Canada is expected to pass sweeping gun reform legislation, including a measure that allows municipalities to ban handguns.

Canadian Prime Minister Justin TrudeauJustin Pierre James TrudeauCanada expected to pass sweeping gun legislation that includes banning handguns Biden unlikely to host foreign leader in person for ‘a couple of months’ Biden’s treatment of energy firms is no way to run a healthy economy MORE announced the new measures on Tuesday, a sweeping package that builds on a ban of more than 1,500 assault-style firearms.

Trudeau said at a news conference on Tuesday that the country would move forward with a buyback program “in the coming months.”

ADVERTISEMENT

The proposals include the Canadian government supporting municipalities that restrict storage and transportation of handguns within their boundaries. Breaching these bylaws would carry a maximum penalty of two years in prison and a possible revocation.

Another proposal would create “red flag” and “yellow flag” laws that would make it easier for concerned friends and relatives to petition courts for the immediate removal of a firearm or to ask a chief firearms officer to suspend and review a person’s license for firearms.

In addition, the bill would increase penalties for firearms trafficking and smuggling from 10 years to 14 years in prison, as well as allow the Royal Canadian Mounted Police and local law enforcement to share licensing and registration data to investigate or prosecute firearms trafficking offenses.

“You can’t fight gun violence or any violence on just one front,” Trudeau said. “You can’t fight it without addressing its root causes.”

The measures come as gun reform measures that were passed in June 2019 are expected to take effect. Those measures include requiring sellers to verify a firearms license before a purchase and expanded background checks that consider an applicant’s lifetime history.

President BidenJoe BidenBiden balks at K student loan forgiveness plan Biden offers to help woman in obtaining vaccine for son with preexisting condition Biden optimistic US will be in ‘very different circumstance’ with pandemic by Christmas MORE is enjoying a honeymoon with many environmental advocates after coming under criticism during the 2020 Democratic presidential primary from green activist groups pressing him to be more ambitious on climate change.

Biden gained favor from a number of groups after winning the Democratic nomination by shifting to the left on climate change and working with progressives, some with ties to Sen. Bernie SandersBernie SandersCotton, Romney introduce bill pairing minimum wage increase with tighter citizenship verification Restaurant association warns Congress on minimum wage hike The Memo: Biden steps out of Trump’s shadow MORE (I-Vt.), as part of a unity effort. 

Since taking office, Biden has revoked a key permit for the Keystone XL pipeline, rejoined the Paris climate agreement and issued a temporary pause on new oil and gas leases for federal lands. 

ADVERTISEMENT

The moves come with some risks for Biden even as they have drawn applause from climate groups.

Republicans aiming to cast Biden’s politics as hurting the economy have blasted the Keystone and leasing decisions, and there has been some criticism from centrist Democrats such as Sen. Joe ManchinJoseph (Joe) ManchinOn The Money: Democrats make historic push for aid, equity for Black farmers | Key players to watch in minimum wage fight Biden pledges action on guns amid resistance Key players to watch in minimum wage fight MORE (W.Va.). 

Yet as Biden keeps an eye on that flank of his party, his administration also could face tests in the coming months from climate groups. 

The administration has yet to make important decisions like laying out an updated goal for emissions reductions under the Paris agreement and whether to shut down the Dakota Access pipeline. If Biden doesn’t move to the environmentalists’ satisfaction on these issues, his honeymoon could be cut short.   

Elizabeth Gore, the Environmental Defense Fund’s senior vice president for political affairs, gives Biden high marks so far but says her group will be focused on how the Biden administration updates its plan to reduce emissions under the Paris agreement. The update is expected in April.

She also wants to see how the administration seeks to reduce emissions in the transportation and power sectors, though she expressed optimism that Biden’s team will take strong action. 

ADVERTISEMENT

“There’s no reason to think that we won’t continue to see that kind of commitment to climate action and a clean environment going forward,” Gore said. 

April is set to be a key period for the climate groups and Biden.

