ReportWire

Tag: Energy industry

  • Trump’s plan to seize and revitalize Venezuela’s oil industry faces major hurdles

    [ad_1]

    President Donald Trump’s plan to take control of Venezuela’s oil industry and ask American companies to revitalize it after capturing President Nicolás Maduro in a raid isn’t likely to have a significant immediate impact on oil prices.

    Venezuela’s oil industry is in disrepair after years of neglect and international sanctions, so it could take years and major investments before production can increase dramatically. But some analysts are optimistic that Venezuela could double or triple its current output of about 1.1 million barrels of oil a day to return to historic levels fairly quickly.

    “While many are reporting Venezuela’s oil infrastructure was unharmed by U.S. military actions, it has been decaying for many many years and will take time to rebuild,” said Patrick De Haan, who is the lead petroleum analyst at gasoline price tracker GasBuddy.

    American oil companies will want a stable regime in the country before they are willing to invest heavily, and the political picture remained uncertain Saturday with Trump saying that the United States is in charge, while the current Venezuelan vice president argued, before Venezuela’s high court ordered her to assume the role of interim president, that Maduro should be restored to power.

    “But if it seems like the U.S. is successful in running the country for the next 24 hours, I would say there would be a lot of optimism that U.S. energy companies could come in and revitalize the Venezuelan oil industry fairly quickly,” said Phil Flynn, a senior market analyst at the Price Futures Group.

    And if Venezuela can grow into an oil production powerhouse, Flynn said “that could cement lower prices for the longer term” and put more pressure on Russia.

    Oil isn’t traded over the weekend, so there wasn’t an immediate impact on prices. But a major shift in prices isn’t expected when the market does reopen. Venezuela is a member of OPEC so its production is already accounted for there. And there is currently a surplus of oil on the global market.

    Venezuela is known to have the world’s largest proven crude oil reserves of approximately 303 billion barrels, according to the U.S. Energy Information Administration. That accounts for roughly 17% of all global oil reserves.

    So international oil companies have reason to be interested in Venezuela. Leading companies, including Exxon Mobil and Chevron, didn’t immediately respond to requests for comment Saturday. ConocoPhillips spokesperson Dennis Nuss said by email that the company “is monitoring developments in Venezuela and their potential implications for global energy supply and stability. It would be premature to speculate on any future business activities or investments.”

    Chevron is the only one with significant operations in Venezuela, where it produces about 250,000 barrels a day. Chevron, which first invested in Venezuela in the 1920s, does business in the country through joint ventures with the state-owned company Petróleos de Venezuela S.A., commonly known as PDVSA.

    But even with those massive reserves, Venezuela has been producing less than 1% of the world’s crude oil supply. Corruption, mismanagement and U.S. economic sanctions saw production steadily decline from the 3.5 million barrels per day pumped in 1999 to today’s levels.

    The problem isn’t finding the oil. It’s a question of the political environment and whether companies can count on the government to live up to their contracts. Back in 2007, then President Hugo Chávez nationalized much of the oil production and forced major players like ExxonMobil and ConocoPhillips out.

    “The issue is not just that the infrastructure is in bad shape, but it’s mostly about how do you get foreign companies to start pouring money in before they have a clear perspective on the political stability, the contract situation and the like,” said Francisco Monaldi, who is the director of the Latin American energy program at Rice University.

    But the infrastructure does need significant investment.

    “The estimate is that in order for Venezuela to increase from one million barrels per day — that is what it produces today — to four million barrels, it will take about a decade and about a hundred billion dollars of investment,” Monaldi said.

    Venezuela produces the kind of heavy crude oil that’s needed for diesel fuel, asphalt and other fuels for heavy equipment. Diesel is in short supply around the world because of the sanctions on oil from Venezuela and Russia and because America’s lighter crude oil can’t easily replace it.

    Years ago, American refineries on the Gulf Coast were optimized to handle that kind of heavy crude at a time when U.S. oil production was falling and Venezuelan and Mexican crude was plentiful. So refineries would love to have more access to Venezuela’s crude because it would help them operate more efficiently, and it tends to be a little cheaper.

    Boosting Venezuelan production could also make it easier to put pressure on Russia because Europe and the rest of the world could get more of the diesel and heavy oil they need from Venezuela and stop buying from Russia.

    “There’s been a big benefit for Russia to see Venezuela’s oil industry collapse. And the reason is because they were a competitor on the global stage for that oil market,” Flynn said.

    But Matthew Waxman, a Columbia University law professor who was a national security official in the George W. Bush administration, said seizing control of Venezuela’s resources opens up additional legal issues.

    “For example, a big issue will be who really owns Venezuela’s oil?” Waxman wrote in an email. “An occupying military power can’t enrich itself by taking another state’s resources, but the Trump administration will probably claim that the Venezuelan government never rightfully held them.”

    But Waxman, who served in the State and Defense departments and on the National Security Council under Bush, noted that “we’ve seen the administration talk very dismissively about international law when it comes to Venezuela.”

    ___

    Associated Press writers Matt O’Brien and Ben Finley contributed to this report.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Turkmenistan, one of the world’s most closed nations, legalizes crypto mining and exchanges

    [ad_1]

    ASHGABAT, Turkmenistan — ASHGABAT, Turkmenistan (AP) — Turkmenistan, one of the world’s most isolated nations, officially legalized mining and exchanging cryptocurrency on Thursday in a major shift for the country’s tightly controlled, gas-dependent economy.

    Signed by President Serdar Berdimuhamedov, the legislation regulating virtual assets brings cryptocurrencies under civil law and establishes a licensing scheme for cryptocurrency exchanges overseen by the country’s central bank.

    However, digital currencies will still not be recognized as a means of payment, currency, or security. Turkmenistan’s internet also remains tightly regulated and controlled by the government.

    Turkmenistan, a former Soviet country in Central Asia, relies heavily on the export of its vast natural gas reserves to support its economy. China is the country’s main importer of gas, and Turkmenistan is currently working on a pipeline to supply gas to Afghanistan, Pakistan, and India.

    Turkmenistan also adopted a law introducing electronic visas in April last year, aimed at simplifying entry for foreigners. After gaining independence in 1991, the autocratic nation typically placed strict entry requirements on would-be visitors, with many visa applications turned down for unclear reasons.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Trump administration orders a Colorado coal-fired power generator to stay open

    [ad_1]

    FORT COLLINS, Colo. — The Trump administration has told another coal-fired power facility to remain open, this time ordering the owners of a Colorado electricity generating unit to keep it running beyond its Wednesday retirement date.

    Compliance will cost Tri-State Generation and Transmission Association and the other owners of the Craig Station power plant in northwestern Colorado. The plant owners will need to fix a broken valve that put the power plant’s 446-megawatt Unit 1 out of operation on Dec. 19, Tri-State said in a statement.

    The order from Energy Secretary Chris Wright follows recent Department of Energy moves to keep coal-fired power stations open in Indiana, Washington state and Michigan despite efforts by their owners to close them.

    It’s part of President Donald Trump’s push to revive the U.S. coal industry at a time when many utilities are shifting to cheaper, less-polluting energy sources such as natural gas and renewables. The administration, meanwhile, has blocked renewable energy, including wind power.

    The 45-year-old generator in Colorado, one of three at Craig Station, had been scheduled to close at the end of 2025.

    “As a not-for-profit cooperative, our membership will bear the costs of compliance with this order unless we can identify a method to share costs with those in the region,” Tri-State CEO Duane Highley said in the statement.

    The power plant’s owners had been planning since 2016 to shut down Unit 1 for economic reasons and to comply with “numerous state and federal requirements.”

    Asked how much returning the unit to operation would cost and how long that would take, Tri-State spokesperson Amy Robertson said by email that the utility had no further information to share.

    The generator must remain operational to address a shortage of electricity and electrical generation in the northwestern U.S., Wright wrote in Tuesday’s emergency order keeping the unit operational.

    “The Trump Administration is committed to lowering energy costs and keeping American families safe,” Wright said in a release.

    Wade Gerber, who works at the power plant, said the announcement changes little for Colorado’s coal country, which is undergoing a long-term shift away from the fossil fuel as a pillar of the local economy.

    He sees Craig — a city of about 9,000 people — as caught in the middle of a dizzying political battle.

    “What does this administration get to do? What does the next administration get to do? Is it going to make (coal) any long-term thing? No, probably not,” Gerber said.

    Gerber recently opened a distillery that caters to the cocktail lounge his wife owns next door, with plans to begin distributing more widely in 2026.

    “I already told both my bosses, if that blows up even a little bit, I can tell you: ‘Here’s my two-week notice,’” Gerber said.

    Colorado officials criticized the Trump administration order as a disservice to electricity users.

    “It is unacceptable to burden ratepayers with these unnecessary costs,” Democratic U.S. Sen. Michael Bennet said in a statement.

    The power plant was completed in 1980. Its No. 2 and No. 3 units have been scheduled to be retired in 2028. The plant’s fuel is mined at the nearby Trapper Mine, which is also scheduled to close.

    ____

    Brittany Peterson in Denver contributed to this report.

    ___

    The Associated Press receives support from the Walton Family Foundation for coverage of water and environmental policy. The AP is solely responsible for all content. For all of AP’s environmental coverage, visit https://apnews.com/hub/climate-and-environment

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • South Korea’s climate pledge to cut coal, lower emissions clash with US push for LNG purchases

    [ad_1]

    SEOUL, South Korea — South Korea is promising to shrink its reliance on coal power as part of its pledge to reduce carbon emissions that contribute to climate change, but that ambition is at odds with the Trump administration’s push for more U.S. natural gas exports.

    At recent United Nations climate talks, South Korea’s new Ministry of Climate, Energy and Environment announced plans to retire most of the country’s coal-fired power plants by 2040 and to at least halve its carbon emissions by 2035.

    Experts say this shows that South Korea, a major coal importer with one of the world’s largest fleets of coal plants, wants to speed up its renewable energy transition, which lags behind its neighbors and global averages.

    But as part of trade deals with President Donald Trump, Seoul is raising imports of U.S. liquefied natural gas, or LNG. Climate activists contend such plans may conflict with the country’s pledges to help curb climate change and could lock South Korea into a fossil fuel-dependent future.

    Talks are underway for South Korea to invest $350 billion in U.S. projects and purchase up to $100 billion worth of U.S. energy products, including LNG, a natural gas cooled to liquid form for easy storage and travel. It burns cleaner than coal, but still causes planet-warming emissions, especially of methane.

    South Korea’s overall LNG imports may not increase if it offsets purchases of more U.S. natural gas by reducing imports from other sources such as Australia and the Middle East.

    Still, it’s unclear how South Korea will “manage and consolidate all this somehow contradictory planning regarding its energy sector,” said Michelle Kim, an energy specialist for the U.S.-based Institute for Energy Economics and Financial Analysis.

    South Korea’s liberal President Lee Jae Myung, who won a snap election in June, campaigned for stronger climate commitments. They had softened under his conservative predecessor Yoon Suk Yeol, who was ousted after a short-lived martial law declaration.

