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:
Everything you need to know — including one big (potential) drawback.
The humble water heater, like your fridge or septic tank, is the type of home technology that you only notice if and when it breaks. For most homeowners, that’s every 13 years. But if you’re on a mission to decarbonize your life, you might want to rethink your current set-up, and perhaps consider a makeover. Per the Department of Energy, water heating accounts for roughly 18% of the average household’s energy use, making it the second largest energy expense in any home.
Back in April, the DOE released new residential water heater standards that it says will save American households approximately $7.6 billion per year on their energy bills “while significantly cutting energy waste and harmful carbon pollution.” The standards will also, in effect, phase out electric resistance water heaters, which currently account for half the U.S. market, in favor of more energy-efficient heat pump water heaters by 2029. If any of that confuses you, read on. We’re breaking down everything you need to know about this oft-forgotten, basement-dwelling home technology, from the taxonomy of water heater types to tax credit and rebate tips to product recommendations.
Andy Meyer is a senior program manager at Efficiency Maine, an independent agency that implements energy efficiency programs in the state. His team is responsible for providing resources on heat pump water heaters to Maine residents, who buy one out of every 10 purchased in the U.S.
Ben Foster is vice president of operations at Barnett Plumbing & Water Heaters, a leading heat pump water heater contractor in California. He’s also developed loaner water heater programs supported by TECH Clean California, and notes that most contractors don’t have access to loaner programs:
Joseph Wachunas is a senior project manager at the New Buildings Institute, a nonprofit working to reduce emissions and deliver climate solutions through the built environment. At NBI, he heads up the Advanced Water Heating Initiative, which aims to decarbonize water heating through heat pump water heaters.
“Heat pump water heaters are simple to install — any plumber or handy person can do it — but plumbers may not be familiar with them. So if you talk with a plumber who has concerns, consider calling another plumber,” Meyer told me. “Again, Mainers have installed over 70,000 in the last 12 years. They are no longer new.”
A heat pump water heater is made up of a compressor, storage tank, condenser, evaporator coil, fan, backup heating elements, and refrigerant. The compressor, located in the upper compartment of the water heater, uses refrigerant to heat the water in the storage tank (via the condenser, which acts as a heat exchanger). The evaporator coil and fan work to change refrigerant from liquid back to gas after the water has been heated. The backup electric heating elements kick in only in periods of high demand to ensure consistent hot water supply.
A common misconception about heat pumps in general is that they don’t work in colder climates. This is not at all the case — half of electric water heaters in Maine, for instance, are now heat pumps. As long as they are installed indoors and in an area where pipes won’t freeze (typically, a basement), heat pump water heaters work throughout the year in all climates, according to Meyer and Wachunas. The rule of thumb, per the DOE, is to install your heat pump water heater in locations that remain in the 40 degree to 90 degree Fahrenheit range year-round.
Per the DOE, replacing your standard electric water heater with a heat pump water heater can save you up to 10% on your electricity bill, reducing your water heating energy consumption and costs by up to 70%.
The number one mistake homeowners make when it comes to their water heaters is waiting until they’re broken to replace them. This severely limits your options for new water heaters — as Foster notes, no one “wants to go days without hot water, let alone weeks,” and it can take weeks or even months to fit your home for a heat pump water heater. (We’ll get into why a bit later.)
“A lot of contractors, if you want a heat pump and you have a leaking water heater that needs to be replaced today, they're just going to convince you to go with gas,” Foster said.
Some contractors have loaner water heater programs, so you can temporarily use a gas heater in an emergency situation, but these programs are few and far between. If you’ve had your water heater for 10 years or more — even if it’s working just fine — it might be time to think about replacing it. If you do, you’ll need to consider a few things about your home and lifestyle, especially if you’re considering a heat pump water heater:
Heat pump water heaters require a significant amount of space. Per Pacific Northwest National Laboratory, heat pump water heaters can require more than 6 feet of height clearance to account for their air filters, as well as a 3-foot diameter space to provide clearance for the drain pan and other connections. Additionally, the heat pump water heater should be positioned so the exhaust outlet is at least 8 inches away from a wall, door, or ceiling.
