The Build Back Better Act is a Bridge to the Future We Need. Senator Manchin, Don’t Blow It Up!
Originally published by Union of Concerned Scientists, The Equation.
By Rachel Cleetus
In the last week, Senator Manchin (D-WV) has become increasingly public with his opposition to the Clean Electricity Performance Program (CEPP), a policy designed to drive down power sector carbon emissions which is part of the reconciliation bill under consideration in Congress. With the vote margins so slim in Congress, his stance significantly jeopardizes the chances that this vital policy will survive the legislative process. At a time when the devastating, costly, and inequitable impacts of climate change around the nation — including worsening flooding in West Virginia — could not be clearer, it is deeply disturbing to see the Senator actively undermining policies that would help drive down heat-trapping emissions and protect people.
The budget reconciliation package for the Build Back Better Act, which was approved by House committees in September, marked a massive turning point in how the United States aims to address climate change, prioritize environmental justice, and create good paying jobs for working people. The package also addresses long-standing social and economic needs — including healthcare, education, elder care, and childcare. And if the climate and clean energy provisions in the package stay robust and fully funded, they would also put the nation firmly on the path to cutting emissions in half by 2030, a goal the Biden administration has committed to as part of the U.S. contribution to global efforts to limit climate change.
Simply put, the reconciliation bill is a much needed and long overdue investment in the well-being of our people and the future of our country.
But now, thanks to the intransigence of Senator Manchin, a key provision to help reduce emissions — the Clean Electricity Performance Program — is at risk of being removed from the package, and no clear alternative to cut power sector emissions has been put forth in its place. Given that the Senator does acknowledge climate change is real, this is hard to understand.
Even more egregiously, the Senator is now claiming that the nation’s clean energy transformation has already been achieved! That is simply untrue. Our nation still gets about 60 percent of its power from fossil fuels and the EIA forecasts that after declining by 19 percent in 2020 due to the pandemic-related economic crisis, coal-related carbon dioxide emissions will rise by 20 percent in 2021. Meanwhile, we need to sharply bend that emissions curve, cutting U.S. heat-trapping emissions at least in half and getting to an 80 percent clean power sector by 2030. Analysis by UCS and others shows that this goal is within reach — but we need to implement strong policies to get going right away.
Further, the overall scale of the reconciliation bill is also under attack, meaning that all of its valuable provisions — including climate and environmental justice priorities — are under threat of being cut out or severely down-scaled. Given the magnitude and severity of the crises of climate change, economic inequality, and environmental injustice our nation faces, all colliding with the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic, this is no time for Congress to shortchange the legitimate and pressing needs of people while indulging in corporate welfare to benefit the rich and powerful.
What’s all too clear from the latest developments is that the power of the fossil fuel lobby to block progress on climate action still reigns strong in Congress. Senator Manchin’s financial stake in the coal industry is well documented. His seeking to cut the CEPP calls into question whether he is prioritizing and protecting fossil fuel industry interests — which include his own — over his constituents’.
He is not alone. Senator Sinema (D-AZ) is also seeking to sharply reduce the investments in the reconciliation bill, and she has very recently held fundraisers with major industry groups opposed to provisions in the Build Back Better agenda.
And let’s not forget that every single Republican in Congress has failed to support the reconciliation bill (or any other serious policy to address climate change for that matter). What a shameful situation for these policymakers to abdicate their responsibilities as elected officials even as climate change, economic inequity, and environmental injustices strike at the hearts of communities all over the country in both red and blue states!
At this pivotal moment, when our ambitions to protect future generations from the ravages of climate change hang in the balance, let us speak plainly about what these members of Congress are doing: they are putting their narrow self-interests and the interests of the fossil fuel industry above that of their constituents. They are squandering the precious little time we have, the narrow window we have left to avert a climate catastrophe, on business-as-usual politics.
Knowing full well the devastating wildfires, heatwaves, drought, intensifying storms and flooding that the country has experienced this year — the 18 billion dollar-plus extreme weather and climate-related disasters so far this year that took 538 lives–these members of Congress choose to protect the fossil fuel industry.