The administration is expected to say that month whether it will shut down the Dakota Access pipeline after a court ruled against the prior administration’s decision to grant passage for the pipeline’s construction. 

Other issues the green groups will be scrutinizing include White House decisions on political appointees for major agencies including the Bureau of Land Management and National Park Service. 

Brett Hartl, government affairs director at the Center for Biological Diversity, says he’ll be watching closely to see how well the administration follows through on its stated goal of conserving 30 percent of the country’s lands and waters by 2030.

“The devil is in the details about how all of this is implemented, and that’s just an open question,” Hartl said. “Take the 30 by ’30 … or even the leasing moratorium. Both of them put us on a path to make strong decisions down the road, but obviously they can end up in a place that is weaker than they should be.”

The environmentalists emphasized that just because they like the Biden administration so far doesn’t mean they don’t need to be vigilant. 

Ramón Cruz, president of the Sierra Club, praised Biden’s focus on climate and his inclusion of environmental inequities faced by disadvantaged communities in his plans. 

“He’s wasting no time in confronting the climate crisis, he’s standing up to the level that is needed to address this,” Cruz said.  “Most importantly, he has been doing this work by centering justice and equity.”

At the same time, Cruz said it “doesn’t mean that now we can just pack our things and go on vacation,” adding, “We’ll collaborate but also push them to do better.” 

Environmental groups also noted that while they had a much better relationship with the Obama administration than the Trump administration, which pulled the United States from the Paris agreement and sought to undo regulations intended to reduce emissions, it was not without its faults. 

One area of contention was an air quality standard for ozone, the main component of smog. In 2011, the Obama White House decided not to move forward with a rule that would have tightened air quality standards for ozone, exposure to which has been linked to health problems like asthma.

ADVERTISEMENT

It did update the standard in 2015, but some environmentalists said at the time that the new standard still wasn’t tight enough. 

“There’s a lot of returning characters,” Hartl said. “I hope they learned some lessons in the Obama years.”

John Paul Mejia, a spokesperson with the youth-led Sunrise Movement, said that Biden should do more to achieve “systemic and progressive action on COVID, climate and the economy.”

“These are spiraling crises that we can all tackle at the same time, and I think it’s time that he delivers on that,” Mejia said. 

He advocated for a “green recovery” that includes $2,000 checks, state and local aid and creating jobs through programs like the Civilian Climate Corps, which Biden called for the establishment of in an executive order. 

“We saw Biden in one day take more action than Obama took in years of his presidency,” Mejia, said. “What the Biden administration is really going to have to … wake up on is that the only way to retain power in their party and in government is by delivering.”

Lawmakers on Capitol Hill are making a renewed effort this year to pass legislation that would create federal safety and security standards for autonomous vehicles.

Congressional efforts to regulate autonomous vehicles have largely been bipartisan, but bills in both the House and Senate have struggled to advance over concerns about safety provisions.

Key lawmakers on both sides of the aisle are nonetheless pledging to work toward overcoming those differences in the 117th Congress.

ADVERTISEMENT

Senate Minority Whip John ThuneJohn Randolph ThuneJuan Williams: Bring sanity back to the GOP Senate GOP ready to turn page on Trump No. 2 GOP senator suggests he’s open to censuring Trump MORE (R-S.D.), who has led the charge on self-driving vehicle legislation in past years among GOP senators, is planning to tackle the issue again this year.

“Senator Thune remains committed to advancing bipartisan automated vehicle legislation this Congress, which will modernize motor vehicle safety standards and establish a uniform regulatory framework for automated vehicles,” a spokesperson for Thune told The Hill last week.

Sen. Gary PetersGary PetersNew rule shakes up Senate Armed Services subcommittees The Hill’s Morning Report – Presented by TikTok – Senate trial will have drama, but no surprise ending Centrist Democrats pose major problem for progressives MORE (D-Mich.), a member of the Senate Commerce, Science and Transportation Committee who previously joined Thune in co-sponsoring autonomous vehicle legislation, is also on board.

