ReportWire

Tag: Clean Energy

  • Americans are facing power shutoffs and mounting debt as energy costs surge

    Americans’ energy bills are piling up, forcing them deeper into debt and even triggering power shutoffs.

    As of June, nearly one in 20 households went into collections or fell in arrears on their utility bills, according to a new joint report from The Century Foundation, a progressive think tank, and advocacy group Protect Borrowers. The problem was even more pronounced in parts of the South and Appalachia, where one in 12 households was already in collections or on the verge of it.

    In the last three years, the average overdue balance on utility bills climbed from $597 to $789, a 32% jump, the report found. 

    More Americans are falling behind on their utility payments due to rising energy prices, alongside a jump in costs for other essentials, ranging from child care to housing.

    “When we see families unable to pay their utility bills, it raises alarm bells about a crisis of home heating and electricity, but it also raises alarm bells about people’s ability to deal with their cost of living across the board,” said Julie Margetta Morgan, president of The Century Foundation. 

    The average overdue utility balance in the U.S. has soared (Line chart)

    Residential electricity prices rose by 10.5% between January and August 2025, one of the fastest increases in a decade, government data analyzed by the National Energy Assistance Directors Association (NEADA), an educational and policy organization, shows. Natural gas is still the most popular way Americans heat their homes, although a growing share are using electricity.

    A combination of high interest rates, rising natural gas costs and an increase in demand from data centers has pushed up prices, according to NEADA.

    The issue will likely come into sharper focus this winter when millions of consumers face heating bills. NEADA predicts that Americans will see their energy bills rise nearly 8% this winter to an average of roughly $976 per month. 

    More Americans at risk of shutoffs

    When people fail to pay their energy bills on time, it can lead to electricity shutoffs, or when a utility turns off a household’s power until people pay the balance, along with a so-called reconnection fee.

    Most states have some sort of safeguard against utility shutoffs when the temperature dips below a certain level, but not all. States without cold-weather protection include Alaska, Florida, Hawaii, Kentucky, Nebraska, North Dakota, South Carolina, Tennessee and Utah, according to the Energy Justice Lab, a joint project of Indiana University and the University of Pennsylvania.

    Despite these protections, Americans are becoming increasingly vulnerable to shutoffs, experts told CBS News.

    While no official national count of utility cutoffs exists, NEADA estimates that 3.5 million American households had their power cut off at some point in 2024 based on public data reported by utility companies. That number is expected to swell to 4 million this year, NEADA estimates.

    “Past due balances climbing, particularly for lower-income families, suggest that shutoffs are going to become much more prevalent,” the Century Foundation’s Margetta Morgan said. 

    Con Edison, a utility serving New York City and Westchester County in New York, has cut off almost 168,000 customers at some point this year, according to data NEADA shared with CBS News. That’s more than five times the number of shutoffs the utility reported last year. 

    Most Americans whose power is cut off have services restored within a few days, according to Mark Wolfe, NEADA’s executive director. Still, the shutoffs can create major disruptions to Americans’ day-to-day lives as they lose refrigeration, internet and lighting. Pipes can also freeze, and residents could get sick if their apartments get too cold, Wolfe added.

    Shutoffs tend to have a bigger impact on low-income households, given they are already stretched thin by everyday expenses, Wolfe said. Many turn to payday lenders, friends and family or state forgiveness plans to cover reconnection costs or overdue bills, he added.

    “When money is limited, people have to prioritize essentials like food and medicine, and utility bills become one of the few expenses they can postpone,” Wolfe told CBS News. “That flexibility gives them a small sense of control, but it also increases the risk of falling behind and facing shutoffs.”

    Edited by

    Aimee Picchi

    Source link

  • Gallagher: LIPA 2026 budget holds line on costs, lowers bills | Long Island Business News

    At a time when families and businesses across Long Island are facing rising costs in nearly every area of life, the Long Island Power Authority (LIPA) is doing its part to keep electricity rates affordable. With our proposed 2026 budget, we’re keeping spending stable, resulting in a projected decrease in the average residential customer bill, while continuing to invest in a cleaner, more reliable electric grid.

    LIPA’s mission is to provide reliable, affordable, and clean energy to our customers across Long Island and the Rockaways. As a nonprofit public utility, every dollar we spend and every dollar we save goes directly toward improving electric service and controlling costs for our customers.

    Each year, our team builds a budget based on priorities that matter most to the 3 million people we serve and funds PSEG Long Island operations to enhance reliability, improve customer service, and plan for the energy transition ahead. And, most importantly, LIPA makes these investments with a focus on affordability.

    While many utilities nationwide are raising rates to keep pace with commodity volatility, rising wholesale energy prices and load-driven infrastructure demands, Long Island’s average residential bills remain stable and below the rate of inflation.

    In fact, according to the Energy Information Administration, electric bills in the Northeast and Mid-Atlantic have increased nearly 22% since 2022. However, with LIPA’s fiscally disciplined approach, customers will continue to be protected from the regional affordability challenges that have consistently plagued other utilities.

    For 2026, we propose that total utility operating spending remain relatively flat, and customers will see no increase in their electric bills.

    This outcome reflects LIPA’s thoughtful financial planning and careful management of operating costs, as well as its innovative use of financing tools, such as the Utility Debt Securitization Authority (UDSA). Through UDSA refinancing, competitive power-purchase agreements, and federal and state grant opportunities, LIPA saves customers hundreds of millions of dollars each year.

    Equally important, these savings don’t come at the expense of reliability. We continue to invest in grid modernization, energy storage, offshore wind and distributed energy resources to prepare for the grid of the future.

    In 2025, LIPA’s electric grid delivered exceptional reliability performance, with customers experiencing fewer than one outage per year on average–equivalent to 99.99% service availability. This performance ranks among the best in the nation for similarly sized utilities and has outperformed all New York State overhead electric utilities over the past five years.

    This demonstrates the value of our record investments in storm hardening, vegetation management, technology modernization and more–totaling $9.4 billion over the past decade.

    One of the most significant milestones shaping this year’s plan is the recently extended contract between LIPA and PSEG Long Island. The new agreement strengthens oversight, enhances cost controls and reduces management fees–producing an estimated $17 million in savings over the life of the extension. It also maintains rigorous performance metrics, linking compensation directly to results and introduces new transparency measures. These improvements reinforce a shared culture of accountability, ensuring that customers benefit from disciplined financial management and measurable performance metrics.

    Looking ahead, 2026 will be a year in which LIPA refocuses on long-term strategic planning–a process that defines the priorities and investments needed to ensure Long Island’s grid remains resilient, flexible, and cost-effective as both energy technologies and customer needs evolve. Balancing reliability, sustainability and affordability will be at the heart of that plan.

    By holding the line on spending today, we create the stability necessary to plan for the grid of tomorrow. And, perhaps most importantly, in an era of consistently rising costs, LIPA’s disciplined and transparent financial approach serves as a case study, demonstrating that reliability, affordability and clean energy can go hand in hand.

    LIPA will hold public comment hearings on the proposed budget on Nov. 18 and Nov. 24. For information on how to attend these hearings and to read our full budget proposal, visit lipower.org.

     

    Carrie Meek Gallagher serves as CEO of LIPA. She brings more than two decades of leadership experience in public utilities, environmental protection, regional planning and sustainability, most of it in service to the Long Island region.


    Opinion

    Source link

  • Proposed 2026 LIPA budget could lower Long Island electric bills | Long Island Business News

    THE BLUEPRINT:

    • LIPA‘s proposed 2026 budget projects a 3.3% drop in electric bills.

    • Plan includes $4.4B in operations and $1B in capital spending.

    • Budget supports offshore wind, battery storage, and grid upgrades.

    • Three public hearings planned before final board vote on Dec. 17.

     

    At a time when costs for most everything else continue to rise, electric bills could be slightly lower for Long Island homeowners under the newly proposed Long Island Power Authority 2026 budget. 

    Following a meeting of its Board of Trustees on Thursday, LIPA announced that its proposed 2026 budget is projected to decrease the average residential customer electric bill by $6.53 or 3.3% compared with 2025 rates. 

    The proposed $4.4 billion operating and $1 billion capital plan is the first budget developed under LIPA’s five-year contract extension with PSEG Long Island, which “strengthens oversight, enhances cost controls, and reduces management fees by an estimated $17 million over the life of the agreement,” according to a LIPA statement. 

    “This budget lays the foundation for success in future years under our extended contract with PSEG Long Island,” Carrie Meek Gallagher, LIPA’s newly minted CEO, said in the statement. “By focusing on reliability, affordability, and increasingly clean energy, we’re maintaining a financially disciplined approach to operations while positioning LIPA to meet the challenges of the next decade with a stronger, more resilient grid.” 

    The proposed budget supports New York State’s energy goals, featuring offshore wind, battery energy storage and transmission upgrades; all of which are expected to deliver thousands of megawatts of carbon-free power. It also budgets for energy commodities, such as electricity, natural gas and fuel oil, projecting a $219 million decrease in power supply costs, according to the statement. 

