Blog Posts

In May, Gov. Larry Hogan announced that he would allow two key clean energy and transportation bills to take effect. The bills will help Maryland unlock a clean energy future. Alarming new data and careful scientific studies reiterate that we must take bold and immediate action to tackle climate change. Businesses are already heeding this call by investing in clean energy and setting bold emissions reduction targets. However, business action alone is not enough. We need smart policy solutions from all levels of government. Read the full blog on Maryland Matters.

By Lisa Davis, Sustainability Manager, IKEA and Carol Lee Rawn, Senior Director for Transportation, Ceres Today, national and state fuel efficiency and vehicle pollution rules—known as clean car standards—are reducing harmful air pollution and saving fuel costs for Pennsylvania residents and businesses. Despite the many benefits, these popular fuel efficiency standards are under attack in our nation’s capital, while states like Pennsylvania are stepping up to protect current standards. The data and science are clear: the proposal to lower miles-per-gallon targets for cars and take away the rights of states to adopt stronger clean car standards would stifle economic growth, threaten jobs, harm the health of our communities and environment, and cause Pennsylvanians to spend more at the pump. The full op-ed can be read on The Philadelphia Inquirer.

King Arthur Flour works with mills and farmers across the nation to supply home bakers everywhere with some of the finest flours and baking supplies available. It takes a lot of time and energy to transport our products to stores and kitchens across the country, and we are acutely aware of the impact all that transportation has on the environment. In 2016, the transportation sector surpassed the electric power sector to become the largest emitter of greenhouse gas emissions in the U.S. In fact, the transportation sector is responsible for nearly a third of all U.S. Greenhouse gas emissions — contributing to climate change and air pollution, and exacerbating public health concerns. At King Arthur, we believe that we should leave the world cleaner and healthier than we found it. That is why we are taking steps to reduce our carbon footprint. Our mileage reimbursement program encourages employees to carpool and saves 38,258 solo-commuting miles per year. We have also installed electric vehicle charging stations at our Norwich facility, which are powered by on-site solar panels that generate 12,000 kWh per year. However, we are just getting started on our efforts. We know that we have more work do, and we also know that we cannot tackle the problem on our own. We need policies that help curb transportation emissions in the Green Mountain State and throughout the region. Therefore we were pleased to see Gov. Phil Scott announce that Vermont will join eight other states and the District of Columbia this year to collaborate on developing a regional, market-based policy to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and modernize our transportation system. Last summer, King Arthur Flour joined over 50 businesses and institutions in calling on regional leaders to prioritize policies and investments for a clean and efficient regional transportation system — and we are excited to see progress being made. A regional program to curb transportation emissions could help enable investments in the growing clean transportation sector, from electric vehicle infrastructure to rural public transportation to improvements for roads and bridges. If designed correctly with a strong emissions cap, a market-based program to reduce transportation emissions — like the one the region’s governors are considering — could also bring significant economic benefits to the region. A proven model already exists in the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative (RGGI), the nation’s first regional cap-and-trade program for power sector emissions. Since 2008, Vermont and other East Coast states from Maryland to Maine have reduced greenhouse gas emissions from power plants in the region by more than 40% with RGGI in place, while also driving $2.8 billion in regional economic growth and creating nearly 30,000 jobs. A similar program could be created for the transportation sector to help cut greenhouse gas emissions and spur investment to create a cleaner, more modern transportation system for Vermont. This transformation can’t come soon enough. Vermont needs to add 90,000 electric vehicles to our roads by 2025 in order to meet the state’s GHG emission reduction goals. We have a ways to go, with fewer than 3,000 electric vehicles currently on Green Mountain State roads, according to a recent report by Energy Action Network. Increasing investment in electric vehicles and their infrastructure would provide myriad environmental and economic benefits for Vermont businesses and residents. Electric vehicles emit far less carbon dioxide than traditional combustion engines, even when powered by the dirtiest grids, and they will only become cleaner as we transition to renewable energy sources. That means less air pollution and a cleaner environment, in addition to cost savings. A recent report also found that rural drivers stand to benefit more from electric vehicles than other Americans because the fuel savings and reduced maintenance costs add up over the miles driven in an electric vehicle when compared to conventional vehicles. As state leaders move forward throughout the year on their plan to design a regional policy, we thank Gov. Scott for participating in the process, and hope that he takes on a leading role in that effort. The Green Mountain State and its business community have a lot to gain by accelerating our transition to clean transportation. Let’s get to work. This blog originally appeared on VTDigger.

