{"query_echo":{"q":"","filters":{"geography":["Prince George's County"]},"warnings":[{"code":"facet_value_not_in_vocabulary","message":"Value 'Prince George's County' for facet 'geography' is not in the controlled vocabulary."}]},"total":{"value":4,"relation":"eq"},"page":1,"page_size":20,"self":"https://climateinsightsdirectory.org/api/v1/search?geography=Prince+George%27s+County","stability":"beta","ai_marking":{"digital_source_type":{"uri":"http://cv.iptc.org/newscodes/digitalsourcetype/trainedAlgorithmicMedia","name":"Created using Generative AI"},"notice":"Summary and key insights are generated using artificial intelligence."},"results":[{"id":"commgmu-000126","url":"https://climateinsightsdirectory.org/document/commgmu-000126","title":"Perceptions of Community Resilience","publisher":{"name":"Center for Climate Change Communication","organization":"center-for-climate-change-communication"},"document_type":"report","language":"en","date_published":"2016","source_url":"https://climatecommunication.gmu.edu/wp-content/uploads/2023/10/2016-MD-Community-Resilience-Report-101216.pdf","generator":"Climate Insights Directory","generated_fields":["summary","key_insights","climate_tags","geography_discussed","analysis_type"],"summary":{"text":"The report finds that residents in underserved Maryland neighborhoods perceive climate change risks similarly to the general state population but experience significantly higher rates of environmental harms, such as flooding and sewage overflows. While these communities support government action on climate and the creation of local resilience hubs, they report lower levels of social capital and resource accessibility. The study highlights a strong demand for energy bill assistance and community centers, suggesting that climate preparedness efforts should be integrated with broader community development and social resilience goals.","ai_generated":true,"unit":"commgmu-000126#summary","date_modified":"2026-10-23"},"key_insights":[{"text":"Residents of the four surveyed neighborhoods in Baltimore and Prince George’s County perceive risks from climate change and its effects—including sea level rise, extreme heat, storms, and flooding—at levels similar to the rest of the state of Maryland.","ai_generated":true,"unit":"commgmu-000126#insight-1","date_modified":"2026-10-23"},{"text":"A majority of residents in the studied areas view climate change as a significant near-term threat, with 57% in Baltimore and 61% in Prince George’s County believing it will cause significant harm in the next several years.","ai_generated":true,"unit":"commgmu-000126#insight-2","date_modified":"2026-10-23"},{"text":"Residents in the surveyed neighborhoods report higher frequencies of environmental hazards compared to the state average, specifically water damage from heavy rains or flooding (38% in Baltimore vs. 15% statewide) and sewage overflows (22% in Baltimore and 19% in Glassmanor-Oxon Hill vs. 6% statewide).","ai_generated":true,"unit":"commgmu-000126#insight-3","date_modified":"2026-10-23"},{"text":"Chronic medical conditions are more prevalent in the three Baltimore neighborhoods than in the state overall, with asthma affecting 23% of residents compared to 12% statewide.","ai_generated":true,"unit":"commgmu-000126#insight-4","date_modified":"2026-10-23"},{"text":"Surveyed communities perceive their social capital to be lower than the state average, particularly regarding their internal communication and ability to obtain necessary resources.","ai_generated":true,"unit":"commgmu-000126#insight-5","date_modified":"2026-10-23"},{"text":"There is strong community support for government intervention to mitigate climate change, with approximately 65% of Baltimore residents and 67% of Glassmanor-Oxon Hill residents favoring protective actions.","ai_generated":true,"unit":"commgmu-000126#insight-6","date_modified":"2026-10-23"},{"text":"Residents expressed high interest in local resilience and services hubs; 65% of respondents in both Baltimore and Glassmanor-Oxon Hill indicated they would be likely to use such facilities for emergency resources.","ai_generated":true,"unit":"commgmu-000126#insight-7","date_modified":"2026-10-23"},{"text":"Information requests from residents were primarily focused on energy-related topics, with 31% of respondents specifically asking for energy bill assistance.","ai_generated":true,"unit":"commgmu-000126#insight-8","date_modified":"2026-10-23"},{"text":"In Baltimore neighborhoods, trash was identified as a top community concern, which the report notes is directly linked to climate resilience because trash clogs storm drains and causes flooding.","ai_generated":true,"unit":"commgmu-000126#insight-9","date_modified":"2026-10-23"},{"text":"Coping mechanisms for stress in these communities differ from the state average, showing a higher reliance on faith in God and higher rates of disengagement or 'learning to live' with stressors.","ai_generated":true,"unit":"commgmu-000126#insight-10","date_modified":"2026-10-23"}],"climate_tags":["climate change","community resilience","environmental health","flood","urban heat island","air pollution","sea level rise","extreme heat","energy efficiency","environmental justice"],"geography_discussed":["Oliver-Broadway East","Sandtown-Winchester","Westport","Glassmanor-Oxon Hill"],"frame_perspective":[],"analysis_type":["public opinion survey","pilot study","comparative