“Senator Peters looks forward to working with manufacturers, advocates, his colleagues in Congress and the Biden Administration on the best path forward to establish a strong federal framework that will usher in the safe deployment of self-driving vehicles,” a spokesperson for Peters told The Hill. 

“This is an issue that Congress must work together to address so that self-driving vehicles can be safely deployed, consumers can be protected and so that these life-saving technologies can be developed and built in the United States,” the spokesperson added. 

Peters and Thune were the main sponsors of the AV START Act, which failed to get a vote in the Senate in 2018 after a handful of Democrats expressed concerns around language on safety and security.

ADVERTISEMENT

The Senate effort came on the heels of the House approving a similar but different piece of legislation in 2017. Since then, neither chamber has voted on autonomous vehicle legislation.

Republican leaders of the House Energy and Commerce Committee last year introduced legislation, but their bill failed to gain Democratic support, though Chairman Frank Pallone Jr. (D-N.J.) held a hearing on the topic in 2020.

The inability to get a bipartisan bill across the finish line is creating a dilemma for automakers who are increasingly investing in the new technology. Without congressional action, states may lose patience and begin setting their own rules of the road.

“The current patchwork of voluntary guidance at the federal level is simply not sufficient to ensure the United States can remain a global leader on auto innovation — and a leader in manufacturing jobs in this field,” the spokesperson for Peters said.

That’s leading to industry pressure.

The Self-Driving Coalition, which represents companies including Ford, Uber, Lyft and Waymo, is working with Congress and the Department of Transportation to create a federal framework, emphasizing the potential for autonomous vehicles to save lives.

“It starts from the basic and central notion that what causes accidents predominantly is human error, and what this technology first and foremost is going to be doing is making the roads safer,” said Ariel Wolf, counsel for the Self-Driving Coalition.

“Let’s not lose sight of the fundamental premise, forest from the trees, that by significantly diminishing human errors we could save tens of thousands of lives,” he added.

But while the technology could serve to significantly reduce fatalities and injuries, safety and security concerns persist.

A self-driving Uber test vehicle hit and killed a woman in Arizona in 2018, with the National Traffic Safety Board later concluding that the car had been unable to recognize the woman was jaywalking. Uber has since made changes to fix the problem.

Cybersecurity has also become an area of concern, as the vehicles could be open to vulnerabilities leading to grave consequences.

“I think cybersecurity is the elephant in the room that nobody wants to talk about with autonomous vehicles,” said Cathy Chase, president of Advocates for Highway and Auto Safety.

ADVERTISEMENT

Chase said that for now the focus should be on advanced driver assistance systems, such as braking and sensors used to detect objects around the vehicle.

“I don’t think autonomous vehicle legislation is needed because it’s a ways down the road and there are proven solutions that should be more pressing to save lives,” she said.

Still, she said the potential for uneven regulations among state governments means the Department of Transportation needs to play a role.

“We are optimistic and look forward to working with them, and it’s not just the safety community,” Chase said. “I think it’s really important that the department listen to the variety of voices in this space and not just the industry.”

Newly confirmed Transportation Secretary Pete ButtigiegPete ButtigiegWhite House says it’s not looking to require COVID-19 tests before domestic flights The Hill’s Morning Report – Presented by TikTok – Dems rest their case; verdict on Trump this weekend The Hill’s 12:30 Report: Republicans privately discuss trial votes MORE has already made clear his interest and focus on autonomous vehicles.

“Automated vehicle technology is coming, it’s advancing very quickly, it is something that holds the potential to be transformative, and I think in many ways policy has not kept up,” Buttigieg said during his Senate confirmation hearing. “I look forward to digging in on that.”

When asked specifically by Peters if he would work with him and Thune to roll out legislation, Buttigieg was enthusiastic.

“Absolutely, I am enthusiastic about the opportunity and for America to lead the way,” he said.

A North Dakota bill that would have mandated app stores allow software developers to implement their own payment processing tools was shut down in the state Senate Tuesday.

