Youth activists defeat trade association in fight over home-building policy: 'An existential threat to our community'
A West Coast youth movement has effectively boosted electrification efforts for new construction projects in Ashland, Oregon, through advocacy. The effort impressively overcame opposition from trade groups and unions in the construction and gas industries, according to OregonLive (OL).
The city council voted without dissent in February to charge new developers a "carbon pollution fee" if they install natural gas heaters and other appliances in new buildings. The goal is to expand cleaner electric use, the story said. The decision came after local youth held a campaign to lobby for support.
"We recognized the climate crisis poses an existential threat to our community and to the globe and that we had a responsibility to do what we could in our community to tackle the causes of this crisis," Ashland Mayor Tonya Graham told OL.
It's a regulatory trend stretching from coast to coast. Ashland's measure was modeled after one from Vermont. A version in Eugene, Oregon, was rescinded after an appeal challenging a Berkeley, California, rule of the same nature was successful, OL reported. But in March, Wired reported that a federal judge dismissed a lawsuit filed by trade groups against a natural gas ban on new builds in New York City, a counter to the Berkeley ruling.
The litigation tangle could determine crucial public health policy. Yale Climate Connections reported that gas stoves release dangerous benzene vapors into homes. It's a known carcinogen, according to the publication. The article cited a study that linked nearly 13% of childhood asthma cases to gas stoves.
There are nearly 100 local governments around the country considering measures like Ashland's, with the goal of also reducing heat-trapping air pollution linked by NASA to greater risks for extreme weather, according to OL. Rulemaking in California is also targeting small gas engines, some prohibiting their sale and use.
By going electric, residents can enjoy high-tech appliances and machines that can provide savings and even speedier cooking, as is the case with induction cooktops. It's an easy switch for renters and homeowners alike, avoiding dangerous gas vapors with an appliance that provides easier meal prep and cleanup with greater efficiency. It can be part of an overall shift to modernizing your home with energy-saving tech.
You can save $840 off the cost of a full induction range thanks to the Inflation Reduction Act. And small countertop versions can be bought for as low as $50. The IRA credits likely won't last forever, as President Donald Trump has said he intends to rescind the benefits. But repealing it requires an act of Congress. The Georgetown Environmental Law Review explained that cancellation may not be a rubber stamp, as many Republican states are benefiting from the measure.
In Ashland, builders can avoid serious fines by going electric. Penalties range from less than $200 for a gas dryer install to more than $4,000 for a furnace, per OL.
In the end, planet-friendly youth helped to push the regulation into action by helping to convince the city council that cutting air pollution is crucial to securing a healthy future. They garnered signatures, held rallies, and offered testimonies.
"That is what motivated the City of Ashland to pass this ordinance," Graham said in the story.
Do you think gas stoves should be banned nationwide?
No way
Let each state decide
I'm not sure
Definitely
Click your choice to see results and speak your mind.
