You’re out of free articles.
Log in
To continue reading, log in to your account.
Create a Free Account
To unlock more free articles, please create a free account.
Sign In or Create an Account.
By continuing, you agree to the Terms of Service and acknowledge our Privacy Policy
Welcome to Heatmap
Thank you for registering with Heatmap. Climate change is one of the greatest challenges of our lives, a force reshaping our economy, our politics, and our culture. We hope to be your trusted, friendly, and insightful guide to that transformation. Please enjoy your free articles. You can check your profile here .
subscribe to get Unlimited access
Offer for a Heatmap News Unlimited Access subscription; please note that your subscription will renew automatically unless you cancel prior to renewal. Cancellation takes effect at the end of your current billing period. We will let you know in advance of any price changes. Taxes may apply. Offer terms are subject to change.
Subscribe to get unlimited Access
Hey, you are out of free articles but you are only a few clicks away from full access. Subscribe below and take advantage of our introductory offer.
subscribe to get Unlimited access
Offer for a Heatmap News Unlimited Access subscription; please note that your subscription will renew automatically unless you cancel prior to renewal. Cancellation takes effect at the end of your current billing period. We will let you know in advance of any price changes. Taxes may apply. Offer terms are subject to change.
Create Your Account
Please Enter Your Password
Forgot your password?
Please enter the email address you use for your account so we can send you a link to reset your password:
On partisan cuts, an atomic LPO, and the left’s data center fight

Current conditions: New York City is set for its first snow of the season • More than a million Filipinos are under evacuation orders after Super Typhoon Fung-wong slammed into the archipelago as the equivalent of a Category 4 hurricane • Mexico just recorded its hottest November day, with temperatures of nearly 83 degrees Fahrenheit in the southern Pacific Coast town of Arriaga.

China’s carbon dioxide emissions stayed steady in the third quarter from a year earlier, extending a flat or falling trend that started in March 2024, according to an analysis published Tuesday by Carbon Brief. The report found that the rapid adoption of electric vehicles dropped emissions from transport fuel by 5% year over year. Vast arrays of solar panels and wind turbines and some of the world’s only new nuclear reactors left CO2 emissions in the power sector unchanged, even as demand for electricity grew in the last quarter by 6.1%, up from 3.7% in the first half of the year. Renewables did most of the work. Solar generation grew by 46%, while electricity from wind production increased 11% year over year. “If this pattern repeats, then China’s CO2 emissions will record a fall for the full year of 2025,” wrote Lauri Myllyvirta, the author and lead analyst at the Centre for Research on Energy and Clean Air, a Finland-based but China-focused research nonprofit. “While an emission increase or decrease of 1% or less might not make a huge difference in an objective sense, it has heightened symbolic meaning, as China’s policymakers have left room for emissions to increase for several more years, leaving the timing of the peak open.”
The finding comes shortly after the Rhodium Group released its latest global warming trajectory and found that planetary heating would stay relatively steady worldwide, despite the Trump administration’s rollbacks. But the consultancy still forecast a range of potential temperature averages from 2 degrees Celsius to 3.9 degrees above pre-industrial normals. Avoiding the higher-end scenario, as Heatmap’s Emily Pontecorvo wrote, we need breakthroughs. “What are those breakthroughs? At this point, they aren’t a mystery. Cheaper clean firm power — like advanced nuclear, fusion, or geothermal — would be a huge help. Solutions for decarbonizing flying and shipping are also on the list. We also need to make it affordable to produce iron, steel, cement, and petrochemicals with far fewer emissions.”

An alliance of clean energy groups, along with the Minnesota city of St. Paul, filed a lawsuit Monday accusing the Trump administration of taking what The New York Times called “nakedly partisan funding cuts” during the government shutdown that “wiped out around $7.5 billion for projects in Democratic-led states.” The lawsuit, which named White House budget director Russell Vought as a main defendant, alleged that the administration targeted states the president lost in the last election with “intentional discrimination” and “bare animus.” When Vought announced plans to slash nearly $8 billion in climate-related projects he slammed as the “Green New Scam” in a post on X, the Office of Management and Budget chief listed 16 states, all represented by senators who vote with the Democrats. “Under bedrock equal protection principles, the government must have some legitimate state interest when it treats one group differently from a similarly situated group,” the coalition said in the suit
Qcells has spent more than $2.5 billion to establish a solar panel supply chain in the United States. But the Seoul-based company still manufactures many of the cells that get assembled into panels in the U.S. in Malaysia or South Korea.