    “As the global temperature rises, we all need to responsibly take climate action and Korea will have a stronger sense of responsibility in tackling the climate crisis,” Kim Sung-hwan, the inaugural Minister of Climate, Energy and Environment, said in an interview with The Associated Press.

    South Korea’s goal to cut carbon emissions by 53% to 61% of its 2018 level, fell short of climate activists’ expectations. Business lobbies representing major manufacturers had proposed a 48% emissions reduction target.

    “This range presents an effort by the government to accommodate two very different ways of thinking about the economic and climate future of the nation,” said Joojin Kim of the Seoul-based advocacy group, Solutions for Our Climate.

    The South Korean government made the ambitious commitment to increase its clean energy use even after Trump’s sweeping ‘America First’ tariffs spurred energy negotiations between Seoul and Washington.

    As part of its broader efforts to avoid higher tariffs, South Korea offered to import more LNG from the U.S., but the final trade deal has not been announced.

    The agreement still under negotiation could last between three to 10 years, according to industry analysis and U.S. federal documents. Depending on the deal’s duration, South Korea may import between 3 million to 9 million tons of American LNG a year.

    LNG made up almost a fifth of South Korea’s total energy supply last year, according to the International Energy Agency, or IEA. The government’s target was to cut that to 10.6% by 2038.

    South Korea risks its climate goals if the pending trade deal increases the total volume of imported LNG, which will likely lead to an oversupply issue and the excess burning of gas to justify the deal, said Insung Lee, with Greenpeace in Seoul.

    “If we just replace coal plants with LNG, that means the coal exit actually doesn’t lead to a green transition and merely shifts Korea’s addiction from coal to gas, which undermines the whole spirit of climate action,” Lee said.

    Renewable energy generated 7% of South Korea’s domestic power in 2022, according to the IEA. South Korean government data show that had increased to 10.5% last year, still one of the lowest levels among leading economies.

    Japan, with an economy more than twice as big, generates 21% of its power from renewable sources. Spain, whose economy is about the same size as South Korea’s, gets 42% of its power from renewable sources.

    Clean energy provided about 30% of global electricity production in 2023.

    Nuclear power produces a major share of South Korea’s domestic energy, with government data showing that nuclear sources accounted for 31% of total electricity generation last year.

    “We will transition into a new energy system that focuses on renewables and nuclear, while phasing out coal,” said Kim, the energy minister. He said South Korea will use LNG as a “complementary or emergency energy source” to make up for irregularities in renewable energy supplies.

    In early December, South Korea set another goal of boosting its offshore wind power capacity to 4 gigawatts, about 10 times the current level.

    South Korean companies that don’t cut back on carbon emissions may find that to be a competitive disadvantage, said Michelle Kim of the IEEFA.

    Many global industries, including shipping and aviation, face pressure to reduce their emissions by providing incentives for low emitters and creating deterrents for high ones, she said.

    “This is a lot of risk,” she said. “South Korea needs to speed up renewable energy deployment and come out from high dependency on the fossil fuel industry.”

    At last month’s climate talks, South Korea joined the Powering Past Coal Alliance, a group of businesses, organizations and governments promoting the green energy transition.

    That’s mainly a symbolic move, said Bruce Douglas, with the Global Renewables Alliance. “But it signifies very clear government intention to move away from fossil fuels and towards clean power.”

    South Korea imports virtually all its coal, largely from Australia, Indonesia and Russia, and the switch to renewables is bound to impact regional markets.

    The pledge to retire 40 of South Korea’s 61 coal sites by 2040 may be “an enforced transition” for coal exporters in the Asia-Pacific region, said James Bowen, with Climate Analytics. “It’s a reality that they’re going to have to face this downturn in the market.”

    “The writing’s on the wall,” Bowen said. “One of the biggest importers in the world, one of the biggest customers, is starting to move away from coal.”

    ___

    The Associated Press’ climate and environmental coverage receives financial support from multiple private foundations. The AP is solely responsible for all content. Find AP’s standards for working with philanthropies, a list of supporters and funded coverage areas at AP.org.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Virginia offshore wind developer sues over Trump administration order halting projects

    [ad_1]

    The developers of a Virginia offshore wind project are asking a federal judge to block a Trump administration order that halted construction of their project, along with four others, over national security concerns

    NORFOLK, Va. — The developers of a Virginia offshore wind project are asking a federal judge to block a Trump administration order that halted construction of their project, along with four others, over national security concerns.

    Dominion Energy Virginia said in its lawsuit filed late Tuesday that the government’s order is “arbitrary and capricious” and unconstitutional. The Richmond-based company is developing Coastal Virginia Offshore Wind, a project it says is essential to meet dramatically growing energy needs driven by dozens of new data centers.

    The Interior Department did not detail the security concerns in blocking the five projects on Monday. In a letter to project developers, Interior’s Bureau of Ocean Energy Management set a 90-day period — and possibly longer — “to determine whether the national security threats posed by this project can be adequately mitigated.”

    The other projects are the Vineyard Wind project under construction in Massachusetts, Revolution Wind in Rhode Island and Connecticut and two projects in New York: Sunrise Wind and Empire Wind. Democratic governors in those states have vowed to fight the order, the latest action by the Trump administration to hobble offshore wind in its push against renewable energy sources.

    Dominion’s project has been under construction since early 2024 and was scheduled to come online early next year, providing enough energy to power about 660,000 homes. The company said the delay was costing it more than $5 million a day in losses solely for the ships used in round-the-clock construction, and that customers or the company would eventually bear the cost.

    Dominion called this week’s order “the latest in a series of irrational agency actions attacking offshore wind and then doubling down when those actions are found unlawful.”

    The Bureau of Ocean Energy Management didn’t immediately respond to an email seeking comment.

    U.S. District Judge Jamar Walker set a hearing for 2 p.m. Monday on Dominion’s request for a temporary restraining order.

    ___

    The Associated Press’ climate and environmental coverage receives financial support from multiple private foundations. AP is solely responsible for all content. Find AP’s standards for working with philanthropies, a list of supporters and funded coverage areas at AP.org.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Trump order halts offshore wind projects for at least 90 days

    [ad_1]

    WASHINGTON — The Trump administration has directed five large-scale wind projects under construction off the East Coast to suspend their activities for at least 90 days, according to letters from the Interior Department obtained Tuesday by The Associated Press, which provide new details on the government’s move to pause the offshore ventures.

    During the pause, the Interior Department will coordinate with project developers “to determine whether the national security threats posed by this project can be adequately mitigated,” the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management said in a letter to project developers. The 90-day period can be extended if necessary, the ocean management agency said.

    The administration announced Monday it was suspending the offshore wind projects because of national security concerns. Its announcement did not indicate whether the pause was limited, nor did it reveal specifics about the national security concerns.

    It was the latest step by the Trump administration to hobble offshore wind in its push against renewable energy sources. It comes two weeks after a federal judge struck down President Donald Trump’s executive order blocking wind energy projects, calling it unlawful. The move angered local officials who have supported the projects and posed a new threat to offshore wind development that has faced increasing pressures since Trump took office.

    The letter to the developers said the Defense Department completed a recent assessment regarding the national security implications of offshore wind projects and provided senior leadership at Interior with new classified information, “including the rapid evolution of relevant adversary technologies and the resulting direct impacts to national security from offshore wind projects.”

    The potential impacts are “heightened by the projects’ sensitive location on the East Coast and the potential to cause serious, immediate and irreparable harm to our great nation,” the letter said. The letter was signed by Matthew Giacona, the acting director of BOEM and a former lobbyist for the National Ocean Industries Association.

    Kirk Lippold, a national security expert and former Commander of the USS Cole, said concerns about wind turbines’ possible effects on radar systems “have been known for decades.”

    While Interior Secretary Doug Burgum said new classified information indicates turbines may pose a national security threat, “I want to know what’s changed?” Lippold said in an interview on Tuesday. “What threat vector has changed? Have the Chinese developed new weapons or techniques that we’re unaware of and can’t fight against?”

    “To my knowledge, nothing has changed in the threat environment that would drive us to stop any offshore wind programs,” he said.

    House Democrats, meanwhile, have called for an ethics investigation into Giacona’s actions since taking over at the agency that manages offshore waters. Giacona’s work may directly overlapped with his prior lobbying work for the ocean industries group, Democrats said.

    A spokesperson for Interior said Giacona “is a highly qualified and ethically sound employee who is working tirelessly on behalf of this administration to make real change for the American people.”

    Wind proponents slammed the administration’s move to suspend the projects, saying it was another blow in an ongoing attack by the Trump administration against clean energy.

    Democratic governors of four affected states — Connecticut, Rhode Island, Massachusetts and New York — issued a joint statement Tuesday vowing to fight the action, which they said “lands like a lump of dirty coal for the holiday season for American workers, consumers and investors.”

    Pausing active leases, including for projects that are nearly completed, “defies logic, will hurt our bid for energy independence, will drive up costs for America’s ratepayers and will make us lose thousands of good-paying jobs,” the governors said. “It also threatens grid reliability that is needed to keep the lights on.”

    The statement was issued by Govs. Ned Lamont of Connecticut, Maura Healey of Massachusetts, Kathy Hochul of New York and Dan McKee of Rhode Island.

    Meanwhile, two Democratic senators said the lease suspensions mean that congressional efforts to approve bipartisan permitting reform are “dead in the water.”

    The House approved legislation last week aimed at speeding up permitting reviews for new energy and infrastructure projects, seeking to meet growing demand for electricity. The bill would also limit judicial review as Congress seeks to enact the most significant change in decades to the National Environmental Policy Act, a bedrock environmental law that requires federal agencies to consider a project’s possible environmental impacts before it is approved.

    Sens. Sheldon Whitehouse of Rhode Island and Martin Heinrich of New Mexico said Monday that with House approval, “there was a deal to be had that would have taken politics out of permitting, made the process faster and more efficient, and streamlined grid infrastructure improvements nationwide.”

    But they said any deal would have to be administered by the Trump administration, whose “reckless and vindictive assault on wind energy” destroys the trust needed for true permitting reform.

    “There is no path to permitting reform if this administration refuses to follow the law,” the senators said. Whitehouse is the top Democrat on the Senate environment panel, while Heinrich is the senior Democrat on the committee on energy and natural resources.

    ___

    McDermott reported from Providence, Rhode Island.

    ___

    The Associated Press’ climate and environmental coverage receives financial support from multiple private foundations. AP is solely responsible for all content. Find AP’s standards for working with philanthropies, a list of supporters and funded coverage areas at AP.org.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • US official: Coast Guard pursues another tanker helping Venezuela skirt sanctions

    [ad_1]

    The pursuit of the tanker, which was confirmed by a U.S. official briefed on the operation, comes after the U.S. administration announced Saturday it had seized a tanker for the second time in less than two weeks.

    This page requires Javascript.

