An AI-related provision in the “Big Beautiful Bill” could restrict state-level legislation of energy-hungry data centers—and is raising bipartisan objections across the US.
Indonesia revoked permits on Tuesday for four of the five mining companies operating in the eastern archipelago of Raja Ampat after activists shared videos of islands damaged by nickel extraction.
The cluster of islands and shoals in Southwest Papua Province sits in the Coral Triangle and is thought to be one of the world’s most pristine reefs, with its clear blue waters making it a popular diving spot.
Indonesia has the world’s largest nickel reserves and is the biggest producer of the metal, which is used in electric vehicle batteries and stainless steel, and a 2020 export ban has spurred a domestic industrial boom.
Last week, Greenpeace Indonesia published videos showing environmental damage to three islands because of nickel mining projects, including one clip which racked up more than 15 million Instagram views.
President Prabowo Subianto “decided that the government will revoke the mining business license of four companies in Raja Ampat”, state secretariat minister Prasetyo Hadi told reporters.
Energy and mineral resources minister Bahlil Lahadalia said “they have violated” regulations.
“We believe this region must be protected,” he said.
Greenpeace said nickel exploitation on the islands of Gag, Kawe and Manuran had led to the destruction of more than 500 hectares (1,200 acres) of forest and vegetation.
Environmentalists say coral reefs and marine life are threatened by the operations, but Bahlil denied the surrounding environment had been harmed.
“If people say the coral reefs and the ocean have been damaged, you can see for yourself. Please be careful to differentiate which one is real and which one is not,” he said.
‘Make sure they stop’
The NGO’s campaign led to growing calls by politicians and celebrities for the licenses to be withdrawn.
The four companies impacted by the immediate ban are PT Anugerah Surya Pratama, PT Nurham, PT Kawei Sejahtera Mining and PT Mulia Raymond Perkasa.
PT Nurham received its mining permits this year and has not started production but the other three have had them since 2013, according to the energy ministry.
One more company—PT Gag Nikel—will continue to operate on Raja Ampat’s Gag island but be closely monitored, said Bahlil. It received its operational permit in 2017.
The three affected islands are categorized as small islands that under Indonesian law should be off-limits to mining, Greenpeace said.
Greenpeace Indonesia said the decision was a good start but the government needed to take further action.
“We appreciate this decision but we need to make sure the decision will be implemented. We need to make sure they stop,” forest campaign team leader Arie Rompas said.
He warned the government could reissue the permits later or the companies could appeal the decision in court.
The activist said the government should also revoke the operating permit for the fifth company.
A report last week by Climate Rights International alleged the Indonesian government was allowing environmental damage and violations against Indigenous people to go unchecked by nickel mining firms in the eastern Maluku islands.
Processing and mining operations have grown there around Weda Bay, the world’s largest nickel mine by production, but have led to locals reporting a spike in air pollution from smelters and rivers polluted by nickel tailings in soil carried by rain.
An AFP report last month detailed how the home of the nomadic Hongana Manyawa tribe was being eaten away by that mine, with members issuing a call for nickel companies to leave their tribal lands alone.
Papuans hold placards reading "revoke all nickel mining permits in Raja Ampat immediately" during a protest march to the Southwest Papua Governor's office in Sorong on June 10, 2025.
Beyond the jokes about its new shuttle service are serious questions about what it will mean for struggling transit systems, air quality, and congestion.
Notably, the legitimacy of the vote itself was dubious, as the Senate parliamentarian — a nonpartisan staffer who helps the Senate understand its own rules — had warned that the waiver did not fall under the Senate's purview. The parliamentarian noted that the EPA waiver wasn’t a formal rule but an administrative order. This means the waiver is not subject to the Congressional Review Act (CRA), the law Senate Republicans used to justify the vote. The CRA only became law in 1996, and had seen little use until recently — it has been used to overturn federal rules a total of 20 times, 16 of which occurred during the previous Trump administration.
The measure will now go to President Trump's desk for signature, as the House already passed legislation to repeal the waiver earlier this month.
The Alliance for Automotive Innovation, a DC lobbying group that represents a number of automakers including GM, Toyota, Volkswagen and Hyundai, celebrated the vote. "These EV sales mandates were never achievable," said John Bozzella, president and CEO of the lobbying group. He argued, "Meeting the mandates would require diverting finite capital from the EV transition to purchase compliance credits from Tesla."
While these automakers rejoiced, environmental protection advocates struck a concerned tone. "It’s deeply disappointing that the Senate used the Congressional Review Act to block states from implementing air pollution standards to improve air quality. This illegitimate move poses threats to public health, the economy and states’ rights." said Steven Higashide, director of the Clean Transportation Program at the Union of Concerned Scientists.
