The Environmental Laws Hindering Clean Energy

This is an edition of Up for Debate, a newsletter by Conor Friedersdorf. On Wednesdays, he rounds up timely conversations and solicits reader responses to one thought-provoking question. Later, he publishes some thoughtful replies. Sign up for the newsletter here.

Question of the Week

Dysfunction is all around us, in public and private institutions, in large and small businesses, in systems and in personal relationships. What is an example you’ve observed of striking dysfunction—or, if you prefer, of something that works strikingly well?

Send responses to conor@theatlantic.com.

Conversations of Note

Mid-August greetings from Europe, a continent presently suffering from a historic drought––and from Norway where the fjords are multifarious and low water levels in many reservoirs may soon limit hydroelectric power exports. That’s a bit of news I probably wouldn’t have noticed if I wasn’t in Oslo when it broke. It’s adding to my growing alarm about the coming winter and the ways that energy and food shortages caused by the war in Ukraine will ripple across this continent and the world. Few things are likelier to stoke wider conflicts or unrest than cold, hungry people.  

Closer to home, this week’s news is better: Although the United States may continue to suffer from inflationary pressures this winter, we enjoy more energy and food security than most places do. And a longer-term threat, climate change, may be a step closer to a non-catastrophic outcome, thanks to new legislation that appropriates. “The legislation will spend roughly $374 billion on decarbonization and climate resilience over the next 10 years, getting us to America’s Paris Agreement goals.” He adds that from a political perspective, the law is striking in that zero Republicans in Congress voted for it.