URI Studying Jonah Crabs to Learn about Offshore Wind Turbines’ Effect on Underwater Ecosystems

Boost to local fishing?

By Joshua Geaughan / ecoRI News contributor

Jonah crabs are being studied in Rhode Island waters
as part of a project examining the effect of offshore
wind turbines on underwater ecosystems.
(Atlantic States Marine Fisheries Commission)

Since the first offshore wind project was developed in Rhode Island in 2016, University of Rhode Island researchers have been attempting to understand their impacts on local marine ecosystems. That work is continuing with first-year URI Ph.D. student Emmanuel Oyewole’s study of the artificial reefs that are often found at the base of turbines.

It’s been established through research surrounding offshore wind that the base of turbines serves as a foundation for algae and coral, which acts as a base for a booming ecosystem.

Bottom of Form

In an attempt to find the cause of this blossoming of aquatic activity, Oyewole is studying the movement and dietary habits of one special creature found at the base of offshore wind turbines: Jonah crabs. He’s working with his academic advisor, Kelton McMahon, an associate professor of oceanography.

Trump wants to run scientific research like his family business.

The new "science golden age" looks suspiciously like a grift

Lisa Needham

The Trump regime is trying to usher in a “Golden Age in Science” where scientific research is run like a Trump family business, artificial intelligence is all that matters, profit is everything, and expertise is for chumps.

Or at least that’s the vision emerging from a new 123-page “Report to the President” from Michael Kratsios, the Director of the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy.

In a normal administration, you could probably skip over learning about a science policy document — but this is no normal administration, and this is no normal science policy document. Instead, it’s Trump’s attempt to end the actual golden age of science that was kicked off in 1945 with the publication of '“The Endless Frontier” by Vannevar Bush.

Bush, at President Franklin Delano Roosevelt’s request, laid out a vision of federal support for science that centered on funding universities to do basic research, saying that as long as those institutions were “vigorous and healthy and their scientists are free to pursue the truth wherever it may lead, there will be a flow of new scientific knowledge to those who can apply it to practical problems in Government, in industry, or elsewhere.”

Kratsios’s report is supposed to be the successor to Bush’s, and even apes the format, but this isn’t really a document about science policy. It’s one about ending science research as we know it in favor of shoveling cash at big tech companies.

While it might be temping to wave this away as an aspirational policy document, Trump has already begun to shift billions in research funds to AI projects and has taken a hatchet to science funding across the board. He’s teed up the shift Kratsios proposes here, and since neither Congress nor the Supreme Court seem inclined to stop him from doing whatever he wants with taxpayer money, it isn’t doomering or hyperbole to say we are staring down the barrel of a world where the only “science” the government intends to support is for-profit tech and defense advancements.

Elon Musk’s Fortune Comes From Not Paying Taxes

So why does he complain all the time?

By Stephen Land, Bob Lord 

The valuation trends up and down, but one thing’s for sure: Elon Musk became the world’s first trillionaire this summer. At the height of the SpaceX IPO he was briefly worth around $1.45 trillion.

Then SpaceX stock tanked, rallied, then tanked again. But the most important thing about Musk’s wealth isn’t whether it stays above the 13-figure threshold — it’s that 94 percent of it comes from not having to pay taxes on unrealized gains.

That’s right: Musk’s fortune effectively comes from not paying taxes.

It’s no exaggeration to say that trillionaires (Musk likely won’t be the last) are creatures of the tax code. 

They ought to be called “taxillionaires.” If it weren’t for laws that permit the wealthy to endlessly defer paying taxes by keeping their gains unrealized, there would be no trillionaires — and many fewer billionaires.

According to Musk’s own account, when he sold his stake in Paypal in 2002, he netted $180 million, invested it all in SpaceX and Tesla, and borrowed to pay his living expenses. To get from $180 million to a trillion today implies annual returns of over 40 percent (returns that would be considered impossible for ordinary investors).

Allowing these returns to compound untaxed supercharges growth.