    “Affordability remains central to LIPA’s mission,” LIPA Board Chair Tracey Edwards said in the statement. “While utilities across the nation are raising rates, LIPA continues to be an outlier – protecting ratepayers by holding the line on costs, maintaining reliability, and investing in a clean energy future for Long Island.” 

    David Lyons, interim president and COO of PSEG Long Island said: “PSEG Long Island is proud to be in partnership with LIPA to deliver cost savings to ratepayers while continuing to be the #1 overhead electric service provider in customer satisfaction and reliability in New York State.” 

    The LIPA board also approved “a temporary pause on disenrollments from its Household Assistance Rate Program” in which some 39,000 customers are enrolled and temporarily suspended service disconnections for low- to moderate-income customers affected by the ongoing federal government shutdown.   

    LIPA will hold three public hearings on the proposed budget: At 6 p.m. on Tuesday, Nov. 18 at the Rockaway YMCA in Arverne; at 10 a.m. on Monday, Nov. 24 at the H. Lee Dennison Building in Hauppauge; and at 6 p.m. the same day at LIPA headquarters at 333 Earle Ovington Blvd. in Uniondale. 

    More information on the proposed 2026 budget is available at lipa.org. The LIPA board will vote on a final budget on Wednesday, Dec. 17. 


    David Winzelberg

    Source link

  • What Resolution’s Investor Strategy Tells Us About Corporate Climate Action

    Two veteran investors with experience in the climate technology and clean energy sectors have launched a new firm and their investment strategy sheds light on some important trends during a volatile period for corporate climate action.

    David Lowish and Akhil Monappa are the driving forces behind Resolution Investors, which aims to “capture the opportunities created by the climate transition.” Both were formerly with Generation Investment Management, the pioneering sustainable investment management firm founded by former Vice President Al Gore a little more than 20 years ago.

    With Resolution, Lowish explained, he and his partners will concentrate on a portfolio of 30 companies across a range of sectors, all benchmarked against rigorous climate action measures.

    “What we’re looking to do is to select those businesses that are quality companies in their own right but also have their eyes firmly on a net zero future,” Lowish told Newsweek.

    That includes companies that are directly involved in reducing emissions and developing adaptations to the impacts of climate change. But the main focus is on what Lowish called transition leaders.

    “That transition leader group of companies is one which has really been ignored by mainstream investors,” he said.

    Resolution is interested in legacy companies that are strongly aligned with meeting international climate targets, addressing emissions across their operations and supply chains, and limiting exposures to climate risks.

    “Our lens on climate is broad,” Monappa said, adding that they are focused on companies with “concrete plans of delivering on that commitment” and those offering products and services that help move the world toward cleaner energy and climate adaptation.

    That often means looking beyond companies just within the clean energy sector.

    “In renewables, it’s just been harder for us to find high-quality companies that meet our criteria for business quality and people and leadership quality,” Monappa said.

    Instead of just looking at solar and wind power manufacturers, Resolution is tracking companies that help to electrify more of the economy, thus allowing for wider reach of clean power and the displacement of fossil fuels.

    As one example, Lowish said Resolution is tracking the French electronics equipment company Legrand.

    “They make a lot of cables, wirings, breakers and the infrastructure, which goes into all kinds of buildings and helps to facilitate more efficient energy use in those buildings, connecting to batteries and connecting to renewable energy sources,” he said. “We tend to focus on those types of enablers.”

    Resolution’s strategy reflects a broader recent trend in corporate sustainability as many company leaders move from making high profile public commitments on emissions reductions and toward the more operational requirements to integrate sustainability goals into core business practices.   

    Companies in the clean tech sector have been through a volatile period with inflationary pressure on supply chains (and, more recently, the impact of tariffs), changes in interest rates and an unprecedented shift in U.S. federal policy on climate and energy.

    “It’s been a really rough ride,” Lowish said. “But the technologies are still here, especially the more mature ones, there’s still a role for them.”

    Resolution is betting that the role for the clean tech sector will grow as demand for power grows with the boom in AI data centers and more industrial activity in the U.S.

    Lowish said the uncertainty hanging over the industry during the early months of the Trump administration is beginning to wane as people adjust to the political reality and the impacts of legislation that stripped away federal support for clean energy.

    “The political moves have been made, the regimes have been fixed,” he said. “When all is said and done, people are still turning to renewables as a way to plug the energy gap.”

    Despite the Trump administration’s crackdown on clean energy, the bulk of new electricity generation capacity added to the grid this year has been in the form of solar, wind and batteries, which are often the fastest and cheapest sources of new power.  

    Lowish said the continued strength of renewable energy will allow also improve the position of the transition leader companies Resolution tracks. And they’re not the only ones making that bet.

    Bloomberg recently reported that the S&P Global Clean Energy Transition Index has outperformed the S&P 500 even in the face of policy changes hostile to clean energy.

    The same week that Resolution announced its arrival, Brookfield Asset Management announced that it had raised $20 billion for what it called the world’s biggest private fund dedicated to the clean energy transition.

    Despite political headwinds and some negative headlines about sustainable investing, Lowish said, many companies continue to adapt to the reality of climate change.  

    “There’s a drumbeat of modifying your business footprint to make it more future-proof for the climate transition,” he said. “We think that’s what’s happening below the surface.”

    Source link

  • Is nuclear power becoming cool in Colorado? Discussion of a role for it is growing

    Colorado has a new law declaring nuclear power a source of clean energy. The Denver airport might explore building a small nuclear reactor to meet the rising demand for electricity. Local business, civic and labor leaders see nuclear  energy as the fuel of choice when Xcel Energy stops burning coal at its power plants in Pueblo County,

    Is nuclear power becoming cool in Colorado?

    The state has had only one nuclear power plant, Fort St. Vrain near Platteville. And it was converted to natural gas in 1989 after 10 years of technical problems. The former Rocky Flats weapons plant, which produced plutonium triggers for nuclear bombs, drew thousands of protesters for years to the site north of Denver, including such prominent activists as Daniel Ellsberg and Beat poet Allen Ginsberg.

    In 2004, Colorado voters were the first in the country to approve a renewable energy mandate for utilities. How has nuclear power, with its baggage of radioactive waste and the Three Mile Island partial meltdown, become a seriously considered option in today’s fuel mix?

    Worry about the demand for electricity outstripping capacity and concerns about progress on cutting greenhouse gas emissions led state Rep. Alex Valdez, a Denver Democrat, to back legislation this year that defines nuclear power as “clean.” He sponsored House Bill 25-1040, which added nuclear to the energy sources that utilities can use to meet state clean energy targets.

    “As a kid, I grew up in the ’80s when a lot of talk about nuclear was in relation to the weaponry that was pointed at each other between the Soviet Union and the United States,” Valdez said. “I think I just kind of lumped nuclear into the same conversations as most people do: around its negative uses, less desirable uses.”

    Valdez got a different perspective when he was appointed to the nuclear working group at the National Conference of State Legislatures. The group visited France, which gets about 70% of its electricity from nuclear power. Roughly 19% of electricity in the U.S. comes from nuclear energy.

    With some forecasts showing electricity demand rising dramatically, Valdez said the U.S. will have to add “a tremendous amount of energy” to the grid if it’s going to compete in quantum computing and other advanced technology.

    A boom in data center construction driven by increasing the use of artificial intelligence is expected to escalate the need for more electricity generation.

    Valdez, who spent most of his career in the renewable energy field, said the legislation he sponsored recognizes that the power generated by nuclear energy is carbon-free. “As we move toward our path to zero-carbon (energy), it can be included in the mix to get us there.”

    Not ready for prime time

    A lot of the current interest in nuclear power revolves around a new technology: small modular nuclear reactors, about one-tenth to one quarter the size of a conventional reactor. They’re billed as potentially less expensive, safer, easier to build and adaptable because modules can be added as more power is needed.

    The technology is also still in the development and demonstration stage. Just a few are operating in China and Russia. No small modular reactors –SMRs– are in commercial use in the U.S.

    “SMRs aren’t ready for prime time,” said Dennis Wamsted, an analyst at  the Institute for Energy Economics and Financial Analysis. “You will hear from developers and others about the advantages. The advantages right now are all on paper.”

    The institute focuses on research into the economics of expanding the use of renewable energy.

    “We are not fans of nuclear power because it costs too much and that cost has been consistently high over the years. We see no track record of it declining,” Wamsted said. “We certainly don’t see that happening with a new class of  reactor that nobody’s built before and nobody’s run before.”

    Noah Rott, a spokesman for the western region of the Sierra Club, said the environmental group feels that discussion around nuclear energy “is largely a distraction as utilities work to address electric load growth in the next decade.”

    “Cleaner sources like wind, solar, demand response, energy efficiency and storage are the answer here,” Rott said in an email.

    However, the concept of an energy source that can run 24/7 and emit no heat-trapping greenhouse gases when generating power is compelling. Denver International Airport CEO Phil Washington and Denver Mayor Mike Johnston said in August that the airport, the country’s third-busiest, planned to commission a study to explore the feasibility of building a small, modular nuclear reactor on its campus to meet the growing demand for electricity in the area and cut the use of carbon-emitting power.

