Quick Key Facts
- More than 45 million people bird in the U.S., spending around $41 billion a year on their hobby.
- U.S. ornithologist Florence Merriam Bailey published what is largely considered the first modern bird guide in 1889 titled Birds: Through an Opera-Glass.
- Twitching is a type of birding in which participants travel far and wide to see rare species.
- One study found that increasing the number of bird species in a person’s daily life by 10 percent raised their contentment more than increasing their income by 10 percent.
- People who engage in wildlife-based recreation like birding are four to five times more likely to actively promote conservation.
- Bird data posted specifically on eBird now varies from official scientific surveys by only 0.4 percent per year.
- The American Birding Association has crafted a “code of birding ethics” that has three main sections: 1. “Respect and promote birds and their environment;” 2. “Respect and promote the birding community and its individual members;” and 3. “Respect and promote the law and the rights of others.”
- Hummingbirds must drink nectar every 10 to 15 minutes from 1,000 to 2,000 flowers per day.
- One 2013 study found that domestic cats kill 1.3 to four billion birds in the U.S. every year. This makes them likely the leading human-related killer of birds in the country.
- In North America alone. bird populations have declined by 29 percent, or nearly three billion birds, since 1970.
What Is ‘Birding’?
McKinneMike / iStock Editorial / Getty Images Plus
Birding is the act of observing and identifying birds in the wild as a form of recreation. This can range from taking note of all the birds who visit a backyard feeder, or traveling across the country to try to see more U.S. bird species than anyone else in a 12-month period, like the characters played by Jack Black, Owen Wilson and Steve Martin do in The Big Year. Birding is a popular pastime: More than 45 million people bird in the U.S., and they spend around $41 billion a year on equipment like binoculars or trips to see birds. In the UK, more people belong to the Royal Society for the Protection of Birds than all of the country’s political parties put together. While it’s historically been associated with older, wealthier, whiter adults, visible interest in the activity is widening alongside awareness of its many benefits for both birders and birds.
In the past, bird lovers would differentiate between birdwatching and birding, with birdwatching seen as a more amateur and passive observation of birds and birding — defined in this case as going out and tracking down different species — as more serious and active. But in recent years there has been a push to make the community more inclusive by leveling the hierarchy and applying the term “birder” to everyone, since it includes people who perceive birds through senses other than their eyes. Birdability coordinator Freya McGregor has proposed a new definition of birding: Simply, “The act of enjoying wild birds.”
A Brief History of Birding
Humans have probably been observing birds since the beginning of our history as a species. One of the images painted on the walls of the Lascaux Cave in France in 15,000 to 10,000 B.C. was a man with the head of a bird, and some prehistoric artists painted owls in other French caves. However, the hobby we recognize today as “birdwatching” or “birding” evolved over the course of the 19th and 20th centuries.
Birding developed as an alternative to the 19th-century trend of collecting stuffed bird specimens for display or scientific study, as Tim Birkhead details in Birds and Us: A 12,000-Year History From Cave Art to Conservation. One early birder, British ornithologist Edmund Selous, converted from stuffing to watching while observing two European nightjars in 1898. “Now that I have watched birds closely, the killing of them seems to me as something monstrous and horrible,” he wrote. In 1901, he published a book called Bird Watching, which is believed to be the first use of that term. Another early proponent of observing over killing was U.S. ornithologist Florence Merriam Bailey, who published what is largely considered the first modern bird guide in 1889 titled Birds: Through an Opera-Glass, which is still in print! She was also distressed by the killing of birds to decorate hats with their plumage and recommended birdwatching as an antidote: “We’ll take the girls afield, and let them get acquainted with the birds,” she said. “Then of inborn necessity, they will wear feathers never more.”
Selous’ and Bailey’s models of compassionate and curious avian engagement took off on both sides of the Atlantic by the early 1900s, aided by improvements to the design of binoculars over the latter half of the 19th century. Birding saw a boost of popularity during and after World War II as well, driven in part by the publication of more field guides, including James Fisher’s Watching Birds, which sold more than a million copies. The hobby’s popularity continued to soar through the 50s, 60s, 70s, and 80s through to today. Improvements in spotting technology and access to the internet have made it easier to identify birds and share that information with others. Guides have become more extensive, and more birders sharing more information means that people are actually seeing more birds now despite some decreases in populations.
The expansion of air travel and communication technology in the second half of the 20th century has made it easier for people to travel far and wide in search of rare birds. This type of birding has earned its own name: twitching. The term comes from British birder Howard Medhurst, who used to ride on the back of a friend’s motorcycle when their group went to spot birds in the 1950s. When the group reached their destination, he would dismount jerkily and shiver, or twitch, while lighting a cigarette. The rest of the group began to copy his movements and to refer to rare-bird chasing as “to go on a twitch.” Twitchers will often attempt Big Years, in which they try to spot as many different species as they can in a certain area. One innovator of the practice was U.S. businessman Guy Emerson, who spotted 497 species while traveling in North America in 1939. The current international record holder is Arjan Dwarshuis of the Netherlands, who logged 6,852 species in 2016 by traveling to 40 countries on every continent except Antarctica.
In the past several decades, birding has also gotten more diverse. When it first emerged, birdwatching was considered a hobby for the wealthy, especially men. But, as society changed over the 20th century, birding did too, with more women, minorities, and people of all economic classes getting involved. Black Birders Week was launched in 2020 to draw attention to African American bird lovers, and, as of 2023, the leaders of the National Audubon Society and the American Ornithological Society are both women. Molly Adams founded the Feminist Bird Club in 2016 to make birding and the outdoors more accessible to people who might not feel safe accessing it alone and to promote positive change. However, while birding has become more visibly diverse and inclusive in the last decades, if you take McGregor’s definition of “the act of enjoying wild birds,” it’s more likely than not that people of all genders, races, classes, nationalities and identities have been birding under the radar from the beginning. For example, in the early 1800s, rural working class poet John Clare penned detailed descriptions of the nests and habits of birds in the English fenlands based on careful observation. Clare is one of the rare working-class voices to enter the cannon relatively early, but doubtless there were many others whose observations stayed between them and the birds.
What Are the Benefits of Birding?
Birding has many benefits both for the people who do it and what they watch.
Mental and Physical Health
A growing body of research has shown that spending time in nature is good for your mental and physical health, and there is evidence that spending that time birding can be especially healing. One 2022 study found that hearing or seeing birds could boost mood for up to eight hours, both among healthy individuals and individuals with depression. The study controlled for seeing or hearing other natural elements like trees, plants or water and found that noticing birds still made a difference. Another, from 2013, found that participants associated birdsong more than any other natural sound with stress relief and improved attention span. A third, from 2021, found that living near more species of birds was correlated with increased happiness: Upping the number of species by 10 percent raised people’s contentment more than increasing their income by 10 percent. Birding is also good for physical health by encouraging people to spend more time outdoors and to walk or hike to better birding spots. The Royal Society for the Protection of Birds has even teamed up with doctors in Shetland to prescribe outdoor activities, including birdwatching.
Community
Another way that birding can boost your mental health and overall well-being is by introducing you to a larger community that shares your interest. Most local wildlife refuges or parks, local bird groups, or local chapters of national bird groups will host outings that anyone can join and learn how to spot birds in that area. If you prefer to bird alone, you can also interact with other birders through social media or digital platforms like eBird, where you can both log your own sightings and read what birds others have spotted in your area.
Conservation
From its origins as an alternative to specimen collections and a lure away from feathered hats, birdwatching has been closely linked with bird conservation. A 2015 study found that people who engage in wildlife-based recreation activities — including birdwatching — were four to five times more likely to actively participate in conservation activities like donating money, joining environmental groups, working to restore habitat on public lands and lobbying for more wildlife recreation. The three major birding organizations in the U.S. — The National Audubon Society, the American Birding Association (ABA) and the American Ornithological Society — consider conservation a key part of their work and missions. It turns out Bailey was right: When people begin to pay attention to birds, they often become more motivated to protect them and their habitats.
Citizen Science
One important way that birders aid conservation efforts is by providing more information to scientists about birds and their numbers and habits. Determining population trends is essential for conservation, and bird data posted on eBird specifically now varies from official scientific surveys by only 0.4 percent per year. Birders also engage in annual surveys of bird numbers to aid in research. One example is the National Audubon Society’s Christmas Bird Count. This was started by ornithologist Frank M. Chapman on Christmas Day, 1900, as an alternative to the tradition of hunting birds during the holidays. Now, tens of thousands of citizen scientists participate between December 14 and January 5 every year, and the data helps conservationists track the health of bird populations and determine priorities. Other annual surveys include The Big Sit and the Great Backyard Bird Count.
Are There Any Downsides to Birding?
