SUSTAINABLE NEWTON - Blog

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.

Meet Sherryn Lo

Thu, 15 Jan 2026 13:59:43 GMT

Editor's Note: The Oxford College Office of Civic & Community Engagement recruits first and second-year students who are paid for part-time work by the college and assigned to organizations within the community to serve as Oxford Service Leaders. Sherryn Lo joined Sustainable Newton as our Oxford Service Leader in the 2025 fall semester and will continue working with us during her time at Oxford College. As we begin spring semester, we asked Sherryn to introduce herself.

By Sherryn Lo, Oxford College Community Service Leader

Hi! My name is Sherryn Lo, currently a freshman at Oxford College of Emory University. I’m an Oxford Service Leader, helping Sustainable Newton out wherever support is needed. I got to learn about the organization and its different committees, and I’ve really enjoyed getting to see how much thought and care go into making Newton County a more sustainable place to live. I wanted to use this post to share a little about who I am, where I’m from, and why sustainability matters to me!

I grew up in Kaohsiung, Taiwan, a coastal city that feels alive all the time, from early morning to late at night. Going around the city, you can see tree-lined streets run alongside busy roads, and it’s normal to see parks, public bikes, night markets, and apartment buildings all sharing the same space. The weather is very warm most of the year, so people spend a lot of time outside. We love walking, eating, talking, and just being around each other. The city is very lively; neighborhoods feel close, and daily life happens in public and shared spaces. Growing up there made me used to paying attention to my surroundings and the people around me, because everything, such as nature, city life, and community, all exist side by side.

Before working with Sustainable Newton, I interned with the Lovely Taiwan Foundation, an organization focused on revitalizing towns and communities across Taiwan. Through that experience, I learned that revitalization isn’t just about trying to make a place look better and improve economically. It is actually about helping communities stay alive, connected, and meaningful to the people who live there. Whether it was supporting local culture, small businesses, or community spaces, the goal was always long-term. This experience changed how I think about sustainability. I started to see it not just as an environmental issue, but as something tied to people, identity, and place.

For me, sustainability is about paying attention to the places we live, the people around us, and the long-term impact of our choices.

When I moved to the U.S., I began noticing how these ideas show up differently in transportation, land use, energy choices, environmental health, etc., in Newton County. Even though the context is different, the underlying question feels the same: how do we care for a place in a way that allows it to last? This is basically why I appreciate and am interested in Sustainable Newton. What I like most about Sustainable Newton is its committee-based approach. I see different groups, led by a bunch of enthusiasts, focus on specific issues, like electric vehicles or chemical safety. It has helped me understand how sustainability is built through many small, focused efforts. Being able to support this work, even behind the scenes, has been a meaningful way for me to keep learning.

I’m still early in my time with Sustainable Newton, but I’m grateful for the opportunity to be involved and looking forward to the future. For me, sustainability is about paying attention to the places we live, the people around us, and the long-term impact of our choices. I’m excited to continue growing with Sustinable Newton and contributing in whatever ways I can!

The Resolution We Need Most in 2026 Is One We've Had Since 2020

Tue, 30 Dec 2025 15:49:29 GMT

By Maurice Carter, Co-Founder & President

This time of year, thoughts turn naturally to what to make of the new year ahead. But perhaps I'm not the only one still struggling with what to make of the year just passed? Has it really even passed?

It's been a tough 12 months for those of us committed to forging concern about the climate crisis into productive climate action. It's not that we aren't making progress -- the trend lines and momentum on the clean energy transition are extremely positive. But across the climate movement, we've been buffeted and battered by political headwinds emanating from Washington, DC, making every ounce of progress hard-earned.

Yet, I have faith the market advantages of clean energy (faster & cheaper than fossil fuels) and electric vehicles (beloved by their owners) will prevail. Where our future feels less certain and our anxiety most intense is locally -- where a proliferation of data center projects stand poised to erase much of the progress our state and local community have made on improving air quality, reducing climate pollution, conserving water, and controlling growth. The energy, water, and land demands of explosive AI data center growth are one of the biggest issues of our time, and we can't simply turn the page to a clean start. Indeed, we've spent the closing days of 2025 joining other concerned organizations to inject some reasonableness into data center plans, while our Environmental Hazards Committee is working to surface all of the potential projects and assess the community risks of each.

