By Trilby MacDonald, Ecology Center Writer

Founded by Sandra Kwak, 10Power is a social impact enterprise that develops community-centered renewable energy projects in the United States and internationally. The Inflation Reduction Act's Direct Pay program opened the door for schools, nonprofits, houses of worship, tribes, and local governments to receive clean-energy tax incentives as direct rebates, making solar and battery projects financially feasible for many communities for the first time. 

But organizations hoping to preserve those benefits now face a rapidly approaching July 4 deadline to safe harbor federal tax credits and secure up to four additional years to complete construction. As the window closes, 10Power is raising capital to help organizations lock in incentives using American-made solar panels it has already warehoused. Readers interested in learning more can visit tinyurl.com/10pwr-itc (access code: ITC2026). If you’re interested in supporting 10Power or would like more information, visit their website: https://10pwr.com/contact/ 

1. For readers who may not be familiar with it, what is Direct Pay, and why was it such a game changer for nonprofits, schools, local governments, houses of worship, and other tax-exempt organizations?

Historically, the Investment Tax Credit (ITC), established under President George W. Bush, provided tax advantages primarily to wealthy individuals, institutional investors, and corporations that invested in clean energy projects.

For the first time, Direct Pay—also known as Elective Pay—allowed tax-exempt entities, including schools, churches, nonprofits, tribes, and municipalities, to receive these incentives as direct rebates. The Inflation Reduction Act (IRA) not only made this possible but also increased rebate percentages based on specific qualifications. A solar-plus-storage project that lowered energy costs for low-income multifamily housing, provided resilience benefits, created green jobs, and was located in a community affected by a coal plant closure, for example, could receive as much as 60 percent of project costs back from the IRS upon completion.

This fundamentally changed who could benefit from renewable energy investments. Instead of being limited to wealthy investors, communities most harmed by fossil fuels and climate change could own their own power sources and immediately realize savings. For many organizations, these rebates brought projects within financial reach for the first time.

2. What exactly is changing on July 4, and why are so many organizations rushing to establish a "beginning of construction" date or safe harbor their projects before the deadline? What challenges are nonprofits encountering as they try to comply with new requirements, including domestic-content rules, documentation requirements, and increased scrutiny of Direct Pay claims?

July 4 is the deadline established by the current federal administration to sunset these tax credits. The recently enacted legislation already ended credits for residential owners. For other organizations, projects must establish a beginning-of-construction date by incurring at least 5 percent of project costs before July 4 in order to safe harbor the tax credits, after which they have four years to complete construction.

The alternative is to fully complete construction before the end of 2027, but many projects take years to develop and place into service, particularly because of lengthy utility interconnection processes.

The political uncertainty has been extraordinary. On June 6, the administration attempted to eliminate the 5 percent safe harbor provision altogether, but a federal court blocked the effort. At the same time, organizations must navigate prevailing wage requirements, domestic-content rules, and new restrictions concerning Foreign Entities of Concern (FEOC) and Prohibited Foreign Entities (PFE), which affect supply chains that include materials sourced from China.

This presents major challenges because China's manufacturing capacity dramatically reduced clean-energy equipment costs worldwide. Finding equipment with no Chinese components is difficult and significantly more expensive. Federal investments intended to expand domestic manufacturing were only beginning to take hold before many were curtailed.

Some organizations we work with have won federal grants but are now participating in class-action lawsuits against the federal government. We have also heard widespread concerns that the IRS is moving slowly in processing rebate claims.

3. Are some clean-energy projects becoming more difficult to finance or no longer financially viable under the new rules? What are you seeing on the ground among the organizations you work with?

Many projects will simply not move forward under these policy changes. Without the ITC, it becomes especially difficult to finance projects in states where utilities do not offer net metering or provide fair compensation for exported electricity.

The ITC created an unprecedented pathway for investment in community resilience and public-serving institutions. For a brief period, schools, nonprofits, local governments, and community organizations had meaningful access to the same financial tools long available to private investors.

A small number of organizations are still moving ahead despite the uncertainty, but most projects have stalled. In response, 10Power has been helping communities preserve access to federal incentives through safe harboring strategies, bridge financing, and forgivable loans.

4. Can you explain how those approaches work and why they are becoming necessary?

10Power is actively raising capital to rescue projects before the July 4 deadline. The company has qualifying American-made solar panels already in storage and can use that inventory to establish safe harbor status for projects. It also assists organizations with ITC (Investment Tax Credit) recordkeeping and Direct Pay filings.

The organization specializes in developing projects that maximize community benefits through blended capital structures. These may include forgivable loans, recoverable grants, and below-market financing that can function as construction bridge loans.

Flexible capital has become essential for managing political risk. If federal incentives disappear or change unexpectedly, organizations should not be left carrying high-interest debt whose repayment costs exceed the energy savings generated by the project. There remain tax-advantaged opportunities for philanthropically minded individuals to contribute, including anonymously if desired.

Readers can learn more at tinyurl.com/10pwr-itc using access code ITC2026.

5. Direct Pay was designed to democratize access to clean energy by extending federal incentives to organizations that had previously been excluded from tax credits. Looking ahead, do you think the program is still delivering on that promise, or are the increasing complexities creating new barriers for the very organizations it was intended to help?

The ITC is ending, and Direct Pay is ending. For a brief moment, there was an extraordinary opportunity for climate justice in this country, and we're trying to help as many communities as possible preserve access to these benefits before that window closes.

In my view, current policies are intentionally undermining the renewable energy sector at precisely the moment when we should be expanding clean generation and storage capacity, particularly to meet growing demand from energy-intensive industries such as data centers while protecting households from rising utility costs.

Whatever your boldest, most ambitious plan for advancing community renewable energy might be, now is the time to pursue it. This effort to safe harbor projects and preserve incentives is our Hail Mary.

By Molly Burger, Clean Transportation Policy Coordinator

If you’re a resident of one of Michigan’s rural counties, you may be curious about the idea of owning an EV, but question, “Would an EV be right for me?” Many rural drivers interested in EVs ask themselves this. In fact, a University of Michigan study finds that residents of rural areas, in particular, need greater certainty about public charging, at-home charging, and EV costs before deciding to switch to an EV. So, if you are a rural driver, could an EV be right for you? 

Public Charging

As of 2026, Michigan has over 3,700 public chargers installed across the state.¹ While public chargers are more abundant in urban areas, they are increasingly being installed in rural counties as well. The map below, created by Michigan’s Office of Future Mobility and SEMCOG², shows the locations of public EV chargers across the state. On their website, you can type in your address and locate the nearest chargers (there are many useful tools on their webpage, but for the locator tool, scroll partway down the page. You’ll find it to the right of this map).³ 

If you find that the nearest charger isn’t as close to your work or home as you’d like, this could change soon. In fact, Michigan is adding more chargers using state and utility funding, as well as another 60 fast charging stations from federal grants. Many of these chargers are also located on highways alongside gas stations, which makes taking a road trip with an EV a similar experience to taking a gas car. 

