You’re out of free articles.
This Halloween, get 20% off using code ADVANCED
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:
Plus three big announcements from the annual hullabaloo.

Now in its fourth year, San Francisco Climate Week is noticeably bigger and buzzier each time I go. When I first attended in 2024, everyone was trying to shoehorn generative artificial intelligence into climate solutions. Last year, founders and funders were struggling to figure out how to deploy capital and stay afloat after Trump took a hammer to Biden-era climate incentives.
This year — which reportedly saw double 2025’s attendance, with roughly 60,000 people choosing from more than 700 events — everyone was banking on the data center buildout, the speed-to-power race, and the broader effort to squeeze more capacity out of the existing grid to save climate tech. Given that the AI race is essentially keeping the U.S. economy afloat during a tumultuous year of tariffs, war, and ongoing energy price shocks, that doesn’t look like such a bad bet, at least for now.
But it wasn’t the only issue at play. Critical minerals were another hot topic, while conversations around adaptation and resilience are finally becoming a bigger part of the picture. I also moderated a surprisingly technical panel on distributed energy resources and virtual power plants, though that inevitably managed to touch on data centers and strategies for managing AI-driven load growth, too.
At Heatmap House, our day of conversations and roundtables with leading climate thinkers, one investor mentioned he had recently backed a lab-grown meat startup – a true contrarian investment if I’ve ever seen one. And my colleague Robinson Meyer hosted a fascinating pair of back-to-back conversations on a controversial geoengineering approach known as solar radiation management, which proposes using aerosolized chemicals to reflect sunlight away from Earth. He first spoke with the CEO of Stardust Solutions, a private company actively building this tech, followed by an advocate for research into solar engineering but certainly not near-term commercial deployment.
It’s impossible to capture the exact essence of a conference with hundreds of individual events — at some level, it’s always going to be what you make of it. But as I bopped around the city shaking hands, I picked up a range of interesting perspectives, along with three pieces of news that I thought were worth unpacking here — one related to funding for critical minerals, and two focused on bringing data centers online as quickly and cleanly as possible.
At a Climate Week event, Atana Elements CEO Thomas Wilson disclosed that the critical minerals exploration startup has quietly closed its seed round, which totals $27.5 million, according to an SEC filing. The round includes participation from Earthshot Ventures, as well as Lowercarbon Capital, and Hitachi Ventures. Last year Atana officially — but stealthily — spun out of Lilac Solutions, a startup developing a cleaner method of extracting lithium from saltwater brines.
But while Lilac is focused on commercializing its novel lithium extraction technology, Atana is tackling the broader upstream mineral discovery process. Its scope includes lithium, but extends to other so-called “flowing” critical minerals dissolved in brines, such as helium, hydrogen, and copper. In the years before the spinout, Atana compiled reams of historical geological datasets — think “Soviet-era oil and gas reports,” Wilson said. It used these to train predictive artificial intelligence models designed to identify previously overlooked mineral deposits.
“You can think of Atana as somewhat analogous to Kobald, but for flowing minerals such as lithium brines rather than hard rock resources,” said Matt Logan of Earthshot Ventures at the event, hosted by the nonprofit climate tech investor Elemental Impact. Kobald similarly uses AI for minerals discovery, and following a $537 million Series C round last year, is reportedly valued at nearly $3 billion.
Atana formed as a team within Lilac back in 2019, benefiting from the more mature startup’s relatively long and well-funded runway — Lilac has raised about $315 million to date. “We have found some of the biggest deposits in the world, and we’ve drilled 19 exploration wells across three continents,” Wilson said. “Around 2% to 3%of the world’s new minerals have been found by this particular team.” That’s a huge number for a startup that’s yet to even formally launch.
To date, Atana has identified a high-grade lithium brine resource in an Argentinean salt flat and secured 1.5 million acres across Germany and Poland, where it’s conducting exploration for lithium brine deposits. While lithium is likely to remain a core market, Wilson said he’s looking forward to broadening Atana’s ambition, asking “now that we’ve been released from the Lilac lithium play, what can we do in copper, helium, hydrogen, and where can we do that in other parts of the world?”
Data center-driven load growth, speed-to-power, and grid flexibility dominated the conversation at SF Climate Week, and the much-hyped data center management platform Emerald AI came prepared with a fitting announcement: It’s partnering with Silicon Valley Power, Santa Clara’s municipally owned utility, not only to demonstrate the benefits of flexible data centers for the grid, but to actually attempt to implement a program that expedites grid interconnection for data centers with flexible loads.