    Javascript is required for you to be able to read premium content. Please enable it in your browser settings.

    kAm%96 @77:4:2=[ H9@ H2D ?@E 2FE9@C:K65 E@ 4@>>6?E AF3=:4=J 23@FE E96 @?8@:?8 @A6C2E:@? 2?5 DA@<6 @? E96 4@?5:E:@? @7 2?@?J>:EJ[ D2:5 $F?52J’D AFCDF:E :?G@=G65 “2 D2?4E:@?65 52C< 7=66E G6DD6= E92E 😀 A2CE @7 ‘6?6KF6=2’D :==682= D2?4E:@?D 6G2D:@?]”k^Am

    kAm%96 @77:4:2= D2:5 E96 G6DD6= H2D 7=J:?8 2 72=D6 7=28 2?5 F?56C 2 ;F5:4:2= D6:KFC6 @C56C]k^Am

    kAm%96 !6?E28@? 2?5 s6A2CE>6?E @7 w@>6=2?5 $64FC:EJ[ H9:49 @G6CD66D E96 &]$] r@2DE vF2C5[ 5676CC65 BF6DE:@?D 23@FE E96 @A6C2E:@? E@ E96 (9:E6 w@FD6[ H9:49 5:5 ?@E @776C 4@>>6?E @? E96 @A6C2E:@?]k^Am

    kAm%96 k2 9C67lQ9EEADi^^2A?6HD]4@>^2CE:4=6^G6?6KF6=2G6DD6=>6C492?E:?E6C?2E:@?2=H2E6CD6gf37cbcfd26af6d64aaabh55g`d_6_eQmAC652H? D6:KFC6k^2m @7 2 !2?2>27=28865 G6DD6=[ r6?EFC:6D[ @? $2EFC52J E2C86E65 H92E E96 (9:E6 w@FD6 56D4C:365 2D 2 “72=D6=J 7=28865 G6DD6= @A6C2E:?8 2D A2CE @7 E96 ‘6?6KF6=2? D925@H 7=66E E@ EC277:4 DE@=6? @:=]”k^Am

    kAm%96 r@2DE vF2C5[ H:E9 2DD:DE2?46 7C@> E96 }2GJ[ k2 9C67lQ9EEADi^^2A?6HD]4@>^2CE:4=6^ECF>AE2?<6CD6:K65G6?6KF6=2>25FC@_2`cg32_`egc74e46`2aag55afefba4_QmD6:K65 2 D2?4E:@?65 E2?<6C 42==65 $<:AA6Ck^2m @? s64] `_[ 2?@E96C k2 9C67lQ9EEADi^^2A?6HD]4@>^2CE:4=6^G6?6KF6=2@:=ECF>AD2?4E:@?D>25FC@2a67d3cd3cgbedge`6_2fac5g4af546bQmA2CE @7 E96 D925@H 7=66E @7 E2?<6CDk^2m E92E E96 &]$] D2JD @A6C2E6D @? E96 7C:?86D @7 E96 =2H E@ >@G6 D2?4E:@?65 42C8@] xE H2D ?@E 6G6? 7=J:?8 2 ?2E:@?’D 7=28 H96? :E H2D D6:K65 3J E96 r@2DE vF2C5]k^Am

    kAmk2 9C67lQ9EEADi^^2A?6HD]4@>^9F3^5@?2=5ECF>AQm!C6D:56?E s@?2=5 %CF>A[k^2m 27E6C E92E 7:CDE D6:KFC6[ D2:5 E92E E96 &]$] H@F=5 42CCJ @FE 2 “3=@4<256” @7 ‘6?6KF6=2] xE 2== 4@>6D 2D %CF>A 92D C2E496E65 FA 9:D C96E@C:4 E@H2C5 ‘6?6KF6=2? k2 9C67lQ9EEADi^^2A?6HD]4@>^9F3^?:4@=2D>25FC@Qm!C6D:56?E }:4@=áD |25FC@k^2m]k^Am

    kAm%9:D A2DE H66<[ %CF>A 56>2?565 E92E ‘6?6KF6=2 C6EFC? 2DD6ED E92E :E D6:K65 7C@> &]$] @:= 4@>A2?:6D J62CD 28@[ ;FDE:7J:?8 2?6H 9:D 2??@F?46>6?E @7 2 k2 9C67lQ9EEADi^^2A?6HD]4@>^2CE:4=6^ECF>AG6?6KF6=2>25FC@@:=E2?<6CDead2f4h2b`_e6b`e4hf463eg2ca2`43dQm“3=@4<256” 282:?DE @:= E2?<6CD EC2G6=:?8k^2m E@ @C 7C@> E96 $@FE9 p>6C:42? 4@F?ECJ E92E 7246 p>6C:42? D2?4E:@?D]k^Am

    kAm%CF>A 4:E65 E96 =@DE &]$] :?G6DE>6?ED 😕 ‘6?6KF6=2 H96? 2D<65 23@FE 9:D ?6H6DE E24E:4 😕 2 k2 9C67lQ9EEADi^^2A?6HD]4@>^2CE:4=6^ECF>A>25FC@G6?6KF6=25CF842CE6=D>:=:E2CJE:>6=:?6h`6aca6d4de664bh3e3f5fa37dd535a5QmAC6DDFC6 42>A2:8?k^2m 282:?DE |25FC@[ DF886DE:?8 E96 #6AF3=:42? 25>:?:DEC2E:@?’D >@G6D 2C6 2E =62DE D@>6H92E >@E:G2E65 3J 5:DAFE6D @G6C @:= :?G6DE>6?ED[ 2=@?8 H:E9 244FD2E:@?D @7 5CF8 EC277:4<:?8] $@>6 D2?4E:@?65 E2?<6CD 2=C625J 2C6 k2 9C67lQ9EEADi^^2A?6HD]4@>^2CE:4=6^G6?6KF6=2@:=E2?<6CD>25FC@ECF>A3=@4<256ace_6hg6c4d_c45a2`4ge3hd`6gad_`bQm5:G6CE:?8 2H2J 7C@> ‘6?6KF6=2k^2m]k^Am

    kAm&]$] @:= 4@>A2?:6D 5@>:?2E65 k2 9C67lQ9EEADi^^2A?6HD]4@>^2CE:4=6^G6?6KF6=2>25FC@@:=ECF>A3=@4<2567@@5D9@CE286D56d_cbcb5a“ggc_7c`344_47efgg67cQm’6?6KF6=2’D A6EC@=6F> :?5FDECJk^2m F?E:= E96 4@F?ECJ’D =6256CD >@G65 E@ ?2E:@?2=:K6 E96 D64E@C[ 7:CDE 😕 E96 `hf_D 2?5 282:? 😕 E96 a`DE 46?EFCJ F?56C |25FC@ 2?5 9:D AC65646DD@C[ wF8@ r9áG6K] r@>A6?D2E:@? @776C65 3J ‘6?6KF6=2 H2D 566>65 :?DF77:4:6?E[ 2?5 😕 a_`c[ 2? :?E6C?2E:@?2= 2C3:EC2E:@? A2?6= @C56C65 E96 4@F?ECJ’D D@4:2=:DE 8@G6C?>6?E E@ A2J S`]e 3:==:@? E@ tII@?|@3:=]k^Am

    kAm|25FC@ D2:5 😕 2 >6DD286 $F?52J @? %6=68C2> E92E ‘6?6KF6=2 92D DA6?E >@?E9D “56?@F?4:?8[ 492==6?8:?8 2?5 56762E:?8 2 42>A2:8? @7 288C6DD:@? E92E 8@6D 7C@> ADJ49@=@8:42= E6CC@C:D> E@ 4@CD2:CD 2EE24<:?8 @:= E2?<6CD]”k^Am

    kAmw6 25565i “(6 2C6 C625J E@ 2446=6C2E6 E96 A246 @7 @FC 566A C6G@=FE:@?P”k^Am

    kAm$6?] #2?5 !2F=[ #zJ][ H9@ 92D 366? 4C:E:42= @7 %CF>A’D ‘6?6KF6=2 A@=:4J[ 42==65 E96 E2?<6C D6:KFC6D 2 “AC@G@42E:@? 2?5 2 AC6=F56 E@ H2C]”k^Am

    kAm“{@@<[ 2E 2?J A@:?E 😕 E:>6[ E96C6 2C6 a_[ b_ 8@G6C?>6?ED 2C@F?5 E96 H@C=5 E92E H6 5@?’E =:<6 E92E 2C6 6:E96C D@4:2=:DE @C 4@>>F?:DE @C 92G6 9F>2? C:89ED G:@=2E:@?D[” !2F= D2:5 @? pqr’D’ “%9:D (66<]” ”qFE :E :D?’E E96 ;@3 @7 E96 p>6C:42? D@=5:6C E@ 36 E96 A@=:46>2? @7 E96 H@C=5]”k^Am

    kAm%96 E2C86E:?8 @7 E2?<6CD 4@>6D 2D %CF>A 92D @C56C65 E96 s676?D6 s6A2CE>6?E E@ 42CCJ @FE 2 D6C:6D @7 2EE24:?:DEC2E:@? 2==686D 2C6 D>F88=:?8 76?E2?J= 2?5 @E96C :==682= 5CF8D :?E@ E96 &?:E65 $E2E6D 2?5 36J@?5]k^Am

    kAmpE =62DE `_c A6@A=6 92G6 366? <:==65 😕 k2 9C67lQ9EEADi^^2A?6HD]4@>^2CE:4=6^ECF>AA6EC@4@=@>3:25CF8DFD2:54bhdd3a46bd`fbf“hha_fc“fg6_defQmag 36C] %96 DEC:<6D 92G6 72465 D4CFE:?J 7C@> &]$] =2H>2<6CD 2?5 9F>2? C:89ED 24E:G:DED[ H9@ D2J E96 25>:?:DEC2E:@? 92D @776C65 D42?E 6G:56?46 E92E :ED E2C86ED 2C6 :?5665 5CF8 D>F88=6CD 2?5 E92E E96 72E2= DEC:<6D 2>@F?E E@ 6IEC2;F5:4:2= <:==:?8D]k^Am

    kAm%CF>A 92D C6A62E65=J D2:5 |25FC@’D 52JD 😕 A@H6C 2C6 ?F>36C65] (9:E6 w@FD6 49:67 @7 DE277 $FD:6 (:=6D D2:5 k2 9C67lQ9EEADi^^2A?6HD]4@>^2CE:4=6^DFD:6H:=6D:?E6CG:6H5@?2=5ECF>A2h3ca37_dg_7h6357hb2cd6f5`hbga7dQm:? 2? :?E6CG:6H H:E9 ‘2?:EJ u2:Ck^2m AF3=:D965 =2DE H66< E92E %CF>A “H2?ED E@ <66A @? 3=@H:?8 3@2ED FA F?E:= |25FC@ 4C:6D F?4=6]”k^Am

    kAm$6?] %:> z2:?6[ s’2][ E@=5 }qr’D “|66E E96 !C6DD” @? $F?52J E92E %CF>A’D FD6 @7 >:=:E2CJ E@ >@F?E AC6DDFC6 @? |25FC@ CF?D 4@?EC2CJ E@ %CF>A’D A=6586 E@ <66A E96 &?:E65 $E2E6D @FE @7 F??646DD2CJ H2CD]k^Am

    Copyright 2025 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed without permission.

