workflows, and flag anomalies in the remediation process. These improvements not only save time but also can reduce the risk of human error.
AI in ENVIRONMENTAL REMEDIATION: What’s Coming Next?
Ongoing research and development of AI tools are pushing the boundaries of what’s possible in environmental remediation. Trends include:
If you like this post, you’ll love our daily environmental newsletter, EnviroPolitics.It’s packed daily with the latest news, commentary, and legislative updates from New Jersey, Pennsylvania, New York, Delaware…and beyond. Please do not take our word for it, try it free for a full month.
The November election results signal changes to energy policy at the state and federal levels. While it is not yet clear how these changes will develop in the months to come, one winner that appears to have emerged at the ballot box is natural gas. As the debate over the use of natural gas in residential and commercial settings continues to play out, this year’s election results demonstrate that voters around the country favor keeping natural gas around, at least for now. The battle over its future is not over though, and policy proposals and ballot initiatives will undoubtably continue to play a role in how the resource is used in the energy transition.
Election Day Wins: Gas Bans and Ballot Measures
On election day, voters in several states were asked to consider initiatives that had the potential to reshape the role of natural gas in those states.1 These initiatives are the latest development in an ongoing battle over natural gas and emissions reduction efforts. Leading up to election day, there were questions about how the election results would impact the composition of state legislatures and whether they would result in more proposals to ban gas, prohibitions on gas bans, or electrification mandates.2 Now that we know the results, it appears there is wind behind the natural gas sails, as voters in several states made it clear they want natural gas here to stay.
In the state of Washington, for example, voters rejected an initiative aimed at killing the state’s nascent carbon market, but at the same time saved natural gas from the chopping block.3 Initiative 2066 protects natural gas access in the state and bars local governments from banning its use.4 The initiative repeals and amends portions of the Washington Decarbonization Act passed in early 2024, which would have required the state’s largest utilities to plan for and encourage building energy electrification, including by prohibiting incentives for natural gas appliances and creating incentives for electric heat pumps.5 The initiative also prohibits Washington building code provisions that “in any way prohibit, penalize, or discourage the use of gas” in residential and nonresidential buildings.6 Opponents of the initiative argue it is unconstitutional because it violates the state’s “single subject rule,” which limits initiatives to one subject, and they are gearing up to challenge it in court.7
Natural gas’ election wins are also apparent in Berkeley, California, where over two-thirds of voters rejected a proposed new tax on natural gas use in buildings.8 The voter-led initiative “Measure GG” sought to implement a fossil fuel tax on large buildings. It would have taxed buildings larger than 15,000 square feet at an escalating rate each year, with the tax doubling in 10 years, tripling in 15 years, and eventually maxing out at 10 times the initial rate.9 Revenue from this tax would have funded a Fossil Fuel Free Buildings Just Transition Fund to pay for “building decarbonization retrofit work, prioritizing low-rise residential buildings and restaurants.”10
Following this election, there will also be several states to watch for future legislation designed to prohibit natural gas bans. For instance, the New Mexico Legislature had bipartisan support for a gas-ban preemption bill (i.e., a state law banning local natural gas bans) in the last legislative session and is expected to reintroduce the bill next year.11
State Policy and Ballot Measures: Gas Bans and Electrification Mandates
In February 2024, we provided an update on the US Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit’s decision in California Restaurant Association v. City of Berkeley, striking down a Berkeley ordinance that prohibited natural gas piping in new buildings as preempted by the federal Energy Policy and Conservation Act (EPCA). Since then, states have remained active in legislating and litigating on the gas ban issue. On 18 April 2024, Nebraska joined 25 other states in passing a gas-ban preemption law that would prohibit local governments from enacting ordinances prohibiting or restricting access to a fuel source or a type of energy that is authorized to be supplied to customers, including propane.12
If you like this post, you’ll love our daily environmental newsletter, EnviroPolitics.It’s packed daily with the latest news, commentary, and legislative updates from New Jersey, Pennsylvania, New York, Delaware…and beyond. Please do not take our word for it, try it free for a full month.
Damen Shipyards Group and SAFEEN Group, a division of AD Ports Group’s Maritime & Shipping Cluster, have set a new Guinness World Records title for the Most Powerful Electric Tugboat.
The record-setting vessel, named Bu Tinah, is a Damen RSD-E Tug 2513 that demonstrated an unprecedented average high peak pull of 78.2 tonnes.
The Bu Tinah, delivered earlier this year, holds the distinction of being the first fully electric tug to operate in the Middle East. The record-breaking performance took place at Khalifa Port, AD Ports Group’s flagship facility, and was announced during ADIPEC, the world’s largest energy event.
The timing of the achievement aligns with the growing emphasis on energy transition within the maritime sector. The RSD-E Tug 2513’s design prioritizes sustainability, offering zero emissions from tank to wake and playing a crucial role in reducing the industry’s environmental footprint.
“This Guinness World Record™ achievement demonstrates that the transition to alternative energy does not come at the cost of performance,” said Captain Ammar Mubarak Al Shaiba, CEO of AD Ports Group’s Maritime & Shipping Cluster. He also highlighted the vessel’s dual benefits of improving operational sustainability and cost efficiency through fuel savings.
If you like this post, you’ll love our daily environmental newsletter, EnviroPolitics.It’s packed daily with the latest news, commentary, and legislative updates from New Jersey, Pennsylvania, New York, Delaware…and beyond. Please do not take our word for it, try it free for a full month.
The difference in profits companies can make from extracting oil and gas and what they can earn from harnessing wind and solar has swung sharply in favor of fossil fuels. Credit…Alisha Jucevic for The New York Times
As leaders gather for a global climate summit, investors are rewarding oil giants like Exxon Mobil that did not embrace wind and solar.
