The End of “Climate Emergency?” More Funders, Nonprofits Lean into Affordability
Inside Philanthropy | By Michael Kavate | January 29, 2026
Excerpt:
When Action for the Climate Emergency rebranded as GoodPower last September, it was not only a turning of the page for the 17-year-old communications nonprofit, but also symbolic of a new chapter for the climate movement and its funders.
Since President Donald Trump was re-elected, the climate community has been casting about for how to win more hearts and minds in debates that echo those within the Democratic party. Some have argued for reaching out to conservatives, others for doing more in rural areas.
But the greatest unity seems to have come around affordability.
…
“This last election was a huge wake-up call, and a painful one, in realizing that without that level of public support, everything comes crashing down,” said Joel Clement, director of climate action at the Lemelson Foundation.
‘The brand has really caught up with us’
…
The climate field’s two biggest legacy funders also issued votes of confidence in GoodPower last year. The William and Flora Hewlett Foundation made a $1 million grant to the organization, double the size of previous funding awards, while the David and Lucile Packard Foundation issued a $500,000 award, both over two years, according to the two foundations’ grants databases.
The group also saw a surge in the months before its most recent name change, with donations reaching $16.5 million in its 2023-2024 fiscal year, up from $7.8 million the year before. The group declined to share a full list of funders. But according to Candid, new backers included the Silicon Valley Community Foundation ($750,000, two grants), the Lemelson Foundation ($700,000), as well as an earlier award from Hewlett.
…
“This work really requires nimbleness, and it requires us to constantly reimagine how we can have an impact in accelerating the energy transition,” said Qusba, who has been with the organization for 16 years, becoming its leader in 2019.
The more recent shift to its current iteration as GoodPower is more the result of a gradual evolution than a wholesale reinvention. “We’ve really been building and evolving toward this moment, and now, the brand has really caught up with us,” she said.
…
Jason Walsh, executive director of the Blue Green Alliance, noted that many Democrats are “not even using words like clean, not even talking about jobs that are getting killed.”
“I find sometimes from a messaging standpoint, there’s sometimes an all-or-nothing approach,” he said. “There can be more walking and chewing gum at the same time.”
For instance, Tom Steyer, a billionaire who rose to prominence on the back of his climate activism, chose to announce his current California gubernatorial bid without mentioning the crisis even once, as Politico observed.
There’s also concern in some quarters that clean energy’s cost-savings potential is being oversimplified. Sun and wind are the most affordable forms of energy available in most places, but power generation is only one element of rising costs. The need for more transmission capacity is another, and some say that buildout will increase costs no matter what type of energy is at the end of the line.
Qusba counters that a focus on people’s pocketbooks is an overdue corrective. “For too long, climate messaging has failed by trying to sell tomorrow while people worry about today,” she said. “The problem hasn’t been focusing too much on affordability; it’s been assuming people would care about anything else before that.”
‘If you can’t talk to me about costs, we can’t really have this conversation’
Considering examples like Steyer’s newfound aversion to the word “climate,” some affordability messaging can seem like a reasonable approach pushed into absurdity by well-paid political consultants eager to offer wealthy clients a shiny new poll-tested strategy.
But Moffitt’s experience is a reminder that such shifts do have roots in what voters are telling their representatives. After the election of Trump darkened the prospects for virtually any federal climate policy progress, Evergreen Action started meeting with governors’ offices to push for climate leadership at the state level. The message was loud and clear.
