SUSTAINABLE NEWTON - Blog

The Arc of Environmental Justice Bends Towards Perseverance

Sun, 27 Sep 2026 16:17:37 GMT

By Maurice Carter, Sustainable Newton Co-founder & President

If you drove down Hazelbrand Road east of GA-142 last week, you may have noticed increased construction activity at the VoltaGrid "pop-up" power plant next to the Serverfarm data center. Or you may have seen one of the plant's 33 gas-fired engines on a flatbed truck parked temporarily on the off-ramp near the site.

In July, the Georgia Environmental Protection Division (EPD) cited both companies for unpermitted construction and ordered VoltaGrid to stop building emission units until EPD issued a final air permit. On Friday, September 18 -- seven months after circulating the draft permit for comment -- EPD finally issued the final permit giving the company permission to complete construction.

Sustainable Newton released our statement Friday summarizing what the permit means. We are disappointed -- but not surprised -- by EPD's decision to issue the permit. It's unquestionable that issues we raised significantly delayed issuance of a final permit. But that delay was never our objective. From the beginning, when VoltaGrid and Serverfarm applied for permits last fall, our goal has been to hold both companies accountable for the full scope of air pollution created by their combined operations. We believed it was inappropriate for EPD to permit them as two separate minor sources of pollution, skirting tighter emissions restrictions their combined operation would require under Title V of the federal Clean Air Act.

In the narrative and the permit just issued, EPD agreed.

On Our Biggest Objection, EPD Ultimately Agreed

During the public comment period on EPD's draft permit for the VoltaGrid ATL-1 EGU site, Sustainable Newton joined the Southern Environmental Law Center and Altamaha Riverkeeper to file comments in a March 13 letter. In that letter, we argued "EPD must permit VoltaGrid and the adjacent Serverfarm operation as a single source," asserting that:

"VoltaGrid intends to sell power exclusively to the adjacent Serverfarm datacenter, and Serverfarm will be solely reliant on VoltaGrid’s power; the two entities will likewise share the same piece of undivided property, owned by Serverfarm. Despite the foregoing, EPD is proposing to permit the two entities as separate sources, allowing both sources to escape more rigorous Title V permitting requirements, amongst other issues. This appears to be improper—especially because this arrangement would violate the Georgia Territorial Act, as discussed below."

In the final permit narrative, EPD acknowledged our comment and agreed with the single-source designation, writing in the Addendum on page 14:

“Based on a contractual agreement EPD became aware of after the issuance of the draft permit, the Division has determined that VoltaGrid and ATL2 [Serverfarm] are a single, minor NSR site. VoltaGrid is considered a support facility for the data center and is under common control. The combination of the two facilities will be a synthetic minor source with respect to Title V and will share a NOX emission limit. VoltaGrid will limit emissions and operating hours to ensure all criteria pollutants remain below the major source threshold for the combined facilities.”

We'll See a Difference in the Air We Breathe

Addendum B, starting on page 17, enumerates the updated emissions, limitations, and toxic impact assessment resulting from combined single-source designation for VoltaGrid and Serverfarm. The material impact is that VoltaGrid agreed to reduce the total annual hours their engines will run and to operate no more than 30 of the 33 engines at at the same time. This "voluntary" limitation was necessary for the combined "single-source" emissions from both sites to remain below the 100-ton threshold to be considered a "synthetic minor" source and avoid additional federal oversight as a "major source."

The table below summarizes emissions data from the permit narrative. The "before" column reflects the total amount of each pollutant that would have been emitted if each facility was permitted as a separate source. The "after" column indicates how much will be allowed with the two sites permitted as a combined single source. The rows highlighted in yellow are pollutants that would have exceeded the major-source threshold without the limits on engine run-times.

The biggest reduction will be for NOx -- which includes nitric oxide (NO) and nitrogen dioxide (NO₂). Carbon monoxide (CO) would also have exceeded the major source threshold without reduced runtimes. But, as the table shows, all criteria pollutants will be lower by the amount shown in the "delta" and "percent change" columns.

PM = Particulate Matter (the numbers represent size in microns)
NOx = Nitrogen Oxides
SO2 = Sulphur Dioxide
CO = Carbon Monoxide
VOC = Volatile Organic Compounds
HAP = Hazardous Air Pollutants (such as formaldehyde, benzene, mercury, etc.)

For more context on the human health implications of these pollutants, see the video replay below featuring Dr. Anne Mellinger-Birdsong, MD presenting about air quality impacts of data centers for the five-part webinar series "Data Centers and Health" jointly hosted by Sierra Club of Georgia, Third Act Georgia, Science for Georgia, and the National Coalition Against Cryptomining.

As Dr. Mellinger-Birdsong shows, these pollutants have significant health impacts for children and elderly adults -- and some measurable effect on all of us. So, we would rather not have these 33 gas-fired engines running in our community at all. But our active public participation in the permitting process led to improved results, compared to what VoltaGrid and Serverfarm were requesting. And we look forward to seeing the "pop-up" power plant disassembled as soon as Georgia Power provides grid power to the data center site (estimated July 2027).

We're Not Done Yet

Meanwhile, there is still the matter of our petition filed on July 13, 2026 with the Georgia Public Service Commission (PSC), asking for expedited declaratory ruling on the lawfulness of the VoltaGrid, LLC operation, as initially described in their air permit application. We raised this issue in our March 13 letter to EPD, commenting on the draft permit, where we argued that "VoltaGrid and Serverfarm's proposed operations violate Georgia's Territorial Act."

In the final permit narrative, EPD responded "This comment falls outside the purview and authority of EPD." But the PSC agreed to hear our petition, assigning a hearing officer and scheduling the hearing on December 9, 2026. Our case is assigned Docket Number 57243.

Though the air permitting process with EPD and the hearing before the PSC are separate matters before two different state regulatory agencies, there is a common thread: to ensure that VoltaGrid and Serverfarm are required to operate transparently and in compliance with Georgia's laws.

The Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. famously said "The arc of the moral universe is long, but it bends toward justice." I would add that the arc of environmental justice is long, but it bends towards perseverance.

Utility Bill Late Fees Are a Symptom of an Energy Cost Burden Problem

Mon, 14 Sep 2026 18:15:42 GMT

By Maurice Carter, Sustainable Newton Co-Founder & President

What do a late-night spat during a very long city council meeting, rising home energy costs, a federally-funded home energy rebate program, and a corporate-funded, non-profit community power initiative have in common? Read on and find out. Someone you know -- or even you -- might benefit.

Source: Science for Georgia

A heated exchange in the wee hours of a Covington City Council meeting on August 3, made local headlines and even Atlanta television newscasts. But honestly, the tensions between the mayor and some councilmembers were understandable. The meeting ran from 6:30 PM to nearly 11 PM! That's unfortunate, though, because the topic -- reducing or eliminating late fees on City of Covington utility bills for senior citizens -- was was worth deeper discussion at a more reasonable hour.

West Ward Councilmember Anthony Henderson first proposed to change the late fee charged for past due utility bill payments from 10% of the outstanding balance to a flat fee of $10 for customers 65 years or older. East Ward Councilmember Dwayne Turner agreed with Henderson's proposal and suggested going further to eliminate the late fee entirely for senior citizens. Unfortunately, the conversation veered off track from there.

Mayor Fleeta Baggett and several councilmembers raised concerns about the complexity of implementing such a change in the city's billing system. And the mayor correctly pointed out that the city already sells electricity to residential customers at a loss. The most recent electric cost of services study performed for the City of Covington by Electric Cities of Georgia (ECG) in July 2026 showed the city's profit margin on residential customers is -13.1%.

Late Fees Are the Symptom of a Deeper Problem

Lost in the discussion was recognition that late fees aren't actually the root problem -- although charging a percentage instead of a flat fee makes it harder for someone who falls behind to catch back up. In most cases, missed utility bill payments are a symptom of a deeper problem: customers cannot afford their energy bills. According to a report by the Savannah Morning News earlier this summer, electricity rates in Georgia have risen 27% over the last five years, and Consumer Affairs ranked our state as having the 8th worst summertime cooling cost burden. For City of Covington electric customers, data from the Georgia Public Service Commission shows the city's summer electric rates have increased by 24-38% (depending on the monthly kilowatt hour consumption level) over the past five years.

Rising home energy costs are tough on low or fixed-income households, like the senior citizens on Social Security that Henderson and Turner were trying to help. With home heating and cooling devouring a growing share of household budgets, the worsening problem is energy cost burden.

By US Department of Energy (DoE) standards, a household spending 6% or more of gross annual income on utility and energy bills is considered to have a high energy cost burden. Households spending over 10% of income are labeled as severely burdened. In Newton County, according to DoE data, single-family detached households earning 100% or less of the Area Median Income (AMI) have an average energy cost burden of 12%. They are, by definition, severely burdened.

But, if the city already loses 13.1% on electricity sold to residential customers, then waiving fees or reducing rates is not the solution. Or at least it's not a sustainable solution. Instead, we should look at how to help these households use less of the thing they're struggling to afford, which is energy.

Solutions Exist, But "It's Complicated"

The Georgia Environmental Finance Authority (GEFA) administers two federally-funded home energy rebate programs for Georgia households looking to lower energy consumption in their homes. To date, Georgians have received a combined total of $56.3M in upfront cost savings through the HER and HEAR programs on upgrades like energy-efficient appliances, wiring panel upgrades, insulation, weatherization, air-sealing, and other improvements.

Thanks to a "Do It Yourself" path, the Home Electrification and Appliance Rebates (HEAR) are totally tapped out. GEFA has stopped accepting applications. The Home Energy Rebates (HER) require a more comprehensive, consultative approach to addressing home energy efficiency. The program starts with a home energy audit, and the final rebate amount is driven by a combination of energy saved and household income relative to AMI. Because the HER program is more complicated, the uptake has been slower. That's the bad news. The very good news is that GEFA still has $71.4M in HER program funding left to distribute to qualified households. And that could be you or someone you know.

Save with SOUL

Enter the non-profit Groundswell, which describes itself as follows:

"Groundswell builds community power to support local resilience and cut electricity bills in half for our neighbors who need savings the most. We deliver community solar, resilience hubs, and residential energy efficiency to preserve affordable housing, strengthen the grid, and support local economic development. Founded in 2009, Groundswell joyfully serves rural, small-town, and urban communities in the Heartland, Mid-Atlantic, and Southeast."

Groundswell's SOUL (Save On Utilities Long-term) program combines philanthropic donations with local, state, federal, and utility-sponsored programs to provide whole-home energy efficiency and electrification upgrades at no cost to the homeowner.

This week, they launched a 24-month local program to bring SOUL to homeowners in Covington and other targeted metro Atlanta communities, saying:

"Groundswell is proud to partner with Amazon and Salesforce on the SOUL® in City of Covington and South Fulton County, Georgia Project to advance energy affordability and community resilience across Metro Atlanta. Through a generous philanthropic commitment combined with state and utility rebates, Amazon and Salesforce are funding zero-cost-to-homeowner heat pump upgrades and energy efficiency improvements for hundreds of low-income households. The project helps households improve energy efficiency and lower utility bills."