    The airport put the study on hold after complaints that city officials hadn’t talked to area residents first. The airport determined that a broader scope will best serve its interests and needs and will issue a request for information later this fall on multiple clean energy solutions, including reactors, after first receiving ideas and input from the community, spokeswoman Courtney Law said in an email Wednesday.

    Nuclear power generation is the top choice of a local advisory committee for replacing coal at Xcel Energy’s Comanche power plants near Pueblo. Xcel has proposed tapping renewable energy, battery storage and natural gas when it stops burning coal by 2031.

    But the Pueblo Innovative Energy Solutions Advisory Committee, established by Xcel and community members, said renewable energy facilities wouldn’t provide the same number of jobs and tax revenue for local governments that nuclear or gas facilities would. The committee is promoting installing SMRs.

    Xcel Energy operates nuclear facilities in Minnesota and has said they’re not off the table for Colorado, but the new type of reactors likely won’t be commercially available when the utility has to replace its coal plants.

    The Western Governors Association, WGA, held workshops in September at the Idaho National Laboratory, which focuses largely on nuclear energy.

    The workshops were part of an initiative by Utah Gov. Spencer Cox called “Energy Superabundance: Unlocking Prosperity in the West.” Cox, the WGA’s chairman this year, said the country is looking to the West for ways to meet the surge in need for more electricity.

    Andy Cross, The Denver Post

    Some community leaders want to see nuclear power replace coal-fired power when Xcel Energy quits burning coal at the Comanche power plant in Pueblo County. (Photo by Andy Cross/The Denver Post)

    Idaho Gov. Brad Little said during a workshop that the U.S. won’t meet its energy needs “with our legacy energy.”

    “We’re going to have to have scalable, safe nuclear energy,” Little said.

    While it could be five to 10 years before small reactors are up and running in the U.S., Mark Jensen, a chemistry professor at the Colorado School of Mines, said the federal government is more involved in promoting nuclear energy than in the recent past. He noted that the Department of Energy has opened federal sites to allow companies to test prototypes and that could help streamline development.

    Judith Kohler

    Source link

  • California Oil Workers Face an Uncertain Future in the State’s Energy Transition

    Thirty years ago, Willie Cruz was shocked when he learned the Southern California oil refinery where he worked was shutting down.

    Cruz, now a 61-year-old living in Arizona, had spent five years working in the environmental department when Powerine Oil Company said it would close the plant in Santa Fe Springs, southeast of Los Angeles.

    Cruz feared getting laid off again if he stayed in the industry. He decided to look into respiratory therapy, in part because he’s asthmatic. A federal job training program paid for his schooling.

    “I thought it was pretty cool, you know — go from polluting to helping, right?” Cruz said.

    Now he’s advising his son, Wilfredo Cruz, as the Phillips 66 refinery in Los Angeles where the 37-year-old has worked for 12 years plans to close by the end of the month.

    Thousands — perhaps tens of thousands — of workers could lose jobs in the coming years as California tries to reduce its reliance on fossil fuels. Energy company Valero said earlier this year it would close a refinery in the Bay Area.

    California’s leading Democrats are grappling with how to confront lost jobs and high gas prices that the oil industry says are the result of the state’s climate policies.

    State energy regulators are negotiating to keep the Valero plant open and recently backed off a proposal to penalize oil companies for high profits, while Democratic Gov. Gavin Newsom signed legislation to speed oil well permitting in the Central Valley. That action came after years of Newsom declaring he was “taking on big oil.”

    That inconsistent messaging has left the industry’s workers unsure of what the future holds.

    Refinery closures

    California was the eighth-largest crude oil producer in the nation in 2024, down from being the third-largest in 2014, according to the U.S. Energy Information Administration. The Valero and Phillips 66 refineries set to close account for roughly 18 percent of California’s refining capacity, according to state energy regulators. They both produce jet fuel, gas and diesel.

    The Phillips 66 refinery will start shutting down this month and end active fuel production at the end of 2025, the company said. The closure is based on multiple factors and “in response to market dynamics,” Phillips 66 said.

    The announcement came after Newsom signed a law last year aimed at preventing gas price spikes that allows energy regulators to require that refineries keep a certain amount of fuel on hand to avoid shortages when they go offline for maintenance. But the company said its decision was unrelated to the law.

    Phillips 66 said it is “committed to treating all our refinery workers fairly and respectfully throughout this process.”

    Valero announced plans to “idle, restructure or cease refining operations” at its refinery in the Bay Area city of Benicia by the end of April. The company didn’t respond to emails seeking comment on the status of its plans.

    Valero pays about $7.7 million annually in taxes to the city, making up around 13 percent of Benicia’s revenues, City Manager Mario Giuliani said.

    “It’s a significant and seismic impact to the city,” he said of the planned closure.

    Forty-six oil refineries in California closed between 2018 and 2024, according to the state’s Employment Development Department. The fossil fuel industry employs roughly 94,000 people in the state, according to the Public Policy Institute of California.

    One study estimated that the state would lose nearly 58,000 workers in the oil and gas industries between 2021 and 2030. About 56 percent of those workers will have to find new jobs because they are not retiring, according to the 2021 report by the Political Economy Research Institute at the University of Massachusetts Amherst.

    Supporting displaced workers

    Lawmakers approved the Displaced Oil and Gas Worker Fund in 2022 to help workers receive career training and connect with job opportunities. The state has since awarded nearly $30 million overall to several groups to help workers across the state — from oil-rich Kern County to Contra Costa County in the Bay Area.

    But the funding is set to run out in 2027, and state lawmakers wrapped up their work for the year without an agreement on whether to extend it.

    Newsom spokesperson Daniel Villaseñor said the governor is committed to supporting displaced oil workers “and affected communities in transitioning into new and emerging jobs and economic opportunities.”

    Newsom approved $20 million in the state’s 2022-2023 budget for a pilot program to train workers in the industry who’ve lost their jobs to plug abandoned oil wells in Kern and Los Angeles counties.

    California needs a clear plan for workers who will lose jobs because of the state’s energy transition, said Faraz Rizvi, the policy and campaign manager at the Asian Pacific Environmental Network.

    “We’re in solidarity with workers who have been displaced and who are looking for a relief to ensure that they’re able to find work that is important for their communities,” Rizvi said.

    But Jodie Muller, president and CEO of the Western States Petroleum Association, said the state can protect jobs by changing its climate policies.

    “The extremists fighting to close California refineries should explain why they are OK with destroying some of the best blue-collar jobs out there — because we certainly are not,” she said in a statement.

    Life as an oil worker

    For many workers, the industry offers an opportunity to earn a living wage without a college degree.

    Wilfredo Cruz was attracted in part by the paycheck. After more than a decade, he makes a base salary of $118,000 a year as a pipe fitter at the Phillips 66 refinery.

    But there are downsides.

    Every day when Cruz gets home from work, he showers immediately to try to shield his son from exposure to any harmful chemicals. He also never lets the 2-year-old ride in the car he takes to work.

    Now he’s enrolled in an online cybersecurity training course, schooling paid for by the state program that’s set to expire in the next couple of years.

    “There’s not really a real clear plan to be able to get workers from this oil industry into these new fields,” he said. “So, you feel kind of forgotten.”

    Copyright 2025. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

    Associated Press

    Source link

  • Sembcorp to acquire ReNew’s solar energy business for $190m

    Singapore-based Sembcorp Industries has agreed to acquire ReNew Sun Bright, the solar energy unit of ReNew Energy Global, for approximately S$246m ($190.02m).

    This acquisition aims to enhance Sembcorp’s renewable energy portfolio in India.

    ReNew Sun Bright operates a 300MW solar power plant situated in the Indian state of Rajasthan. The plant began commercial operations in November 2021.

    The facility operates under a 25-year power purchase agreement (PPA) with the local electricity company.

    Upon closing of the transaction, Sembcorp’s total renewable energy capacity in India will reach 6.9GW, encompassing both installed and under-development projects.

    The transaction comes at a time when India aims to increase its renewable energy capacity to 500GW by 2030, which is currently at 165GW, reported Reuters.

    Last year, Sembcorp Industries received a letter of award for a 300MW interstate transmission system wind-solar hybrid power project.

    The project was awarded to Sembcorp’s subsidiary Sembcorp Green Infra by India’s National Thermal Power Corporation (NTPC), as part of a larger 1.2GW bid.

    The award stipulates that the power generated by the project would be sold to NTPC under a 25-year PPA.

    This deal comes days after India’s Union Ministry of New and Renewable Energy ordered domestic clean energy agencies to cancel and reissue solar project tenders that were hurriedly floated to bypass certain regulatory requirements.

    Most domestic developers rely on low-cost Chinese solar cells. However, India’s clean energy policy allows only locally manufactured modules and cells be used in government-backed projects.

    “Sembcorp to acquire ReNew’s solar energy business for $190m ” was originally created and published by Power Technology, a GlobalData owned brand.

     


    The information on this site has been included in good faith for general informational purposes only. It is not intended to amount to advice on which you should rely, and we give no representation, warranty or guarantee, whether express or implied as to its accuracy or completeness. You must obtain professional or specialist advice before taking, or refraining from, any action on the basis of the content on our site.

