This story is part of our series Science Matters, where we interview scientists about the practical implications of federal attacks on science jobs, funding, and education for everyday families and public health.
“The EPA seems to have changed their mission. Maybe not formally, but when Administrator Zeldin talks about the mission of the agency, he certainly speaks in ways that I don’t think any prior administrator has,” says environmental social scientist David Konisky.
David’s work at Indiana University—he’s a School of Public and Environmental Affairs professor and co-director of Energy Justice Lab—straddles the intersection of energy and environment, climate change, and social justice. He found himself face-to-face with Lee Zeldin’s new mission earlier this year, when a research project abruptly lost considerable EPA funding.
“We went from an administration that for the first time was sincerely and systematically interested in and pursuing environmental justice in all of its manifestations throughout the government. That obviously has changed,” he says.
Tell the Trump Administration: Don't Bail Out Coal. Protect Our Children's Health!
Some change was anticipated; a pendulum shift around energy, environment, and climate frequently occurs from one administration to the next. But this was different. “The depth and speed of the changes caught me a little bit off guard,” he allows.
Lost funding, fear, and a solution
Energy Justice Lab had an EPA grant of over $1 million for a three-year multi-institutional project. “This was a really elaborate project to study how things like electrification and energy efficiency upgrades in homes lead to potentially better outcomes in terms of energy affordability, improved comfort, and improved air quality.” Partners included a few other universities and groups on the ground in Cincinnati, where the project was being rolled out, including the regional climate collaborative Green Umbrella and a nonprofit subsidized housing organization serving economically disadvantaged populations. When EPA pulled the plug, an enormous amount of work had already been done—recruiting people, forging relationships, collecting pre-intervention data. Physical upgrades in volunteer homes were about to begin.
David’s immediate concern was for staff and students funded by the project. He was also afraid of what would be lost: “From a science standpoint, we were really disappointed. We wanted to learn and then to share widely the true benefits of these kinds of physical upgrades to people’s homes.” Though it was a small study, he and his partners believed the implications of the findings were going to be important—and could even create widespread urgency and motivation to address big problems through upgrades and electrification. David felt being able to demonstrate the dividends of these investments, especially for low-income populations, would resonate with the policy community, larger scale investors like foundations, and other key players essential to a broad clean energy transition.
Good news: the project continues, so this is once again possible. The grant partners were able to pivot, scramble, and find alternative non-EPA funding from a private donor and one of the universities involved. They were only set back a few months. “It was quite disruptive, but it didn’t kill our ability to complete the study,” he says.
Loss of future workforce
EPA’s new mission, including funding cuts, however, is more than just disruptive. While David’s undergraduate class, Environmental Law, Justice, and Politics, remains continuously at capacity, there has been a decline in interest at the graduate level. “We have a pretty large professional program around environmental management that typically attracts a lot of students. But they’re seeing a pretty challenging job market, so some are reconsidering that as a career path, at least in the short term,” he notes. Students currently enrolled or recently graduated have struggled to find jobs across different sectors of the economy.
Federal impacts on cleaner energy transition
This is a shift. In recent years, the fast-moving transition to cleaner energy—pushed forward by technology and markets—has been a job creator. Now this, too, is poised to change. “Using electric vehicles as an example, there was a rush for people to buy EVs. Many did, but federal tax credits will no longer be offered. I think we would expect to see a slowdown in demand.” Car companies have reportedly been discussing decreasing EV production.
But it’s not just cars. “With the repeal of most parts of the Inflation Reduction Act, the trajectory for the medium term is not nearly as robust as it was just a year ago,” says David, clarifying that nothing happening on the federal level can stop the clean energy transition at this point. But it can slow it down, and even a slower pace can be devastating given the urgency of addressing climate change. “We don’t have a lot of time to spare. And if we slow down our transition away from those fuels, people are going to continue to be exposed to them. That matters. That means that a lot of lower income communities of color, other vulnerable populations are going to continue to disproportionately feel those burdens.”
A new book
David chose to focus on these populations in his most recent book, Power Lines: The Human Costs of American Energy in Transition, written with Sanya Carley, his long-time collaborator at the University of Pennsylvania. Research is data-heavy, quantitative, full of statistics. The co-authors chose to shift their typical research lens in this book to center people and communities, especially those who struggle to pay for energy or who might be adversely affected by the clean energy transition. “Not to suggest that we should not take on climate change, but to try to remind everyone to do that in a smart, effective, just way requires thinking about those who might find themselves on the downsides of the transition,” he notes.
This is central to the work of Energy Justice Lab, which, now without federal support, David feels is more important than ever. “The issues we are working on, the intersection of energy transition and social justice, do not become less important because of changes at the federal level. They become more important,” he insists.
Things will eventually change again at the federal level, he contends, and there will be opportunities for policy and programs to come back. “We need to be positioned with evidence-based recommendations so that when that opportunity next arises, we’re well positioned to make those changes. That’s how I look at it and how I try to remain optimistic and motivated to continue the work.”
Tell the Trump Administration: Don't Bail Out Coal. Protect Our Children's Health!