To help eligible homeowners navigate the complexities of GEFA HER rebates, Groundswell uses a portion of the funds from corporate donors to hire Community Power Navigators who work in the community. These navigators assist applicants through every step of the process to apply for and become qualified to receive a HER rebate. The remainder of the corporate funding is then used to fill any gaps between what GEFA will cover and what the total project will cost. Thus making the upgrades zero-cost for the homeowner.

To qualify, applicants must meet the following criteria:

Occupancy & Ownership: Must be an owner-occupied single-family residence.
Target Location: Residence must be in designated focus areas in Metro Atlanta (in our case, the city limits of Covington).
Income Requirement: Household income must be below 80% Area Median Income (AMI) OR qualify via verified Categorical Enrollment

Full details are available on the program website and also the flyer. If you believe you meet the program qualifications, Groundswell is accepting pre-qualifying submissions now on the website. But please be patient, since the SOUL program for Covington and South Fulton just launched this week.

Amazon and Salesforce Backing Is an Encouraging Sign

Sustainable Newton is especially encouraged to see major tech companies like Amazon and Salesforce supporting this program. Readers of this blog may recall I wrote back in February about research showing data center developers can invest in residential energy efficiency and renewables as powerful, community-serving alternative to building new fossil gas power plants to meet the electricity needs of their data centers. In particular, I referenced Rewiring America's Homegrown Energy Report, which detailed how home energy investments from hyperscalers could free up substantial electricity for data centers:

Homegrown Energy: How household upgrades can meet 100 percent of data center demand growth

These investments suggest Amazon and Salesforce are seizing that opportunity and, in the process, are helping the most energy-vulnerable households in our community. And the electricity saved through home energy efficiency improvements stays in the grid to serve other customers -- including data centers. It's cleaner, cheaper, and better for everyone.

The Yale Program on Climate Change Communication (YPCCC) recently published a research note regarding US public opinion on data center development. Among their key findings, the research team found: "A large majority of Americans (73%) “strongly” or “somewhat” support a proposal requiring new data centers to offset their electricity use by installing rooftop solar on, and/or helping to weatherize and insulate nearby homes, while only 26% oppose it."

The webinar recording below features one of the lead authors of the report, George Mason University Ph.D. candidate Neha Gour, along with Rewiring America's Vice President of Policy, Kristin Eberhard. Together they explain the dynamics that make investing in residential energy a smart move for data center developers and the communities where they are building.

This partnership between Amazon, Salesforce, Groundswell, and the communities of Covington and South Fulton is just one example of collaborations taking shape across Georgia -- which is now the most active North American market for active data center construction. Earlier this year, Google announced a partnership with Georgia Power to invest $5M in a Community Impact Fund to "support programs that expand access for families to energy-saving technologies that will lead to lower electric bills and stronger local energy systems across Georgia." Amazon is also funding a $100M investment with the City of Covington to build an industrial water reclamation system for its Alcovy Road data center.

Coming Full-Circle Back to Energy Cost Burden

It's important to note that these residential energy efficiency programs do not involve local government or taxpayer funding. But local leaders still play a critical role in maximizing the impact of these opportunities. As city, county state, and local business leaders recruit economic development for our community, we should emphasize the value of partnerships that invest in households, neighborhoods, and entire communities to address pervasive issues like energy cost burden and create new opportunities for positive growth. We're excited to see Groundswell working in our community and grateful to Amazon and Salesforce for their investment in the people living here.

With Data Centers, Transparency Is the Only Acceptable Policy

Mon, 10 Aug 2026 17:54:43 GMT

By Maurice Carter, Sustainable Newton Co-Founder & President

Effingham County residents were startled last month with news a $20B OpenAI data center project was approved by their local officials without public notice or any opportunity to comment. A story in Sunday's edition of the Atlanta Journal-Constitution recaps the events that led to the July 22 surprise announcement, with the goal of answering Effingham County residents who wondered "How is it that we didn’t hear a peep about this until it was already done?”

We want to answer the logical next question for our neighbors here in Newton County: "Could it happen here?" The answer is "thankfully not," but it could have turned out differently.

As AJC reporter Adam Van Brimmer explains it, 2024 updates to Effingham County's zoning ordinances allowed the OpenAI project to be approved by county officials without public notice. "A push to modernize the county’s zoning ordinance resulted in data centers already being a permitted use a year before OpenAI first made contact," he writes. "A key element in addressing the antiquated zoning laws was the creation of a permitted use table. This tool established what could be built where 'by right' — meaning without significant review. The initial version was added to the zoning law in late 2024; the tables of uses ran for 10 pages. Data centers were on the list but drew little attention."

It Could Have Happened Here -- But Not Anymore

Before the Covington City Council enacted a data center moratorium in January, the same vulnerability existed in the city's zoning ordinances, which listed data centers as permitted by right in light and heavy industrial zoning districts (M1 and M2). Those were the requirements in effect when Amazon Data Services started their project on Alcovy Road and when the Serverfarm data center (and associated pop-up power plant) were initiated on Hazelbrand Road. The moratorium was enacted to allow the city's Planning and Development staff to draft revisions to strengthen the city's ordinances and provide more control over data center construction and operation. The City of Covington Planning Commission approved new language on July 14, which Planning and Development Director Judy Thagard presented to the mayor and council for a first reading and a public hearing on Monday, August 3. Below is a replay of the presentation and the public hearing:

No More Data Centers Permitted by Right

The draft amendment presented to the council for the first reading and public hearing included critically important changes that would prevent a situation like what occurred in Effingham County:

Data centers are only allowed in M1 & M2 zoning districts and require a Special Use Permit (SUP). No data center is permitted by right going forward, once the ordinance is adopted and the moratorium is lifted.
The process to obtain an SUP requires a public hearing before the Planning Commission and also before the City Council.
The ordinance also requires that, at least 30 days prior to a public hearing, "the applicant shall conduct at least one (1) community meeting to describe the project, including the proposed site plan, building elevations, equipment-yard locations, proposed buffers and screening, utility demands, anticipated construction impacts, and a viewshed analysis from public rights-of-way and nearby residential areas." Signs announcing the public meeting must be posted on the property, and the applicant must also advertise the meeting in the newspaper and in letters sent to all owners of property within 1,000 feet of the proposed data center site.

In his motion to approve the first reading and proceed to a second and final reading before adoption on August 17, council member Jared Rutberg proposed strengthening the public notice requirements with the following changes:

To require the applicant to advertise and host two public meetings.
To require that the applicant send letters of notice to any owner of property within two miles of the data center property line.

(Members of Sustainable Newton's Environmental Hazards Committee had previously requested two public meetings and a wider letter distribution in our written and verbal comments to staff and the planning commission.)

The council voted unanimously to approve the first reading with those changes. This is a massive step forward for transparency around data center projects in Covington. We believe certain provisions of the supplemental requirements outlined in the new ordinance can be improved before final adoption -- especially in areas like noise limits, prohibitions on "behind the meter" generation of firm power using fossil fuels, and formal signoffs on water usage plans. But, regardless of those opportunities, we commend the council for valuing public involvement and requiring transparency from data center developers and themselves. And we urge them to follow through by adopting a final ordinance on August 17 that retains all of these rules around public notice and involvement.

A Word About Newton County's Data Center Ordinance

NOTE: The Newton County Board of Commissioners also has a moratorium in effect until October 20 and is currently reviewing draft changes to their Unified Development Ordinance concerning data centers. The draft we have read requires data centers to have a Conditional Use Permit (CUP), which would also entail some level of public notice. We will remain engaged in those discussions to encourage the commissioners to put similar transparency requirements in place that mirror what Covington has done.

Where there's Smoke, there's Fire (& Fingerprints of Climate Change)

Tue, 28 Jul 2026 12:42:15 GMT

By Maurice Carter, Sustainable Newton Co-Founder & President

Recent local events have conspired to keep us talking about data centers -- which remain a pressing issue for our community. But from a slightly broader perspective today, I'm must raise a different hot topic today: Our world is on fire.

Connecting the dots from climate change to raging wildfires, endless waves of deadly extreme heat, violent tornado outbreaks, and devastating flash floods feels like stating the obvious. But if it was obvious, we wouldn't be in the hellscape we find ourselves in now.

August is still days away, but this brutal year has already made our deepening climate crisis impossible to ignore. Unprecedented May heat baked Europe before summer even arrived and was soon surpassed by an even more oppressive, extended heat dome in late June that's estimated to have killed ~14,000 people. In mid-July, a similar weather system scorched the American West and Central Plains, with highs of 115° F in parts of Montana. This week, as I write, an intense heat dome is parked over the central US, producing heat indices well over 100°F from northern Minnesota down the Mississippi Gulf Coast and westward all the way to California and Nevada. Highs in the Southwest are expected to reach 120°F this week. Meanwhile, the year's fourth extreme heat event is building in Europe.

A World on Fire

The combined effects of prolonged extreme heat and drought have made kindling of much Europe, the Western US, and Canada -- breeding conditions for the massive wildfires burn now out of control. As one forestry expert in Spain told a Bloomberg reporter: "These are fires that burn with the intensity of several atomic bombs and, as such, putting them out is extremely complex." It’s a familiar pattern even to residents of South Georgia and North Florida who endured evacuations and property losses when wildfires scorched tens of thousands of acres this spring, also brought on by heatwaves and exceptional drought.

Fingerprints of climate change are all over the European wildfires, and also blazes burning across North America. When smoke from Canadian fires filled US skies, President Trump sought to blame Canadian officials and even threatened to implement punitive tariffs. Which led climate scientist Zeke Hausfather to write a post for Carbon Brief proving the climate change connection and refuting arguments the blazes are primarily a result of forest mismanagement. "The surge in Canadian burning tracks temperature with striking consistency, and hotter, drier fire seasons burn far more forest (+80% per 1C)," he wrote. "The biggest fire years are almost universally hotter and drier, over 90% of the record 2023 burn was remote lightning fire, and the attribution studies tie these extremes to a warmer atmosphere without needing to invoke forest management at all."

Watch this senior expert with the European Forest Institute show frustration when asked if fires raging now in France and Spain are "unprecedented"? (Short answer: Not anymore.) For him -- and more than 99% of all climate scientists -- the links between human-caused climate change and extreme weather such as wildfires are undeniable.

But extreme heat and wildfires are not the only glaring evidence of our deepening climate crisis. Extreme tornado outbreaks like the one that carved a 12-mile-long, one-mile-wide path of destruction through Wisconsin on Monday afternoon and the torrential rain causing heavy flash flooding in the Northeast on Tuesday are also examples of extreme weather made more likely and intense by climate change. As short video from Climate Central explains how Attribution Science is giving scientists and meteorologists deeper insights into how climate change affects extreme weather.

