Scientists with NASA’s Jet Propulsion Laboratory were flying a plane equipped with a visible-infrared imaging spectrometer over an oil field in California’s San Joaquin Valley when they made a worrisome discovery. Images produced by the device revealed a large plume of methane lingering in the air.

The plane made flights over the field for several more weeks, and while the plume shifted and changed shape with the blowing wind, its presence persisted. Believing the source could be a leak at the oil well, the scientists notified the operator. Soon, the plume disappeared. The leak, coming from a small fuel line, had been repaired.

“This is the essence of proactive measurement,” Riley Duren, one of the scientists involved in the flights and now CEO of Carbon Mapper, told Grist. “It’s a good example of how you would want it to work.” 

The leak, detected in July 2020, was what’s called a “super emitter.” The term refers to events in which a lot of methane is quickly expelled, or to infrastructure that releases a disproportionately high amount of the gas. In oil and gas production, events can occur on purpose, as part of routine processes like venting (when producers intentionally release unburned gas) or by accident, due to faulty equipment or human error. 

However they happen, super emitters release a particularly insidious greenhouse gas. Although it only stays in the atmosphere for about a decade, methane is 28 times more potent than carbon dioxide at trapping heat in the atmosphere. Because methane lacks color or odor, releases can go undetected for months. 

Nearly one-third of methane emissions in the U.S. come from the oil and natural gas sector, and super emitters account for almost half of them. But a new emissions rule from the Environmental Protection Agency, or EPA, targets super emitters by leveraging technology like remote-sensing aircraft and even high-resolution satellites to not only find leaks, but to hold those who cause them accountable. 

The EPA’s methane rule, announced December 2 at the COP28 climate summit in Dubai, includes a suite of regulations aimed at addressing the gas and other dangerous pollutants at oil and gas facilities. It establishes emissions standards for new equipment, phases out routine flaring of natural gas, guides states in regulating emissions from existing equipment, and requires the industry to conduct regular monitoring for leaks. 

“Its importance should not be understated,” Darin Schroeder, of the Clean Air Task Force’s methane pollution prevention program, said of the rule. “Reducing methane emissions is the best action we can take right now to bend the climate curve.” The EPA predicts the new regulations will avoid 58 million tons of methane emissions by 2038, reducing projected emissions from the gas by 80 percent. 

The rule also includes the “super-emitter program,” in which outside organizations certified by the EPA can use approved remote-sensing technologies, including airborne spectrometers and satellites, to monitor oil and gas facilities and detect large releases. 

Under the program, watchdogs will report super-emitter events — defined as a release of more than 100 kilograms per hour — to the EPA, which vets the data and informs the operator. The owner must investigate and report back to the EPA within 15 days, explaining how and when it will fix the problem. 

The EPA will also post verified super-emitter events on the program’s website, allowing those in frontline communities to monitor their possible exposure to dangerous gasses. 

Schroeder said the program gives organizations that are already identifying leaks a way to make their data actionable. “They’re finding super emitters all over the place, but there’s nothing to do with that information,” he told Grist. 

One of those organizations is Carbon Mapper, a nonprofit created in 2020 to drive emissions mitigation with data from specific facilities. The aircraft that Carbon Mapper uses carries an imaging spectrometer capable of measuring hundreds of wavelengths of light. Gases absorb different light wavelengths, leaving a “spectral fingerprint” invisible to the human eye. 

Through a coalition that includes NASA, Planet Labs, and several other institutions, Carbon Mapper is also working to launch two spectrometer-equipped satellites to detect methane and CO2 directly at their sources. 

Satellites are quickly boosting the potential of methane monitoring. The U.N.-led Methane Alert and Response System, launched at COP27, has used them to issue alerts on 127 plumes in the last year. The technology is also expected to play an important role in monitoring the new Oil and Gas Decarbonization Charter, announced at COP28, which commits 50 oil companies to drastically lowering their methane pollution by 2030. 

In the super-emitter program, Duren of Carbon Mapper said outside monitoring will act as a backstop to the inspections oil and gas companies do themselves. The EPA rule requires operators to periodically check their infrastructure and repair leaks, but inspections are made bimonthly or even quarterly. “Super emitters are unpredictable,” said Duren. “There’s a lot of methane that can be emitted between that, which a satellite can catch.”

Methane can also be emitted in places that aren’t being monitored at all. Duren says his team often detects releases coming from abandoned oil wells. The Interstate Oil and Gas Commission counts more than 130,000 orphan wells in the U.S., but estimates there could be between 310,000 and 800,000 still unidentified.

The new rule mandates that operators address verified leaks, something Andrew Klooster of the advocacy group Earthworks said they don’t always do.