Musk paid some taxes along the way, when he exercised stock options or sold some Tesla shares, but any taxes he paid are insignificant compared to his wealth. By contrast, for most working Americans earning a good salary, total state and federal taxes are significant — typically around 40 percent.

Cold

How Trump has changed world opinion about America

Trump proposes end to rule requiring companies to disclose climate costs to shareholders

SEC Proposes to Scrap Climate Disclosure Rules 

By Gina-Marie Cheeseman 

The Securities and Exchange Commission announced on May 29 that it is proposing to send its climate disclosure rules to the metaphorical scrap yard. That’s where any climate change-related rules go during President Trump’s second term in office. The federal agency stated that it is “returning the agency to its core mandate.”

​In March 2024, the SEC approved rules that mandated public companies to disclose climate-related matters, including greenhouse gas emissions. The Commission stayed the rule due to litigation. A year later, the SEC voted to stop defending the rules.

​The SEC claims the rules “exceed the scope” of its statutory authority. The agency labels the climate disclosure rules as unnecessary, costly for public companies, and at odds with its policy objectives. However, Tom Zimpleman, a senior attorney at the Natural Resources Defense Council, characterizes the SEC’s proposal as “shirking its responsibility to protect investors.” He points out that “climate risk is financial risk.”

Consuming less protein could have greater health benefits and extend lifespan

Like so many food issues, fads are often fake and balance is the key

Cell Press

Protein-fortified foods are popping up everywhere, from cereal and coffee to even protein water. But a new review covering over 350 papers on protein restriction and aging-publishing July 31 in the Cell Press journal Cell Press Blue-suggests that consuming less protein could have greater health benefits and could, in some cases, extend lifespan. 

The authors describe how protein restriction slows aging by improving metabolism, changing how cells respond to nutrients, reducing cellular damage, and preserving healthy cell function. 

"It's absolutely crystal clear that there are benefits of protein to muscle growth and exercise response of active individuals," says Dudley Lamming, the paper's corresponding author, of the University of Wisconsin-Madison. 

"But because most people are relatively sedentary, many people are likely consuming more protein than they actually need, which probably has negative health consequences." 

For decades, scientists have known that eating less calories can extend lifespan in many organisms and reduce the risk of age-related diseases like cancer. But maintaining a calorie-restricted diet is difficult for most people. 

Previous studies have found that eating less protein can extend the lifespan of flies and rodents without reducing their calorie consumption. Several recent clinical trials in humans have also shown that reducing protein intake can reduce weight and fat mass and improve fasting blood sugar in humans, even though protein-restricted individuals tend to eat more calories. 

But at the same time, some studies have found that eating more protein could promote weight loss and reduce age-related muscle loss in older adults when paired with exercise. Those findings prompted US authorities to update its dietary guidelines this year, recommending an increase in daily protein intake to 1.2–1.6 grams per kilogram of body weight (0.5–0.7 grams per pound), nearly doubling the previous recommendations. 

Westerly Council Adopts One-Year Data Center Moratorium

Sends Four Charter Questions to November Ballot

Adriana Vossari, RI & Local Government News

Westerly voters will decide four Town Charter questions on November 3, including changes to how council and school committee vacancies are filled and whether the town can stop advertising ordinances in the newspaper. A one-year moratorium blocks data center proposals while zoning rules are written. A proposed short-term rental ordinance would limit unhosted rentals to three coastal zoning districts, but no vote was taken.

The Westerly Town Council adopted a one-year moratorium on data centers, approved four Town Charter questions for the November 3 ballot, and heard a first outline of a proposed short-term rental ordinance at its July 27 meeting, according to the Westerly Town Council's published meeting recording.

The charter debate consumed most of the night and ended with a 4-3 poll vote on the most contested question, a brief recess called mid-argument, and an apology from the council president to a fellow councilor.