All of this has me thinking not about new resolutions for 2026, but instead about an old resolution adopted -- but never fully operationalized -- by the Covington City Council for Earth Day in April of 2020. First a little background, and then I'll explain the connection to our current data center crossroads in Covington and Newton County...

Then Covington City Manager Scott Andrews asked Sustainable Newton to draft an Earth Day resolution for the mayor and council to read and adopt at their April 20, 2020 council meeting. Rather than focus narrowly on a handful of tangible, immediate actions -- recycle more, save energy, etc. -- we crafted a statement to capture the essence of sustainability in a way that could guide the council through any opportunities and challenges that might arise.

We were inspired by our own vision to "build a world where people and planet are as important as profit and future generation matter."

With all the appropriate "whereases," we sought to connect Covington's past to our present and future, arriving at a statement we hoped the councilmembers, mayor, and staff would embrace. The first two bullet points below are key and should provide clarity today as the council and other local government agencies grapple with the demands of AI data centers. The resolution unanimously adopted by the Covington City Council on April 20, 2020 said:

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, the Mayor and City Council of the City of Covington commit to making sustainability a core consideration in how we operate by taking the following steps:

Applying a decision-making process that explicitly examines economic, social, and environmental implications of actions taken by the Mayor and City Council.
Proactively recognizing conflicting economic, social, and environmental interests in those decisions and striving to manage tradeoffs between those interests in a way that maintains long-term balance for the good of all current citizens and with consideration for impacts to future generations of citizens.

Money Matters -- But So Do People, Planet, and Future Generations

Let's be very clear on this point: We've never said "ignore the economics." But we are saying financial gain or loss alone is not an adequate measure of impact. Profit is not the only goal of any human enterprise. Taking our inspiration from the "Triple Bottom Line," we call for a balancing of economic gain or loss with the impacts on society (the people) and environment (the planet). And that balance must extend beyond just thinking about current day impacts to considering how future generations will be affected.

We're also pragmatic realists. In any situation, interests often conflict. What's critical is making explicit compromises that are recognized, documented, and balanced in the long-run by offsetting actions to preserve all of the objectives.

It's a Data Center and a Power Plant!

A prime opportunity to apply the principles of that 2020 resolution is the data center planned for an existing 498,960-square-foot warehouse building at 10835 Hazelbrand Road in Covington. The 97-acre site was annexed into the City of Covington by a 5-1 vote of the city council in January 2025 at the request of the developer, Serverfarm.

What makes this project unique in Georgia are plans to go live generating baseload electricity with gas-fired reciprocating internal combustion engines, rather than a connection to an electric utility. To protect their 24x7 operations, all data centers have some sort of diesel or gasoline backup generators on-site to insure against loss of power. But Serverfarm has contracted with a Houston-based energy company, VoltaGrid to provide baseload power with methane gas engines running 24 hours a day, seven days a week. VoltaGrid has applied to the Georgia Environmental Protection Division (EPD) Air Branch for a permit to operate the following:

33 Jenbacher J620 natural gas-fired, four-stroke lean-burn, reciprocating internal combustion engines;
two Mesa Solutions natural gas-fired fuel gas heaters;
one Algas natural gas-fired black start emergency engine generator;
and five Caterpillar temporary engines.

At peak operation the maximum power output of the fleet would be 90 megawatts of electricity, which is enough to power roughly 67,500 homes. In that January 2025 council meeting, Serverfarm representative, Josh Volk told council members the facility will use “about as much [gas] as you can pump through the existing pipes — in fact, upgrades will be required." Volk said the gas would be used for "a number of years," until Georgia Power can develop a substation to serve the site. Later, in a September council meeting where the gas contract was approved, City of Covington Gas Director Mike Jewell said the additional gas consumption by Serverfarm "will pull our system operating pressure down significantly for a couple of months during peak demand."

No data center or other type of facility in Georgia has ever been permitted for onsite generation of baseload power. But, similar projects are creating controversy in other states. One of those making headlines and attracting lawsuits is Elon Musk's xAI Data Center in Memphis, TN, which originally employed 35 unpermitted temporary gas turbines for power. Activists and health officials have documented the health impacts suffered by residents living near the supercomputing complex the company calls "Colossus."