    [ad_2]

    By AAMER MADHANI – Associated Press

    Source link

  • Trump’s return brought stiff headwinds for clean energy. So why are advocates optimistic in 2026?

    [ad_1]

    There were some highs amid a lot of lows in a roller coaster year for clean energy as President Donald Trump worked to boost polluting fuels while blocking wind and solar, according to dozens of energy developers, experts and politicians.

    Surveyed by The Associated Press, many described 2025 as turbulent and challenging for clean energy, though there was progress as projects connected to the electric grid. They said clean energy must continue to grow to meet skyrocketing demand for electricity to power data centers and to lower Americans’ utility bills.

    Solar builder and operator Jorge Vargas said it has been “a very tough year for clean energy” as Trump often made headlines criticizing renewable energy and Republicans muscled a tax and spending cut bill through Congress in July that dramatically rolled back tax breaks for clean energy.

    “There was a cooldown effect this year,” said Vargas, cofounder and CEO of Aspen Power. “Having said that, we are a resilient industry.”

    Plug Power president Jose Luis Crespo said the developments — both policy recalibration and technological progress — will shape clean energy’s trajectory for years to come.

    Much of clean energy’s fate in 2025 was driven by booster Joe Biden’s exit from the White House.

    The year began with ample federal subsidies for clean energy technologies, a growing number of U.S.-based companies making parts and materials for projects and a lot of demand from states and corporations, said Tom Harper, partner at global consultant Baringa.

    It ends with subsidies stripped back, a weakened supply chain, higher costs from tariffs and some customers questioning their commitment to clean energy, Harper said. He described the year as “paradigm shifting.”

    Trump called wind and solar power “the scam of the century” and vowed not to approve new projects. The federal government canceled grants for hundreds of projects.

    The Republicans’ tax bill reversed or steeply curtailed clean energy programs established through the Democrats’ flagship climate and health care bill in 2022. Wayne Winegarden, at the Pacific Research Institute think tank, said the time has come for alternative energy to demonstrate viability without subsidies. ( Fossil fuels also receive subsidies.)

    Many energy executives said this was the most consequential policy shift. The bill reshaped the economics of clean energy projects, drove a rush to start construction before incentives expire and forced developers to reassess their strategies for acquiring parts and materials, Lennart Hinrichs said. He leads the expansion of TWAICE in the Americas, providing analytics software for battery energy storage systems.

    Companies can’t make billion-dollar investments with so much policy uncertainty, said American Clean Power Association CEO Jason Grumet.

    Consequently, greenhouse gas emissions will fall at a much lower rate than previously projected in the U.S., said Brian Murray, director of the Nicholas Institute for Energy, Environment and Sustainability at Duke University.

    Solar and storage accounted for 85% of the new power added to the grid in the first nine months of the Trump administration, according to Wood Mackenzie research.

    That’s because the economics remain strong, demand is high and the technologies can be deployed quickly, said Mike Hall, CEO of Anza Renewables.

    Solar energy company Sol Systems said it had a record year as it brought its largest utility-scale project online and grew its business. The energy storage systems company CMBlu Energy said storage clearly stands out as a winner this year too, moving from optional to essential.

    “Trump’s effort to manipulate government regulation to harm clean energy just isn’t enough to offset the natural advantages that clean energy has,” Democratic U.S. Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse said. “The direction is still all good.”

    The Solar Energy Industries Association said that no matter the policies in Washington, solar and storage will grow as the backbone of the nation’s energy future.

    Democrats and Republicans have supported investing to keep nuclear reactors online, restart previously closed reactors and deploy new, advanced reactor designs. Nuclear power is a carbon-free source of electricity, though not typically labeled as green energy like other renewables.

    “Who had ‘restart Three Mile Island’ on their 2025 Bingo card?” questioned Baringa partner David Shepheard. The Pennsylvania plant was the site of the nation’s worst commercial nuclear power accident, in 1979. The Energy Department is loaning $1 billion to help finance a restart.

    Everyone loves nuclear, said Darrin Kayser, executive vice president at Edelman. It helps that the technology for small, modular reactors is starting to come to fruition, Kayser added.

    Benton Arnett, a senior director at the Nuclear Energy Institute, said that as the need for clean, reliable power intensifies, “we will look back on the actions being taken now as laying the foundation.”

    The Trump administration also supports geothermal energy, and the tax bill largely preserved geothermal tax credits. The Geothermal Rising association said technologies continue to mature and produce, making 2025 a breakthrough year.

    Momentum for offshore wind in the United States came to a grinding halt just as the industry was starting to gain traction, said Joey Lange, a senior managing director at Trio, a global sustainability and energy advisory company.

    The Trump administration stopped construction on major offshore wind farms, revoked wind energy permits and paused permitting, canceled plans to use large areas of federal waters for new offshore wind development and stopped federal funding for offshore wind projects.

    That has decimated the projects, developers and tech innovators, and no one in wind is raising or spending capital, said Eric Fischgrund, founder and CEO at FischTank PR. Still, Fischgrund said he remains optimistic because the world is transitioning to cleaner energy.

    An energy strategy with a diverse mix of sources is the only way forward as demand grows from data centers and other sources, and as people demand affordable, reliable electricity, said former Democratic Sen. Mary Landrieu. Landrieu, now with Natural Allies for a Clean Energy Future, said promoting or punishing specific energy technologies on ideological grounds is unsustainable.

    Experts expect solar and battery storage to continue growing in 2026 to add a lot of power to the grid quickly and cheaply. The market will continue to ensure that most new electricity is renewable, said Amanda Levin, policy analysis director at the Natural Resources Defense Council.

    Hillary Bright, executive director of Turn Forward, thinks offshore wind will still play an important role too. It is both ready and needed to help address the demand for electricity in the new year, which will become increasingly clear “to all audiences,” she said. Turn Forward advocates for offshore wind.

    That skyrocketing demand “is shaking up the political calculus that drove the administration’s early policy decisions around renewables,” she said.

    BlueWave CEO Sean Finnerty thinks that states, feeling the pressure to deliver affordable, reliable electricity, will increasingly drive clean energy momentum in 2026 by streamlining permitting and the process of connecting to the grid, and by reducing costs for things like permits and fees.

    Ed Gunn, Lunar Energy’s vice president for revenue, said the industry has weathered tough years before.

    “The fundamentals are unchanged,” Gunn said, “there is massive value in clean energy.”

    ___

    The Associated Press’ climate and environmental coverage receives financial support from multiple private foundations. AP is solely responsible for all content. Find AP’s standards for working with philanthropies, a list of supporters and funded coverage areas at AP.org.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • India’s Parliament approves bill to open civil nuclear power sector to private firms

    [ad_1]

    NEW DELHI — India’s Parliament approved new legislation Thursday that enables opening the tightly controlled civil nuclear power sector to private companies.

    The government termed it a major policy shift to speed up clean energy expansion while the opposition political parties argued that it dilutes safety and liability safeguards.

    The lower house of parliament passed the legislation Wednesday and the upper house on Thursday. It now needs the assent from the Indian president, which is a formality, to come into force.

    The move carries global significance as India seeks to position itself as a major player in the next wave of nuclear energy, including with small modular reactors at a time many nations are reassessing nuclear power to meet climate targets and reduce dependence on fossil fuels.

    Supporters argue the legislation marks a decisive break from decades of state dominance in nuclear energy while critics say it opens the door to risks, mainly health hazards, that could have long term consequences.

    “It marks a momentous milestone for India and signals capable private sector players that the country is open for business in the nuclear energy space,” said Karthik Ganesan, director of strategic partnerships at the Council on Energy, Environment and Water, a think tank.

    Junior Minister Jitendra Singh, who oversees the department of atomic energy, told lawmakers that the bill — which has been dubbed Sustainable Harnessing and Advancement of Nuclear Energy for Transforming India — seeks to modernize India’s nuclear framework in line with technological, economic and energy realities. It also retains and strengthens core safety, security and regulatory safeguards.

    “India’s role in geopolitics is increasing. And if we have to be a global player effectively, we have to live up to global benchmarks, follow global parameters and adopt global strategies,” Singh said in the lower house, adding that the legislation was necessary to address the country’s growing energy needs.

    India wants more nuclear power and has pledged over $2 billion in recent months toward research and allied activities. Nuclear power is a way to make electricity that doesn’t emit planet-warming gases, although it does create radioactive waste.

    India is one of the world’s biggest emitters of planet-heating gases and over 75% of its power is still generated by burning fossil fuels, mostly coal. India wants to install 100 gigawatts of nuclear power by 2047 — enough to power nearly 60 million Indian homes a year.

    Energy experts say that for the world to move away from carbon-polluting fuels like coal, oil and gas, sources like nuclear that don’t rely on the sun and the wind — which aren’t always available — are needed. But some are skeptical about India’s ambitions as the country’s nuclear sector is still very small, and negative public perceptions about the industry remain.

    Opposition parties flagged concerns related to several provisions of the bill and urged the government to refer it to a parliamentary panel for examination. The government didn’t adhere to the request.

    “The bill doesn’t have sufficient safeguards when it comes to mitigating the bad health of those impacted by living in areas closer to nuclear plants,” Ashok Mittal, a lawmaker from the opposition Aam Admi Party, told The Associated Press.

    G. Sundarrajan, an anti-nuclear energy activist, called the bill a “disastrous law,” saying it takes away essential safeguards that are needed to make sure companies invest in safety and reduce the chances of a major disaster that can impact millions from occurring.

    “It also provides little recourse for any Indian citizen to claim damages from nuclear companies even if they are affected by radiation leaks or suffer from any other health impact as a result of a nuclear plant in their region,” he said.

    ___

    AP journalist Sibi Arasu contributed to this report.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • China exploits US-funded research on nuclear technology, a congressional report says

    [ad_1]

    WASHINGTON — China is exploiting partnerships with U.S. researchers funded by the Department of Energy to provide the Chinese military with access to sensitive nuclear technology and other innovations with economic and national security applications, according to a congressional report published Wednesday.

    The authors of the report say the U.S. must do more to protect high-tech research and ensure that the results of taxpayer-funded work don’t end up benefiting Beijing. They recommended several changes to better protect scientific research in the U.S., including new policies for the Department of Energy to use when deciding whether to fund work that involves Chinese partnerships.

    The investigation is part of a congressional push to raise a firewall blocking U.S. research from boosting China’s military buildup when the two countries are locked in a tech and arms rivalry that will shape the future global order.

    Investigators from the House Select Committee on the Chinese Communist Party and the House Committee on Education and the Workforce identified more than 4,300 academic papers published between June 2023 and June of this year that involved collaborations between DOE-funded scientists and Chinese researchers. About half of the papers involved Chinese researchers affiliated with China’s military or industrial base.

    Particularly concerning, investigators found that federal funds went to research collaborations with Chinese state-owned laboratories and universities that work directly for China’s military, including some listed in a Pentagon database of Chinese military companies with operations in the U.S. The report also detailed collaborations between U.S. researchers and groups blamed for cyberattacks as well as human rights abuses in China.