    Source link

  • Trump administration to cancel $645 million worth of grants for climate-related projects in Minnesota

    In the hours after the federal government shut down on Wednesday, the Trump administration announced it would cancel nearly $8 billion in climate projects in more than a dozen states, including Minnesota. 

    The number of grants impacted totals $645 million in Minnesota, according to a statement from Democratic U.S. Sen. Tina Smith’s office. 

    Among the projects her office said were affected include $464 million to build new electrical transmission lines connecting Minnesota and other Midwest states, $50 million to upgrade an electrical transmission line between Minnesota and North Dakota, and $1.7 million for research to ensure solar projects save money.

    The U.S. Department of Energy provided WCCO a list of the funding recipients across all 16 states expected to see the cuts. Xcel Energy is among them. A spokesperson said the utility company is still evaluating the impact, but it did receive confirmation that a future iron-air battery plant to store renewable energy like solar and wind in Becker, Minnesota, had been canceled. That award totaled $70 million. 

    In an interview on CNN, Energy Secretary Chris Wright said the decisions about where to slash the grants were made over the last few months, even though the announcement came Wednesday, the day the first government shutdown since 2018 began.

    “A team of seven or eight people have evaluated over 2,400 projects on business conditions and whether it makes sense for the American taxpayers or not,” Wright said. 

    The Minnesota Department of Commerce was also on the list. A spokeswoman said the agency did not get any official notice from the Department of Energy about the termination of funding, but that if it is true, it would “represent an unprecedented and politically motivated breach of federal law and funding norms.”

    “Without these investments, Minnesota could face higher energy prices, slower infrastructure development, and increased burdens on low- and middle-income households — all while demand for clean, affordable energy continues to grow,” a statement from the state’s commerce department said.

    U.S. Rep. Tom Emmer, the Republican majority whip who represents Minnesota’s Sixth District, told reporters Friday that the administration has to make tough decisions during the government shutdown and blamed Democrats for letting it happen. 

    The GOP-led House approved a continuing resolution in September to keep funding at current levels. But both parties are at an impasse over a funding measure in the Senate, where there is a 60-vote threshold to move forward. Republicans have 53 votes in the chamber.

    Emmer suggested the funding could be restored when the shutdown ends.

    “They’re going to have to put the American people first. If they do that, I think Minnesotans will be pleased, and a lot of these projects will be back on the board,” he said. 

    All of the states seeing funding rescinded, including Minnesota, were states won by Vice President Kamala Harris in the 2024 presidential election.

    Gov. Tim Walz, a Democrat, called it “outrageous.”

    “This whole idea that they see states as Democrats and Republicans, or they see areas as red or blue, is simply the most egregious violation of their oath. You have a responsibility to give your best for people who vote against you,” Walz said Thursday.

    Caroline Cummings

    Source link

  • The White House thinks taking partial ownership of a Canadian mining company will reduce the national debt

    Since being reelected, President Donald Trump has falsely claimed his tariffs will reduce the national debt. Trump is now taking this marketing pitch to sell another one of his economic policies: government ownership in private companies. 

    On Wednesday, the Energy Department announced that the government will be taking a 5 percent stake in Canadian mining firm Lithium Americas and a 5 percent stake in Thacker Pass, the company’s lithium mining project in Nevada. This equity stake builds on a $2.26 billion loan from the Biden administration Energy Department to the company last year to “help finance the construction of facilities for manufacturing lithium carbonate” at Thacker Pass, which has the largest confirmed lithium reserves in North America. The deal, according to Energy Secretary Chris Wright, will ensure “better stewardship of American taxpayer dollars.”

    The White House has taken this messaging further. “This is a creative solution by the president of the United States to tackle our nation’s crippling debt crisis,” White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt said on Wednesday. “The president is focused on how can the United States government make more money, how can we make our country wealthy and rich again? Cutting some of these unique, creative deals with companies around the world and here at home is just one way that the president is seeking to do that.”

    These types of “creative deals” have become a hallmark of the second Trump administration. Since Trump’s return to the White House, the federal government has taken a “golden share” of U.S. Steel, granted export licenses to American chipmakers in exchange for a cut of the revenue generated from their sales, and, more recently, became the largest shareholder of Intel by taking a 10 percent stake in the company (worth about $9 billion at the time of acquisition and $17 billion today). 

    The deals have been justified as a way to protect America’s economic and national security interests, and the Lithium Americas announcement is no different. “It’s in America’s best interest to get that mine built,” Wright told Bloomberg. “Lithium Americas needs to raise some more capital so the mine is financially sound….We’re leaning in with a large amount of debt capital, so it’s just a more commercial transaction.”

    Like the other government stakes before it, the economic justification for this deal is flimsy. At the time of the initial Energy Department loan in 2024, global lithium demand was experiencing unprecedented growth, which has continued and is expected to continue as the use of semiconductors, electric vehicles, and renewable energy sources becomes ubiquitous. With the mine expected to produce 400,000 metric tons of battery-grade lithium carbonate each year and generate over $2 billion in revenue (according to a January estimate), there is no reason why taxpayers need to finance a project that the market seems to think will be profitable. 

    The White House’s argument that this will tackle the “crippling debt crisis” could be even flimsier. Scott Lincicome, vice president of general economics at the Cato Institute, tells Reason that taking a 5 percent stake in a $2 billion project is a “rounding error for our debt problem.” The national debt currently stands at over $30 trillion held by the public. Lincicome points out that “the only way to get money back is by selling the stake, which [the Energy Department] doesn’t plan on doing.” At the end of the day, he adds, this deal has less to do with addressing the national debt and “everything to do with exercising more control over private businesses.”

    The White House has made several questionable claims to justify Trump’s takeover of the economy. Arguing that a government stake in an already federally backed project will shrink the national debt could be its weakest argument yet.

    Jeff Luse

    Source link

  • IAEA Honors Blue Wave AI Labs, Constellation, and Southern Nuclear With 2025 Global Innovation Award for Pioneering AI in Nuclear Power


    VIENNA, September 18, 2025 (Newswire.com)
    –
    The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) has announced that Blue Wave AI Labs, Constellation, and Southern Company subsidiary Southern Nuclear won the prestigious 2025 Global ISOP Innovation Award for AI. This recognition celebrates their groundbreaking application of Blue Wave’s ThermalLimits.ai, a state-of-the-art AI solution that delivers unprecedented accuracy in online thermal limit forecasting for Boiling Water Reactors (BWRs).

    At the heart of this innovation is Blue Wave’s Nuclear-Grade AI™ framework, which represents a paradigm shift in reliability for critical nuclear environments. Unlike general-purpose large language models (LLMs) that prioritize broad applicability over precision, Nuclear-Grade AI applications leverage physics-informed machine learning and deep neural networks trained on historical fuel cycle data, core simulator outputs, and real-time instrumentation feedback. This approach achieves unprecedented reliability; reducing prediction biases by up to 75% compared to traditional methods and enabling engineers and operators to maximize electrical output with optimal fuel utilization while preserving the resiliency of nuclear power.

    “This award emphasizes the place of Blue Wave’s Nuclear-Grade AI applications in the future of nuclear energy,” said Gina Pattermann, CEO of Blue Wave AI Labs. “Our collaboration demonstrates how precise, reliable AI can drive safety and operational efficiency, paving the way for more abundant and affordable nuclear energy.”

    “We’re excited to see Blue Wave AI Labs, Constellation and Southern Nuclear recognized in this major international forum for the successful deployment of AI technologies to increase operational efficiency and lower costs for nuclear power plants,” said Acting Assistant Secretary for Nuclear Energy Dr. Mike Goff. “This effort was supported in part by a competitive award from the U.S. Department of Energy and technical assistance from two national laboratories, spotlighting the U.S. Government’s ongoing commitment to fostering innovation and excellence in the nuclear energy industry.”

    “The IAEA is committed to fostering innovation that drives nuclear excellence worldwide,” said Aline Des Cloizeaux, Director of the IAEA Division of Nuclear Power. “The ISOP Innovation Awards highlight novel solutions that are already making a difference in the field. By recognizing these achievements, we are contributing to a growing library of real-world use cases in areas such as AI, advanced manufacturing, robotics and drones or advanced instrumentation and control – inspiring collaboration and further innovation across the nuclear sector.”

    “Nuclear energy is essential to support the load growth demands we are seeing across the country and having real-time insights into unit performance positions us to maximize our units at a time when reliable, safe, clean power is more important than ever,” said Southern Nuclear Chairman, President and CEO Pete Sena.” We are proud to be recognized as part of the collaborative work between companies leading the industry in pioneering AI for nuclear power plants.”

    “By leveraging the power of artificial intelligence, we can enhance our ability to deliver more clean, reliable megawatts to American families and businesses. AI can be seamlessly integrated into plant operations to enhance forecasting accuracy, reduce operational risks, and operate our nuclear fleet at the highest levels of safety, efficiency and reliability,” said Constellation Chief Generation Officer Bryan Hanson. “Constellation is not just helping the nation win the AI race, we also are harnessing the technology to meet America’s growing demand for clean, reliable and affordable energy.”