By Rebecca F. Elliott , Reporting from the COP29 climate summit in Baku, Azerbaijan, and New York
When oil and gas companies made ambitious commitments four years ago to curb emissions and transition to renewable energy, their businesses were in free fall.
Demand for the fuels was drying up as the pandemic took hold. Prices plunged. And large Western oil companies were hemorrhaging money, with losses topping $100 billion, according to the energy consulting firm Wood Mackenzie.
Renewable energy, it seemed to many companies and investors at the time, was not just cleaner — it was a better business than oil and gas.
“Investors were focused on what I would say was the prevailing narrative around it’s all moving to wind and solar,” Darren Woods, Exxon Mobil’s chief executive, said in an interview with The New York Times last week at a United Nations climate conference in Baku, Azerbaijan. “I had a lot of pressure to get into the wind and solar business,” he added.
Mr. Woods resisted, reasoning that Exxon did not have expertise in those areas. Instead, the company invested in areas like hydrogen and lithium extraction that are more akin to its traditional business.
Wall Street has rewarded the company for those bets. The company’s stock price has climbed more than 70 percent since the end of 2019, lifting its market valuation to a record of nearly $560 billion in October, though it has since fallen to about $524 billion.
If you like this post, you’ll love our daily environmental newsletter, EnviroPolitics.It’s packed daily with the latest news, commentary, and legislative updates from New Jersey, Pennsylvania, New York, Delaware…and beyond. Please do not take our word for it, try it free for a full month.
As political commentators assess the implications of Donald Trump potentially returning to the White House, one key question emerges: What would this mean for electric vehicles (EVs) and offshore wind energy development? Analysts agree that Trump’s policies could disrupt federal support for clean energy, though global market dynamics and state initiatives may prevent a complete rollback.
Electric Vehicles: Policy Slowdown but Global Momentum
Under a second Trump presidency, electric vehicle incentives such as those in the Inflation Reduction Act (IRA) could face scrutiny. Trump has criticized the IRA as a “wasteful green agenda,” suggesting he might target programs encouraging EV adoption. Analysts predict that such actions could deter investment and slow growth in the U.S. market.
Aaron Viles of the Electrification Coalition underscores the importance of EV tax credits in fostering domestic manufacturing. He warns that rescinding these incentives could shift economic opportunities to Europe and China, where EV production is booming.
Steven Cohen of Columbia University notes that uncertainty surrounding federal support has already caused automakers like Ford and GM to delay new EV models. Many are waiting to see if policies under the IRA will survive the 2024 elections .
Despite this, Nick Nigro of Atlas Public Policy argues that Trump’s potential actions might not halt global trends. Automakers see the future as electric, and international competition will continue to drive innovation and production
Offshore Wind Energy: Subsidies at Risk
Trump has consistently criticized wind energy, calling it unreliable and environmentally harmful. His return could lead to reduced federal support for offshore wind farms, a cornerstone of U.S. clean energy strategy.
The Heritage Foundation’s Project 2025, which outlines a conservative policy roadmap, proposes cutting federal funds for renewable energy projects. While Trump has distanced himself from the document, it reflects his administration’s past efforts to prioritize fossil fuels over renewables
However, projects already funded might continue due to legal and financial safeguards. Analysts note that states like New York and Massachusetts, which lead in offshore wind development, could sustain progress even without federal backing.
The Bigger Picture: Challenges and Opportunities
While Trump could slow clean energy transitions, outright halting them is unlikely. Many IRA-funded projects have bipartisan support, particularly in red and swing states that benefit from job creation. Furthermore, global competition and market demand will push companies to continue investments, especially as consumers increasingly favor sustainable energy solutions
Even before the imminent return of Donald Trump to the White House, global climate action was in a tricky spot. Major gaps exist between countries in the developed and developing world over how to collectively bring down emissions, mitigate the calamitous effects posed by a warming planet and fund these efforts. Within some Western democracies, there’s a growing backlash to green policies, with voters resenting onerous carbon taxes, the loss of fuel subsidies and the prospect of stricter environmental regulations that raise household costs.
All the while, the planetary warnings are blaring at full pitch. Scientists expect this year to be the hottest on record, supplanting 2023, the titleholder. “It will also probably be the first full calendar year when temperatures rose more than 1.5 degrees Celsius above the preindustrial average — a critical line signaling that Earth is crossing into territory where some extreme climate effects may be irreversible,” noted my colleague Kasha Patel.
World leaders, activists, policymakers and corporate executives are in Baku, capital of oil-rich Azerbaijan, for the annual U.N.-backed climate conference. The two-week mega-summit, dubbed COP29, opened Monday, but many prominent heads of state, including President Joe Biden and Chinese President Xi Jinping, have skipped it. (For some, the session of the Group of 20 major economies in Brazil takes precedence.)
COP29 is not going smoothly. Inside, attendees vent their frustration with the slow pace of negotiations over a new deal intended to raise $1 trillion in climate financing for poorer nations. Outside, campaigners lament the presence of more than 1,700 lobbyists from the fossil fuel industry. Swedish activist Greta Thunberg said it was “beyond absurd” that such a critical meeting was being hosted by “an authoritarian petrostate.” But that’s now par for the course for the COPs — the previous two summits were held in the United Arab Emirates and Egypt.
If you like this post, you’ll love our daily environmental newsletter, EnviroPolitics.It’s packed daily with the latest news, commentary, and legislative updates from New Jersey, Pennsylvania, New York, Delaware…and beyond. Please do not take our word for it, try it free for a full month.