Sustainable Newton is concerned about the potential for similar health impacts on Covington and Newton County residents if the VoltaGrid project is permitted to continue as proposed, so we recently joined the Southern Environmental Law Center (SELC) and Altamaha Riverkeeper in filing public comments regarding the VoltaGrid permit application.

In a newly released fact sheet, on "Protecting Our Environment in the Digital Age," SELC states the following:

Data centers are an integral part of our modern economy but consume vast amounts of energy, water, and land. SELC is working to ensure that data centers undergo a fair and transparent review and permitting process, rely on clean energy sources, pay their fair share for energy and water to protect consumers from rate hikes, and do the least amount of harm possible, including by limiting air pollution and water consumption and pollution.

At Sustainable Newton, we agree and will continue working with allies to ensure the fairness, transparency, and protection citizens of Covington and Newton County deserve. We also believe the Covington City Council and other local government agencies should do the same.

The Money Is Huge, but So Are Impacts to Health & Wellbeing

With so many players profiting, who will look out for the interests of the people who live here and the planet we live on?

Serverfarm profits by building and operating AI-ready data centers across North America, Europe, and the Middle East. Their clients for the Covington site have not been identified.
VoltaGrid makes money by providing turnkey power solutions to clients like data centers.
The City of Covington generates additional revenue by selling gas to industrial customers like Serverfarm and Voltagrid.

But what about the rest of the balance sheet -- the Triple Bottom Line? What is the cost to the community in terms of public health and environmental harm?

From the AJC article cited earlier:

Joe Bozeman III, an assistant professor of civil and environmental engineering at Georgia Tech, said the facility will generate cleaner electricity than a coal-fired power plant. Still, burning natural gas produces carbon dioxide, the main greenhouse gas responsible for global warming. Extracting and transporting natural gas also releases methane, an even more potent greenhouse gas that’s heating up the planet. “I would not categorize this as a clean energy source,” Bozeman said.

And later, from the same article:

VoltaGrid’s air permit application says each RICE unit features a “built-in combustion exhaust treatment system,” but the company’s modeling shows the emissions will still contain compounds that could pose health hazards.
Those include a class of ultrafine particle pollution called PM 2.5, which has been linked to a range of cardiovascular and respiratory problems. The units will also release nitrogen oxides and volatile organic compounds, two known contributors to ground-level ozone, an air pollutant that can trigger breathing problems, especially in people with asthma, children and the elderly.

The entire point of the resolution the city council adopted in April 2020 is that the financial cost/benefit of any major decision must be examined within the context of equal consideration for impacts on people and planet. This is where the municipal utility model gets complicated. As a business selling gas (or electricity or water), the City of Covington has a vested interest to maximize sales to drive more revenue. But, as a body charged with serving and protecting the public, the mayor, council, and city staff also have an obligation to act in the best interest of current and future citizens.

Another Example Shows How This Could Work

In its December 15 meeting, the Covington City Council approved four agreements with Amazon Data Services that will have the tech giant fund $100M for construction of an on-site wastewater reuse treatment plant for Amazon's Alcovy Road data center. The treatment plant is similar to one managed by the Newton County Water & Sewerage Authority to serve industrial users in the Stanton Springs Business Park. The authority will collaborate with the city and Amazon on this project as well. According to Covington City Attorney Frank Turner Jr, the treatment plant and other agreements with Amazon "will keep them completely off of our potable water supply, other than what their water needs are for their domestic consumption requirements.”

Water consumption and electricity demand are the top two concerns data centers pose for local communities. It's easy to understand clean drinking water as a finite resource, the impacts of electricity demand are more varied. In most cases, the data center operators look to the electric utility company to supply power, in which case the concerns are how that load affects grid stability and electricity prices for existing customers. In the earlier example with Serverfarm/Voltagrid, they intend to generate their own electricity, in which case our local concerns become issues of air quality and public health. And, whether power is supplied by the utility company or generated onsite, the use of fossil fuels generates more planet-warming climate pollution that exacerbates climate change.

It's not clear yet how the Amazon data center will be powered -- and that will likely raise additional concerns to be addressed. But we commend the City of Covington and Amazon for working to find innovative water solutions funded by the data center developer, just as we commend the Newton County Water & Sewerage Authority, Meta, and other customers in Stanton Springs for their example of partnering to lower water usage there too.

What we need from those same players, now, is to see that same level of transparency, proactivity, and collaboration applied to powering data centers in our community with methods that don't cause public health or environmental issues. It is imperative that local and state officials not jeopardize people and planet for the sake of profit.