Many public chargers, sometimes called “level 3 chargers,” are fast chargers that can fully charge a car in about 30 minutes. A full charge for an average EV manufactured in 2025 is nearly 300 miles, but this can vary significantly based on the model, with top-range EVs boasting around 500 miles of range. It’s worth noting that cold weather reduces EV range, as demonstrated in this Consumer Reports article, but these impacts are getting smaller as EV engineering improves⁴. While public charging is popular amongst EV drivers, many choose to charge their vehicles at home. This is a great option for those looking to ‘charge while they sleep.’ 

At Home Charging

Most at-home charging involves either a “level 1” or “level 2” charger. Both can be a great choice depending on your preferences. Level 1 chargers are the slower of the two, but are still the charger of choice for many EV drivers with standard daily commute distances. This is because charging your car overnight while you sleep using a level 1 charger, which uses a standard electrical outlet, results in around 30-40 miles of charge (about 3-5 miles of charge per hour)⁵, which is enough for most commuters to make it to and from work and run a couple of errands. Level 2 chargers are faster, offering about 25 to 40 miles of charge per hour.⁶ These chargers are becoming more popular due to decreasing prices and the convenience of delivering a full charge more quickly. 

This guide by the EPA can help new EV owners through the home charger installation process. The costs of installation can vary from a few hundred dollars to a few thousand, depending on a few factors, and should be taken into account by new EV owners. Fortunately, utility rebates can help lower the installation cost, and both DTE and Consumers Energy offer rebates to qualifying customers. 

Often, EV drivers install a level 1 or level 2 charger at home, and when traveling, use fast chargers, which are commonly located along highways at rest stations. 

Cost of an EV 

The cost of EVs is another concern amongst rural drivers; however, EVs can actually save money in the long term, depending on the model and other factors like gas prices, which are currently at a high point.

The notoriously high price tags from the past now generally apply only to luxury EVs, with many new EVs now on the market in the $30k to $40k range. Popular models around the 30k mark include the Chevrolet Bolt, Chevrolet Equinox, Nissan Leaf, and the Hyundai Kona, among others. The Ford Mustang Mach-E is also a top-selling model and only slightly more expensive than its gasoline equivalent, starting around $38k. With the average price of a new car (gas or electric) in 2026 at $49k⁷, many electric models still come in well below that. Used EVs are an even better deal, with some listed below $10k. The graph below illustrates these savings, with used EVs (in light blue) on par with gasoline cars (dark blue). A few of the EV models are even significantly less expensive.⁸

If you’re looking to save money, a new EV will be more expensive than the same car in a gas model, but that gap is closing. 

You can find used EVs near your zip code for your desired price using this resource by Electric for All, a nonprofit focused on EV education. They also have this handy “EV Savings Calculator” that you can use to calculate a rough estimate of how much an EV could save you annually, by plugging in factors like how much you drive, the cost of gas where you live, and what type of EV you would buy. There are also several other useful resources covering how to charge an EV, locating a charger near you, and finding rebates to lower the cost of purchasing an EV. 

Of course, the cost of electricity can be a concern, but gas has always been considerably more expensive on a per-mile or “e-gallon” basis. The graph below shows the prices of gas (light blue) versus electricity (dark blue) between 2001 and 2025, with electricity always coming out as the clear winner for our wallets.⁹

Maintenance costs are also lower for EVs, and according to NRDC, “EV maintenance and repair costs run about 40 percent lower than comparable gas vehicles.”

To summarize, here are a few key points on EVs and cost:

1. Used EV drivers see the biggest savings compared to both gasoline drivers and drivers of new EVs.
2. Both new and used EVs have lower fuel and maintenance costs than gasoline cars.
3. New EVs may cost less than gas cars over total lifetime ownership, despite higher upfront costs. 

Deciding on your next vehicle is no small task; however, considering an EV could end up saving you thousands of dollars. 

Sources

1.  https://www.cleanfuelsmichigan.org/2025/02/mi-keeps-ev-charging-plans-on-track-despite-federal-cuts/ 

2.  SEMCOG is a planning partnership between several MI counties

3. https://southeast-michigan-ev-resource-kit-and-planning-hub-semcog.hub.arcgis.com/pages/interactive-maps-and-data-resources#EVChargingLocator 

4.  https://www.consumerreports.org/cars/hybrids-evs/how-much-do-cold-temperatures-affect-an-evs-driving-range-a5751769461/ 

5.  https://www.epa.gov/greenvehicles/getting-started-horound-tripLevelme-ev-charging

6.  https://www.epa.gov/greenvehicles/getting-started-home-ev-charging 

7.  https://www.coxautoinc.com/insights/feb-2026-atp-report/ 

8.  https://rmi.org/tired-of-gasoline-prices-heres-a-surprising-way-to-save-money/

9.  https://www.nrdc.org/stories/electric-vs-gas-cars-it-cheaper-drive-ev#gas

By Yuki Nakayama, Ecology Center Writer, and Bailey Flannery, Environmental Storyteller Fellow

Organic grass turf is cheaper and safer, yet artificial turf is marketed as an "innovative green solution" that's recyclable and maintenance-free. Despite the greenwashing, artificial turf pollutes through microplastics, hazardous plastic additives, and PFAS, making it an environmental issue. Now, public athletic fields are the battleground for key decisions on environmental and health safety at various levels of local government. ​

The Ecology Center interviewed Diana Carpinone and Tracy Stewart, community organizers who oppose artificial turf. Carpinone created Non-Toxic Communities to provide toxic-free play spaces for her child. Stewart, a fourth-generation Medway, Massachusetts resident, fought her city’s plans for new artificial turf fields. Both women shared lessons from a decade in the artificial turf debate.

Artificial Turf: Plastic, Polluting, and More Expensive  

Artificial turfs are made from plastic and often recycled tire waste. These materials create microplastics and leach toxic chemicals. Stewart cited research by Zhenyu Tian showing artificial turf infill from tires contributes to salmon deaths. Human health is at risk, too. The Ecology Center co-authored a study linking artificial turf to illnesses like heart attack, stroke, and diabetes. Jeff Gearhart, Ecology Center Research Director, noted that ongoing studies show that older artificial turfs become more dangerous over time.  

Children and youth athletes use athletic fields the most. Artificial turf poses short- and long-term health risks, especially for children. Studies show ACL injuries are more likely on artificial turf fields because it traps feet during pivots, increasing knee strain. Endocrine-disrupting chemicals from turf may cause future fertility problems. Many of these risks can be reduced by using organic grass fields.

Artificial turf is often not cost-effective. Stewart pointed out that installation can cost $2 million or more. This does not include ongoing maintenance costs, which increase as the field ages. Carpinone said that not maintaining artificial turf—that is, not cleaning or removing contaminated infill, controlling dust from the turf that emits VOCs (volatile organic compounds) , and ensuring proper drainage—may increase risks. These include greater exposure to toxic chemicals, higher infection risk from turf burns, and more heat-related illnesses because synthetic turf heats up without regular maintenance.

Artificial turf has hidden costs, such as water filtration and disposal. Lead and PFAS from turf require new filtration systems. These costs are often overlooked before installation. Stewart said local water users usually pay for these filters, increasing the financial burden on the entire community, even years after the turf is gone.