    The Energy Department routinely funds advanced research into nuclear energy and the development and disposal of nuclear weaponry, along with a long list of other high-tech fields like quantum computing, materials science and physics. It doles out hundreds of millions of dollars each year for research. The department oversees 17 national laboratories that have led the development in many technologies.

    The report followed a number of congressional investigations into federally funded research involving Chinese scientists and researchers. Last year, a report released by Republicans found that partnerships between U.S. and Chinese universities over the past decade had allowed hundreds of millions of dollars in federal funding to help Beijing develop critical technology that could help strengthen its military. Another investigation this year revealed that the Pentagon in a recent two-year period funded hundreds of projects in collaboration with Chinese entities linked to China’s defense industry.

    The Energy Department has failed for decades to take steps to ensure the research it funds doesn’t benefit China, the report’s authors found. They made several recommendations to tighten the rules, including a new standardized approach to assessing the national security risks of research, as well as requirements that the department share information about research ties with China with other U.S. government agencies to make it easier to spot problems.

    “These longstanding policy failures and inaction have left taxpayer-funded research vulnerable to exploitation by China’s defense research and industrial base and state-directed technology transfer activities,” the authors concluded.

    The Department of Energy did not immediately respond to questions about the report and its recommendations. A message seeking comment was left with the Chinese Embassy in Washington.

    Rep. John Moolenaar, a Michigan Republican who chairs the select committee, said in a statement that the “investigation reveals a deeply alarming problem: The Department of Energy failed to ensure the security of its research and it put American taxpayers on the hook for funding the military rise of our nation’s foremost adversary.”

    Moolenaar this year introduced legislation aimed at preventing research funding in science and technology and defense from going to collaborations or partnerships with “foreign adversary-controlled” entities that pose a national security risk.

    The legislation cleared the House but failed to advance to become part of the annual sweeping defense policy bill. It was met with strong opposition from scientists and researchers, who argued that the measures were too broad and could chill collaboration and undermine America’s competitive edge in science and technology.

    In an October letter, a group of more than 750 faculty members and senior staffers from American universities told congressional leaders overseeing the armed services that the U.S. is in a global competition for talent. They called for “very careful and targeted measures for risk management” to address security concerns.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Judge overturns Trump order blocking wind permits

    [ad_1]

    BOSTON — A federal judge gave the go-ahead for Massachusetts and other states to proceed with wind energy expansion by rejecting an executive order signed by President Donald Trump halting permits for clean energy projects.

    The ruling by U.S. District Court Judge Patti Saris on Monday sides with Massachusetts Attorney General Andrea Campbell and 16 other Democrats who challenged Trump’s authority to enforce an order Jan. 20 that halted several offshore wind energy projects along the Atlantic Coast from Maine to New Jersey.

    This page requires Javascript.

    Javascript is required for you to be able to read premium content. Please enable it in your browser settings.

    kAm$2C:D 564=2C65 %CF>A’D @C56C “:==682=” 😕 96C CF=:?8 2?5 D2:5 E96 7656C2= 8@G6C?>6?E’D 564:D:@? E@ :?567:?:E6=J C67FD6 E@ 4@?D:56C 2AA=:42E:@?D 7@C @77D9@C6 2?5 @?D9@C6 H:?5 AC@;64ED H2D “2C3:EC2CJ 2?5 42AC:4:@FD” 2?5 G:@=2E6D E96 7656C2= p5>:?:DEC2E:G6 !C@465FC6 p4E]k^Am

    kAm“%96 AC@@7 😀 😕 E96 AF55:?8i }@ A6C>:ED 92G6 366? :DDF65 D:?46 E96 (:?5 ~C56C H2D AC@>F=82E65[ 2?5 E96 286?4J 5676?52?ED 24:ED 2E =62DE F?E:= E96J 4@>A=6E6 E96 r@>AC696?D:G6 pDD6DD>6?E[ 7@C H9:49 E96C6 😀 ?@ E:>6=:?6[” $2C:D HC@E6 😕 E96 cfA286 CF=:?8] “%92E 24E:@? 😀 4@?EC2CJ E@ =2H]”k^Am

    kAmr2>A36== D2:5 E96 CF=:?8 AC@E64ED 9F?5C65D @7 >:==:@?D @7 5@==2CD 😕 :?G6DE>6?ED E96 DE2E6 >256 😕 @77D9@C6 H:?5 56G6=@A>6?E 2D :E AFCDF6D :ED 4=62? 6?6C8J 8@2=D]k^Am

    kAm“%9:D 4C:E:42= G:4E@CJ 2=D@ AC6D6CG6D H6==A2J:?8 8C66? ;@3D 2?5 2446DD E@ C6=:23=6[ 277@C523=6 6?6C8J E92E H:== 96=A |2DD249FD6EED >66E @FC 4=62? 6?6C8J 2?5 4=:>2E6 8@2=D[” r2>A36== D2:5 😕 2 DE2E6>6?E]k^Am

    kAm%CF>A[ H9@ @AA@D6D H:?5 2?5 D@=2C 6?6C8J[ 92D D@F89E E@ :?4C62D6 8@G6C?>6?E DFAA@CE 7@C 7@DD:= 7F6=D E@ >2I:>:K6 E96 ?2E:@?’D @FEAFE 2D E96 H@C=5’D E@A @:= 2?5 ?2EFC2= 82D AC@5F46C 2?5 E@ 7F=7:== E96 #6AF3=:42?’D 42>A2:8? AC@>:D6 E@ “5C:==[ 323J[ 5C:==” :7 6=64E65 E@ E96 AC6D:56?4J 7@C 2 D64@?5 E6C>]k^Am

    kAmx? $6AE6>36C[ %CF>A 5:C64E65 E96 &]$] s6A2CE>6?E @7 %C2?DA@CE2E:@? E@ 42?46= Sefh >:==:@? 😕 7656C2= 7F?5:?8 7@C 2 5@K6? :?7C2DECF4EFC6 AC@;64ED E92E H@F=5 DFAA@CE }6H t?8=2?5 (:?5 2?5 @E96C AC@;64ED[ D2J:?8 E96 A=2?D “H6C6 ?@E 2=:8?65 H:E9 E96 8@2=D 2?5 AC:@C:E:6D @7 E96 25>:?:DEC2E:@?]”k^Am

    kAm%96 4FED :?4=F565 2 7656C2= 8C2?E 7@C E96 $2=6> ~77D9@C6 (:?5 %6C>:?2= AC@;64E[ H9:49 8@E F?56CH2J =2DE DF>>6C 27E6C C646:G:?8 7F?5:?8 2?5 DE2E6 2?5 7656C2= A6C>:ED]k^Am

    kAm%96 Sb__ >:==:@? $2=6> ~77D9@C6 (:?5 %6C>:?2=[ 2 A2CE?6CD9:A 36EH66? rC@H=6J (:?5 $6CG:46D[ $2=6> 2?5 E96 |2DD249FD6EED r=62? t?6C8J r6?E6C[ 42==D 7@C C656G6=@A:?8 2 ca24C6 D:E6 7@C>6C=J @44FA:65 3J 2 4@2= 2?5 @:=7:C65 A@H6C A=2?E]k^Am

    kAm%96 A=2?D 42== 7@C FD:?8 E96 D:E6 2D 2 DE28:?8 2C62 7@C 2DD6>3=:?8 2?5 EC2?DA@CE:?8 H:?5 EFC3:?6 4@>A@?6?ED E@ }6H t?8=2?5 (:?5 2?5 @E96C @77D9@C6 H:?5 72C>D]k^Am

    kAmp (9:E6 w@FD6 DA@<6DA6CD@? 5676?565 E96 %CF>A 25>:?:DEC2E:@?’D A@=:4:6D @? AC@>@E:?8 7@DD:= 7F6=D[ D2J:?8 E96 AC6D:56?E’D y2?F2CJ @C56C “F?=62D965 p>6C:42’D 6?6C8J 5@>:?2?46]”k^Am

    kAm“&?56C y@6 q:56?’D vC66? }6H $42>[ @77D9@C6 H:?5 AC@;64ED H6C6 8:G6? F?72:C[ AC676C6?E:2= EC62E>6?E H9:=6 E96 C6DE @7 E96 6?6C8J :?5FDECJ H2D 9:?56C65 3J 3FC56?D@>6 C68F=2E:@?D[” (9:E6 w@FD6 DA@<6DH@>2? %2J=@C #@86CD D2:5 😕 2 DE2E6>6?E]k^Am

    kAm|2DD249FD6EED 92D D6E D@>6 @7 E96 E@F896DE 6?G:C@?>6?E2= C68F=2E:@?D 😕 E96 4@F?ECJ H:E9 2 8@2= @7 C6249:?8 “?6EK6C@” 8C66?9@FD6 82D 6>:DD:@?D C6=2E:G6 E@ `hh_ =6G6=D 3J a_d_] %@ >66E E9@D6 8@2=D[ E96 DE2E6 92D D6E 2 8@2= E@ 86?6C2E6 2E =62DE d[e__ >682H2EED @7 @77D9@C6 H:?5 A@H6C 3J a_af]k^Am

    kAm%96 DE2E6 😀 H@C<:?8 H:E9 #9@56 xD=2?5 @? E9C66 AC@;64ED E@E2=:?8 a[efg >682H2EED @7 @77D9@C6 H:?5[ H9:49 :?4=F56D E96 }6H t?8=2?5 (:?5 a AC@;64E] (96? 4@>A=6E65[ E96 H:?5 EFC3:?6D H:== 36 42A23=6 @7 AC@G:5:?8 6?@F89 6=64EC:4:EJ E@ A@H6C >@C6 E92? `]c >:==:@? 9@>6D]k^Am

    kAmxE 😀 2=D@ A2CE @7 E96 !@H6C &A }6H t?8=2?5 :?:E:2E:G6 H:E9 r@??64E:4FE[ |2:?6[ }6H w2>AD9:C6[ #9@56 xD=2?5 2?5 ‘6C>@?E 2?5 D6G6C2= FE:=:E:6D — H9:49 42==D 7@C 6IA2?5:?8 :?E6C4@??64E:@? A@:?ED 7@C F?56CD62 423=6D E92E H:== 6G6?EF2==J 3C:?8 A@H6C 7C@> @77D9@C6 H:?5 EFC3:?6D E@ E96 C68:@?2= 8C:5]k^Am

    kAm|62?H9:=6[ E96 ‘:?6J2C5 (:?5 AC@;64E @77 |2CE92’D ‘:?6J2C5 😀 23@FE d_T 4@>A=6E6] %96 AC@;64E 42==D 7@C ea EFC3:?6D 42A23=6 @7 D6?5:?8 FA E@ c__ >682H2EED E@ E96 C68:@?2= 6=64EC:4 8C:5]k^Am

    kAm%H@ >2;@C @77D9@C6 H:?5 56G6=@A6CD 😕 |2DD249FD6EED – r@>>@?H62=E9 (:?5 2?5 $96== 2?5 ~462? (:?5D }@CE9 p>6C:42 – E6C>:?2E65 E96:C A@H6C AFC492D6 28C66>6?ED H:E9 E96 DE2E6’D FE:=:E:6D 😕 a_ab[ 4:E:?8 DFAA=J 492:? :DDF6D 2?5 @E96C 4@?46C?D E92E 92G6 >256 :E E@@ 5:77:4F=E E@ 7:?2?46 E96 AC@;64ED]k^Am

    kAm(:?5 AC@G:56D 23@FE `_T @7 E96 6=64EC:4:EJ 86?6C2E65 😕 E96 &]$][ >2<:?8 :E E96 ?2E:@?’D =2C86DE D@FC46 @7 C6?6H23=6 6?6C8J[ 244@C5:?8 E@ 7656C2= 52E2]k^Am

    kAmr9C:DE:2? |] (256 4@G6CD E96 |2DD249FD6EED $E2E69@FD6 7@C }@CE9 @7 q@DE@? |65:2 vC@FAUCDBF@jD ?6HDA2A6CD 2?5 H63D:E6D] t>2:= 9:> 2E k2 9C67lQ>2:=E@i4H256o4?9:?6HD]4@>Qm4H256o4?9:?6HD]4@>k^2m]k^Am