    ThermalLimits.ai addresses longstanding challenges in nuclear reload core design and cycle management by bridging the gap between biased offline approximations and online realities. With an average bias of less than 0.75% for key metrics, the tool prevents unplanned derates, optimizes fuel usage, and minimizes risks like premature coast down. By integrating seamlessly with existing nuclear fuel analysis software, it empowers operators to make data-driven decisions that boost plant performance and reduce reload fuel costs.

    About Blue Wave AI Labs

    Blue Wave AI Labs is an AI company specializing in Nuclear-Grade AI applications, a set of highly-precise and reliable AI-based algorithms designed for critical applications in nuclear energy, defense, and supply chains. Our Nuclear-Grade AI applications ensure unmatched safety and performance in high-stakes environments. Blue Wave integrates advanced neural nets, large language models, and other machine learning techniques to deliver transformative, secure solutions for complex challenges. Follow Blue Wave AI Labs and learn more about Nuclear-Grade AI on LinkedIn and X.

    Contact Information

    Pete Mrvos
    VP, Communications
    pete.mrvos@bwailabs.com

    Source: Blue Wave AI Labs

    Source link

  • Which form of energy is the cheapest? CBS News asked the experts to find out.

    The emergence of renewable energy like wind and solar as a viable alternative to oil, gas and other fossil fuels has raised critical questions about which form of power offers the best value today — a debate made all the more urgent by the ravages of climate change.

    In the U.S., where energy policy has been shaped by politics for more than a century, the battle continues to play out at the highest levels of government. Former President Biden delivered one of the biggest endorsements of renewable energy in the form of the 2022 Inflation Reduction Act (IRA), which offered tax credits and rebates to businesses, organizations and households that invest in solar, wind and geothermal technologies. 

    By contrast, President Trump has been a staunch supporter of the oil and gas industry. During his inauguration speech in January, he reaffirmed his commitment to fossil fuel production, saying, “We will be a rich nation again, and it is that liquid gold under our feet. That will help to do it.”

    Within six months of taking office, Mr. Trump signed the “One Big Beautiful Bill Act” into law, which phases out clean energy tax incentives while simultaneously expanding tax breaks for the oil and gas industries. Separately, his administration has pared back offshore wind leasing and made it more difficult for clean energy projects to qualify for federal dollars. 

    On the global trade front, Mr. Trump has issued a flurry of tariffs on dozens of U.S. trading partners, which experts say will translate into higher costs for energy projects that rely on imports. The White House is pushing these policies amid concerns over rising U.S. energy prices, with average electricity costs up 5.5% from a year ago, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics.

    To get to the bottom of which form of energy is the cheapest, CBS News analyzed the cost to produce coal, gas, nuclear, wind and solar energy, including the impact of tax incentives, tariffs and other factors.

    Determining the cheapest form of energy

    Multiple criteria come into play in trying to assess the cheapest form of energy. These include consumers’ monthly costs; the cost to produce energy; and the potential social cost energy production can have on a community’s health and the environment. External factors like tax incentives and fluctuations in the economy also can affect the price it costs to heat and cool our homes.

    CBS News set out to answer the question using what’s called the Levelized Cost of Energy, or LCOE, a commonly cited benchmark for wholesale energy costs. LCOE is the price that a power-generating facility must receive for its electricity to cover all its expenses — including capital, equipment, maintenance and other financing costs — over the lifespan of a project. 

    A 2025 LCOE report from investment bank Lazard shows the cost to produce energy without any government subsidies and how that changes when you layer in other factors, such as tax subsidies provided under the Inflation Reduction Act.

    Yet while LCOE calculations are widely used, they don’t offer a full picture when it comes to evaluating the cost and value of energy, experts told CBS News. Other factors, such as interest rates and federal regulations, can also have a major impact on the cost of building and operating energy infrastructure. 

    LCOE also doesn’t account for the value a given form of energy delivers. For example, because solar and wind are affected by the weather, they tend to be less consistent than oil and gas, meaning a backup source of energy may be necessary.

    “You have to talk about, what is the additional cost of balancing that production from a resource that doesn’t produce all the time?” Severin Borenstein, faculty director of the Energy Institute at UC Berkeley’s Haas School of Business, told CBS News.

    How tax subsidies factor in

    The U.S. government has a long history of using tax subsidies to encourage energy production. Oil and gas companies have benefited from such support for more than a century. By comparison, only in recent decades have renewable energy projects drawn a larger share of federal dollars.

    Lazard’s report shows how the LCOE for renewable energy fluctuates when you account for certain provisions of the IRA aimed at lowering the cost of developing clean energy projects. Those include the investment tax credit (ITC), production tax credit (PTC) and energy community bonus, which increases the value of the ITC and PTC by 10% for projects in certain areas. 

    Lazard’s calculations assume these credits will be in place for 10 years. Notably, however, the Republican-backed “big, beautiful bill” signed into law by Mr. Trump this summer is slated to phase out those credits over the next two years.

    Although Lazard examines how the IRA affects renewable energy prices, it doesn’t factor in any government subsidies flowing to the oil and gas industry, which vary widely and can be difficult to assess.

    The Environmental and Energy Study Institute, a bipartisan nonprofit research group, estimates that direct U.S. subsidies to the fossil fuel industry amount to at least $20 billion per year. However, the FracTracker Alliance, a nonprofit focused on the impact of fossil fuels, says the industry receives an estimated $760 billion annually in government subsidies and tax breaks.

    More benefits will go to the oil and gas industries under the “big, beautiful bill.” A June report from the Joint Committee on Taxation estimates that the legislation will funnel nearly $18 billion in tax incentives to the oil and gas industry over the next 10 years. 

    Oil and gas companies have lauded the new law as a win for the industry. Sunil Mathew, chief financial officer of Occidental Petroleum, said during a recent company earnings call that the measure “will provide significant cash tax benefits to Oxy.” He expects the law will save Occidental $700 million to $800 million in “cash taxes” by the end of next year.

    How do tariffs factor into energy production costs?

    Mr. Trump’s tariffs are also projected to alter the cost it takes to fund energy projects in the U.S. To gauge the impact of tariffs on energy costs, CBS News turned to a model created by global data and analytics company Wood Mackenzie. 

    In the following chart, dark green indicates a scenario in which the U.S. hasn’t applied any country-level tariffs, but still maintains levies on copper, steel and aluminum imports; the medium shade of green represents current baseline tariffs imposed by the U.S. since Mr. Trump resumed office in January through August 7; and the light green indicates if trade relations with a U.S. economic partner is likely to worsen or deteriorate.

    As depicted, U.S. tariffs are projected to hit battery storage production the hardest. Chris Seiple, vice chairman of the power and renewables group at Wood Mackenzie, noted that while some energy equipment is produced domestically, other tech, such as battery cells, mostly comes from abroad, making them more susceptible to tariffs.

    “The vast majority of our battery cells come from China,” he said. “And so the cost of a battery project is going to go up by a certain percentage.”

    This could lead to what Seiple described as a “whack-a-mole” effect, in which over time companies move their manufacturing to non-tariffed countries to avoid an additional financial burden. 

    What is the cheapest form of energy?

    Given these multiple and interconnected factors, what ends up being the cheapest form of energy to produce? 

    According to Lazard, renewables remain the most cost-competitive form of generating and distributing energy. Onshore wind, which runs from $37 to $86 per megawatt-hour ($/MWh), is the most affordable on a baseline level and when tax subsidies are included.

    Utility scale solar — what most people think of when they hear about solar energy — is the next most cost-effective approach, with costs ranging from $38 to $78 per megawatt-hour.

    Fossil fuel and nuclear energy sources are more expensive to generate. Coal costs $71 to $173 per megawatt-hour; gas costs $48 to $109; and U.S. nuclear costs $141 to $220, Lazard found. 

    The main reasons for these differences in cost? Experts told CBS News that while the capital cost for renewable projects is steep, the expense of operating and maintaining such facilities tends to be lower than that associated with fossil fuel production. 

    “Wind and solar you basically do all the investment up front, and then it operates — not quite for free — but at extremely low operating costs per kilowatt hour,” Borenstein said. 

    With fossil fuels, the cost of oil, gas and coal — which can be volatile — is another key factor. 

    “For a natural gas-fired power plant, you have to buy the natural gas,” he explained. “And likewise, a coal-fired power plant, you have to buy the coal. And so the price… is going to fluctuate.” 

    Experts who spoke with CBS News agreed that renewable energy ends up being the most competitive when it comes to costs. Rob Gramlich, president of Grid Strategies, a Washington, D.C. consulting firm, concurred that solar and wind are the cheapest to run. Natural gas is the most affordable source of backup energy, which is necessary to make sure power is available around the clock, he said. 

    Seiple said if you need a small amount of inexpensive electricity, solar is the way to go. It’s “low cost to build, it can be deployed quickly and modularly, the fuel is free and not volatile in price, and the ongoing maintenance costs are minimal,” he said. “And if the U.S. didn’t penalize it with tariffs, it would be even lower cost.”

