Hey, it's Jigar Shah. Welcome back to Energy Empire. This is the second of our three special episodes from the UNC Cleantech Summit produced in partnership with Suncast. This week, I sat down with Michael Regan, the 16th administrator of the EPA under President Biden and the first Black man to ever lead the agency. It's a pretty candid conversation. Love to know how you think about it. A lot of folks want to characterize clean energy and climate as an existential threat and a fight. And I'm not going to say that they aren't. But when it comes right down to the work that we're trying to accomplish, it is about establishing long-term, healthful environments for our families and for the generations to come. Few people have been able to tie the work that we're doing in energy and climate to public health like our next guest. Michael Regan is the former administrator of the EPA and is also a fellow North Carolinian. It's awesome to have you here, Michael, with Jigar and I on this collaboration podcast between Suncast and Energy Empire. Well, thank you all for having me. I'm a big fan of the podcast and you finally invited me. That's right. You've made it. We didn't practice reps before we got superstars on. I was going to say, I feel like we've made it now. That's great. I mentioned that you grew up here in North Carolina. Your father is a veteran, National Guard, worked in agriculture, helping farmers take care of their land. You grew up like I did, hunting and fishing and really understanding the stewardship of the land. Did you talk about what it was like growing up in that world? I had a blast. I grew up hunting and fishing with my father and grandfather. And, you know, it wasn't just sort of being out in nature hunting and fishing. It was being with my father and grandfather, an opportunity to bond and to learn and hear the stories. And so I really valued that time. It was very precious to me. and growing up, I did have some issues, some respiratory issues that were exacerbated by pollution. And when the ozone was really intense, those ozone action days, those were times that I could not be outdoors with my father and grandfather. So you can imagine as a kid wanting to be out there with them and having to sit in the house, that was no fun. So at a very early age, I started to make the connection between public health personally and nature and the environment. But I had a wonderful childhood, rural eastern North Carolina. And I really try to always think back to what that meant to me. Yeah. And how do I incorporate that into my service? Yeah, I think when you think about, you know, the origin story of the Clean Air Act, Clean Water Act, right, the Cayuga River being on fire, you know, 20 million Americans, I mean, 10% of the entire U.S. population participated in the first Earth Day. Yes. Right. I mean, clearly there were a lot of people who had that similar sort of life story to you around the fact that something was clearly wrong. Right. That we were out of balance in a way. Right. And that we were prioritizing, you know, economic growth over human health. Right. Talk more about your, you know, the bad air days and like, you know, how did you make a connection between that experience for you and what was causing it? Yes, that's a very good question. It took a while for me to really make that connection. But in high school, you know, as the chemistry and biology classes become more intense, you start to ask yourself some questions and you start to understand how these things connect. And it's at that point where you really start to talk to others. And at that time in life, we didn't really have the vocabulary to understand environmental justice. We just knew what was happening to us as individuals. But then you talk to others in your community and then you realize, hey, this is happening more frequently than one might think. I pursued an environmental science degree at A&T State University. And it's really there that I started to understand the connectivity to pollution, public health and the impact to natural resources. I think it's something that has always been a focus because it's so personal. But again, you quickly realize it's not just about us as individuals. You start to talk to others and see, quite frankly, that there are some that have it much worse than you do. And when I look back and I think about some of the surrounding communities where I grew up, there were a lot of communities that were much closer to a hog lagoon than we were, much closer to a coal ash pond than we were, much closer to an industrial operation than we were. And it's at that juncture you start to think, wow, what if I lived that close to some of those operations? I would have been in much worse condition. And that's where some of the passion comes from. You know, you mentioned coal ash. A lot of folks now rightly know the work that you did at the EPA. Before that, you were running North Carolina's Department of Environmental Quality, won a landmark case against Duke, 80 million tons of coal ash as a judgment. That alone must have felt very sort of vindicating and honorable in the work. I'm curious, the amount of work that you did that really is, it changed the way chemical companies and utilities think about how they have to interact with the communities. Yes. It transformative not just for the state of North Carolina but other states that are watching