Salesforce is calling on Virginia’s utilities, regulators, and lawmakers to prioritize clean energy in their policymaking and grid-planning activities. Today, approximately 70 percent of the world’s internet traffic flows through data centers in Virginia. It takes a tremendous amount of energy to power those data centers, but less than six percent of the power generated in Virginia comes from renewable sources leaving fossil fuels—a major contributor to climate change—to dominate. If we don’t take immediate, collective action to transition away from fossil fuels and halve greenhouse gas emissions in the next twelve years, we risk the long-term health of the planet, its people, and the global economy. Today, data centers are cited as the largest source of growth in electricity demand in Virginia.  Energy providers are intending to meet this growing demand with additional fossil fuel projects despite clear preference for clean and renewable energy from many data center companies. In fact, more than 17 data center companies operating in Virginia have committed to purchasing 100% renewable energy. Last fall, and again this spring, Salesforce teamed up with several data center and technology companies to urge Dominion Energy to prioritize clean-energy technologies in their grid planning processes. Virginia utilities, like Dominion Energy, have made progress in recent years developing options for some of their customers to purchase renewable energy. We were also encouraged to see the Virginia State Air Pollution Control Board adopt a new regulation earlier this month to cap and reduce carbon emissions from the Commonwealth’s electric sector. These are both important steps on the Commonwealth’s path toward a low-carbon future, however they are only the start. Meaningful progress will also require new policies in addition to the acceleration of current goals. As the cost of renewable energy continues to fall, investments in new fossil fuel infrastructure — like the Atlantic Coast Pipeline — may leave ratepayers burdened with uneconomic investments for years to come. Just last week, the Indiana Utility Regulatory Commission rejected a proposal to build a natural gas power plant citing the potential financial risk to customers in a time when the energy industry is rapidly evolving. With the upcoming review of Dominion Energy’s Resource Plan, we encourage the Virginia State Corporation Commission to similarly ensure the state’s resource planning leverages the full benefits of clean energy technology and takes into account both the public’s best short term and long term interests. A low-carbon future is critical for both human health and economic prosperity in the Commonwealth. For sufficient progress to be made in the next twelve years, we need actions today. It’s time for Virginia to embrace the transition to a clean energy future. Patrick Flynn is the vice president of sustainability for Salesforce, the global leader in customer relationship management, where he defines and leads the execution of Salesforce’s environmental strategy. This blog originally appeared on Energy News Network.

When executives from companies involved in Ceres’ Connect the Drops initiative met with California legislators recently in Sacramento, a main topic was the need for lawmakers to solve California’s contaminated water problem and ensure all residents have safe drinking water. Many California businesses are rightly concerned. Across the state in both rural and urban communities, 300 public water systems fail to meet the federal Safe Drinking Water standards. State water authorities estimate that exposes as many as 1 million people to contaminated water. As 15 major California businesses wrote earlier this month to California legislative leaders, businesses depend “on a reliable, good quality source of water in California for both our operations and for the communities where our employees and customers live.” Increasingly we are seeing businesses engage in social issues important to the communities they serve and to their employees. They want to help accelerate a sustainable solution. The businesses expressing their opinions join public health experts, environmental groups, agricultural groups, community advocates and Gov. Gavin Newsom in stating that safe drinking water must be a priority for this legislative session. It is hard to fathom how the fifth-largest economy in the world can settle for letting public water systems serve up contaminated water. How will our economy continue to grow and how will we attract new businesses and new workers if the state can’t provide a basic human need? Thankfully, the state legislature and executive branch are moving to solve the contaminated water issue this session. State Sen. Bill Monning and Assemblyman Eduardo Garcia introduced legislation in their respective chambers to solve the problem, and Newsom included a solution within his budget proposal. While the legislative and budgetary processes haven’t given final shape to these measures, we are heartened by what we read. The important thing about these proposals, which differ in detail provided on the exact size of fees and who contributes, is that the funding stream would be consistent and not subject to the political winds of yearly appropriations or to the ebb and flow of the economy. The governor’s proposal is nearly identical to last session’s SB 623 authored by Sen. Monning and drafted through compromise. The bill made steady progress but it was never put to a final vote. California now has another chance to deliver on its statutory promise of a “human right to clean water” and develop a funding source - through a pennies a day fee attached to water bills and reasonable agricultural fertilizer and dairy fees. According to a survey of Californians in 2017, two-thirds of the public said they would be willing to pay up to $1 a month to ensure that all Californians have safe drinking water. Legislative leaders have stated that ongoing funding for safe drinking water is a priority. Now we urge them to work together to make that priority a reality in this year's budget so that the state and its residents can continue to prosper. This blog originally appeared in the Sacramento Business Journal.