    Despite such advantages for renewable energy, experts say the U.S. shouldn’t put all of its eggs in one basket. Multiple sources told CBS News that what’s needed is a diversity of energy options that can meet the country’s rising demand for electricity. Taking certain forms of energy out of the mix would compromise the system as a whole, they note.

    “There is no one cheapest form that you can run the whole system on, and in fact, it depends on combining them in ways to [get] the cheapest possible cost,” Borenstein said.

    Mary Cunningham

    Mary Cunningham is a reporter for CBS MoneyWatch. Before joining the business and finance vertical, she worked at “60 Minutes,” CBSNews.com and CBS News 24/7 as part of the CBS News Associate Program.

    Source link

  •  Trump’s energy department said wind and solar energy capacity is ‘worthless’ without sunlight or wind. Elon Musk reminds DoE about batteries: ‘Um… hello?’

    President Donald Trump’s Department of Energy sparked backlash last week after posting on X that “wind and solar energy infrastructure is essentially worthless when it is dark outside, and the wind is not blowing.”  

    The message echoed recent remarks from Energy Secretary Chris Wright, a longtime oil and gas executive, who defended Trump’s claim that renewable energy is driving up electricity costs, though he acknowledged the picture is more complicated.

    He also argued that wind and solar are “intermittent” and, without large-scale batteries, “worthless” when the sun isn’t shining or the wind isn’t blowing. Greater reliance on renewables, he added, effectively creates “a whole separate grid” that raises overall costs.

    Still, the DoE’s X post drew millions of views and many mocking replies, including a community note reminding readers that batteries exist to store power when the sun isn’t shining or the wind isn’t blowing.

    Among the most prominent replies was from Elon Musk, who cut through the noise with just two words: “Um … hello?”

    Alongside his reply, the Tesla CEO boosted his company’s large-scale battery business, which had recently touted a 370-megawatt-hour storage project in Australia designed to stabilize the grid and expand renewable use. His post garnered a little over half a million views. Tesla also has a solar panel business for use in homes. 

    The Department of Energy didn’t immediately respond to a request for comment.

    Several users also pointed out Musk’s extensive campaign support for the president last year despite Tesla’s focus on green energy.

    Musk spent nearly $300 million on Republican candidates in the last election cycle, endorsing Trump after he survived an assassination attempt. After he was elected, Trump installed Musk to head the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE,) and the two men seemed inseparable, with Musk writing in February that he loves Trump “as much as any straight man can love another man.”

    But the two also had clear ideological differences from the start, particularly around renewables. Musk heads one of the world’s leading electric-vehicle companies, and has long supported all kinds of renewable energy, including solar and wind.

    The alliance unraveled in a very public break-up earlier this year over the One Big Beautiful Bill, which sparked Musk’s fierce opposition because it ended Biden-era tax credits for renewable energy and is expected to add to U.S. debt.

    In a now-deleted X post, Musk escalated the feud even further, accusing Trump of being named in the Epstein files and of blocking the release of more details. Since then, Musk has said that he’ll do “a lot less” political spending in the future.

    “I think I’ve done enough,” he said in a video interview with Bloomberg News at the Qatar Economic Forum.

    Meanwhile, Trump’s administration has sought to cripple clean energy, blocking nearly $19 billion in renewable energy projects and announcing that it will not approve any wind or solar projects.

    The president himself has used various justifications for his anti-renewable stance, saying that wind mills kill birds and are ugly, while he wrote in a Truth Social post that solar panels are “farmer destroying.”

    “The days of stupidity are over in the USA!!!” Trump added. 

    Fortune Global Forum returns Oct. 26–27, 2025 in Riyadh. CEOs and global leaders will gather for a dynamic, invitation-only event shaping the future of business. Apply for an invitation.

    Eva Roytburg

    Source link

  • Officials celebrate after transforming farm land into facility capturing ‘unlimited’ energy: ‘It’s free power that you’re able to harness’

    Mercer County, Illinois, is now running on more sunshine. A new 38-acre solar farm is already generating enough clean energy to power around 850 homes and businesses across three counties, reported WQAD TV.

    The Goldenrod Solar Farm, developed by Cultivate Power, is made up of more than 12,000 solar panels and produces 5 megawatts of electricity. Before it officially opened at the end of July, the site had been quietly online for two months, feeding renewable energy into the grid.

    For the Essary family, who owns the land where the project sits, solar was the clear path forward. “We’ve always kind of been stewards of the land, and we felt like we needed to do something a little more to give back, so we weighed everything out and ended up going with solar as the safest for the land,” Robert Essary said.

    Residents who opt into the community solar program may see lower monthly energy bills, thanks to the stability and affordability of solar power. “It’s one of the cheapest renewable energy sources out there. Not just renewables, but energy altogether,” explained United Renewable Energy Project Manager Seth Bishop. “It’s free power that you’re able to harness from the sun, so there’s an unlimited resource there.”

    By easing demand on the regional grid, the farm will also help improve reliability for nearby communities. Mercer County currently imports much of its electricity from Missouri, but now some of that power will be homegrown. “The farther you get from your source of power, the less you’ll have overall,” Bishop said. “So, it supplements the line and will alleviate some strain on the grid there.”

    The project is also putting money back into the community. A portion of the farm’s profits is already funding local scholarships, fire departments, and youth agricultural programs, including Future Farmers of America programs at two local high schools.

    Goldenrod is one of many new solar projects across the country helping communities lower costs, strengthen local grids, and reduce reliance on dirty energy sources. Communities from Wyoming to West Virginia are already seeing the difference, with cleaner air and more reliable electricity as the payoff.

    But homeowners don’t have to wait for a solar farm to be built nearby to reap similar benefits. Adding rooftop solar can drive household energy costs close to zero, while also making other efficient appliances — like heat pumps — cheaper to run. Tools like EnergySage make it easy to compare quotes from vetted local installers and save thousands on going solar. And for those considering a heat pump, Mitsubishi can help match families with affordable options.

    Join our free newsletter for good news and useful tips, and don’t miss this cool list of easy ways to help yourself while helping the planet.

    Source link

  • Santa Fe County commissioners approve high-profile solar energy project near Eldorado

    Santa Fe County commissioners have given the green light to a high-profile and controversial solar and battery energy storage facility that has divided opinion in the region and generated heated opposition in the Eldorado area.

    The commission’s 4-1 vote Tuesday to approve the Rancho Viejo Solar project is likely not the end of the story — opponents have said they plan to appeal the approval to state District Court.

    The project comes as New Mexico aims to make a shift to clean energy and away from coal and gas, and commissioners who voted to support the project cited the need to get renewable energy projects online to combat climate change.

    “I think that this project is much, much, much safer than the alternative — the alternative would be a 332-home development, with 332 potential fire hazards,” said Commissioner Hank Hughes, who is a resident of Eldorado and made the motion at Tuesday’s meeting to approve the proposal.

    He added, “I think this is the right decision. We are living in a climate crisis. … This is so much safer than fossil fuels.”

    The commission’s decision comes after a public hearing earlier this month that featured more than 20 hours of testimony. When the roll-call vote played out, at least one person in the audience cried out in frustration. Rancho Viejo Solar, proposed by Northern Virginia-based AES Corp., has drawn fierce opposition from residents concerned about impact on property values and the risk of fire from battery cells overheating.

    Company lauds vote

    Aiming to generate 96 megawatts of power and roughly 45 megawatts of battery storage, the project would cover 680 acres of a roughly 800-acre parcel and include a solar facility, a 1-acre collector substation, a 3-acre battery storage system and a 2.3-mile generation line about four miles east of La Cienega.

    Public Service Company of New Mexico is the intended client for the project.

    Joshua Mayer, senior development manager for AES, said in a statement the vote is “an essential step toward delivering safe, reliable, and affordable energy to the local grid as energy demand continues to rise, while directly advancing New Mexico’s clean energy goals.”

    081225_GC_]RanchoViejo02rgb.jpg (copy)

    Joshua Mayer, senior development manager for AES, listens to concerned citizens speak about on the Rancho Viejo Solar project during Day 2 of a hearing at the Santa Fe County Commission chamber earlier this month. The public hearing featured over 20 hours of testimony on the project before commissioners approved the site Tuesday.

    The county Planning Commission approved a conditional use permit for Rancho Viejo Solar earlier this year, a decision project opponents appealed to county commissioners. In an interview earlier this month, leaders with the Clean Energy Coalition of Santa Fe County, an organization that opposes the solar project and has about 2,000 members, said the group intended to appeal if the commissioners opted to uphold the Planning Commission’s decision.

    The vehement pushback has been a source of frustration for the project’s supporters, who say it could generate enough electricity to carry roughly the entire residential power load of Santa Fe and would mark a significant move in the state’s clean energy transition.

    Commissioners sound off

    Commissioner Lisa Cacari Stone was the lone member of the board to vote against Rancho Viejo Solar. In her comments ahead of the vote, she indicated she has concerns about safety, technology and about the application overall.

    Lisa Cacari Stone headshot

    Lisa Cacari Stone

    “There is the importance of the public health impact. The proximity of this large-scale project to neighborhoods and Rancho Viejo continues to create potential hazards and can be very detrimental to all those in the area,” Cacari Stone said.