The latter objective differentiates this from Emerald AI’s earlier utility pilots, which were primarily technical demonstrations of its software — proving it can slow, pause, or reroute AI workloads during periods of peak demand without disrupting critical operations, which research shows could unlock nearly 100 gigawatts of grid capacity. This new pilot appears to go a step further by explicitly linking that flexibility to interconnection outcomes. As Emerald AI’s business development lead Daniel Padilla confirmed at a panel, data centers operating flexibly in Silicon Valley Power’s territory “will get material acceleration in time-to-power.”
Santa Clara, which sits about 45 miles south of San Francisco, is a major West Coast data center hub, with roughly 58 facilities packed into 19 square miles, according to Chris Karwick, Silicon Valley Power’s assistant director of utility operations, who spoke later at the same event. Karwick confirmed that the pilot with Emerald includes a “flexible load interconnection program,” and noted that while utilities broadly recognize the need for solutions to rising data center load growth, few are eager to be first movers. “We’re the electric utility for a city. We’re not known for being innovative — we’re usually followers. So this is big for us,” he explained.
Since emerging from stealth last summer, Emerald AI has already raised $67.5 million, and is now working with Nvidia to develop a 96-megawatt flexible data center facility in Virginia called Aurora, which Padilla said is expected to come online in October.
As Heatmap’s end-of-year survey revealed, experts widely consider Meta to be among of the worst hyperscalers when it comes to its climate impact and sustainability efforts. But the company nevertheless maintains a net-zero by 2030 target, even as it continues to bring plenty of new natural gas capacity online to power its AI expansion. Now, however, the company is throwing its weight behind a markedly greener — and less proven — technology, the ultra-long duration energy storage startup Noon Energy.
Meta announced this week that it has reserved 100 gigawatt-hours of storage capacity from Noon, which completed a successful demonstration of its 100-plus-hour carbon-oxygen battery earlier this year. Noon’s system charges by breaking down CO2 and discharges by recombining it using a technology known as a reversible solid-oxide fuel cell, and is certainly one of the earliest-stage data center power technologies that Meta has supported.
“There’s an urgency now that I don’t think existed before,” Carolyn Campbell, head of clean technology innovation at Meta said at a Climate Week panel, referring to the need to deploy emerging energy tech to meet the surge in data-center driven electricity demand. She added that Meta is evaluating how its procurement strategy can help commercialize early-stage climate tech — an area it so far hasn’t backed as extensively as its peers Google and Microsoft.
“When we sign a partnership agreement with a new company, does that help them with their next financing round because their investors see a different level of interest in the technology than they would have otherwise?” Campbell speculated. “Can we provide some upfront development capital to support a pilot that was maybe conceptual — going from concept to reality? So I think that’s one of the things that I’m really excited about with the Noon partnership.”
As I reported earlier this year, Noon CEO Chris Graves expects initial commercial deployments to begin as soon as next year, with early systems installed onsite to allow data centers or other large loads to draw power directly from Noon’s batteries rather than interconnecting to the grid itself. The startup’s collaboration with Meta will kick off with a 2.5-gigawatt-hour project, scheduled for completion by 2028.
This Halloween, get 20% off using code ADVANCED
Log in
To continue reading, log in to your account.
Create a Free Account
To unlock more free articles, please create a free account.
Trump’s “data center dividend” appears to have backfired. Our latest poll results help explain why.
This year’s midterm elections called into question the efficacy of a push to pay local residents directly in exchange for building data centers.
Before the elections, I profiled the campaign for politicians to embrace the data center “dividend,” a policy idea modeled off Alaska’s Permanent Fund, which doles out checks to residents from profits off state oil, gas and mineral royalties. The Bitcoin Policy Institute, a tech policy think tank, was one of the first to trumpet the concept, but it was quickly taken up by President Donald Trump, who started raising it in speeches and on social media. “If companies want to make their Data Centers popular, pay the community, and/or individuals within the community, a ‘dividend,’” Trump posted to Truth Social on October 21.
Clearly the idea didn’t stop the bleeding. Democrats trounced Trump’s party in the midterms on a message that was heavy on attacks against data centers. But that still doesn’t explain why direct payments did so little to move the American public.
A Heatmap Pro poll conducted in early-to-mid October, right before the midterm elections, gives us an answer. As part of a broader survey of 2,500 registered voters, we asked about the idea — what we believe to be the first independent poll on direct payments for data centers by a news organization. We asked respondents whether there was a specific dollar amount they’d accept as a one-time cash payment in exchange for a data center being built near them. We also gave them the option to say no amount of money was sufficient.
Shockingly, a majority of people surveyed said they’d reject the data center cash payment in any amount. Among those who said they’d actually take the money, the median figure was around $10,000. The average was a whopping $146,000, skewed by the number of people who wrote $999,999, the maximum allowed by the survey.