One-year data center moratorium adopted

The council opened a public hearing and then approved an ordinance imposing a one-year moratorium on all data centers. The town manager told the council the town's ordinances are currently silent on data centers, and the pause is meant to give the zoning side time to draft rules on where such facilities would be allowed or restricted. He noted that data centers consume large amounts of electricity and water.

One speaker, a former Hopkinton Town Council member who identified himself as a candidate for state representative in District 38, spoke in support. He said once a development application is submitted and becomes vested, a community loses much of its ability to decide where that development belongs. No one spoke against the moratorium.

Councilors approved the ordinance by voice vote after closing the hearing. One councilor said a year "really isn't enough time" for the Planning Board to do the work, but called it the most the council could do.

Charlestown invites residents to meet the team behind Amtrak's New Haven to Providence Capacity Planning Study

Charlestown Asks Residents to Face the Boogeyman

Adriana Vossari, RI & Local Government News

The study covers the rail corridor through southern Rhode Island and could shape future track alignments, speeds and service. Charlestown residents have a direct channel to comment while the work is still at the conceptual stage.

The Town of Charlestown is inviting residents to meet with the Amtrak team running a new study of the rail corridor between New Haven and Providence — the same 65-mile stretch that produced a proposal a decade ago to cut a high-speed bypass straight through town.

The invitation appears on the town's website under the heading "Public Invitation: Amtrak Northeast Corridor Study Team Community Engagement." Charlestown has maintained a dedicated page for Amtrak matters since the last round of federal rail planning, including an email address, amtrak-comments@charlestownri.org, for residents who want their comments on the record with the town.

The study itself began in May and is scheduled to run through May 2028, according to Amtrak's announcement of the New Haven to Providence Capacity Planning Study. It covers the Northeast Corridor main line between the two cities plus the connecting corridor through Hartford toward Springfield, and it accounts for Amtrak intercity trains, CTrail's Shore Line East and Hartford Line, and MBTA commuter rail. The Federal Railroad Administration awarded Amtrak up to $4 million on November 6, 2023, to complete the work.

What the study will and will not do matters for anyone worried about their property. Amtrak says the current phase is limited to conceptual design and analysis of alternatives. It does not include detailed engineering, land acquisition or construction. Any improvements that come out of it would then have to move through the CONNECT NEC and Capital Investment Plan processes, and later stages would depend on funding that has not been appropriated.

Amtrak also states plainly that the study "does not include a preconceived preferred alternative alignment or set of improvements," and that it will not build on NEC Future, the 2012-2017 federal planning effort. The company's own summary acknowledges that the earlier process was "unable to undertake the levels of public engagement necessary to respond to concerns raised by the public regarding that proposal."

That proposal is why Charlestown pays attention. In December 2016, the FRA published a Tier 1 Final Environmental Impact Statement naming the "Old Saybrook to Kenyon Bypass" as a preferred alternative. New track would have entered Charlestown from Westerly, crossed the town from its western edge to its eastern edge, and rejoined the existing line near the Great Swamp State Wildlife Management Area in South Kingstown. The route ran through Burdickville village, the Carter Preserve, the Revolutionary-era Amos Green Farm, tribal land and Historic Columbia Heights housing.

EDITOR'S NOTE: Amtrak is facing handicaps at least as severe as they were in 2017 with train-hating Donald Trump in the White House and conservative Republicans in control of Congress. With no funding or political support, the Kenyon Bypass never stood a chance.  - Will Collette

Town officials learned about it from news coverage. An online petition against the plan gathered more than 1,500 signatures within days. A public meeting in Charlestown on January 10, 2017 drew more than 400 residents along with state and federal staff. Two weeks later, Charlestown and Westerly council members led a delegation of residents to the State House.

EDITOR'S NOTE: Charlestown Citizens Alliance leader and Town Council President Tom Gentz admitted publicly that Charlestown had received earlier notice in a large document that he and his CCA colleagues had failed to read.  - Will Collette

On July 12, 2017, the FRA issued a Record of Decision that removed the track realignment proposal from the New Haven-to-Providence section and instead directed Connecticut and Rhode Island to collaborate on a capacity planning study. That is the study now underway. It was the win Charlestown wanted, and it also created the process that could revisit alignment questions.

