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 China’s carbon goal, a U.S. uranium ramp up, and Microsoft’s green steel deal
Current conditions: Tropical Storm Humberto formed in the Atlantic and is expected to strengthen into a hurricane this weekend, bringing rip currents to Bermuda, the Bahamas, and the U.S. East Coast • Severe storms could bring winds of up to 75 miles per hours throughout the Mid-Atlantic region • As its death toll climbs to 25 in Taiwan and the Philippines, Typhoon Ragasa is weakening as it moves toward Southeast Asia.
The Trump administration is stepping up its efforts to crack down on states’ policies to curb climate-changing pollution, asking the public to submit examples of laws with “significant adverse effects” on the economy. So far, E&E News reported Thursday, 251 respondents have given the Justice Department potential targets, including bans on fossil fuel appliances in new buildings and policies to bar the use of so-called forever chemicals in states such as Maine, New Mexico, and Minnesota.
The Department of Justice first posted a call for comments in the Federal Register in August to find state climate policies that are “burdening” energy development. Already, the administration has filed lawsuits against Vermont and New York to challenge their climate Superfund laws, and sued Hawaii and Michigan to thwart those states’ plans to sue fossil fuel companies over the effects of global warming. This month, the administration urged the Supreme Court to side with industry and transfer climate lawsuits from state to federal courts.
Chinese President Xi Jinping. Suo Takekuma - Pool/Getty Images
When President Donald Trump shredded the United States’ climate goals and started the process to withdraw from the Paris climate accords on his first day in office, campaigners hoped China and the European Union would pursue more ambitious carbon-cutting targets to make up the difference. But that’s not what’s happening. On Wednesday, Chinese President Xi Jinping announced plans to cut emissions by just 7% to 10% by 2035. The European Union complained that Beijing’s new goal “falls well short.” But, as I reported in this newsletter, the EU failed to muster support across the bloc for its own new binding carbon targets ahead of the United Nations General Assembly this week.
Get Heatmap AM directly in your inbox every morning:
Centrus, the American uranium enrichment giant spun out from the federal government in 1998, announced on Thursday an expansion of its Piketon, Ohio, nuclear fuel facility. The new production line is expected to add 300 jobs at the plant and bolster output of both the low-enriched uranium used in traditional reactors and the High-Assay Low-Enriched Uranium, or HALEU, needed for many of the new next-generation small modular reactors under development. While the company said the size and scope of the expansion depend on federal funding decisions from the Department of Energy, the plans “would represent a multibillion-dollar private and public investment.” After decades of decline, the surge in electricity growth has spurred newfound interest in atomic energy. As Heatmap’s Katie Brigham wrote last month, “the nuclear power dealmaking boom is real.”
“The time has come to restore America’s ability to enrich uranium at scale,” Centrus CEO Amir Vexler said in a statement. “We are planning a historic, multi-billion-dollar investment right here in Ohio — supported by a nationwide supply chain to do just that. When it comes to powering our energy future, it’s time to stop relying on foreign, state-owned corporations and start investing in American technology, built by American workers.”
Microsoft this week inked a deal to buy green steel from a first-of-a-kind facility in northern Sweden, Canary Media’s Maria Gallucci reported Thursday. While the tech giant doesn’t directly buy construction materials itself for its data centers, Microsoft agreed to work with its equipment suppliers to ensure that Stegra’s green steel is used in some of its server farms in Europe. As part of the deal, Microsoft will also buy “environmental attribute certificates” that represent the emissions reductions provided by Stegra’s steel and allow the steelmaker to sell its “near-zero emission” metal into the European market at a significant markdown, putting the more expensive green steel in line with the prices of fossil-fueled steel. Efforts to green the U.S. steel industry have stalled out since Trump returned to office. But the White House’s decision to claim a “golden share” of steelmaker U.S. Steel as part of its approval of Japanese rival Nippon Steel’s takeover earlier this year could, as Heatmap’s Matthew Zeitlin wrote this summer, give a future administration the leverage to push greening the supply in the future.
The National Association for the Advancement of Colored People came out against a proposal for a 4.5 million-square-foot data center campus in Bessemer, Alabama, on the grounds that the 70% Black city is already home to major emitters of greenhouse gases and an energy-hungry server farm would make that worse. In an open letter cited in Inside Climate News on Thursday, the state chapter of the NAACP said “the impacts of the data center do not justify its construction.” Residents “are fighting for cleaner air as these plants contribute significantly to the current climate crisis and health issues in the county.” It’s part of a mounting backlash to the growth of data centers. Earlier this month, a Heatmap Pro survey found that only 44% of Americans would welcome a data center in their neighborhood, making them significantly less popular than even a gas-fired power station.