It'll Get Worse Before It Gets Better

For now, the situation will only get worse. On land, Earth just had its second warmest June ever. But unprecedented heat is building in our oceans, where ~90% of global warming since the industrial revolution has been absorbed. With seas hotter than they’ve ever been, an historic El Nino is welling up in the Pacific – one expected to shatter all records, as waters heat by as much as +7.5° F over normal. When that heat and moisture escape over land, we’ll face catastrophic natural (really, unnatural) disasters around the globe well into spring.

The images below are from Berkley Earth climate scientist Zeke Hausfather in his July 26 Carbon Brief post "State of the climate: Rapidly developing El Nino raises chance of record-warm 2026." Hausfather has a reputation for being cautious with his modeling runs and predictions, so his expectations for record-shattering heat are noteworthy.

More than 30% of the global surface had a top-five warmest start to the year and 7.1% saw its warmest on record.

An observer of all things climate and energy-related, YouTube researcher and presenter Dave Borlace is also known for his "wait and see" reactions to "breaking news" in his field. But, as Borlace shares in this recent episode of his Just Have a Think series, he, too, believes there there are historic developments afoot.

Don't Abandon All Hope Just Yet!

My sincere apologies for the long litany of alarming headlines. But this is an exceptional moment -- with all we cherish at stake. I'm not trying to tip you into inconsolable despair, nor do I seek to push you into defensive indifference. What I want is to make three things crystal clear:

It’s getting late – but not too late.
The tasks before us are hard -- but not too hard.
It's worth it because we love the ones who'll be left living here when we no longer are.

It’s late, because human-caused climate change is pushing Earth past critical thresholds. The United Nations says one million species face extinction due to habitat loss from climate change and overdevelopment. A 2025 report from the Institute and Faculty of Actuaries warned the world economy could lose 50% of gross domestic product (GDP) from 2070 to 2090 from climate shocks. Neither our bodies nor our societies were made for this.

Despite the worsening crisis, it’s not too late

With over 99% consensus, scientists say human activity – primarily burning oil, gas, and coal – is causing the buildup of carbon dioxide and other gases overheating the planet and destabilizing our weather. Last July, when the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) rescinded the 2009 Endangerment Finding, which gave EPA authority to regulate green house gas (GHG) emissions, the National Academies of Science, Engineering, and Medicine convened a committee to perform an "independent assessment of the science underpinning the Endangerment Finding." Their report, "Effects of Human-Caused Greenhouse Gas Emissions on U.S. Climate, Health, and Welfare," Washington, DC: The National Academies Press, was published September 17, 2025. https://doi.org/10.17226/29239.

In the report, the committee reached the overarching conclusion that: "EPA’s 2009 finding that the human-caused emissions of greenhouse gases threaten human health and welfare was accurate, has stood the test of time, and is now reinforced by even stronger evidence. Today, many of EPA’s conclusions are further supported by longer observational records and multiple new lines of evidence. Moreover, research has uncovered additional risks that were not apparent in 2009."

In short: it's us.

What’s human-caused is also human-preventable

Tying the effects of climate change to human activities is not about "who's to blame?" It's a matter of "who is empowered to act?" And again, it's us!

Some of the necessary changes are hard, but innovation is making them less so. We must urgently decarbonize energy and transportation and thankfully falling prices and technology advancements have made solar and wind the cheapest source of electricity humanity has ever known. And, with affordable batteries, clean energy can serve us day and night.

There are many things you can do.

Replace gasoline car trips with walking, bicycling, carpooling, transit, or an electric vehicle.
Electrify your home to save energy and money with better insulation, weatherization, high-efficiency electric heat pumps for HVAC and/or water heating, electric induction cooking, and solar panels.
Better yet, hire a contractor for a home energy audit to get the most bang for your buck. Georgia even offers rebates making some improvements almost free.

Sustainable Newton, has useful information on our website to help you find the quickest, lowest-cost opportunities that fit your situation. See links for Action and Resources. Also check out the How to Take Climate Action in Your Georgia Community toolkit we wrote for Drawdown Georgia.

But perhaps the most important thing you can do about the climate crisis is talk about it. Yale University, which surveys and tracks American attitudes on climate change, finds 66% of Americans are at least “somewhat worried” about global warming. Yet only 17% say they hear other people discussing it. You’re not alone. Speak up and others will too.

Don't Try to Save the Planet

We don’t have to save the world -- Earth will be just fine without us.

Take action because you want to save the places you love for the people you love to share them with. It’s personal.

This blog post is based on material I gathered earlier this year for a class I was asked to teach for the National Garden Club (NGC) Environmental School. If you leaf through the slides below, you'll find more examples of and links to the points made above.

NGC: Earth Stewardship - Effective Citizenship by Sustainable Newton

New EPA Rule Would Allow Data Centers to Evade Public Scrutiny

Wed, 22 Jul 2026 15:55:02 GMT

By Maurice Carter, Sustainable Newton Co-founder & President

I testified Wednesday, on behalf of Sustainable Newton, in a virtual public hearing hosted by the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), where I opposed rules changes EPA is considering that would effectively eliminate public notice and comment requirements in most air pollution permit proceedings.

The regulations EPA seeks to revise have been in effect under the federal Clean Air Act since 1973. They require states to provide public notice and at least a 30-day comment period on pre-construction permits for new and modified stationary air pollution sources. In Georgia, that process is managed by the state Environmental Protection Division (EPD). Federally mandated notifications from EPD are why Sustainable Newton and our partners at the Southern Environmental Law Center (SECL) and Altamaha Riverkeeper were made aware last November of applications for air permits filed by a Houston-based energy company, VoltaGrid, seeking to construct a methane-fired pop-up power plant to serve electricity for a data center on Hazelbrand Road being built by Serverfarm. As allowed by law, we commented on the application in December and submitted comments again in March, raising issues with the draft permit EPD published for comment.

In June, Sustainable Newton, SELC, and Altamaha Riverkeeper sent aerial photographs and other evidence to EPD, alerting them to unpermitted emissions sources being constructed by VoltaGrid and Serverfarm -- in direct violation of state and federal law. EPD agreed, sending notices of violation to both companies and ordering VoltaGrid to stop work on "air pollution emissions sources and/or control equipment." We've also since petitioned the Georgia Public Service Commission (PSC) to determine if VoltaGrid's electricity sales to Serverfarm are even legal in Georgia.

As I stressed in my testimony on Wednesday:

"None of this would have happened had Sustainable Newton and our partners not been notified through the New Source Review process presently required for minor sources. Nonprofits like ours rely on a transparent review process giving local communities an opportunity to hold polluters accountable. Without that, people suffer."

Don't Let Polluters like Data Centers Build in Secrecy

I'm sharing my recorded testimony below, along with this text transcript, in hopes you will join us in urging EPA not to enact this proposed rule change. See links and instructions below for submitting your own written comments before the August 21 deadline.

Let your voice be heard

The Trump administration has not hidden their desire to make it easier for AI data centers to be constructed quickly -- regardless of the concerns and pushback from local residents. Eliminating public participation in the permitting process seems part of that push.

In justifying the proposed rule change, EPA claims the public doesn't participate in most air permit proceedings and that such participation has no effect on whether a permit is sufficient to protect ambient air quality. Sustainable Newton and our partners at SELC and Altamaha Riverkeeper have proven those assertions false. We have participated fully, from the beginning, in the VoltaGrid/Serverfarm permitting process and have raised serious fact-based legal questions that remain under deliberation by both EPD and the PSC. Without mandated public participation, that would not be so.

For information about the proposed rule changes and how they would impact permitting of pollution sources in Georgia and elsewhere, we recommend this fact sheet from SELC.

To submit written comments to EPA online, use this link. Again, the deadline to comment is August 21, 2026.

Covington Data Center Cited for Violations, Faces More Scrutiny

Mon, 13 Jul 2026 14:43:13 GMT

By Maurice Carter, Sustainable Newton Co-Founder & President

Today the Southern Environmental Law Center filed a petition on behalf of Sustainable Newton asking the Georgia Public Service Commission to determine whether VoltaGrid is violating state energy laws at its pop-up power plant in Covington, GA and to halt any unlawful operations.

When we last posted on June 29, Sustainable Newton had joined the Southern Environmental Law Center (SELC) and Altamaha Riverkeeper to file a complaint with the Georgia Environmental Protection Division (EPD) on June 25, alerting them to apparently unpermitted construction activity at the Hazelbrand Road site where Houston-based energy company VoltaGrid is building a methane-fired power plant to provide electricity to Serverfarm data center next door.

On July 2, following their investigation, EPD issued a separate Notice of Violation letter to each company. The letter to VoltaGrid included an order that "the Company must stop all remaining construction of air pollution emissions sources and/or control equipment until such time that an air quality permit is issued for the construction and operation of the Facility." Serverfarm was allowed to continue work because EPD issued a permit for their 37 diesel backup generators on June 29. However, both Serverfarm and VoltaGrid are required to respond with additional information with in 15 days and were told in the letter that "the Company is not relieved in any way from liability for civil penalties pursuant to Section 23 of the Georgia Air Quality Act by submitting the requested information."

Today, in a separate-but-related matter, Sustainable Newton and SELC petitioned the Georgia Public Service Commission (PSC) asking them to determine whether to investigate VoltaGrid's stated plans to generate and sell electricity to the Serverfarm data center to decide if they violate the Georgia Territorial Electric Service Act and the Georgia Cogeneration and Distributed Generation Act.

Violations at Covington Data Center Site Make Headlines & Newscasts

Atlanta media coverage of the air permit violations brought the situation to the attention of PSC Commissioner Peter Hubbard, who raised the question of possible violations of the Territorial Electric Service Act in a PSC hearing on July 2. A resolution authorizing PSC staff to open an investigation docket will be discussed at the July 16 commission meeting. Today's petition from Sustainable Newton and SELC is separate from, but complementary to, the resolution requested by Commissioner Hubbard.

Atlanta Journal-Constitution reporter Drew Kann was the first to cover alleged air permit violations, following a visit to the Hazelbrand Road site on June 25 with a drone photographer. Kann's story was featured on the front page of the AJC's July 2 edition.

Following EPD's issuance of the Notice of Violation letters, Kann wrote a follow-up story for the newspaper's July 8th edition, reporting on the actions taken against both companies: Georgia agency orders data center's 'pop-up' power plant to halt construction. d

In the same story, Kann also noted Commissioner Hubbard's remarks in the July 2 PSC hearing and his request to open an investigation docket.

Sustainable Newton, SELC Ask PSC to Investigate VoltaGrid 'Pop-up' Power Plant

Quoting from the joint press release we issued today with SELC:

"Based on information from the companies’ air permit applications to the Georgia Environmental Protection Division, VoltaGrid and Serverfarm are separately owned and operated businesses, which makes the sale of power from VoltaGrid to Serverfarm a violation of the Georgia Territorial Electric Service Act and the Georgia Cogeneration and Distributed Generation Act."

