Illustration: Rebecca Zisser/Axios

People often ask me how I decide what to cover in this noisy and disparate energy and climate change beat. My answer: I stay focused on the puzzle.

The big picture: I look at the various factors that go into reducing greenhouse gases in a world that depends upon the energy resources that emit them. That is a simple deduction of what is a complex dynamic. Like puzzle pieces, these numerous factors work in tandem, not in isolation.

Tangible climate change

As the impacts of a warmer world become more tangible to people through extreme weather and more convincing science, the awareness of the issue grows.

How it fits: This is an essential foundation piece, because if the problem feels too far in the future compared to shorter term sacrifices, nothing will happen. And by the way, I’m still not convinced that it feels tangible enough — yet — to drive the level of change scientists say is needed to adequately address climate change.

Social movement

As I wrote in a recent column, over the past year, a concrete social movement has formed that’s far more global, persistent and sweeping than any other like-minded efforts in the past.

How it fits: Big societal changes have often occurred only once a concerted constituency — in this case led by young people — rose up and called for change.

Media coverage

Media companies in both TV and print are covering this issue far more than in the past — including myself.

How it fits: This trend is both a reflection of these other puzzle pieces and an amplifying force in its own right, because the media plays a role in shaping public opinion.

Technology costs

Costs for wind and solar have plummeted in the last decade, and the same thing is happening now in battery technologies that will enable those variable energy resources to last long after the wind stops blowing and the sun stops shining.

How it fits: The dropping costs, fueled largely by state mandates and federal subsidies, help build corporate and political support for greater use of greener technologies.

Corporate and investor concerns

Investors are increasingly investing in energy resources that aren’t the current dominant ones — oil, natural gas and coal. Meanwhile, they’re putting pressure on those companies to do more to ready themselves for a warmer world that is drastically reducing emissions.

How it fits: The planet needs more than altruism to save it in our capitalistic society — it needs the risk of financial losses and the potential for financial gain.

Lobbying shifts

Corporate America is calling on Congress to pass ambitious climate policy in the most aggressive and united way since 2009.

This includes big oil companies that have fought similar measures in the past and are now facing lawsuits alleging they're responsible for billions of dollars in extreme-weather damage due to climate change. That legal pressure is one driver of companies like ExxonMobil putting money toward a carbon tax lobbying campaign.

How it fits: Few major policies get through the legislative process without at least some support from the adversely affected industries.

Republican positioning

After a decade of ignoring or outright dismissing climate change as a problem, a small contingent of congressional Republicans are acknowledging it as an issue and discussing policies to address it. It’s nowhere near what most other political constituencies are calling for, though.

How it fits: Sweeping policy changes rarely get through Washington by one political party pushing it over the opposition of another, which is what many Democratic presidential hopefuls want to do with climate change.

Washington compromise

Many experts believe that ultimately environmentalists must be willing, for example, to trade at least some environmental regulations for a legislative solution like a carbon price. That policy, meanwhile, marks the beginning of the end for fossil-fuel companies as we know them today, an existential compromise on behalf of those industries and workers.

How it fits: Because of the prior puzzle piece about bipartisanship, it follows that all sides involved in the sausage-making that is making American laws must accept some things they don’t like.

What's next: I discussed this topic on a podcast Thursday. Tune in here.

Go deeper

Updated 1 hour ago - Politics & Policy

Coronavirus dashboard

Illustration: Sarah Grillo/Axios

  1. Global: Total confirmed cases as of 3 a.m. ET: 30,782,337 — Total deaths: 957,037— Total recoveries: 21,032,539Map.
  2. U.S.: Total confirmed cases as of 3 a.m. ET: 6,764,962 — Total deaths: 199,258 — Total recoveries: 2,577,446 — Total tests: 94,211,463Map.
  3. Politics: In reversal, CDC again recommends coronavirus testing for asymptomatic people.
  4. Health: The dwindling chances of eliminating COVID-19.
  5. World: Guatemalan president tests positive for COVID-19 — The countries painting their pandemic recoveries green.

The positions of key GOP senators on replacing Ruth Bader Ginsburg

Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell talks to reporters on Capitol Hill last Thursday. Photo: Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images

With President Trump planning to nominate his third Supreme Court justice nominee by next week, key Republican senators are indicating their stance on replacing the late Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg just over six weeks out from Election Day.

The big picture: Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (Ky.) has vowed that "Trump’s nominee will receive a vote on the floor of the United States Senate." But Sen. Lisa Murkowski (Alaska) told Alaska Public Media, "I would not vote to confirm a Supreme Court nominee. We are 50 some days away from an election."

Updated 3 hours ago - Politics & Policy

ActBlue collects a record $91 million in hours after Ginsburg's death

A makeshift memorial in honor of Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg in front of the U.S. Supreme Court on Sept. 19. Photo: Samuel Corum/Getty Images

ActBlue received a record $91.4 million in the 28 hours following Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg's death, the Democratic donation-processing site confirmed to Axios late Saturday.

Why it matters via the New York Times: "The unprecedented outpouring shows the power of a looming Supreme Court confirmation fight to motivate Democratic donors."