While birding can have many positives for nature and humans, like any activity, it has drawbacks when participants choose to be less than respectful of nature and other humans. None of these problems are necessarily inherent to the act of looking at birds; they are rather things that birders should be mindful to avoid.
Damaging Species and Ecosystems
While birding has many conservation benefits, it can also harm birds and their habitat if done improperly. For example, some birders will play a recording of a bird they are seeking in order to encourage a response in the wild. This practice has been shown to increase the time some birds spend singing, which could harm them by using up energy and distracting them from other activities. In the age of social media, postings of rare or vulnerable birds can draw large crowds that could disturb or harm them. To address situations like these, ABA has crafted a “code of birding ethics” that has three main sections: 1. “Respect and promote birds and their environment;” 2. “Respect and promote the birding community and its individual members;” and 3. “Respect and promote the law and the rights of others.” Section 1 includes minimizing playback, being careful around nests and roosts and reducing habitat disturbance by sticking to paths and trails.
Taking It Too Far
Birding can turn competitive or obsessive, especially among people who attempt Big Years or travel in search of rare birds. People have missed important family events and put serious relationships in jeopardy. As sites like eBird have made it easier to share information, they have also increased the competitiveness, and sometimes people can be rude to birders who, for example, misidentify a bird in a public forum. The ABA code of ethics applies here too, encouraging birders to “respect the interests, rights, and skill levels of fellow birders” and be welcoming to newcomers.
Environmental Injustice
Birding has historically been seen as a hobby for white and well-off people. Sometimes, people of color can even be harassed when they attempt to spend time in nature, such as the infamous incident in 2020 when a woman called the cops on African American birder Christian Cooper when he asked her to leash her dog in a leash-only area of Central Park. For lower-income people, both purchasing binoculars and finding leisure time can be barriers to birding. There is also a legacy of colonialism and racism in early ornithology. John James Audubon — a prominent 19th century bird artist and scientist who gave the National Audubon Society its name — also owned slaves and embraced scientific racism. In recent years, the birding world has made efforts to reconcile with this history and make the hobby more inclusive. The National Audubon Society considered changing its name, but ultimately decided against it. However, local chapters have abandoned the Audubon name. The American Ornithological Society announced in 2023 that it would change all the English names of birds in its jurisdiction named after people, since many of them were named after controversial figures who had a history of racism. “Everyone who loves and cares about birds should be able to enjoy and study them freely — and birds need our help now more than ever,” AOS President Colleen Handel said of the change.
How to Get Started
If you are interested in birding, there are many resources available to help you get started.
Where to Find Birds
You can find birds everywhere, but the best place to start is somewhere near home with either green space, open water or both. Some birds, like gulls, crows or mallards, make their presence obvious. For others, you might have to look a little harder. The National Audubon Society recommends taking a moment to clear your head from other distractions, looking at places where birds might perch such as power lines or trees, scanning the landscape slowly, looking with your eyes before trying binoculars, listening for distinctive bird calls and moving on once you have seen a sizable number of birds in one area.
How to Attract Birds
You don’t even have to leave home to bird. Backyard birding is the act of observing birds from your porch or window by enticing them to come to you. The best way to do this is by planting native plants in your yard. This will draw both birds and insects, which the birds can eat. If you decide to install feeders, smaller tubular feeders filled with thistle seed will attract finches, while a larger feeder filled with nuts, fruit and sunflower seeds will be a hit with cardinals, grackles and blue jays. Place your feeders within 12 feet of another feature the birds can fly to if predators approach. This will make them feel safer visiting your home. The most important times to feed birds are during extreme weather events, migration season and late winter or early spring. During the summer, most species can find plenty of food.
The exceptions are nectar-hungry hummingbirds. There are at least 53 species of North American birds that primarily drink nectar, including hummingbirds and orioles. Hummingbirds in particular must drink nectar every 10 to 15 minutes from 1,000 to 2,000 flowers per day. You can plant hummingbird-friendly flowers, but while you wait for them to grow, fill feeders with a mixture of one part white sugar to three parts water. It’s important to remove feeders if you learn of any avian disease outbreaks in your area that your feeders could spread.
How to Identify Birds
There are many digital and paper resources that will help you identify birds. The Cornell Lab of Ornithology’s Merlin app will give you an ID based on a photograph or audio recording of their song. There are also many field guides to birds in your area. Popular books for U.S. birders include The Sibley Guide to Birds, the Peterson Field Guide to Birds of North America, the Golden Guide’s Birds of North America and National Geographic Field Guide to the Birds of North America. It’s better to choose a guide with drawings rather than photographs, as artists make sure to include all identifying features that might be obscured by lighting. When you are trying to match a wild bird to a potential ID, it’s important to consider what group it belongs to, i.e. is it a sparrow or an owl; its shape; its size; its behavior; where you are seeing it; when you are seeing it; any distinctive markings; and its song or call.
What You Need
Bird enthusiasts participate in the National Audubon Society’s 117th annual Christmas Bird Count in Anne Arundel County, Maryland on Dec. 18, 2016. Will Parson / Chesapeake Bay Program
You do need a limited amount of gear for birding — most importantly, binoculars. The National Audubon Society offers recommendations for specific models based on how much you want to spend. In general, look for a power of seven or eight and lenses on the wider end that are between 30 and 42 millimeters. In addition to binoculars and a field guide, bring whatever outdoor gear you need to safely and comfortably bird your chosen area. You may also want a notebook to compile a life list of all the different species you see. The Merlin app also allows you to keep a digital record.
How to Get Involved
Chances are, there are other birders in your area. The National Audubon Society has a guide to its local chapters here, the ABA has a list of birding clubs and organizations by state here, and the Feminist Bird Club here. Many of these local groups will advertise bird outings on their websites or social media pages in local parks that you can attend to get started or meet other birders. You can also sign up for their email listservs. Many will share opportunities to advocate for birds in your town, city or state as well.
How to Protect Birds (So You Can Keep Watching Them!)
Conservation is so important to birding that the ABA’s ethics code calls on birders to “support the conservation of birds and their habitats” and “Engage in and promote bird-friendly practices whenever possible.”
From Window Strikes
Building strikes killed an estimated median of 599 million birds in the U.S. in 2017. You can prevent birds from crashing into your own home by identifying large windows or windows near feeders and decorating them with vertical markings two inches by two inches apart. Adding screens can also be an effective deterrent. At night, bright lights during migration season can pull birds from their route and make them more likely to crash into the illuminated buildings. In addition to switching off your own lights during peak migration, you can advocate for your city or town to participate in a Lights Out initiative to reduce urban light pollution in spring or fall.
From Cats
One 2013 study found that domestic cats kill 1.3 to four billion birds in the U.S. every year. This makes them likely the leading human-related killer of birds in the country. While most of these deaths are caused by feral cats, there are things pet owners can do to protect birds. The most important thing is keeping your cats indoors. If that’s not possible, make sure your yard has lots of shrubs or bushes where smaller animals can hide. Place feeders or bird baths 10 to 12 feet from where cats could hide and take down your feeders if your cat is killing birds. If you want to get a cat, adopt a shelter animal to prevent it from ending up on the streets, and never abandon cats outside.
From Pesticides
Pesticide poisoning killed a median 72 million U.S. birds in 2017. Anticoagulant rodenticides can harm or kill birds of prey when they eat rats that have ingested them. To avoid this, manage rodents in alternative ways by not leaving out food, dismantling potential nesting spots and using non-lethal trapping methods. Herbicides and insecticides, especially neonicotinoids, can also harm birds. Avoid using pesticides on your own garden, and, when possible, choose organic produce to support pesticide-free agriculture.
From Habitat Loss
While numbers are difficult to ascertain, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service believes that habitat loss is the leading threat to birds. Human activity clears or disturbs forests or converts wild areas to farmland or human developments. In the U.S., 4.8 million acres of wild land were converted to agriculture between 2007 and 2018. This reduces the amount of land available for winter breeding and feeding for migratory birds. You can push back against habitat loss by planting native species; creating habitats like brush piles in your yard; avoiding raking; advocating for the protection or restoration of ecosystems on a local, state and national level; and choosing brands of coffee or beef that are grown in ways that don’t harm birds.
From Climate Change
The National Audubon Society found that rising temperatures caused by the climate crisis put two-thirds of North American bird species at risk of extinction as their ranges shift due to changing conditions. However, limiting global warming to 1.5 degrees Celsius above pre-industrial levels would improve the situation of 76 percent of vulnerable species and keep almost 150 species from extinction risk. The only way this will happen is if human societies and governments swiftly phase out fossil fuels and end the destruction of natural carbon sinks like forests. You can advocate for climate action on a global, national, regional and local level and take steps to reduce your own carbon footprint by, for example, reducing car and plane travel and cutting your home’s emissions by taking steps to improve its energy efficiency.