"The Territorial Act divides the state into service areas and assigns each electric utility its own territory to serve customers in that area. Georgia’s largest customers (like Serverfarm) can shop around for their electricity provider, but they may only choose among certain electric suppliers regulated by the Public Service Commission. VoltaGrid is not a lawful electric supplier. VoltaGrid is also violating the Cogeneration Act because it is flatly prohibited from selling its excess energy to Serverfarm without oversight from the Commission."

VoltaGrid and Serverfarm tried to obscure their full impact on air quality in our community by seeking air permits as two distinct business operations, ignoring foundational tenets of Georgia's energy laws to do so. Communities deserve transparency and equal protection when massive industrial projects are proposed in our neighborhoods, and we are relying on Georgia regulators to ensure these laws are fully enforced.

As I was quoted saying in the same press release:

“VoltaGrid and Serverfarm tried to obscure their full impact on air quality in our community by seeking air permits as two distinct business operations, ignoring foundational tenets of Georgia's energy laws to do so. Communities deserve transparency and equal protection when massive industrial projects are proposed in our neighborhoods, and we are relying on Georgia regulators to ensure these laws are fully enforced.”

Covington Data Center Power Plant Being Built without State Permits

Mon, 29 Jun 2026 19:28:30 GMT

Read More in today's Atlanta Journal Constitution: Georgia's first data center 'pop-up' power plant is breaking rules, groups say.

By Maurice Carter, Sustainable Newton Co-Founder & President

I wrote three weeks ago that "With Data Centers, What You Don't See Can Hurt You." But drive down Hazelbrand Road east of GA-142 in Covington today and now you can see exactly what I meant.

The exhaust stacks towering above the roadway are part of a methane-fired power plant being built to generate electricity for a data center. But neither the energy company constructing the engines nor the data center operator next door have a state permit for doing so.

The federal Clean Air Act and Georgia's federally-approved State Implementation Plan (SIP) both require companies to obtain a preconstruction permit for new sources of air pollution prior to starting construction. While VoltaGrid has applied for a permit, Georgia law explicitly prohibits building "emission units" before the final air permit is issued. Per the process, EPD published a draft permit for the VoltaGrid project in February, inviting public review and comments through March 13. In response, SELC submitted comments on our behalf, raising major issues with the permit, and Sustainable Newton sent a separate letter as well. To date, EPD is still reviewing those comments and has issued no final permit.

After ground and aerial photographs confirmed illegal activity at the site, Sustainable Newton filed a complaint late last week, along with the Southern Environmental Law Center (SELC) and Altamaha Riverkeeper, requesting the Georgia Environmental Protection Division (EPD) investigate and commence an enforcement action against the Houston-based energy company VoltaGrid for constructing a 90 MW power plant in Covington without obtaining necessary preconstruction air permits. The letter, submitted by our SELC attorneys, includes aerial photographs showing completion of at least eight of 33 reciprocating internal combustion engines the company plans to operate to power the adjacent Serverfarm data center on Hazelbrand Road. The photos also show Serverfarm has installed 36 diesel engines to provide backup power -- also without a permit.

Ground-based photos taken by a neighbor on June 19 at the 10835 Hazelbrand Road site showed exhaust stacks and other equipment that cannot legally be constructed without a permit. That prompted SELC to commission a drone photographer who took aerial photographs on June 25. Those images show eight of the planned 33 methane-fired engines were completed, with the other 25 under construction. (All aerial photos credited to: ©Michael A. Schwarz.)

Images of the adjacent Serverfarm data center at the same address reveal the owner has installed at least 36 of the 37 diesel-fired emergency generators proposed in the original application. These too are unpermitted.

In public comments we submitted to EPD on March 13, both Sustainable Newton and SELC questioned whether the power plant described in the VoltaGrid application would comply with EPD’s air regulations as well as Georgia’s laws governing sale of electricity to independent entities. With those concerns still unanswered, there is no guarantee EPD will issue any air permit to VoltaGrid or that the permit will not impose additional safeguards. For instance, EPD could limit the number or location of engines to reduce risks to public health from ambient levels of toxic and carcinogenic formaldehyde, an issue raised in our comments. The unpermitted construction already taking place makes any new requirements more difficult and contentious to implement.

By jumping the gun, VoltaGrid and Serverfarm are ignoring EPD’s legal requirements and blatantly disregarding the public participation process meant to protect those living downwind of the facility.

As we noted in our earlier comments on the application and the subsequent draft permit circulated by EPD, this project sits in a highly sensitive area already stressed by other polluting activities, past and present. Within a small radius from the VoltaGrid/Serverfarm site, there are multiple industrial facilities emitting pollution into the local air: Amazon is currently building a data center less than a mile away, while the two largest emitters in the county (General Mills and Pactiv Corp) are within two miles. EPA has also previously warned about elevated cancer risks from the BD Covington sterilization facility less than two miles away, which was forced to shutdown temporarily by court order in 2019 after significantly elevated levels of the carcinogen ethylene oxide (EtO) were detected.

We anxiously await EPD's response and are hopeful both VoltaGrid and Serverfarm will be held accountable for their actions, made to comply with state and federal law, and required to operate transparently and in good faith moving forward. But we also hope local governments in Newton County take note of this incident and recognize the extreme risks they must protect citizens from when AI data center hyper-scalers look to set up shop in our communities.

Both the City of Covington and Newton County have data center moratoriums currently in effect, while staff and planning commissions craft amendments to ordinances governing data center development. This VoltaGrid incident underscores why we must have rock-solid laws and enforcement procedures that anticipate developers will not always operate in good faith, nor will they fully respect what is best for our community. In an AI industry obsessed with speed, money is no object and corners are routinely cut. In this case, VoltaGrid and Serverfarm have made the business decision that spending untold millions of dollars to pour concrete pads, run wiring and gas lines, and install and operate 33 methane-fired engines for only two years before Georgia Power can provide grid electricity is a sound business decision.

Officials with these companies are not thinking about what any of this means now or down the road for Covington and Newton County. But local officials must prioritize those considerations above all others, think longer term, and put the health and wellbeing of citizens first.

To get a good feel for what's at stake, drive by 10835 Hazelbrand Road and see for yourself. You can see it, and it will hurt you.

With Data Centers, What You Don't See Can Hurt You

Tue, 09 Jun 2026 16:57:44 GMT

By Maurice Carter, Co-Founder & Current President

"Regardless of how you feel about AI itself, or the way that it's being rolled out, one thing is inescapable," says the narrator of a new PBS documentary. "Despite tech companies making promises about renewable energy and sustainable technology, much of this massive AI expansion is still being powered by fossil fuels."

We know. Because -- as we reported back in December -- a data center developer (Serverfarm) and an energy company (VoltaGrid) are partnering to install and operate 33 fossil gas-fired engines to power a data center on Hazelbrand Road in Covington. If you live here, this PBS Digital Studios Overview documentary We Saw What AI Data Centers Don't Want You to See is essential viewing. In this episode, investigative reporter Evan Simon uses a drone fitted with a thermal imaging camera to expose the air pollution emanating from the Stargate Data Center in Abilene, TX.

"Your AI query likely pings a data center like this full of millions of power hungry processing chips, running the chatbots agents and other tools that millions of people interact with every day," says the narrator. "But to power those operations data centers around the country are increasingly relying on their own custom built gas power plants. The Stargate Data Center already has 62 diesel generators and 10 gas powered turbines on site with plans for 41 more. This will make it one of the largest fossil fuel power plants of any kind in Texas, and it's just to power this data center."

Built Here on a Smaller Scale, but with Dirtier Engines

Describing the thermal images his drone is capturing at the Stargate Data Center in Abilene, Simon explains: "These air pollutants, they don't go up into the atmosphere and go away. We know that these facilities are emitting volatile organic compounds, NOs and particulate matter, and the health impacts are respiratory, cardiovascular -- you know, people with asthma or children and elderly people in these communities."

The Serverfarm/VoltaGrid project in Covington is smaller in terms of equipment -- 33 reciprocating internal combustion engines (RICE) burning fossil gas, two gas-fired fuel heaters, and 37 backup diesel generators. But it is important to note that RICE units emit higher quantities of harmful pollutants like methane, nitrogen oxides, formaldehyde, and particulate pollution than gas turbines like those used in Texas.

Standing Up Now to Protect Our Community

For VoltaGrid to operate their power plant and supply electricity to the Serverfarm data center, the Georgia Environmental Projection Division (EPD) Air Protection Branch must issue an Air Permit. And, although a draft permit was issued in March, the final is still pending. Sustainable Newton is working with the Southern Environmental Law Center (SELC) to challenge VoltaGrid's plans and press EPD to place more restrictive conditions on them to protect community health. To date, we have:

Joined SELC and Altamaha River Keeper last December to file comments regarding VoltaGrid's application for permit.
Joined again to file comments on the draft permit in March.
Submitted our own letter also in March underscoring our objections to the draft permit.

As noted in the letter submitted by SELC on our behalf on March 13, the formaldehyde levels VoltaGrid projects from its gas engines are especially concerning. Our letter states:

"[P]er Georgia Environmental Protection Division’s (EPD) draft permit Narrative, air pollution from this facility will cause ambient levels of formaldehyde that equal EPD’s maximum allowable concentration. Formaldehyde is both toxic and 'carcinogenic to humans by the inhalation route of exposure;' EPD’s ambient standard is thus set to limit cancer risks to those surrounding facilities like VoltaGrid, yet despite VoltaGrid’s modeling showing it will equal the maximum allowable levels of carcinogenic formaldehyde, EPD is not taking any further steps to address cancer risks."

The cancer risks posed by formaldehyde are compound by our community's prior exposure to elevated levels of the chemical compound ethylene oxide (EtO) leaking from the Becton Dickinson sterilizer facility and associated warehouse that was included in EPA findings in 2018 and confirmed by subsequent measurements in 2019. As our letter to EPD states: "EPA has also singled out Covington as a place 'where risks of cancer were potentially elevated.'”

Our third major concern hinges on the fact that VoltaGrid applied for a permit to operate as a separate business, distinct from Serverfarm. And, as a result, did not include emissions from the Serverfarm data center itself (including the 37 diesel backup generators they will operate). We take exception with the fact that EPD has issued a draft permit allowing that. In their letter on our behalf, SELC argues "EPD must permit VoltaGrid and the co-located Serverfarm datacenter as a single source; in particular, it appears that the proposed arrangement between the two entities violates Georgia’s electric utility laws and raises significant doubts that the two entities will operate independently." If required to permit as one operation, the VoltaGrid/Serverfarm project would fall within levels requiring higher standards and oversight under federal law.

In response to our recent phone inquiry, officials in EPD's Air Protection Branch indicated they are still evaluating all comments. We will await their further action before deciding what next steps we must take with this project.

(We also continue to monitor permitting and other announcements related to the Amazon Data Services data center campus on Alcovy Road.)