analysis"]},{"id":"earjust-002655","url":"https://climateinsightsdirectory.org/document/earjust-002655","title":"POST-SETTLEMENT HEARING BRIEF OF THE SIERRA CLUB AND CHESAPEAKE CLIMATE ACTION NETWORK","publisher":{"name":"Earthjustice","organization":"earthjustice"},"document_type":"briefing","language":"en","date_published":"2015-05-01","source_url":"https://earthjustice.org/wp-content/uploads/post-settlement-hearing-brief_sierra-club-ccan.pdf","generator":"Climate Insights Directory","generated_fields":["summary","key_insights","climate_tags","geography_discussed","analysis_type"],"summary":{"text":"The Sierra Club and Chesapeake Climate Action Network oppose Exelon's acquisition of Pepco Holdings, Inc., asserting that the proposed settlement is insufficient. They argue that Exelon's solar commitments are merely statutory obligations, its financial health is questionable, and the merger would conflict with Maryland's renewable energy goals. The brief claims that the acquisition offers negligible ratepayer savings while introducing substantial risks to the public interest.","ai_generated":true,"unit":"earjust-002655#summary","date_modified":"2026-10-23"},"key_insights":[{"text":"The proposed acquisition is not in the public interest because it threatens the state's energy policy objectives and offers only speculative, minor benefits to customers, such as residential bill reductions of approximately 80 cents for Pepco customers and $1.25 for Delmarva customers per month.","ai_generated":true,"unit":"earjust-002655#insight-1","date_modified":"2026-10-23"},{"text":"Exelon's commitment to develop 15 MW of solar generation across Prince George’s County, Montgomery County, and the Delmarva service territory is viewed as a minimum effort to comply with the Renewable Portfolio Standard (RPS) rather than a genuine benefit, as it would only increase Maryland's installed solar capacity by 5 percent.","ai_generated":true,"unit":"earjust-002655#insight-2","date_modified":"2026-10-23"},{"text":"Exelon's financial stability is questioned, noting that its generation business lost $91 million in the fourth quarter compared to a $269 million profit the previous year, and that it is highly exposed to declines in natural gas prices due to its heavy reliance on nuclear power (85 percent of generation in 2013).","ai_generated":true,"unit":"earjust-002655#insight-3","date_modified":"2026-10-23"},{"text":"The proposed $94.4 million Consumer Investment Fund (CIF) is legally problematic because the applicants failed to provide evidence regarding the adequacy of the current funding of the Electric Universal Service Program (EUSP), as required by Md. Code Ann., Pub. Utils. § 7-512.1(g).","ai_generated":true,"unit":"earjust-002655#insight-4","date_modified":"2026-10-23"},{"text":"The commitment to forgive residential customer accounts receivable over three years old is deemed to have little impact, as only 206 customers in Pepco's territory and 112 in Delmarva's territory meet this criteria.","ai_generated":true,"unit":"earjust-002655#insight-5","date_modified":"2026-10-23"},{"text":"Energy efficiency funding for Prince George’s and Montgomery Counties (approximately $5 million and $6 million per year respectively) is criticized for creating redundant administrative processes that duplicate existing EmPower Maryland programs.","ai_generated":true,"unit":"earjust-002655#insight-6","date_modified":"2026-10-23"}],"climate_tags":["solar energy","Renewable portfolio standard","energy efficiency","nuclear power","distributed generation"],"geography_discussed":["Prince George's County","Montgomery County"],"frame_perspective":[],"analysis_type":["policy analysis","legal argument"]},{"id":"earjust-001895","url":"https://climateinsightsdirectory.org/document/earjust-001895","title":"Maryland: Coal Ash Disposal in Ponds and Landfills","publisher":{"name":"Earthjustice","organization":"earthjustice"},"document_type":"fact sheet","language":"en","date_published":null,"source_url":"https://earthjustice.org/wp-content/uploads/md-coal-ash-factsheet.pdf","generator":"Climate Insights Directory","generated_fields":["summary","key_insights","climate_tags","geography_discussed","analysis_type"],"summary":{"text":"Maryland generates over 1.9 million tons of coal combustion waste annually, ranking 23rd in the US. The state utilizes at least 31 landfills and minefills, as ponds are prohibited. However, the document highlights significant regulatory gaps, such as discretionary groundwater monitoring and a lack of financial assurance requirements. These deficiencies are linked to several contamination cases, including a $54 million settlement for the BBSS Gambrills site and documented groundwater pollution at the Brandywine and Faulkner facilities.","ai_generated":true,"unit":"earjust-001895#summary","date_modified":"2026-10-23"},"key_insights":[{"text":"Maryland generates more than 1.9 million tons of coal combustion waste (CCW) per year, which places the state 23rd in the United States for coal ash generation.","ai_generated":true,"unit":"earjust-001895#insight-1","date_modified":"2026-10-23"},{"text":"Maryland has at least 31 coal ash landfills and minefills, while the use of ponds is prohibited. Notable sites include the BBSS Sand and Gravel Pit (4 million tons), Brandon Woods Structural Fill (3.5 million tons), and the Faulkner Flyash Site (7 million cubic