Also, since heat pump water heaters work by drawing heat from the surrounding air, they require 700 cubic feet of unenclosed space surrounding the water heater location. While it is possible to install a heat pump water heater in a location with insufficient air volume (for instance, by installing the water heater with a door equipped with top and bottom grills), this would require extra work from your contractor. Taking all these measurements into account, this basically means that a heat pump water heater requires a 10-foot by 9-foot room with an 8-foot-tall ceiling.
Heat pump water heaters also require monthly and yearly service, Meyer told me. You should change the water filter every two to six months, and clear the condensate lines to ensure your unit doesn’t get clogged with mold or bacteria. Additionally, if your unit is a hybrid, you’ll have to keep an eye on its anode rod, which can become corroded over time and lead to heating issues. You’ll have to flush your heat pump water heater annually to avoid corrosion.
If you’re going to DIY it, understanding your household’s water needs is key to sizing and installing a new heat pump water heater. First, determine your house’s peak hour demand (the maximum amount of water your house uses in one hour per day) using this worksheet from the DOE. You can then use that number (measured in gallons) to determine what size heat water heater to buy — look at the heater’s first hour rating, a.k.a. the amount of hot water the heater can supply per hour, starting with a tank full of hot water. You’ll want your heater’s first hour rating to be equal to (or ideally, higher than) your peak hour demand.
Though you should use the worksheet to determine your unique peak hour demand, a general rule is that households of one to two people should use a 50-gallon water heater, while households of three or more people should use a 65- to 80-gallon tank. The average family uses 50 gallons of hot water per day, Wachunas explained. “So even if you have lots of showers in the morning, your heat pump in two to four hours will heat that water back up and you have plenty of extra supply.”
If you’re between two sizes of heat pump water heaters, always upsize, Foster said. This ensures that the heat pump is the primary source of heat, as opposed to the much less efficient backup electric mechanisms. In other words, it’s far more efficient (and less expensive!) for a larger heat pump water heater to heat a few extra gallons of water using the heat pump than it is for a smaller heat pump water heater to have to use its electric elements to keep up with excess demand.
Since many heat pump water heaters have certain voltage requirements, you may have to upgrade your electrical panel for 240-volt hardwired service. The cost and time involved in having your service upgraded can vary and depends on whether the power lines coming into your house are above ground. If they’re underground, Foster explained, a contractor will have to excavate and run new cables, which can take over a year. The best way to determine if you’ll need to upgrade your service is to have a trusted contractor do an assessment on your home. (This is also why it’s essential to plan in advance.)
Basements are always the best places for heat pump water heaters, regardless of climate. Other common locations for installation include garages, interior rooms, and rooms outside the thermal envelope, like attached sheds and utility rooms. The garage does not have to be insulated if outdoor temperatures are usually above 50°F, but if temperatures dip below freezing and the garage is uninsulated, it’d be best to consider another location. Interior rooms, like laundry or IT rooms, are a great choice because a heat pump water heater can utilize any waste heat generated by the equipment in the room. Finally, rooms outside the thermal envelope, like attached sheds, can be even more efficient than interior spaces in hot or warm climates because of the excess hot air.
Feeling ready to go shopping? Here’s everything you need to know about the buying and installation process.
This plug-in model caused quite a stir when it came out two years ago, and for good reason. Its low voltage allows it to be plugged into a standard outlet, making it a great fit for smaller homes with fewer residents, or anyone in need of a quick fix. (This is also a relatively foolproof choice for DIYers because of the quick and easy installation process.) For those wanting a model with a bit more flexibility but still an easy install, there’s the A.O. Smith Signature 900Plug-in Hybrid, which is more expensive but has the added benefit of back-up electric resistance elements that help with higher hot water demand. Alternatively, you can go for the 120-Volt Rheem ProTerra Plug-in Water Heater with HydroBoost, which utilizes a mixing valve for maximum hot water output.
If app functionality is especially important to you, Rheem’s ProTerra line might be particularly appealing. The EcoNet app allows users to monitor the hot water heater from their phone, with status updates on potential leaks as well as compressor health, hot water availability and the unit’s set water temperature.