Stewart described how artificial turf disposal in Pennsylvania results in hidden costs. While turf is stored on farms at a low fee, toxic chemicals can seep into the soil, resulting in much higher costs. Many farmers are left with turf when disposal companies go out of business. Sometimes, turf is dumped illegally. These unclear costs burden communities for years. We need strong regulations to ensure turf is safely disposed of at the end of its life.    

Caripone offered guidance on how to prevent the industry from steamrolling local communities and their health and safety concerns: “To start, it’s important to carefully scrutinize the claims made by the artificial turf industry. Make sure grass experts are part of the planning, not just turf company engineers. And, make sure to push for industry accountability.”

Organic Grass: Cheaper, Safer, and Environmental

Organic grass fields are cheaper and safer thanks to advances in maintenance. Grass does not need high levels of pesticides; organic methods like compost topdressing control weeds. Choosing artificial turf to avoid pesticides ignores the toxic chemicals it contains. Carpinone also said reclaimed water can be used for natural grass, reducing local water demand.        

Actions Prioritizing People over Profits

The Ecology Center advocates for organic grass fields to keep children safe during activities. Children have no say in field decisions but take on the greatest risks as primary users.  ​

There are no federal bans on artificial turf. Only Vermont, California, Minnesota, and New York have state restrictions. The Ecology Center is calling for clear safety standards and strict rules to limit the use of artificial turf.

​For those looking to join the fight in their own communities, Stewart reminds them: “Be prepared for long-term effort; don’t think it’s a single fight that will be over in a few weeks or months. Talk to decision-makers and understand their position on the matter. And make sure other community members are informed, because some towns do not allow for residents to be part of legal decisions.”

Fighting artificial turf is worthwhile. It puts children before profits. It shows communities do not have to pay extra for specialized water filters to protect health and safety from turf chemicals.

Bottom line: We should not pay more to expose children and communities to toxic chemicals.

Sources:

• Non Toxic Communities, “Synthetic Turf Bans & Moratoriums,” January 17, 2025, https://www.google.com/maps/d/u/0/viewer?mid=1pZ_Ryd5HKL3yplIhNNlcYnA6NinlYPk&ll=41.00444031104358%2C-82.63062813910773&z=6
• Ecology Center, “Toxic ‘Forever Chemicals’ Infest Artificial Turf,” October 10, 2019, https://www.ecocenter.org/toxic-forever-chemicals-infest-artificial-turf.
• Non-Toxic Communities, https://www.nontoxiccommunities.com/.
• Rebecca Goulding, “Artificial turf playing fields: A review of the health risks and environmental concerns,” November 19, 2025, https://ncceh.ca/resources/evidence-reviews/artificial-turf-playing-fields-review-evidence-health-risks-and. 
• Illinois Sustainable Technology Center, “6PPD-Quinone and Beyond: Tire Rubber Additives and Transformation Products as Emerging Contaminants,” August 10, 2023, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qpjETu491iI.
• Kyle R. Siegel, Brooklynn R. Murray, Jeff Gearhart, and Christopher D. Kassotis, “In vitro endocrine and cardiometabolic toxicity associated with artificial turf materials,” Environmental Toxicology and Pharmacology, 111 (2024): 104562. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.etap.2024.104562.
• Micah Ngatuvai, Jingzhen Yang, Sandhya Kistamgari, Christy Collins, and Gary Smith, “Epidemiological Comparison of ACL Injuries on Different Playing Surfaces in High School Football and Soccer,” Orthopaedic Journal of Sports Medicine 10, no. 5 (May 5, 2022): 23259671221092321, https://doi.org/10.1177/23259671221092321.
• “Products Compatible with Organic Landscape Management,” Beyond Pesticides, https://www.beyondpesticides.org/resources/lawns-and-landscapes/tools-for-change/products-compatible-with-organic-landscape-management.

Coalition stands in solidarity with Michiganders for Money Out of Politics following the submission of more than 562,000 signatures.

LANSING, MI — Michigan Energy Michigan Jobs (MEMJ) recognized Michiganders for Money Out of Politics (MMOP) for submitting over 562,000 petition signatures to the Secretary of State.The coalition called the moment a clear reflection of how fed up Michigan residents and small businesses are with the utilities companies wielding political influence while continuing to drive up rates.

"Michiganders have sent a message that cannot be ignored. When utilities spend freely on the politicians who are supposed to regulate them, families foot the bill. Consumers Energy has requested over $700 million in rate increases in less than three months alone, and this petition is giving voters the power to demand better," said Sergio Cira-Reyes, Climate Justice Catalyst Urban Core Collective. 

Energy and consumer advocates in the coalition shared this outcry is a direct result of the ongoing frustration that has been documented for years, from service disconnections and some of the longest outages in the state to a continued pattern of rate increases with little evidence that utilities are delivering meaningful improvements for customers. 

"Expanding access to more affordable energy sources and avenues, including renewable energy, has been slower and more expensive than it needs to be because utilities have monopolized that access to protect their profits. When they can also fund the politicians overseeing them, ratepayers pay more and wait longer. This initiative gets to the root of that problem," said Andrea Pierce, Deputy Director of Programming, Michigan Environmental Justice Coalition.

MEMJ members expressed this petition demonstrates the larger movement around utility accountability, energy affordability, and fairness taking hold across Michigan. If MMOP's petition is certified by the Board of State Canvassers, the proposal will appear on the November 2026 ballot.

"Utility accountability is not a partisan issue. Michigan families across the state are struggling with rising energy costs and deserve a government that works for them, not one that is funded by the utilities setting their bills," said Alexis Blizman, Policy Director, Ecology Center.

“Preventing rate hikes is in the interest of public health, as affordable, reliable energy can keep household conditions safe and medications and medical equipment stable,” said Teresa Homsi, MPH, Michigan Clinicians for Climate Action. “This petition addresses a serious conflict of interest that currently buys utilities and other major government contractors like Blue Cross Blue Shield disproportionate access to our policymakers.”

“While Michiganders struggle through an energy affordability crisis, DTE and Consumers Energy posted record profits in 2024 and 2025 and continued opposing cost-saving measures like community solar. The people of Michigan want accountability from their utilities and this petition shows they’re ready to demand their voices are heard,” said Patty O’Keefe, Senior Midwest Regional Director, Vote Solar.

"Michigan families don't just need lower bills -- they need a government that isn't being bankrolled by the companies setting those bills. The energy affordability crisis is as real as the political influence fueling it, said Ashley Rudzinski, Climate & Environment Program Director for Groundwork Center. “We stand with every resident who signed that petition and every ratepayer still waiting for relief."

###

Clear the Air, a statewide coalition that Ecology Center is a founding member of, hosted Michigan’s third annual Air Quality Awareness Week in the first week of May, 2026. This week of events brought together Michiganders throughout the state to advocate for the right to breathe clean air for all communities. ​

Regions with a heavy industrial presence and limited access to green spaces bear a disproportionate burden of air pollution, leading to increased respiratory issues and reduced well-being for vulnerable populations. State-level pollution regulation is a primary line of defense against the hazards of living in polluted conditions. Clear the Air (CTA) is pushing for Michigan to hold polluters accountable and manage policy shortcomings that allow permitting for degradation of air quality in and around residential areas.

