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 Arctic drilling, BYD’s drop, and Democrats’ timid embrace of nuclear recycling

Current conditions: Hurricane Melissa now a Category 2 storm, has left as much as $52 billion in damages in its wake • Sadly for trick-or-treaters, a new storm moving northward from the Mississippi Valley is forecast to bring heavy rains and gusty winds to the Northeast, particularly New England, on Halloween • Heavy rains are bringing the highest possible flood risk to Kenya today.
Oil giant Shell withdrew from its Atlantic Shores project to develop offshore wind off the coast of New Jersey and New York. In a press release on Thursday, the company said it was pulling out of a 50-50 joint venture with the French energy giant EDF as the Anglo-Dutch behemoth grapples with the Trump administration’s so-called “total war on wind.” The decision, the company said, “was taken in line with Shell’s power strategy,” which includes “shifting away from capital-intensive generation projects to assets that support our trading and retail strengths.” The move comes nearly a month after Shell’s top executive in the United States called out President Donald Trump for setting what she called a bad precedent for future administrations that would use the legal approaches the White House has taken to attack offshore wind against oil and gas, as I wrote here a few weeks ago.
The Senate voted Thursday to overturn Biden-era rules limiting drilling in the Alaskan Arctic. The 52-45 vote, in which Senator John Fetterman of Pennsylvania joined Republicans to vote in favor, canceled out the 2022 Biden administration plan that made just 52% of land in what’s known as the National Petroleum Reserve in Alaska available for drilling. A previous Trump administration proposal made 82% of the area eligible for drilling. “This will benefit North Slope communities with jobs & economic growth, and support their tax base to improve access to essential services like water and sewer systems and clinics,” Alaska Senator Dan Sullivan, who sponsored the legislation to withdraw the Biden-era rules, said in a post on X in September.
The move comes a week after Trump opened a broad swath of Alaskan wilderness to drilling, as I reported here.
Get Heatmap AM directly in your inbox every morning:
Chinese electric auto giant BYD reported another slump in its quarterly profits amid growing domestic competition. Much like Tesla, which has seen its market share in the U.S. drop in recent months as rivals surged ahead, BYD saw its third-quarter profits tumble 33% from a year earlier to roughly $1.1 billion. Total revenue dropped 3%. The Shenzhen-based company — the world’s largest electric automaker — remains dominant in China, but rivals Geely Automobile Holdings and Chongqing Changan Automobile Co. saw increases in third-quarter sales of 96% and 84% respectively, Bloomberg reported.
Still, BYD’s strength in the international market gives the Chinese company an edge over Tesla, the U.S.’s domestic EV champion. As Heatmap’s Matthew Zeitlin wrote recently, “Tesla’s stranglehold over the U.S. EV market may be weakening, so too is its hold on the international market.”
Real estate giant Related Companies agreed to build a data-center campus worth more than $7 billion on farmland outside Detroit, in what The Wall Street Journal called “one of the largest deals yet” for this class of property deals to power artificial intelligence. The 250-acre campus is the fourth new site announced as part of a $300 billion contract between Oracle and OpenAI to power the ChatGPT-maker’s Stargate project.
The news came the same day the small modular reactor startup Blue Energy announced a deal with the artificial intelligence company Crusoe to develop a nuclear-powered data center campus in Port of Victoria, Texas. The project, which aims to build up to 1.5 gigawatts of power, would first build natural gas-fired plants with the intention of phasing them out in favor of Blue Energy’s nuclear reactors by 2031. The nuclear company plans to construct its plants on sites where it can ship the reactors to the campus by barge. “We’re not really doing anything where there isn’t regulatory precedent in the past,” Blue Energy CEO Jake Jurewicz told nuclear scholar Emmet Penney on the podcast Nuclear Barbarians earlier this month. “In the end, it comes down to being really thoughtful with design, plant architecture, and site selection.”
Nuclear waste recycling was once a third-rail issue among liberals who, like former President Jimmy Carter, feared that the technology to extract additional reactor fuel from spent uranium risked sending the message worldwide that the U.S. supported continued weapons proliferation. But when the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee voted Wednesday to approve legislation to streamline the process for licensing nuclear recycling plants, only a handful of Democrats pushed back. The radioactive waste sitting at power plants across the U.S. is relatively tiny compared to the amount of electricity those fuel rods produced. But part of why the spent fuel remains dangerously toxic for so long is that it still contains the vast majority of the energy in the uranium. By reprocessing the enriched metal to extract the useful fuel isotopes, the nation’s waste stockpile would shrink and, by some estimates, the U.S. could power its entire grid system for more than a century.