The best possible time to implement more robust local laws governing data centers would have been a couple of years ago. But the second best time is now.

Navigating a Difficult Present While Pursuing a Better Future (Hopefully)

Both the Serverfarm/VoltaGrid data center and the Amazon Data Services project were initiated well before the City of Covington enacted a moratorium in January to pause accepting data center permit applications. Prior to that, City of Covington ordinances permitted data centers by right, with no special conditions, in both M1 (Light Industrial) and M2 (Heavy Industrial) zoning districts. As such, any new ordinances the city adopts now will only apply to future additions or other major changes to those projects. The best possible time to implement more robust local laws governing data centers would have been a couple of years ago. But the second best time is now.

Newton County has two operational data centers -- both in Newton County and owned by Meta. Inside the Covington city limits, we currently have the two active projects mentioned above. But multiple data center developers denied by the county have sought in recent years to have their property annexed into either the City of Covington or Social Circle, which necessitated both the Covington City Council and the Newton County Board of Commissioners enacting a moratorium earlier this year suspending acceptance of new data center permit applications. The goal of each moratorium is to allow local governments to amend existing ordinances and place tighter controls for where and how data centers are built. Covington's is currently set to expire on August 4, while the county moratorium is scheduled to be in effect until October 7. By law, however, the moratoria and ordinance changes under consideration would not apply to the two projects initiated under prior laws.

Our Sustainable Newton Environmental Hazards Committee is actively engaged in both local government efforts to rewrite ordinances. Using our contacts with experts like the attorneys at SELC and activists in other Georgia communities, we have explored the issues, developed policy recommendations, and provided examples of good ordinances from other cities and counties.

Leveraging resources like the Georgia Data Center Ordinance Hub from the Energy Policy & Innovation Center at Georgia Tech, we've been able to suggest best practices and proven solutions from across Georgia and the US. The hub is well organized and presented in a format that both policy makers and engaged citizens can understand. It's structured into five main areas:

Site Planning & Building Design -- including building placement, size, & setbacks.
Infrastructure & Utilities -- covering power sources, utility infrastructure, renewable energy, water, sewerage, and storm water runoff.
Environmental & Community Protections -- including noise limits, buffers, environmental impacts, and community engagements.
Public Safety & Security -- addressing public safety, emergency management, lighting, etc.
Lifecycle Governance -- covering requirements for decommissioning data centers after ceasing operations.

There's even a section showing which local governments have moratoria in effect, including the start and end dates. The list is not all-inclusive, but it does reflect the extent to which local governments are recognizing the need to be more prescriptive about where and how data centers are permitted to be built.

Sometimes, the best you can do is yell "STOP!!!" But these temporary pauses can't protect our community indefinitely. We must take advantage of every resource, listen to experts, and make future decisions with transparency as a core principle of doing business. In that vein, we're encouraged that the draft ordinances working their way through the City of Covington Planning & Development Department and the city's Planning Commission include a provision that every proposed new data center must have at least one public meeting to addressed a standard set of questions before a permit is considered. (We're pushing for two meetings, but even just one is a major step forward for transparency and respecting/protecting neighbors.)

In the City of Covington, the Planning & Development Department is working with the city's Planning Commission to craft the wording for text changes they will recommend the City Council to adopt into the city's current ordinances. The commission will discuss those changes again at their next meeting on July 14 and must host a public hearing before passing their recommendations on to the City Council. After that, the City Council must host a first reading and a public hearing, followed by as second reading at another city council meeting, before the changes can be adopted as law. Based on that, the new laws could take effect no sooner than August 17. So the expiration for the city's data center moratorium will likely be extended past August 4.

In the county, new data center regulations are being worked as part of the county's Unified Development Ordinance (UDO), which is being developed by consultants from Kending & Keast, working under direction of a steering committed appointed by the Board of Commissioners. Under the current schedule, a public hearing is tentatively scheduled for this July.

We will do our best to keep you apprised of developments with both the City of Covington and Newton County, but it would be wise to also monitor these processes yourself and to attend the public meetings where your input can be provided through comments. You can bet developers wanting to build data centers in our community will be in attendance and watching out for their interests. It's up to you (and us) to ensure the needs of the pubic are also heard, respected, and honored.

Servers in Tents, Illegal Gas-fired Power Plants, & Heat Islands

Nothing underscores better why we must get this right than to witness what's happening around the country as AI Tech companies and their data center developers deploy at breakneck speed, proving money is no object in their quest for first to market. We see from the PBS documentary what is happening in Abilene with Stargate. Consider also, what industry analyst Michael Thomas reports about what Meta is doing in Ohio with his Cleanview newsletter story about "the Mad Max phase of the AI boom":

Mark Zuckerberg recently ditched the data center designs that Meta had perfected over the last decade and told his team to stick tens of thousands of chips in tents outside their data center in New Albany, Ohio. Each of these chips costs about $60,000. Zuckerberg plans to stick billions of dollars worth of them in the tents.

The strategy has helped cut the time to build compute in half. The first five buildings at Meta’s New Albany, Ohio data center took between two and three years to build. Meta started building five ~125,000 square foot tents between April and June of 2026, according to city permits. Satellite images show the structures have all been built.

To power those “rapid deployment structures”, as they are officially named, Meta signed a 10-year deal with Williams to build a pair of 200 MW off-grid power plants. Those power plants began construction about a year ago and are nearly complete.

In a recent post for his Climate & Energy blog, Norwegian freelance analyst and writer Keshan Joshi criticized AI tech company Anthropic for their agreement to host their AI engines at xAI's Colossus data centers in Memphis, TN and northern Mississippi. Elon Musk's xAI company has faced multiple lawsuits over unpermitted gas turbines operating to power the data centers. But, according to Joshi, what's happening with Colossus is the norm, not the exception, for the industry. He writes:

Yes: there are many more data centres with a less-bad environmental footprint. But Colossus 1 is far from the worst. There are more than 800 data centre projects with a worse PM2.5 air pollution footprint, for instance. More than 600 have a higher health cost. Most of the harm is really skewed towards these massive, high-polluting data centre megaprojects. There are 1,358 projects on the list. The top 50% of emissions are concentrated in the first 58 projects on that list.

Another emerging concern with data centers are studies finding waste heat from a large data center can create large "heat islands" around them. In a recenter article published in Forbe's, University of Georgia professor and scientist Dr. Marshall Shepherd wrote about one such study co-authored by a colleague in Arizona, which found found substantial warming downwind from four Phoenix data centers, ranging from 1.5 to 4 degrees Fahrenheit as much as 500 meters from the facilities. As Dr. Shepherd's colleague, David Sailor writes:

Data centers consume massive amounts of energy, and hence emit massive amounts of waste heat, but their direct thermal impact on nearby neighborhoods has remained largely unmeasured—until now. A single 169 MW data center campus rejects waste heat equivalent to that emitted by nearly 200,000 households, concentrated in an area equivalent to less than a few hundred residential parcels.

Another study, conducted by the Earth Observation group at the University of Cambridge and reported by CNN, looked at more than 6,000 data centers located away from large urban areas, using 20 years of historical temperature data to determine how much surrounding surfaces area temperatures warmed after the data centers were built. That team found surface temperatures increased an average of 3.6°F once the data center started operations and, in some cases, by up to 16.4°F.

The potential consequences of large data centers must not to be taken lightly. The point is not that all data center developers and AI tech executives are "bad apples." But there are bad actors -- moving swiftly and cutting corners, with little to no regard for financial costs. And they certainly do not care about impacts to our quality of life and the environment we'll be left to live in when they are done with us.

Where things go from here hinges on how well our local officials write and enforce the laws that will take effect when current moratoria are lifted. The stakes are incredibly high, and the margin for error is essentially zero. We commend local officials for calling time out and encourage them to seek all of the advice and counsel they can tap into to best protect our community and our shared future.

EV Savings Are Real - Try the Math

Wed, 25 Mar 2026 12:30:52 GMT

By Maurice Carter, Sustainable Newton Co-Founder & Current President

I wrote a piece on Monday arguing that EVs are the best hedge against rising prices at the gas pump -- during the current US/Iran conflict or in any future global energy disruption. And, as a result, that Georgia lawmakers could do more to lower ongoing costs for Georgia drivers if they put their resources into helping them transition to #DriveElectric, rather than resorting to the Band-Aid solution of suspending the state's $0.33 gasoline tax.

If you're open-minded about that suggestion, it might help if I share numbers to back up my assertion. (Remember, we're not factoring in the environmental reasons for driving an EV, nor will we get into why we think you'll love driving electric once you try it. That's all in the videos we created to share our EV experiences.) We're only talking here about economic advantages.

How Do You Compare Costs of Vehicles with Different Fuel Types:

To compare the costs of fueling two vehicles of similar or different types, there are really only two variables:

The cost of the fuel:

$/gallon for a gasoline vehicle in the US
$/kilowatt hour (kWh) in an electric vehicle

The efficiency of the vehicle:

Miles per gallon (MPG) in a gasoline car
Miles per kWh in an electric vehicle

(Note: The efficiency figures are generally available either on the vehicle's price sticker or online. Gas prices you see on signs all over town, and the price you pay per kWh can be calculated from your montly utility bill.

ChooseEV is a consulting practice that contracts with utility companies to put together a suite of interactive tools to help those utilities educate end customers about the advantages of electrifying transportation. Their EV Savings Calculator will compare the cost of driving a gasoline vehicle to the cost of driving an electric vehicle based on national averages for fuel cost and vehicle efficiency. But the far more useful way to leverage the tool is by entering specifics for energy costs where you live and the efficiency of specific vehicles you are currently driving or might be interested in purchasing.

Below are a series of snapshots I'll use to demonstrate:

Let's Compare the Gasoline & Electric Versions of the Chevy Equinox

The Chevrolet Equinox is a very popular American-made car that comes in both gasoline and electric versions, making apples to apples comparisons much easier. Three of our Sustainable Newton leaders -- Chris, Florian, and Theodosia -- each bought a new Equinox EV last year. So let's see what they gained by choosing electric over gas.

In the image below, I selected the year (2026), make (Chevrolet), and model (Equinox) -- which then pre-filled the MPG for the gas model and the mile/kWh for the electric model (based on vehicle specs).

I put $4.00/gallon for gasoline because that was the prevailing rate in our area before the state suspended the gas tax last week. I put $0.1289 for the utility kWh rate, because that is the State of Georgia average for residential rates, as documented by the Georgia Public Service Commission's semi-annual residential rate survey.

Using the data above, the EV Savings Calculator displays comparison data for the cost to fuel and drive each vehicle:

For the price of one gallon of gas, you can go 27 miles in a gasoline Equinox, while the EV version will take you 100 miles for the same cost -- that's almost four times as far!

If you drive 15,000 miles in a year, you would save $1,621 when charging the EV Equinox at home, vs. fueling the gasoline model at the gas station.