As reported in the L.A. Times, Will Barrett, senior director at the American Lung Association and a clean air advocate said, “This is a major blow to the decades-long public health protections delivered under the Clean Air Act.” Highlighting the importance of these waivers he said “It is more important than ever that California and all other states that rely on Clean Air Act waivers continue to cut tailpipe pollution through homegrown, health-protective policies."
This article originally appeared on Engadget at https://www.engadget.com/transportation/evs/senate-votes-to-kill-californias-gas-powered-vehicle-restrictions-191341389.html?src=rss
Meta’s building a new AI data center so massive in Louisiana that the local utility company has plans to construct three new gas-fired power plants to provide it with enough electricity. Now, advocates and lawmakers are pressing Meta for answers about how it’ll clean up pollution stemming from the data center’s energy consumption.
Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse (D-RI), ranking member of the Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works, shot off a letter to Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg on Wednesday demanding answers about how much energy the data center would use and the greenhouse gas emissions that would be generated. Powering the new data center with gas “flies in the face of Meta’s climate commitments,” the letter says.
Tech companies are rushing to build out data centers to train and run new AI tools, driving up electricity demand. In this case, power utility Entergy wants to meet that demand with new gas infrastructure, raising concerns about the impact Meta’s data center will have on the environment and local residents.
“We urgently need corporate responsibility”
“Meta’s backslide from its own climate pledges risks triggering broader economic harm at a time when we urgently need corporate responsibility,” Sen. Whitehouse said in a statement emailed to The Verge.
In 2020, Meta pledged to reach net-zero emissions across its operations, supply chain, and consumer use of its products by the end of the decade. But the company’s carbon footprint is larger now than it was when it set that goal, according to its latest sustainability report, as it doubles down on AI.
The company has tried to reduce its emissions by matching its electricity use with equal purchases of renewable energy. It’s a strategy Meta and other big companies often take: pay to support new clean energy projects to try to cancel out the environmental effects of your facilities plugging into a power grid that runs on dirty energy. Environmental advocates are increasingly concerned that this strategy still burdens communities with local pollution, and that the pressure to meet rising electricity demand from AI is boosting fossil fuel use rather than renewable energy.
We’re seeing that tussle play out in Richland Parish, Louisiana, where Meta has plans to build its largest data center to date. It’s spending $10 billion on the project, the company announced in December. Once complete, the campus would span 4 million square feet, about as large as 70 football fields. But the project is moot unless Meta can ensure there will be enough electricity available for all those servers, a problem it’s working with Entergy to solve. Entergy proposed building three entirely new gas plants with a total capacity of 2,260 megawatts to support the data center, but it has to get regulatory approval first.
Some advocates contend that there hasn’t been enough transparency around Meta’s data center plans to help the public understand the potential impact on the local power grid. The New Orleans-based Alliance for Affordable Energy and the Union of Concerned Scientists filed a motion in March asking the Louisiana Public Service Commission to add Meta as an official party to proceedings over whether to approve construction of the new gas plants. Doing so would compel the company to disclose more information, and the commission is scheduled to consider the motion on Monday.
“It’s hard to wrap your brain around [whether] a facility like this either might be good for your community or bad for your community without understanding the possible impact to your electrical system, your bills, and your water,” says Logan Burke, executive director of the Alliance for Affordable Energy.
Sen. Whitehouse’s letter, meanwhile, asks Meta to answer a list of questions by May 28th. On top of questions about the data center’s electricity use and greenhouse gas emissions, Whitehouse wants to know what the justification is for building gas-fired power plants rather than renewable energy alternatives. And it presses Meta to explain how the proposal aligns with its 2030 climate goal.
Meta maintains that it’ll continue matching its electricity use with support for renewable energy, including a commitment to help fund 1,500 megawatts of new solar and battery resources in Louisiana. It also said it would help fund the cost of adding technology to at least one power plant that would capture carbon dioxide emissions. Whitehouse wants to know how much funding it will provide and how much carbon will be captured. Carbon capture tech has been prohibitively expensive to deploy and costs are often offset by using the captured CO2 to produce more fossil fuels through a process called enhanced oil recovery.
“We received the letter and look forward to providing a response,” Meta spokesperson Ashley Settle said in an email to The Verge. “We believe a diverse set of energy solutions are necessary to power our AI ambitions – and we continue to explore innovative technology solutions.”