Takeaway
In North America alone, bird populations have declined by 29 percent, or nearly three billion birds, since 1970. The biodiversity and climate crises mean that birds are perhaps more threatened than ever. Yet more and more people are learning to appreciate them. During the Covid-19 pandemic, people turned to birding as an infection-safe activity, and sales of bird seed and feeders took flight. The more people who take up birding, the more people who will grow aware of birds and the threats they face and have a strong personal motivation to protect them. So if you’re thinking of giving birding a try, go ahead and install a feeder or upload Merlin. At the least, you will make your own life more interesting. At the most, you may be inspired to help save the world.
The post Birding 101: Everything You Need to Know appeared first on EcoWatch.
https://www.ecowatch.com/birding-facts-ecowatch.html
Green Living
Sustainability In Your Ear: GoodPower’s Leah Qusba on Selling Clean Energy as Pocketbook Power
In 2024, 91% of new large-scale renewable projects around the world made electricity for less money than any fossil-fuel option, according to the International Renewable Energy Agency. Solar power was 41% cheaper than the lowest-cost fossil fuel, and onshore wind was 53% cheaper. The technology that can lower energy bills, keep the grid stable, and create jobs is now the most affordable way to build power almost anywhere. So, here’s the big question our guest faces every day: if clean energy is this good and this affordable, why is it still so tough to get people to support it? Leah Qusba leads GoodPower, a nonprofit focused on strategic communications and research. For almost twenty years, it was known as Action for the Climate Emergency, but it changed its name during Climate Week 2025. Since Leah took over, the group has grown about ten times bigger, built a network of over 8,500 content creators who share facts about renewables, and started running live messaging tests through its Good Data Lab. The new name highlights that renewable power is good power, and the best way to win support is by showing how it affects people’s monthly bills. The decision to rebrand was based on data. Leah’s team learned that words like “climate” and “emergency” can shut down conversations in rural, conservative areas where most new wind and solar projects are built. GoodPower shifted its message to focus on jobs, community investment, and steady power bills.
GoodPower also works to fight anti-renewables disinformation, which Leah says spreads fastest in the first day or two after a grid emergency. When Winter Storm Fern knocked out power in more than 20 states in January, the organization had a few days’ notice and quickly got its creator network ready to “prebunk” the usual claim that renewables caused the blackouts. This strategy, based on the Debunking Handbook, starts with the truth, points out the false claim, and then repeats the truth to make it stick. GoodPower uses the same idea in its AI tools: CleanCast predicts where local fights over new projects might start so communities can get accurate information early, and TrueVoice spots AI-generated comments in public records. Still, Leah says the best messengers are neighbors, since people trust those who share their experiences. For instance, when Boulder City, Nevada’s Republican mayor, Joe Hardy, talks about how solar and storage helped his town’s budget, it connects with other conservative communities in a way ads can’t.
GoodPower’s network of creators shares clean-energy messages through car-repair, food, and gaming videos. Leah calls this the raisin bread theory: the regular content is the bread, and the renewables message is the raisin. For communities already dealing with climate impacts, she highlights groups like Extreme Weather Survivors, which gives wildfire and flood survivors a way to push for policy changes from the ground up.
To learn more, visit goodpower.org and follow Leah Qusba on LinkedIn, where she is active and easy to reach.
- Subscribe to Sustainability In Your Ear on iTunes
- Follow Sustainability In Your Ear on Spreaker, iHeartRadio, or YouTube
Interview Transcript
Mitch Ratcliffe 0:10
Hello! Good morning, good afternoon, or good evening, wherever you are on this beautiful planet of ours. Welcome to Sustainability In Your Ear. This is the podcast conversation about accelerating the transition to a sustainable, carbon-neutral society. And I’m your host, Mitch Ratcliffe. Thanks for joining the conversation today. Let’s talk about accelerating that shift to renewables in detail.
The technology to lower our energy bills, build a more secure grid, and create millions of jobs already exists. Renewables are now the cheapest and fastest power to deploy almost anywhere on the planet, so here’s the puzzle my guest today wrestles with every single day. If the solutions are this good and this affordable, why is it so hard to build public support for them?
Part of the answer is that we’re trying to make the case for sustainable technologies in an openly hostile environment. Federal climate policy has been rolled back, and there are coordinated disinformation campaigns ready to blame wind and solar within hours of any grid emergency, whether or not the facts support those accusations. And the social platforms where most people get their information will quietly bury anything labeled climate, handing it only to people who already agree that it’s a concern. The audiences you need to reach most never see your message about sustainability.
Leah Qusba has built a career breaking through the noise to reach audiences intent on climate progress. She’s the CEO of GoodPower, an organization you may have known until recently as Action for the Climate Emergency, or ACE. She’s led it for more than 15 years, growing it roughly tenfold into one of the sharpest media and research operations in the climate space, and she runs real experiments on what messaging actually changes behavior, working with thousands of content creators to carry the conversation to people the movement has never reached before. Her own path started along Wisconsin’s Fox River, in a stretch of water she played in as a kid that later became an EPA Superfund site before she finished high school.
We’re going to explore how to sell the benefits of clean energy when the word climate itself becomes a liability, and how you fight disinformation when a lie travels faster than the truth, and why Leah ultimately believes affordability, not alarm, is the door most people will actually walk through when asked about climate. So, what can we do to shift the climate conversation? Let’s find out after this brief commercial break.
[COMMERCIAL BREAK]
Mitch Ratcliffe 2:41
Leah Qusba, welcome to Sustainability In Your Ear. How are you doing today?
Leah Qusba 2:45
I’m doing great. How are you?
Mitch Ratcliffe 2:46
Well, I’m well, thanks for taking the time to talk with me. It’s always interesting to speak to somebody who’s been dedicated to climate awareness for so long. You grew up in Wisconsin’s Paper Valley, and a river you played in, the Fox, became an EPA Superfund site while you were in high school. How much of your work derives from the experience of having played in that river, which was polluted and needed a cleanup?
Leah Qusba 3:10
Yeah, I certainly didn’t know it at the time, growing up in small-town USA in northeastern Wisconsin. I think it has impacted me dramatically and greatly. I kind of look back — it’s over, you know, 25 to 30 years ago at this point. I look back at that time and think, wow, there’s nobody organizing people around that type of environmental disaster. People were angry, they felt powerless. It took over a decade, and then the EPA said, well, we did our best, we can’t really fully clean this up in terms of all the PCBs in the river. So I look back on that time, and I think it did set me on the path that I’m on today.
Mitch Ratcliffe 3:52
We know so much more about the world, and part of the experience of living by a river that turned out to be so polluted is your own recognition. How do you use that approach to storytelling to help other people make the leap to understand where we are with regard to the climate?
Leah Qusba 4:09
Well, I often think about my dad, and what’s interesting about my dad is he’s a staunch conservative — he believes climate change is not man-made — and he recently became a supporter of solar, not because of me, not because of his own daughter’s influence, but actually his HVAC guy has a side business doing rooftop solar, and it was that conversation that convinced my dad. So I think what I take away is: rural speaks to rural, conservative speaks to conservative, neighbor speaks to neighbor.
I think in an internet environment where people trust what’s on the internet less and less, and with the rise of artificial intelligence and related content, I think all we have left is really each other, and so we really leverage that. How do we find stories of communities that already have solar, wind, and batteries, for example, to demystify what these technologies are for a neighboring town, county, or state? It really works.
Mitch Ratcliffe 5:11
In September, you changed the name of the organization from Action for the Climate Emergency to GoodPower. What stopped working about the words climate emergency?
Leah Qusba 5:21
Yeah, I mean, I think as the years went on and we were using this brand, we don’t want to fall into traps where climate, decarbonization, and energy issues are sort of unfairly politicized as left versus right. When we say words like climate in a rural conservative community, that can be a non-starter. When we say things like emergency, do we fall into the trap of being climate alarmists, as we have been dubbed? There’s a different way — there’s a bigger-tent approach where, depending on the audience you’re speaking to, there’s different ways in to showing the economic promise of the energy transition.
Right, what do communities get? Jobs, community investment, long-term leases for farmers and landowners that are, you know, nervous private equity is coming to buy their land for an Amazon logistics warehouse or a data center or something like that. So I think for us, our brand wasn’t working for enough of the American people, especially where, you know, ground zero for the energy transition happens to be rural red America, where a lot of this infrastructure needs to be built and is being built.
So we did it because we wanted a bigger tent that more people could get under and feel a sense of belonging — that, wow, I see something for me in the energy transition. I see something for me in what community benefits I could potentially reap from decarbonized power being built in my town or community. So it was really about creating that bigger tent for more people to get under.