The chamber voted by a 36-11 margin to scrap the bill in a win for tech giants such as Apple and Google that would’ve seen some of their fees bypassed had the bill become law.

The now-dead North Dakota legislation was the first to be introduced in any state legislature that addressed the app stores of the tech titans. Had it ultimately become law, it could have sparked similar bills in other states. 

ADVERTISEMENT

Apple and Google receive fees from purchases of apps from their stores.

The shot-down legislation in North Dakota would have specifically mandated that companies whose app stores deliver them over $10 million per year offer different payment methods for app store purchases that would have allowed developers to keep the fees usually provided to the companies. The bill’s parameters would have essentially impacted just Apple and Google.

Apple had come out hard against the bill, saying it would hurt their products and that no consumers were forced to buy their phones with their app stores. 

“Simply put, we work hard to keep bad apps out of the App Store; Senate Bill 2333 could require us to let them in,” Apple official Erik Neuenschwander testified last week. “For a store owner, that would be like the government forcing you to stock your shelves with products you know lack in quality, authenticity, or even safety.”

The vote comes as Apple and Google face increased scrutiny over their business practices, including over policies critics say box out competitors and create monopolies for online ads and software distribution.

The World Health Organization (WHO) announced Thursday it is sending a team of experts to Guinea and the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC) to battle Ebola outbreaks there.

Health authorities in Guinea declared an Ebola outbreak on Sunday after identifying three cases, the first outbreak there since the virus ravaged the country in 2016. There have also been four confirmed Ebola cases in the DRC.

More than 100 WHO staff are expected to be part of the effort, which will help with surveillance, contact tracing, testing and treatment and preparations for vaccination, among other things. The WHO has already released $1.25 million to bolster its efforts in Guinea and reinforce preparations to battle the virus in neighboring Cote d’Ivoire, Guinea-Bissau, Liberia, Mali, Senegal and Sierra Leone.

ADVERTISEMENT

“We are hard at work, shifting quickly through the gears to get ahead of the virus. With experts and emergency supplies already getting on the ground, the response is off to a strong start,” said Matshidiso Moeti, WHO regional director for Africa. “Our collective, quick action is crucial to averting an uncontrolled spread of Ebola amid the COVID-19 pandemic, which has already pushed health workers and health facilities to the edge.”

Beyond the WHO’s efforts, the United Nations Central Emergency Response Fund has already doled out $15 million to boost the responses in Guinea and the DRC and assist neighboring nations prepare for possible outbreaks of their own.

Guinea’s outbreak this month occurred in Goueke, which is a short distance from the tiny village of Meliandou, the origin of the 2013 pandemic that ultimately spread across the region and killed over 11,000 people. A two-year outbreak also ended in the DRC just last year.

Democrats are aiming to move quickly on a $1.9 trillion coronavirus relief package and give President BidenJoe BidenBiden balks at K student loan forgiveness plan Biden offers to help woman in obtaining vaccine for son with preexisting condition Biden optimistic US will be in ‘very different circumstance’ with pandemic by Christmas MORE a legislative accomplishment early in his tenure.

A multitude of House committees advanced portions of the bill last week, and House Majority Leader Steny HoyerSteny Hamilton HoyerRaskin gets emotional recounting personal experience on Jan. 6: ‘This cannot be our future’ LIVE COVERAGE: Senate opens Trump’s second impeachment trial Congress mulls tightening eligibility for stimulus checks MORE (D-Md.) told colleagues on Tuesday that the plan is for the bill to be considered on the House floor next week.

The bigger challenge lies ahead when the work shifts over to the Senate. The legislation will need every Senate Democrat to vote for it to pass if no Republicans back it.

ADVERTISEMENT

Additionally, portions of the bill could run into issues with the Senate parliamentarian, who will be tasked with determining whether the legislation meets the requirements of the budget reconciliation process, which Democrats are using to pass the measure with a simple majority vote.

Here’s where things stand with some of the key components of Democrats’ coronavirus relief proposal.