With new trade restrictions “routinely stalling” shipments of key components, as Reuters put it, the company has furloughed 1,000 workers at its Georgia factories as production slowed. In response, Qcells said it’s ramping up U.S. cell manufacturing at its new plant. “Qcells expects to resume full production in the coming weeks and months. Our commitment to building the entire solar supply chain in the United States remains,” Qcells spokesperson Marta Stoepker said in a statement. “We will soon be back on track with the full force of our Georgia team delivering American-made energy to communities around the country.” (If reading this made you want to review what actually goes into making a solar panel, my colleague Matthew Zeitlin had a great explainer in Heatmap’s Climate 101 series).
Sign up to receive Heatmap AM in your inbox every morning:
The Department of Energy’s Loan Programs Office formed the speartip of the Biden administration’s clean energy funding efforts, pumping billions to everything from building much-needed solar megafarms in Puerto Rico to restarting a shuttered nuclear reactor for the first time in U.S. history in Michigan. The Trump administration prefers the latter. Speaking at the American Nuclear Society’s winter conference Monday, Secretary of Energy Chris Wright said he would focus the agency’s in-house lender almost entirely on atomic energy. “By far the biggest use of those dollars will be for nuclear power plants to get those first plants built,” Wright told the audience in Washington, D.C., according to Reuters. The Loan Programs Office would match “three to one, maybe even up to four to one” on equity deals with “low-cost debt dollars” from the agency.
Back in the spring, the Trump administration was widely expected to zero out the so-called LPO altogether as part of steep cuts led by Elon Musk’s Department of Government Efficiency. But groups including the right-leaning Foundation for American Innovation campaigned to preserve the LPO, pitching the entity to the new administration on its potential to fund nuclear projects in particular.
Senator Bernie Sanders of Vermont is leading a group of Democratic senators calling on the White House to answer for how soaring electric bills are helping to pay for the artificial intelligence boom driving what The Wall Street Journal called “one of the most expensive infrastructure build-outs in U.S. history.” The letter, directed to the White House and Secretary of Commerce Howard Lutnick, said the president’s order to fast-track data centers forced Americans into “bidding wars with trillion-dollar companies to keep the lights on at home,” suggesting the tech giants behind such services as Facebook, ChatGPT, and Google were winning.
It’s a clear political lane. Silicon Valley’s captains of industry lurched rightward in the last election, embracing Trump in ways that alienated many Americans at a moment when social media is increasingly viewed as addictive and harmful. In what was supposed to be a close race, Democrat Mikie Sherrill trounced her Republican opponent in last week’s New Jersey gubernatorial election by campaigning on taking the state’s grid operator to task for recent rate spikes in what Matthew called the “electricity election.” And a Heatmap Pro poll in September found just 44% of Americans would welcome a data center nearby.
It’s been a big year for green methanol — the chemical better known as wood alcohol — in China. In July, a Chinese cargo ship refueled with the stuff for the first time. In October, the Communist Party’s top agency in charge of macroeconomic planning listed green methanol among the new sectors eligible for subsidies from the central government. At the end of October, an offshore Chinese project successfully produced its first batch of the fuel. Where’s China looking next for green methanol fuel? Cow dung. Last week, a company in Inner Mongolia applied for green certification to start up what would be China’s first green methanol plant using cattle manure, according to analyst Jian Wu’s China Hydrogen Bulletin.
Log in
To continue reading, log in to your account.
Create a Free Account
To unlock more free articles, please create a free account.
A chat with CleanCapital founder Jon Powers.
This week’s conversation is with Jon Powers, founder of the investment firm CleanCapital. I reached out to Powers because I wanted to get a better understanding of how renewable energy investments were shifting one year into the Trump administration. What followed was a candid, detailed look inside the thinking of how the big money in cleantech actually views Trump’s war on renewable energy permitting.
The following conversation was lightly edited for clarity.
Alright, so let’s start off with a big question: How do investors in clean energy view Trump’s permitting freeze?
So, let’s take a step back. Look at the trend over the last decade. The industry’s boomed, manufacturing jobs are happening, the labor force has grown, investments are coming.