and learning from it Where did that confidence come from to attack this kind of a social justice issue I have to tell you while I always had a personal intrinsic motivation, the day I was being sworn in as secretary of the Department of Environmental Quality, I bumped into a former governor, Jim Hunt, who told me that if I really wanted to know the state, that I needed to visit all 100 counties. We did 90 counties and then COVID hit. But during that tour and visiting those 90 counties, when you sit down in the living room with a mother whose child has asthma, that's exacerbated by a cement kiln. Yeah. Or if you're talking to some grandparents whose water wells have been contaminated by coal ash, if you care, it's really hard to look away. And so spending time in the communities with people in their living rooms one-on-one, having the personal conversations led me to believe that I had to do everything that I could to uphold the mission of the agency, which is to protect public health. When most people think about EPA, they think about the environment. I think about EPA, it's really a public health agency first. And so staying connected in that way really incentivized me to push as hard as possible. Working with the former attorney general who is now governor of North Carolina, Josh Stein, and the Department of Justice, we pursued the largest coal ash settlement in United States history. I think Duke Energy understood that they needed to put that chapter behind them so that we all could collectively focus on clean energy. And they could not focus on a clean energy future with that dark cloud hanging over them. And we needed to rectify the significant issues that they caused in so many communities all across North Carolina. No, I think that's well said. You know, I continue to struggle, though, with, you know, the fact that the EPA really was created around, as you suggested, all of these communities were in some ways forced to live next to a lot of this pollution. And there was a responsibility to find a balance. Yes. And, you know, when communities tested their own water, did something to, like, you know, prove that there was maybe some harm there, that there was a responsive EPA to, like, actually help them through that process. I do think that there's been a feeling on behalf of many of these communities, and it bubbled up a lot in the wake of George Floyd's death, right, going into the 2020 election, that EPA was really focused on shutting down coal plants. but not necessarily focused on serving those communities. I'm wondering whether you heard the same thing from those communities and whether, like, while you were administrator, like, they felt more heard, that the processes felt more transparent. Like, I mean, what is it that, like, what is the relationship now between those communities and those groups and EPA? Well, I'll tell you, I learned a ton from the Governor Hunt suggestion. And so when I became EP administrator, within a couple of months, we launched a Journey to Justice tour. It started with Mississippi, Louisiana, and Texas. But by the time we finished with the administration, we had toured the entire country, including Puerto Rico and Alaska. Right. It reshaped my agenda. Of course, the president had an agenda. But spending time in those communities, whether you're in McDowell County, West Virginia, or Lowndes County, Alabama, when you see straight piping out the side of a house into the creek where people are getting their water, when you understand the number of petrochemical facilities that are lined up against communities in Louisiana, And that's where you start to really focus the agency's mission. And we're supposed to provide equal protection under the law for everyone, irrespective of political affiliation, how much money they have in their pocket or the color of their skin. And so I will tell you that the folks in Alaska and Puerto Rico, in the Southwest, really helped me understand that you have to be able to walk and chew gum at the same time. You can't solely focus on coal plants. You have to focus on all pollution sources. And you have to prioritize the communities that are most vulnerable. And I believe that's what we did. And not only do I believe it, we received billions of dollars from Congress to pursue these actions. Yeah. And to answer your question directly, over the four year period I was EPA administrator, we developed relationships with communities that had never existed before. We worked very hard to earn their trust. And right now it's a significant disappointment that they are not having the same seat at the table that we gave them. Administrator, it is. I share that sense of disappointment, and I'm sure that we can dig in a little deeper on kind of what you're seeing now from the sidelines. Before we go there, and I appreciate you tying, connecting the work that you did visiting all the counties to the journey of justice. I'd like a little bit more understanding of how that showed up in regulations that you wrote. How did it affect the work more than the dollars that were funded flowing in? How did it show up in legislation during your time? Well, I can tell you what, the first place it showed up in was enforcement. Yeah. We were not taking action in these communities from an enforcement standpoint like we should. Yeah. The data and the record from the enforcement action further substantiated