After five years, the savings from driving the EV can really add up. In this comparison, you saved $8,108 by fueling your Equinox with electricity rather than with gasoline. Right now, the Manufacturer's Suggested Retail Price (MSRP) difference between the gasoline and EV versions would make the EV version $2,000 more expensive to buy -- so still a savings of more than $6,000 after five years. But, Edmunds recommends paying ~$6,000 less for the EV, due to current dealers incentives and rebates available through some utility companies -- all of which could significantly increase your total savings. And, if you buy a used vehicle, the potential to save is even greater. (Note: We're not telling you to buy the Chevrolet Equinox, we only used it for comparison purposes because the gasoline and EV models come in very similar trim packages. We urge you to shop around to find the best vehicle for your unique situation.)

Consider All of the Variables for You Specific Situation

There are many factors that come into play in determining how your actual savings compare to this scenario. The cost for electricity we've used assumes you are primarily charging your vehicle at home overnight, paying the standard price your utility company charges you for electricity.

If you we are unable to charge at home, you will pay more for electricity at a public charging station. So factor that in. To see what those costs typically are, you can use an app/website like PlugShare to see what's available near you and what the rates are for each station.

But, on the other side of the equation, your utility company may have time of use plans that let you charge during off-peak/late-night hours for a cost much lower than your daytime rates. Or, you my have rooftop solar that lets you charge your vehicle for free!

All Things Considered, the Path Forward Is Clear

Stop worrying about the price at the pump or when the gasoline tax suspension expires. Get yourself an EV and let gas prices be someone else's problem. Let some of our members tell you have it feels to drive past the gas station without ever stopping.

Enough with the Band-Aids!

Mon, 23 Mar 2026 18:27:49 GMT

By Maurice Carter, Sustainable Newton Co-Founder & Current President

When Georgia Governor Brian Kemp signed legislation Friday to suspend Georgia's $0.33/gallon gasoline tax for 60 days, it was "Deja Vu all over again," as Yogi Berra would say. Or as Crosby, Stills, Nash, and Young sang before many of you were born, "We have all been her before. We have all been here before." (Yeah, I'm old, but so what!? Google it.)

Friday marked the fourth time Kemp has paused the tax at the pumps during his time as governor. The previous three were the 2022 Russian attack on Ukraine, the 2023 inflation spike, and the devastation from Hurricane Helene in 2024. In each instance, as prices for gasoline skyrocketed, the legislature and the governor stepped in to try and ease the pain at the pump.

Addressing his fellow senators on Friday regarding the suspension, Sen. Chuck Hufstetler, R-Rome, said “Hopefully this (conflict) will be resolved. But, in the meantime, we’re going to do what we can to help our citizens of Georgia have the lowest costs possible.” Sen. Nikki Merritt, D-Grayson, said “It’s a win for our constituents and will hopefully give them much-needed relief.” But is this relief? Or just a Band-Aid with political upside, but no real cure for what ails us?

To show citizens of Georgia the "lowest costs possible," there are better solutions than artificially lowering fossil fuel prices for a couple of months. Georgia should be do as other states have done and help citizens transition to electric vehicles that

cost less to fuel (free if you have rooftop solar),
are less expensive to maintain, and
are powered by an energy source (electricity) that isn't traded as a market commodity with extremely volatile prices during times of crisis.

Even though the US is the largest producer of oil the world has ever seen, even that can't buffer us from pain when the stuff we burn to move our cars and trucks is threatened by global conflict. When international crude oil prices rise, domestic gasoline prices rise. It's well past time to break our dependency on fossil fuels.

We recently chatted with Sustainable Newton members who already #DriveElectric to find out what life's been like for them during the current "energy crisis."

Suspending the gasoline tax is a subsidy for Big Oil. It pays the oil companies the higher prices they're demanding and it keeps drivers whole by siphoning off funds being collected to cover the cost of maintaining Georgia's roads. The state sends a message to drivers of even the most inefficient, gas-guzzling cars and trucks not to worry -- "we have your back." AND, it also indirectly punishes drivers of the most efficient vehicles on the roads: EVs.

Did you know Georgia charges EV owners an annual fixed fee to offset the gas tax they don’t pay at the pump. The current fee of $213.70/year is equivalent to buying 648 gallons of gas at the pump. With the average fuel efficiency of a light-duty passenger vehicle today being 33.3 MPG, an EV owner must drive at least 21,578 miles just to break even on the tax. Even though our state ranks near the top of the list nationally, the average Georgian drives less than 18,000 miles/year.

Someone driving only 10,000 miles in an EV registered in Georgia will end up paying the equivalent of $0.71/gallon with the fixed fee structure. I drove 3,000 miles last year, which means I paid the equivalent of $2.37/gallon. In most cases, EV drivers are paying more "gas tax" that drivers of gasoline and diesel vehicles.

And no, the governor did not sign a bill to suspend the tax on EV drivers. Not on Friday, and not on the other three occasions that he suspended the gas tax.

I'm not arguing anyone should be forced to switch to an electric vehicle, and I understand that a spike in the price of gasoline hurts families who depend on their car or truck for employment and as a lifeline to accomplish other necessities of life. But driving electric has many benefits, as my colleagues point out in the videos above, and these clips as well. We've been on this road of oil-dependence long enough now, that we should be helping people transition to a better solution, not making it easier for them to avoid doing it.

No matter who first said it (and it probably wasn't Einstein), the quote still rings true: "Insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results."

Five Ways to Cut Back on Gas

Thu, 12 Mar 2026 11:37:24 GMT

By Sara Peach, Yale Climate Connections

Don't be a victim. These transportation choices allow you to live more freely & affordably.

This article was originally published on March 10, 2026, by Yale Climate Connections. We're republishing it here to highlight the ways in which the work of our Sustainable Newton Transportation Committee supports not only cleaner, more affordable transportation choices, but also a lifestyle less dependent on oil and gas, without as much vulnerability to price volatility and disruption to supplies.

It might be time to fix up your rusty old bike.

Gasoline prices are already spiking in what The Wall Street Journal (paywall) calls “the most severe energy crisis since the 1970s.” In response to bombing by the U.S. and Israel, Iran attacked vessels in the Strait of Hormuz, a chokepoint through which roughly 20% of the world’s oil normally flows. As a result, most shipping traffic in the strait has halted.

“We are looking at what is by far the biggest disruption in world history in terms of daily oil production,” energy historian Daniel Yergin told The Wall Street Journal. “If it goes on for weeks, it will reverberate across the global economy.”

Here’s a guide, drawn from the Yale Climate Connections archives, to what you can do to get through the immediate crisis – and help wean your community off oil in the long term.

I also want to hear from you: How are rising gas prices affecting your community? What are your strategies for reducing how often you need to fill up? Let me know here.

Drive more efficiently.

This is the simplest strategy to implement. You can start today:

Maintain a proper tire pressure
Keep your engine in good condition
Use cruise control on the highway
Avoid high speeds (cars are most efficient at about 60 mph and under)
Accelerate slowly from a stop (if it’s safe to do so)

Switch some trips to a bike or e-bike.

My e-bike has replaced virtually all of my in-town trips, saving me money on fuel and parking – and since I’m exercising during my commute, I don’t need a gym membership, either. A few notes:

E-bike libraries are growing in popularity. These libraries typically let you borrow an e-bike for free for a few days to try it out.
Other communities are helping residents pay for e-bikes. Does yours? If not, could your community start an e-bike fund?
Kids at an elementary school in Portland, Oregon, ride in a bike bus to school: “This parade of bicycles has a set route, and kids and parents join the growing caravan along the way,” our radio team reported in 2024.

Consider the bus.

Many communities have made improvements to their bus systems recently, upgrading stops and making the rides fare-free: “Far beyond just saving riders money, free buses deliver a cascade of benefits, from easing traffic to promoting public safety. Just look at Boston; Chapel Hill, N.C.; Richmond, Va.; Kansas City, Mo.; and even New York itself, all of which have tried it to excellent effect,” Emily Galvin Almanza wrote in an op-ed for The New York Times.

Get an electric vehicle.

This is a more expensive option than biking or taking the bus, but think of an EV purchase as a divorce from oil geopolitics.

If you’re a renter, don’t miss this guide to charging up. Live in a rural area? Read this.

What about road trips? David Carlson drove 6,000 miles in an EV and wrote about what he learned. (Bottom line: Road-tripping is doable if you plan ahead.)

Dig deeper on EVs:

Help build the walkable, bikeable community of your dreams.

Your elected officials may be unusually receptive right now to reducing car-dependency. Here’s some inspiration for getting started:

This article first appeared on Yale Climate Connections and is republished here under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.

Building Bridges and Bins

Mon, 09 Mar 2026 12:28:04 GMT

By Nancy Schulz, Sustainable Newton Waste Reduction & Diversion Committee Chair

On Friday afternoon, March 6, 2026, the gray sky over the Newton County FFA Camp hinted of impending showers, yet the spirits of the 15 teenagers assembled inside were not dampened. On the contrary, these students from the Youth for Understanding USA exchange program were eager to begin work. After all, they'd come all the way from Hamburg, Germany to gain more knowledge of the USA and more specifically, Georgia.

The project itself was simple. Sustainable Newton received a $10,000 grant from Amazon Web Services — a little corporate seed money planted right here in Newton County. The plan was to purchase, assemble, and distribute compost bins that would eventually land in backyards, schools, and civic groups across the county.

A Growing Solution

Germans are quite familiar with composting. They know very well that banana peels, coffee grounds, and apple cores deserve a second act. Sustainable Newton volunteers, Florian Pohl, Chris Martin, and Nancy Schulz provided guidance, answered questions, handed out tools, and reminded students to follow the instructions provided in the kits. Once assembled these bins would give nourishment to the soil and to the gardens that nourish the people who tend them.

Working in groups of three, the students quickly unpacked their kits. Screws tightened. Occasionally installed backwards. There were moments of German, moments of English, and a universal language known as “Wait, hold that while I fix this.”

If At First You Don't Succeed

It turns out teenagers from Hamburg and volunteers from Newton County share an important skill set: figuring things out as they go.

After a little more than an hour, the students had assembled five bins.

There was laughter when the last screw went in. A few photos. Someday soon those bins will sit behind a school, or next to a garden, or behind someone’s house here in Newton County. People will toss in lettuce leaves, eggshells, and yesterday’s coffee grounds.

And months later it will all turn into dark, living soil.

Yes, we assembled bins. Most importantly, we built bridges of understanding and connection.

Thinking Globally, Acting Locally

On Sunday, as I walked down one of the aisles at our local Kroger, I heard “Look there’s Nancy”. Standing in the middle of the vinegar aisle were 5 of the German teenagers. I was there to purchase products to make “homemade” weed deterrent. We chatted about grocery stores, the gloomy weather, and how to make sustainable products from scratch. They were gleeful about their time in Newton County. Simple exchanges can change lives. I’m proud to have been a part of this opportunity to think globally and act locally.

Going... Going... Almost Gone!