Another solid choice for larger families, for roughly the same price, is A.O. Smith’s Signature 900 80-Gal.For further durability, consider Bradford White’s Aerotherm Series water heaters, which can only be purchased through a qualified contractor, but are frequently praised for their resilience and anti-microbial technology.
Split-system heat pump water heaters are the answer for truly huge houses, where the heat pump itself is outside while the storage tank remains inside. “You can chain together as many heat pump units as you want with as many storage tanks as you want,” Foster said. “So you can create as big a system as you want.” While split-system heat pump water heaters are much less widely-available in the U.S. than they are in Asia and Europe, you can purchase this one online. SANCO is also shipping a new fifth generation unit soon, Quit Carbon advises, which may prove more cost-effective and will qualify for more rebates in California.
The quietest HPWH on the market, at 45 decibels, is made by A.O. Smith, according to Foster. It’s available in 50, 65, and 80 gallon sizes, so it can accommodate a variety of household types. Another quiet option is LG’s Inverter Heat Pump Water Heater, though LG is much newer to the heat pump water heater game than Rheem and A.O. Smith, so it may be more difficult to find qualified contractors.
Three more expert contractors I spoke with — Nate Adams, a longtime HVAC insulation and sealing contractor in West Virginia who specializes in electrification retrofits for homeowners; John Semmelhack, an HVAC consultant and the owner of Think Little, a building science consulting firm specializing in mechanical system design for passive house and net-zero energy homes; and Tim Portman, the owner of Portman Mechanical, specializing in electrification, heating and cooling, and home performance — had concerns about heat pump water heater installations.
Adams said heaters he’s installed have had a 50% failure rate, while Portman and Semmelhack cite a 60% failure rate. These issues have seemingly cropped up after 2018 and are almost entirely occurring with A.O. Smith and Rheem’s fifth generation of water heater models; older generations performed and continue to perform much better. “All my installs from 2014-2018 are still running to my knowledge,” says Adams. “Which is a big part of my frustration— we had this figured out already.”
The specific causes of these failures vary, spanning from tanks bursting to heat pumps losing charge, according to Adams. Semmelhack and Portman, meanwhile, pointed mainly to refrigerant leaks and compressor issues. (A.O. Smith and Rheem did not respond to requests for comment.) “All of the failures are happening inside the first year of operation,” noted Semmelhack. “So it's happening pretty quick, which makes us think that it's a factory problem and not an environmental problem inside the household.”
Semmelhack and Portman are hopeful about Cala’s new heat pump water heaters, which use an AI-powered control system to forecast hot water demand and heat the water in the tank accordingly with a heat pump. They’re aiming to start shipping those units in 2025, and you can preorder and learn more here.
Log in
To continue reading, log in to your account.
Create a Free Account
To unlock more free articles, please create a free account.
Current conditions: Bosnia’s capital of Sarajevo is blanketed in a layer of toxic smog • Temperatures in Perth, in Western Australia, could hit 106 degrees Fahrenheit this weekend • It is cloudy in Washington, D.C., where lawmakers are scrambling to prevent a government shutdown.
The weather has gotten so weird that the U.S. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration is holding internal talks about how to adjust its models to produce more accurate forecasts, the Financial Timesreported. Current models are based on temperature swings observed over one part of the Pacific Ocean that have for years correlated consistently with specific weather phenomena across the globe, but climate change seems to be disrupting that cause and effect pattern, making it harder to predict things like La Niña and El Niño. Many forecasters had expected La Niña to appear by now and help cool things down, but that has yet to happen. “It’s concerning when this region we’ve studied and written all these papers on is not related to all the impacts you’d see with [La Niña],” NOAA’s Michelle L’Heureux told the FT. “That’s when you start going ‘uh-oh’ there may be an issue here we need to resolve.”
There is quite a lot of news coming out of the Department of Energy as the year (and the Biden administration) comes to an end. A few recent updates:
Walmart, the world’s largest retailer, does not expect to meet its 2025 or 2030 emissions targets, and is putting the blame on policy, infrastructure, and technology limitations. The company previously pledged to cut its emissions by 35% by next year, and 65% by the end of the decade. Emissions in 2023 were up 4% year-over-year.