Join our free newsletter for good news and useful tips, and don't miss this cool list of easy ways to help yourself while helping the planet.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
27 minutes ago
- Yahoo
US dollar declines as traders assess tariff outlook
By Kevin Buckland TOKYO (Reuters) -The U.S. dollar edged lower on Monday, giving back some of its gains from last week, as markets weighed the outlook for President Donald Trump's tariff policy and its potential to constrict growth and unleash inflation. The greenback starts the week on the back foot after Trump said late on Friday that he plans to double duties on imported steel and aluminum to 50% from Wednesday. The U.S. currency has been whipsawed for weeks by Trump's on-again-off-again trade war, falling when a flare up in tensions stokes worries of a potential U.S. recession. The dollar witnessed weekly tumbles of 3% against major peers in the days after the April 2 "Liberation Day" tariffs and 1.9% two weeks ago, when Trump threatened 50% levies on Europe. Last week, the greenback got a bit of respite, rising 0.3% after talks with the European Union got back on track and a U.S. trade court blocked the bulk of Trump's tariffs on the grounds that he overstepped his authority. Although an appeals court reinstated the duties a day later as it considers the case, and Trump's administration said it had other avenues to implement the levies if it loses in court, many analysts said it shows there are still checks in place on the President's power. The dollar dropped 0.3% to 143.57 yen as of 0023 GMT, giving back some of its more than 1% rally from last week. The euro gained 0.2% to $1.1372, and sterling advanced 0.3% to $1.3489. The Australian dollar added 0.3% to $0.6454. The U.S. dollar index, which measures the currency against six major peers, eased 0.2% to 99.214. The dollar has also been weighed down by fiscal worries in recent weeks, amid a broad "Sell America" theme that has seen dollar assets from stocks to Treasury bonds dropping. Those concerns come into particular focus this week as the Senate starts considering Trump's sweeping tax cut and spending bill, which will add an estimated $3.8 trillion to the federal government's $36.2 trillion in debt over the next decade. Many senators have already said the bill will need major revisions, and Trump said he welcomes changes. The fate of section 899 of the bill could be crucial, according to Barclays analysts. "S899 would give the U.S. free rein to tax companies and investors from countries deemed to have 'unfair foreign taxes' (and) could be seen as a tax on the U.S. capital account at a time when investor nervousness towards U.S. assets has grown," they said in a research report. "Actively reducing foreigners' total return on their U.S. investments would dent inflows and weigh on the dollar, all else equal," they added. "While dollar sentiment/positioning remains close to extreme negativity, the path ahead is by no means clear cut."
Yahoo
40 minutes ago
- Yahoo
S.Korea factory activity shrinks again, new orders suffer steepest slump in 5 years, PMI shows
SEOUL (Reuters) - South Korea's factory activity shrank for a fourth month in May as frail domestic demand and the impact of U.S. tariffs took a heavy toll on factory output while overall orders plunged at their steepest pace in five years, a business survey showed on Monday. The Purchasing Managers Index (PMI) for manufacturers in Asia's fourth-largest economy, released by S&P Global, edged up to 47.7 in May, from 47.5 in April. The index has stayed below 50-mark, which separates expansion from contraction, since February. "South Korea's manufacturing sector came into May on an unstable footing," said Usamah Bhatti, economist at S&P Global Market Intelligence. "Firms often mentioned that the contraction was attributed to a continuing stagnation in the domestic economy, as well the continued impact of higher U.S. tariffs on the home market as well as on key export markets." New orders suffered their steepest contraction since June 2020 while output fell at the quickest rate in just over two-and-a-half years. U.S. President Donald Trump's global trade war has added to already weak demand conditions in South Korea, which recently suffered its worst wildfires on record and has faced political turmoil. The trade-reliant economy unexpectedly contracted in the first quarter, raising pressure on policymakers to shore up demand. The Bank of Korea on Thursday cut rates for the fourth time in its current easing cycle and almost halved this year's economic outlook to 0.8%, just days ahead of a presidential election slated for June 3, citing downside risks from U.S. tariff policy as well as a sluggish construction sector. The PMI survey also showed a fall in backlogs of work for the second month, with the most pronounced depletion in nearly five years in the face of subdued new orders. On a brighter note, manufacturers turned optimistic, reversing the brief spell of negative sentiment in April, partly led by hopes of an easing in global trade tensions. However, the degree of confidence was modest and reflected persistent concerns over the impact of tariffs. Sign in to access your portfolio
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
