I was looking for optimism in these interesting times, and I have to say, Hannah Ritchie delivered with her book, Not the End of the World. If you find yourself needing a healthy dose of hope without toxic positivity or perfectionism, this is the book for you. The general vibe is this: we have made great improvements solving various environmentally-themed problems, here is the evidence of that, we still have a lot of work to do, and this is how you do it. Dr. Ritchie emphasizes that the climate emergency requires collaboration and the outcome is uncertain, but we know how to address the problems at hand and this is good news! I found her approach to be refreshing and realistic. I finished the book with concrete steps I can take to minimize my environmental impact, and the sense that those things will genuinely make a difference. As an ER nurse and a highway-fighting activist, the chapter discussing air pollution seems particularly relevant to my work. And if you’re reading this, odds are it’s relevant to your life in some way as well. Let’s dive in!

The chapter begins with a brief introduction to the problem, followed by air pollution throughout human history. Solving problems requires a good foundational understanding of “how we got to now” in order to move forward. Apparently, air quality used to be way worse, even as far back as the Roman Empire. The philosopher Seneca (4 BC-AD 65) noticed the impacts of the air quality in ancient Rome on his health, commenting that as soon as he left the city he felt the difference in an immediate and physical way. Throughout human history, burning things has been a blessing and a curse to our survival: granting us warmth and greater nutrition, while also bestowing upon us chemicals that cause heart attacks, strokes, cancer, and a multitude of other maladies. Her comparison of the air in London a few centuries ago to air in some of the world’s most polluted cities today completely shifted my perspective and filled me with hope. She used examples of problems such as the ozone layer and acid rain that the world has collectively solved to strengthen my sense that we can still fix this.

She goes on to discuss the problem in the present day (copyright year is 2024, so as of this writing the data is still fairly relevant.) I was proud to see we’ve used a common source: I also quoted the World Health Organization when addressing Austin City Council about the health impacts of expanding I-35 on Austinites.

With a thorough understanding of where we are, she gives evidence-based solutions to the problem of air pollution. The short version is: quit burning things. Burning things is the cause of air pollution. How exactly do we accomplish that? Certainly not by expanding highways. Because of the concept of induced traffic, highway expansion universally leads to greater fossil fuel consumption and decreased air quality. Austin needs more alternatives to driving. Walking, biking, and taking public transit are better for the environment and human health.

Each chapter of the book ends with a section titled “Things to stress less about,” but this chapter, and one other, were the exceptions. Dr. Ritchie urges us to stress about air quality more. As an ER nurse, I have to say that I agree. Breathing is a mandatory part of life. If someone comes to my ER with obvious respiratory distress and their vital signs show they are not getting adequate oxygen, they will be rushed to the back immediately, and for good reason. If we don’t fix the problem, they could be dead in minutes. Air, and I cannot stress this enough, is really important. We have a right to clean air that will not put us at risk for early death from heart attack, stroke, or cancer. We have a right to air that will not put us at risk of the traumatic event that is a miscarriage or stillbirth. This is my why.

My overall impression of the book is that it’s absolutely worth the time to read it. The information was presented in a way that was engaging and inspiring. Dr. Ritchie is a voice of optimism, reason, and compassion, which is exactly what we need from our leaders and climate experts in this increasingly urgent situation. Pick up a copy at your local independent or second-hand bookstore. In the meantime, keep fighting highways! You can do this by volunteering with us or using transportation alternatives. If enough of us walk, bike, and bus, perhaps we can shift demand together.

In 2021, the EPA revisited its standards on fine particle pollution after recognizing just how dangerous it is for human health. Not long after, TxDOT rolled out its draft environmental review for the I-35 project in 2022. By early 2023, more than 6,000 people had submitted comments, over 75% of them speaking out against the expansion and urging TxDOT to take air quality and health concerns seriously.

Austin already struggles with unhealthy air, and expanding I-35 will only pile on more pollution without easing traffic. The neighborhoods that will be impacted the most are the ones with the fewest resources to fight back, which makes this a fight for equity as much as for clean air. At the end of the day, this battle is about creating a city that puts people, not highways, first.

Despite this overwhelming opposition, TxDOT signed off on the project in August 2023. Even more troubling, they admitted the expansion would hit low-income and minority neighborhoods the hardest. This is bigger than congestion–it’s about environmental justice, and whether or not the health of vulnerable communities is considered expendable.