Knowing full well the extreme rainfall and devastating floods that are becoming increasingly commonplace in West Virginia, and the extreme heat, drought and wildfires affecting the people of Arizona, Senators Manchin and Sinema aren’t willing to invest what’s necessary to secure a clean energy future and are thus enabling the status quo.
Knowing full well that hard-working coal miners and their communities — who have helped keep the lights on for generations — deserve investments that can help them create a prosperous and healthy future in West Virginia, Senator Manchin is seeking sharp cuts in the bill that would affect investments vital to West Virginians, including investments in social safety net programs, infrastructure, and clean energy, while protecting his financial stake in coal.
Knowing full well that fossil fuels are dirty and polluting and impose an outsize health burden on Black, Brown, Indigenous and low-income communities, these members of Congress choose to prolong that burden to prolong fossil fuel profits.
Knowing full well that in this consequential decade we must make a sharp turn away from fossil fuels to have a fighting chance of leaving our children and grandchildren a livable planet, these members of Congress choose to rely on funding from the fossil fuel industry to secure their next term in office.
Knowing full well that the U.S. stands to lose coastal properties by the millions; be exposed to dangerous summer heat unsafe for outdoor work and play; that our cities, vital infrastructure, and lives will be upended by worsening storms, floods, and fires; and that we will lose invaluable species and ecosystems, they choose to let emissions from the fossil fuel industry continue to rise.
Knowing full well that a just and equitable transition to clean energy would also be a boon for public health, job creation, and the economy, they choose to let the fossil fuel industry dictate our future.
That choice they are making is unconscionable. That choice is gravely consequential for young people around the world, today and in the future. We can have a thriving, equitable, clean, and climate-resilient economy if we are courageous enough to seize this momentous opportunity today.
Senators Manchin and Sinema, Republican members of Congress, what do you want your legacy to be? Will you be among those willing to stand up for a bold vision of a future that is clean and just, with benefits for all communities? Will you stand behind the scale of investments necessary to secure that future?
We will continue to fight alongside a diverse and powerful movement for all the incredibly important components of the reconciliation bill that are vital for our nation’s prosperity, especially those that ensure just and equitable climate action. And we urge members of Congress and the Biden administration to stop allowing fossil fuel politics to win the day when so much is at stake for our children and grandchildren.
Appreciate CleanTechnica’s originality? Consider becoming a CleanTechnica Member, Supporter, Technician, or Ambassador — or a patron on Patreon.
Environment
Hyundai Ioniq 9 first drive: Stylish SUV outside, spacious and versatile 3-row minivan inside
Hyundai flew us out to Savannah, Georgia, a few weeks ago to get our first impressions of the much-anticipated Ioniq 9 three-row SUV. The vehicle uses the same E-GMP platform as the Kia EV9 and some smaller HMG EVs but the real question is: how is the Ioniq 9 different? Let’s take a look…
Size matters
This is a big EV with spacious three rows that seat six or seven adults comfortably. As far as I am concerned,the Ioniq 9 is Hyundai’s flagship vehicle.
The drive was similar to the Kia EV9, which is obviously a good thing. The big vehicle has solid electric acceleration, and Hyundai has done great work with the suspension to make this heavy car feel light on its toes. But Hyundai has made efforts to make the drive even smoother and quieter. The foam-filled tires, soft suspension, acoustic glass, and active noise cancellation all make the ride feel like floating rather than driving.
Front-row seats are not only spacious but also offer ample comfort and legroom. Also, there’s plenty of legroom in the second row (42.8 inches) and spacious third row (32.0 inches). Did I mention this is a big vehicle?
What stands out to me on the interior is the flat floor enabled by the E-GMP battery and remarkably long wheelbase (3,130mm / 123.2 inches). It doesn’t feel like an SUV inside, it feels like a big minivan (oxymoron noted). While many folks are embarrassed to be seen in a minivan, nothing beats the configuration internally for trips and driving more than 4 people around – so the comparison is fully complimentary.
Hyundai obviously kitted us out with their top-end interiors, and they definitely felt sporty and luxurious.
Frunk
The Frunk o the Ioniq 9 isn’t anything to write home about and one of the few downsides to this vehicle. Hyundai of course says that their customers don’t want it, just like the bigger Frunk-maker’s say that their customers love it. For better or worse, it is a great place to put some charging cables, a tire inflator kit or some valuables but don’t expect it to be used frequently like a Tesla/Rivian or F-150/Silverado Frunk for groceries and general purpose cargo.
