Science has a communication problem. This week on Possibly we’re taking a look at an audio-storytelling organization, called Transom, that’s trying to help fix it.

Megan Hall: Welcome to Possibly. Where we take on huge problems, like the future of our planet, and break them down into small questions with unexpected answers. I’m Megan Hall.

Science has a communication problem. It can be hard for everyday people to understand what scientists are saying about their research..

Juliana Merullo and Nat Hardy are here to tell us about a science storytelling workshop trying to help solve this problem.

Juliana Merullo: Hiya!

Nat Hardy: Hey Megan!

Megan Hall: So why is it hard for scientists to tell stories in the first place?

Juliana Merullo: We were wondering that too! So to find out, we talked to one.

Kathleen Savage: I am Kathleen Savage. I’m a senior research scientist at Woodwell Climate Research Center.

Nat Hardy: Kathleen studies how climate change affects forests in the Northeast. And she says,

Kathleen Savage: Scientists aren’t trained to create a story. We’re trained to give every little detail of what we did so that it can go through a peer-reviewed process.

Juliana Merullo: But in recent years, people have been paying more attention to how we talk about scientific research. Especially as there have been more attacks on science, and scientists.

Megan Hall: And there are people working with scientists to help them do this?

Nat Hardy: Yes! Including one organization in Woods Hole, Massachusetts, called Transom.

Juliana Merullo: Transom was started 25 years ago as an organization that focuses mostly on audio storytelling. They hold workshops and have a website with tons of resources.

Nat Hardy: Yeah, I took a class with them this summer.

Juliana Merullo: But after the Trump administration threatened to pull funding from science research institutions, including ones in Woods Hole, Transom decided to hold a storytelling workshop for scientists in their community, free of charge.

Nat Hardy: 11 scientists participated in a two-day storytelling workshop that built towards a live storytelling event, open to the public.

Juliana Merullo: Sophie Crane, the executive director of the Transom Story Lab, says that at the beginning, she wasn’t so sure it would work:

Sophie Crane: Scientists are so experienced in communicating in a completely different way. And I had this moment of panic of, oh my gosh, are these stories gonna work, are they gonna come together in time?

Megan Hall: So what kind of things did they teach in the storytelling workshop?

Juliana Merullo: Each of the scientists came with a story they wanted to tell.

Nat Hardy: They learned how to structure that story, shared their stories in small groups, and got feedback. Kathleen says,

Kathleen Savage: My story was pretty long and had a lot of nuance to it, and so a lot of detail had to be condensed. And as a scientist, that’s really hard.

Nat Hardy: Sophie says they helped the scientists focus on the human side of their stories, more than their facts.

Sophie Crane:  I think there’s almost been sort of a stigma within the scientific  community of, you know, we need to sort of seem quite perfect all the time. I actually think it’s maybe the opposite, that if you understand that scientists make mistakes and are human just like the rest of us, it might actually be easier to understand what it is they’re doing.

Megan Hall: So what was Kathleen’s story about?

Juliana Merullo: She started by talking about how frustrating it is for her when people don’t believe the overwhelming scientific evidence that climate change is real, and is caused by humans. But then she got a little more personal. Here’s a clip from the live speech:

Kathleen Savage: 15 years ago, I was sitting in the office of a cardiologist and he said to me, it is not a matter of if, it is a matter of when you’re going to need open heart surgery.

Juliana Merullo: For a long time she refused to believe what the doctors told her about her heart.

Kathleen Savage: I’m a scientist and I’m also a science denier.  So now, when I meet people who question climate change and push back on the evidence, I present facts, but given this experience and how comfortable it is to be in denial about hard choices, I respond with more empathy towards their position.

Megan Hall: Wow! It sounds like the event was a big success.

Nat Hardy: Totally. But Sophie says that for them, it’s not really about big successful storytelling events.

Sophie Crane: It’s the skills that the scientists will take with them from the workshop that they’ll bring back to their labs, that they’ll talk about over lunch with their colleagues.

Juliana Merullo: They’ve got another workshop planned in DC in the fall, and they’re hoping to take this model to scientists and researchers all across the country.

Megan Hall: Got it! Thanks, Nat and Juliana.

That’s it for today. You can find more information, or ask a question about the way your choices affect our planet, at askpossibly.org. You can also subscribe to Possibly wherever you get your podcasts or follow us on Instagram, Facebook, LinkedIn, or Bluesky at  “askpossibly”

Possibly is a co-production of Brown University’s Institute for Environment and Society, Brown’s Climate Solutions Initiative, and the Public’s Radio.

The post How can we help scientists tell their stories? appeared first on TPR: The Public’s Radio.

The post How can we help scientists tell their stories? appeared first on Possibly.