At this week’s vote, the opposition stood out against the unanimous support for other bills to promote plastics cleanup and diesel emissions, E&E News reported. But the bipartisan Nuclear REFUEL Act attracted just a handful of dissenters, ultimately passing in a 16 to 3 vote. Separately, in Illinois late Thursday, Governor JB Pritzker signed legislation to lift the state’s moratorium on building nuclear reactors. That puts the state, by far the largest nuclear hub in the nation, in play for new large-scale reactors that the Trump administration has pledged to fund.

Happy Halloween, to all who celebrate. In the holiday spirit, would you like to read something a little spooky? Climate change is already taking a toll on the nation’s pumpkin crop. Extreme heat and rain are reducing how many gourds are available for jack-o-lanterns, as the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration warned last year. The downward trend continues. In the latest crop update from the U.S. Department of Agriculture, the per capita availability of pumpkins fell by 11%, more than five times the reduction in squash and twice the fall in sweet potatoes.
Log in
To continue reading, log in to your account.
Create a Free Account
To unlock more free articles, please create a free account.
Activists are suing for records on three projects in Wyoming.
Three wind projects in Wyoming are stuck in the middle of a widening legal battle between local wildlife conservation activists and the Trump administration over eagle death records.
The rural Wyoming bird advocacy group Albany County Conservancy filed a federal lawsuit last week against the Trump administration seeking to compel the government to release reams of information about how it records deaths from three facilities owned and operated by the utility PacifiCorp: Dunlap Wind, Ekola Flats, and Seven Mile Hill. The group filed its lawsuit under the Freedom of Information Act, the national public records disclosure law, and accused the Fish and Wildlife Service of unlawfully withholding evidence related to whether the three wind farms were fully compliant with the Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act.
I’m eyeing this case closely because it suggests these wind farms may fall under future scrutiny from the Fish and Wildlife Service, either for prospective fines or far worse, as the agency continues a sweeping review of wind projects’ compliance with BGEPA, a statute anti-wind advocates have made clear they seek to use as a cudgel against operating facilities. It’s especially noteworthy that a year into Trump’s term, his promises to go after wind projects have not really touched onshore, primarily offshore. (The exception, of course, being Lava Ridge.)
Violating the eagle protection statute has significant penalties. For each eagle death beyond what FWS has permitted, a company is subject to at least $100,000 in fines or a year in prison. These penalties go up if a company is knowingly violating the law repeatedly. In August, the Service sent letters to wind developers and utilities across the country requesting records demonstrating compliance with BGEPA as part of a crackdown on wind energy writ large.
This brings us back to the lawsuit. Crucial to this case is the work of a former Fish and Wildlife Service biologist Mike Lockhart, whom intrepid readers of The Fight may remember for telling me that he’s been submitting evidence of excessive golden eagle deaths to Fish and Wildlife for years. Along with its legal complaint, the Conservancy filed a detailed breakdown of its back-and-forth with Fish and Wildlife over an initial public records request. Per those records, the agency has failed to produce any evidence that it received Lockhart’s proof of bird deaths – ones that he asserts occurred because of these wind farms.
“By refusing to even identify, let alone disclose, obviously responsive but nonexempt records the Conservancy knows to be in the Department’s possession and/or control, the Department leaves open serious questions about the integrity of its administration of BGEPA,” the lawsuit alleges.
The Fish and Wildlife Service did not respond to a request for comment on the case, though it’s worth noting that agencies rarely comment on pending litigation. PacifiCorp did not immediately respond to a request either. I will keep you posted as this progresses.
Plus more of the week’s biggest fights in renewable energy.
1. York County, Nebraska – A county commissioner in this rural corner of Nebraska appears to have lost his job after greenlighting a solar project.
2. St. Joseph County, Indiana – Down goes another data center!
3. Maricopa County, Arizona – I’m looking at the city of Mesa to see whether it’ll establish new rules that make battery storage development incredibly challenging.