 

Minimum wage

The bill would raise the federal minimum wage to $15 per hour, a long-sought goal for progressives that has drawn opposition from Republicans, powerful lobbies and some Senate Democrats.

The House Democratic measure would raise the wage gradually from $7.25 to $15 per hour in 2025.

Two Democratic senators, Sens. Joe ManchinJoseph (Joe) ManchinOn The Money: Democrats make historic push for aid, equity for Black farmers | Key players to watch in minimum wage fight Biden pledges action on guns amid resistance Key players to watch in minimum wage fight MORE (W.Va.) and Kyrsten Sinema (Ariz.), oppose the hike. Manchin has expressed support for a smaller increase, while Sinema has said she doesn’t think it’s appropriate for a minimum wage increase to be included in the relief measure.

ADVERTISEMENT

There are also questions about whether the Senate parliamentarian, Elizabeth MacDonough, will allow the minimum wage increase to be included in a budget reconciliation bill. In reconciliation legislation, every provision has to be directly related to the budget and can’t have a budgetary impact that’s “merely incidental” to its non-budgetary aspects.

Key Senate Democrats are hopeful that MacDonough will rule in their favor, but other lawmakers and budgetary-policy experts are skeptical.

 

Relief checks

Democrats’ proposal includes payments to most Americans of $1,400 per person. This provision is designed to further Democrats’ goal of providing people with $2,000, in combination with the $600 payments enacted in late December.

Before House Democrats unveiled their proposal, there was a debate among lawmakers over what the income eligibility requirements should be for the payments.

Progressives wanted to keep the requirements from the first two rounds of payments in an effort to ensure that people who lost income last year received their full payments quickly, while Republicans and some moderate Democrats wanted to tighten the requirements in an effort to focus the payments on low- and middle-income households.

House Democrats’ bill addressed this debate by keeping the same phaseout thresholds as the first two rounds, while ensuring that families with income of more than $200,000 aren’t eligible for checks.

Under the bill, individuals with income of up to $75,000 and married couples with income of up to $150,000 would be eligible to receive the full payment amount, as was the case for the previous rounds. The bill then adjusts how the payment amounts are reduced above those thresholds and provides that individuals with income above $100,000 and married couples with income above $200,000 don’t qualify for any payment.

Biden has indicated his support for the income eligibility requirements in the proposal, and Manchin, one of the leading Democratic proponents of targeting the checks, has not come out against them.

Unemployment benefits

The House bill would extend federal unemployment programs set to expire in mid-March through the end of August. It also would increase the federal government’s weekly boost to benefits from $300 to $400 from mid-March through the end of August.

The measure is based on a proposal Biden released in January that called for extending unemployment programs through September — one month longer than the extensions under the House bill. House committees were restricted in how much their portions of the bill could add to the deficit under the budget resolution that was adopted.

Senate Finance Committee Chairman Ron WydenRonald (Ron) Lee WydenHillicon Valley: Krebs is back on Capitol Hill | Cybersecurity as ‘preeminent threat’ | News on data privacy and voter security US calls for Turkey to release jailed philanthropist Democrats introduce bill to fix unemployment systems technology MORE (D-Ore.) has said that he is planning to work to find a solution that will allow the final piece of legislation to extend unemployment benefits through the end of September.

ADVERTISEMENT

 

Vaccine funding

The House bill includes about $14 billion for vaccines and therapeutics.

It would provide $7.5 billion to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) to prepare, administer and monitor vaccines, as well as another $1 billion to the CDC to provide information and education about the vaccines and improve vaccination rates.

It also would provide the Department of Health and Human Services with $5.2 billion to support research, development and manufacturing of vaccines and therapeutics, and it would provide the Food and Drug Administration with $500 million for vaccine and therapeutic-related activities.

Vaccine funding is an area with bipartisan support. Some lawmakers had suggested that Congress separate vaccine funding from other aspects of the package and pass that on a bipartisan basis, but Democratic leaders and the White House are instead pursuing one large piece of legislation.