​Air Quality Awareness Week is an opportunity for organizational partners, community members, and environmental justice advocates to come together and organize for the right to clean air.​

A Week of Events to Advocate for Our Right to Breathe Clean Air

Clear the Air Virtual Press Conference: April 30, 2026

A virtual press conference kicked off the week, where Ecology Center representatives were joined by leaders from Clear the Air partners. The coalition announced this year’s community programs and detailed the opportunities to follow, highlighting the educational and advocacy priorities for the events. Amongst this year’s enthusiastic speakers were Raquel Garcia from Southwest Detroit Environmental Vision, Ned Andree from the Community Collaboration on Climate Change, Patrick McNeal and Mona Munroe-Younis from the Environmental Transformation Movement of Flint, Lucas Aguirre from Detroit’s Eastside Community Network, and Salam Beydoun from the Ecology Center.

Filter Forest Tree Planting & Letterpress Printing: May 2, 2026

The first event of the week was a tree-planting and letterpress-printing event hosted by Arboretum Detroit. Clear the Air representatives, community members, and tree enthusiasts joined in to take matters into their own hands and get them dirty for clean air. This offered a platform for residents and visitors to connect about their frustrations with air pollution, while providing an opportunity to actively counter its effects by planting trees. 

Everyone enjoyed being outside in an invigorating green space, broadening their horizons through an artistic activity. Participants learned about air quality issues through interacting with creative educational materials, which included illustrations of trees’ impact on air quality, informational zines, letterpress cards that read “Growing a Detroit We can Breathe in”, and thematic coloring pages. 

This tree planting expanded the Filter Forest green buffer around pollution-impacted neighborhoods in Detroit. 50 new climate-resilient trees and native shrubs were planted to withstand changing and future conditions, ensuring this beautiful resource will remain to provide filtration and recreational benefits to Detroiters for a long time.

Cinco de Mayo Parade: May 3, 2026

The next day, Clear the Air partners, including Southwest Detroit Environmental Vision, Ecology Center, and Trucks Off Our Streets, walked in the annual Cinco de Mayo Parade to celebrate the community and culture and to distribute air quality materials to over 6,000 community members in Southwest Detroit. 

Hundreds of vibrant floats, school marching bands, mariachis, Charros, and dignitaries traveled a 2.5-mile stretch along West Vernor Highway, showcasing local businesses and commemorating the Battle of Puebla in 1862. Families and residents in attendance partook in the festivities as well as learned about Clear the Air’s mission. Now, more than 6,000 Detroiters are better equipped to identify, report, and protect themselves from poor air quality.​

Community Conversations About Clean Air

Fueled by the success and statewide interest of previous years, Clear the Air branched out from a single statewide conversation event to three separate community conversations in various cities to better connect with and amplify local concerns and voices. The cities of Flint, Grand Rapids, and Detroit all hosted their own unique Community Conversations for Clean Air events, focusing on regional priorities:

In Flint: May 6, 2026 —

The Environmental Transformation Movement of Flint (ETMF) raised awareness and discussed opportunities for collective action among residents affected by unhealthy air. Activities included a lesson on health impacts of poor air quality by resident Registered Nurse Tarnesa Martin (affectionately known as Nurse T), a presentation by ETMF’s own Mona Munroe-Yunis on ways to improve air quality in Flint at household, neighborhood, and community scales, a share-out conversation with attendees on their own air quality experiences, concerns, and ideas for action, and a raffle for one resident to win an air purifier! All residents, however, were able to pick up coalition handouts with further information and resources about air quality and how to make DIY air filters. 

Attending members reported a warm and energized atmosphere, with unanimous support for future collective action measures such as organizing for a no-idling ordinance, rollbacks on industrial pollution permits, the acquisition of electric equipment for Genesee County Land Bank’s Clean & Green program, and staying involved in upcoming advocacy opportunities that CTA hosts. At the end of the event, ETMF connected with neighborhood leaders to host smaller-scale versions of this conversation for clean air across Flint later in the summer.

In Grand Rapids: May 6, 2026 —

The Community Collaboration on Climate Change (C4) celebrated Air Quality Awareness Week at the MLK Park Lodge to learn about local air quality and hear from community experts. This gathering was designed to educate and empower the community, providing practical tools and resources to help individuals and families take action on air quality in their homes and neighborhoods. Presenters included Ned Andree from C4; Ericka Lozano-Buhl from Clear the Air; Hannah Napolillo and Rusty Flewelling from the Kent County Health Department; Benjamin Rance and Ingrid Scheer from the City of Grand Rapids Office of Emergency Management; Nate Rauh-Bieri from JustAir; Wende Randall from the Kent County Food Policy Council; and Nancy Morales from the Urban Core Collective. Presenters shared data from their areas of specialization, focusing on pollution's health impacts, how to monitor air quality, and what is being done locally. 

Participation was high and enthusiastic as attendees discussed the various sources of air pollution in Grand Rapids and shared their questions and concerns about air quality with the group. Most recurring topics for Grand Rapids were truck traffic and what residents could do to monitor and improve local air quality. This event included a giveaway finale, with nine large air purifiers, N95 masks, lead filters, and smaller air purifiers raffled off to participants. This community conversation equipped, informed, and engaged residents of all ages and backgrounds for a truly transformational evening!

In Detroit: May 9, 2026 —

The Eastside Community Network hosted this year’s Community Conversation for Clean Air in Detroit. As one of the most heavily impacted regions in Michigan with poor air quality, this event highlighted the need to provide resources for health management and care to residents. To this end, the ECN invited various healthcare providers to offer services and educational materials on asthma, health, and air quality, as well as vendors offering vaccines for children and blood tests. Presenters there to further explain health concerns and protective measures included the Michigan Asthma and Allergy Foundation, Detroit Children's Healthcare Services, Bloom Pediatric Unit, Detroit Mobile Access, and Community Action to Promote Healthy Environments (CAPHE). These organizations connected residents with resources to protect themselves from adverse health impacts of air pollution, especially in the upcoming summer months and wildfire season. 

Detroiters in attendance discussed the importance of taking protective measures and demanding better pollution control simultaneously, and were keen to advocate for clean air in their communities. Keeping with the theme, this event included a raffle for 2 air purifiers and a DIY air filter workshop so attendees could leave with their very own air filter!

Let’s Clear the Air!

The 2026 Air Quality Awareness Week wrapped up with many more informed and energized Michigan residents ready to take action and demand polluter accountability and protections for our natural resources and public health. With newly planted trees and better-resourced communities, the fight for the universal right to clean air is moving forward as strongly as ever.

By Trilby MacDonald, Ecology Center Writer

On a cool September morning in 2025, the Ann Arbor Office of Sustainability (OSI) invited local residents to gather at the Bryant Community Center to feel the ground shake. A drilling rig pushed a geothermal pipe 500 feet into the earth — the first of roughly 200 wells that will eventually heat and cool homes across the neighborhood as part of what city officials hope will become the nation’s first city-owned, neighborhood-scale networked geothermal system of its kind, and the country’s first fully carbon-neutral retrofitted neighborhood. For OSI Director Missy Stults, transparent communications have been vital to the project’s success. “We’re trying to be really candid about the disruption this will cause so that people trust the process as it unfolds.” 