Entergy didn’t immediately respond to inquiries from The Verge. It has a goal of making sure that 50 percent of its generating capacity is carbon pollution-free by 2030. But the utility said that gas “is the lowest reasonable cost option available that can support the 24/7 electrical demands of a large data center like Meta,” in a statement to Fast Company, which first reported on Whitehouse’s letter.
Scientists were able to create a bespoke treatment for KJ Muldoon’s rare genetic disorder within six months. It could be a blueprint for potentially life-saving, gene-editing Crispr therapies.
Donald Trump signed a presidential memorandum Friday afternoon directing the Department of Energy to “consider using all lawful authority to rescind” or weaken regulations for water and energy efficiency for dishwashers and washingmachines. The action also includes water use standards for showers, faucets, toilets, and urinals.
It closes out a week of attacks on policies meant to save Americans money by incentivizing manufacturers to make products that save water and energy. Earlier in the week, CNN and E&E News reported that the Trump administration would shutter the Energy Star program as part of a “reorganization” planned at the Environmental Protection Agency.
Energy Star certifies products for energy efficiency, allowing consumers to choose the most energy-efficient home appliances by spotting the recognizable blue Energy Star label. The rules President Trump is targeting now are actually consumer protections, meant to ensure that any customer can purchase something that meets reasonable efficiency standards.
“Congress enacted these laws, the president can’t just decide that they’re going to go away.”
A White House fact sheet says the Secretary of Energy should work with the Office of Legislative Affairs to make recommendations to Congress on any water pressure “or related energy efficiency laws” that ought to change or be repealed altogether.
It also says the Secretary of Energy should pause enforcement of the rules mentioned in the memorandum until they’re rescinded or revised. “The Federal Government should not impose or enforce regulations that make taxpayers’ lives worse,” the presidential memorandum says.
“It’ll only raise costs for consumers to get rid of these standards, if they get rid of these standards,” says Andrew deLaski, executive director of the Appliance Standards Awareness Project. “Congress enacted these laws, the president can’t just decide that they’re going to go away.” deLaski also notes that while the White House says it wants to get rid of “useless water pressure standards,” the rules mentioned in the memorandum actually target efficiency standards since water pressure depends on the plumbing system connected to the device.
The Trump administration has announced plans to eliminate the Energy Star program, as originally reported by The Washington Post. This announcement occurred during an all-hands meeting of the Environmental Protection Agency’s Office of Atmospheric Protection, in which the department was shuttered.
As for Energy Star, this program started all the way back in 1992 under the first Bush administration. This is the department that’s responsible for the iconic yellow stickers on home appliances. The long-standing public-private partnership certifies energy efficient appliances and helps consumers find tax credits for these fixtures.
Data indicates that the program has helped Americans save more than $500 billion in energy costs in the past 33 years. The organization states that the average American saves about $450 per year on energy bills by choosing appliances that have been Energy Star-certified.
"Eliminating the Energy Star program would directly contradict this administration’s promise to reduce household energy costs," Paula Glover, president of the nonprofit coalition Alliance to Save Energy, told CNN. "For just $32 million a year, Energy Star helps American families save over $40 billion in annual energy costs. That’s a return of $350 for every federal dollar invested."
This article originally appeared on Engadget at https://www.engadget.com/big-tech/trump-admin-announces-plans-to-shut-down-the-energy-star-program-184846271.html?src=rss
MARIN CITY, CA - MARCH 26: An Energy Star label is displayed on a brand new washing machine at a Best Buy store March 26, 2010 in Marin City, California. Government investigators from the General Accountability Office has concluded that the Environmental Protection Agency and the Energy Department run Energy Star program is susceptible to fraud and abuse. Investigators attempted to get Energy Star certification for 20 fake products, including a gasoline powered alarm clock, which was approved along with 14 other phony appliances. (Photo by Justin Sullivan/Getty Images)
Following inaction from the government, fishing communities and conservationists are taking it upon themselves to set up and monitor no-catch zones to combat species depletion caused by overfishing.
A new species of cable bacteria, which function like electrical wiring, was recently discovered in the US. Its unique morphology and genetic structure may be useful for the development of bioelectronics.
Donald Trump wants to mine the depths of the ocean for critical minerals ubiquitous in rechargeable batteries, signing an executive order on Thursday to try to expedite mining within US and international waters.
It’s a brash move that critics say could create unknown havoc on sea life and coastal economies, and that bucks international agreements. Talks to develop rules for deep-sea mining are still ongoing through the International Seabed Authority (ISA), a process that missed an initial 2023 deadline and has continued to stymie efforts to start commercially mining the deep sea.