Last month the Department of the Interior stopped construction on a Rhode Island wind farm that was 80% complete. This week on Possibly we break down what the order means clean energy, jobs, and your utility bill.

Megan Hall: Welcome to Possibly, where we take on huge problems like the future of our planet and break them down into small questions with unexpected answers. I’m Megan Hall.

In August an order from the Department of the Interior stopped construction on a wind farm off the coast of Rhode Island that was already 80% done.

So this week on Possibly, we had Nat Hardy and Emma Mejia from our Possibly Team break down what this decision means for everyday Rhode Islanders.

Nat Hardy: Hi, Megan!

Emma Mejia Hello!

Megan Hall: So could you give us a quick refresher, what’s going on with this wind farm?

Nat Hardy: Sure. So the windfarm is called Revolution Wind. It’s a 65 turbine wind farm off the coast of Rhode Island.

Emma Mejia: The turbines should make enough electricity to power around 350,000 homes. And that power will be split between Rhode Island and Connecticut.

Nat Hardy: The project has been under construction since 2023, but it took 9 years before that to get all the permits.

Emma Mejia: They’ve already connected it to the grid, and most of the turbines are already built. The project was expected to open in early 2026, until this order stopped construction.

Nat Hardy: But the latest update in the story is that last week, Ørsted, the company building the wind turbines, filed a lawsuit against the Trump administration.

Emma Mejia: That same day, the Attorneys General of Rhode Island and Connecticut also filed a lawsuit against the administration, arguing that the order is against the law.

Megan: So, what happens next?

Nat Hardy: With those lawsuits going on, it’s unclear how or when the situation will get resolved, but for now, the project is on hold.

Megan Hall: Ok, so what does that mean for Rhode islanders?

Emma Mejia: To find out, we talked to Stephen Porder. He’s an environmental scientist at Brown University and our show’s founder.

Nat Hardy: Stephen says Rhode Islanders will feel this the most when they get their utility bills.

Emma Mejia: One of the big benefits of switching to clean energy is more stable prices.

Stephen Porder:  87% of Rhode Island’s electricity comes from natural gas consumption. Natural gas prices go up and down with geopolitical events. They go up and down as this administration pushes to export more natural gas.

Nat Hardy: But with clean energy, where there’s no fuel to burn, the cost is predictable, and most of it is up front.

Stephen Porder: There’s no doubt that in the long run, renewable energy is going to be cheaper. Solar is already cheaper. Wind will get cheaper because you don’t have to pay for anything other than maintenance once you build the thing and plug it in.

Emma Mejia: In fact, even ISO New England, the group that runs the region’s electric grid, said in a statement that the delay “will stifle future investments, increase costs to consumers, and undermine the power grid’s reliability and the region’s economy.”

Nat Hardy: But stopping construction on the project will also affect people’s jobs. Ørsted, hired  more than 1,000 people to work on the wind farm. A joint statement by the presidents of Rhode Island and Connecticut’s AFL-CIO labor unions said that the order has left hundreds of workers unemployed and many more at risk of losing their jobs.

Emma Mejia: But Rhode Island’s efforts to create pollution-free energy will take the biggest hit.

Nat Hardy: Rhode Island legislators committed to having  100% clean electricity in just 8 years 

Emma Mejia: And Revolution Wind was expected to make about 20% of the electricity we need right now.

Megan Hall: Woah, And that’s what, just from like around 30ish turbines?

Nat Hardy: Yeah, just Rhode Island’s share of the wind farm can do that. And that’s the thing – Stephen says it would just take a few more projects like this one, and we could get to 100% clean energy pretty quickly.

Stephen Porder: And that’s just an incredible opportunity for the first time in human history to be free from burning stuff to get our energy. Look, you know, I’m 53 years old. I got, let’s hope, 30 more years. I wanna see the end of that transition. And this decision to shut down Revolution Wind is just standing in the way.

Nat Hardy: To see if we get there, we’ll keep an eye on these lawsuits.

Megan Hall: Great! Thanks, Nat and Emma!

That’s it for today. You can find more information, or ask a question about the way your choices affect our planet, at askpossibly.org. You can also subscribe to Possibly wherever you get your podcasts or follow us on Instagram, Facebook, LinkedIn, or Bluesky at  “askpossibly”

Possibly is a co-production of Brown University’s Institute for Environment and Society, Brown’s Climate Solutions Initiative, and the Public’s Radio.

The post What does the stop-work order on Revolution Wind mean for Rhode Islanders? appeared first on TPR: The Public’s Radio.

The post What does the stop-work order on Revolution Wind mean for Rhode Islanders? appeared first on Possibly.

With the second Trump administration underway, the Possibly team takes a look at a group hoping to shape the country’s energy policy: a Republican caucus in the House of Representatives.