The demonstration offered a preview of a project that could reshape how cities across America deliver energy. Unlike places like Boise, Idaho, where a hydrothermal reservoir close to the surface has supplied naturally heated water to warm much of the city for more than 130 years, Ann Arbor isn’t blessed with any special geological advantage. Its underground temperature holds steady at about 55 degrees, which is the average for most of the country. That is exactly what makes Ann Arbor such a compelling test case: if district-scale geothermal can work there, it could work in almost any city with the political will and public investment to build it.

In 2022, Ann Arbor received technical assistance through the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Communities LEAP program to design the Bryant neighborhood geothermal system. Bryant was selected as the test case because it is a working-class neighborhood of single-family households that experience high energy cost burdens. The homes were built in the 1970s and have poor energy efficiency, frequent flooding, and mold and other health and safety issues. In October, 2025, the City won an $11 million grant from the DOE to build the geothermal system designed for Bryant, which includes a wellfield capable of heating and cooling the Bryant Elementary School, Community Center, and all 262 homes in the Bryant neighborhood. 

Ann Arbor is matching the DOE investment with funds to connect neighborhood buildings to the system and making home energy efficiency upgrades. The first 100 homes will be connected to geothermal by 2028, and additional homes will be connected as funds become available. The Bryant Elementary School was originally part of the project, but was dropped due to the need for expensive mechanical upgrades to the school building. When those upgrades are in place, the school can be served by the same geothermal system used by the homes and community center in the Bryant neighborhood. 

Energy use in buildings accounts for roughly 70 percent of Ann Arbor's carbon footprint, but state law prevents the City from requiring developers to adopt renewable energy technologies. That leaves cities with a challenge: how do you encourage investment in systems that cost more upfront but save money over time? Geothermal is one example. Because it moves heat rather than generating it, a geothermal system can deliver three to five times more heat than the electricity it consumes. Yet, many developers still choose less expensive conventional systems because they are focused on minimizing construction costs. Ann Arbor's strategy is to reduce that barrier by investing in shared geothermal infrastructure, making it easier and more affordable for residents and businesses to participate. 

The Bryant neighborhood geothermal system is part of Ann Arbor’s Sustainable Energy Utility (SEU), a voter-approved initiative that allows the City to deliver independently owned and operated renewable energy to residents beyond what the utility company DTE provides. The SEU is the nation’s first opt-in, city-owned utility that runs parallel to an investor-owned utility company. As a utility provider, Ann Arbor can devise creative strategies for deploying renewable energy across the city as part of its plan to reach carbon neutrality by 2030. Though the City is unlikely to achieve full carbon neutrality by the self-imposed deadline, the goal has galvanized city leaders to take on systemic changes that could someday make carbon neutrality possible. 

Networked geothermal in a moderate-income residential neighborhood is the kind of systems-level solution that is only possible when city leadership and residents share a willingness to invest in bold experiments. The potential payout is huge: dramatic reductions in utility costs and carbon emissions, and improved reliability in a city plagued by frequent power outages. If successful, cities across the country may follow suit. But the substantial upfront costs may be a barrier to large-scale implementation.

Many of the Bryant neighborhood homes require substantial investments in energy efficiency as well as health and safety measures to ensure that the geothermal system will function at its best. Further, lopsided demand may overtax the system. In a strictly residential neighborhood, peak demand is after business hours when most people are at home. If everyone is heating and cooling at the same time, there is less energy to go around. A neighborhood with a mix of homes, businesses, and public buildings is better suited to networked geothermal because it distributes energy usage more evenly throughout the day. 

OSI is drilling experimental wells across the City to see where networked geothermal might be feasible, including in the mixed-use Kerrytown neighborhood. “We need to run these models. We need to actually understand and then optimize,” says Stults, who cautions that “geothermal is not going to work everywhere in the city.” 

Creating innovative alternatives to our costly and unreliable energy system requires patience and willingness to invest in breakthrough technologies that carry some risk. The federal government has a long history of supporting innovation and could be a strong partner in this work. While federal policy is actively working to dismantle solar and wind energy projects in favor of oil and gas, geothermal remains a renewable energy that the administration may support. Technological advances in oil and natural gas extraction are proving to be useful in drilling geothermal wells. OSI will continue to apply for public dollars, but the level of investment necessary to deliver resilient, clean, inexpensive geothermal heating and cooling will require Ann Arbor residents to share the costs. The good news is that once the pipes are in the ground, geothermal systems require little maintenance over their 50-100-year life cycle, and they reduce energy bills between 25% and 50%. 

A citywide geothermal system would cost billions and take decades to implement, but is still far more cost-effective than creating separate geothermal systems for each structure. Stults explains that financing this investment could follow the model used by utilities when paying for grid upgrades. “We pay for our utilities by taking out capital dollars, and you pay back that capital debt through rates,” she says, explaining that paying for geothermal energy through the SEU “is the exact same thing.” 

Geothermal makes so much sense that Ann Arbor Public Schools and the University of Michigan are also in on the action. But there aren’t enough geothermal installation companies to meet demand. Closing that gap remains a sticky problem that requires out-of-the-box thinking. “We're thinking about all kinds of solutions,” says Stults. “Do we buy a rig for Ann Arbor? Do we recruit a business to come set up in Ann Arbor to meet all of our demand and the county's demand? Do we sequence our projects in a certain way? Do we drill central wells?” Whichever solution the City settles on will expedite the clean energy transition and lower costs for all local institutions that are striving towards net neutrality. 

You may have recently seen ads — on social media, television, even your front door — from the “Responsible Energy Coalition,” attacking an Ann Arbor proposal to transform electricity distribution in the city.

But don’t be fooled. These ads come from a front group for DTE, spending an unprecedented amount of political money to ward off a ballot proposal that would move the City further along in the development of a municipal utility.

According to campaign finance filings, DTE has already invested $1.8 million in the ballot committee, even though the citizens’ initiative hasn’t even qualified for the ballot. Just to put that in perspective, less than $200,000 was spent on ALL municipal elections combined in Ann Arbor in 2022.

There are good arguments for and against the municipal utility proposal, but consider the source. DTE has a long track record of spending ratepayer money to influence elections. In Lansing, DTE is one of the state’s largest political donors, contributing to virtually every legislator. In Ann Arbor, DTE is spending profits from the electric bills paid by city residents and businesses to lobby them against a ballot proposal.

That’s right. That’s a monopoly utility, using our own money against us. There should be a law. 

As it turns out, 23 states have just such a law. They prohibit regulated utilities from donating money to political campaigns. A grassroots coalition has collected signatures to put a similar proposal on Michigan’s November ballot, and submitted them on May 27 to state officials for verification.

As for the Ann Arbor ballot initiative, please form your own opinion about it and find responsible sources of information on the topic. Just know that the Responsible Energy Coalition is not one of them.

By Yuki Nakayama, Ecology Center Writer

Last year, Becca Nielsen was appointed the Director of the Environmental Education department at the Ecology Center. She is an experienced science educator and place-based, EcoJustice practitioner with experience in both traditional and non-traditional educational settings for a wide variety of audiences. Nielsen worked with Al Gore on his Inconvenient Truth Project, co-led a statewide coalition connecting children with nature, and is also one of the original members of the leadership team that built the Southeast Michigan Stewardship (SEMIS) Coalition, a group focused on integrating EcoJustice-focused place-based education (PBE) across K–12 and higher education. 