As a field advocate in Colorado, Klooster uses a handheld camera called an optical gas imaging thermographer to track pollution. In a press briefing last week, he recalled visiting a site in Idaho last spring where, half a decade ago, the EPA had found problems with leaking storage tanks. 

“Fast forward five years and these issues persisted, they had not been addressed,” said Klooster. “Without strong regulations and oversight, the oil and gas industry can’t be relied upon to strive for anything more than the bare minimum of emissions reductions.”

The program also could empower frontline communities. The EPA will publish confirmed super emitters on their website, making it easier for nearby residents to know what’s being released by neighboring oil and gas operations. 

Releases can be dangerous in the short and long term: As the gas spills out, so do volatile organic compounds like benzene, which can increase the risk of chronic illnesses and cancers. During the 2015 Aliso Canyon methane gas leak, which lasted nearly four months, more than 8,000 households in the Los Angeles suburb of Porter Ranch had to be evacuated to escape a leaking well. 

Joseph Hernandez, Indigenous energy organizer for Naeva, noted in the press briefing that Indigenous communities in New Mexico are surrounded by operating wells. In San Juan county alone, 27,000 Native Americans live within a half-mile of an oil and gas production site, he said. 

As a former oil worker who lives on the Navajo Nation, Hernandez has seen the risks firsthand. “It’s not a question of if [leaks] will happen, but when,” he said. “Our communities deserve protection.” 

How much the program protects people will depend on how effectively it is enforced, according to Lauren Pagel, policy director at Earthworks, who told Grist that currently, even states with strict methane regulations don’t have enough inspectors or high enough fines to compel companies to act. “Without on the ground enforcement, we could be in the same situation that we are in now.”

The EPA rule is expected to take effect early next year, but monitors must first be certified by the agency. It’s not clear yet how many organizations could apply to join the program. The Environmental Defense Fund will launch its own methane-detecting satellite in 2024. The company GHGSat operates 12 greenhouse gas-detecting satellites and says it will monitor every major industrial site in the world by 2026, but did not respond to requests for comment on whether it would participate in the program.

Access to the technology will be a barrier, and so will funding. Carbon Mapper relies on philanthropic support to conduct its monitoring. “It’s something that governments are going to have to step up to solve,” said Duren, “to make sure these programs are maintained and expanded and sustained.” 

In an email, the EPA confirmed that the rule does not include funding, but said that the agency is partnering with the Energy Department to provide financial assistance for monitoring and reducing methane emissions from the oil and gas sector, which is “intended to complement EPA’s regulatory programs.”

As the oil and gas industry updates equipment to comply with other parts of the rule, Duren hopes that, eventually, there will be far fewer super emitters to detect. But that will take time. “We’re all going to be very busy with this for the rest of a decade.”

This story was originally published by Grist with the headline In EPA’s new methane rule, an innovative way to stop ‘super emitters’ on Dec 13, 2023.

Realtors are used to answering questions about available closet space and the number of bathrooms, but there’s a new question people are asking when searching for a new home:

How’s the energy efficiency?

Recent research has shown that more Americans are searching to buy or build an energy-efficient home. And with climate change worsening and energy bills rising, it’s perhaps not much of a surprise that sustainability is shifting to a top priority.

But just how much of a difference does it make? Do homes that help people to conserve energy really help to save money and the planet?

Let’s look at some of the top statistics for energy-efficient homes.

Jump To: Top Home Energy Facts and Statistics | Energy Efficient Window Facts and Statistics | LED Light Facts and Statistics | Sustainable Roofing Facts and Statistics | High-Performance HVAC Facts and Statistics | Residential Solar Facts and Statistics

Energy-Efficient Homes: Statistics and Facts

A survey from the National Association of Realtors (NAR) revealed that 63% of agents and brokers find it valuable to promote energy efficiency in a house listing.

Here are some stats that back up why homeowners are — or why they should be — prioritizing energy-savvy homes.

1. Energy-efficient-rated homes sell for 2.7% more than unrated homes, and better-rated homes sell for 3% to 5% more than lesser-rated homes.
2. Nine out of 10 homebuyers would rather buy a more expensive home with energy-efficient features versus a cheaper and less energy-efficient home.
3. Real estate agents report that energy efficiency adds $8,246 to a home’s value in 2022, up more than $1600 from 2021.
4. Homes and commercial buildings consume 40% of the energy used in the United States.
5. To enhance energy efficiency, homes can benefit from upgrades such as air leak sealing, new windows, programmable thermostats, insulation, energy-efficient water heaters, Energy Star appliances, solar panels, and LED lighting.
6. Compared to traditional homes, LEED-certified homes typically consume 20% to 30% less energy, with some achieving remarkable energy reductions of up to 60%.
7. Residential energy accounts for roughly 20% of annual greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions in the U.S.
8. A properly insulated attic can reduce your energy bill by 10% to 50%, according to the Department of Energy.
9. Switching to energy-efficient windows can save the average homeowner up to $583 per year.
10. Inefficient windows lead to $50 billion in energy waste per year in the U.S.