A new analysis of a million-year-old human skull discovered in China could radically upend the scientific consensus on the origins of Homo sapiens, raising the possibility that our species developed in Asia rather than Africa. “This changes a lot of thinking because it suggests that by one million years ago our ancestors had already split into distinct groups, pointing to a much earlier and more complex human evolutionary split than previously believed,” Chris Stringer, an anthropologist and research leader in human evolution at the Natural History Museum in London, told The Guardian. “It more or less doubles the time of origin of Homo sapiens.”
Log in
To continue reading, log in to your account.
Create a Free Account
To unlock more free articles, please create a free account.
Packed hearings. Facebook organizing. Complaints about prime farmland and a disappearing way of life. Sound familiar?
Solar and wind companies cite the rise of artificial intelligence to make their business cases after the United States government slashed massive tax incentives for their projects.
But the data centers supposed to power the AI boom are now facing the sort of swift wave of rejections from local governments across the country eerily similar to what renewables developers have been dealing with on the ground over the last decade. The only difference is, this land use techlash feels even more sudden, intense, and culturally diffuse.
What’s happening is simple: Data centers are now routinely being denied by local governments in zoning and permitting decisions after local residents turn against them. These aggrieved denizens organize grassroots campaigns, many with associated Facebook groups, and then flood city council and county commission hearings.
Just take this past week. Last Thursday, Prince George’s County, Maryland, paused all data center permitting after a campaign against converting an abandoned mall into a data center gained traction online, with a petition garnering more than 20,000 signatures. On Monday, faced with a ferocious public outcry, Google rescinded a proposal to build what would’ve been its second data center in Indiana in Franklin Township, a community in southeastern Indianapolis – a withdrawal requested mere minutes before the township council was reportedly going to reject it.
That same day, the rural Illinois town of DeKalb denied a solar company’s request to build a “boutique data center” on the same site as a previously-permitted solar farm. And on Tuesday, the small city of Howell – located smack between Lansing and Detroit, Michigan – denied a data center proposed by an anonymous Fortune 100 company. Apparently, so many people showed up to voice their opposition to the project that the hearing was held in a high school gymnasium.
Opponents cite many things in their arguments against development, some unique to the sector like energy and water use, and others familiar to the solar and wind industry, like preserving prime farmland or maintaining a way of life.
These arguments are incredibly salient, as polling conducted by Heatmap News has revealed: less than half of Americans would ever support a data center coming near them, and this technology infrastructure is less popular than any form of renewable energy. Digging into the cross-tabs of that poll, data centers are unpopular with essentially all age demographics, and arguments against the facilities – like “they use too much water” or “they consume too much electricity” – get relatively similar agreement from registered Democrats and Republicans alike.
Ben Inskeep, a clean energy advocate in Indianapolis, told me he started fighting data centers last year after he became aware of the total power needed to fuel the rising number of projects in the state. His advocacy organization, Citizens Action Coalition of Indiana, previously weighed in on rate hikes and electricity generation decisions. Now, they’re tracking more than 40 data center projects they say are proposed in the state and getting involved in the fight on the ground against them.
Inskeep told me that, from his point of view, the primary support for data centers comes from local governments and municipally-funded works like schools and health facilities that are facing slashed budgets. In some cases the projects are being rejected despite representing millions – even billions – in capital investments and potential tax revenues so large that municipal governments are put between a rock and a hard place as they’re pressured by a weakening economy and state funding cuts.
That’s what happened in Indianapolis. Earlier this month the school district that would’ve been funded by the now-rejected Google data center came out in support of the project, declaring it would welcome new tax revenue, and said it would also lead to new educational partnerships with the tech giant. But none of that mattered. Some local officials even lambasted their colleagues' support as unwarranted, a lashing out that reminds me of what happens to pro-solar officials in Ohio.
Heatmap News has been tracking contested data center projects since the spring of this year and has found almost 100 projects under development across the country that are being actively fought by local organizers, citizens advocacy groups, and environmental organizations. The data is preliminary and likely an undercount.
Still, there’s lots to glean from it. Crucially, as we’ve seen with renewable energy development, data center opposition crops up most often in tandem with the number of projects proposed and constructed. This is only logical: the more of something that is built in a place, the more likely people are to say, “We’ve built enough of that.” This is why Virginia is the top state when it comes to data centers being opposed – it’s a hub that’s seen development spike for far longer than elsewhere in the United States.
I believe that as data center project proposals continue to rise across the country, we’ll see in parallel rising hostility to their development – potentially much larger than anything renewable energy has ever faced. It will undoubtedly also be a problem for anyone in solar or wind who is riding on an AI boom to add demand for their projects.
And more of the week’s most important news around renewable energy conflicts.
1. Pulaski County, Arkansas – The attorney general of Arkansas is reassuring residents that yes, they can still ban wind farms if they want to.