“If some companies and industries fail to adjust to this new world, they will fail to exist.” That’s what the governors of the Banks of England and France, Mark Carney and François Villeroy de Galhau, wrote in their recent open letter on climate-related financial risks. A stark warning from two of the world’s most influential central banks, their letter underscored what many investors have been saying for decades: Climate change, and our market and regulatory response to it, has the potential to upend entire markets and sectors, and leave even the largest companies in the dustbin of history. Yet ExxonMobil, along with other oil and gas majors, still hasn’t heeded the warnings -- leading investors to seriously question the company’s governance. Indeed, with Exxon’s annual general meeting fast approaching, New York State Comptroller Tom DiNapoli and the Church of England have declared they’ll vote against the board. They’ve also said they will vote to separate the positions of board chair and CEO, in what has become a referendum on Exxon’s paltry engagement with investors on climate risk. When it comes to climate change and its impacts, you don’t need to look very hard to find examples of Exxon’s misalignment with its investors -- not to mention with science, the public and even the company’s peers. While Exxon’s competitors still have a long way to go, they have taken steps forward in ways Exxon has not. Shell has set short- and long-term greenhouse gas emissions reduction targets and articulated increasingly clear strategies to manage the low-carbon transition. BP and Equinor have each committed to aligning their capital spending with the goals of the Paris Climate Agreement. Exxon, on the other hand, has refused to set any business-wide emissions reduction target and is taking a business-as-usual approach to investment. BP’s board announced that it would support a shareholder proposal to align its business practices with the Paris Agreement on climate change at its annual meeting, and more than 99% of its investors voiced their agreement by voting in favor. Meanwhile, Exxon’s board has fought to keep a similar proposal off its ballot -- even though investors representing $9.5 trillion in assets publicly urged it be allowed to go to a vote. And while peers regularly make independent directors available to meet with investors to discuss climate strategy, Exxon has refused to engage in a meaningful way with its investors on climate change. These investors include those involved in Climate Action 100+, an investor-led initiative backed by investors with more than $33 trillion in assets under management. This is not a question of supporting a trending concern, it is about due diligence and fiduciary duty. As Shell’s CEO said recently, climate change has the “potential to disrupt our industry on...a deep and fundamental level.” If oil companies don’t take the lead, Equinor’s CEO warned, they risk being “dragged into a low-carbon future.” At a certain point, enough is enough. When a risk becomes material to a company -- as climate risk has for those in the oil and gas sector, in particular -- it is a central role of the board to analyze it and act on it. When Exxon’s CEO and board refuse to heed calls from its investors to address climate risk, one must suspect that the governing body is failing to provide real oversight. And when a board isn’t providing real oversight, its investors have a fiduciary duty to intervene on behalf of their portfolios and beneficiaries. It’s time investors raise their voices and cast their votes in favor of good governance, and it’s time Exxon introduce an independent party into its board leadership to ensure it can appropriately engage with and act on climate risk.