 

ADVERTISEMENT

Housing assistance

The bill would provide $25 billion in assistance to renters and their landlords. It also includes $10 billion for assistance to homeowners.

The Biden administration announced on Tuesday that it is extending the foreclosure moratorium for borrowers with federally backed loans, which had been set to expire next month, through the end of June.

The White House said in a fact sheet that it’s important for Congress to also approve the homeowner assistance in the relief bill, because that assistance is “critical for homeowners with mortgages in the private market who are not able to take advantage of today’s actions and may face longer-term challenges.”

 

Aid to state and local
governments

The Democratic bill would provide $350 billion for state and local governments, territories and tribal governments.

States and localities would be able to use the funds to respond to the pandemic and the related economic downturn, cover costs incurred as a result of the pandemic and replace revenue that was lost because of the pandemic.

State and local aid has long been a top priority for Democrats but has been controversial among Republicans. The coronavirus relief law enacted in December did not include a state and local aid package.

The first two Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA)-run mass vaccination sites opened Tuesday in California, part of the Biden administration’s effort to ramp up the federal government’s role getting vaccines in arms.

The sites, at the Oakland-Alameda Coliseum and California State University Los Angeles are designed to administer up to 6,000 vaccines each day and are intended to reach underserved communities.

The Department of Defense is also helping staff the sites.

ADVERTISEMENT

“FEMA is proud to partner with the state of California and the Department of Defense in opening the first of these pilot community vaccination sites,” said Acting FEMA Administrator Bob Fenton.

“These sites demonstrate how we can provide more opportunities for vaccination to the hardest hit communities and ensure everyone who wants a vaccine can get one.”

The Pentagon is sending troops to additional vaccination sites in Houston and Dallas, Texas as well as New York City next week.

Officials also announced four mobile vaccination clinics, two paired with each of the sites in Oakland and Los Angeles, to provide more opportunities to reach out to get people vaccinated.

President BidenJoe BidenBiden balks at K student loan forgiveness plan Biden offers to help woman in obtaining vaccine for son with preexisting condition Biden optimistic US will be in ‘very different circumstance’ with pandemic by Christmas MORE has called for 100 federal vaccination sites across the country by the end of February.

FEMA has deployed 1,279 staff members to help with vaccination efforts so far, the agency said. The National Guard has provided another 1,201 and there are 1,110 active-duty troops involved.

The pace of vaccinations overall in the US has been rising, with a 7-day average of 1.7 million shots per day, according to data compiled by Our World in Data.

Texas’s electric grid has been thrust into the national spotlight amid a deadly winter storm that left 2.7 million households without power as of Wednesday morning.

The grid that typically brings electricity to homes and businesses buckled under the frigid temperatures, leading to unexpected rolling blackouts.

Amid the chaos, here are five important things to know about the state’s power network.

ADVERTISEMENT

It’s almost entirely isolated from other grids 

There are three major energy grids in the continental United States: the Eastern Interconnection, the Western Interconnection and the Texas Interconnection.

The first two grids provide power to large swaths of the country, while the Texas grid provides power exclusively to the Lone Star State. That also means Texas receives very little of its power beyond state lines.

“There’s only a few gigawatts of what we call direct current ties with the other parts of the grid,” said Carey King, assistant director of the University of Texas at Austin’s Energy Institute.

Wade Schauer, research director for Americas power and renewables at Wood Mackenzie, an energy research and consultancy firm, told The Hill that in grids elsewhere in the country, “there’s been some pretty large transfers of power” during the current crisis.

“There is no real ability to import very much power into the ERCOT grid,” Schauer said, referring to the Electric Reliability Council of Texas, the nonprofit corporation that manages the grid’s power flow.

Just a few portions of Texas lie outside the ERCOT system.

ADVERTISEMENT

Local news outlets have reported that the city of El Paso, where power is supplied by the Western Interconnect, has largely been spared from the outages facing other parts of the state. 