    [ad_2]

    By Christian M. Wade | Statehouse Reporter

    Source link

  • Lawsuit challenges the approval of an exploratory drilling program in Alaska

    [ad_1]

    JUNEAU, Alaska — Conservation groups and an Iñupiat-aligned group sued Thursday to overturn the recent approval of an exploratory drilling program in the National Petroleum Reserve-Alaska, saying it was improperly analyzed by the federal government and could harm caribou and important habitat areas.

    The U.S. Bureau of Land Management approved a one-year program proposed by ConocoPhillips Alaska last month that included seismic surveys aimed at helping identify oil and gas reserves and plans to drill four exploration wells. Activities would occur near existing ConocoPhillips Alaska developments, including the large Willow oil project, the lawsuit states.

    The complaint, filed by Earthjustice on behalf of Sovereign Iñupiat for a Living Arctic, the Center for Biological Diversity and The Wilderness Society, says the process around the company’s application and its subsequent approval lacked transparency and was rushed. A final decision was issued days after a limited public comment period ended, it says.

    The Bureau of Land Management “has pushed this project through without proper analysis or process and without considering the significant flaws in the measures it relies on to justify its approval of the exploration program,” the lawsuit states.

    It names as defendants the Bureau of Land Management and its parent agency, the Department of the Interior, along with top officials including Interior Secretary Doug Burgum.

    Interior Department spokesperson Alyse Sharpe said the department does not comment on pending litigation.

    Dennis Nuss, a spokesperson for ConocoPhillips Alaska, said in an email that the company is confident in the “robustness” of its plan and permits and looks forward to completing its work within the limited winter exploration season.

    There has been longstanding debate over how much of the petroleum reserve — which covers an area roughly the size of Indiana — should be open for development. President Donald Trump’s administration has moved to roll back limits on drilling and protections enacted during the Biden administration, and a law passed this year calls for the first lease sales in the reserve since 2019.

    The push has been cheered by the state’s Republican congressional delegation and governor, but it raised concerns among environmentalists who caution against the continued embrace of new oil production in the face of climate change. The reserve is home to Teshekpuk Lake, the largest lake in Alaska’s arctic region and third-largest in the state.

    Nauri Simmonds, executive director of Sovereign Iñupiat for a Living Arctic, said the proposed exploration program is “not only an assault on caribou and tundra — it is another chapter in the enfoldment of our people into systems designed to fracture us from within.”

    “Sovereign Iñupiat for a Living Arctic stands against this approval because our future depends on protecting our homelands, our unity, and our right to live free from the harms of industrial expansion,” Simmonds said in a statement.

    The group describes itself online as “an organization of Iñupiat Peoples and community members that believe in a balanced Earth for future generations.”

    There are differing views among Alaska Natives, however, over further oil development in places like the petroleum reserve. A group representing many North Slope leaders, Voice of the Arctic Iñupiat, has supported efforts to drill there.

    The lawsuit says work under the proposed program could begin “any day” and last until April or May.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Canada’s prime minister and Alberta’s premier sign pipeline deal

    [ad_1]

    TORONTO — TORONTO (AP) — Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney and the premier of Canada’s oil rich province of Alberta agreed Thursday to work toward building a pipeline to the Pacific Coast to diversify the country’s oil exports beyond the United States, in a move that has caused turmoil in Carney’s inner circle.

    The memorandum of understanding includes an adjustment of an oil tanker ban off parts of the British Columbia coast if a pipeline comes to fruition.

    Carney’s support for it led to the resignation Thursday of one of his cabinet ministers, Steven Guilbeault, a former environment minister and career environmentalist who has been serving as the minister of culture.

    Guilbeault said in a statement he strongly opposes the agreement with Alberta, noting the pipeline could cross the Great Bear Rainforest and that it would increase the risk of a tanker spill on the coast. But he said he understands why Canada needs to remain united and said he will stay on as a Liberal Member of Parliament.

    Carney said he was glad Guilbeault is staying as a Liberal lawmaker.

    Carney has set a goal for Canada to double its non-U.S. exports in the next decade, saying American tariffs are causing a chill in investment.

    Alberta Premier Danielle Smith said the agreement will lead to more than 1 million barrels per day for mainly Asian markets so “our province and our country are no longer dependent on just one customer to buy our most valuable resource.”

    Carney reiterated that as the U.S. transforms all of its trading relationships, many of Canada’s strengths – based on those close ties to America – have become its vulnerabilities.

    “Over 95% of all our energy exports went to the States. This tight interdependence – once a strength – is now a weakness,” Carney said.

    Carney said a pipeline can reduce the price discount on current oil sales to U.S. markets.

    He called the framework agreement the start of a process.

    “We have created some of the necessary conditions for this to happen but there is a lot more work to do,” he said.

    Carney said if there is not a private sector proponent there won’t be a pipeline.

    The agreement calls on Ottawa and Alberta to engage with British Columbia, where there is fierce opposition to oil tankers off the coast, to advance that province’s economic interests.

    Former Prime Minister Justin Trudeau approved one controversial pipeline from the Alberta oil sands to the British Columbia coast in 2016 but the federal government had to build and finish construction of it as it faced opposition from environmental and aboriginal groups.

    Trudeau at the same time rejected the Northern Gateway project to northwest British Columbia which would have passed through the Great Bear Rainforest. Northern Gateway would have transported 525,000 barrels of oil a day from Alberta’s oil sands to the Pacific to deliver oil to Asia, mainly energy-hungry China.

    The northern Alberta region has one of the largest oil reserves in the world, with about 164 billion barrels of proven reserves.

    Carney’s announcement comes after British Columbia Premier David Eby said lifting the tanker ban would threaten projects already in development in the region and consensus among coastal First Nations.

    Eby said he knows the federal government could impose this pipeline if they wished.

    “What this is about is the fact that this project has no company that’s advancing it. It’s got no money. It’s got no coastal First Nations support,” he said.

    Eby said the agreement is a “distraction” to real projects.

    “We have zero interest in co-ownership or economic benefits of a project that has the potential to destroy our way of life and everything we have built on the coast,” Coastal First Nations President Marilyn Slett said.

    The agreement pairs the pipeline project a proposed carbon capture project and government officials say the two projects must be built in tandem.

    The agreement says Ottawa and Alberta will with work with companies to identify by April 1 new emissions-reduction projects to be rolled out starting in 2027.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Trump signs executive order for AI project called Genesis Mission to boost scientific discoveries

    [ad_1]

    President Donald Trump is directing the federal government to combine efforts with tech companies and universities to convert government data into scientific discoveries, acting on his push to make artificial intelligence the engine of the nation’s economic future.

    Trump unveiled the “Genesis Mission” as part of an executive order he signed Monday that directs the Department of Energy and national labs to build a digital platform to concentrate the nation’s scientific data in one place.

    It solicits private sector and university partners to use their AI capability to help the government solve engineering, energy and national security problems, including streamlining the nation’s electric grid, according to White House officials who spoke to reporters on condition of anonymity to describe the order before it was signed. Officials made no specific mention of seeking medical advances as part of the project.

    “The Genesis Mission will bring together our Nation’s research and development resources — combining the efforts of brilliant American scientists, including those at our national laboratories, with pioneering American businesses; world-renowned universities; and existing research infrastructure, data repositories, production plants, and national security sites — to achieve dramatic acceleration in AI development and utilization,” the executive order says.

    The administration portrayed the effort as the government’s most ambitious marshaling of federal scientific resources since the Apollo space missions of the late 1960s and early 1970s, even as it had cut billions of dollars in federal funding for scientific research and thousands of scientists had lost their jobs and funding.

    Trump is increasingly counting on the tech sector and the development of AI to power the U.S. economy, made clear last week as he hosted Saudi Arabia’s Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman. The monarch has committed to investing $1 trillion, largely from the Arab nation’s oil and natural gas reserves, to pivot his nation into becoming an AI data hub.

    For the U.S.’s part, funding was appropriated to the Energy Department as part of the massive tax-break and spending bill signed into law by Trump in July, White House officials said.

    As AI raises concerns that its heavy use of electricity may be contributing to higher utility rates in the nearer term, which is a political risk for Trump, administration officials argued that rates will come down as the technology develops. They said the increased demand will build capacity in existing transmission lines and bring down costs per unit of electricity.

    Data centers needed to fuel AI accounted for about 1.5% of the world’s electricity consumption last year, and those facilities’ energy consumption is predicted to more than double by 2030, according to the International Energy Agency. That increase could lead to burning more fossil fuels such as coal and natural gas, which release greenhouse gases that contribute to warming temperatures, sea level rise and extreme weather.

    The project will rely on national labs’ supercomputers but will also use supercomputing capacity being developed in the private sector. The project’s use of public data including national security information along with private sector supercomputers prompted officials to issue assurances that there would be controls to respect protected information.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Millions of Floridians’ utility bills will soon go up. Here’s what to know

    [ad_1]

    TALLAHASSEE, Fla. — Millions of electricity customers in President Donald Trump’s adopted home state of Florida will see their bills rise, after a regulatory board approved what environmental advocates say is one of the largest utility rate increases in the state’s history.

    The price hike will affect an estimated 12 million Floridians — roughly half the state’s population — at a time when voters are citing economic concerns as a top issue, and as Democrats and Republicans brace for a debate over affordability in the intensifying midterm battle to control Congress.

    The Florida Public Service Commission approved the rate increase Thursday for Florida Power & Light, the state’s largest power company, over the strong objections of advocates for the elderly, conservation groups, and the state-appointed advocate for Florida ratepayers, who called the proposal “disproportionately favorable” to corporate interests.

    In a statement, FPL said the rate increase is needed to make “smart, necessary investments in the grid to power Florida’s growth,” while keeping customers’ bills “well below the national average.”

    Here’s what to know.