the direction we needed to go. Yeah. In many regulations to ensure that everyone was properly protected And there were some flaws in our regulations that left certain data sets out or certain people behind And so as we pursued regulations for certain chemicals as we looked at the emissions coming from petrochemical facilities as we looked at, you know, our natural gas facilities, our coal facilities, we were able to put certain people and certain data sets and certain things in the context and demand that certain technologies be applied. It was never about shutting down any facility. It was about controlling the pollution and the emissions. One regulation that I will point out is a regulation focused on the petrochemical industry. And there is a community in Louisiana, in one of the parishes, where we reduced the risk of elevated cancer by over 96% with one regulation. And that regulation really brought into focus how we have been missing the mark for so many years. Yeah, I mean, I think that like when you think about what this new administration, you know, the press and the narrative that's coming out of it around the endangerment, you know, finding the coal plant work, etc. You know, give me some more information on what they're doing on the enforcement side of things, because I don't see that in the press. I don't feel like that's part of the narrative. I don't feel like folks are talking about it. I mean, are they rolling back enforcement? Are they rolling back some of the good work that's done on clean air and clean water? Absolutely. We are seeing a retreat from the leadership position that EPA should play. The endangerment finding argument really from this administration isn't about the science. they are stipulating that it's out of EPH jurisdiction to control pollution that impacts public health. Yeah. That's mind-blowing. So we're not even talking about an attack on the science per se. We're talking about an attack on the agency's mission. So yes, we are seeing a retreat in regulatory oversight. And we're absolutely seeing a retreat in enforcement of the laws that are on the books that are supposed to protect the least amongst us. It's very troubling. And I will say, because most people will think that what we did was political, but whether you were in McDowell County, West Virginia, which was a very red county, majority population that are white, or Lowndes County, Alabama. They were facing the same issues. And so when we have this retreat like we're seeing now, I can assure you it is just as much, if not more, impactful to red counties as it is to blue counties. You really can't put borders around pollution and public health protection. And I don't think we should pretend that you can. People do care about the health and safety of their family. Absolutely. So much of what you fought for is getting rolled back right before your eyes. What do you think is really gone that we might not get back? What can we salvage? And more importantly, what can justice communities do to have a voice at this time? Well, I think we have to remain optimistic. And under the Biden administration, not only did we build trust with communities that we never had before, Through grants, through connectivity, we built infrastructure that never existed before. Yes, that infrastructure, that connectivity, that leadership is paused for now. But there's a foundation there that will be poised for the next opportunity. I do believe that we've lost a lot of time. I do believe that a lot of people will get hurt. I do believe we've lost a lot of talent. but regulations, as you both know, are not something you turn on and turn off. You have to go through a process. And I think we need to be prepared to litigate the process by which these regulations are unlawfully being terminated. And I think we really need to litigate the lack of equal protection under the law for all people all across this country. And I don't see... the American people being protected adequately with the assault that we're seeing on certain regulations and certain policies. I do think it's blowing back on the administration now, though. It does feel like, I think part of what you're saying, I think, is that there is like this sort of business as usual approach that they're sort of trying to go back to. But I think that that's also hurting them on the data center side. So when you look at like this ratepayer protection pledge, right? I mean, part of that is, well, you can meet the pledge by building new coal plants or new natural gas plants, right, to support these new data centers. But you can also do it through deployment of batteries, deployment of resiliency technologies, deployment of energy efficiency, weatherization in people's homes, right? I mean, I guess what I'm trying to figure out a little bit, though, is that part of what you did as administrator was to, you know, try to facilitate a different type of conversation, one where you could get a win-win on two or three different fronts just by spending a little more time listening and a little less time talking. And I'm curious, like that approach though, seems like it's relevant in this moment where Duke is trying to raise rates 15% in the state of North Carolina because they want to use business as usual techniques and they don't instead want to lean into battery storage or lean into other technologies. Tell me a little bit more about