yards).","ai_generated":true,"unit":"earjust-001895#insight-2","date_modified":"2026-10-23"},{"text":"Maryland's regulatory framework for coal ash disposal in landfills and beneficial reuse contains significant gaps. Monitoring requirements for surface and groundwater, the number and location of monitoring wells, and the use of daily cover are largely discretionary. Additionally, the state does not require financial assurance or composite liners, and post-closure monitoring lasts only 5 years.","ai_generated":true,"unit":"earjust-001895#insight-3","date_modified":"2026-10-23"},{"text":"Several coal ash sites have caused documented environmental and public health damage. The BBSS Gambrills site contaminated drinking water wells in an African American community with various metals, leading to a $54 million settlement. The Brandywine Landfill has caused groundwater and surface water damage, with cadmium levels reaching 100 times the maximum contaminant level (MCL) in one well. The Faulkner Off-site Disposal Facility is listed by the EPA as a proven damage case due to groundwater contamination and acidic pH.","ai_generated":true,"unit":"earjust-001895#insight-4","date_modified":"2026-10-23"},{"text":"On March 9, 2009, New Page Corp. reported a spill of 4,000 gallons of coal ash slurry into the North Branch Potomac River in Allegany County.","ai_generated":true,"unit":"earjust-001895#insight-5","date_modified":"2026-10-23"}],"climate_tags":["landfill","water quality","environmental regulation"],"geography_discussed":["Allegany County","Anne Arundel County","Baltimore","Charles","Garrett","Montgomery County","Prince George's County","Queen Anne's County","Washington, D.C.","West Virginia"],"frame_perspective":[],"analysis_type":["regulatory analysis","environmental impact assessment"]},{"id":"wri-001348","url":"https://climateinsightsdirectory.org/document/wri-001348","title":"JOINT BENEFITS AUTHORITY FAQ","publisher":{"name":"World Resources Institute","organization":"world-resources-institute"},"document_type":"fact sheet","language":"en","date_published":null,"source_url":"https://files.wri.org/d8/s3fs-public/2023-01/joint-benefits-authority-faqs.pdf","generator":"Climate Insights Directory","generated_fields":["summary","key_insights","climate_tags","geography_discussed","analysis_type"],"summary":{"text":"The Joint Benefits Authority (JBA) is a proposed governance and finance model based on the Joint Powers Authority (JPA) structure. It aims to overcome the challenges of siloed city departments and tight budgets by pooling resources and using advanced capital planning to deliver multi-purpose, nature-based infrastructure. The JBA focuses on capturing co-benefits, pioneering creative municipal financing, and advancing social equity by prioritizing underserved neighborhoods. The concept is currently being piloted in San Francisco through a partnership between the World Resources Institute, Encourage Capital, the Liquid Assets Project, and the San Francisco Public Utility Commission, with funding from the Kresge Foundation, Spring Point Partners, and the Moore Foundation.","ai_generated":true,"unit":"wri-001348#summary","date_modified":"2026-10-23"},"key_insights":[{"text":"The Joint Benefits Authority (JBA) is designed as a governance and finance tool to integrate multiple city departments and community partners to deliver infrastructure that builds climate resilience and transforms neighborhoods.","ai_generated":true,"unit":"wri-001348#insight-1","date_modified":"2026-10-23"},{"text":"The JBA model is based on the Joint Powers Authority (JPA), a legal entity formed by two or more government agencies to execute projects of regional importance, which allows for the consolidation of resources and the ability to issue bonds.","ai_generated":true,"unit":"wri-001348#insight-2","date_modified":"2026-10-23"},{"text":"The JBA seeks to address urban climate impacts—such as inland flooding, sea level rise, and the heat island effect—which disproportionately affect vulnerable and underserved communities.","ai_generated":true,"unit":"wri-001348#insight-3","date_modified":"2026-10-23"},{"text":"A core objective of the JBA is to advance social equity by directing resources to historically underserved areas and ensuring that existing communities have a voice in shaping and owning neighborhood investments.","ai_generated":true,"unit":"wri-001348#insight-4","date_modified":"2026-10-23"},{"text":"The JBA aims to solve governance inefficiencies caused by 'siloed' city departments, which often have independent project management, funding, and schedules, leading to overlapping services and higher costs.","ai_generated":true,"unit":"wri-001348#insight-5","date_modified":"2026-10-23"},{"text":"The JBA is being piloted in San Francisco through a collaboration involving the World Resources Institute, Encourage Capital, the Liquid Assets Project, and the San Francisco Public Utility Commission, with financial support from the Kresge Foundation, Spring Point Partners, and the Moore Foundation.","ai_generated":true,"unit":"wri-001348#insight-6","date_modified":"2026-10-23"}],"climate_tags":["climate resilience","nature-based solutions","urban forestry","green infrastructure","climate justice","climate change adaptation","sea level rise","urban heat island"],"geography_discussed":["California","Atlanta","Denver","Prince George's County"],"frame_perspective":[],"analysis_type":["governance framework","financial model assessment"]}]}