During the decade since the 2008 financial crisis, the US economy witnessed a steady growth and the S&P500 now hovers around an all-time high. With that growth and easy liquidity in markets, it is worth asking: Are US wealth management firms once again losing sight of risks piling up in investor portfolios – this time the risks of climate change? The recent PG&E filing for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection may be the first corporate bankruptcy linked to climate change, but it likely will not be the last. If the investment community does not strengthen environmental, social and governance (ESG) related risk analysis and make investment choices that have positive ecological and societal impacts – also referred to as sustainable investing – we'll see more corporations fail. Sustainable investing has gone mainstream, according to a recent report from Morgan Stanley and Bloomberg. However, few leading US wealth management firms have made progress on engaging their customers on sustainable investing. A recent survey by UBS Group assessed interest in sustainable investing globally among high net-worth investors. It found that only 12% of U.S. wealthy investors have aligned their investments with ESG issues, compared with 39% of wealthy investors globally. Not surprisingly, the survey also revealed that nine out of the 10 investors cite their advisor's impact on their decision to invest sustainably. This clearly signifies that wealth advisors have tremendous influence on how the wealthy invest. Considering that the collective assets-under-management of 10 leading wealth management firms in the US is over $6 trillion, a significant portion of the assets owned by the US wealthiest investors remains exposed to ESG risk. It is time wealth managers learn from the lessons of the 2008 crisis and act before the problem gets too large to handle. Firms that care to understand customers' values and aspirations and integrate sustainable investing into their advisory process by moving away from the 'one size fits all' approach will strengthen and retain client relationships. In an age of complex and new regulations, robo-advisors and massive wealth transfer across generations, adding the element of 'impact' to client investments has the potential to be a game changer. The trends and challenges mentioned below are shaping the future of the wealth management industry and must compel wealth management firms to seriously consider adopting a stronger sustainability focus: Wealth transfer: An estimated $30 trillion in wealth will change hands over the next 30 to 40 years, according to a study by Morgan Stanley. Most of this will be inherited by millennials and women, who statistically are more environmentally conscious and want to align their investments with their values. Firms that fail to gain loyalty across generations will run the risk of losing assets rapidly. Shrinking margins: An increasing number of investors only want to compensate for investment performance or prefer passive investments. Passive investments often mean 70% less fee revenue. Under such circumstances, the best way to command a premium may be to add a third dimension – impact– which goes beyond the traditional risk/return approach. Robot advisors: With digital advancement, there has been a rise in robo-advisors, which managed $300 billion in assets in 2017, compared to no assets in 2012. Human advisors can add value over robo-advisors by offering a deeper understanding of their clients' values and the impact they would like to create. Regulatory changes: Since the 2008 crisis, the cost of complying with complex and new regulations has become significantly higher for wealth management firms. Amid regulations around cross-border transactions, fraud prevention and fiduciary duty, there is now an increased pressure to consider climate risk. Intense competition: Competition among investment advisors is fierce. It is not uncommon for the ultra-rich to be advised by multiple advisors. Advisors who educate and engage investors on sustainable investments have an advantage, as the impressive growth of some sustainability-focused firms indicates. As wealth management firms navigate these trends, they can pursue new approaches to better represent their clients' values and aspirations, and retain assets. Among them: Move beyond the 'one-off' product approach: Sustainable investing must be integrated throughout the investment value chain, beginning with getting to know customers and their investment goals. Advisors must understand the impact their customers aim to create through their portfolios. CIO teams should incorporate long-term effects of climate change and its associated risks in macro analysis. This should translate into developing investment strategies and solutions that avoid investments in high greenhouse gas emitting companies. Investments should instead be directed towards companies that are able to manoeuver their business models to an under 1.5ºC global temperature rise scenario, improve their overall efficiency of resource utilisation and cope with technological disruption. Finally, as part of portfolio management, every investment should be reviewed through an ESG lens, and its performance in return and impact reported according to customers' expectations. Build the right incentive: A portion of the advisors' incentive should be linked to the assets garnered that qualify as sustainable investments. For CIO, product and portfolio managers, incentives should be based on how well they have factored the ESG risks and opportunities into the recommendation and implementation process. Create awareness: Firms that lack internal capability should hire external consultants to train staff on how to incorporate ESG issues into client discussions, product analysis and portfolio implementation. Externally, firms should create awareness among investors about investment risks and opportunities as the world transitions towards a low or zero carbon economy. Foster diversity: Many women are taking on financial leadership roles and many more are gaining financial independence. Young entrepreneurs from varied cultural backgrounds are generating wealth. It's time to hire and invest in more advisors who are women and who come from multicultural backgrounds, to more effectively manage the wealth of increasingly diverse clients. As the demand for sustainable investing grows, the complexity of such investments will create a role for wealth management firms that provide access to such investments and then monitor, measure and report their impact. Firms that demonstrate a differentiated process by helping clients shape portfolios with purpose, will likely see more success in attracting and retaining clients, and in safeguarding their clients' investments from rude climate shocks. This blog originally appeared on Environmental Finance.