Energy Audit Surprise Yields a Big Opportunity for Savings

Mon, 29 Sep 2025 13:05:35 GMT

By Sara Vinson, Sustainable Newton Co-Founder & Secretary

This year, we're highlighting Newton County residents who have used Inflation Reduction Act tax credits and rebates, most of which end this year. We call these individuals our Sustainable Stars. They have used the incentives to increase household energy efficiency and transition to clean energy.

Our fourth and final Sustainable Star for 2025 is Nancy Schulz. Nancy is a wife, mother, and grandmother who has served Newton County as a former commissioner and continues to lead through civic engagement. She is a past president and dedicated member of Sustainable Newton, where she chairs the Waste Reduction and Diversion Committee. She also currently serves on the board of Newton County Tomorrow. We asked Nancy some questions about her efforts to improve her home's energy efficiency.

What inspired you to start with a home energy audit, and what did you learn from the process?
Honestly, had it not been for having an energy audit, I would not have known that I had NO insulation in the roof or walls of my office. I learned about the home energy audit through Sustainable Newton. Frankly, when I heard Sara Vinson speak about her energy audit experience, I thought, "why not". Interestingly, my home was inspected 2 years prior and the home inspection did not reveal the missing insulation because my office is in a space technically considered an auxiliary space.

How did the Inflation Reduction Act tax credits and rebates influence your decision to move forward with spray foam insulation?

Once the home energy audit revealed the missing insulation, I had a contractor install the spray foam and it was an added benefit to take the 30 percent tax credit.

What changes have you noticed in your home since the insulation was installed—comfort, energy bills, or both?
The difference is startling. Last summer, I was miserable in my office. No amount of air conditioning, fans or working at certain hours could provide relief. Now I look forward to spending time in my office. I was also able to install an energy-efficient glass door that provides natural light and allows me to see the birds on the adjacent trees while I work in comfort. The energy audit also revealed that the largest percentage of energy demand was from my office. Since adding the insulation and the energy efficient door, my electric bill has dropped 20 percent.

Were there any surprises or challenges along the way as you worked on improving your home’s efficiency?
The biggest surprise was realizing I had no insulation in the office. On the other hand a welcome surprise was knowing how efficient the main portion of my home is. The only additional recommendation for the main portion of my home was to add an insulation blanket to my water heater -- which is relatively inexpensive.

What final thoughts do you have for other Newton County residents who are thinking about getting an energy audit and possibly upgrading their home’s insulation?
The cost of the $500 audit for my home was worth every penny. I cannot tell you how dumbfounded I was that there was no insulation in a portion of my home that was otherwise so energy efficient.

Editor’s note: The federal tax credit for home insulation and air sealing is 30 percent up to $1,200 and is 30 percent up to $150 for household energy audits. See 2025 IRS instructions for more information.

A Step in the Wrong Direction Makes Floyd Street More Dangerous for All

Tue, 26 Aug 2025 18:39:23 GMT

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

Sign the Petition

I don't doubt City of Covington officials were acting in good faith to solve a real problem with speeding and reckless driving when they implemented "traffic calming" measures on Floyd Street recently -- in the form of traffic islands, bump outs, and the mother of all speed bumps.

But, while only time will tell if these changes slow traffic and keep cars between the lines, what is immediately clear is that Floyd Street is now a much more dangerous place for bicyclists, joggers, walkers, and residents retrieving mail from their mailboxes. To prove it, I mounted a camera on my bicycle handlebars last Friday afternoon to ride in the "bike lane" (what's left of it) from my house near the Cricket Frog Trail crossing to the Library and back. I made it safely home, thank goodness! But it was much scarier than I imagined. I can't really recommend anyone else try it. But here's a video from one of the worst moments.

Someone Is Going to Get Hurt -- or Worse

This clip shows only one intersection where "traffic furniture" causes the bike lane on each side of the road to suddenly end, forcing people on bikes, joggers, walkers, etc. to merge into 35 MPH+ motorized vehicle traffic. If you have moving traffic to your left when the bike lane runs out -- as I did here -- there's nowhere for a bicyclist to go. I was forced to take the lane in front of the third car blocking me in, but I could just as easily have ended up vaulting over the curb if that car did not yield. Also, as the video shows, accelerating away from a stop sign at a crowded intersection with no bike lane is an unsafe situation. If you want to see more, I've posted the full videos of my eastbound & westbound adventure on YouTube.