“A dangerous precedent”
“Fast-tracking deep-sea mining by bypassing the ISA’s global regulatory processes would set a dangerous precedent and would be a violation of customary international law,” Duncan Currie, legal adviser for the Deep Sea Conservation Coalition that has advocated for a moratorium on deep sea mining, said in a press statement.
The ISA was established by the 1982 United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea. More than 160 nations have ratified the convention, but the United States has not. Ignoring the convention, the executive order Trump signed directs federal agencies to expedite the process for issuing licenses to companies seeking to recover minerals “in areas beyond national jurisdiction” in accordance with the 1980 US Deep Seabed Hard Mineral Resources Act. A country’s territorial jurisdiction only extends roughly 200 nautical miles from shore.
The Trump administration wants to work with industry “to counter China’s growing influence over seabed mineral resources,” the executive order says. However, no country has yet to commercially mine the deep ocean where depths reach about 656 feet (200 meters) in international waters. There have already been efforts to explore parts of the ocean floor rich in nickel, copper, cobalt, iron, and manganese sought after for rechargeable batteries, though, and China is a leading refiner of many critical minerals.
China responded on Friday: the BBC reported Chinese foreign ministry spokesman Guo Jiakun as saying that Trump’s move “violates international law and harms the overall interests of the international community.”
The Metals Company announced in March that the Canadian company had already “met with officials in the White House” and planned to apply for permits under existing US mining code to begin extracting minerals from the high seas.
California-based company Impossible Metals asked the Trump administration earlier this month to auction off mining leases for areas off the coast of American Samoa, which would be within US-controlled waters. Trump’s executive order also directs the Secretary of the Interior to expedite the process for leasing areas for mining within US waters.
Companies seeking to exploit offshore mineral resources argue that it would cause less harm than mining on land. Their opponents contend that there’s still too little research to even understand how widespread the effects of deep sea mining could be on marine ecosystems and the people who depend on them. Recent studies have warned of “irreversible” damage and loud noise affecting sea life, and one controversial study raises questions of whether the deep sea could be an important source of “dark oxygen” for the world.
More than 30 countries — including Palau, Fiji, Costa Rica, Canada, Mexico, Brazil, New Zealand, France, Germany, and the United Kingdom — have called for a ban or moratorium on deep-sea mining until international rules are in place to minimize the potential damage.
“The harm caused by deep-sea mining isn’t restricted to the ocean floor: it will impact the entire water column, top to bottom, and everyone and everything relying on it,” Jeff Watters, vice president for external affairs at the nonprofit Ocean Conservancy said in a press release.
In March, Finland successfully completed the first test of its encapsulation plant, which, if finished, will become the world’s first permanent underground storage facility for radioactive waste.
The Tamaulipan thorn forest once covered 1 million acres on both sides of the US-Mexico border. Restoring even a fraction of it could help the region cope with the ravages of a warming world.
A pair of studies analyzing the effects of AI on our planet have been released and the news is fairly grim. Greenpeace studied the emissions generated from the production of the semiconductors used in AI chips and found that there was a fourfold increase in 2024. This analysis was completed using publicly available data.
Greenpeace
Many of the big chipmakers like NVIDIA rely on companies like Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co and SK Hynix Inc. for the components of GPUs and memory units. Most of this manufacturing happens in Taiwan, South Korea and Japan, where power grids are primarily reliant on fossil fuels. This accounts for some of the increase in global emissions. The organization also says that global electricity requirements for AI could experience a 170-fold increase by 2030.
Greenpeace
Greenpeace’s estimates have led some to worry that the AI race could derail global decarbonization goals, according to a report by Bloomberg. The nonprofit recommends that governments in eastern Asia transition to renewable power for chip manufacturing, but the opposite seems to be happening. South Korea recently announced plans to build plants for four gigawatts of gas-fired power generation. Taiwan has used the increased power demand related to AI as an excuse to expand liquid natural gas projects and grid infrastructure.
Another study by The International Energy Agency (IEA) took a look at the US. The analysis suggested that power consumption by AI-adjacent data centers could account for half of the growth in electricity demand by 2030. As a matter of fact, the US economy could be on track to consume more electricity for processing data than for manufacturing all energy-intensive goods combined. This includes aluminum, steel, cement and chemicals.
Proponents of AI say that the massive energy needs will eventually abate as the technology leads to scientific discoveries that accelerate innovation in fields like batteries and solar photovoltaic (PV) technology. However, that’s a big fat maybe.
This article originally appeared on Engadget at https://www.engadget.com/ai/global-emissions-due-to-ai-related-chipmaking-grew-more-than-four-times-in-2024-160304017.html?src=rss
Login