Walmart
“While we continue to work toward our aspirational target of zero operational emissions by 2040, progress will not be linear … and depends not only on our own initiatives but also on factors beyond our control,” Walmart’s statement said. “These factors include energy policy and infrastructure in Walmart markets around the world, availability of more cost-effective low-GWP refrigeration and HVAC solutions, and timely emergence of cost-effective technologies for low-carbon heavy tractor transportation (which does not appear likely until the 2030s).”
BlackRock yesterday said it is writing down the value of its Global Renewable Power Fund III following the failure of Northvolt and SolarZero, two companies the fund had invested in. Its net internal rate of return was -0.3% at the end of the third quarter, way down from 11.5% in the second quarter, according toBloomberg. Sectors like EV charging, transmission, and renewable energy generation and storage have been “particularly challenged,” executives said, and some other renewables companies in the portfolio have yet to get in the black, meaning their valuations may be “more subjective and sensitive to evolving dynamics in the industry.”
Flies may be more vulnerable to climate change than bees are, according to a new study published in the Journal of Melittology. The fly haters among us might shrug at the finding, but the researchers insist flies are essential pollinators that help bolster ecosystem biodiversity and agriculture. “It’s time we gave flies some more recognition for their role as pollinators,” said lead author Margarita López-Uribe, who is the Lorenzo Langstroth Early Career Associate Professor of Entomology at Penn State. The study found bees can tolerate higher temperatures than flies, so flies are at greater risk of decline as global temperatures rise. “In alpine and subarctic environments, flies are the primary pollinator,” López-Uribe said. “This study shows us that we have entire regions that could lose their primary pollinator as the climate warms, which could be catastrophic for those ecosystems.”
“No one goes to the movies because they want to be scolded.” –Heatmap’s Jeva Lange writes about the challenges facing climate cinema, and why 2024 might be the year the climate movie grew up.
Whether you agree probably depends on how you define “climate movie” to begin with.
Climate change is the greatest story of our time — but our time doesn’t seem to invent many great stories about climate change. Maybe it’s due to the enormity and urgency of the subject matter: Climate is “important,” and therefore conscripted to the humorless realms of journalism and documentary. Or maybe it’s because of a misunderstanding on the part of producers and storytellers, rooted in an outdated belief that climate change still needs to be explained to an audience, when in reality they don’t need convincing. Maybe there’s just not a great way to have a character mention climate change and not have it feel super cringe.
Whatever the reason, between 2016 and 2020, less than 3% of film and TV scripts used climate-related keywords during their runtime, according to an analysis by media researchers at the University of Southern California. (The situation isn’t as bad in literature, where cli-fi has been going strong since at least 2013.) At least on the surface, this on-screen avoidance of climate change continued in 2024. One of the biggest movies of the summer, Twisters, had an extreme weather angle sitting right there, but its director, Lee Isaac Chung, went out of his way to ensure the film didn’t have a climate change “message.”
I have a slightly different take on the situation, though — that 2024 was actuallyfull of climate movies, and, I’d argue, that they’re getting much closer to the kinds of stories a climate-concerned individual should want on screen.
That’s because for the most part, when movies and TV shows have tackled the topic of climate change in the past, it’s been with the sort of “simplistic anger-stoking and pathos-wringing” that The New Yorker’s Richard Brody identified in 2022’s Don’t Look Up, the Adam McKay satire that became the primary touchpoint for scripted climate stories. At least it was kind of funny: More overt climate stories like last year’s Foe, starring Saoirse Ronan and Paul Mescal, and Extrapolations, the Apple TV+ show in which Meryl Streep voices a whale, are so self-righteous as to be unwatchable (not to mention, no fun).
But what if we widened our lens and weren’t so prescriptive? Then maybe Furiosa, this spring’s Mad Max prequel, becomes a climate change movie. The film is set during a “near future” ecological collapse, and it certainly makes you think about water scarcity and our overreliance on a finite extracted resource — but it also makes you think about how badass the Octoboss’ kite is. The same goes for Dune: Part Two, which made over $82 million in its opening weekend and is also a recognizable environmental allegory featuring some cool worms. Even Ghostbusters: Frozen Empire, a flop that most people have already memory-holed, revisitedThe Day After Tomorrow’s question of, “What if New York City got really, really, really cold?”