Mitch Ratcliffe 6:51
Well, your dad’s experience is recognizing that there’s economic opportunity in advanced technology. Funny thing, it wakes you up to the opportunity, but it doesn’t address the fact that we’re being told that there’s a crisis all the time, and one of the issues that I seem to run into a lot is that even within the climate community there are very rigid differences of opinion about where to focus our effort and investment. How has the movement torn itself apart to a degree, even as it establishes real credibility because of the fact of the climate changing so rapidly?
Leah Qusba 7:25
I mean, when you just break it down to scientific terms, right? Climate change happens very slowly, and then all at once, I think, is the famous quote, right? How did I go broke? It started slowly, and then all at once. I think for us, what we have learned — we’ve been in business for about 18 years, and I’ve been at GoodPower for about 17 of those years — the number one voting issue, cycle after cycle, and now even young people in 2024, in the last presidential, even young people rated the economy as number one. Usually they’re voting on values issues, you know, racial justice and all sorts of other things. They rated the economy. So the economy isn’t working for most people. Nearly 70% of us in the US live paycheck to paycheck.
So we really, at GoodPower, recognize that people want immediate change. How are my energy bills going to go down? Why are prices at the gas pump going up and down like the stock market? Why aren’t they more predictable? The answer: homegrown power — solar, wind, batteries. It’s not exposed to global commodity risks like oil and gas, right? There’s no far-off war that is going to make the cost of the wind and the sun, which happen to be free — there is no fuel cost — it’s not going to make those go up and down in that way.
So I think it’s about connecting the everyday experiences and things people are constantly worried about. How am I going to keep my job? Am I going to be laid off? Will I be able to afford groceries this week? My energy bill doubled in the last year, and there’s no sight. How do we look at the energy transition as unlocking this generational economic opportunity, right? This potential economic renaissance for the middle class. It’s not just saving money and having more predictability and control and autonomy around one’s bills. It’s also about the wealth regenerating and the economic investment.
I’m from a rural community. These communities are emptying out. Young people are leaving. They need investment. They need new schools, new infrastructure, new roads. Farmers are struggling — hundreds close every year in the US. Well, great: let’s farm 300 acres of solar, along with my 3,000 acres of soybeans and corn. When I have a rough year, the solar still pays the bill. So I think there’s incredible economic potential here, and that hasn’t really been communicated effectively.
Mitch Ratcliffe 9:39
You argue that renewable power is good power, but at the same time, as you just pointed out, our energy bills are going through the roof. Are you arguing for truly distributed energy generation, or are you saying that there is a path to a collectively owned — whatever form that takes — infrastructure that allows us to really meet the electrical demands of the era we’re entering?
Leah Qusba 10:00
I think that’s a false choice. Our position is all of it. We are huge proponents of distributed energy resources, dispatchable power, some of the virtual power plant policies and investments that we’ve seen. We’re huge proponents of utility-scale and community-level renewable projects. We think battery energy storage — when you pair that, right, that’s the invention of the battery — is how we get to more reliable power. So all of it. I think we need all of it.
I think, you know, global energy volatility is really a hidden tax on American families that people are really exhausted having to pay, in the midst of a cost-of-living crisis where everything else is going up — healthcare, housing, groceries. When energy goes up, by the way, everything else goes up too. So I think it’s the predictability, it’s having more control and not being at the whims of these sort of global markets and importing that volatility into people’s lives that already feel chaotic.
Mitch Ratcliffe 10:59
And yet we need to press through the capital investment phase of this with determination, and it seems like the determination is being shaken by, let’s say, people at the White House. How do you tell a story in the face of such rigorous and often completely misleading responses from the other side of the political argument?
Leah Qusba 11:20
Well, I think the American people are pretty smart. Only 40% of Republicans actually approve of their own president’s energy policies right now. That’s from GoodPower’s own national poll we did with the University of Chicago back in mid-March. So there’s extremely low approval. People understand — they feel it. You have to fill your gas tank up, right, probably once, maybe twice a week. If you’re going on vacation, a lot more than that. You have to pay that energy bill and open it up, or go online and pay it every month. So it’s in your face constantly. Nobody’s seeing change, and when you have only 40% of your own party approving your energy policies and your agenda, that’s pretty abysmal.
So I think, from my perspective, when we look at the sort of all-of-government approach to kill renewables, we’re choosing energy winners and losers, and Americans are left kind of holding the bill. It’s simple economics 101 here — supply and demand. If we’re restricting the fastest, most affordable electrons from coming online, which happen to be from solar, storage, and wind right now, we’re going to drive up bills. I mean, my 11-year-old daughter would understand the economics of that.
Mitch Ratcliffe 12:28
AI is going to play a big part in how we ultimately tell the story, and part of the solution in terms of how we optimize everything that we do — simply because we have visibility into how things work in ways we would never have been able to pre-AI. How do you integrate that part of the story, that some of this investment is necessary to develop the intelligence that is going to help us untangle the crisis that we face?
Leah Qusba 12:53
I think the stark reality is that data centers are highly unpopular right now, and land use in general — land use projects across the country are really facing increasing public opposition. I am seeing some really bright lights within the news cycle around land-use development that is being done very responsibly, transparently, in an innovative way. I think about some of the Google data center announcements recently in the MISO region, where they’re looking creatively at how do we get electrons through virtual power plants, how do we invest in infrastructure, how do we invest in community benefits, how do we procure clean electrons to power our digital infrastructure. So I think there are some really good actors out there lifting up those stories where these developments are happening in a very positive way.
I think we can look to the utility-scale renewable energy sector — I mean, this is a lot of GoodPower’s work — but just telling the stories: people have reaped enormous benefits and are very happy with this infrastructure when it’s done in the right way, and it’s transparent, and it’s with stakeholder input. I think there’s a way to do land use that can be really uplifting to communities, but getting their input and involving them as stakeholders, I think, is absolutely essential.
I think the other piece of the story that we forget: big tech, right — technology has been the number one global procurer of decarbonized electrons on planet Earth for the last 15 years. So in other words, the growth of the renewable energy sector has been commensurate with the growth and advancement in the sort of digital revolution and technology. So again, there’s a right way to do it, and if we can uplift stories of where the community is on board with this infrastructure — because they’ve been consulted and they’ve gotten to weigh in, and they’re really getting a good deal out of it — I think the more we can do that, the better off we’ll be.
Mitch Ratcliffe 14:47
On the other hand, AI is also part of the problem, because it is used by algorithms to direct people away from the issue. You’ve said that when you mention climate in a video, it immediately gets relegated to a pile of links to people who already agree. In other words, we’re talking to the converted. How do you articulate that to somebody who is focused on the concerns they have about their community — particularly a rural community, where I live in one as well — when talking about the need for the investment in electrification and AI, which is also potentially part of the problem that we face in terms of being relegated to pools of people who agree and never get the opportunity to evangelize to others?
Leah Qusba 15:28
We don’t say anything to rural communities. We let rural communities talk to each other, so that’s what we enable. We basically find stories that are under-told and under-platformed. For example, here’s a farmer in rural Oklahoma, in western Oklahoma. They’ve had wind on their land for 20 years, put their kids through college. They were able to keep their generational farm that was handed down to them for six generations, and they wouldn’t have been able to keep it without the wind industry, right? So that could be very convincing to another farmer who’s facing closure in a neighboring plains state, or even within the Midwest generally.
So brands, I think, need to say less. I think what we need to do more of is find and mine those stories where the projects were built responsibly, the land-use development was done in a way that enriched the community and, you know, consulted the community. How do we find those stories? We’ve produced hundreds of these now over the last five years, all over the United States, all over Brazil, the UK, right, where we were trying to really build positivity and social permission and social acceptance of this infrastructure. The stories are all out there, and it’s just about platforming and telling them and breaking through when we see this news cycle that has been so anti-renewable from this particular administration. This is the counterbalance. Just go and ask the communities, and they’ll tell you how they feel about this infrastructure.
Mitch Ratcliffe 16:55
Can you give an example of a story that, for lack of a better word, sells the idea of economic prosperity built on renewables?
Leah Qusba 17:03
Yeah, I mean, really authentic, genuine stories. I’m thinking of a story from Mayor Joe Hardy in Boulder City, Nevada. Mayor Hardy is a Republican. He’s a staunch conservative. His story is about how economically secure Boulder City, Nevada, is for the next 25 years. He talks about solar and storage. He takes us out to the fields and shows us what that looks like, and that the community has no economic worries in terms of property tax revenue, and where those revenues are going, and how it’s investing in community infrastructure, schools, etc.
I think of another story in Oklahoma, of a school superintendent who talks about how the community benefit agreement that they signed with this wind developer built a new school, and what that means for children in a community that has not seen a lot of investment over the last few decades. And then we have countless stories of farmers, landowners, neighbors to these projects who talk about the community benefits agreements — what’s in them: long-term leases, new infrastructure, donations of emergency management vehicles, police cars, fire trucks.