Megan Hall: Welcome to Possibly, where we take on huge problems like the future of our planet and break them down into small questions with unexpected answers. I’m Megan Hall.

In Washington, action on climate seems to fall pretty much along party lines. But in recent years a group of Republicans in the House of Representatives has come together to call for serious climate solutions. They’re called the Conservative Climate Caucus or the CCC.

What does this group stand for? And how might they influence climate in Congress?

We had Charlie Adams and Nat Hardy from our Possibly team investigate.

Charlie Adams: Hello!

Nat Hardy: Hi, Megan!

Megan Hall: So when did the Conservative Climate Caucus get started?

Nat Hardy: The CCC launched in 2021, with around 40 members. Today it has over 80. That makes it the second largest caucus in the Republican party.

Megan Hall: Who are its members?

Charlie Adams: There’s quite a range of perspectives. To learn more, we talked to Jackie Hunley, the executive director of the caucus.

Jackie Hunley: It’s really diverse, right? So we have members with nuclear facilities in their district. Congresswoman Kiggans is from Virginia, she has offshore wind in her district. We have membership in Oregon, Washington, and we have membership from traditional fossil fuel producing states as well.

Nat Hardy: Jackie says that diversity among the members is part of what makes their caucus stronger.

Megan Hall: Got it, but I imagine it could also make coming to agreements on climate harder. What does the CCC believe in?

Charlie Adams: The caucus’ official stance is that “The climate is changing, and decades of a global industrial era that has brought prosperity to the world has also contributed to that change.”

Megan Hall: Sounds right to me. So does that mean they support moving away from using fossil fuels?

Nat Hardy: Not exactly. The caucus’ website continues by saying, “With innovative technologies, fossil fuels can and should be a major part of the global solution.”

Charlie Adams: Keeping fossil fuels in the picture comes from an idea that the caucus’ leaders and other experts we spoke with call an “all of the above” energy policy.

Megan Hall: How does that work?

Nat Hardy: To learn more, we talked to Philip Rossetti, a senior fellow for Energy and Environment at the R Street Institute, a center-right free market think tank. He says,

Philip Rossetti: So all of the above is just this idea that you’re not going to have the government dictate what the energy solution is going to be.

Charlie Adams: The idea is that the US should use the energy sources it has – be it natural gas, oil, or renewables – in order to stay economically competitive.

Nat Hardy: But as you might have guessed, many climate scientists disagree with this approach, they say we need to reduce our emissions as quickly as possible.

Charlie Adams: The science shows that if we don’t significantly reduce our fossil fuel use, the world won’t hit net zero by 2050.

Nat Hardy: And if we miss that goal, our planet will reach temperatures that would really push the limits of our ability to adapt to climate change.

Megan Hall: Got it, so what is the caucus doing to act on their ideas?

Charlie Adams: So far the CCC has only existed under the Biden administration. During that period members largely spent their time critiquing the President’s climate actions.

Nat Hardy: And none of the members of the caucus voted for The Inflation Reduction Act, or IRA, which created funding for all sorts of climate projects.

Charlie Adams: But, two years after the bill passed, a handful of those caucus members called on Republican leadership to keep some of the IRA’s energy tax credits. So it’s a mixed bag.

Nat Hardy: Jackie says the CCC has also served an educational role, helping to brief members of Congress on climate policies and share legislative fixes.

Megan Hall: What do they plan to do now that Republicans have control of Congress and the White House?

Charlie Adams: Jackie says they want to reform the way the government approves large infrastructure projects- like new transmission lines or oil pipelines.

Nat Hardy: She also expects them to push to overturn some parts of the Inflation Reduction Act – like the tax breaks for electric cars.

Charlie Adams: But they’ll probably try to keep parts of the IRA that incentivize manufacturing and energy production, and benefit Republican districts.

Nat Hardy: Of course, Republicans have a pretty narrow control of the House, so it’s unclear exactly what this group can actually accomplish.

Charlie Adams: But it’s worth noting that the influence of the caucus is growing. One of its former members is Trump’s pick to lead the EPA.

Nat Hardy:  So we’ll have to stay tuned and see what happens once they are shaping policy.

Megan Hall: Great! Thanks, Charlie and Nat!

That’s it for today. You can find more information, or ask a question about the way your choices affect our planet, at askpossibly.org. You can also subscribe to Possibly wherever you get your podcasts or follow us on Instagram, Facebook, LinkedIn, X, or Bluesky at  “askpossibly”

Possibly is a co-production of Brown University’s Institute for Environment and Society, Brown’s Climate Solutions Initiative, and the Public’s Radio.

The post What is the Conservative Climate Caucus?  appeared first on TPR: The Public’s Radio.

The post What is the Conservative Climate Caucus?  appeared first on Possibly.