Two 2024 animated films with climate themes could even compete against each other at the Academy Awards next year. Dreamworks Animation’s The Wild Robot, one of the centerpiece films at this fall’s inaugural Climate Film Festival, is set in a world where sea levels have risen to submerge the Golden Gate Bridge, and it impresses on its audience the importance of protecting the natural world. And in Gints Zilbalodis’ Flow, one of my favorite films of the year, a cat must band together with other animals to survive a flood.
Flow also raises the question of whether a project can unintentionally be a climate movie. Zilbalodis told me that making a point about environmental catastrophe wasn’t his intention — “I can’t really start with the message, I have to start with the character,” he said — and to him, the water is a visual metaphor in an allegory about overcoming your fears.
But watching the movie in a year when more than a thousand people worldwide have died in floods, and with images of inundated towns in North Carolina still fresh in mind, it’s actually climate change itself that makes one watch Flow as a movie about climate change. (I’m not the only one with this interpretation, either: Zilbalodis told me he’d been asked by one young audience member if the flood depicted in his film is “the future.”)
Perhaps this is how we should also consider Chung’s comments about Twisters. While nobody in the film says the words “climate change” or “global warming,” the characters note that storms are becoming exceptional — “we've never seen tornadoes like this before,” one says. Despite the director’s stated intention not to make the movie “about” climate change, it becomes a climate movie by virtue of what its audiences have experienced in their own lives.
Still, there’s that niggling question: Do movies like these, which approach climate themes slant-wise, really count? To help me decide, I turned to Sam Read, the executive director of the Sustainable Entertainment Alliance, an advocacy consortium that encourages environmental awareness both on set and on screen. He told me that to qualify something as a “climate” movie or TV show, some research groups look to see if climate change exists in the world of the story or whether the characters acknowledge it. Other groups consider climate in tiers, such as whether a project has a climate premise, theme, or simply a moment.
The Sustainable Entertainment Alliance, however, has no hard rules. “We want to make sure that we support creatives in integrating these stories in whatever way works for them,” Read told me.
Read also confirmed my belief that there seemed to be an uptick in movies this year that were “not about climate change but still deal with things that feel very climate-related, like resource extraction.” There was even more progress on this front in television, he pointed out: True Detective: Night Country wove in themes of environmentalism, pollution, mining, and Indigenous stewardship; the Max comedy Hacks featured an episode about climate change this season; and Industry involved a storyline about taking a clean energy company public, with some of the characters even attending COP. Even Doctor Odyssey, a cruise ship medical drama that airs on USA, worked climate change into its script, albeit in ridiculous ways. (Also worth mentioning: The Netflix dating show Love is Blind cast Taylor Krause, who works on decarbonizing heavy industry at RMI.)
We can certainly do more. As many critics before me have written, it’s still important to draw a connection between things like environmental catastrophes and the real-world human causes of global warming. But the difference between something being “a climate movie” and propaganda — however true its message, or however well-intentioned — is thin. Besides, no one goes to the movies because they want to be scolded; we want to be moved and distracted and entertained.
I’ve done my fair share of complaining over the past few years about how climate storytelling needs to grow up. But lately I’ve been coming around to the idea that it’s not the words “climate change” appearing in a script that we need to be so focused on. As 2024’s slate of films has proven to me — or, perhaps, as this year’s extreme weather events have thrown into relief — there are climate movies everywhere.
Keep ‘em coming.
They might not be worried now, but Democrats made the same mistake earlier this year.
Permitting reform is dead in the 118th Congress.
It died earlier this week, although you could be forgiven for missing it. On Tuesday, bipartisan talks among lawmakers fell apart over a bid to rewrite parts of the National Environmental Policy Act. The changes — pushed for by Representative Bruce Westerman, chairman of the House Natural Resources Committee — would have made it harder for outside groups to sue to block energy projects under NEPA, a 1970 law that governs the country’s process for environmental decisionmaking.