As a local doctor said to me: "Someone is going to get killed." (Jump to the petition.)

When we make our community safer and more inviting for pedestrians, bicyclists, and persons using other mobility devices, we directly benefit everyone by reducing air pollution and traffic congestion on our streets.

It's Not Like We Hadn't All Prepared for this Moment

Even if you sympathize with the plight of everyone forced to navigate this dangerous street by bike or foot, you may still wonder why this is a sustainability issue? As I wrote in a blog post early last year titled, Two Wheels, Four Wheels, No Wheels, Go!, walking and biking are important as zero-emissions, healthy transportation alternatives. They are a part of the Drawdown Georgia solutions framework. And, as I said then "When we make our community safer and more inviting for pedestrians, bicyclists, and persons using other mobility devices, we directly benefit everyone by reducing air pollution and traffic congestion on our streets."

However, Sustainable Newton is not the only entity promoting more walking and biking in the community. Just look at these excerpts below from the City of Covington's own 2023-2027 Comprehensive Plan adopted by the city council in early 2023. The city's official plan, filed with the State of Georgia's Department of Community Affairs, calls for putting a priority on active transportation (walking & biking), trail connectivity, and a "complete streets and trails" plan.

The very first paragraph in the city's official document explains the purpose and intent of having a formal comprehensive plan:

A Comprehensive Plan is a community’s long-range guide for growth and development and is a living and breathing document that is publicly accessible. This plan, designed distinctively for the City of Covington, outlines the vision and goals identified by the community, and establishes the actions required to achieve those vision and goals. The plan serves as a decision-making guide for local government officials and community leaders and was developed based on input from the public, city staff, elected officials, and a steering committee. The document illustrates Covington’s needs and opportunities, goals and policies, land use practices, and implementation framework, also known as a community work program. The plan seeks to answer three questions: Where are we now? Where do we want to be? How do we get there?

The city's Comprehensive Plan was developed with extensive public input -- including a survey, a series of public input sessions, and two public hearings. I know, because I attended every session (see the sign-in sheets). So I know how much active transportation, connectivity, and complete streets were discussed. Simply put, this SHOULD have been the first place Covington officials looked when considering how to address their concerns with speeding on Floyd Street.

We Already Had a Better Way

No matter how well-intentioned the modifications to Floyd Street are, it's crystal-clear they don't promote bicycle and pedestrian connectivity or safety. Indeed, they have accomplished the opposite, making it impossible for any reasonable, sane person to bike or jog there. (My temporary insanity to film the video not withstanding.) When the mayor, council, and staff decided they needed to slow traffic on Floyd Street, they were within their authority to act. But that requirement could have been met without sacrificing the connectivity provided between the Cricket Frog Trail and the Eastside Trail by the Floyd Street bike lanes, which are now useless because they are too dangerous. As just one example, here is the design proposed for the City of Covington and Newton Trails by the PATH Foundation and Kaizen Collaborative when they developed a master plan for the Cricket Frog Trail and connecting streets in 2018. To connect the Cricket Frog Trail and the Eastside Trail, PATH and Kaizen proposed this street design between the points where each trail intersects with Floyd Street.

Note: the proposed trail, buffer, and travel lanes in the second figure fit within the same width as the then-existing sidewalk, bike, and travel lanes in the first figure. Implementing this design would have required no additional right of way be taken from property owners. The design would have both calmed traffic in the travel lanes and provided a much safer, buffered path for bicyclists and pedestrians. That this design was not considered or discussed publicly suggests that the city's documented objectives to IMPROVE active transportation and connectivity were not considered at all in the planning for what has now been implemented on Floyd Street.

Connecting the Cricket Frog and Eastside trails is important not only for recreation, but also as a vital active transportation linkage for residents of the Render Covington apartments and the Neely Farms and Wildwood neighborhoods, making it possible for them to safely bike to town instead of driving. It also provides downtown residents with safe access to the grocery store, bike shop, doctors offices, banks, restaurants, the pharmacy, and other services. Not implementing a complete streets design like the one put forth in the 2018 masterplan is a big miss. It sets us back substantially relative to the objectives and actions laid out in the comprehensive plan.