Watch Below: Learn what our favorite science guy, Bill Nye, is doing to improve the energy efficiency of his home.

Energy-Efficient LED Lights for Homes: Statistics and Facts

15. LED bulbs use about 90% less energy and last 25 times longer than incandescent bulbs, saving the average household about $225 per year.
16. An average household dedicates 15% of its energy budget to lighting. Using new technologies can reduce lighting energy use in your home by 50% to 75%.
17. LED lights contain no mercury and are 95% recyclable.
18. LEDs excel in energy efficiency, converting 95% of their energy into light, while incandescent bulbs waste a staggering 90% of their energy as heat.
19. By 2030, LEDs are projected to account for an impressive 87% of all lighting sources worldwide. 
20. The widespread adoption of energy-efficient LED lighting is projected to slash global electricity consumption for lighting by 30-40% by 2030.

Energy-Efficient Roofs for Homes: Statistics and Facts

Replacing your roof will not only help protect your home from the elements, but it can also drastically increase its energy efficiency. And as it turns out, the best roofing materials for the environment are also the best roofs for lowering personal energy consumption.

18. You can save up to 30% on air cooling costs by installing a metal roof over an asphalt one. 
19. A green roof would save about $200,000 over its estimated lifespan of 40 years, with nearly two-thirds of that coming from reduced energy costs.
20. Metal roofs are 100% recyclable after use. Additionally, aluminum roofing materials are made from 95% post-consumer recycled contents and steel roofing is made from 10% post-consumer recycled contents.
21. A metal roof replacement will increase your home value by more than $23,000 — more than $6,000 more compared to an asphalt shingle roof replacement.

Energy-Efficient Home HVAC Systems: Statistics and Facts

Heating, ventilation and air conditioning (HVAC) systems are responsible for a whopping 48% of a home’s energy usage. Small changes like switching from a gas furnace to a heat pump or choosing an air conditioner with a better SEER rating can make a big difference for your home and for the planet.

22. Conventional air conditioner systems cost over $29 billion annually, according to the U.S. Department of Energy.
23. The $4.28 billion High-Efficiency Electric Home Rebate Program (part of the Inflation Reduction Act) provides rebates of up to $8,000 to install heat pumps, which can both heat and cool homes. It also provides a rebate of up to $1,750 for heat-pump water heaters.
24. Standard water heaters account for 14-18% of your utility bill. 
25. Energy Star-certified smart thermostats can save homeowners between 8% and 15% on electricity costs.
26. According to The U.S. Department of Energy, adjusting your thermostat by 7-10 degrees for eight hours a day can save up to 10% on energy costs.

Energy-Efficient Home Solar Systems: Statistics and Facts

By installing solar panels on your roof or switching to solar shingles, you can rely less on traditional energy sources and generate your own electricity. Plus, housing trends point toward an increasing amount of interest in homes with solar features.

27. On average, a U.S. homeowner sees $20,000 of lifetime savings from switching to solar energy.
28. Solar installations increase a home’s resale value by an average of 4.1%.
29. The cost of adding solar panels has dropped more than 70% over the last decade.
30. The number of U.S. homes with installed solar panels has increased by an average of 32% per year since the year 2005.

Energy Conservation: Statistics and Facts

31. Americans waste $200 to $400 in home energy expenses per year due to air leaks and outdated HVAC (heating, ventilation and air conditioning) systems.
32. Energy efficiency measures, including building insulation and efficient appliances, are projected to save IEA countries USD 680 billion in energy costs in 2022, representing a 15% reduction in their total energy expenditure.
33. Making energy-efficient choices helps burn fewer fossil fuels, which helps lessen the bi-product of greenhouse gasses and other air pollutants.

The post Energy-Efficient Homes 2023: Top 33 Energy Facts and Statistics appeared first on EcoWatch.

Brenda Mallory reports directly to President Joe Biden, but in a crowded building at Expo City in Dubai, United Arab Emirates, nobody recognizes her. Mallory is the chair of the Council on Environmental Quality, a White House department in charge of implementing some of Biden’s key climate priorities, and she’s promoting that agenda as the annual United Nations climate conference nears its close.

On Saturday, she’s seated on a couch in the middle of a bustling corridor listening intently to KM Reyes, a community organizer and conservation lobbyist based in the Philippines. With a notepad balanced on her lap, Mallory wants to hear what the U.S. can do to help grassroots advocates like Reyes. “I’m big on details,” she tells her.