In January 2024, we went to court, filing a lawsuit against TxDOT for breaking environmental law. The very next month, the EPA continued to tighten air pollution standards, even though  Austin had been over the existing PM2.5 limit for some time. Still, in October 2024, TxDOT pushed forward with construction without updating their environmental review, putting public health in further danger.

By November 2024, we had brought in a nationally-renowned air quality expert to ensure the judge had accurate evidence. This past spring, in March 2025, the court agreed to hear that expert’s testimony. In April 2025, we filed for summary judgment, making the case that TxDOT knowingly ignored the pollution impacts and violated the law and asking the court to decide the case without a full trial.

On September 10th, 2025, a judge heard arguments in our lawsuit against TxDOT’s I-35 expansion. We held a watch party at Scholz Garten, where community members united to show that the community wants a different future than more lanes and more pollution.

 Now, we await the judge’s decision.

The most powerful thing you can do is stay informed and speak up. Share these updates with your friends and neighbors. Follow Rethink35 for ongoing news. Join us in pushing for a healthy region where everyone has the right to breathe clean air.

Austin, TX

As TxDOT plans to expand I-35 through the heart of Austin, we appreciate Council’s desire to do what it can to protect the community from some of the project’s worst impacts. While caps over I-35 may offer some benefits, we believe a broader set of strategies — including those outlined below — may more equitably and cost-effectively improve connectivity, encourage modeshift, and address environmental and health impacts. We are especially concerned given recent analysis from City staff indicating that money spent on caps will significantly compromise the City’s ability to fund other priorities. The recommendations below are premised on this analysis.

1. In general, Austin should make investments that encourage development along transit corridors, rather than highways. This is important for both public health and transportation modeshift. Living near highways can have serious health impacts, and development around highways tends to encourage car use. (As an illustrative example, instead of paying for capping sections of the highway, the City could purchase surface parking lots in transit rich areas and convert them into housing with affordable units.)
   
   

2. In addressing I-35’s harms, Austin should prioritize increasing connectivity across the highway and invest in transit, safety, and active transportation infrastructure throughout the city. Caps enhance — but do not provide additional — connections. Adding crossings would more impactfully and equitably improve connectivity, particularly where people walking and bicycling must travel multiple miles to cross I-35. Staff have identified six new crossings, totalling $50m, that would significantly improve connectivity.
   
   

3. Given the surrounding physical environment, turning caps into successful public spaces will be challenging. We therefore recommend that the City fund the structural supports for no more than one or two caps. The more focused the investment, the greater the likelihood of success for any given cap.
   
   

4. TxDOT’s proposed frontage roads pose a serious threat to the caps as vibrant public spaces. The City should press TxDOT to redesign the frontage roads along any caps as city streets with design speeds of 30 mph maximum, no more than two through lanes in each direction, trees and parking on both sides, and other design specifications, per UTC recommendations. 
   
   

5. If the City proceeds, expected air pollution on or near caps should be studied. The City should then monitor pollution levels and take appropriate action. (The California Air Resource Board recommends that parks be placed at least 500 feet away from highways.)

Many Austin Council Members — along with Travis County Commissioners and state and federal representatives — have spoken out powerfully against expanding I-35 and the outdated, harmful practice of highway expansions. We’re deeply grateful for their leadership and shared commitment to a more just, livable future. We look forward to continuing this work together.

Here are some highlights from the event, including press coverage!

Just say you don’t like us, TxDOT 😢.

As those in the loop know, we have been raising money for our upcoming lawsuit against TxDOT! We're excited to announce with this funding, we have hired a world-class environmental and air quality expert! This expert will perform the requisite research and reporting to support our case.

A critical point in this lawsuit is the effect of the I-35 expansion project on air quality surrounding communities. Hiring experts is essential for creating a compelling case, as testimony from experts reinforces the validity of arguments within very specialized fields requiring deep knowledge.

We expect that we will have a court date early in 2025. Stay tuned!

Thanks to everyone for your continued support. If you would like to donate, you can do so via this link. Lawsuits are unfortunately expensive, and we are up against the very well-funded, well-resourced TxDOT, so anything helps.

On Election Day, November 5th, Austinites voted on 6 of Austin's 11 City Council seats. Now that the results are in, we are excited to see that of the 6 seats, 4 are going to oppose the expansion! The people of Austin, and a whopping 13 of the 16 candidates, have shown strong opposition to this project.

This means that in total, 9 out of the 11 seats will be occupied by people opposing the I-35 expansion project.