4. Imperial County, California – Solar is going to have a much harder time in this agricultural area now that there’s a cap on utility-scale projects.
5. Converse County, Wyoming – The Pronghorn 2 hydrogen project is losing its best shot at operating: the wind.
6. Grundy County, Illinois – Another noteworthy court ruling came this week as a state circuit court ruled against the small city of Morris, which had sued the county seeking to block permits for an ECA Solar utility-scale project.
A conversation with Public Citizen’s Deanna Noel.
This week’s conversation is with Deanna Noel, climate campaigns director for the advocacy group Public Citizen. I reached out to Deanna because last week Public Citizen became one of the first major environmental groups I’ve seen call for localities and states to institute full-on moratoria against any future data center development. The exhortation was part of a broader guide for more progressive policymakers on data centers, but I found this proposal to be an especially radical one as some communities institute data center moratoria that also restrict renewable energy. I wanted to know, how do progressive political organizations talk about data center bans without inadvertently helping opponents of solar and wind projects?
The following conversation was lightly edited for clarity.
Why are you recommending we ban data centers until we have regulations?
The point of us putting this out was to give policymakers a roadmap and a starting point at all levels of government, putting in guardrails to start reeling in Big Tech. Because the reality is they’re writing their own rules with how they’d like to roll out these massive data centers.
A big reason for a moratorium at the state and local level is to put in place requirements to ensure any more development that is happening is not just stepping on local communities, undermining our climate goals, impacting water resources or having adverse societal impacts like incessant noise. Big Tech is often hiding behind non-disclosure agreements and tying the hands of local officials behind NDAs while they’re negotiating deals for their data centers, which then becomes a gag order blocking officials and the public from understanding what is happening. And so our guide set out to provide a policy roadmap and a starting point is to say, let’s put a pause on this.
Do you see any cities or states doing this now? I’m trying to get a better understanding of where this came from.
It’s happening at the local level. There was a moratorium in Prince George’s County [in Maryland], where I live, until a task force can be developed and make sure local residents’ concerns are addressed. In Georgia, localities have done this, too.
The idea on its own is simple: States and localities have the authority and should be the ones to implement these moratoriums that no data centers should go forward until baseline protections are in place. There are many protections we go through in our guide, but No. 1, Big Tech should be forced to pay their way. These are some of the most wealthy corporations on the planet, and yet they’re bending backwards to negotiate deals with local utilities and governments to ensure they’re paying as little as possible for the cost of their power infrastructure. Those costs are being put on ratepayers.
The idea of a moratorium is there’s a tension in a data center buildout without any regulations.
Do you have any concerns about pushing for blanket moratoria on new technological infrastructure? We’re seeing this policy thrown at solar and wind and batteries now. Is there any concern it’ll go from data centers to renewables next in some places?
First off, you’re right, and the Trump administration wants to fast-track an expansion that’ll rely on fossil fuels: coal, oil and gas. We’re in a climate crisis, and we’d be better off if these data centers relied entirely on renewable energy.
It’s incredibly important for policymakers to be clear when they’re setting moratoria that they’re not inadvertently halting clean, cheap energy like wind and solar. This is about the unfettered expansion of the data center industry to feed the AI machine. That’s what the focus needs to be on.
Yes, but there’s also this land use techlash going on, and I’m a little concerned advocacy for a moratorium on data centers will help those fighting to institute moratoria on solar and wind. I’m talking about Ohio and Wisconsin and Iowa. Are you at all concerned about a horseshoe phenomenon here, where people are opposing data centers for the same reasons they’re fighting renewable energy projects? What should folks in the advocacy space do to make sure those things aren’t tethered to one another?
That’s a great question. I think it comes down to clear messaging for the public.
People are opportunistic — they want to get their passion projects no matter what. We as advocates need to consistently message that renewable energy is not only the energy of tomorrow, but of today. It’s where the rest of the world is headed and the U.S. is going backwards under the Trump administration.
The data center issue is separate. Data centers are using way more land – these massive hyperscaler data center campuses – are using more land than solar and wind. We can be creative with those energies in a way we can’t with the data center expansion.
We need to make it absolutely clear: This is about corporate expansion at the expense of everyone else in a way that solar and wind aren’t. Those bring costs down and don’t have anywhere near as much of an environmental impact.