“If those residents essentially experienced the same weather for the most part and they did not have as much of a power outage, that would be good information to know for understanding the potential vulnerability of the ERCOT grid,” King said.

It’s subject to less federal regulation 

Because the Texas grid does business only within the state, it’s not subject to oversight from the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC), a government body that regulates interstate transmission.

That makes Texas an outlier when it comes to FERC’s rules.

Former Texas Gov. Rick PerryRick PerryOVERNIGHT ENERGY: Five things to know about Texas’s strained electric grid | Biden honeymoon with green groups faces tests | Electric vehicles are poised to aid Biden in climate fight Five things to know about Texas’s strained electric grid Rick Perry: ‘Texans would be without electricity for longer’ to ‘keep the federal government out’ MORE (R), who served as Energy secretary during the Trump administration, suggested this week that it’s a worthwhile trade-off, even with the current power outages in subfreezing temperatures.

He said Texans “would be without electricity for longer than three days to keep the federal government out of their business,” though the blog post where he made the remark said the comment was made “partly rhetorically.”

Schauer, of Wood Mackenzie, noted that markets in other states have mechanisms in place to help ensure that companies generating electricity are able to meet demand during peak times such extreme weather events. 

“Other markets have performance penalties and things that require generators to be available for a certain amount of time on peak winter days, and that’s not really a feature of the ERCOT market,” he said.

The grid is largely ill-equipped to handle low temperatures 

Many Texas facilities aren’t equipped with the same type of insulation that might be found in states further north.

Wind turbines aren’t winterized like those in the northern U.S., while machinery for other energy sources isn’t as well insulated, making water intake a problem in frigid temperatures.

Making those upgrades could come at a substantial cost.

“It’s a question of how much you invest to protect the grid from something that would be very unlikely. And this type of cold snap in Texas would be very unlikely, but here we are,” said Thomas Overbye, a professor of electrical and computer engineering at Texas A&M University in College Station.

ADVERTISEMENT

Varun Rai, director of the University of Texas at Austin’s Energy Institute, said more needs to be done in order to ensure the state is prepared for these kinds of storms. Equipment needs to be kept warm, regular maintenance is needed to guard against falling trees and homes need to be properly insulated, he said. 

“This type of event is actually a routine event every year in those parts of the country,” Rai said, referring to the Northeast and Midwest. “It’s totally possible to maintain operation of a grid at a very large scale.”

Reliance on natural gas helped fuel the energy shortage 

Natural gas is the largest energy source in Texas, accounting for 40 percent of the state’s energy.

But in a region ill-prepared for single-digit temperatures, that power supply got stuck in an unfortunate cycle. 

Natural gas producers need electricity to run their compressors, but electric systems were strained by cold weather and a lack of natural gas. 

“Another thing this event has driven home is how interdependent our electric and natural gas systems are. We get the majority of our electricity from natural gas, and we need electricity to operate the natural gas systems, and both of them get very strained by cold weather,” Daniel Cohan, a professor of civil and environmental engineering at Rice University in Houston, previously told The Hill. 

ADVERTISEMENT

“You have the two systems that need each other to operate and both of them are experiencing a surge in demand and a loss in supply at same time,” he said. “This is really a story of how fragile systems can be when they are so dependent on natural gas in an extreme weather event.” 

Other fuel sources have also struggled in the cold weather, with some wind turbines coated in ice due to a lack of protections common in other parts of the country.

Still, the renewable source struggled far less than natural gas.

Wind production fell 1 gigawatt below the 6 gigawatts officials predicted would be needed to cover winter demand, whereas electricity from coal, natural gas and nuclear fell 30 gigawatts below the more than 60 gigawatts they were expected to deliver. 

Some critics, particularly Republicans, have sought to blame renewable energy for the power outages. 

“Our wind and our solar got shut down,” Texas Gov. Greg Abbott (R) said on Fox News. “That thrust Texas into a situation where it was lacking power on a statewide basis. … It just shows that fossil fuel is necessary.”