The meeting mainly concerned approving a CAMPO long range transportation plan that included funding for I-35 expansion. In a valient effort to win a better project than TxDOT’s current plans, Austin’s CAMPO delegates (Council Members Natasha Harper-Madison, Vanessa Fuentes, Paige Ellis, and Alison Alter), along with Travis County delegate Amy Pattillo, put forward a motion to make funding for the I-35 project conditional on completing key environmental studies.

A pivotal point in this project’s trajectory, this meeting became a focal battleground for the public in a way not seen before. TxDOT and CAMPO are notorious for allowing public input and then paying lip service, at best, to that input. This meeting was one of the few instances where the public could meaningfully try and influence a vote’s outcome that would affect the I-35 project’s outcome.

A long line of people signed up to speak, such that each person was only given one minute instead of the usual three to speak, and attendance was standing room only. Many people stayed towards the back of the room, breaking their silence to applaud in support of Austin’s representation as they raised questions about the project, questions that were often treated disrespectfully or dismissively by CAMPO’s chair (one of many examples).

Among the voices heard from our community were experts, doctors, teachers, urban planners, and community organizers. They were joined by ordinary citizens that would be affected by the expansion--business owners, those unable to drive, and people with health conditions that would be affected by the pollution. These voices not only underscored the negative effects of funding the the project as-is, but also questioned the merits of the project in general.

The concerns raised included:

• Levels of airborne soot from car exhausts (PM 2.5) being unsafe now, even before the project begins.

• The pitfalls of car dependent urban planning, including personal costs, community isolation, and safety risks.

• The discriminatory history of the highway going through downtown instead of around the city.

• The historical ineffectiveness of highway expansions.

• The project’s costs, which could more effectively be applied to alternate modes of transport.

Unfortunately, after hearing from over 50 voices, all but one opposing the expansion, the rest of the CAMPO board voted down the amendment and voted to move forward with the project as-is. It is important to note that only four of CAMPO’s 22 board members represent Austin, despite the fact that Austin makes up half of the represented population. It is also important to note that the meeting’s location was not accessible by any mode of transportation other than an automobile, and occurred in the middle of the work week.

However, despite the decision, the meeting actually represents a new level of success for our movement for key reasons:

• Austin representatives took an oppositional stance on a level never before seen never before seen against I-35 expansion.

• There was a huge and diverse turnout of voices opposing the expansion.

• CAMPO and TxDOT’s long-standing disregard of public opinion was clearly on display.

• That CAMPO’s board does not proportionately represent - or operate in the interests of - Austin was clear.

As on many previous occasions, this event showed that the community DOES want equitable transport and they DON’T want a highway expansion that is costly, dangerous, harmful, and above all else, won't do what it purports to do: Address congestion. It is the systems in place that favor car-centric development, and the people who profit from it, that continue to move this project forward.

We will continue to fight this unjust project and empower other communities in similar situations to do the same!

Public commenters waiting to sepak

See also

Stream of the meeting, timestamped by Kelsey Huse - Thanks, Kelsey!

A great overview of the meeting from KUT

Speaker highlights:

• Barbara Epstein

• John Bengson

• Nina Rahman

Many folks have asked us for more regular updates about the lawsuit. Here is the latest from us!

Our Lawsuit Wins $25k To Hire National Experts

Impact Fund just awarded our lawsuit $25,000! We'll use these funds to hire experts to testify during the trial. Assuming we can raise the remaining funds (see below), this will be a huge upgrade for our case. Huge thanks, Impact Fund!

TxDOT, get ready: We're coming with everything we've got!

We’re (Not) Shocked: TxDOT Denies Everything

On August 28th, TxDOT filed its initial response to our lawsuit. And guess what? TxDOT denies all! Amazingly, TxDOT denies that I-35 ever caused racial discrimination at all, even though its own I-35 project review says otherwise!

A Match Made in Heaven? Our and TxDOT’s Lawyers Finally Meet With a Judge

On September 9th, our lawyers and TxDOT’s lawyers met together with a judge to agree on how to move to trial, which we hope to see start in the coming months. This means the lawsuit’s in good health and is moving ahead.

Help Raise $25k to Hire National Experts To Testify In Court

Thanks to the generosity of an anonymous supporter, your donation will be matched up to $5k! We need a total of $50k to hire national experts to testify at trial. The Impact Fund grant (see above) got us halfway there. Now we need your help to raise the final $25k. Every dollar counts! Help fund this CRUCIAL part of the lawsuit.