And again, when you position the community as a stakeholder and it’s transparent and you consult them, we can strike deals here that really work for the industry and for building decarbonized power, and that really work for people in the communities who feel like, “Wow, I’m being invested in, I’m not being extracted from.” We’re not replicating those systems of extraction; we’re investing in building something together. I think that’s really special.
Mitch Ratcliffe 18:35
Is there a risk in the movement swinging so hard toward pocketbook messaging that it no longer talks about climate, or clean in contrast to the dirty systems — or is that exactly the point?
Leah Qusba 18:45
I also think this is a false question, because we do talk about climate. It’s important to talk about climate. 8% of voters under 35 rated climate as their number one issue in 2024. So a front-door climate message, and increasing the awareness and the pie — you know, the slice of people who are really motivated by a climate message that’s front-door — I think there is a huge audience out there. We speak to that audience.
I think the point is, this is not a one-size-fits-all solution, right? The internet and social media are increasingly fractured. Audiences are tribalized. Knowing what platform you’re on and who you’re speaking to — once you know that information, you should have a very sophisticated segmented strategy. How do we connect audience to messenger and message? If you’re trying to have a silver bullet, sort of, you know, one campaign to rule them all, I think that’s a recipe for failure, and in fact you can have polarizing effects. You can make people feel less inclined to support energy and climate policies that are going to drive forward a decarbonized economy by not having the right messenger, or even a polarizing messenger that could make them more entrenched in that opinion. So I think you can do more harm than good in some cases.
I think having empathy — whether you’re talking to somebody on the left side of the ideological spectrum or the right side of the ideological spectrum, or somewhere in between — really knowing who those people are and what moves them and what they’re about, and really trying to seek to understand them and not label them as something other, or “these are not my people.” I kind of hear a lot of that sometimes. Everybody’s our people. If you’re a person, you’re our people. And I think there’s a way to speak to literally anybody about these issues in a way that’s going to land with them, and that’s really the science of communication.
Mitch Ratcliffe 20:37
To be a people person takes real work, especially when you’re telling stories. There’s a lot to unpack in this strategy. Let’s take a quick commercial break and come back to continue this fascinating discussion. Stay tuned, folks.
[COMMERCIAL BREAK]
Welcome back to Sustainability In Your Ear. Now, let’s continue the conversation with Leah Qusba. She is CEO of GoodPower, which is a strategic communications nonprofit working to highlight the need for and benefits of renewable energy. Leah, how do you see the world of storytelling changing because we have the tools that AI unlocks to target and reach people better? Or are we going to be overwhelmed by misinformation? I’m just — where should we set the bar in our expectations about the future of storytelling?
Leah Qusba 21:25
What a deep and complex and fascinating question. So let me start with the platforms themselves, where people are now using Claude and ChatGPT and other AI platforms almost as Google search platforms, right? So they’re looking for information. So I think one way that we’re using these tools is really, how do we set the terms of what information comes up when people are searching around: is solar good or bad? You know, will this raise my bills, lower my bills? Right, so it’s basically like SEO, but for these AI platforms — it’s called AEO and GEO. So how do you do search optimization and get the facts, not the fiction, to pop up in search results? So we do some of that work, going to the source of when people are searching, what information are they getting.
I think then, you know, we think about AI as a technology when it’s really a set of complementary capabilities, right? We’ve got automation — how do we automate the tedious and repetitive things that humans don’t want to do, so we can focus on higher-level creative work? Predictive — right, how do we forecast where siting and permitting battles are going to be through 2030 around clean energy projects, or where opposition might be forming? So how do we predict the future? And then we’re all familiar with the generative capabilities around doing better analysis and communications and content creation, etc. And the way we look at these capabilities at GoodPower, it’s less about a single piece of technology; it’s about leveraging these capabilities to build custom models. So I can walk you through a few pieces of those technologies that we’ve sort of housed.
One product is called CleanCast, and this is a piece of predictive, AI-enabled technology. It helps us forecast where the renewable energy industry might build their projects, so it pipes in public opinion research from local counties, it pipes in the governmental, environmental, and regulatory constraints that might exist. Are there existing bans and moratoria? How does that state do permitting? Does it do it at the county level through a county commission, or is it a state process through a PUC or PSC? So all sorts of intelligence to help us predict: where are these projects going to be built? What’s the prime location? Can we get there first and inoculate the public to disinformation? Can we make them resilient and less vulnerable to disinformation?
The disinformation we see out there is astounding. There was a disinformation cluster last week trying to scare potato farmers, saying Frito-Lay won’t buy your potatoes if you host solar on your land, because they’ll have glass shards in them — your potatoes will have glass inside from the solar panels. We traced this disinformation to some potato trade industry associations that are funded predominantly by the fertilizer industry, and fertilizer is petrochemicals, right? So if you follow the money — how do we anticipate where disinformation or opposition is going to be? Where is the industry going, and how do we get there first? Generally, people remember what they hear first, right? So before the public understanding hardens around the disinformation, how do we get there first? So that’s an example of one product. I have a few more I could share with you as well.
Mitch Ratcliffe 24:41
Well, you also have a small army in what you call the Creator Collective — 8,500 creators, 350 to 400 million followers in food and fashion and gaming and all the things that creators do. How does the sustainability message travel through a network like that? Maybe the message begins with a car influencer, then you run into it in a fashion commentary as well.
Leah Qusba 25:03
Well, I think, going back to your previous question around the tribalization problem on social media — like, how do we break through when the algorithms just sort us into the, you know, left-of-center green climate bucket? We don’t want to be sorted into that bucket. So creator marketing is a way to get around that. We don’t generally lead with a sustainability message with everyone. We lead with the message we think is going to work with that audience.
So if we’re trying to reach a bunch of car bros or commuters that really could save thousands of dollars annually from switching to an EV — maybe they live in a rural commuter town, they drive to the city for work — we want to hire a bunch of car bros, right, creators that are talking about fixing cars, and they slip EV messaging into their regular content streams that are more entertaining for their audience. We call it the raisin bread theory, where most of the content stays the bread, and you’re sprinkling in the raisins.
You could apply this to any one of these content verticals. If we’re talking about regenerative agriculture and getting toxic chemicals out of our food supply, MAHA moms are a great example — suburban white women in the MAHA movement, right? We want to find a bunch of them, or doctors and nurses who are really universally credible messengers who talk about health content. So depending on the audience and the campaign’s goals, we look into that community and we decide: okay, who do we want to engage for this campaign, and who’s the right credible messenger for the audience?
Mitch Ratcliffe 26:26
So would you describe that as: you coordinate and plan a sequence of messages? Or is this something that continues to happen organically based on your urging?
Leah Qusba 26:35
We do both. We do long-term campaigns that are multi-year, sort of patient-capital investments to changing an entire community’s way that they think about these technologies, where maybe there was a huge gap in understanding. One example would be: over 55% of Americans say they’ve never or rarely even heard about battery energy storage. They don’t know what it is. Great — it’s a fantastic opportunity to provide some baseline education to a huge group of people, where these projects are probably going to be built. We can get there first, before any disinformation gets out around these projects.
Then we have things that are more reactive and tied to the news cycle. So, almost two decades I’ve been in this work, and we keep losing during these rapid-response, sort of high-attention moments. The wildfires in LA are a really great example from last January, and we actually lost that narrative — DEI was blamed, that we were too busy with DEI in California to, you know, do proper forest management. It was ridiculous, but when you looked online and did advanced social listening analysis of the narrative, there were more mentions where the disinformation around DEI took over the conversation, instead of “hey, climate change is making these disasters more costly, more dangerous, and by the way, insurers are leaving the market in California.” Who’s holding the bag for that? It’s not the polluters that caused the problem; it’s the ratepayers, the premium holders that live in that state. So how do we make those connections? So there’s both a rapid-response element where we’re gathering this intelligence from the news cycle and responding, and then there’s more long-term strategies that we’re building as well.
Mitch Ratcliffe 28:14
Talk a little about the rapid response. In January, Winter Storm Fern caused up to $6.7 billion in damage, and there were a lot of disinformation initiatives around that storm almost immediately, and they were blaming wind and solar for the grid not having stayed as resilient as it needed to be, ignoring the fact that it’s an ancient grid. What does an effective, fast counter-messaging effort look like? How do you move the truth at the speed of a lie when lies are propagating so quickly?
Leah Qusba 28:46
We actually did a rapid-response activation with our creator community that last weekend in January — I remember that vividly — and because Winter Storm Fern was a forecasted storm, we actually had a few days of lead time, so it wasn’t a same-day activation. We could plan and really activate our community.