“It’s ensuring that we get actual finance on the ground,” Reyes responds. “Because we’re nowhere near the target $20 billion by 2025 in order to fulfill the framework,” she adds, referring to a global biodiversity agreement signed last year.

Finance is an overarching concern at COP28, as the conference is abbreviated, and its predecessor gatherings. Global climate and environment agreements recognize that the planet is careening toward disaster largely as a result of carbon pollution by countries that industrialized relatively early in their histories — like the United States — as opposed to those whose economies began developing more recently, like the Philippines.

As a result, developed countries’ commitments to provide financial support to developing countries are at the crux of climate agreements. As the world’s largest historical polluter, the U.S. is expected to provide its fair share to support climate efforts, but it has failed to deliver in recent years. For instance, only $2 billion of the $3 billion that the U.S. pledged to a climate fund in 2014 has been delivered. Nevertheless, a few days prior to Mallory’s arrival in Dubai, Vice President Kamala Harris pledged another $3 billion to the same fund.

But looming over these promises are questions about a divided Congress’ ability to execute U.S. funding commitments, as well as the very real possibility that former president Donald Trump will defeat Biden in an election next year, throwing U.S. climate policy into disarray. After all, one of Trump’s signature policies was withdrawing the U.S. from the landmark Paris Agreement to limit global warming.

That tension was evident during COP28. On the very first day, negotiators made the unprecedented decision to adopt a so-called loss-and-damage fund to provide funding to developing countries facing the disastrous effects of warming that has already taken place. While the United Arab Emirates and Germany pledged $100 million each, the U.S. was roundly criticized for committing only $17.5 million, an amount climate justice advocates described as “paltry” and “shameful.” 

Without mentioning U.S. responsibility explicitly, Reyes emphasized the need for developing countries to receive funding. Just $50,000 could go a long way to protecting 100,000 acres of carbon-dense forests in the Philippines, she told Mallory. “It’s a drop in the bucket for global commitments, but it’s going to be completely transformational,” she said. 

Mallory nodded along, scribbling notes. Later on, Mallory told me that “everyone appreciates that none of this is going to happen unless we figure out mechanisms to finance.”  

Mallory is one of several high-ranking U.S. officials attending COP28 to tout the Biden administration’s accomplishments, and she’s in Dubai for three days “lifting up the work we’re doing that is supporting the president’s agenda on climate change,” she said. Grist spent half a day with Mallory as she led panels on the administration’s climate initiatives, spoke to the press, and recorded a video with a young ocean-justice activist.

Mallory promoted two major U.S. initiatives on Saturday. That morning, she announced that the U.S. would join an international partnership promoting nature-based climate solutions, like tree planting and mangrove protection. (Healthy ecosystems can remove carbon from the atmosphere, and they can also function as natural infrastructure that protects landscapes from climate-driven impacts like flooding.) Later, she moderated an event about a Biden administration conservation initiative called America the Beautiful, through which the president outlined ways to conserve 30 percent of the country’s land and water by 2030. (The commitment is in line with the so-called 30 by 30 goal codified in an international pact signed by many other countries, but the U.S. Congress has never ratified that convention.)

But while Mallory was touting the president’s initiatives, a group of Republican lawmakers were meeting with world leaders and emphasizing their country’s position as one of the world’s top fossil fuel producers. Earlier in the week, Republicans fired off statements condemning Vice President Harris’ commitment to provide $3 billion to the Green Climate Fund, the largest international fund to support climate projects in developing countries. 

“I am appalled that the Biden administration will pledge billions more of taxpayer dollars, money that Congress has not even provided, to yet another bloated, mismanaged, and ineffective slush fund that will do nothing to change the temperature of the planet,” said Representative Mario Díaz-Balart, a Republican from Florida and chair of an appropriations subcommittee on state and foreign operations, which has jurisdiction over international climate spending.

Meanwhile, at the media center, reporters found postcards with the acronym IRA, a reference to the Inflation Reduction Act, the landmark 2022 U.S. law that is expected to cut the country’s carbon emissions by roughly 45 percent, putting Paris Agreement targets within reach. The postcard rebranded the IRA as “Irresponsible Reckless Alarming” and included a QR code that linked to a report by Republican lawmakers titled “IRA Will Make the United States Poorer and China Richer.”

“It’s so hard when you’re depending on Congress actually coming around to support exactly what you’re doing,” Mallory said. “What I personally hope is that when people see the efforts to deliver on the commitments that we’re making on dollars combined with the other acts we’re also doing, that you look at those as a package.”