the process and what we learned about the process of being more inclusive and whether that really gets you to a better outcome. It absolutely gets you to a better outcome People Washington DC and sometimes Raleigh seems to think that communities are anti or anti That is absolutely a myth Folks want jobs Folks want jobs. Yeah. They want a strong tax base so that they can have good schools and, you know, opportunities to go to a museum or see a symphony. Yeah. And so they want to see growth. They just want to see growth that is not disrespectful to them. And their culture. And so through conversation, I found it's the easiest, easiest path to make the process more efficient. And yes, you have to tweak your plans here and there. But at the end of the day, you can get the project done. As we're seeing with data centers, I believe that this country is approaching this topic haphazardly. And the constituency is too educated to stand by and not understand how to stop things. Did you know that the latest poll numbers actually show that data centers are more hated than ICE? Than ICE. I mean, like, you have to really screw up the narrative and communication. You do. To be polling that low. You know, like, yeah, but keep going. Sorry. Well, I think that what happens is anytime you try to shove anything down anybody's throat, they're resistant. And I think you have to acknowledge the potential negative aspects of any construction project, whether that be a data center or a natural gas combined cycle project or a solar project. A construction site is a construction site in the eyes of someone who owns property. But when you go in and have a conversation about how it will be done, take in some ideas, see if you can tweak that. I guarantee you most communities will see a path forward that we all could work with. This administration, time and time again, is fumbling that ball. People's voices matter. And I think as it relates to data centers, we're not even getting to the communities talking about the negative environmental impacts potentially. People have educated themselves on rates and affordability, and they are protesting these facilities based on an antiquated system that we have in place to create and generate electricity in this country, especially here in North Carolina. I think Duke is learning a big lesson, and they should. Administrator Regan, thank you for all the insight into what it takes to really hold in high regard the public health of all our communities. North Carolina, I'm sure across the country is seen as a very red state, but in fact, it's a very purple state. There's a lot of need for bipartisan action. and you spent your whole career learning to navigate and in some ways straddle that divide on behalf of clean air and clean water. I wonder what you've learned that as an industry, from energy, even AI, and as communities, we can carry forward that can help break through what has been a very partisan battle to elevate these topics in the public narrative as something that is good for the general good rather than using them as the whipping post for political gain. You know, when Governor Cooper nominated me for secretary, there was a Republican supermajority in the North Carolina General Assembly, and I got a unanimous confirmation. Yeah. Senator Richard Burr and Senator Tom Tillis introduced me to the Senate when I was nominated for EPA administrator for President Biden. And I got a more than 60 plus vote from the United States Senate. I've always understood that Republicans and Democrats are people. And most people want similar things. And so I believe that in our conversations, we have to talk about the benefits of what we're doing to all sides. When I think about clean energy, I think about national security just as much as I think about global competition, just as much as I think about public health and protecting communities. We want a competitive, America. We want an America that works for everyone. And we all know that the best technologies tied to our markets, tied to American ingenuity, we cannot run anyone in the world. And we can do that without sacrificing our communities. So when we talk to Democrats and Republicans, and we talk about energy and infrastructure, I think we have to talk about the fragility of our energy grid, our water infrastructure, and what that does to us as a nation. And then we have to think about what are the solutions. And if you look at the cost-effective solutions, the most efficient solutions, the solutions that are winning the day around the world, they're the solutions that just happen to fall into our category of being called clean. You can have that as a lead headline for climate. You can have it as a lead headline for communities. or you can have it as a lead headline for global competitiveness. I believe this all three. Well, thank you for being here. Your moral clarity is truly inspiring. So such a pleasure to have you. Thank you. Thanks, Michael. Thank you. That was Michael Regan, recorded live at the UNC Clean Tech Summit. One more episode left in this series. Dan Sugar, founder and CEO of NextPower, one of the people who has done more to scale solar development globally than almost anyone alive. And don't forget, if you want to hear our conversations with John Shoka and Ahmad Shatila from the same summit, those are on Suncast. Go find Nico wherever you get your podcasts. Thank you.