So what we did: we used the best practices — sort of the gold standard for inoculation, or prebunking, is another way you can name it. It’s to prepare the audience for disinformation they might see, so that when they see it, it bounces off of them instead of sinks into them. So we follow the Debunking Handbook, and there’s a way to do it where you’re not reinforcing the disinformation. There’s a huge risk in social science of actually reinforcing the lie if you don’t do it in the right way, in terms of introducing the truth, talking about the disinformation, and ending with the truth. We call it the truth sandwich.
So we did that. We activated a couple dozen creators who got millions of views on their content, basically saying, look, the lights are going to go out because of this storm. It’s affecting over 20 states. It’s happening this weekend. If you see blaming or scapegoating — that, oh, the power went out because of those unreliable renewables — don’t be fooled, that’s not the reason. It’s actually inter-regional transmission in our aging grid, and literally frozen coal and gas supply.
And we can look back — we had people who went through Winter Storm Uri. We had some Texas moms who were in our rapid-response creator community that could talk about their own experience. Oh, the same thing: Governor Abbott actually said disinformation on national television in Texas, saying, “Oh, those frozen wind turbines, that’s why the lights went out.” So we actually had people from Winter Storm Uri, who went through that in ’21, that were part of this collection of creators that were activated and were able to speak to their own experience — that, oh, every time there’s extreme weather and the lights go out, renewables are scapegoated. Don’t be fooled, that’s not what it is, it’s this. And so it was very effective.
Mitch Ratcliffe 30:45
Now, you do a lot of randomized trials of different kinds of messaging, and I’m wondering if there’s an example of something that you didn’t expect to work but really did when you put it in the market — or conversely, something you thought was a surefire win that didn’t work at all.
Leah Qusba 30:59
You know what was surprising? We saw a speech that was televised on the Senate floor with Senator Brian Schatz from Hawaii. He was giving a speech on the Senate floor around how the Trump administration’s policies to block renewable energy were driving up the cost of electricity and utility bills for Americans, and that that will continue to happen. We said, wow, this is great — most people in our testing think Congress isn’t talking about these issues. So we said, why don’t we give this speech to our creators, have them clip it up and add some commentary to it, and we’ll have a bunch of them share it. And then we’ll do a randomized control trial, where the treatment audience saw the content — one of the pieces of creator content — and the control group saw nothing, or a placebo. Let’s see how this works.
And our research question was: does this help Democrats, or does it help Republicans? Like, what happens when we have people in Congress talking about this? And it turns out not only was it extremely effective at solidifying the idea that these policies to block renewables from being built are driving up bills — so it was very effective at education and awareness — it was very bad for the Republican party generally. Eleven points we were able to get in the treatment group on disfavor for how Republicans were handling energy policy and utility issues. So we found that to be fascinating. We didn’t think a single exposure of a speech of somebody in Congress talking about these issues would be that effective, or have that outsized of an impact.
Mitch Ratcliffe 32:27
One of the things I noted: you started off focused primarily on youth climate education, but as you pivot toward everyone’s energy bill — which is a very dinner-table kind of 30s-and-40s, you-got-kids, you-got-to-think-about-this-stuff kind of problem — how do you stay relevant to youth who continue to grow up into what they can see plainly is a crisis, but that is increasingly being cast as a pocketbook issue?
Leah Qusba 32:53
I think what’s fascinating, and the unique part of this story, is that I’ve been at GoodPower almost the entire time, so many of the young people I personally worked with in high school are now into their 30s. They’re working for social impact investors, they’re working at the EPA, they’re working for big foundations, some are working for hyperscalers and AI companies, and what’s fascinating is they’re taking those values around these issues into their professional lives.
I think, you know, this idea of kind of growing up and maturing within the movement — and I think post-COVID, when we see how COVID really affected the youth movement in general, and college campus organizing: nobody was in person, and you kind of got to be in person to do organizing, to build those relationships and pass the baton to underclassmen, etc. So I think, for us, seeing some of these young people mature themselves into the professional working world — this generation has now permeated the private sector, the public sector, and they’ve carried this sort of generational youth climate movement, sparked by Sunrise, you know, sparked by our organization, Power Shift Network. They have a whole new view, I think, that they’re bringing into corporate America right now, around their values and around how much they prioritize climate and energy policies that make sense.
I think they’re also living in a world where they can’t attain the same things their parents did financially. They can’t own a home, they can’t afford to buy a car, or even move out of their parents’ house. So I think our messaging around the economy — I think it works for young people that have kind of grown up in this movement and are very angry, like most Americans are, around this cost-of-living crisis.
Mitch Ratcliffe 34:37
The number of jobs represented by the capital that is being held in abeyance because of the misinformation must be incredibly frustrating for younger people. I mean, we can see the explosion of economic opportunity that would happen — it might look more like China, for instance. I was reading your 2030 plan; you’re leaning into AI and product development and breakthrough technology, and I’m wondering what those breakthrough technologies that you think are most important to understanding where we can go might be.
Leah Qusba 35:07
I think geothermal is really fascinating. Of course, anything that is zero carbon, I think, is really interesting to our organization when we think about the climate problem and decarbonizing the global economy. I think it’s a very nascent technology, so there’s some fair criticism there, but I would say uniquely it has this bipartisan support because it uses the same rigging and tools and equipment and skills as the fossil fuel industry, right — oil and gas and fracking workers. So I think there’s incredible bipartisan support as well, and I think as these technologies mature, we’ll be in a front-row seat, kind of looking and seeing how these develop and mature over time.
When we think about artificial intelligence tools, we think about it in a bit of a different way. I think one pervasive issue we’re seeing right now is AI manipulation and fabricated opposition in local siting — so AI-generated comments flooding decision-makers, and they don’t know what’s real and who’s real. So we built a product for that called TrueVoice that separates authentic local input from AI-manufactured opposition. We’re going to give it to community stakeholders, county commissioners, public service commissioners, the developers — everybody deserves to know: okay, what’s the probability that there was AI manipulation on this docket, and now how much do we weigh this? Maybe it’ll create new systems of what we prioritize and how we gather community input. Maybe there’ll be a premium on in-person hearings and showing up, you know, and reinvesting in local organizing.
So I think our use of these tools is really around identifying the cracks that could become fissures that could become huge cliffs for the work that we do in our pathway to accelerating decarbonization — and how do we fit within those, and how do we problem-solve and deliver solutions that don’t just solve our own problems at GoodPower, but sort of solve big, big systemic, sectoral problems.
Mitch Ratcliffe 37:04
As you think about where we are right now, and everything you just said in the context of what we’re looking toward in terms of the world we want to build — what are you most hopeful about right now?
Leah Qusba 37:13
Well, I think the market forces, much to President Trump’s chagrin, are just too strong to stop the industry. You know, we have a deadline coming up on July 4, where the PTC and ITC — right, if you haven’t begun substantial construction, and now this is being litigated, or this 5% test, you know, have you spent 5% of the project budget — you will not be eligible for the PTC and ITC, these important tax credits that make these projects more lucrative and more profitable and more desirable from a financial investment perspective.
But when you look at the impacts of this sort of arbitrary deadline that we’re all racing toward — yes, Rhodium Group says, you know, the industry is going to take a hit, and a lot fewer projects will be built, there’ll be more consolidation — but the industry is too mature, and decarbonized power is too attractive and affordable and clean and just desirable and homegrown and stable and secure. There’s just too many good things, I think, wrapped up in decarbonized power to stop it.
I think the same is true for electric transportation. If we look to the global south — we work in the global south and non-OECD economies — where you see these two-wheelers and people buying electric vehicles in droves, because they don’t want to import this volatility of the global oil market into their households either. We look to food and agriculture, the MAHA movement of regenerative agriculture, the best carbon capture solution nature offers. People don’t want poison in their food, and we’re seeing a movement around that, and we’re seeing people get very exhausted and disgusted with, you know, the administration’s actions with Monsanto recently.
And so I think there is too much momentum for any one person or one administration to stop what’s happening right now. Can we throw roadblocks? Can we create friction? Can we run interference? Of course. We see our role as removing those bottlenecks, and kind of the counterbalance to that. So I think that gives me hope. The question is, how much time will it take? Time is our greatest enemy, and if we can save time, I think that’s the point. That’s where we avoid the worst consequences, and we seize the most opportunity. So how do we save time?
Mitch Ratcliffe 39:22
How does the adaptation story fit into what you’re doing today? Obviously, we’re going to need to prepare for this.
Leah Qusba 39:28
I think there are fantastic organizations out there working more on adaptation, disaster relief, mutual aid — community-based organizations that are doing a lot of that work. I think it’s hugely, hugely important. We’re going to need to figure out how to live and thrive and support people. The stories out of New Orleans, you know — hey, people have to move; this is going to be us; we’re going to lose 60 miles inland, right? So it has to happen. That’s not work that GoodPower is leading.