This tracks what we’re seeing play out in communities where developers have tried this idea. In Hazle Township, Pennsylvania, NorthPoint — developer of an Amazon-linked data center project — proposed $10,000 cash payments to residents, no catch. Residents compared it to a bribe. In De Soto, Kansas, data center developer Digital Realty is offering annual $1,000 tax credits for a decade to neighbors of its proposed data center project. That proposal has been reportedly met with mixed reviews, too.
Clearly one of the problems here is that data centers not only face public perception issues around their local impacts, but are also more broadly associated with systemic inequality in the U.S. economy. The same Heatmap Pro survey found that a majority of voters believed AI companies have more control over the government than the oil and gas industry, pharmaceutical companies, banks, or other large industries.
Shaunna Thomas, executive director of Democratic-allied super PAC Guardrails Alliance, told me that during the campaign season they found that residents often associated the dividends with bribes, and that the president’s support for direct payments ultimately fed into voter sentiments about the tech sector controlling the government and society.
“People don’t want to have a conversation about distribution of wealth disconnected from a conversation about distribution of power,” Thomas said. “Specifically because Trump was saying that, we started hearing from voters in focus groups that it didn’t work for them. They’re hearing it as a bribe. They’re hearing they may get some sort of short-term economic or financial incentive to accept a technology they don’t trust is designed to help them.”
The Heatmap Pro survey results about cash payments ultimately reveal how emotionally driven the data center debate has become, said Sam Lyman of the Bitcoin Policy Institute. I asked Lyman to respond to the results because I thought they called into question the political effectiveness of the proposal we’d discussed months earlier. Lyman stipulated that he thinks the one-time payment nature of the question may have undermined the results, saying he prefers the dividends be paid out “in perpetuity.” But he acknowledged they also show “there’s still a lot of education to be done on data centers, what they do, and the impacts they have on the places where they’re built.”
“I think there’s a lot of Americans out there who have legitimate concerns that the future economy doesn’t include them. That’s something that needs to be addressed,” said Lyman, who said he laid part of the blame on what he called “irresponsible rhetoric” from AI industry executives about their technology’s impacts on society. “With data center dividends, the idea behind this policy is to help Americans understand the AI economy includes them. To give them a very material stake in that economy as it gets built out, especially in the rural communities that make data centers possible in the first place.”
Congressional seats were more likely to flip in states where bills rose fastest, according to our partners on the Electricity Price Hub.
The rise in household electricity costs over the past couple of years followed elected officials to the ballot box last week. But the pattern didn't hold evenly: Congressional seats flipped most often in states where bills rose fastest, while governors and regulators, the officials closest to rate decisions, were judged on very different terms.
No analysis can account for exactly why someone voted the way they did. Still, polling just before and after the election has made clear that soaring utility bills and the cost of living were at the forefront of voters’ minds. It’s easy to imagine that a South Carolina voter who backed Trump in 2024 and is now paying about $20 per month more for electricity might have been more inclined to vote for Annie Andrews for Senate than the president’s pick, Darline Graham. While we can’t yet make a causal claim about how increases in voters’ average monthly bills influenced their decisions, we can look at where bills rose and where seats changed hands.
To do that, we use data from Heatmap and MIT’s Electricity Price Hub to unpack the correlation between rising electricity bills under the second Trump administration and the electoral swings of this year’s midterms. Nationally, average electricity bills are up 10% since the start of the Trump administration. Meanwhile, the House popular vote swung 15 points toward Democrats compared to 2024’s presidential results, according to data from The New York Times.
A swing that size would have flipped many seats regardless of bills. The more telling question is whether seats flipped beyond what the swing predicts. Among seats where the incumbent party was vulnerable (those won by less than 15 points in 2024), states with above-average bill growth matched or exceeded the expected losses. States with below-average growth flipped fewer seats than a uniform 15-point swing would predict.
Further, nearly two-thirds of the 44 House seats Democrats flipped were in states where the average electricity bill grew faster than the national average over the past year, and one in five were in states where bill growth was double the national average. If Democrats flip the Senate seat in Alaska, then seven out of the nine Democratic pickups in the Senate will be in states with above national average one-year bill growth.
States with fast-rising bills differ in other ways, from their mix of competitive seats to their exposure to broader economic trends. Our bill growth figures are also statewide averages, and bills can vary widely within a state. The overall trend is in line with expectations, but the relationship between rising bills and electoral outcomes goes deeper.
Elections for governor or other statewide positions are historically less nationalized than their federal counterparts. That makes them a weaker test of national frustration with bills, but allows for additional analysis on how local conditions shape voters’ choices.