The corridor's underlying problems have not changed: limited capacity and curved shoreline track that holds down train speeds.

Amtrak plans roughly 30 outreach events across the study area, beginning with appearances at community events this summer, and says it will form a public advisory committee. Not everyone is satisfied with that approach. Gregory Stroud, editor-in-chief of CT Examiner, who helped lead the opposition to the earlier proposal, has questioned whether pop-up appearances can adequately explain a complicated planning process, and said his concerns extend to how the study itself is structured.

EDITOR'S NOTE: Stroud and his CCA collaborator Ruth Platner have attempted to keep this issue alive for their own purposes even though the Kenyon Bypass issue flatlined almost a decade ago. It has helped Stroud build readership for his website and helped Platner whip up fear among the Charlestown electorate.  - Will Collette

Amtrak has set up a project website and email address where residents can ask questions, submit feedback, ask about upcoming public meetings and sign up for periodic updates. Charlestown residents who want their input logged locally as well can write to the town's Amtrak comment address. The full announcement of the study is posted on Amtrak's media site, and the town's Amtrak page collects the 2016-2017 record at charlestownri.gov.

His final act

Narragansett powwow coming, August 8-9

 

Do personal green lifestyle choices distract from commitment to address bigger issues?

Scientists put the “recycling is a distraction” claim to the test

University of New South Wales

Recycling, greener diets, and other personal climate choices do not seem to distract people from supporting major environmental reforms. A four-year study of nearly 2,800 Australians found that these habits neither increased nor reduced later political engagement. 

Behavioral scientists from UNSW Sydney and Griffith University have found no evidence that personal climate-friendly choices reduce people's interest in broader action on climate change.

The research, published on July 23, followed nearly 2,800 Australians over four years as part of the National Climate Action Survey. Participants who recycled, used reusable cups and containers, took public transportation, ate greener diets, or cycled to work were no less likely to support wider climate policies and collective action.

The findings challenge a common argument that governments and businesses promote small lifestyle changes to shift attention away from more difficult reforms, such as transforming energy systems and regulating industry.

"Individual climate actions neither facilitate nor undermine broader climate engagement," says lead author Dr. Omid Ghasemi from the UNSW Institute for Climate Risk & Response.

"We found no evidence for the idea that personal action might reduce collective action or policy support because people feel they've done enough, overestimate the impact of individual actions, or feel less worried about climate change," he says.

Rather than changing people's political behavior, everyday environmental choices may mainly reflect values they already hold. The researchers found that these actions were neither a trigger nor a barrier to greater public engagement.

In a close vote, Charlestown voters approve Chariho land deal

Almost 900 voted; 50 votes made the difference

By Will Collette

The Chariho School District plans to consolidate its three aging elementary schools into one campus. That plan advanced when Charlestown voters approved a deal that would make the existing Charlestown Elementary School the site for the new unified school.

The vote was 454 YES votes versus 404 NO votes.

If voters in all three towns approve the $116 million bond proposal that will appear on the November 3 General Election ballot, the project will move on to construction that will involve a choreographed construction plan to avoid disrupting the kids’ education.

Charlestown produced a special edition of The Pipeline to provide details about the proposed school project. CLICK HERE.

For those of you wondering about the cost, it’s not out of line. In Rhode Island, average elementary school construction runs at around $580 per square foot. The cost rises to $650 per square foot for high schools. A year ago, it cost nearly $100 million to build an elementary school, but construction costs have soared in 2026 due to inflation driven by tariffs and labor shortages.

Roughly 65% of the construction costs will be covered by the state.

The plan for a unified elementary school arose as the alternative to building new schools in each town, a proposal that voters rejected in 2024.