Last year, the world’s leading climate scientists sent a clear message: we must cut greenhouse gas emissions by 50 percent in 10 years and transition to a carbon free economy by 2050 in order to avoid the most catastrophic impacts of climate change. One of the most important steps in achieving that goal is accelerating our transition away from fossil fueled power generation and toward renewable and carbon-free sources such as wind and solar.  Despite the urgent need for action, the current U.S. federal administration is committed to pulling us in the wrong direction. President Trump has announced his intention to pull the U.S. out of the Paris Agreement, and is trying to repeal or otherwise weaken critical regulations that keep our air and water clean and position U.S. industries to lead in a low-carbon future. On top of that, the administration is attempting to skew the rules of the game to benefit uneconomic and heavily-polluting industries of the past, such as coal. These moves make the challenge in front of us much more acute. How can we remake the energy landscape in the United States to embrace a robust clean energy and decarbonization trajectory within a decade, and do so in the face of significant political headwinds at the federal level? There is no single answer to that question, but it is clear that we will need to further tap bold private sector leadership to scale existing solutions. Companies are the leading consumers of electricity and uniquely situated to take advantage of renewable energy benefits. They’re also the primary drivers of innovation. When it comes to building a renewable electricity grid, we already have solutions that are technologically feasible and economically beneficial. Renewable energy is already the cheapest energy source in markets around the world, energy storage costs are falling fast, and the energy transition is creating skilled, well-paying jobs in communities across the country. New leaders in state and local governments, businesses, technology, and many other sectors are rolling up their sleeves and getting to work on clean energy. Here in the U.S., over 3,600 leaders from all 50 states, representing over 150 million people and nearly $9.5 trillion in GDP, have joined together to announce that “We Are Still In” the Paris Climate Agreement and support its goals. Globally, over 160 leading companies have committed to powering their businesses with 100 percent renewable energy, putting some of the smartest minds and best problem solvers in private industry to work finding ways to achieve these ambitious goals. Last year, corporate buyers in the U.S. signed contracts for over 6,500 megawatts of renewable energy, more than doubling previous records. This progress is encouraging, but it’s just the start. We must push ourselves to go further, asking how we can take the power of the clean energy revolution that has begun inside dozens of leading American companies and use it to bring the promise of cleaner, safer and cheaper power to everyone.  Here are some of the ways companies are increasing the impact of their renewable energy procurement efforts to deliver on that promise: Aggregation: Leading companies have developed innovative deal structures—such as Virtual Power Purchase Agreements (VPPAs)—that allow them to overcome market barriers and secure access to new, large-scale, renewable energy resources. However, these deals are complex and require a scale, a level of expertise, and a risk tolerance that put them out of reach for many companies.  To overcome these barriers, innovative companies are working together. By aggregating their demands, as well as pooling their expertise and resources, companies can create bigger deals than ever before and make renewable energy available to those smaller companies previously unable to access the market. For example, last year Etsy (an e-commerce website with relatively modest electricity demand) partnered with Apple (a global leader in renewable energy procurement) and other companies to put together a major deal. This deal allowed Etsy to access renewable energy in a way once considered out of reach for a company of its size. Apple was also able to facilitate a larger deal, and deliver great beneficial impact, than if the company had gone it alone. Green Tariffs: In traditionally regulated states (as opposed to states that have undertaken utility “de-regulation”), utilities have monopoly control over the supply of electricity. Companies in these areas have leveraged their market power as major utility customers (often by publicly setting renewable energy goals) to get their utility to provide them with access to energy from new renewable sources via a “green tariff”. These green tariff programs not only allow the companies to achieve their goals but, by creating a mechanism for renewable energy procurement where none existed before, also have the potential to open up clean power access to other companies. Target, Walmart, Google, and Johnson & Johnson teamed up with Georgia Power to craft such a deal in April of last year. New Product Offerings: Innovative energy suppliers are also finding ways to eliminate market barriers. By offering renewable energy deals that better meet the needs of buyers, including simpler contract terms and shorter contract lengths, electricity suppliers such as NRG are making affordable, clean power accessible to more companies. In other sectors, real estate companies, building managers and owners of co-located server facilities, such as Iron Mountain, are finding that supplying their tenants with renewable energy is a great way to reduce their carbon footprint, increase customer loyalty and get an edge on competitors. Greening supply chains: As more companies embrace science-based carbon reduction goals, they are focusing on the need to reduce the carbon emissions of both their upstream suppliers and their downstream customers (these are known as “scope 3” emissions). Through direct investment in renewable energy facilities, joining forces on aggregation deals, supplier education efforts, and joining voices to advance supportive policies, the most innovative energy suppliers are not merely going renewable, they’re bringing their whole supply chains with them, as Apple recently set out to do in China. Sharing success stories: As the economic barriers to renewable energy continue to fall, we also need to tackle a still-persistent awareness gap. Not every company can run an ad in the Super Bowl like Budweiser did earlier this year, but as more companies share their clean energy stories with their employees, customers, partners, and competitors they help build awareness of successes while bringing renewable energy further into the mainstream. While the current U.S. federal administration is creating many obstacles, companies are developing innovative ways to work around, leap over, or plow right through. As the already-robust business case for renewable energy continues to improve, the urgent need to tackle the climate crisis becomes clearer, and businesses build on one another’s successes, it is clear we have the tools and foundation we need to rise to the challenge.