We've purchased all the tumblers our Amazon grant would cover -- and we've already distributed 86 of them into the community! But we saved the ones our guests from Hamburg assembled to give away via a drawing at our Earth Day Celebration at the Cheerios Challenge on April 18. Stop by our tent on Legion Field after the races to enter to win one.

Data Centers Are a Hot Mess, but Maybe There's a Way Forward

Wed, 18 Feb 2026 19:13:23 GMT

By Maurice Carter, Co-Founder & President

Is It a Data Center or A Power Plant?

Data centers are a hot mess! Whether you're a big supporter or the most ardent opponent, you don't need me to tell you that. There's every reason to want to slow things down, so it makes sense for the City of Covington and Newton County to put moratoriums in place, as they did recently. But it's critical we use these timeouts to better understand the issues and the not-so-obvious solutions to some of the most vexing problems these massive facilities pose.

Concerns over soil and water impacts, noise and light pollution, heavy water use, electricity consumption, and air pollution, have communities across Georgia and the Southeast pushing back on data centers in their area. Meanwhile, in the Georgia General Assembly, lawmakers are proposing a variety of bills meant to put guardrails around data center projects to protect Georgia taxpayers and ratepayers.

The concerns are many, but I am going to delve specifically here into issues around electricity demand: including risk to ratepayers, grid reliability, and air quality concerns. There are some emerging ideas we should be following.

If You Build It, Will They Come?

The extra electricity utility companies say they must generate for data centers is staggering. In December, the Georgia Public Service Commission (PSC) approved a request from Georgia Power to invest over $16B to build 10 gigawatts (GW) of new generating capacity and upgrade existing transmission infrastructure. Consumer watchdog and environmental groups have questioned the reliability of Georgia Power's estimates, raising concerns about the risk to Georgia ratepayers and the impacts of increased pollution from expanded fossil gas-fired generation.

But an even bigger threat is emerging. Facing delays of up to seven years for utilities to serve them power, a growing number of data center developers are turning to alternative solutions to generate their own electricity without connecting to the power grid.

Michael Thomas publishes the Distilled Newsletter, where he follows developments in clean energy technology. More recently, he founded the company Cleanview to aggregate and sell data and analysis to clients. Part of that analysis includes reporting on data center projects and industry trends. In a recent report titled "Bypassing the Grid: How Data Centers Are Building Their Own Power Plants," Thomas wrote:

"As a company, our main job is to track data centers and power projects. Still, much of this data shocked us. The public narrative is that data centers are waiting for grid connections and 5-7 year turbine backlogs. But that narrative is lagging what is actually happening on the ground in rural counties across the country."

Time Is Not on Our Side

What shocked Thomas and his colleagues was finding 46 data centers with a combined capacity of 56 GW planning to build their own “behind-the-meter” electricity generation, representing ~30% of all planned data center capacity in the United States. Aside from the obvious risk that Georgia Power might not find paying customers for that 10 GW of new capacity, the other major concern is air pollution. Lot's of it. One or more power plants operating in every community!

Thomas and his team compared the public statements about data center projects to the equipment orders and permits being sought. What they discovered: "Most of the press releases we found mentioned 'all of the above' strategies that include renewables. But ~75% of the generation equipment we could identify (23 GW) was natural gas-powered. Virtually none of the developers planned to build renewables in the short term."

They are also mostly planning to use less-efficient (read dirtier) equipment to achieve speed to market. "Power generation efficiency is out," he writes. "Speed to power is all that developers care about." Thomas even found one data center project purchasing equipment from a company that current only sells ship engines.

For a worst-case demonstration of how badly a singular focus on speed can harm a community, consider the two massive data centers Elon Musk's xAI is operating in Memphis with dozens of illegal, unpermitted gas turbines. Closer to home, Sustainable Newton is concerned about plans by the Houston-based energy company VoltaGrid to install gas-fired power generation for a data center on Hazelbrand Road being built by the company ServerFarm. In December, we joined the Southern Environmental Law Center and Altamaha Riverkeeper in filing comments challenging VoltaGrid's permit application to the Georgia Environmental Project Division (EPD).

What If We Told You None of This Is Necessary?

Regardless of where the electricity comes from -- building out centralized, utility-owned generation (the Georgia Power approach) or from tech companies installing their own on-site power capacity -- wouldn't we all be better off if neither of these had to happen?

Isn't there some other way? Yes.

Waste Not, Want Not

Spoiler Alert: Conservation isn't America's strong suit. It's a bi-product of generations growing up with what seemed like a limitless supply of land, water, and clean air, so we haven't been encouraged to use our resources efficiently. In the Southeast, it turns out, we are REALLY BAD at conserving energy. Worse than the rest of the country by far.

Last week, the Southern Alliance for Clean Energy (SACE) hosted a webinar to review their recent "Energy Efficiency in the Southeast Seventh Edition Report." In their report, SACE scores the efficiency performance of each utility using an index created by dividing energy efficiency program savings, expressed in megawatt hours (MWh), by the total MWh the utility sold its customers. Efficiency programs are the rebates and other incentives utility companies offer customers in order lower their energy consumption.

By rolling those performance figures up by state and region, SACE shows the Southeast is significantly behind other regions of the US. And, except for Duke Energy, every utility in the Southeast is performing well below the national average for large utility companies. We shared some of the key findings from the SACE report recently on our social media channels. Below also is the video replay of the webinar. Watching it will clue you in on just how big the efficiency opportunity is for Georgia Power and the other utilities in the Southeast.

It's disappointing utilities in our region haven't done more to help residential, commercial, and industrial customers use electricity more efficiently and consume less of it. But that weakness is also a major opportunity now, when we need every available kilowatt to meet escalating demand. The electricity we save is capacity we don't have to build and fossil fuels we don't have to burn.

A significant factor holding our region back on efficiency is a regulatory environment that incentivizes building new generation and transmission capabilities, rather than investing in efficiency. The non-profit American Council for an Energy-Efficient Economy (ACEEE) recently published a report arguing that implementing energy-efficiency measures and shifting electricity usage to lower-demand times are two of the fastest and cheapest ways to satisfy new demand for electricity. They estimate those methods could meet much, if not all, of the nation’s projected load growth at only half the cost of building new infrastructure.

The non-profit publication Grist interviewed the report's author, Mike Specian, who explained that building infrastructure is considered a capital investment, and utilities can pass that cost on to customers, plus an additional rate of return, or premium, which is typically around 10 percent. Energy-efficiency programs, however, are generally considered an operating expense, which aren’t eligible for a rate of return. This setup, he said, motivates utilities to build new infrastructure rather than conserve energy, even if the latter presents a more affordable option for ratepayers.

Changing the current dynamic will require a different posture from the Georgia PSC and other regulators. But just this week, PSC members voted 3-2 to reject an appeal from environmental groups asking the board to reconsider their approval in December of Georgia Power's 10 GW fossil-fuel buildout. Among data presented to encourage the PSC to reconsider was a report from Greenlink Analytics and Science for Georgia summarizing their findings after extensive modeling and analysis on data center load projections southeastern utilities used to justify building new capacity. Their findings say utility company load forecasts are likely grossly exaggerated:

"Across nearly all simulations, utility estimates landed above what the model considers a reasonable upper bound. Excluding the technological advancement model, the likelihood of utilities' predicted growth is approximately 1 in 500, or 0.22%."

But for now, changes to the incentive structure motivating utilities will have to come from new legislation or changes to the PSC makeup in future election cycles.

Of course, there are other ways to accelerate energy efficiency, and one of those is the federal government. The Biden administration passed the Federal Inflation Reduction Act (IRA) to provide homeowners tax credits and rebates for energy improvements. However, the Trump administration terminated the tax credits at the end of 2025, as part of a larger effort to roll back nearly all IRA provisions. One glimmer of hope for Georgians remains from the IRA, in the form of rebates for low and moderate-income households. While funded by the federal government, these programs are administered by the state. But Georgia and North Carolina are the only southeastern states able to lock in funding before it was gone. The Georgia Environmental Finance Authority (GEFA): offers two programs:

Home Energy Rebates (HER) -- focuses on whole-home energy efficient retrofits and upgrades, with the total rebate amount being affected by income level and the amount of energy saved.
Home Electrification & Appliance Rebates (HEAR) -- helps low-and-moderate income households secure savings on specific appliance purchases.

These programs were piloted in late 2024, before going live in 2025, and to-date, Georgians have claimed $17.8M in up-front cost savings. Another $155M remains available to these income-qualified programs. (We have a webinar coming up on February 26 to discuss these rebates and how to benefit from them. Register here.) The HER & HEAR rebates are good news for Georgia households seeking to use less energy and save money. But it's still a drop in the bucket vs. what it will take to move the needle on statewide electricity use.

So, with utility companies lagging behind and no incentives to do better, the Georgia PSC declining to change that, and the federal government rolling back its incentives, where can we turn for the investments required to free up wasted electricity to avoid building new generation?

How About These Guys?

Enter data center hyperscalers. They're hyper-focused on speed to market -- to the point they'll use anything they can get their hands on to generate electricity to power and cool their servers. Many of the larger companies (though not all) also have public images to bolster and sustainability commitments they can't just ignore. Locally, we've seen Amazon working with the City of Covington to build infrastructure for water reuse to lower consumption. What if something similar were possible on the energy side of the equation? A quick way to find electricity without a multi-year buildout of new fossil gas-fired power plants or firing up of hundreds of on-site gas turbine, engines, and generators?

Last September, the home electrification non-profit Rewiring America published a report titled "Homegrown energy: How household upgrades can meet 100 percent of data center demand growth." The authors assert data centers can meet all of their electricity needs from the grid by investing in just two home energy solutions, which will provide a third overarching benefit beyond meeting the data center energy needs:

"Hyperscalers could meet one third of their projected additional capacity needs by paying for heat pumps in select households that currently use inefficient electric heating, cooling, and water heating, thereby creating capacity on the grid from a subset of households."
"Hyperscalers could more than meet their total planned capacity needs by paying for battery storage as well as rooftop solar for homes well suited for it. This will create new generation capacity on the grid."
"Hyperscalers’ immediate investments in these solutions will forge the technological and economic pathways that transform America’s entire energy system. What starts as an urgent solution to AI’s power hunger becomes the foundation for an all-electric economy — efficient, resilient, affordable for households, and perfectly suited to position the U.S. as a global leader in the industries that will define this century."

"Nationally, peak demand is roughly 850 gigawatts (GW), while average load sits just over half that level. The real challenge lies in fewer than 200 hours per year — typically during heat waves or cold snaps — when demand spikes. So this is not primarily a generation problem; it’s a utilization problem."

Smart Appliances, Smarter Grid

In December, the industry publication Utility Dive reported on analysis by the energy policy group AnnDyl, examining data center buildout in Ohio. Their research determined a hypothetical 200-MW data center could offset 10% of its peak load by investing $50 million in low-cost residential efficiency upgrades. That same story provided updates on the Rewiring America report, including a follow-on finding that data center hyperscalers investing in millions of heat pumps, batteries and solar systems across the United States would create up to 1.1 million new jobs over the next five years.