Trump Administration Demands Hospitals Share Emergency Room Records

Perverting privacy protections for Trump's agenda

By Amanda Seitz, Maia Rosenfeld, and Darius Tahir

A tiny federal agency tasked with protecting the public from injuries caused by lawn mowers and coffeemakers is demanding that some of the nation’s biggest health systems turn over detailed, personally identifiable medical records of all patients who seek help at their emergency rooms.

The Consumer Product Safety Commission, responsible for tracking and issuing recalls of dangerous products sold in the U.S., began discreetly pressuring hospital executives this year to share personally identifiable health data with a private contractor. 

But hospital lawyers and other industry experts have questioned the agency’s authority to collect, its ability to safeguard such a swath of sensitive information, and whether it has followed the legal process to overhaul its surveillance system.

After KFF Health News asked the CPSC about the new system, the agency announced the program on July 21. Left unmentioned, however, is the alarm it has raised among hospital executives, as well as the nature and extent of the agency’s data demands.

In a stark departure from its product-focused mission, the agency’s goal is to obtain millions of Americans’ medical records from emergency room visits for most injuries, from a broken bone to a childhood vaccine reaction or even a suicide attempt, according to documents and emails obtained by KFF Health News, as well as interviews with five people involved or familiar with the discussions.

A CPSC official also insisted in the emails that the institutions provide all ER patients’ identifiable information — such as names, addresses, diagnoses, and other personal details — to the contractor, Konza Health, for analysis. In correspondence with hospital executives, Konza representatives described participation as “mandatory” or “required.”

As a condition of viewing the correspondence, KFF Health News agreed not to republish some of the emails it obtained.

The CPSC wants at least 100 hospitals to start sending detailed medical records by the end of this year, according to an internal memo.

“The whole thing is troubling,” said Sharona Hoffman, a professor of health law at Case Western Reserve University who noted that giving a private entity access to a sweeping collection of data will introduce risks to patient privacy. “If this company really is collecting identifiable information, that is worrisome for patients.”

Trump Unveils Sweeping New Tariffs Expected to Cost Americans $100 Billion a Year

Trump uses bogus claims to continue to impose a national sales tax on Americans

Jake Johnson

On July 23, Donald Trump  unveiled a new package of tariffs targeting 60 countries that account for over 99% of US imports, a move that—if upheld in court—would cost Americans an estimated $100 billion per year in the form of higher costs.

The duties, ranging from 10% to 12.5%, were announced as part of Trump's effort to maneuver around repeated court rulings against his sweeping tariffs, including by the conservative-dominated US Supreme Court. Jamieson Greer, the Trump administration’s top trade official, pointed to Section 301 of the Trade Act of 1974 to justify the new tariffs, introduced with the purported goal of penalizing countries “for their failure to impose and effectively enforce a prohibition on the importation of goods produced with forced labor.”

Observers questioned the administration’s pretext. “Magically, the US tariff probe on forced labor practices is done perfectly in time to replace the generalized but expiring Section 122 tariffs,” noted Bloomberg’s Josh Wingrove, referring to the legal authority Trump cited for earlier tariffs.

Rep. Mike Levin (D-Calif.) acknowledged that “Section 301 is a law Congress passed,” but added, “What was passed in 1974 was authority to respond to specific unfair trade practices after investigation.”

“What is being done with it now is a tariff on 99% of American trade, set by Trump, with no expiration, no vote, and no ceiling,” said Levin. “If a delegation that broad is lawful, then the tariff power in Article I means very little. The Supreme Court struck down the last version of this policy in February. The response was to avoid Congress and find a different statute and rebuild substantially the same tariffs, effective the same minute the old ones lapsed.”

The list of countries targeted by the Section 301 tariffs includes Canada, Australia, Brazil, China, Mexico, Russia, Norway, the United Kingdom, and Vietnam.

Between the start of his second administration and January 2026, Trump’s tariffs cost American families $1,700 each on average as importers passed burdens onto consumers in the form of higher prices. The tariffs have also hammered small businesses, increased hardship for farmers, and failed to arrest the decline of American manufacturing jobs.