2. Des Moines County, Iowa – This county facing intense pressure to lock out renewables is trying to find a sweet spot that doesn’t involve capitulation. Whether that’s possible remains to be seen.
3. Fayette County, Tennessee – This county just extended its solar energy moratorium for at least the next 18 months after pressure from residents.
4. McCracken County, Kentucky – It’s not all bad news this week, as a large solar project in Kentucky appears to be moving forward without fomenting difficulties on the ground.
A conversation with Wil Gehl at the Solar Energy Industries Association
This week I chatted with Wil Gehl, the InterMountain West senior manager at the Solar Energy Industries Association. I reached out in the hopes we could chat candidly about the impacts of the current national policy regime on solar development in the American West, where a pause on federal permits risks jeopardizing immense development in Nevada. To my delight, Wil was (pun intended) willing to get into the hot seat with me and get into the mix.
The following conversation was lightly edited for clarity.
So for starters, walk me through how solar development out west has changed since the start of this year.
Certainly been a lot of changes. I think there’s sort of a confluence of lots of uncertainty and change in the industry. The impending tax credit deadlines and safe harbor and commence construction deadlines, all of that combined with the sort of things that have been ongoing in the West for a while — public lands, siting issues — I think those have made a relatively difficult development environment for folks.
But that said, we’re also seeing unprecedented load growth across the West, and Nevada’s a really good example of that. So the demand for solar and storage remains super high. But I think now we’re navigating even more difficulty in getting projects both sited and also over the finish line.
How has the pause on federal permitting impacted projects in this area of the country?
Nevada is 80% public land, give or take, so those changes at the federal level, particularly, the Department of Interior … it’s pretty difficult if you’re looking at utility-scale solar in the state to avoid a sort of federal lands nexus. Those policy changes are really being felt on the ground in Nevada.
We don’t do a ton of engagement at the county level but I’ve been tracking those developments across the state, in Nevada, and others around the West. Whether they’re moratoriums or consideration on moratoriums, or new siting restrictions… in most states in the West, the land use decisions rest at the local level, either the county or the municipal jurisdiction. The patchwork of changing ordinances, that [has a] pace that has intensified a little bit this year as well.
How is SEIA trying to get those projects unstuck? I think about Esmeralda 7 for example, which hasn’t seen its permitting timeline updated online in half a year. What’s the process for trying to get these projects to move forward at this juncture?
I guess I don’t have project by project specific information but in general, I think the example with Nevada Gov. Joe Lombardo’s letter is how we’ve been approaching this issue. Trying to make the case for states like Nevada with really high load growth that projects like this are critical to meeting energy demand and serving customers reliably. Trying to tie the really near-term challenge of serving load together with these issues of federal land so that people on the ground at the state level are aware of it and can use the influence they have with federal officials and other folks to make this situation known, that this has real practical effects with states and their economic development.
When it comes to transmission for these solar projects, what’s the status? Is the scope of the pause just limited to the scope of solar generation or also transmission lines connected to them?
I think the kind of more recent challenges have been more focused on the generation side. The pace of the transmission and associated queue bottlenecks, I feel like that situation has not improved by any means but I don’t get the sense there’s any near-term changes that have impacted that. I’d be curious if other folks who work more closely on the transmission side have a different perspective, but that’s kind of what I’m seeing.
Is there from your vantage point a clip or an end here? If these projects are unable to be unstuck, do you expect developers to try and wait out this limbo with public lands? Or do you expect developers to rethink how they site their projects?
I think in general for projects already under the development process, folks have already invested a lot of time, energy, and capital to get those projects to this point. Particularly those in the West really necessary to serve as growing load, I would expect folks to really be pursuing every angle they can to get those projects over the finish line.
That said, I’m sure there is some point. I just don’t have a good sense of when this becomes totally unpalatable or you’re not able to move forward.
NV Energy recently had a filing at the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission that allowed projects previously in their queue an escape route out if they were not able to maintain their queue position. I do think that’s a sign of the siting difficulties, the people re-evaluating their project portfolio. I’m not a developer but if you’re looking on private land or federal land, signs are pointing to a smoother path forward on private land but in states like Nevada where 80% plus is public land, even for a project fully sited on private land, it’s really difficult to avoid interconnection or transmission. There are pretty much always going to be federal impacts. That’s just going to be a challenge that industry’s facing at this point.
What’s your message to developers who are anxious in this moment?
That’s a good question. I share the anxiety.
I also think there’s a lot of effort being undertaken by developers to explain the situation on the ground to their elected officials and I really think that’s the kind of message that needs to get out there. These real tangible impacts of projects that were already invested in, in some cases already under construction, that are being hindered by these policy decisions that I don’t think are serving the public interests and are going to limit economic development if they don’t come online in time. Ultimately energy is needed to meet the growing demand. There’s not a great alternative to these projects not getting done.