There’s a group of organizations, and also environmental disaster survivors. Extreme Weather Survivors is a great organization led by a dear friend of mine named Sierra Kos. They’re doing incredible work to really platform disaster survivors and what it’s like to live through wildfires, lose everything, lose your insurance — what does it look like to be on the front lines of these climate consequences, and how do we really tell those stories and use them, I think, as a warning signal, but also as an education tool to move local, state, and federal policies further toward supporting people.
I think the last thing I’ll say is some of the insurance subrogation laws that are being proposed in Rhode Island and New York, California, Hawaii. These are some of the leadership states saying, wait a second, polluters caused this knowingly for four decades — why are my constituents being left holding the bag? Why are they footing the bill when this industry was complicit? There’s actually a huge state policy movement right now called insurance subrogation, where insurance companies can actually go and make the industry pay for this and clean up — have a superfund, basically, where these companies pay into it, and when these disasters happen, they have to help clean it up, and that bill should not go necessarily to the community or the homeowner. And the insurance companies, too, I think, always get the blame and the ire, but as this continues to happen, that market is going to be more and more difficult over time. So I think having a solution where those most responsible and complicit with driving this situation are also going to be helping to pay for it.
Mitch Ratcliffe 41:46
Leah, thanks so much for this incredibly inspiring conversation. How can folks keep track of what GoodPower is up to?
Leah Qusba 41:52
Oh, good. Go to goodpower.org. We’d love to hear from you. You can contact us, you can reach me on LinkedIn, where I’m active as well, and we’d love to be in touch. Thanks for having me.
Mitch Ratcliffe 42:02
Thank you very much for spending time with us today.
Leah Qusba 42:04
Take care.
[COMMERCIAL BREAK]
Mitch Ratcliffe 42:11
Welcome back to Sustainability In Your Ear. You’ve been listening to my conversation with Leah Qusba. She’s CEO of GoodPower, the climate and media research organization known until recently as Action for the Climate Emergency, and you can learn more about Leah and her team’s work at goodpower.org. GoodPower is all one word, no space, no dash — goodpower.org.
Let’s consider what it means when an organization that spent 18 years with the words climate emergency in its name concludes those words themselves have become an obstacle to connecting with an audience. Now, this was a data-driven decision. Only 8% of voters under 35 rated climate as their top issue in 2024, and young people ranked the economy first and most important. And that’s the movement’s critical base. If it’s to transform this economy, affordability is what people — especially young people, who want to buy their first home, want to buy their first EV, or would like to be able to put their kids through school. Those folks are the ones who are going to make the change that we’re talking about, who are going to vote — both with their wallet and at the ballot box — for a new world. GoodPower’s rebrand is a bet that the movement can meet them at the crossroads of economics and sustainability.
Leah accurately described global energy volatility as a hidden tax on American families. Every far-off war and commodity swing shows up in the utility bill and at the pump, while wind and sun carry no fuel costs at all. There’s only the capital investment involved in building the solar and wind systems in the first place; then you get free power. But with oil, those taxes are effectively paid to companies, not governments. And as we heard in last week’s interview with Shareholder Democracy’s Gabriel Grant, shareholders have not yet leveraged their voting power to exert control over the companies whose stocks they own, and those companies are ultimately accountable to those shareholders.
When you see the problem through the lens of the Trump administration’s hypocritical approach to market competition, in which they suppress emerging technology, the renewables argument becomes simple supply-and-demand mathematics. The fastest, cheapest form of energy is being blocked from coming to market, and the result is rising rates rather than economic resilience. This isn’t the proverbial 500-miles-per-gallon carburetor purportedly suppressed by the oil industry in the 1970s. This is a real technology ready to reduce the cost of living while doing immense good for the environment, and people see this. GoodPower’s polling with the University of Chicago found just 40% of Republicans approve of their party’s current energy policy.
There’s a real tension as we continue to reinvent the economy, and Leah’s decision to lean entirely on pocketbook messaging is a clear path to building support for solar, wind, geothermal, and other renewables, which will only become more plentiful, not run dry, over the next century, like fossil fuels ultimately will. Leah’s answer is audience segmentation: one message — a front-door climate message — for the audience that wants one, the people who are already convinced and who want to share that message; and on the other side, economics-based messaging for everyone else. The messenger now matters more than the message, and in an era of influencers, this really comes through bright and clear.
Leah’s father, a conservative who doubts human-caused climate change, went solar because his HVAC contractor made the case — not his daughter, who runs one of the country’s largest climate communication shops, but an HVAC contractor. As Leah said, rural speaks to rural, neighbor speaks to neighbor, and GoodPower has operationalized that instinct at scale. They have a creator collective of more than 8,500 content makers with a combined audience in the hundreds of millions, and they’re slipping what Leah calls raisins of clean energy content into the bread of car videos, food channels, and gaming streams. And they measure it. That’s a discipline that separates persuasion from wishful thinking. What you can measure, you can change. It remains too rare in a movement that too often assumes its urgent warnings will carry the day by themselves.
The last idea to revisit is a leading indicator, and that is that artificial intelligence has become the new front line of the information fight, on both sides of the aisle.
Mitch Ratcliffe 46:29
People now ask Claude and ChatGPT whether solar will raise their electric bills, so GoodPower practices answer engine optimization to make sure accurate information surfaces in the first AI response. Its CleanCast tool predicts where siting battles over solar installations, wind installations, and so forth will erupt, so that developers can inoculate communities before disinformation arrives — like the recent industry-funded campaign that told potato farmers that solar panels would result in glass shards in their crops. Another tool that GoodPower has come up with, the TrueVoice tool, launching now, separates authentic public comments from AI-manufactured opposition flooding county permitting dockets and congressional mailboxes.
So one of the good things about AI, at least, is that it allows us to cut through a lot of the noise that we’re being flooded with. But look, this is an arms race, and Leah is candid about the tools being young. These are nascent movements and a nascent set of technologies we’re building on. But the prebunking playbook worked with Winter Storm Fern in January, when creators reached millions with the truth about the aging grid before the wind-turbine scapegoating could harden into what would be perceived as truth by many people. There’s a clear strategic method evolving in real time, and we will keep tracking that race for the American mind here on Sustainability In Your Ear.
Hey, look, if today’s conversation was useful to you, could you pass it along? Sharing an episode with a friend or leaving a review on your favorite podcast website is a great way to get the word out there, because folks, you are the amplifiers that can spread more ideas to create less waste. And you can tell folks they can find more than 560 episodes of Sustainability In Your Ear at Earth911.com/podcast, or you can check us out on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, iHeartRadio, Audible, or whatever purveyor of podcast goodness you prefer.
Thanks for your support. I’m Mitch Ratcliffe. This is Sustainability In Your Ear, and we will be back with another innovator interview soon. In the meantime, folks, take care of yourself, take care of one another, and of course, let’s all take care of this beautiful planet of ours. Have a green day.
The post Sustainability In Your Ear: GoodPower’s Leah Qusba on Selling Clean Energy as Pocketbook Power appeared first on Earth911.
https://earth911.com/business-policy/sustainability-in-your-ear-goodpowers-leah-qusba-on-selling-clean-energy-as-pocketbook-power-2/
This week’s quote is a Somali proverb: “Be a mountain or lean on one.”
Earth911 inspirations. Post them, share your desire to help people think of the planet first, every day. Click to get a larger image.
The post Earth911 Inspiration: Be a Mountain or Lean on One appeared first on Earth911.
https://earth911.com/inspire/earth911-inspiration-be-a-mountain/
Ballet flats have long been a staple in my wardrobe, but in the past few years have experienced a significant resurgence — and for good reason. The right pair can be practical, versatile, and oh so chic through days at work, with family, or out for the evening. But finding that “just right” set that’s well-crafted and sustainably made can be a whole other story. That’s why this sustainable flats guide exists.
Comfort, style, sustainability, and longevity are a lot to ask in a shoe, but I don’t believe it’s too much. It just takes some extra digging. And thankfully, I’ve done that digging for you. Because I get it! I want a flat that looks beautiful. I want a flat that’s made responsibly in line with my values. I want a shoe I can actually wear for my life. And I want that shoe to be worth the investment — it has to last. That’s why I vetted through dozens of brands to create this curated list of flats.
What Makes a Flat More Sustainable?
Material Sourcing
Footwear is a tricky category when it comes to sustainable fashion because we ask a lot of our shoes. We wear them in rain or sunshine, paved paths and cobblestone, day in and day out for years. And through it all, they have to remain beautiful. Because when they’re unwearable, there’s not much left to do with them: there is no viable footwear recycling today. Anywhere that calls it “shoe recycling” is really repurposing that footwear. But once it can no longer be worn, it’s simply trash.