Coons chairs the Senate appropriations subcommittee on state and foreign operations. His comments refer to $1.5 billion in climate finance that Congress appropriated last year, which led to the U.S. contributing an additional $1 billion to the Green Climate Fund earlier this year. The contribution came after years of U.S. disengagement from the Paris Agreement and international climate finance during the Trump administration, and it underscored the domestic challenges U.S. administrations face in fulfilling climate commitments. 

Such complexities are little comfort to those in developing countries.

“I just don’t care,” said Harjeet Singh, the head of global political strategy with the international environmental group Climate Action Network. “For decades, the United States has masked its lack of genuine political commitment behind the veil of complex domestic politics.”

The U.S. government should have worked to inform its citizens of the country’s historical responsibility in causing and exacerbating the climate crisis, he said: “This negligence towards its international duties exacerbates the plight of vulnerable communities and developing countries, who bear the brunt of a crisis they did little to create.”

This story was originally published by Grist with the headline At COP28, Trump and GOP threaten Biden’s climate promises on Dec 12, 2023.

The drive from Seattle into the Cascade mountains quickly plunges into dense, green tunnels of evergreen forest — and just as rapidly, reveals patches where the forest has been cleared. Nestled among the trees is the small town of Darrington. A church welcomes visitors with a sign made from a saw blade. Its high school mascot is “the Logger.” And for more than a century, its residents’ lifeblood has been timber.

Logging has put Darrington squarely on the frontlines of rural conservation battles. Things reached a low point in the early 1990s, when environmentalists and timber companies fought over how much, if any, logging should take place on federal forests. Then, in 1994, the federal government quickly passed the Northwest Forest Plan, covering over 24 million acres in Washington, Oregon, and Northern California. The largest forest and ecosystem management plan in the nation, the policy has safeguarded streams, salmon, and old-growth forests — now crucial for climate change mitigation. Since then, very little management has taken place on federal forest land in Washington. Forests have grown too dense, becoming unhealthy and susceptible to catastrophic wildfire.

And communities like Darrington suffered. As logging dwindled, residents left for jobs and amenities elsewhere, and businesses closed. Today, the population hovers around 1,100 people, and the median income is around $37,000 per year. The majority of people with jobs have to commute out of the area, often for more than an hour. 

As the Northwest Forest Plan gets updated this year, community-based groups like the Darrington Collaborative are working to show how conservation can more successfully co-exist with rural communities. They hope to find new solutions for other towns surrounded by federal forest land.

Collaboration is crucial

The Darrington Collaborative formed in 2015 to modernize ecological practices and innovate in ways that wouldn’t leave anyone behind. Its ten members include representatives from timber companies and environmental groups like The Wilderness Society, as well as key civic leaders like Darrington mayor Dan Rankin. Since then, the group has launched multiple demonstration projects. Each shows how management techniques can work in practice — like restoration thinning, which involves managers helping forests become more diverse and clearing space for remaining trees to grow.

When the collaboration began, Mayor Rankin said building trust took real time. “We’re 25 years out of the Northwest Forest Plan, and we were called traitors,” he said. “It was nasty. But we prevailed.” He said the group has focused on projects that can simultaneously bring timber to market, provide jobs, and restore the forest. 

The team’s first step was to get to know each other and figure out commonalities. Next, they wanted to test those areas of agreement in places that weren’t currently hosting critical wildlife species. The first two pilot projects, named Segelsen 1 and Segelsen 2, involved analyzing and thinning on 70-acre sections of forest. Both were full of Western hemlock and Douglas fir trees all about the same age and size that shaded out the understory. 

The goal was to make a healthier forest, with some open areas, and some places where trees grew densely, similar to a natural landscape. The Segelsen 1 project was purchased by Darrington-based Hampton Lumber, while another company, Sierra Pacific Industries, bought the Segelsen 2 project.

Restoration, unlike traditional logging, focuses more on what is left behind than what is taken to the mill. This kind of forest management increases biodiversity and also makes forests more resilient to fire, said Taylor Luneau, The Wilderness Society’s Western North Cascades conservation manager. 

“When you’ve reduced those small trees that act as ladder fuels,” or vegetation that allows a fire to climb upward from the forest floor, “you can get through a fire more sustainably,” Luneau said. This helps develop a diverse mix of small and large trees more similar to an old-growth forest, creating an ecosystem that supports wildlife habitat. “You’ve got a win-win right there, where you’re taking timber out of the forest, and you’re doing it in an ecologically sound way,” he said.

Hampton Lumber, which currently employs 175 people at its Darrington mill, supported the Segelsen projects. Tim Johnson, the Washington regional manager for the company, is part of the Darrington Collaborative. “[Thinning is] out of the ordinary for our company,” he said. “It takes a lot more effort. It’s harder to log, and it’s a little bit higher cost.” But if that’s what they need to do to bring money into the area and get wood out of overly dense federal forests, Johnson adds, Hampton is willing. 