And so, we find ourselves faced with the predicament lamented by John Greenleaf Whittier in his poem Maud Muller: "Of all sad words of tongue or pen, the saddest are these: 'It might have been!'"

So, Now What?

Since the traffic islands went in, I hear every day from people who -- for a variety of reasons -- want what I want: "Pull those islands out and put the road back the way it was!" The practical side of me says "That will never happen. We can't just rewind the tape and have a do-over" But then, are we willing to just let people get hurt or die because someone is unwilling to say "we were wrong"? There are really three steps the City of Covington needs to take:

The current conditions on Floyd Street are unacceptable and cannot be allowed to stand as is. The city must Immediately act to eliminate the hazards posed by the compromised bike lanes.
City officials must recommit and develop a plan of action to honor the promises they made when they adopted the 2023-2025 Comprehensive Plan. Live up to those objectives. Make future decisions with the committed plan in mind. And start working now -- with broad stakeholder input -- on the "Citywide Complete Streets & Trails Plan" referenced with a 2025-2026 timeline in the city's Short Term Work Program of the Comprehensive Plan.
City staff should reach out for professional assistance with expertise in active transportation planning to help the city plan comprehensively to meet the needs of all transportation system users -- not just motor vehicle drivers. Go Georgia (formerly Georgia Bikes) is a statewide non-profit working to "advance safe, equitable, and sustainable transportation and recreation as vital components of a thriving, livable Georgia." (Full disclosure: I am a current board member with Go Georgia. I am not suggesting they are the only resource to assist in this, but they do offer programs specifically designed for this situation.)

Sustainable Newton wants to be a stakeholder in all of the above activities, and we encourage Newton Trails, the Covington Conyers Cycling Club (C4), our local bicycle shop (C-Town Bikes), and the walking, biking, and running community in general to join us in pushing for the actions outlined above. We will need more transparency and collaboration from all parties to achieve the immediate and long-term objective our community wants and needs.

Sign the Petition

If you support these requests and are willing to join us in pressing for more accountability from city officials to the maintain safe streets and fulfill the active transportation objectives spelled out in the Comprehensive Plan, please sign the petition.

Sign the Petition

Making the Switch: From Gas Truck to F-150 Lightning

Wed, 13 Aug 2025 19:01:52 GMT

By Sara Vinson, Sustainable Newton Co-Founder & Secretary

This year, we're highlighting Newton County residents who have used Inflation Reduction Act tax credits and rebates, some of which end this year. We call these individuals our Sustainable Stars, and they have used the incentives to increase household energy efficiency and transition to clean energy.

Our third Sustainable Star for 2025 is Jay Lanners. Jay is a retired IT professional who lives on a small farm in Newton County. We asked Jay some questions about his decision to purchase a Ford F-150 Lightning truck, his experience transitioning to an EV, and what advice he has for others considering an EV purchase.

How long have you had your F-150 Lightning, and what made you decide to make the purchase?
I’ve had it about two years. I love technology, and I need a truck for my lifestyle. The F-150 Lightning is a great match for me.

How did the Inflation Reduction Act incentives influence your decision?

Without that extra $7,500 I don’t think I would have made the purchase. In my mind, the transition to an EV is simple economics: when the cost to buy and operate an EV is the same as gas or diesel, people will move en masse to electric.

Were there any challenges or surprises you encountered while transitioning to an EV?
It was surprising to realize that the cost to operate my new truck is so much cheaper than my previous gas truck. The greatest challenge is charging on a long trip. Most of the time, it’s fine, but there are times where I get to the committed charging station and it’s full or not working correctly. Now that Ford is compatible with Tesla chargers, it is much better.

How has your experience been so far in terms of performance, range, and overall satisfaction?
I am extremely satisfied with my truck. It is virtually maintenance free and really quiet. It handles really well. The range is fine for me, however, I would say count on 80% of what you’re told. There are many variables that impact range like temperature, payload, speed, etc.

What advice would you give to others considering an EV?
Go for it. I don’t ever see myself going back to a gas powered vehicle.

Electric Vehicle Tax Credits/Rebates End on September 30

If you’re thinking about buying an electric vehicle or a plug-in hybrid,
be aware that the federal tax credit/rebate of $7,500 for new and leased vehicles as well as a $4,000 tax credit/rebate for used vehicles will end on September 30, 2025.