His remarks sparked backlash given the significance of the contribution of other fuel sources to Texas’s predicament.

ADVERTISEMENT

“I go offline a few days and return to a GOP Gov blaming policies he hasn’t even implemented for his own failures,” tweeted Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-CortezAlexandria Ocasio-CortezOn The Money: Biden faces backlash from left on student loans | Where things stand on the COVID-19 relief measure | Retail sales rebound Five things to know about Texas’s strained electric grid Biden faces backlash from left on student loans MORE (D-N.Y.), referencing Abbott’s invocation of the Green New Deal in his criticism of renewables.

The state had winter blackouts in 1989 and 2011 

This is not the first time Texas has dealt with rolling blackouts.

The 1989 blackouts came amid a cold snap in December, while the 2011 blackouts took place during the first week of February when wind and unseasonably cold temperatures hit Texas and neighboring New Mexico. 

In total, approximately 1.3 million electric customers were out of service at the peak of the 2011 event on Feb. 2, and a total of 4.4 million were affected from Feb. 2 to Feb. 4.

In a report following the 2011 blackouts, FERC and the North American Electric Reliability Corporation recommended steps including increasing winterization measures.

The report said electricity generating companies operating within the ERCOT system “failed to adequately prepare for winter,” citing inadequate insulation and a failure to train operators and maintenance personnel on winter preparations. 

Rai said it is not clear exactly how many recommendations from that report were adopted but that this week’s results indicate more needs to be done.

“If those recommendations were implemented and taken seriously at full scale and with strict enforcement … you’d still see some outages,” he said.

“But it is about how massive and deep the failure has been. If those recommendations were taken seriously and more proactive work was done … we would not have gone out of 34 gigawatts of power a couple days ago,” he added. “When you look at the outcome, there was a lot that appears to have been left on the table.”

U.S. stock markets opened to losses on Thursday following an unexpectedly poor initial jobless claims report.

The Dow Jones Industrial Average was down 200 points, or 0.6 percent, and the S&P 500 dropped 25 points, or 0.6 percent.

The declines, which followed a strong start in February that saw record highs, were registered after data from the Labor Department showed initial jobless claims at a seasonally adjusted 861,000, an unexpected increase paired with an upward revision of the previous week’s data.

ADVERTISEMENT

Claims have now exceeded their Great Recession record for 48 straight weeks.

But government data showed more promising news this week as well. Wednesday data showed retail sales jumping 5.3 percent in January, a boost fueled by the distribution of $600 stimulus checks.

Congress is hashing out details of a $1.9 trillion COVID-19 relief bill in hopes of passing it before emergency unemployment programs expire on March 14.

 

Capitol security forces and Washington, D.C.’s Metropolitan Police are being called to testify before the Senate to examine the breakdown in response to rioters who attacked the Capitol on Jan. 6.

Former Senate Sergeant at Arms and Doorkeeper Michael Stenger, former House Sergeant at Arms Paul D. Irving and former U.S. Capitol Police Chief Steven Sund, all who resigned in the wake of the attack, have been called to testify along with Robert Contee, chief of the Metropolitan Police Department.

The three men that resigned have faced questions about their hesitancy to call for National Guard assistance ahead of the planned protests that turned into a violent mob. The group has faced scrutiny about their preparation for a day when thousands of former President TrumpDonald TrumpBiden: ‘I’m tired of talking about Trump’ Hacker claims to have stolen files from law firm tied to Trump: WSJ Texas governor faces criticism over handling of winter storm fallout MORE‘s supporters pledged to protest congressional certification of the 2020 election results.

The Feb. 23 hearing is a joint effort from the Senate’s Rules Committee and Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee, which, alongside two other committees, recently kicked off a probe of 22 different agencies seeking information on preparations for the attack.

“The security failures that led to the breach endangered not just the Vice President and the Congress, but the peaceful, democratic transfer of power itself. The American people deserve a complete accounting of those failures,” lawmakers wrote in a letter accompanying their request last week.