The town’s government has stayed very involved. Mayor Rankin, who co-chairs the Collaborative, has been visiting the project sites each year. “The way the landscape responded was perfect,” he said. “It brought the complexity of that landscape to a different level that we didn’t anticipate.” Sunlight now shines through to the forest floor, and shrubs and other plant life have begun to grow below.

Now, animals like deer, bobcats, and squirrels are using these sections of forest, along with birds. “You can see where that trajectory is going,” Rankin said, “and it’s pretty reassuring that, ‘Hey, we did it right.’”

Along the way, the members of the Collaborative have found they share more common ground than they expected, said member Megan Birzell, Washington state director for The Wilderness Society. 

“When conservation and timber don’t talk to each other, there’s a perception that loggers and rural people don’t care about the environment and conservationists don’t care about people,” Birzell said. “That’s absolutely not true. There are things we’re never going to agree on, but on the 80% we do agree on, we can actually get a lot done—and we build trust that allows us to increase that zone of agreement.”

Seeding hope

In March of 2014, the Oso landslide seven miles outside town became the deadliest in U.S. history, killing 43 people. After the tragedy, Darrington found itself searching for new solutions that aimed to minimize environmental damage. 

The hope is that the Darrington Collaborative’s efforts will lead to more wood available for local communities to support existing sawmills as well as new economic opportunities. In 2020, the city government proposed the Darrington Wood Innovation Center, to pursue a new construction technique called mass timber. It involves nailing or gluing wood panels together to generate a strength approaching that of concrete, albeit with a much lower carbon footprint. 

Federal and state governments awarded the town up to $120 million to be a “one-stop shop” for the forest-based construction material. Its first phase involves a trial to create the material, followed by an expansion into modular construction using mass timber, and eventually maybe even a sawmill that would produce the material at scale.

The project could someday provide up to 120 jobs, including not only highly-skilled positions for engineers and architects, but also entry-level positions, said Rankin. “It could make a huge difference in encouraging young people to stay in Darrington,” he added. Watching high school students graduate is always exciting, he said. But “it’s also the saddest day, because you know the next stage of their life probably isn’t going to be here.” He hopes providing more jobs for young people might be part of the solution.  

Unlocking more from the outdoors

In the meantime, Darrington hopes to capitalize on another major economic driver: outdoor recreation. The picturesque area is a natural jumping-off point for adventurous types coming from Seattle. It’s close to rivers, glaciers, waterfalls, and the mountains. 

The town sits near a daredevil mountain bike network that offers sweeping views of Mt. Baker. It’s also close to a famed rock climbing area, Three O’Clock Rock in the Boulder River Wilderness. And for hikers, the Mount Baker-Snoqualmie National Forest offers trailheads that lead to crowd-pleasing spots like Glacier Peak and Granite Falls. 

Yet — mirroring national trends — teachers reported that many local kids were barely spending time outdoors. Darrington’s young people weren’t benefitting from these wilderness opportunities or their economic potential. So after the Oso landslide, Oak Rankin, Mayor Rankin’s nephew, helped found the Glacier Peak Institute. The institute offers 500 in-school and afterschool programs per year that expose participants to hiking, rafting, canoeing, foraging, navigation, wilderness survival, wilderness first aid, and planting trees.

“Multiple kids who’ve gone through the program are now continuing their education in areas like fisheries management and outdoor guiding,” Oak Rankin said. 

He says the next step is to develop more locally-owned companies, to ensure that tourism dollars stay in the community. Progress is already being made in that direction: After years of revolving-door restaurants that would close for the winter—or sometimes forever—Darrington now supports three consistent food establishments and a new brewery, River Time Brewing. They help give the town a sense of year-round life. 

That gives everyone from Mayor Rankin to environmental leaders like Luneau hope. To be truly sustainable, “we need to consider what the needs are of the local community,” Luneau said. “That’s likely going to include some level of timber harvest. But it’s also going to entail Darrington investing in its outdoor recreation infrastructure. There’s so much that could be done, and I’m really excited to see where Darrington takes things in the future.”

The Wilderness Society has been working since 1935 on uniting people to protect America’s wild places. With more than one million members and supporters, The Wilderness Society has led the effort to permanently protect nearly 112 million acres of wilderness in 44 states and ensure sound management of public lands. We believe that public lands can and should be a critical part of the solution to the climate crisis and a healthy future for all. We work to rapidly and fairly phase out fossil fuel development, responsibly ramp up renewable energy development, and protect and restore natural carbon sinks – like old-growth forests – on public lands and waters.