I really love the look of the Ioniq 9, which the company says is shaped like a sailboat hull with its big taper at the back. That also gives the Ioniq an otherworldly low drag coefficient of 0.259. That, along with the big 110kWh battery and Hyundai’s always efficient EVs, gets this thing to 335 miles for the RWD version. The performance AWD variant only drops down to 311 miles, a hit worth taking.
That range and the spacious interior mean that this is a great road trip EV. AWD versions can even tow up to 5000lbs. HMG’s software adjusts range predictions based on towing. Aerodynamics and efficiency of the trailer will all determine how much range is sacrificed but with over 300 miles to start with, odds are it will get you where you are towing.
NACS charging
The Ioniq 9 is one of the first non-Tesla EVs to come standard with a NACS charger, meaning it can natively charge at most Tesla Superchargers. Hyundai also includes an adapter so it can charge at CCS Combo stations and use a J-1772 Level1/2 charger.
Exterior
I am torn on the exterior look of the Ioniq 9. I love the shape, which Hyundai says is reminiscent of the aerodynamic hull of a sailing ship. I love the pixel lights that have become iconic in Hyundai’s EV lineup. Even the overall silhouette, something that Hyundai calls “Aerosthetic”—a harmonious blend of aerodynamics and aesthetics— is pretty incredible.
But I don’t love some of the design ornaments–like the cutout pieces over the front and back wheels. While I realize that seems like a nit-pick, I can’t unsee it. It is more subdued in the darker colors, however.
Pricing: starts at $58,955 for the RWD S trim and goes up to $76,490 for the Performance Calligraphy Design AWD trim. Eligible for $7500 Federal tax credit and various state/local and utility discounts.
Electrek’s take
I really love this take on the 3rd row electric SUV. Would I take the Ioniq 9 off-road like a Rivian? No. Does it accelerate like a Telsa Model X? No.
However, it does everything most third-row SUV owners expect, and it does it quietly and effortlessly. For those looking for a luxurious 3-row electric SUV with an interior that rivals the comfort of a minivan, you have to put the Hyundai Ioniq 9 at the top of your list.
FTC: We use income earning auto affiliate links. More.
That larger Honda electric SUV may be a pipe dream after all. Honda follows Ford, Toyota, and other automakers in adjusting major EV plans in the US.
Honda scraps plans for a larger electric SUV
Although Honda’s first electric SUV, the Prologue, was one of the top-selling EVs in the US last year, the Japanese automaker is preparing for a slowdown.
Thanks to the Trump Administration’s recently passed “Big, Beautiful Bill,” which kills off the $7,500 federal tax credit at the end of September, Honda expects lower demand for EVs.
According to a new Nikkei report, Honda is now scrapping plans for its larger electric SUV in the US, its largest market. Instead, the company will focus on hybrid vehicles, similar to recent moves from Ford, Toyota, and others.
Honda’s larger electric SUV was due to be released around 2027, about the same time as Ford and Toyota’s three-row EV SUVs. The upcoming Honda 0 Series electric SUV and sedan are still set to arrive starting next year.
We got a sneak peek of the midsize electric SUV in April after a camouflaged prototype made its debut on the streets of Tokyo for the first time.
Honda announced earlier this year that it is reducing its planned EV investments by $21 billion through 2030, as it expects lower demand. Like Ford and Toyota, Honda will focus on hybrids in the meantime.
In a separate report on June 20, Nikkei claimed that Honda and Nissan were considering a new US partnership just months after their global tie-up fell through.
Electrek’s Take
Honda is one of the few Japanese automakers to gain some momentum in the US EV market, but scrapping plans for the bigger model could put it behind rivals like Hyundai and Kia.
Through the first half of the year, Honda has sold over 16,300 Prologues in the US. In comparison, Toyota sold just over 9,200 bZ4X models.
Even Acura’s EV is seeing significantly more demand than expected. Acura sold 10,355 ZDX models in the first half of 2025, outpacing the Cadillac Lyriq, which is based on the same platform. Earlier this year, Mike Langel, vice president of national sales for Acura, told Automotive News that the company expected to sell around 1,000 ZDX models a month this year.