Unpacking the South African land law that so inflames Trump
South Africa's President Cyril Ramaphosa is at the centre of a political firestorm after he approved a law that gives the state the power to expropriate some privately owned land without compensation for owners. The law, which is yet to be implemented, has drawn the ire of US President Donald Trump, who sees it as discriminating against white farmers. Centre-right political parties and lobby groups in South Africa have also opposed it, saying they will challenge the Expropriation Act – as the law is named – in court on the grounds that it threatens property rights. Ramaphosa's government says the law provides for compensation to be paid in the vast majority of cases – and the changes are needed to increase black ownership of land. Most private farmland is still owned by white people. When Nelson Mandela came to power more than 30 years ago, ending the racist system of apartheid, it was promised that this would be rectified through a willing-buyer, willing-seller land reform programme – but critics say this has proved too slow and too costly. In rare circumstances it would be land that was needed for the "public interest", legal experts told the BBC. According to South African law firm Werksmans Attorneys, this suggested it would mainly, or perhaps only, happen in relation to the land reform programme. Although it could also be used to access natural resources such as minerals and water, the firm added, in an opinion written by its experts in the field, Bulelwa Mabasa and Thomas Karberg. Mabasa and Karberg told the BBC that in their view, productive agricultural land could not be expropriated without compensation. They said any expropriation without compensation – known as EWC – could take place only in a few circumstances: For example, when an owner was not using the land and was holding it for "speculative purposes" Or when an owner "abandoned the land by failing to exercise control over it despite being reasonably capable of doing so". Owners would probably still get compensation for the buildings on the land and for the natural resources, the lawyers said. Mabasa and Karberg added that EWC was "not aimed at rural land or farmland specifically, and could include land in urban areas". However, in cases where compensation is paid, the rules are set to change, with owners likely to get less money. The plan is for owners to receive "just-and-equitable" compensation – a departure from the higher "market value" they have been getting up to now, Mabasa and Karberg said. The government had been paying market-value compensation despite the fact that this was "at odds" with the constitution, adopted after white-minority rule ended in 1994, they added. The lawyers said that all expropriations had "extensive procedural fairness requirements", including the owner's right to go to court if they were not happy. The move away from market-value compensation will also apply to land expropriated for a "public purpose" – like building state schools or railways. This has not been a major point of controversy, possibly because it is "hardly a novel concept" – a point made by JURISTnews, a legal website run by law students from around the world. "The US Constitution, for instance, provides that the government can seize private property for public use so long as 'just compensation' is provided," it added. The government hopes so. University of Western Cape land expert Prof Ruth Hall told the BBC that more than 80,000 land claims remain unsettled. In the eastern regions of South Africa, many black people work on farms for free – in exchange they are allowed to live there and keep their livestock on a portion of the owners' land, she said. The government wants to transfer ownership of this land to the workers, and it was "unfair" to expect it to pay the market value, Prof Hall added. Over the last three decades, the government has used existing powers to expropriate property–- with less than market-value compensation – in fewer than 20 cases, she said. The new law was aimed at making it easier and cheaper to restore land to black people who were "dispossessed" of it during white-minority rule or were forced to be "long-term tenants" as they could not own land, Prof Hall added. "It's a bargaining chip," she said. But she doubts that the government will press ahead with implementing the law in the foreseeable future as the "political cost" has become too high. The academic was referring to the fact that Trump has opposed the law, saying it discriminates against white farmers and their land was being "seized" – a charge the government denies. In February, Trump cut aid to South Africa, and in April he announced a 30% tariff on South African goods and agricultural products, although this was later paused for 90 days. This was followed by last month's infamous Oval Office showdown when Trump ambushed Ramaphosa with a video and printouts of stories alleging white people were being persecuted – much of his dossier has been discredited. Fact-checking Trump's Oval Office confrontation with Ramaphosa Like Trump, the second-biggest party in Ramaphosa's coalition government, the Democratic Alliance (DA), is opposed to the legislation. In a statement on 26 May, the party said that