    The new rates will kick in Jan. 1 and run through 2029. According to FPL, the monthly bill for a typical residential customer in most of Florida will go up by $2.50 a month, from about $134.14 to $136.64. Following other rate hikes in recent years, the average FPL customer will pay hundreds of dollars more each year than they did in 2021, when the typical monthly bill was $101.70, according to legal filings in the case.

    Across the south Atlantic region, which includes Florida, the average monthly electric bill cost residential customers $152.04 in 2024, according to the U.S. Energy Information Administration.

    Nationally, household electric bills are rising more rapidly than wages and inflation, according to a recent analysis by the National Energy Assistance Directors’ Association, with prices increasing by more than 10.5% between January and August of this year.

    Combined with higher consumer prices and higher energy costs caused by extreme weather events, lower income families are hit hardest by the increases, which advocates say are forcing some to choose whether to “eat or heat.”

    “Even modest rate increases can force painful trade-offs between paying energy bills and covering essentials such as food, rent, or medicine,” reads the NEADA analysis.

    FPL maintains that the rate increases are necessary to power the growing and hurricane-prone state. The Florida Public Service Commission, a state board appointed by Republican Gov. Ron DeSantis, approved the rate hike, instead of a counterproposal from the Florida Office of Public Counsel.

    A coalition of environmental conservation groups and consumer advocates opposed the rate hikes for months.

    “FPL should not be allowed to pad their profits on the backs of residential customers like me,” reads a petition circulated by AARP Florida. “Please consider the impact to residential customers and put our needs above corporate profits.”

    A bipartisan group of more than two dozen state and local elected officials also signed a joint letter to oppose the increase. Meanwhile, an influential Republican state senator has been calling for broader changes to the state agency responsible for regulating the utilities.

    Already, Trump is signaling that he’ll focus on affordability next year as he and Republicans try to maintain their slim congressional majorities, while Democrats are blaming Trump for rising household costs.

    Electricity costs were a key issue in this month’s elections for governor in New Jersey and Virginia, a data center hot spot, and in Georgia, where Democrats ousted two Republican incumbents for seats on the state’s utility regulatory commission.

    Voters in New Jersey, Virginia, California and New York City all cited economic concerns as the top issue. Rising electricity costs aren’t expected to ease and many Americans could see an increase on their monthly bills in the middle of next year’s campaigns.

    A recent analysis of consumer data found that more people are falling behind on paying their bills to keep on the lights and heat their homes — a warning sign for the U.S. economy that could drive voters’ decision making next year.

    ___

    Kate Payne is a corps member for The Associated Press/Report for America Statehouse News Initiative. Report for America is a nonprofit national service program that places journalists in local newsrooms to report on undercovered issues.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Trump admin announces plan for new oil drilling off coasts of California and Florida

    [ad_1]

    WASHINGTON — The Trump administration announced on Thursday new oil drilling off the California and Florida coasts for the first time in decades, advancing a project that critics say could harm coastal communities and ecosystems, as President Donald Trump seeks to expand U.S. oil production.

    The oil industry has been seeking access to new offshore areas, including Southern California and off the coast of Florida, as a way to boost U.S. energy security and jobs. The federal government has not allowed drilling in federal waters in the eastern Gulf of Mexico, which includes offshore Florida and part of offshore Alabama, since 1995, because of concerns about oil spills. California has some offshore oil rigs, but there has been no new leasing in federal waters since the mid-1980s.

    Since taking office for a second time in January, Trump has systematically reversed former President Joe Biden’s focus on slowing climate change to pursue what the Republican calls U.S. “energy dominance” in the global market. Trump, who recently called climate change “the greatest con job ever perpetrated on the world,” created a National Energy Dominance Council and directed it to move quickly to drive up already record-high U.S. energy production, particularly fossil fuels such as oil, coal and natural gas.

    Meanwhile, Trump’s administration has blocked renewable energy sources such as offshore wind and canceled billions of dollars in grants that supported hundreds of clean energy projects across the country.

    Even before it was released, the offshore drilling plan has been met with strong opposition from California Gov. Gavin Newsom, a Democrat who is eyeing a 2028 presidential run and has emerged as a leading Trump critic. Newsom pronounced the idea “dead on arrival” in a social media post. The proposal also is likely to draw bipartisan opposition in Florida. Tourism and access to clean beaches are key parts of the economy in both states.

    The administration’s plan proposes six offshore lease sales off the coast of California.

    It also calls for new drilling off the coast of Florida in areas at least 100 miles from that state’s shore. The area targeted for leasing is adjacent to an area in the Central Gulf of Mexico that already contains thousands of wells and hundreds of drilling platforms.

    The five-year plan also would compel more than 20 lease sales off the coast of Alaska, including a newly designated area known as the High Arctic, more than 200 miles offshore in the Arctic Ocean.

    All offshore areas “with the potential to generate jobs, new revenue and additional production to advance America’s energy dominance should be considered for inclusion,” the American Petroleum Institute and other groups said in a joint letter to the Trump administration in June.

    The groups cited California’s history as an oil-producing state. “Undiscovered resources could be readily produced given the array of existing infrastructure in the area, particularly in southern California,” the letter said.

    Sen. Rick Scott, a Florida Republican and Trump ally, helped persuade Trump officials to drop a similar offshore plan in 2018 when he was governor. Last week, Scott and fellow Florida Republican Sen. Ashley Moody’ co-sponsored a bill to maintain a moratorium on offshore drilling in the state that Trump signed in his first term.

    “As Floridians, we know how vital our beautiful beaches and coastal waters are to our state’s economy, environment and way of life,″ Scott said in a statement. “I will always work to keep Florida’s shores pristine and protect our natural treasures for generations to come.”

    A Newsom spokesman said Trump officials had not formally shared the plan, but said “expensive and riskier offshore drilling would put our communities at risk and undermine the economic stability of our coastal economies.”

    California has been a leader in restricting offshore oil drilling since the infamous 1969 Santa Barbara spill that helped spark the modern environmental movement. While there have been no new federal leases offered since the mid-1980s, drilling from existing platforms continues.

    Newsom expressed support for greater offshore controls after a 2021 spill off Huntington Beach and has backed a congressional effort to ban new offshore drilling on the West Coast.

    A Texas-based company, with support from the Trump administration, is seeking to restart production in waters off Santa Barbara damaged by a 2015 oil spill. The administration has hailed the plan by Houston-based Sable Offshore Corp. as the kind of project Trump wants to increase U.S. energy production as the federal government removes regulatory barriers.

    Trump signed an executive order on the first day of his second term reversing former President Joe Biden’s ban on future offshore oil drilling on the East and West coasts. A federal court later struck down Biden’s order to withdraw 625 million acres of federal waters from oil development.

    Democratic lawmakers, including California Sens. Alex Padilla and Adam Schiff and Rep. Jared Huffman, the top Democrat on the House Natural Resources Committee, warned that opening vast coastlines to new offshore drilling “would devastate coastal economies, jeopardize our national security, ravage coastal ecosystems, and put millions of Americans’ health and safety at risk.”

    Oil spills “not only cause irreparable environmental damage, but also suppress the value of coastal homes, harm tourism economies and weaken coastal infrastructure,” the lawmakers said in a letter signed by dozens of Democrats. One disastrous oil spill can cost taxpayers billions in lost revenue, cleanup costs and ecosystem restoration, they said.

    Joseph Gordon, campaign director for the environmental group Oceana, called the Trump administration’s latest plan “an oil spill nightmare.”

    Coastal communities “depend on healthy oceans for economic security and their cherished way of life,” he said. “We need to protect our coasts from more offshore drilling, not put them up for sale to the oil and gas industry. There’s too much at stake to risk more horrific oil spills that will haunt our coastlines for generations to come.”

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Europe could get Cypriot natural gas by 2027, president says

    [ad_1]

    NICOSIA, Cyprus — Some of the estimated 20 trillion cubic feet of natural gas discovered in waters off Cyprus could reach European markets as soon as 2027, the Cypriot president said Wednesday, as Europe looks for more ways to wean itself off Russian energy.

    President Nikos Christodoulides said that the first quantity of natural gas that could be exported abroad will come from the so-called Cronos deposit, which is operated by a consortium made up of Italian company Eni and French firm TotalEnergies.

    Christodoulides told an energy conference that the consortium would make its final decision to move ahead with the project next year, with Cronos gas potentially reaching a processing plant in the Egyptian port city of Damietta for liquefaction and transportation to European markets by ship in 2027.

    “Cyprus is part of the energy solutions for energy security in the eastern Mediterranean and like I said, it’s an important objective to align your interests with those of powerful states and to act as an alternative energy corridor for Europe,” Christodoulides said.

    Speaking at the same conference, Cypriot Energy Minister George Pananastasiou said that natural gas from the Cronos deposit could reach markets the quickest, because it can be connected to infrastructure already in place conveying gas from Egypt’s huge Zor deposit around 80 kilometers (50 miles) away.

    Papanastasiou said that a late 2027 target date for Cronos gas to reach market is “optimistic but doable.”

    According to the Cypriot energy minister, plans to export natural gas from another of Cyprus’ deposits known as Aphrodite foresee the positioning of a floating processing plant atop the actual reservoir to modify the hydrocarbon into what he called “dry gas” that can be routed directly to consumers inside Egypt.

    The processed gas will reach a facility near Egypt’s Port Said and will either be utilized for domestic Egyptian consumption or liquefied for export to Europe, depending on what will be decided in further consultations between Cyprus and the deposit’s operator, a partnership between Chevron, Shell and Israeli company NewMed Energy.

    Christodoulides said that he would travel to Lebanon next week to exclusively discuss Cyprus’ energy plans. Cyprus shares maritime borders with Lebanon, but the Lebanese government hasn’t fully ratified an agreement delineating the exclusive economic zones of the two countries. That has prevented Cyprus from opening up areas abutting Lebanese waters for hydrocarbons exploration.

    The Cypriot president said that there’s “interest from energy giants” to license more areas — or blocks — from within Cypriot waters. ExxonMobil and partners QatarEnergy also hold hydrocarbon exploration licenses for two blocks off Cyprus’ southern coast.

    In one block, the partnership has made two significant natural gas deposit discoveries known as Glaucus and Pegasus. Glaucus is estimated to hold approximately 4.5 trillion cubic feet of gas, while Pegasus’ size is still being determined.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Energy Department loans $1B to help finance restart of nuclear reactor

    [ad_1]

    HARRISBURG, Pa. — The U.S. Department of Energy said Tuesday that it will loan $1 billion to help finance the restart of the nuclear power plant on Pennsylvania’s Three Mile Island that is under contract to supply power to data centers for tech giant Microsoft.

    The loan is in line with the priorities of President Donald Trump’s administration, including bolstering nuclear power and artificial intelligence.

    For Constellation Energy, which owns Three Mile Island’s lone functioning nuclear power reactor, the federal loan will lower its financing cost to get the mothballed plant up and running again. The 835-megawatt reactor can power the equivalent of approximately 800,000 homes, the Department of Energy said.