Honda, like most of the auto industry, is bracing for a shakeup as the Trump Administration rolls back EV incentives, putting the US on track to lag even further behind leaders like China.
FTC: We use income earning auto affiliate links. More.
Paris’ bike-share system, Vélib has long been considered one of the shining success stories of urban micromobility. With a massive fleet of over 20,000 pedal and electric-assist bicycles around Paris, the service has helped millions of residents and tourists get around the City of Light without needing a car or scooter. But lately, a growing problem is threatening to knock the wheels off this urban mobility marvel: theft and joyriding.
According to city officials and the service operator, more than 600 Vélib bikes are now going missing every single week. That’s over 30 bikes a day simply vanishing from the system – some stolen outright, others taken on “joy rides” and never returned.
“At the moment we’re missing 3,000 bikes,” explained Sylvain Raifaud, head of the Agemob company that currently operates the Velib system. That’s nearly 15% of over 20,000 Vélib bikes across Paris.
The sticky-fingered culprits aren’t necessarily professional thieves or organized crime rings. Instead, they’re often regular users who treat the shared bikes like disposable toys.
The city estimates that many people have figured out how to pry the bikes out of the system’s parking docks, unlocking one for a casual cruise and then ditching it somewhere far from a docking station.
Once pried free, the bikes are technically usable for the next 24 hours until their automatic locking feature kicks in. At that point, the bikes are often simply abandoned. Some end up in alleyways. Others get tossed in rivers. A few just disappear completely.
And since the bikes are intended to be parked at their many docking stations around the city, they don’t have GPS chips, further complicating recovery of “liberated” bikes.
The issue started small but has grown into more than an inconvenience – it’s beginning to undermine the entire purpose of the service. With bikes going missing at such a high rate, many Vélib docking stations are left empty, especially during rush hours.
Riders looking for a quick commute or a convenient hop across town are increasingly finding themselves without available bikes, or having to walk long distances to find a functioning one.
That kind of unreliability chips away at user confidence and threatens to drive potential riders back into cars, cabs, or other less sustainable forms of transport at a time when Paris has already made great strides to dramatically reduce car usage in the city.
The losses are financially painful, too. Replacing stolen or vandalized bikes isn’t cheap, and the resources spent on tracking down missing equipment or reinforcing anti-theft measures are stretching thin. Vélib has faced theft and vandalism issues before, especially during its early years, but this latest surge has officials sounding the alarm with renewed urgency.
Officials acknowledge that there’s no easy fix. Paris, like many cities with bike-share systems, walks a fine line between accessibility and accountability. Part of what makes Vélib so successful is its ease of use and widespread availability. But those same features make it vulnerable to misuse – especially when enforcement is limited and the consequences for abuse are minimal.
The timing of the problem is especially unfortunate. In recent years, Paris has seen impressive results in reducing car traffic, expanding bike lanes, and promoting cycling as a key part of its sustainable transport strategy. Vélib is a cornerstone of that plan. But if the system becomes too unreliable, it risks losing the very people it was designed to serve.
Meanwhile, as Parisians increasingly find themselves staring at empty docks, the challenge for the city and Vélib will be to restore confidence in the system without making it harder to use. That means striking the right balance between freedom and responsibility, between open access and protection against abuse.
In a city where cycling is supposed to be the future of mobility, losing thousands of bikes to joyriders and sticky fingers isn’t just frustrating; it’s unsustainable.
FTC: We use income earning auto affiliate links. More.
-
Sports3 years ago‘Storybook stuff’: Inside the night Bryce Harper sent the Phillies to the World Series
-
Sports1 year agoStory injured on diving stop, exits Red Sox game
-
Sports2 years agoGame 1 of WS least-watched in recorded history
-
Sports2 years agoMLB Rank 2023: Ranking baseball’s top 100 players
-
Sports4 years ago
Team Europe easily wins 4th straight Laver Cup
-
Environment2 years agoJapan and South Korea have a lot at stake in a free and open South China Sea
-
Sports2 years agoButton battles heat exhaustion in NASCAR debut
-
Environment2 years agoGame-changing Lectric XPedition launched as affordable electric cargo bike