Nielsen became interested in education because her parents were teachers and she experienced struggles as a young student within the traditional education system. She wanted to find ways to effectively support students and teachers who are often limited by the rigidity of the standardized curriculum. 

Despite her career as a science educator, she initially thought she was “bad” at science until a biology professor she worked for at the Museum of Natural History in college scouted her to switch from English to biology. This experience pushed Nielsen to reconnect with her love for nature and the outdoors and develop her dedication to helping all students find the right path for learning through science education. It also demonstrates the power of one teacher to turn a challenging subject into a lifelong career path. 

Nielsen’s specialty, place-based education (PBE), is a practice that views physical, cultural, and historical aspects of our environment as crucial starting points for teaching and learning. She also uses an EcoJustice approach in her place-based education practice. Nielsen describes EcoJustice as environmental justice that digs into the root causes of issues that we see. An EcoJustice approach treats environmental and cultural issues as intertwined and inseparable. Using a place-based, EcoJustice approach purposefully connects scientific knowledge to local places to solve real-world cultural and ecological issues that are directly experienced by students. PBE expands the classroom into the community and places collective care and justice at the center of learning alongside the content. The power of a PBE approach is its ability to connect students to place and community, to help students learn content more deeply, and to empower students to take action on local issues around them. 

Nielsen aims “to equip people with the skills and knowledge necessary to thrive in healthy, sustainable, and just communities.” For her, EcoJustice is the core of her educational work because “teaching and learning isn’t possible without a safe and healthy environment.” Nielsen sees “EcoJustice work as where all of [my] interests and the pressing issues of our time coalesce.”

Nielsen explained that, “the secret to framing a lesson with a place-based, EcoJustice lens is to use larger questions of inquiry [that are action-oriented and locally specific] upfront at the beginning of a lesson or unit and to tailor the unit around answering those questions.” Applying that idea to some of the Ecology Center’s environmental education program topics, she offered the following questions as examples: “How can I participate in the circular economy in my local community? What zero waste practices can I use at my school and at home to make better decisions for my environment and my community?” These questions allow students “to connect with community partners, get out into the community to learn more about the practices, and design action projects to showcase what they’ve learned in the classroom and to make a difference in their community at the same time.” 

The Cody Youth Ambassadors program is one example of a place-based educational approach from Nielsen’s previous work with the SEMIS Coalition. The Youth (student) Ambassadors worked with teachers and local partners to embed Rouge Park into the ninth-grade curriculum across subjects. Through this program, students learned about the history of the land and water in the Cody Rouge community, the ongoing litter and pollution issues at the park, and the Rouge River’s water quality problems. The students gained a multi-perspective exploration of their community, experienced the importance of stewardship, and witnessed the power of civic action. The program was the first of its kind to integrate such topics into all core subjects during regular school days instead of isolated one-off lessons. (More examples of PBE programs are available on the SEMIS student gallery page) 

Integrating environmental topics into subjects beyond science may be difficult for some to imagine — but it is not only possible but can also lead to deeper, more meaningful learning and a more engaging experience for students. For example, in January, Nielsen led Green Training workshops for all 10th graders in their geometry classes at Ypsilanti High School. “We connected landfill construction, zero waste, and circular economy ideas to geometry. We also discussed other sustainability projects at the schools that connect to math, science, and community.” As part of the Washtenaw County Recycling Education Program, these individual lessons can feed into “larger inquiries such as a schoolwide waste audit to investigate how they are doing at keeping recyclable things out of the trash.”

PBE conducted with an EcoJustice lens offers a grounded approach to connect traditional education to the material realities of our lives. It answers the common “why do we need to know this” question in a powerful and local way, and it calls on us to apply our education to actions that connect to a future beyond ours. 

Ecology Center’s Environmental Education Department 

Nielsen joined the Ecology Center staff because its mission and work align with her lifelong interests and allow her to take PBE even further. She is thoroughly impressed by past Ecology Center Environmental Education initiatives. She sees her job as deepening the connections between existing environmental education programs and other Ecology Center programs, as well as working more closely with other campaigns in the future. She also would like to strengthen partnerships with other organizations doing complementary work to build capacity for transformative programs across the region. 

One of her major goals is to “get a seat at the table” in larger conversation spaces as a way to connect environmental education to effective policy decisions. Environmental education is not just about informing children or concerned residents about recycling and composting; it is about educating decision-makers and voters about making systemic choices that ensure a safe and healthy future. Effective environmental education reaches not only youth, but also community members who can model stewardship and civic actions as a result of their education experiences. 

According to Nielsen, a “lack of answers” is a core shortcoming for many education programs. Many programs present overwhelming information about environmental challenges, much of which can sound depressing or scary. Often, those programs do not include insights about what is being done to find solutions or how to take action at the individual level, which can leave learners feeling paralyzed or helpless. She believes that information about environmental concerns “should always include actionable opportunities to make a difference” as a result of what has been learned, especially at the K-12 level. Using a place-based, EcoJustice approach to environmental education builds in those connections between science, community, and the call to action that can lead to deeper understanding as well as protective and regulatory policies in the real world. 

Making Decades of Environmental Education Available to Everyone

The Environmental Education team is launching an Education Resources Online Library (EROL), a digital library of downloadable resources to help K-12 students, educators, and families take action on key environmental issues. These materials focus on topics like renewable energy, green chemistry, and waste reduction, providing practical tools to inspire informed, hands-on learning and positive community impact.

While going into the classroom to lead students, teachers, and families through various lessons is incredibly powerful, it is not always possible. This is why we created the EROL library that provides lesson plans and activities that people can use on their own. These resources transform our engaging lessons on environmental issues from one-time special events into opportunities for on-demand, easily accessible, long-term learning. 

EROL is available to everyone. Each lesson is labeled by target grade level, but can be used by a variety of different age groups. For example, an adult who is new to a concept might benefit from a lesson meant for a 3rd grade classroom. On the other hand, a student who has had multiple experiences with a topic may be successful with a lesson that is above their grade level. This resource has been created with flexible learning goals in mind for anyone in the community who is interested in learning more about environmental issues.

The Environmental Education team has many other exciting ideas in the works. Nielsen looks forward to expanding EROL offerings, infusing PBE into existing programs, and continuing to develop new place-based education experiences around different Ecology Center topics with her team. 

By Markus Merin, Environmental Storyteller Fellow

In northeastern Washtenaw County, on the border of Salem and Northville Townships, sits Arbor Hills landfill. Active since the 1970s as a gravel pit, Arbor Hills has functioned as one of Michigan’s 60-plus landfill sites for decades. More than 50 years after its creation, Arbor Hills is running out of space and is looking for an expansion. Northville residents are not pleased.

A Lousy Neighbor

“The problem you hear about always is the odor,” says David Drinan, Vice President of the Conservancy Initiative, a Northville-based organization opposed to the expansion of Arbor Hills. Based on tracking by the Conservancy Initiative, the Michigan Department of Environment, Great Lakes, and Energy (EGLE) has received hundreds of complaints about the Arbor Hills site just in the last six months. Arbor Hills Landfill has been a nuisance to the community of Northville for years. Since 2020, Arbor Hills has been owned and operated by GFL Environmental, a Canadian waste management firm. 