    “My vote is not against solar energy,” she added. “It is against this particular proposal by AES because it does not meet — based on the evidence I’ve reviewed, written submissions and testimonies — the highest standards we owe all of our communities.”

    Commissioner Justin Greene, who is among the candidates running to be the next mayor of Santa Fe and who voted to support the project, noted some of the conditions with which AES will need to comply, including increasing the distance between battery containers in the interest of reducing fire risk.

    Justin Greene

    Justin Greene

    “We get calls for environmentalism and sustainability, and we are answering that call by creating a project and helping a project that will power Santa Fe and Santa Fe County,” Greene said.

    Some commissioners noted county officials as well as third-party technical experts recommended approval of the conditional use permit.

    “The environmental benefits of this are very important to me as an environmentalist myself and as someone with a 7-year-old child who will inherit our future,” Commissioner Adam Fulton Johnson said. “Projects like this are critical to meeting our renewable energy goals and replacing retired coal plants.”

    ‘It will go to District Court’

    Lee Zlotoff, who helms the Clean Energy Coalition of Santa Fe County, said in an interview earlier this month the organization has raised more than $50,000 and is prepared to go to court if the commissioners approve the land use permit. He noted his group is “in this for the long haul.”

    “The fight’s not over,” said Randy Coleman, the organization’s vice president, confirming Tuesday the group plans to file an appeal.

    081125_MS_AES Hearing Protest_003.JPG (copy)

    John Lee, left, and Pat Czeto stand outside with protest signs ahead of a public hearing on the Rancho Viejo Solar project in August 2025. The Clean Energy Coalition of Santa Fe County, an organization that opposes the solar project and has about 2,000 members, said the group intended to appeal if the commissioners opted to uphold the Planning Commission’s decision.

    Selma Eikelenboom, a resident of Ranchos San Marcos who lives near the project site, was unsurprised by the outcome Thursday, but said she is confident the matter will end up in court.

    An opponent of the project, she said she has spent three years studying AES’ proposal but, as a party with standing before the county commissioners, had only an hour to make her case.

    “It’s a shame, but it’s not over till the fat lady sings, as they say, and it means it will go to District Court,” Eikelenboom said.

    ‘A great precedent’

    After the meeting, Robert Cordingley, president of the nonprofit 350 Santa Fe, said the Rancho Viejo Solar hearing process can serve as a template moving forward for advocates who are pushing to get such projects approved.

    “We think this will set a great precedent and a template for future battery storage and solar farm projects, not just in Santa Fe County but in the state as a whole,” Cordingley said.

    Glenn Schiffbauer, executive director of the Santa Fe Green Chamber of Commerce, has also supported Rancho Viejo Solar through the lengthy process alongside groups like the Sierra Club’s Rio Grande Chapter.

    “It’s a good day,” Schiffbauer said. “For me and my organization, I think it was really good to see the county of Santa Fe take advantage of the opportunity that was presented to them to lead in renewable energy generation. … This was the first big one. Rather than doing nothing, which is usually the easier way, they did something, and now we have a template going forward.”

    Source link

  • Green Eggs and Sun

    How the Trump Administration’s irrational dislike of solar and wind energy imperils both the environment and the economy.

    Bill McKibben

    Source link

  • How Long Will Trump Be Able to Deny Reality with His Energy Policy?

    They would not like them on our federal lands (those are reserved for oil and gas, and maybe nuclear reactors). They do not want them on farmland. They will not allow them to float offshore. The Trump Administration’s war on wind and solar power just keeps getting more aggressive: late last week, for instance, it announced an investigation into whether it should tariff wind-turbine components arriving from other nations for projects that it had taken office too late to block. As the Times politely put it, “The Trump administration has typically imposed tariffs to protect American companies against foreign competition and spur domestic production of critical products. This time, laying out a path to impose tariffs could be an attempt to stymie an industry.” On Friday, it shut down an almost-completed wind farm off the coast of Rhode Island on unspecified (and hard to imagine) “national security” grounds.

    The Seussian rancor with which every layer of the Administration views clean energy would be almost funny if it weren’t so tragically shortsighted. As recently as 2009, Donald Trump joined a handful of other business leaders in signing a full-page ad in the Times urging President Obama to “strengthen” U.S. climate legislation and to “lead the world by example.” The ad insisted that “investing in a Clean Energy Economy will drive state-of-the-art technologies that will spur economic growth, create new energy jobs, and increase our energy security, all while reducing the harmful emissions that are putting our planet at risk. We have the ability and know how to lead the world in clean energy technology.” The other signatories ran the gamut from Ben and Jerry to Martha Stewart, but only Trump had the rest of his key executives sign on: Don, Jr.; Eric; and Ivanka.

    But that was before the sight of wind turbines on the horizon at Trump’s Scottish golf course wounded him grievously. As he wrote to Scotland’s First Minister, in 2011, as his project neared completion, “Unfortunately, instead of celebrating the start of something valuable and beautiful for Scotland, this ugly cloud is hanging over the future of the great Scottish coastline.” And it was nearly fifteen years before oil-and-gas executives spent unprecedented sums during an election cycle; nearly half the amount spent during the 2024 cycle went to Republicans, and the rest on lobbying Congress. We’re not in Kansas (the fourth-largest wind-producing state) anymore.

    The greatest irony of this dramatic turnaround is that in 2009 solar and wind power were still expensive; now they are the cheapest forms of energy on offer. And yet the Administration is digging in. The question is: will it be able to hold that position even as electricity prices begin to rise? (On average, they are up ten per cent so far this year.)

    At the moment, official policy appears to be a complete muddle. The President, on his first day in office in January, declared an “energy emergency” as a way to suspend regulations and allow both increased drilling and the creation of more generating capacity. His team argues that we need far more electricity in order to build data centers that would enable the U.S. to outpace China in the race for “A.I. dominance.” As Trump put it in his Day One declaration, “without immediate remedy,” America’s energy situation “will dramatically deteriorate in the near future due to a high demand for energy and natural resources to power the next generation of technology. The United States’ ability to remain at the forefront of technological innovation depends on a reliable supply of energy and the integrity of our Nation’s electrical grid.” But then came the cascade of decisions designed to restrict the cheapest—and, just as important, fastest to construct—sources of new energy supply. Trump’s team ignored the pleas of actual data-center operators to keep Biden-era rules on renewable energy, which might have let them build what they needed right away. We are, to use a metaphor from the internal-combustion era, stamping on the gas and the brakes at the same time.

    Though Economics 101 would seem to indicate that cutting off the easiest source of new supply while demand is simultaneously rising would inevitably cause prices to climb, the Trump Administration has been rejecting this argument in favor of telling whoppers. Last Wednesday, the President took to Truth Social to insist that “STUPID AND UGLY WINDMILLS ARE KILLING NEW JERSEY. Energy prices up 28% this year, and not enough electricity to take care of state. STOP THE WINDMILLS!” In point of fact, though, the windmills planned for off the Jersey shore have been cancelled, thanks to the Administration. The entire state currently has just six wind turbines, generating nine megawatts of power, which, as the American Clean Power Association points out, is 0.03 per cent of the state’s energy production. Whatever is driving up electricity prices, it isn’t wind—in fact, the states with high levels of wind power, including the very red states of North and South Dakota, Wyoming, and Oklahoma, have some of the lowest electric rates in the country.

    The Administration’s bet seems to be that it can hold back renewable power in this country indefinitely—and perhaps it can. But even here its reach is somewhat limited: Texas, with very little in the way of public lands, continues to lead the nation in installing new clean energy. And, outside our borders, the sun rush continues unabated, which matters because Trump, in his energy-emergency directive, also called on the U. S. to export more fuel, in order to “create jobs and economic prosperity for Americans forgotten in the present economy, improve the United States’ trade balance, help our country compete with hostile foreign powers, strengthen relations with allies and partners, and support international peace and security.” That may be a tall order. We learned last month that China installed two hundred and twelve gigawatts of new solar power in the first six months of the year, compared with twelve in the U.S.; as a result, its carbon emissions have begun to fall, even as its economy keeps growing. (America’s emissions, in contrast, rose sharply over the same period.) And other nations are following China’s lead: Indonesia, the fourth most populous country, announced plans last week for a hundred gigawatts of solar over the next five years. Why? Because it’s so much cheaper than running the diesel generators that currently supply much of that country’s rural electricity. “The estimated levelized cost of electricity (L.C.O.E.) for this system is about $0.12 to $0.15/kWh over the next 25 years, compared to $0.20 to $0.40/kWh for a diesel generator,” the head of a Jakarta-based energy-transition think tank told PV magazine.

    Numbers like that have convinced the International Energy Agency that peak consumption of oil on this planet can’t be far off; the Trump Administration’s response has been, as in other cases, to try to play with the data. It is currently pressuring the I.E.A. (set up by that environmental radical Henry Kissinger in the nineteen-seventies in response to the OPEC oil-price shocks) to fire one of its top officials and replace her with someone who will parrot the White House line that demand for fossil fuels will keep climbing for decades. “They want to get operatives in there, whether they’re career or political, who can actually move the needle,” an unidentified lobbyist told Politico. “They’re going to get someone they trust and that person is going to fight from the inside out.”