We [Clean Capital] are backed by infrastructure life insurance money. It’s money that wasn’t in this market 10 years ago. It’s there because these are long-term infrastructure assets. They see the opportunity. What are they looking for? Certainty. If somebody takes your life insurance money, and they invest it, they want to know it’s going to be there in 20 years in case they need to pay it out. These are really great assets – they’re paying for electricity, the panels hold up, etcetera.
With investors, the more you can manage that risk, the more capital there is out there and the better cost of capital there is for the project. If I was taking high cost private equity money to fund a project, you have to pay for the equipment and the cost of the financing. The more you can bring down the cost of financing – which has happened over the last decade – the cheaper the power can be on the back-end. You can use cheaper money to build.
Once you get that type of capital, you need certainty. That certainty had developed. The election of President Trump threw that into a little bit of disarray. We’re seeing that being implemented today, and they’re doing everything they can to throw wrenches into the growth of what we’ve been doing. They passed the bill affecting the tax credits, and the work they’re doing on permitting to slow roll projects, all of that uncertainty is damaging the projects and more importantly costs everyone down the road by raising the cost of electricity, in turn making projects more expensive in the first place. It’s not a nice recipe for people buying electricity.
But in September, I went to the RE+ conference in California – I thought that was going to be a funeral march but it wasn’t. People were saying, Now we have to shift and adjust. This is a huge industry. How do we get those adjustments and move forward?
Investors looked at it the same way. Yes, how will things like permitting affect the timeline of getting to build? But the fundamentals of supply and demand haven’t changed and in fact are working more in favor of us than before, so we’re figuring out where to invest on that potential. Also, yes federal is key, but state permitting is crucial. When you’re talking about distributed generation going out of a facility next to a data center, or a Wal-Mart, or an Amazon warehouse, that demand very much still exists and projects are being built in that middle market today.
What you’re seeing is a recalibration of risk among investors to understand where we put our money today. And we’re seeing some international money pulling back, and it all comes back to that concept of certainty.
To what extent does the international money moving out of the U.S. have to do with what Trump has done to offshore wind? Is that trade policy? Help us understand why that is happening.
I think it’s not trade policy, per se. Maybe that’s happening on the technology side. But what I’m talking about is money going into infrastructure and assets – for a couple of years, we were one of the hottest places to invest.
Think about a European pension fund who is taking money from a country in Europe and wanting to invest it somewhere they’ll get their money back. That type of capital has definitely been re-evaluating where they’ll put their money, and parallel, some of the larger utility players are starting to re-evaluate or even back out of projects because they’re concerned about questions around large-scale utility solar development, specifically.
Taking a step back to something else you said about federal permitting not being as crucial as state permitting–
That’s about the size of the project. Huge utility projects may still need federal approvals for transmission.
Okay. But when it comes to the trendline on community relations and social conflict, are we seeing renewable energy permitting risk increase in the U.S.? Decrease? Stay the same?
That has less to do with the administration but more of a well-structured fossil fuel campaign. Anti-climate, very dark money. I am not an expert on where the money comes from, but folks have tried to map that out. Now you’re even seeing local communities pass stuff like no energy storage [ordinances].
What’s interesting is that in those communities, we as an industry are not really present providing facts to counter this. That’s very frustrating for folks. We’re seeing these pass and honestly asking, Who was there?
Is the federal permitting freeze impacting investment too?
Definitely.
It’s not like you put money into a project all at once, right? It happens in these chunks. Let’s say there’s 10 steps for investing in a project. A little bit of money at step one, more money at step two, and it gradually gets more until you build the project. The middle area – permitting, getting approval from utilities – is really critical to the investments. So you’re seeing a little bit of a pause in when and how we make investments, because we sometimes don’t know if we’ll make it to, say, step six.
I actually think we’ll see the most impact from this in data center costs.
Can you explain that a bit more for me?
Look at northern Virginia for a second. There wasn’t a lot of new electricity added to that market but you all of the sudden upped demand for electricity by 20 percent. We’re literally seeing today all these utilities putting in rate hikes for consumers because it is literally a supply-demand question. If you can’t build new supply, it's going to be consumers paying for it, and even if you could build a new natural gas plant – at minimum that will happen four-to-six years from now. So over the next four years, we’ll see costs go up.
We’re building projects today that we invested in two years ago. That policy landscape we invested in two years ago hasn’t changed from what we invested into. But the policy landscape then changed dramatically.
If you wipe out half of what was coming in, there’s nothing backfilling that.