This story was originally published by Grist with the headline A more collaborative approach to conservation on Dec 12, 2023.

Congress created the National Flood Insurance Program in 1968 as a way for the federal government to bear a risk that private companies wouldn’t. Since then, Uncle Sam has backed the vast majority of flood insurance policies in the United States. 

Yet it is impossible to buy or renew such plans directly with the Federal Emergency Management Agency, or FEMA, which administers the program. Instead, the government relies upon a network of private companies to sell and service its policies — and hands them nearly one-third of the premiums the program brings in. Lately, that’s come to almost $1 billion a year.

“It is certainly something that should be examined,” said Stephen Ellis, president of the watchdog organization Taxpayers for Common Sense. “It would be one thing if it were a very high performing program. Certainly that’s not been the case.” 

The government’s flood insurance program is plagued by low-participation rates and is deep in debt. How its run has often drawn scrutiny, and earlier this year, a bipartisan group of lawmakers proposed legislation that would, among other things, cap the compensation paid to private brokers, who do not take on any risk. There also have been calls for FEMA to sell policies directly to consumers. Proponents of such changes say they would make it easier, and potentially cheaper, for property owners to obtain coverage, while saving taxpayers money.

“Flood insurance is a government service,” said Rob Moore, director of the Water & Climate Team at the Natural Resources Defense Council. “People should be able to buy it directly from FEMA. No question.”

FEMA and insurance companies say it isn’t quite that straightforward.

Read Next

What happens when America’s flood insurance market goes underwater?

Lois Parshley

The National Flood Insurance Act of 1968 established the National Flood Insurance Program, or NFIP, to fill a gap as the private sector retreated from the market. Five years later, Congress mandated that homeowners in high-risk areas who have a federally backed mortgage buy adequate coverage. In 1979, President Jimmy Carter assigned FEMA the role of overseeing the NFIP. But insurance uptake remained relatively low.

In 1983, FEMA enlisted private insurance agents in the effort to sell more policies. The government agreed to reimburse the cost of writing policies and processing claims. The hope was that allowing homeowners to use the same agents that sold other types of insurance would boost participation.

As dozens of companies joined the so-called Write You Own, or WYO, program, flood insurance enrollment indeed grew. But the number of policies peaked in 2009, at 5.7 million, and has been declining since.

“Even with private insurance engaged, and advertising, it still sits right around 5 million policies,” Ellis said. (As of 2022, the figure is 4.7 million.) That’s a fraction of the roughly 100 million eligible properties.

Between 2017 and 2022, the NFIP paid brokers $5.82 billion in commission and expense reimbursements. That’s nearly 29 percent of all premiums brought in by the program, which is saddled with debt and loses billions of dollars annually. Reducing that cut by even a percentage point could save millions. But the Government Accountability Office, or GAO, has on at least two occasions critiqued FEMA’s approach to compensating brokers.

“FEMA sets rates for paying WYOs for their services without knowing how much of its payments actually cover expenses and how much goes toward profit,” the nonpartisan agency noted in a 2009 report. Three years later, Congress directed FEMA to reevaluate its compensation formula. But a 2016 GAO report found that hadn’t yet happened and recommended that FEMA “improve the transparency and accountability over the compensation paid to WYO companies and set appropriate compensation rates.”

The GAO still lists that recommendation as “unresolved,” and it remains unclear how much FEMA is over- or underpaying brokers. While the GAO found that some were not being reimbursed for all of their expenses, a 2019 FEMA rulemaking proposal noted that the 30.8 percent compensation rate that the agency pays them is well above the 25.3 percent in actual expenses they reported to an industry trade group. The difference is presumably profit, which could amount to many millions of dollars.

FEMA told Grist it has completed the congressionally mandated analysis of broker compensation, but declined to share details because it’s under internal review.

Read Next

FEMA maps said they weren’t in a flood zone. Then came the rain.

Tik Root

What is known is that in fiscal year 2023, FEMA agreed to pay WYOs 29.7 percent of premiums. That is higher than the 20 percent cap that the Affordable Care Act generally places on the administrative, overhead, and marketing costs of health insurance sold through the government marketplace. It is also proportionally more than the 14 percent in expense payments that the Department of Agriculture has been giving companies to sell and service crop insurance for the last five years (the companies also get additional compensation as profit because, unlike WYOs, they take on crop insurance risk).

Roy Wright, who led the NFIP from 2015 to 2018, says such comparisons aren’t analogous because those programs are much larger. That allows for significantly lower overhead, he said. Still, he sees room for improvement.

“The operating costs have been the subject of a fair amount of debate,” said Wright, who is now the president of the Insurance Institute for Business & Home Safety. “I always think we should pay attention to how dollars are spent.”