    You can only get away with that kind of maneuvering for a while, however, and the Administration’s license may be running out. One fascinating indicator: the world’s hedge funds seem to be placing their bets on solar. Since Liberation Day, Bloomberg reported earlier this month, the main index of renewable funds had risen eighteen per cent, while oil-and-gas shares had fallen four per cent. “If we are going to continue to grow both in developed and emerging economies, we’re going to need a lot of energy,” one analyst explained. “A big chunk of the marginal growth in energy over the last 10 years has come from renewables and it’s hard to see why that isn’t going to continue.”

    Bill McKibben

    Source link

  • Clean energy credits are set to expire. Find out how much you can claim before they end.




































    How Trump budget law will impact green energy



    How Trump’s budget law will impact green energy in the U.S.

    08:06

    The window to take advantage of clean energy credits is running out. 

    After three years, the sun is setting on a series of tax credits aimed at lowering the cost of buying electric vehicles, as well as installing solar panels, heat pumps and other clean energy technologies in your home. 

    That’s because, in July, Congress passed President Trump’s sweeping budget package, known as the One Big Beautiful Bill Act, which phases out the Biden-era clean energy subsidies earlier than originally outlined in the Inflation Reduction Act (IRA) under which they were established.

    For example, the Residential Clean Energy Credit originally offered homeowners a 30% tax credit for installing rooftop solar, storage batteries and other qualifying clean energy systems through 2032. Under the new budget law, however, the deadline to install the technology has been moved up to Dec. 31, 2025.

    Here’s a list from the U.S. Climate Alliance, a bipartisan coalition of governors, of additional tax credits that are still available under the IRA, along with the new deadline for eligibility. 

    Keep in mind, there are limits to the total amount of credits you can claim. For example, the Energy Efficient Home Improvement Credit caps homeowner tax credits on clean energy upgrades at $3,200 per year, according to the Internal Revenue Service. There are also caps on individual items, such as a $250 cap on exterior doors and a $500 cap on the cost of multiple doors installed.

    Mary Cunningham

    Mary Cunningham is a reporter for CBS MoneyWatch. Before joining the business and finance vertical, she worked at “60 Minutes,” CBSNews.com and CBS News 24/7 as part of the CBS News Associate Program.

    Source link

  • Consumer advocacy groups score major win after lawmakers fail to void a million homeowners’ lucrative contracts: ‘[This] sent a clear message’

    A coalition of advocacy groups has scored a major win to preserve a lucrative agreement that has increased property values for California homeowners who install solar panels.

    EnergySage reported that the Golden State’s Senate Energy Committee has removed language from Assembly Bill 942 that would have nullified net-metering contracts if ownership changed on a solar-equipped home. In California, more than one million households have 20-year net-metering agreements, per the California Solar and Storage Association (CALSSA).

    If the anti-solar language had remained in AB 942, buyers who bought a home with existing solar panels could have seen their electricity rates rise by as much as $63 per month, as reported by PV Magazine. In turn, the property values of those homes likely would have declined.

    Fortunately, more than 100 environmental, clean energy, and consumer advocacy groups pushed back on AB 942’s original language, leading EnergySage to declare that “California solar homebuyers just dodged a $756-a-year bullet” that would have eroded consumer trust.

    Installing solar panels has become a popular choice because it is one of the best ways to lower utility bills or even reduce them to $0.

    EnergySage’s free tools have connected numerous solar customers with vetted installers, making it easy for them to compare quotes and save up to $10,000 on installations.

    If you are interested in solar panels, installing them now could save you significant money in the long term. To qualify for the 30% solar tax credit, projects must be underway by Dec. 31 due to the passage of the One Big Beautiful Bill.

    EnergySage’s handy mapping tool can also provide more insight into the average cost of solar in your state, as well as any additional incentives available in your jurisdiction.

    Solar panels can also maximize your household savings on other energy-efficient equipment like heat pumps, which are capable of heating and cooling your home. However, the 30% tax credit on qualified heat pumps also ends Dec. 31. Mitsubishi is among the brands helping consumers find the right heat pump at an affordable price.

    Meanwhile, EnergySage sees California’s move to protect solar buyers as a positive sign because it influences industry trends as the country’s largest residential solar market.

    Weakening support for clean-energy projects in the Golden State could have set back efforts to improve electricity affordability elsewhere, as well as having ramifications for public health. Studies have linked pollution from dirty fuels to millions of premature deaths each year.

    “By ensuring that these contracts are honored, the Senate Energy Committee and Chairman [Josh] Becker reinforced consumer trust, safeguarded clean energy investments, and sent a clear message that California stands by its commitments to climate action and energy innovation,” CALSSA executive director Brad Heavner said in a press release.

    Join our free newsletter for easy tips to save more and waste less, and don’t miss this cool list of easy ways to help yourself while helping the planet.

    Source link

  • Critics call out new data center over potential threat to residents’ energy bills: ‘No one voted for that’

    Michigan has emerged as a leader in the clean-energy transition in the United States. However, an “offramp” provision in its 2023 climate and clean energy laws could hinder the state’s plans and is raising questions about whether utility consumers will end up paying the price.

    What’s happening?

    In November 2023, Gov. Gretchen Whitmer signed legislation aimed at improving public health, protecting resources like drinking water, and driving down costs for consumers. As part of that plan, Michigan announced it would generate 100% of its energy from clean sources by 2040.

    Yet the bill included an important caveat: Dirty energy plants could remain active if the state wasn’t generating enough power to meet demand. As detailed by Inside Climate News, data center development in the Great Lakes State is stressing the grid and could trigger this “offramp.”

    Michigan’s largest utility provider, DTE, is in negotiations with major tech companies to provide power for new data centers, and it says building a new gas plant may be necessary to meet demand, according to the report.

    Why is this important?

    At this time, it is unclear whether residents will shoulder the burden of paying for electric expansion costs caused by data center development.

    Chris Gilmer-Hill, a policy associate with the Michigan Environmental Justice Coalition, explained to ICN that this was a key reason why opponents of 2024 tax incentives for data centers fought so hard against the legislation.

    While data centers can create local jobs and are increasingly relying on renewable energy — with some arguing they could even speed up a clean-energy transition — they also have the potential to drive dirty energy development, as the case in Michigan demonstrates. Studies have linked air pollution from dirty fuels to debilitating illnesses and premature death.

    “Looking back to the fight over the incentives, this is absolutely what DTE wanted to happen,” Gilmer-Hill said. “DTE’s theory is if they can find a way to easily jack up demand that has to be met no matter what, then they can build coal or methane or gas plants.”

    What’s being done about this?

    Douglas Jester, a partner at energy consulting firm 5 Lakes Energy, told ICN that the offramp doesn’t change the obligation for companies to try to comply with Michigan’s clean and renewable energy standards.

    However, critics are wary of how things will play out because DTE has donated millions of dollars to Gov. Whitmer and the state Democratic Party. According to the Detroit Metro Times, DTE has also contributed to campaigns for 138 of the state’s 148 senators and representatives.

    “There were multiple attempts made to protect our climate goals and ratepayers, and those did not move because DTE controls the state Legislature with its contributions,” Voters Not Politicians executive director Christy McGillivray told ICN.

    “It is not popular to hike up energy rates so Silicon Valley billionaires build out infrastructure to raid our entire government — no one voted for that,” she added.

    You can contact your representatives if you want to make your voice heard on this matter.

    Join our free newsletter for good news and useful tips, and don’t miss this cool list of easy ways to help yourself while helping the planet.

    Source link

  • New Report Spotlights Tools for Environmental Justice in Renewable Energy

    Press Release
    •


    updated: Dec 10, 2024


    Online, December 10, 2024 (Newswire.com)
    –
    A new policy brief reveals how states implement legislative requirements to ensure communities benefit from renewable energy projects. The analysis highlights how these state-level community benefits requirements complement the Justice40 Initiative’s mission to redirect 40% of federal energy investment benefits to historically marginalized communities. The report outlines actionable policies at local, state, and federal levels that ensure fair benefits for overburdened populations.

    Key Takeaways

    Why It Matters

    CBAs and similar policies represent a tangible step toward environmental justice, creating enforceable agreements that deliver tangible community benefits. They also reduce opposition to renewable projects, speeding the transition to clean energy.

    But challenges remain. Weak enforcement and vague agreements risk reinforcing the same inequalities these policies aim to fix.

    What’s Next?

    States and communities are innovating fast, with examples like:

    • Michigan: A $2,000-per-MW payment for host communities.

    • California: Enforceable agreements with grassroots organizations.

    • Maine: Annual payments tied to wind turbine installations.

    With more research and accountability, these tools could actively transform the United States’ energy future.

    Read the full report to explore case studies and best practices shaping energy justice nationwide.

    ###

    The Initiative for Energy Justice conducts research, provides policy analysis, and facilitates dialogue to advance concrete policy pathways toward energy justice. IEJ partners with frontline organizing groups and allies who are striving for universal access to affordable, renewable, and democratically managed energy. For more detailed findings and recommendations, visit our website.

    Source: Initiative for Energy Justice

    Source link