    The reactor had been out of operation for five years when Constellation Energy announced last year that it would spend $1.6 billion to restart it under a 20-year agreement with Microsoft to buy the power for its data centers.

    Constellation Energy renamed the functioning unit the Crane Clean Energy Center as it works to restore equipment including the turbine, generator, main power transformer and cooling and control systems. It hopes to bring the plant back online in 2027.

    The loan is being issued under an existing $250 billion energy infrastructure program initially authorized by Congress in 2022. Neither the department nor Constellation released terms of the loan.

    The plant, on an island in the Susquehanna River just outside Harrisburg, was the site of the nation’s worst commercial nuclear power accident, in 1979. The accident destroyed one reactor, Unit 2, and left the plant with one functioning reactor, Unit 1.

    In 2019, Constellation Energy’s then-parent company Exelon shut down the functioning reactor, saying it was losing money and Pennsylvania lawmakers had refused to subsidize it to keep it running.

    The plan to restart the reactor comes amid something of a renaissance for nuclear power, as policymakers are increasingly looking to it to shore up the nation’s power supply, help avoid the worst effects of climate change and meet rising power demand driven by data centers.

    ___

    Follow Marc Levy at http://twitter.com/timelywriter.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Czech Republic plans $19 billion nuclear expansion to double output and end fossil fuel reliance

    [ad_1]

    DUKOVANY NUCLEAR PLANT, Czech Republic (AP) — The eight huge cooling towers of the Dukovany power plant overlook a construction site for two more reactors as the Czech Republic pushes ahead with plans to expand its reliance on nuclear energy.

    Mobile drilling rigs have been extracting samples 140 meters below ground for a geological survey to make sure the site is suitable for a $19 billion project as part of the expansion that should eventually at least double the country’s nuclear output and cement its place among Europe’s most nuclear-dependent nations.

    South Korea’s KHNP beat France’s EDF in a tender to construct a new plant whose two reactors will have an output of over 1,000 megawatts each. After becoming operational in the second half 2030s, they will complement Dukovany’s four 512-MW reactors that date from the 1980s.

    The KHNP deal gives the Czechs an option to have two more units built at the other nuclear plant in Temelín, which currently has two 1,000-megawatt reactors.

    Then, they are set to follow up with small modular nuclear reactors.

    “Nuclear will generate between 50% and 60% around 2050 in the Czech Republic, or maybe slightly more,” Petr Závodský, chief executive of the Dukovany project, told The Associated Press in an interview.

    The nuclear expansion is needed to help the country wean itself off fossil fuels, secure steady and reliable supplies at a reasonable price, meet low emission requirements and enable robust demand for electricity expected in the coming years to power data centers and electric cars, Závodský said.

    Europe’s nuclear revival

    The Czech expansion comes at a time when surging energy demand and looming deadlines by countries and companies to sharply cut carbon pollution are helping to revive interest in nuclear technology. While nuclear power does produce waste, it does not produce greenhouse gas emissions, like carbon dioxide, the main driver of climate change.

    The European Union has accepted nuclear by including it in the classification system for environmentally sustainable economic activities, opening the door to financing. That has been a boost for the Czech Republic, Slovakia, Hungary and France — the continent’s nuclear leader — that have heavily relied on nuclear.

    Belgium and Sweden recently scrapped plans to phase out nuclear power. Denmark and Italy are reconsidering its use, while Poland is set to join a club of 12 nuclear-friendly nations in the European Union after signing a deal with U.S.-based Westinghouse to build three nuclear units.

    The EU generated 24% of nuclear electricity in 2024.

    Britain signed a cooperation deal with the United States in September that Energy Secretary Ed Miliband said would lead to “a golden age of nuclear in this country.” It will also invest 14.2 billion pounds ($19 billion) to build the Sizewell C nuclear power plant, the first in the U.K. since 1995.

    CEZ, the dominant Czech power company in which the government holds a 70% stake, and Britain’s Rolls-Royce SMR have agreed on a strategic partnership to develop and deploy small modular nuclear reactors.

    Money matters

    The cost of the Dukovany project is estimated at over $19 billion, with the government agreeing to acquire an 80% majority in the new plant. The government will secure a loan for the new units that CEZ will repay over 30 years. The state will also guarantee a stable income from the electricity production for CEZ for 40 years. Approval is expected to be granted by the EU, which aims to become “climate-neutral” by 2050.

    “We’re in a good position to argue that we won’t be able to do without new nuclear units,” Závodský said. “Today, we get some 40% electricity from nuclear, but we also currently get another 40% from coal. It’s clear we have to replace the coal.”

    Uncertainty over financing has caused a significant delay in the nuclear expansion. In 2014, CEZ canceled a tender to build two reactors at the existing Temelin nuclear plant after the government refused to provide financial guarantees.

    Russia’s energy giant Rosatom and China’s CNG were excluded from the Dukovany tender on security grounds following the Kremlin’s invasion of Ukraine.

    CEZ signed a deal wit h Westinghouse and France’s Framatome to supply nuclear fuel for its two nuclear plants, eliminating the country’s dependence on Russia. The contract with KHNP secures fuel supplies for 10 years.

    Opposition

    While atomic energy enjoys public support, skeptical voices can be heard at home and abroad.

    The Friends of the Earth say it is too costly and the money could be better used for improving the industry. The country also still does not have a permanent storage for spent fuel.

    The Dukovany and Temelín plants are located near the border with Austria, which abandoned nuclear energy after the 1986 Chernobyl nuclear explosion. In 2000, a dispute over the Temelín plant resulted in a political crisis and blocked border crossings for weeks.

    Austria remains the most nuclear-skeptical EU country and its lower house of Parliament has already rejected the Czech small modular reactors plan.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Future data centers are driving up forecasts for energy demand. States want proof they’ll get built

    [ad_1]

    HARRISBURG, Pa. (AP) — The forecasts are eye-popping: utilities saying they’ll need two or three times more electricity within a few years to power massive new data centers that are feeding a fast-growing AI economy.

    But the challenges — some say the impossibility — of building new power plants to meet that demand so quickly has set off alarm bells for lawmakers, policymakers and regulators who wonder if those utility forecasts can be trusted.

    One burning question is whether the forecasts are based on data center projects that may never get built — eliciting concern that regular ratepayers could be stuck with the bill to build unnecessary power plants and grid infrastructure at a cost of billions of dollars.

    The scrutiny comes as analysts warn of the risk of an artificial intelligence investment bubble that’s ballooned tech stock prices and could burst.

    Meanwhile, consumer advocates are finding that ratepayers in some areas — such as the mid-Atlantic electricity grid, which encompasses all or parts of 13 states stretching from New Jersey to Illinois, as well as Washington, D.C. — are already underwriting the cost to supply power to data centers, some of them built, some not.

    “There’s speculation in there,” said Joe Bowring, who heads Monitoring Analytics, the independent market watchdog in the mid-Atlantic grid territory. “Nobody really knows. Nobody has been looking carefully enough at the forecast to know what’s speculative, what’s double-counting, what’s real, what’s not.”

    Suspicions about skyrocketing demand

    There is no standard practice across grids or for utilities to vet such massive projects, and figuring out a solution has become a hot topic, utilities and grid operators say.

    Uncertainty around forecasts is typically traced to a couple of things.

    One concerns developers seeking a grid connection, but whose plans aren’t set in stone or lack the heft — clients, financing or otherwise — to bring the project to completion, industry and regulatory officials say.

    Another is data center developers submitting grid connection requests in various separate utility territories, PJM Interconnection, which operates the mid-Atlantic grid, and Texas lawmakers have found.

    Often, developers, for competitive reasons, won’t tell utilities if or where they’ve submitted other requests for electricity, PJM said. That means a single project could inflate the energy forecasts of multiple utilities.

    The effort to improve forecasts got a high-profile boost in September, when a Federal Energy Regulatory Commission member asked the nation’s grid operators for information on how they determine that a project is not only viable, but will use the electricity it says it needs.

    “Better data, better decision-making, better and faster decisions mean we can get all these projects, all this infrastructure built,” the commissioner, David Rosner, said in an interview.

    The Edison Electric Institute, a trade association of for-profit electric utilities, said it welcomed efforts to improve demand forecasting.

    Real, speculative, or ‘somewhere in between’

    The Data Center Coalition, which represents tech giants like Google and Meta and data center developers, has urged regulators to request more information from utilities on their forecasts and to develop a set of best practices to determine the commercial viability of a data center project.

    The coalition’s vice president of energy, Aaron Tinjum, said improving the accuracy and transparency of forecasts is a “fundamental first step of really meeting this moment” of energy growth.

    “Wherever we go, the question is, ‘Is the (energy) growth real? How can we be so sure?’” Tinjum said. “And we really view commercial readiness verification as one of those important kind of low-hanging opportunities for us to be adopting at this moment.”

    Igal Feibush, the CEO of Pennsylvania Data Center Partners, a data center developer, said utilities are in a “fire drill” as they try to vet a deluge of data center projects all seeking electricity.

    The vast majority, he said, will fall off because many project backers are new to the concept and don’t know what it takes to get a data center built.

    States also are trying to do more to find out what’s in utility forecasts and weed out speculative or duplicative projects.

    In Texas, which is attracting large data center projects, lawmakers still haunted by a blackout during a deadly 2021 winter storm were shocked when told in 2024 by the grid operator, the Electric Reliability Council of Texas, that its peak demand could nearly double by 2030.

    They found that state utility regulators lacked the tools to determine whether that was realistic.

    Texas state Sen. Phil King told a hearing earlier this year that the grid operator, utility regulators and utilities weren’t sure if the power requests “are real or just speculative or somewhere in between.”

    Lawmakers passed legislation sponsored by King, now law, that requires data center developers to disclose whether they have requests for electricity elsewhere in Texas and to set standards for developers to show that they have a substantial financial commitment to a site.

    Electricity bills are rising, too

    PPL Electric Utilities, which delivers power to 1.5 million customers across central and eastern Pennsylvania, projects that data centers will more than triple its peak electricity demand by 2030.

    Vincent Sorgi, president and CEO of PPL Corp., told analysts on an earnings call this month that the data center projects “are real, they are coming fast and furious” and that the “near-term risk of overbuilding generation simply does not exist.”

    The data center projects counted in the forecast are backed by contracts with financial commitments often reaching tens of millions of dollars, PPL said.

    Still, PPL’s projections helped spur a state lawmaker, Rep. Danilo Burgos, to introduce a bill to bolster the authority of state utility regulators to inspect how utilities assemble their energy demand forecasts.

    Ratepayers in Burgos’ Philadelphia district just absorbed an increase in their electricity bills — attributed by the utility, PECO, to the rising cost of wholesale electricity in the mid-Atlantic grid driven primarily by data center demand.

    That’s why ratepayers need more protection to ensure they are benefiting from the higher cost, Burgos said.

    “Once they make their buck, whatever company,” Burgos said, “you don’t see no empathy towards the ratepayers.”

    ___

    Follow Marc Levy at http://twitter.com/timelywriter.

    [ad_2]

    Source link