Since 2016, Arbor Hills has been hit with more than $1 million in fines under multiple owners, including a $355,109 EGLE settlement for failing to contain noxious odors. The agreement also required the landfill to invest millions in monitoring equipment and tree planting. Unfortunately, these measures have not prevented the continued uptick in landfill odor complaints since the acquisition in 2020. Locals have every reason to fear the continuation of these problems — odors from landfills are more than disgusting. The leading causes of landfill odors, hydrogen sulfide and ammonia, are linked to chronic headaches, irritation of the respiratory system, nausea, and difficulty breathing. Observational studies also indicate that chronic exposure to landfill gas can lead to increased rates of lung cancer.

Beyond issues with the smell are fears of pollution and the health risks associated with waste. Arbor Hills Landfill was identified as a PFAS site by the state of Michigan in 2019, and subsequent research by independent organizations like Ecology Center and its allies has shown the problem goes beyond the waste site itself. Thanks to help from Great Lakes PFAS Action Network in 2023, members of the Northville community discovered that the forever chemical PFOS was present in nearby Johnson Creek at levels several times higher than official safety standards. PFOS is known to cause pregnancy complications, thyroid disorders, and liver cancer. Local fish also tested positive for PFAS contamination, raising concerns about wildlife preservation and health risks for fishers in the area.

While Northville residents are expected to endure the difficulties of life next to an active landfill, they receive few direct financial benefits, as most proceeds accrue to Washtenaw County and Salem Township across the border. Similarly, Northville residents don’t have a direct public vote on the expansion, even though the township has representation on the planning committee. This is a common problem with landfills — such undesirable industries are placed at the border between one municipality and another, minimizing the host municipality’s negative consequences while exposing those externalities to another community. Northville residents are not alone in suffering from landfill-related pollution. Many residents of the rural community of Salem use well water in their homes, raising possible concerns about PFAS contamination that are likely to increase with a larger site.

The Landfill Economy

Arbor Hills is a pollution hazard for the communities that live near it, but its expansion threatens to worsen a much bigger issue facing our state. Michigan is a state filled to the brim with landfills, afflicted with a surplus going back decades. According to a 2025 study by the Department of Environment, Great Lakes, and Energy, Michigan has 23 years’ worth of landfill space left, and right now, Arbor Hills is not the only landfill in Southeast Michigan looking to expand. A similar project is under consideration at Pine Tree Acres landfill in Macomb County, while the expansion of Woodland Meadows landfill in Wayne County is already underway.

Nearly 20% of waste dumped in Michigan landfills comes from out-of-state, a large portion of it from our neighbors in Canada. “In 2020,” Drinan says, “when we couldn’t cross the border into Canada, when Canadians couldn’t cross the border and come here, the trash was still coming in like always.” This booming import of waste is the direct result of the extremely low waste disposal charges in Michigan compared to other Midwestern states. Those extremely low charges are a direct result of Michigan’s enormous landfill oversupply.

Beyond the Landfill Economy

Do we want a state economy built on waste? Michigan currently aims to increase its amount of recycled waste from 26% to 30% by 2030 as part of its sustainable development goals. Still, corporate insistence on maintaining the state’s artificially high landfill capacity can get in the way of this achievement, which will almost certainly make further progress towards its long-term goal of 45% more difficult. Michigan’s consistent approval of landfill construction and expansion has created a regionally anomalous overcapacity, which can only be maintained at the expense of investment in waste recycling. Just as cheap oil reproduces dependence on oil and hampers the development of renewable energy, cheap dumping of trash reproduces dependence on landfills. 

Michigan can instead choose to support investment in the recycling industry rather than landfills, making recycling an even more economically competitive option in the long run. Most recent landfill expansion projects are expected to remain in operation for up to 50 years. The externalized cost may be the health of Southeast Michigan’s ecosystem and the well-being of locals in Washtenaw and Northville counties. The expansion of Arbor Hills reproduces this economy of perverse incentives and restricts the willingness to invest in waste reduction technology and infrastructure.

This is not the first time Southeast Michigan has had to reckon with a leaky landfill. In the 1980s, the City of Ann Arbor, with the support of the Ecology Center, engineered a massive expansion of its recycling system in response to its dangerously full and out-of-compliance municipal landfill. The greater development of recycling infrastructure is one part of the shift towards a zero-waste economy, alongside reductions in solid waste and the infrastructure that enables it. In March of 2026, four state legislators proposed a bill to the Michigan Senate. SB 818 would make it more difficult to expand landfill sites like Arbor Hills by banning landfill construction within one mile of an existing dwelling. In a best-case scenario, new impediments to landfill construction and expansion could reset the state’s relationship between waste creation, recycling, and reduction.

Opposition to landfill expansion goes beyond the concerns of locals, who themselves deserve a clean township. The expansion of these landfills will lock Southeast Michigan into a cycle of cheap waste and high environmental tolls for decades. Michigan does not need to be a garbage dump for the Midwest. If the people of Michigan want a healthy environment and a green future for the state, preventing the growth of the state’s landfill surplus is a necessity.

Sources Cited:

• Aghion, Philippe et al. “Path dependence, innovation and the economics of climate change.” Centre for Climate Change Economics and Policy. November 2014.

• Conservancy Initiative website

• Conservancy Initiative. “January 2026 Odor Nuisance Charts.”

• James, Janelle D. “Michigan recycling rate hits high. Bottle law critics say it could go higher.” Bridge Michigan, April 22, 2026.

• Mataloni, F et. al. “Morbidity and mortality of people who live close to municipal waste landfills: a multisite cohort study.” International Journal of Epidemiology. 2016 Jun;45(3):806-15.

• Meerschaert, Kevin. “Michigan Senate Bill could kill Arbor Hills expansion.” WEMU, March 6, 2026.

• Michigan Department of Attorney General. “AG Nessel, EGLE Reach Settlement with Arbor Hills Landfill,” March 10, 2022.

• Michigan Department of Environment, Great Lakes, and Energy. “By the Numbers: Michigan on track to reach 30% recycling rate by 2029.” January 08, 2026.

• Michigan Department of Environment, Great Lakes, and Energy. “Report of Solid Waste Landfilled in Michigan. Report Period: 2025.” Legislative Report.

• “NATURAL RESOURCES AND ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION ACT (EXCERPT). Act 451 of 1994 Part 115. SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT SUBPART 1. GENERAL AND DEFINITIONS.”

• New York State Department of Health. “Important Things to Know About Landfill Gas.”

• Senate Bill No. 818

By Trilby MacDonald, Ecology Center Writer

Michigan’s slow but steady population decline is not news, but recent data from the Michigan Department of Management and Budget is alarming: 45,000 workers lost from March-September, 2025, most from the auto industry. And yet, 85% of employers in the clean energy sectors report having trouble filling open positions. In an effort to close the gap, government agencies, trade associations, and public-private partnerships have successfully leveraged corporate, state, and federal funding to train tens of thousands of workers in fast-growing fields like solar installation, energy efficiency, advanced manufacturing, and EV technologies. 

