I saw this article earlier this week and think it raises an important issue EPA Advisor: Agency Is Funneling Billions To Climate Cult Groups As “Insurance Policy” Against Trump. This post links to work by Project Veritas who “investigates and exposes corruption, dishonesty, waste, fraud, and other misconduct in both public and private institutions to achieve a more ethical and transparent society”. On occasion they tape an interview with someone with inside knowledge. This post reproduces their article describing a chat with Brent Efron, a special advisor implementing Biden’s climate agenda. It ticks most of the boxes of the Project Veritas mission statement.
I am convinced that implementation of the New York Climate Leadership & Community Protection Act (Climate Act) net-zero mandates will do more harm than good if the electric system transition relies on wind, solar, and energy storage because of impacts on reliability, affordability, and the environment. I have followed the Climate Act since it was first proposed, submitted comments on the Climate Act implementation plan, and have written over 480 articles about New York’s net-zero transition. The opinions expressed in this article do not reflect the position of any of my previous employers or any other organization I have been associated with, these comments are mine alone.
Overview
The Climate Act established a New York “Net Zero” target (85% reduction in GHG emissions and 15% offset of emissions) by 2050. It includes an interim 2030 reduction target of a 40% GHG reduction by 2030. Two targets address the electric sector: 70% of the electricity must come from renewable energy by 2030 and all electricity must be generated by “zero-emissions” resources by 2040. The Climate Action Council (CAC) was responsible for preparing the Scoping Plan that outlined how to “achieve the State’s bold clean energy and climate agenda.” The Integration Analysis prepared by the New York State Energy Research and Development Authority (NYSERDA) and its consultants quantified the impact of the electrification strategies. That material was used to develop the Draft Scoping Plan outline of strategies. After a year-long review, the Scoping Plan was finalized at the end of 2022. Since then, the State has been trying to implement the Scoping Plan recommendations through regulations, proceedings, and legislation.
One of the mostly unremarked aspects of net-zero transition legislation is that many laws incorporate Progressive “Green New Deal” components to achieve other social aims like job creation, economic growth, and climate justice. They are more than just emission reduction programs. For example, New York’s Climate Act goes to great lengths to address environmental justice (EJ) issues. The law mandates that at least 35% of the benefits of spending must be directed to disadvantaged communities. The Climate Justice Working Group works “to ensure that while we move the State toward a carbon neutral economy, all New Yorkers will reap the economic and environmental benefits of our nation-leading transition.”
Project Veritas Article – The following is a copy of the article
It’s a turbulent time at the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), according to a current staffer, with morale at an all-time low. As President-Elect Trump readies to take office, gloomy EPA employees are scrambling to distribute funding for their favored climate change initiatives. Brent Efron, a special advisor implementing Biden’s climate agenda, told Project Veritas the agency is frantically shoveling billions in grants to nonprofits, making sure that the Biden administration’s climate projects stay afloat — no matter who’s in charge.
“Now it’s how to get the money out as fast as possible before they [Trump Administration] come in … it’s like we’re on the Titanic and we’re throwing gold bars off the edge.” – Brent Efron, EPA Advisor
Efron spoke to a Project Veritas investigative journalist about his role in doling out over $100 billion in grants to nonprofits under Biden’s Inflation Reduction Act, which he dubs “Biden’s climate law.” The EPA’s website describes these grants as part of their mission to advance “environmental and climate justice.”
Efron even admits that the EPA is scrambling to push money out the door for projects originally designed for a Kamala Harris presidency.
“The thing that we haven’t funded yet are [sic] the local nonprofit program that was going to be an inter-Kamala Harris administration program… so now we’re getting it [funding] out as quick as possible. It’s like two billion at this point, we’ve got most of it out – like 90%.”
So committed are these staffers, Efron confesses, that they plan to work right up until the final moments on inauguration day, rushing to ensure that every possible tax-payer dollar is disbursed before a Republican administration can turn off the spigot.
“It’s until the Trump people come in and tell us we can no longer give out money. That’s at the very earliest the 20th [January 2025]. But it’s probably a little bit after because they have to get in the building and tell people what to do.”
Efron predicts that the Trump administration will swiftly issue an order to block all grants, with Congress potentially trying to claw back the EPA’s funding. Anticipating this, he reveals that the EPA has been working to funnel money to aligned nonprofits capable of implementing climate change policies at the local level, viewing it as an “insurance policy” against the upcoming Trump presidency.
“We gave them [nonprofits] the money because… it was an insurance policy against Trump winning. Because they aren’t [a government agency], they’re safer from Republicans taking the money away.”
Efron openly admits how the EPA uses nonprofits as a political buffer against Republican administrations—and reveals how he could later reap personal rewards with a cushy job at one of the nonprofits he helped fund during his tenure.
“Over the last year we’ve given out $50 billion dollars for climate things…so to go work for one of these places would be really cool.”
Indeed, the EPA’s website lists several pass-through nonprofits, each awarded between $50 million and $100 million, with the responsibility of distributing subgrants to other nonprofits—ensuring that Biden’s climate agenda keeps rolling, even after his presidency ends.
Efron and his colleagues are working feverishly until the shakeup.
“We’re throwing gold bars off the Titanic. We’re getting the money out.”
The Project Veritas article notes that
Utah Senator Mike Lee responded to Project Veritas’ investigation on X stating, “The U.S. government is actively working to undermine the American people. We’ve empowered Washington to the point that it’s become dangerous and destructive. It’s too big, too expensive, and too powerful. We must return to constitutional government.”
Commentary
The University of California Center for Climate Justice notes that Climate Justice recognizes “the disproportionate impacts of climate change on low-income communities and communities of color around the world, the people and places least responsible for the problem” and “seeks solutions that address the root causes of climate change and in doing so, simultaneously address a broad range of social, racial, and environmental injustices.” There is no question that disadvantaged communities have suffered and continue to suffer disproportionate environmental impacts, but it is important to understand what causes the harm, and balance expectations and potential solutions.
In addition to the obvious dishonesty, waste, fraud, and other misconduct evident in these revelations,
the problem is that the non-profits targeted for the EPA “insurance” funds have no reason to balance expectations and potential solutions. They will never be satisfied because that ends the funding stream. It also gives politicians and regulators a dependable demographic to support ever more stringent regulations. I am also concerned that “Scrambling to push money out the door” is an invitation for poor oversight and management.
For a pragmatist like me who was involved in environmental permitting before retirement, the deference given to the EJ activists is bewildering. New York agencies bend over backwards to appease these activists so much so that I wonder how many projects can be permitted because these activists demand zero impacts to disadvantaged communities. No mind that facilities meet all the emissions requirements and do not contribute to violations of ambient standards, if they emit anything that is unacceptable. It has also been a source of wonder that myriad EJ organizations manage to fund slickly produced analyses that support their narratives. I knew that EPA funding was part of their funding streams but was unaware of the magnitude of Federal largesse until reading the Project Veritas article.
Finally, I cannot help but wonder how many of the gold bars thrown off the allegorical sinking ship are aimed at New York’s Climate Act programs. The Hochul Administration still has not acknowledged how much implementation will cost claiming that they need to know how much money will come from the Federal government. This uncertainty may explain the delay of the release of pending regulations.
Pragmatic Environmentalist of New York 