State races are not fully isolated from national trends. The Blue Tsunami flipped five gubernatorial seats, with zero pickups in the reverse direction so far. (Alaska is still undecided.) But those flips weren't concentrated in high-growth states. Three of the five (Georgia, Iowa, and Texas) came in states with some of the lowest bill growth over the past year. Meanwhile, the incumbent party held governorships in high-growth states at a higher rate than the national environment would predict, though Alaska could affect these results.
A few moderate Republican governors even held on in otherwise blue states. Incumbency certainly played a part, but the holds also demonstrate where voters targeted their backlash. In the Northeast, New Hampshire re-elected Governor Kelly Ayotte by four points, despite the Democratic Senate candidate carrying the state by 14 points. Vermont voters re-elected Phil Scott by six points. Both states had double-digit bill growth since President Trump took office, with average bills increasing by 18% and 15%, respectively.
On the other end, Democratic candidate Rob Sand flipped an open governorship in Iowa, outperforming the Democratic Senate candidate on the ballot. Statewide average bills in Iowa have grown at some of the slowest rates nationally; however growth rates vary across the state. Governor-elect Sand ran furthest ahead of his party’s Senate candidate in counties where bills rose the most.
The lessons of state-level races are less clear than federal ones. In states with popular incumbents, affordability backlash may have focused on a Republican-controlled Congress, while voters most affected by rising costs within a state sought new leadership in their state capital.
Another set of key players in electricity affordability, state energy regulators, were also on the ballot in these midterm elections. The general election mostly spared these races from the anti-incumbent party fervor, with only one state out of nine (Georgia) flipping control of their commission. These races, which were in more predominantly Republican states, largely followed partisan voting shares of other races in these states, with the greatest fervor around unseating establishment officials occurring during the primaries or last year’s off-cycle elections. That is not the end of the story, however: Utility commissioners are appointed, rather than elected, in most states, meaning there is more turnover to come.
The lack of electoral backlash toward the regulators who sign off on rate increases may indicate a lack of voter awareness of how different policymakers influence their bill. It may also highlight how national coverage has focused on rising generation costs, such as the Mid-Atlantic’s capacity cost spike, which pushes greater blame towards federal officials than state regulators that have less purview over generation prices that pass through to residential customers.
Utility costs alone didn’t produce this year’s Democratic wave, and the data can’t tell us precisely how much they contributed. But a below-the-hood look at the data shows a consistent pattern: the party broadly in power in Washington lost the most ground where bills rose fastest, while governors and regulators were judged on local circumstances, from incumbency to long-running rate fights. With new majorities in both chambers and rate cases pointing to more increases, there is an opportunity for this new Congress to meet voters’ demands and bring costs down.
On Meta’s green materials, China’s SMR wave, and Alaskan crude
Current conditions: The United States National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration has declared the ongoing El Niño a “super” version of the weather patterns that could be the most intense ever recorded • Storm Charles deluged Madeira, Portugal’s island exclave, as hundreds of flights were canceled to and from the Iberian country • Temperatures in New York City are set to drop as low as 39 degrees Fahrenheit as a nor’easter pummels the American Northeast ahead of what’s forecast to be a brisk but sunny weekend.
Nvidia CEO Jensen Huang stepped down Thursday amid a ballooning scandal over his extramarital affairs with a Chinese spy and at least two employees of the world’s top designer of microchips for artificial intelligence, according to press reports. His departure, and the controversy left in his wake, poses a test for AI stocks, which took a battering last week after Democrats’ blue wave victory in Congress, and of what The Wall Street Journal called “the great-man theory that the course of history is often determined by singular individuals.” SpaceX Elon Musk (who said it “would be an honor” to hire Huang) is plowing ahead with plans to invest more than $74 billion at two supercomputing campuses in Texas and Arizona that are designed to train frontier AI models, Investor’s Business Daily reported. While the company says it plans to work with local generators to power the Arizona site, the Texas campus is expected to run on behind-the-meter natural gas-fired generation. Such huge new sources of demand for natural gas risk driving up prices for regular consumers, Sonia Aggarwal and Jamie Van Nostrand wrote yesterday in a piece for our Ideas section that called for a Gas Customer Protection Pledge. “It’s simple supply and demand.”
Meta, meanwhile, struck a series of deals to make the physical material that builds its data centers greener. In back-to-back partnerships announced on Thursday, the Facebook owner agreed to buy low-carbon cement from the Massachusetts startup Sublime Systems and green steel from Sweden’s Stegra. While the supply of green steel has not yet caught up with demand, Meta said it would fulfill its contract with environmental attribute certificates that “let us act on those emissions now, with third-party verification, and direct demand toward production that is still coming online. That is how the market for green steel gets built.”