its top leadership body had rejected the notion of "nil compensation". However, it has agreed with the concept of just-and-equitable compensation rather than market-value compensation, adding it should be "adjudicated by a court of law". Surprisingly, Jaco Kleynhans of the Solidarity Movement, an influential Afrikaner lobby group, said that while the new law could "destroy" some businesses and he was opposed to it, he did not believe it would lead to the "large-scale expropriation of farmland". "I don't see within the wording of this text that that will happen," he said in a recent panel discussion at an agricultural exhibition held in South Africa's Free State province – where a large number of conservative Afrikaner farmers live. The South African Property Owners Association said it was "irrational" to give "nil compensation" to an owner who held land for speculative purposes. "There are many landowners whose sole purpose of business is to speculate in land. They do not get the land for free and they have significant holding costs," the association said, adding it had no doubt the law would be "abundantly tested" in the courts. Mabasa and Karberg said one view was that the concept of EWC was a "legal absurdity" because "intrinsic in the legal definition of expropriation, is a requirement for compensation to be paid". However, the lawyers pointed out the alternative view was that South Africa's constitution "implicitly recognises that it would in some circumstances be just and equitable for compensation to be nil". South Africa's Public Works Minister Dean Macpherson has defended the legislation, breaking ranks with his party, the DA. In fact he is in charge of the new legalisation and, on a discussion panel, he explained that while he had some concerns about the law, it was a "dramatic improvement" on the previous Expropriation Act, with greater safeguards for land-owners. He said the law could also help end extortionist demands on the state, and in some cases "nil compensation" could be justified. He gave as an example the problems being faced by the state-owned power utility Eskom. It plans to roll out a transmission network over about 4,500km (28,000 miles) of land to boost electricity supplies to end the power crisis in the country. Ahead of the roll-out, some individuals colluded with Eskom officials to buy land for 1m rand ($56,000; £41,000), and then demanded R20m for it, he said. "Is it just and equitable to give them what they want? I don't think that's in the interest of the broader community or the state," Macpherson said. Giving another example, Macpherson said that some of South Africa's inner cities were in a "disastrous" condition. After owners left, buildings were "over-run" and "hijacked" for illegal occupation. The cost to the state to rebuild them could exceed their value, and in such cases the courts could rule that an owner qualified for "nil compensation", he said. "Nil is a form of compensation," Macpherson added, while ruling it out for farms. Johannesburg mayor Dada Morero told South Africa's Mail & Guardian newspaper that he wanted to use the buildings for the "public good", like accommodating around 300,000 people on the housing waiting list. He added the owners of nearly 100 buildings could not be located. "They have abandoned the buildings," he said, adding some of the owners were from the UK and Germany. But Mabasa and Karberg told the BBC that in such cases compensation would probably still have to be paid for the buildings, though not the land. If the state could not locate the owners, it "must deposit the compensation with the Master of the High Court" in case they returned or could be traced later, they said. The law is in limbo, as Ramaphosa – about four months after giving his assent to it – has still not set a date for its implementation. Nor is he likely to do so anytime soon, as he would not want to further antagonise Trump while South Africa was trying to negotiate a trade deal with the US. And on the domestic front, the DA is spearheading opposition to the legislation. It said it wanted a "judicial review" of it, while at the same time it was pressing ahead with court action to challenge the law's constitutionality. The DA's tough line is in contrast with that of Macpherson, who, a few weeks ago, warned that if the law was struck down in its entirety: "I don't know what's going to come after that. "In politics, sometimes you must be careful what you wish for because often you can get it," he said. His comments highlight the deep fissures in South African politics, with some parties, such as Julius Malema's Economic Freedom Fighters (EFF), believing that the legislation did not go far enough to tackle racial inequality in land ownership. With land such an emotive issue, there is no easy solution to the dispute – and it is likely to continue to cause tensions within South Africa, as well as with the US president. Rebuked by Trump but praised at home: How Ramaphosa might gain from US showdown Is there a genocide of white South Africans as Trump claims? South Africans' anger over land set to explode Go to for more news from the African continent. Follow us on Twitter @BBCAfrica, on Facebook at BBC Africa or on Instagram at bbcafrica Africa Daily Focus on Africa