Installing well-understood, field-proven home energy solutions is an actionable strategy that can produce immediate results -- exactly what the data center companies need. Longer term, energy technology experts are already developing and piloting advanced solutions to give utility companies even greater control over how electricity demand impacts their grids. Former US Department of Energy Director for Loan Programs, Jigar Shah, described those possibilities recently in an article for another utility industry publication, T&D World, explaining "How Electric Utilities Can Lead Through the Affordability Crisis."

In the piece, Shah writes "So far, the conversation about powering AI has focused almost entirely on building new generation. But the grid already has substantial unused capacity. Nationally, peak demand is roughly 850 gigawatts (GW), while average load sits just over half that level. The real challenge lies in fewer than 200 hours per year — typically during heat waves or cold snaps — when demand spikes. So this is not primarily a generation problem; it’s a utilization problem. The opportunity is to get far more value out of the grid we’ve already paid for."

He then explains how adding grid storage, rewarding consumers for demand flexibility, deploying grid-enhancing technologies, and leveraging virtual power plants (VPP), can all help utilities to get more out of the existing grid, without imposing costs or risks on existing customers. These are also places where utility companies, data center hyperscalers, utility regulators, and local governments can all collaborate for the benefit of everyone involved.

And THAT's the bottom line. These are the conversations that should be taking place now, alongside discussions about tax incentives, increasing the tax base, and creating jobs. The local ordinances being rewritten at the City of Covington, Newton County, and elsewhere need to be focused on putting these discussions and collaboration at the center of of the development process. We must find ways to grow and adapt that don't require sacrificing the reliability and sustainability of our water and energy systems and the livability of our community. Thankfully, there are encouraging avenues to explore.

EPA Should Protect Human Health & the Environment -- They Aren't

Fri, 13 Feb 2026 16:21:59 GMT

By Maurice Carter, Co-Founder & President

Surprisingly, the federal website for the United States Environmental Protection Agency still says "The mission of EPA is to protect human health and the environment." (My apologies if reading that caused you to spew coffee, a soft drink, or something stronger through your nose. If we couldn't laugh, we would cry.) But, after over a year of bad news, things got much worse last week for anyone not spending their days in the boardroom of a major oil company.

On February 12, President Trump and US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Administrator Lee Zeldin announced the Trump administration was officially rescinding the 2009 "Endangerment Finding," which had given US agencies authority for over 16 years to regulate six greenhouse gases (including CO2) as harmful pollutants that endanger American health and wellbeing. This action removes the legal basis by which the EPA has regulated fuel efficiency and tailpipe emissions standards. It also paves the way for repealing rules that restrict pollution from power plants and oil and gas operations.

In announcing the change, President Trump claimed "this has nothing to do with public health," adding "This was all a scam, a giant scam." Neither of those statements could be farther from the truth.

Though disturbing and dangerous, this action was not unexpected. Administrator Zeldin first announced the proposed rule change on August 1, 2025. Which meant, by process, public comments could be submitted up until September 15, 2025.

One of the most thorough and authoritative responses was submitted by the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicines, which produced the consensus study report "Effects of Human-Caused Greenhouse Gas Emissions on U.S. Climate, Health, and Welfare*," authored by 16 scientists and eight study staff and then peer-reviewed by 15 other scientists. Before I share their findings, let me give some context to the weight and meaning of their report.

What Are the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicines?

The National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine operate under a congressional charter signed by President Abraham Lincoln in 1863, at the height of the Civil War, to advise the nation on issues related to science and technology. The work of the academies is carried out by a network of thousands of renowned experts, practitioners, and thought leaders who volunteer their service to solving society’s toughest challenges.

What Is a Consensus Study Report?

As explained by the Academies: "Consensus Study Reports published by the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine document the evidence-based consensus on the study’s statement of task by an authoring committee of experts. Reports typically include findings, conclusions, and recommendations based on information gathered by the committee and the committee’s deliberations. Each report has been subjected to a rigorous and independent peer-review process and it represents the position of the National Academies on the statement of task."

To respond to the rule changes proposed by Administrator Zeldin last August, the Academies assembled a team of volunteers and tasked them as follows:

"The impetus for this report was a notice of proposed rulemaking issued by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) indicating its intention to rescind the 2009 action titled “Endangerment and Cause or Contribute Findings for Greenhouse Gases Under Section 202(a) of the Clean Air Act.” Recognizing that significantly more evidence is available today, the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine launched this study to review newly available scientific evidence on the topics considered in the Technical Support Document that EPA prepared in considering whether to make the finding (see Box 1.2 for the Statement of Task). The committee’s report focuses on evidence gathered by the scientific community since the Technical Support Document was published in 2009 and describes supporting evidence, the level of confidence, and areas that are under continuing debate or are unknown."

The team of 16 scientists and eight study staff completed a draft report that was then peer-reviewed by 15 other experts in the field. The final report submitted to the EPA by the September 15 deadline presented the conclusions and supporting data outlined below. (Use areas to scroll.)

The full report is 112-pages-long, filled with extensive data and additional citations to support each conclusion above. The summary finding delivered to the EPA was as shown below:

In summary, the committee concludes that the evidence for current and future harm to human health and welfare created by human-caused GHGs is beyond scientific dispute. Much of the understanding of climate change that was uncertain or tentative in 2009 is now resolved, and new threats have been identified.

A Dangerous Rule Change Based on Dubious "Science"

When EPA Administrator Zeldin revealed his proposed rule change last August, the announcement came on the heels of a report issued on July 23, 2025 by the US Department of Energy titled "A Critical Review of Impacts of Greenhouse Gas Emissions on the U.S. Climate." Purported to be an objective assessment of the current science around climate change, the report was put together in secrecy by a team of five scientists, handpicked by US Energy Secretary Chris Wright, each well-known for holding dismissive views on climate change risks and impacts.

Though it was published without peer-review or comment, the DOE report was universally condemned by the scientific community as misleading, error-filled, and lacking in scientific rigor. Much of the criticism came from climate scientists who argued their work cited in the report was misquoted, misconstrued, or taken out of context. Reporting from Politico Energy & Environment News shows the DOE report was even strongly criticized by scientists inside the department who called it "Misleading. Unjustified. Hypocritical." Secretary Wright formally disbanded the working group on the eve of a lawsuit filed by multiple non-profits arguing the process to create the report violated the law by operating in secret with authors "of only one point of view." A US District Court judge agreed and declared the report was created illegally, but did not order that it be stricken from the public record.

Climate Scientist Overwhelmingly Agree Human Activity Is Causing Climate Change

The decision by the EPA to repeal the Endangerment Finding -- and the clumsy work of the DOE used to justify the action -- both fly in the face of overwhelming scientific consensus that climate change is caused by greenhouse gases generated from human activities. A 2021 survey of 88,125 climate-related studies by Cornell University Researchers found: "More than 99.9% of peer-reviewed scientific papers agree that climate change is mainly caused by humans.

Flawed DOE Report Was Preceded by Overt Actions to Silence Real Science

At the same time Energy Secretary Wright was convening his secret panel of five climate-denying scientists, the Trump administration was actively shutting down valid scientific research and reporting on climate change. In April 2025, the President Trump dismissed the group of 400 scientists and other experts working on the Sixth National Climate Assessment scheduled to be published in 2027. The assessment published every four years is the US Government’s preeminent report on climate change impacts, risks, and responses. It is congressionally mandated by the 1990 Global Change Research Act to provide the scientific foundation to support informed decision-making across the United States.

In June 2025, all five prior editions of the National Climate Assessment were suddenly removed without comment from federal government websites. Thankfully, quick-thinking former employees of the government cloned the Fifth National Climate Assessment and have published in on the climate.us website, which is the non-profit successor to the climate.gov website previously run by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA). That government site was also shut down by the Trump administration.

The climate report released by the Department of Energy in July 2025 includes a summary statement from Energy Secretary Chris Wright stating:

"Climate change is real, and it deserves attention. But it is not the greatest threat facing humanity. That distinction belongs to global energy poverty. As someone who values data, I know that improving the human condition depends on expanding access to reliable, affordable energy."

This was Wright's way of telling us: stop worrying about climate change and just "drill, baby, drill." Not coincidentally, Wright joined the Trump administration after serving 14 years as CEO of a gas fracking company he founded. It's his word (plus five hand-picked climate deniers) against hundreds of climate scientists whose work was done transparently and published only after extensive peer-reviews and revisions as The Fifth National Climate Assessment in 2023. Their work should be the basis for driving EPA rule-making. You can read the entire report here, but below are links to some important graphics from the report:

The yawning chasm between what climate science is telling us and what Secretary Wright, Administrator Zeldin, and President Trump want you to believe makes the Grand Canyon look like a backyard ditch. On something this consequential -- a move that affects not only you, but your entire family, their quality of life, and prospects for their future -- consider this.

The extreme actions by the Trump administration to shut down, thwart, and hide real climate science and supplant it with shoddy work by the Department of Energy happened for just one reason: to justify EPA's repeal of the Endangerment Finding. It's a payback to big donors in the 2024 presidential campaign. We are endangered not only by greenhouse gas emissions, but also by the very agency tasked with the mission "to protect human health and the environment." For they have chosen to protect nothing more than the profits of big oil, gas, and coal.

The EPA's missions statement includes as a core responsibility that EPA works to ensure that "National efforts to reduce environmental risks are based on the best available scientific information." Well, in this administration, are they?

Sustainable Newton Joins Federal Lawsuit over EtO Regulations

Wed, 28 Jan 2026 20:25:14 GMT

By Maurice Carter, Co-Founder & Current President

Today, Sustainable Newton joined the Southern Environmental Law Center (SELC), the National Resources Defense Council (NRDC), and other environmental non-profits to file a lawsuit in the US District Court for the District of Columbia challenging two-year renewable exemptions the Trump administration issued in July to allow 40 commercial sterilizer facilities nationwide, including nine in Georgia, to bypass stricter ethylene oxide (EtO) regulations implemented in 2024.

EtO is a cancer-causing chemical classified as a hazardous air pollutant under the Clean Air Act. The stricter standards being bypassed were implemented by the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) after extensive scientific studies found EtO to be 60-times more toxic that previously thought. The 2024 rule has been shown to reduce EtO emissions by more than 90% and to reduce cancer risk by 92%. Read more about EtO and reasons for filing the complaint on the SELC website.

For Sustainable Newton, joining this lawsuit was an easy decision, given our history of working to encourage transparency, safety monitoring, and a science-based approach to public health. Through our Environmental Hazards Committee, we have made a commitment to do all we can to protect our Newton County community from harm through advocacy and education. As an organization, Sustainable Newton is "working to build a world where people and planet are as important as profit and future generations matter." Challenging this presidential exemption is a vital to that cause.