I cannot think of any New York Times editorial board endorsement that swung a race in last week’s midterm elections. But the paper’s opinion section leaders made a splash Thursday morning by giving the Senate’s permitting reform deal its full-throated backing. “Anyone who cares about climate change should cheer this bill,” the paper wrote. “And a party that just won an election on affordability should not pass up a chance to start delivering immediately.” The headline pointedly read: “Democrats, take the deal.”
But the argument has a glaring omission: It does not address the most potent source of opposition to the bill. “Unsurprisingly, the Time’s [sic] Editorial Board says nothing about tribes, even while tribal issues are central to negotiations,” Julian Brave NoiseCat, the Academy Award-nominated documentarian and writer and member of the Canim Lake Band Tsq’escen in British Columbia, wrote in a post on X. “It is absolutely outrageous how little American cultural, political, and economic elites know about Indigenous peoples and our concerns.”
China is building more nuclear reactors at home than any other country. Nearly all 30-plus of them — created by two state-owned nuclear giants — are large-scale conventional reactors. But more than 20 startups in the country are now racing to develop small modular reactors, according to a tally published Thursday in the South China Morning Post. Founded last year, Weilan NuEnergy, a Shanghai-based startup looking to develop water-cooled SMRs, said the push by private companies to build out an SMR industry to compete with the sector emerging in the U.S. is relatively recent. “There were no similar domestic competitors when we launched,” Hu Po, Weilan’s chief executive, told Hong Kong’s English-language newspaper of record. “This allowed us to successfully recruit a cohort of outstanding engineers from the industry with extensive practical experience. Building a high-caliber team is our greatest competitive advantage at present.” While the commercialization of SMRs has only just begun, Hu said he expected the technology to spread overseas. “Just like China’s other large-scale energy projects, while we will fully secure and meet domestic energy needs, we will certainly actively pursue a global footprint,” Hu said.
Just look at renewables. At the United Nations COP31 climate summit in Antalya, Turkey, China signed a $15 billion deal to sell 7 gigawatts of solar and wind to the host country, along with battery storage capacity and 4 gigawatts of transmission infrastructure. “This cooperation will not only increase our renewable energy capacity but also facilitate technology transfer, making a very significant contribution to the production of wind turbine equipment in our country and the development of our domestic industry,” Alparslan Bayraktar, Turkey’s minister of energy and natural resources, wrote in a post on X.
Sign up to receive Heatmap AM in your inbox every morning:
California’s energy regulators ordered the state’s three major investor-owned utilities to jointly propose a common framework for coordinating distributed energy resources such as rooftop solar and home batteries. The proposal, announced late last month and reported by Utility Dive on Thursday, sets a deadline of next October to show how the DER load can be orchestrated and dispatched. “Our decision gives families and businesses more options to charge a car, electrify a home, or expand operations while reducing the need for costly upgrades,” the California Public Utilities Commission’s Christine Harada said in a statement. “Those options need to be easy to understand and easy to use, people shouldn’t need an engineering degree to benefit.”
In New York, meanwhile, the state took what it called “a significant step in its effort to develop at least 1 gigawatt” of new nuclear power upstate. On Thursday, the New York Power Authority approved 10 developers’ requests to qualify as potential vendors. “In qualifying 10 major players in the nuclear industry, NYPA has strengthened its ability to directly advance the development of the first nuclear facility in New York in generations,” NYPA CEO Justin Driscoll said in a statement.

It’s been exactly 6,645 days since then-Alaska Governor Sarah Palin stood on stage at the 2008 Republican National Convention and vowed to “drill, baby, drill.” The three-word slogan — still widely used in American politics today — has far outlasted the former Republican vice presidential nominee, whose relevance faded years ago. But Alaska is, indeed, drilling. New analysis by the U.S. Energy Information Administration shows a projected 13% uptick in crude production in the state next year. That’s more than double the 6% increase in 2026. “If realized, these annual production increases will be the largest since the 1980s, when Alaskan crude production peaked at 2.0 million barrels per day,” the agency wrote.

China’s electric vehicle champion has unveiled a new integrated charging system powered by solar panels. Built in the Abu Dhabi desert, the new station — which looks like a gas pump — features panels, batteries, ultra-fast charging, and a robotic arm that automatically plugs into the vehicle. “We are providing clean energy generation, energy storage and ultra-fast charging together, and we are making the charging experience smarter, simpler and more seamless for drivers around the world,” Stella Li, BYD’s executive vice president, said in a statement.