Plus more on the week’s biggest renewables fights.
Shelby County, Indiana – A large data center was rejected late Wednesday southeast of Indianapolis, as the takedown of a major Google campus last year continues to reverberate in the area.
Dane County, Wisconsin – Heading northwest, the QTS data center in DeForest we’ve been tracking is broiling into a major conflict, after activists uncovered controversial emails between the village’s president and the company.
White Pine County, Nevada – The Trump administration is finally moving a little bit of renewable energy infrastructure through the permitting process. Or at least, that’s what it looks like.
Mineral County, Nevada – Meanwhile, the BLM actually did approve a solar project on federal lands while we were gone: the Libra energy facility in southwest Nevada.
Hancock County, Ohio – Ohio’s legal system appears friendly for solar development right now, as another utility-scale project’s permits were upheld by the state Supreme Court.
The offshore wind industry is using the law to fight back against the Trump administration.
It’s time for a big renewable energy legal update because Trump’s war on renewable energy projects will soon be decided in the courts.
A flurry of lawsuits were filed around the holidays after the Interior Department issued stop work orders against every offshore wind project under construction, citing a classified military analysis. By my count, at least three developers filed individual suits against these actions: Dominion Energy over the Coastal Virginia offshore wind project, Equinor over Empire Wind in New York, and Orsted over Revolution Wind (for the second time).
Each of these cases are moving on separate tracks before different district courts and the urgency is plain. I expect rulings in a matter of days, as developers have said in legal filings that further delays could jeopardize the completion of these projects due to vessel availability and narrow timelines for meeting power contracts with their respective state customers. In the most dire case, Equinor stated in its initial filing against the government that if the stop work order is implemented as written, it would “likely” result in the project being canceled. Revolution Wind faces similar risks, as I’ve previously detailed for Heatmap.
Meanwhile, around the same time these cases were filed, a separate lawsuit was dropped on the Interior Department from a group of regional renewable energy power associations, including Interwest Energy Alliance, which represents solar developers operating in the American Southwest – ground zero for Trump’s freeze on solar permits.
This lawsuit challenges Interior Secretary Doug Burgum’s secretarial orders requiring his approval for renewable energy decisions, the Army Corps of Engineers’ quiet pause on wetlands approvals, and the Fish and Wildlife Services’ ban on permitting eagle takes, as well as its refusal to let developers know if they require species consultations under the Endangered Species Act. The case argues that the administration is implementing federal land law “contrary to Congress’ intent” by “unlawfully picking winners and losers among energy sources,” and that these moves violate the Administrative Procedures Act.
I expect crucial action in this case imminently, too. On Thursday, these associations filed a motion declaring their intent to seek a preliminary injunction against the administration while the case is adjudicated because, as the filing states, the actions against the renewables sector are “currently costing the wind and solar industry billions of dollars.”
Now, a victory here wouldn’t be complete, since a favorable ruling would likely be appealed and the Trump administration has been reluctant to act on rulings they disagree with. Nevertheless, it would still be a big win for renewables companies frozen by federal bureaucracy and ammo in any future legal or regulatory action around permit activity.
So far, Trump’s war on solar and wind has not really been tested by the courts, sans one positive ruling against his anti-wind Day One executive order. It’s easy in a vacuum to see these challenges and think, Wow, the industry is really fighting back! Maybe they can prevail? However I want to remind my readers that simply having the power of the federal government grants one the capacity to delay commercial construction activity under federal purview, no matter the legality. These matters can become whack-a-mole quite quickly.
Dominion Energy’s Coastal Virginia offshore wind project is one such example. Intrepid readers of The Fight may remember I was first to report the Trump administration might try to mess around with the permits previously issued for construction through litigation brought by anti-renewables activists, arguing the government did not adequately analyse potential impacts to endangered whales. Well, it appears we’re getting closer to an answer: In a Dec. 18 filing submitted in that lawsuit, Justice Department attorneys said they have been “advised” that the Interior Department is now considering whether to revoke permits for the project.
Dominion did not respond to a request for comment about this filing, but it is worth noting that the DOJ’s filing concedes Dominion is aware of this threat and “does not concede the propriety” of any review or revocation of the permits.
I don’t believe this alone would kill Coastal Virginia given the project is so far along in construction. But I expect a death by a thousand cuts strategy from the Trump team against renewable energy projects writ large, regardless of who wins these cases.