One attempt to rein in costs came in June, when a bipartisan team of lawmakers introduced an NFIP reauthorization act that would, among other things, cap the compensation paid to private brokers at 22.46 percent. That would have saved the NFIP hundreds of millions of dollars last year alone.

“The NFIP has one million less policyholders than it did over a decade ago, but at the same time flooding, and subsequently premiums, has only increased,” said Senator Bob Menendez*, the New Jersey Democrat who is among the four lawmakers who sponsored the bill. “High administrative costs are an unnecessary burden to current policyholders and a barrier to those who want to enter. It’s time Congress rebalances the WYO compensation structure to provide premium relief and mitigation grants to grow the NFIP and reduce its risk profile.”

So far, little has happened with the bill.

Read Next

What happens when America’s flood insurance market goes underwater?

Lois Parshley

Looking beyond the matter of how much FEMA is paying brokers, some would like to see the agency interacting with consumers directly. That, they say, could cut costs while almost certainly improving access and transparency.

“Every intermediary adds one more step in the chain of telephone,” said Moore. “If more people bought directly from FEMA, there are some tangible benefits to the flood insurance programs.”

FEMA does run a program called NFIP Direct, which allows policyholders to make payments and file claims. It is somewhat similar to how the program ran before WYOs, except that today consumers must still buy a policy through a broker, who earns a 15 percent commision. According to one Democratic Senate aide, NFIP Direct’s overall expenses are about 22.46 percent, or the number proposed in the legislation. 

“This is an example of where the government is more efficient than the private market,” the aide said.

Still, NFIP Direct only comprises about 1 in 10 policies. That’s at least in part because agents have minimal incentives to sell them, said Joe Rossi, a broker who chairs the Flood Insurance Producers National Committee. Agents generally find it easier — or are required — to work with private insurers they already have relationships with. Doing so also can bring more in commissions.

“The WYOs are not restricted in how much they give to their agents,” Rossi said. “There are agencies that give 20 percent or more.”

The industry argues that agent expertise is critical to helping consumers navigate a complex subject fraught with questions like, say, whether getting an elevation certificate might reduce premiums.

“The agent is the NFIP whisperer, if you will,” said Lauren Pachman, director of regulatory affairs for the National Association of Professional Insurance Agents. She added that any cuts in government payments to insurance companies would almost certainly impact agents’ commissions, which would make it more difficult to attract and retain them. The number of Write Your Owns has already been dropping, she noted. “Carriers don’t make a ton of money on the flood program.”

Read Next

As climate risks mount, the insurance safety net is collapsing

Lois Parshley

Less private sector involvement would require NFIP Direct to take on more of the burden — an outcome that worries her. “I guess it’s hard for me to imagine the NFIP operating like a well-run insurance company,” she said. “I worry that the federal government would be biting off more than it can chew.”

Nonetheless, FEMA says it wants to try to move closer to customers and is developing a “direct to consumer” online flood insurance quoting tool that it aims to have running by April 2025. In its initial request for information, which Grist obtained, the agency called a digital means of selling and servicing policies “imperative” and said, “Flood insurance remains behind the times, leading to potential customer frustration and the inability to protect one’s home or business.” 

The hope is that fixing those issues will lead more people to sign up. 

“If we’re serious about closing the insurance gap, we have to get more in tune about meeting our customers where they are,” said David Maurstad, senior executive of the National Flood Insurance Program. “What this would do is lead people through the process, at the end of which, if they decide they want to buy a policy, then we connect them with an agent who works on securing their policy.”

Maurstad did not say whether the new system would save the program money, but noted that bypassing private brokers would at the least be a logistical challenge, because insurance is regulated at the state level. The alternative would require FEMA to figure out how to have in-house agents registered in every state. 

“My sense is that that would not be as effective as the co-system that already exists,” he said. “It was decided a number of years ago, and it still makes sense today, to leverage the private sector and their capabilities to administer the program on behalf of the federal government.” 

Wright agrees that most people would probably benefit from professional guidance when buying flood insurance, but supports FEMA making more information easily and readily available to consumers. FEMA already has the technology needed to, say, allow someone to enter an address and get answers to most of their questions, he said: “They should find a way to turn it on.”

Whether NFIP can save money by moving more of the flood insurance process in-house is an open question, said Wright. But to the extent that there are savings, he said they should be passed on to the policy holders. 

“If the cost of the insurance has gone down,” he said, “the consumers should benefit.”

*This story has been updated to include a comment from Senator Bob Menendez.

This story was originally published by Grist with the headline The billion-dollar industry between you and FEMA’s flood insurance on Dec 12, 2023.