When those talks died, they also killed a separate deal over permitting struck earlier this year between Senator Joe Manchin of West Virginia and Senator John Barrasso of Wyoming. That deal, as I detailed last week, would have loosened some federal rules around oil and gas drilling in exchange for a new, quasi-mandatory scheme to build huge amounts of long-distance transmission.
Rest in peace, I suppose. Even if lawmakers could not agree on NEPA changes, I think Republicans made a mistake by not moving forward with the Manchin-Barrasso deal. (I still believe that the standalone deal could have passed the Senate and the House if put to a vote.) At this point, I do not think we will see another shot at bipartisan permitting reform until at least late 2026, when the federal highway law will need fresh funding.
But it is difficult to get too upset about this failure because larger mistakes have since compounded the initial one. On Wednesday, Republican Speaker Mike Johnson’s bipartisan deal to fund the government — which is, after all, a much more fundamental task of governance than rewriting some federal permitting laws — fell apart, seemingly because Donald Trump and Elon Musk decided they didn’t like it. If I can indulge in the subjunctive for a moment: That breakdown might have likely killed any potential permitting deal, too. So even in a world where lawmakers somehow did strike a deal earlier this week, it might already be dead. (As I write this, the House GOP has reportedly reached a new deal to fund the government through March, which has weakened or removed provisions governing pharmacy benefit managers and limiting American investments in China.)
The facile reading of this situation is that Republicans now hold the advantage. The Trump administration will soon be able to implement some of the fossil fuel provisions in the Manchin-Barrasso deal through the administrative state. Trump will likely expand onshore and offshore drilling, will lease the government’s best acreage to oil and gas companies, and will approve as many liquified natural gas export terminals as possible. His administration will do so, however, without the enhanced legal protection that the deal would have provided — and while those protections are not a must-have, especially with a friendly Supreme Court, their absence will still allow environmental groups to try to run down the clock on some of Trump’s more ambitious initiatives.
Republicans believe that they will be able to get parts of permitting reform done in a partisan reconciliation bill next year. These efforts seem quite likely to run aground, at least as long as something like the current rules governing reconciliation bills hold. I have heard some crazy proposals on this topic — what if skipping a permitting fight somehow became a revenue-raiser for the federal government? — but even they do not touch the deep structure of NEPA in the way a bipartisan compromise could. As Westerman toldPolitico’s Josh Siegel: “We need 60 votes in the Senate to get real permitting reform … People are just going to have to come to an agreement on what permitting reform is.” In any case, Manchin and the Democrats already tried to reform the permitting system via a partisan reconciliation bill and found it essentially impossible.
Even if reconciliation fails, Republicans say, they will still be in a better negotiating position next year than this year because the party will control a few more Senate votes. But will they? The GOP will just have come off a difficult fight over tax reform. Twelve or 24 months from now, demands on the country’s electricity grid are likely to be higher than they are today, and the risk of blackouts will be higher than before. The lack of a robust transmission network will hinder the ability to build a massive new AI infrastructure, as some of Trump’s tech industry backers hope. But 12 or 24 months from now, too, Democrats — furious at Trump — are not going to be in a dealmaking mood, and Republicans have relatively few ways to bring them to the table.
In any case, savvy Republicans should have realized that it is important to get supply-side economic reforms done as early in a president’s four-year term as possible. Such changes take time to filter through the system and turn into real projects and real economic activity; passing the law as early as possible means that the president’s party can enjoy them and campaign on them.
All of it starts to seem more and more familiar. When Manchin and Barrasso unveiled their compromise earlier this year, Democrats didn’t act quickly on it. They felt confident that the window for a deal wouldn’t close — and they looked forward to a potential trifecta, when they would be able to get even more done (and reject some of Manchin’s fossil fuel-friendly compromises).
Democrats, I think, wound up regretting the cavalier attitude that they brought to permitting reform before Trump’s win. But now the GOP is acting the same way: It is rejecting compromises, believing that it will be able to strike a better deal on permitting issues during its forthcoming trifecta. That was a mistake when Democrats did it. I think it will be a mistake for Republicans, too.