But instead of ramping up these efforts to keep pace with the shifting sands of the workforce, the state is slashing the budget of one of its biggest and most successful programs, the GoingPro Talent Fund, by 42%. As a result, LEO projects about 300 fewer employers will receive awards and 10,000 fewer Michigan workers will receive training support over the two award cycles. Michigan's Community & Worker Economic Transition Office and EGLE clean energy grants continue supporting sector-specific training, but there will be no new funding to fill the gap. Without state investment, Michigan is poised to lose more workers than ever before. 

Michigan has a vested interest in upskilling its workforce to ensure that the jobs in our state are filled by our workers. The Going PRO Talent Fund and Clean Energy Workforce Grants are examples of state-funded programs that partner with employers who upskill new and incumbent workers into higher-paying jobs with bright futures. This strategy allows companies to retain workers that may otherwise have been replaced with qualified candidates from out of state. 

Trade associations such as Clean Fuels Michigan, along with public–private partnerships like the Michigan Economic Development Team Talent Action Team, BlueGreen Alliance, Michigan Energy Workforce Development Consortium, EV Jobs Academy, and the Community & Worker Economic Transition Office are aligning workforce training with evolving industry needs. Together, these initiatives are building strong pipelines that equip and place workers in clean energy careers, ensuring that employees, unions, and employers advance in step as Michigan leads the nation’s energy transition and advances towards MI Healthy Climate Plan goals. 

In the story ahead, we look closely at how this ecosystem works in practice — spotlighting energy efficiency company Walker-Miller Energy, a B-Corporation that channels both novice workers and seasoned professionals into clean energy jobs using a braided mix of utility dollars, Workforce Innovation Opportunity Act funding, state grants such as the GoingPRO Talent Fund, and philanthropic support. 

Walker-Miller Energy Services

Walker-Miller Energy Services is a Detroit-based, Black woman-owned B-Corporation delivering energy efficiency and clean energy solutions to residents, utilities, private companies, and nonprofits. As a B Corporation, Walker-Miller is bound to a triple bottom line that measures success by social equity, environmental sustainability, and financial stability metrics. This three-pronged approach makes it uniquely positioned to work at the intersection of public, private, utility, and nonprofit sectors to deliver MI Healthy Climate Plan workforce goals. 

Walker-Miller has a number of programs designed to fill the energy sector’s employment gaps, from utility companies in search of energy efficiency experts, to small business incubation, to training and apprenticeships for a range of specializations. Walker-Miller collaborates with the LEO Going PRO Talent Fund and utility companies DTE and Consumers Energy to ensure that opportunity reaches all parts of the state. Walker-Miller is a registered proprietary school with the State of Michigan and graduates of the UpSkill Cohort and Building Performance Institute Training Program are qualified to accept state and utility company contracts. 

Recruitment is keenly focused on communities of color and women. Of the over 200 graduates from Walker-Miller training programs since 2020, 92% are people of color, and 40% are women. Michigan’s Black labor force is on par with the White labor force relative to population sizes, but white men hold a 17% employment lead over Black men. This indicates that Black workers are entering the workforce but encounter barriers to actually landing a job. Women represent 50% of Michigan’s workforce, but nationwide only hold about 28% of clean energy jobs and 5% of construction apprenticeships. Factors like racism and sexism are out of a candidate’s control, but knowing how to perform well in a job interview can be just as important to employers as having the skills to do a job. Walker-Miller helps close the employment gap by providing soft skills training as part of workforce development. 

Data from the Michigan Environmental Justice Screen Tool shows that communities with low income and low educational attainment have been disproportionately impacted by climate change and high energy costs. These communities also tend to be racially diverse. By focusing recruitment for clean energy workforce development in these areas, Walker-Miller is maximizing the benefits of family sustaining jobs that do not require a college degree.

Derrick Meeking, Director of Workforce Development at Walker-Miller, engages individuals and business owners looking to gain additional credentials that allow them to expand. “We are trying to grow and scale businesses, also introduce individuals to the clean energy economy through workforce trainings,” he explains. “We find ourselves really being that educational beacon and providing opportunities for folks to enter into these ecosystems.”

Most recruits can’t afford to take training programs, even if they’re tuition free. That’s why wraparound supports are crucial to the program’s success. Trainees receive a stipend and funding for basics like transportation and childcare, as well as instruction in interview skills, resume building, and money management to ensure that they get, and stay, employed. “Many people think the program is a scam because it seems too good to be true,” says Meeking. It costs $12,000 to put one person through the Upskill program, an investment the utilities believe is more than worthwhile to meet the demand for skilled energy efficiency professionals. Word has gotten around, and there are more than 20 applicants for each open spot in the next Upskill Cohort. 

The program has created a positive feedback loop in the business community. “Our number one key performance indicator is employment,” says Meeking. “We train and place. We don’t train and pray.” He sees the results every day. “We found that empowering those businesses and helping them scale and grow, in return they come back and hire our folks that have gone through our novice program. So it’s kind of full circle.” 

Jonathan Jenkins owns energy efficiency company Target AIR HVAC based in Livonia. He attended the Upskilled Cohort program to expand his business beyond installing high efficiency equipment, because “we’re just more efficient at wasting dollars if we don’t address the envelope as well.” Jonathan explains how a lot of homeowners have oversized heating and cooling equipment that pumps out more energy than they need. With efficiency measures in place, they can downsize equipment, and by adding solar panels, they can save even more money on utilities. He jokes that after the program, he realized how much he had to fix in his own house. “It’s an eye opener!”

Jenkins says there is tremendous room for growth in the field of energy efficiency. “Everybody’s a lot more conscious of their utility bills … So, it’s a great time for us, because it directly correlates with HVAC,” as well as installing clean energy alternatives like solar and geothermal energy. 

Jonathan has hired two UpSkilled graduates and has an employee who is currently going through the program. Walker-Miller takes on a few students in each program for on the job training and commits to hiring students out of each cohort. Partnering businesses will typically invite workers that train with them to apply for open positions. “In the current cohort, all fourteen trainees have secured jobs with employment partners in week six in the program,” says Meeking. 

Additional Walker-Miller training allowed Jenkins to open a second company, Michigan Energy Auditors, to help people see inefficiencies in their home and business energy systems. “It’s just been such a wonderful experience just from the top down in regards to the Upskilled program,” says Jenkins. 

Michigan’s workforce development for clean energy exemplifies a “whole ecosystem” approach, where state tools, utility funding, and community-rooted employers like Walker-Miller Energy Services and Target Air HVAC/Michigan Energy Auditors forge tangible pipelines into high-demand careers in EV manufacturing, battery engineering, energy efficiency, and clean infrastructure trades. Integrating housing, transportation, competitive wages, benefits, and clear career ladders will be essential to attract, train, and retain talent, complementing initiatives like the MI Growth Office and Make MI Home. As federal funding dries up and state budgets tighten, programs like UpSkilled and GoingPro Talent Fund face uncertain futures despite their success in advancing equity and opportunity in clean energy.

With sustained synergy among government, business, nonprofits, and unions — bolstered by predictive planning — Michigan can bridge critical shortages and lead the national energy transition.