Clean energy is a natural fit for New Hampshire, a state full of freethinkers and problem solvers who cherish their independence. As a global outdoor lifestyle brand based in Stratham, Timberland is proud to be part of this culture. We also firmly believe that we must account for our impact on the planet and on the communities we call home. Clean energy offers a way for both residents and businesses to be more self-sufficient and control their energy costs. For our part, we’ve set an ambitious goal to power our owned operations with 50 percent renewable energy by 2020. Smart policies that expand access to clean energy—such as the current proposal in the legislature to increase the cap on net metering projects—are a good fit for the state of New Hampshire. And while our lawmakers have considered similar net metering bills in the past, this year’s bill is a marked improvement to an already smart policy. Net metering allows utility customers to generate their own renewable energy—whether through a rooftop solar array on your neighbor’s home or a small hydropower generator installed at a local business, to give just two examples. Customers sell excess power back to the grid, providing the surrounding community with locally-produced clean energy and reducing the need to import fossil fuels. New Hampshire currently has a cap on net metering projects so that only those under one megawatt are allowed to sell excess power back to the utility. This artificial, government-imposed cap is hindering clean energy investment in the Granite State. We at Timberland think it’s time for a more progressive look at clean energy policy in our state. That is why Timberland is one of many companies, including Dartmouth-Hitchcock Health, MegaFood, Stonyfield Farm, Worthen Industries and more supporting the House and Senate bills (House Bill 365 and Senate Bill 159), which would raise the project cap on net metering. The currently proposed bills differ from previous net metering bills in that they include provisions to save all ratepayers money, as electricity rates will reflect the reduced transmission and distribution costs of more locally-generated renewable energy. These additional provisions further strengthen the benefits of expanding net metering in our state—which is probably why the New Hampshire House voted to pass their bill with an overwhelming bipartisan majority and why the New Hampshire Senate passed their bill unanimously. We encourage the administration to bring it home. Timberland prioritizes clean energy because it helps us cut energy costs and stay competitive in a region where neighboring states are leaving us behind when it comes to investing in renewable energy and energy efficiency. And just as importantly, it’s good for the planet. At Timberland we believe that nature needs heroes, and we are proud of our New Hampshire heritage. Investing in clean energy will help strengthen our state’s overall economy, create new jobs and provide our communities with clean power. We applaud our Legislature for their leadership and commitment to the future of the Granite State. This new bill promises even greater benefits with the improved provisions to save ratepayers money. Granite Staters have shown consistent, bipartisan support for expanding net metering — and we look forward to these bills’ hopeful enactment. Colleen Vien is sustainability director at Timberland, globally headquartered in Stratham. This blog post originally appeared on NH Business Review.

CLEVELAND—As pediatricians, we have a responsibility to alert parents, our community, and policymakers about threats to the health of our children, so we can take steps to protect our state’s most vulnerable citizens. State lawmakers are currently considering a bill that would endanger the health of all Ohioans, especially the health and well-being of our children. Babies and children cannot advocate for themselves, so it is important that we speak for them. House Bill 6 is misleadingly called a “clean air resource” bill. However, it would effectively repeal Ohio’s Renewable Portfolio Standard and Energy Efficiency Resource Standard, which provide Ohioans essential protections from toxic air pollution. These two standards limit our state’s reliance on coal and natural gas, thus reducing the amount of dangerous pollutants released by burning these fuels in power plants. Read the full op-ed here.