In other words, our shoes need to be incredibly durable, even though the most durable materials don’t always come with the lightest footprint. In footwear, when we talk about durability, we usually rely on leather or high-performance synthetic materials. Leather can hold up with many years of wear, getting more beautiful with wear, and is easy to repair when needed. Synthetic materials are also durable, particularly for withstanding the elements like snow and rain.
But sourcing these materials conventionally is highly polluting — so how can we source these materials better?
For synthetics, we have recycled options. Today, that’s largely recycling from plastic bottles, which isn’t without it’s controversies, but there is much innovation happening in the industry around true textile-to-textile recycling.
For leather, I look for:
- Vegetable-tanned (rather than chromium tanned)
- Locally-sourced leather (more traceability), and/or
- Leather Working Group certified leather, which covers responsible management of water, energy, and waste; safe chemical management, traceability of the raw material, and occupational safety for workers.
Notably, there is no certification for animal welfare, so these are imperfect systems. But the alternative is footwear made from synthetic plastic materials or vegan leather alternatives that don’t yet meet the same durability standards as leather. Sustainability within today’s constraints requires trade-offs.
That said, there is always secondhand leather — by buying shoes secondhand you can access the quality of leather without adding further demand for the material.
Responsible Manufacturing
When considering responsible production practices, I look for first and foremost: transparency. Seeing what the brand shares about their material sourcing, their process, and who made their shoes where. And then I look at the details of that process: were the shoes made locally or within a geographic region? How are the workers paid and treated — and under which conditions do they work?
And, sometimes a brand employs an out-of-the-box approach to manufacturing entirely. There are a few slow fashion footwear brands challenging the traditional fashion system of ordering in mass quantities before demand is assessed —which inevitably leads to overproduction. These brands use an “on demand” model instead, producing their shoes only after they’ve been ordered. This reduces the risk of overproduction (i.e. producing more than what gets sold) while also encouraging more thoughtful consumption. You can’t impulse buy a pair of Mary Janes that you have to wait 8 weeks for.
Wearable and Beautiful
The most perfectly environmentally sustainable flat in the world is useless if no one wants to wear it. And as I mentioned earlier, footwear cannot be recycled into new footwear at the end of its life, so we want our shoes to last a really long time. That means they need to be design forward and comfortable, too.
My Top Picks for More Sustainable and Ethical Flats
Keeping all of that in mind, these more sustainable flats brands meet this criteria, albeit to various extents. Some err more on comfort while some more on style. Some have admirable levels of transparency and social impact, while other brands have more of a focus on their ecological impact. I’ve included descriptions alongside each brand as well as a summary of conscious qualities so you can find a brand that meets your priorities best. And, of course, a price range so you know what makes sense for your budget as well.
Some that this guide includes affiliate links which means we may earn a commission if you shop through these links. As always, brands featured in shopping guides are brands that meet our strict sustainability criteria that we think you’ll love.
1. ALOHAS
Spanish brand ALOHAS flips the typical fashion production system on its head with its on-demand model.
Instead of overproducing thousands of shoes to later discount them, ALOHAS does the exact opposite. Its newest styles are available for pre-order at a discount of 30%, so the footwear brand can more accurately forecast demand. Then the shoes — like their flats — are primarily made by local artisans in Spain and Portugal. The brand regularly shows the behind the scenes of their production on their social media.
Conscious Qualities: On-Demand Production, Locally Made
Size Range: EU 35-42 (US 5-11)
Price Range: $195-$225
2. Rothy’s
If you’re looking for flats for all-day wear at work or running errands, Rothy’s is my recommendation with their cushy insoles. The brand makes their more sustainable flats from recycled plastic bottles, as well as materials like hemp and merino wool, but they still look sleek enough for the office.
While I might not wear Rothy’s flats to a fashion event (I prefer smooth leather for more elevated occasions), they are more than stylish enough to wear to most of my real-life scenarios. My favorite part about Rothy’s, though, is that they are machine washable.
Materials: Recycled & Natural Materials, Owns One Factory (undisclosed percentage of production)
Size Range: US 5-13
Price Range: $99-$165
3. Vivaia
Vivaia has the most adorable sustainable Mary Janes made from recycled plastic bottles. The adjustable straps and arch support make Vivaia’s Mary Janes suitable for all-day comfort, even if your feet are typically prone to slipping out of flats.
This vegan footwear brand also makes square-toe and pointed-toe flats for a more elevated look. And of the several recycled plastic bottle footwear brands on the market today, Vivaia tends to have the most elevated designs in my opinion.
Conscious Qualities: Vegan, Recycled Materials
Size Range: US 5-11
Price: $97 – $116
4. The RealReal
The RealReal is an authenticated luxury resale platform with contemporary, designer, and high-end luxury brands. Depending on your priorities you can find shoes in anywhere from pristine condition (but higher priced)) to “fair” or even “as is” for the largest discount from full price.
You don’t always have as many options aesthetically when shopping more sustainably, so I like to go to The RealReal when I’m looking for specific styles. I was recently looking for Mary Janes with feminine detailing and came across Larroude Flats on The RealReal, where I purchased a pair of neutral scalloped accent flats. (Pictured here!)
Conscious Qualities: Secondhand
Size Range: US 3.5-14
Price Range: $9+
5. ESSĒN
ESSĒN elegant, minimalist footwear is artisan handcrafted from Leather Working Group-certified leather in solar-powered facilities in Italy, Portugal, and Spain. Each shoe also comes with a product passport where you can view the step-by-step journey that product took through the brand’s supply chain from raw material to manufacturing to packaging and distribution.
Beyond transparency and responsible manufacturing, ESSĒN’s slow fashion business model prevents overproduction by operating on a made to order basis. Meaning while sizes and styles are predefined, the shoes are only produced after they’ve been ordered.
Conscious Qualities: LWG Certified, Supply Chain Transparency, On Demand Production
Size Range: EU 35-44 (US 4-13)
Price Range: $295-$450
6. Allbirds
Another comfort-first footwear option besides Rothy’s is Allbirds. The brand creates lightweight, super smooth and breathable flats from tree fibers, aptly called “Tree Breezers”. The (washable) shoes are also soft enough to wear without socks.
The Allbirds Tree Breezers are far more comfortable than typical flats, though I find that the Rothy’s are slightly comfier.
Conscious Qualities: Natural materials (FSC-Certified eucalyptus, castor mean oil, sugarcane EVA)
Size Range: US 5-11
Price Range: $105-$125
7. Darzah
Fair trade certified by Fair Trade Federation, Darzah’s ethical flats are entirely hand-embroidered and handcrafted in Palestine from locally sourced leather.
The tatreez flats from this nonprofit are embroidered by refugee and low-income women artisans in the West Bank with this traditional Palestinian techniques.
Conscious Qualities: Sustains Heritage Crafts, Fair Trade Certified
Size Range: EU 36-41 (US 6-10)
Price Range: $199 – $209
8. Nisolo
If you’re seeking a quality pair of classic leather flats ideal for your capsule wardrobe, Nisolo is a strong pick. Nisolo’s flats are handcrafted by artisans using leather sourced from a Leather Working Group certified tannery.
I’ve been wearing my Nisolo shoes for many years and can attest to their quality and durability.
That said, the brand has recently turned over to new ownership and now has significantly less information about their sustainability and ethics in their supply chain. I will be keeping a close eye on this brand to see if it continues to uphold the values Nisolo has long held.
Conscious Qualities: LWG-Certified, Artisan Handcrafted
Size Range: US 5-11
Price: $138 – $198
For More Slow Fashion Content:
You May Also Want to Check Out:
The Best Affordable Ethical Fashion Brands
Responsibly Made Vegan Shoe Brands
15 Brands with Ethical Boots to Rock this Fall (and Beyond)
The post 8 Best Ethical & Sustainable Flats That Are Effortlessly Chic appeared first on Conscious Life & Style.
https://www.consciouslifeandstyle.com/sustainable-ethical-flats/?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=sustainable-ethical-flats
-
Climate Change11 months ago
Guest post: Why China is still building new coal – and when it might stop
-
Greenhouse Gases11 months ago
Guest post: Why China is still building new coal – and when it might stop
-
Greenhouse Gases2 years ago嘉宾来稿：满足中国增长的用电需求 光伏加储能“比新建煤电更实惠”
-
Climate Change2 years ago嘉宾来稿：满足中国增长的用电需求 光伏加储能“比新建煤电更实惠”
-
Climate Change2 years ago
Bill Discounting Climate Change in Florida’s Energy Policy Awaits DeSantis’ Approval
-
Renewable Energy9 months agoSending Progressive Philanthropist George Soros to Prison?
-
Carbon Footprint2 years agoUS SEC’s Climate Disclosure Rules Spur Renewed Interest in Carbon Credits
-
Greenhouse Gases12 months ago
嘉宾来稿：探究火山喷发如何影响气候预测