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:
With a total solar eclipse on its way — the last one visible from the U.S. in the next 20 years — millions are asking: What will the weather be?
On December 14, 2020, at a little past 1 p.m., meteorologist Matthew Cappucci sat down in the middle of a random field near the Chilean-Argentinian border and cried because it was cloudy.
“To say I was devastated would be an understatement,” he told me.
Cappucci had traveled from his home in Washington, D.C., to Pucón, Chile, to experience a total solar eclipse, only to be denied by an atmospheric river. Under normal circumstances, he could have driven into Argentina, where there were clear skies on the other side of the Andes, but COVID travel restrictions were still in place and the border was closed. His long months of planning and excitement, all dashed by a couple last-minute rain clouds.
All that is to say, Cappucci understands better than most the importance of making an immaculate eclipse-day forecast. In less than a week, millions of Americans will flood the 115-mile-wide, 15-state-long path of totality for the country’s last total solar eclipse until 2044. As they do so, they’ll be relying on the predictions of local and national meteorologists like Cappucci, an atmospheric scientist at MyRadar and the Capitol Weather Gang. “I will say that I’ve never personally been more stressed about an event, nor been looking forward to something as much,” Cappucci told me.
Weather teams across the country have been preparing for April 8, 2024, since as early as 2017, when the last American total solar eclipse occurred. There was a noticeable giddiness among the meteorologists I spoke to; it’s fairly unusual for the public to have a high level of interest in a forecast that isn’t potentially life-threatening. “It’ll be really fun to get to be out there and not have to be in a raincoat or have things flying through the air,” Alex Wilson, an on-air meteorologist at The Weather Channel, joked to me.
But as Cappucci alluded to, there is also an elevated sense of responsibility. Every local weather website in or near the path of totality I checked last week already had information about the eclipse-day forecast on its homepage. National publications like The Washington Post, meanwhile, are publishing new explainers, live maps, and opinion pieces daily in the lead-up to the event. Wilson told me The Weather Channel will have “a bunch of teams” stationed from Texas all the way along the path of totality to Maine; she’ll personally be on hand in Dallas for the station’s Celestron telescope live stream from Love Field.
Cappucci and the rest of the small MyRadar team are also planning to head to Texas for their coverage, which is shaping up to include a live stream and an “Eclipse Week” package that started Monday. (The company has also been giving away MyRadar-branded eclipse glasses in the lead-up to the event.) This time, Cappucci has thought of everything; he even has a StarLink subscription to ensure that the team can maintain internet connectivity if it ends up reporting from a remote corner of the state.
Fox Weather, meanwhile, has 120 meteorologists under its national, regional, and local umbrella, and has been planning its own solar eclipse package since October’s annular eclipse over Texas. The finer details were still coming together last week when I spoke to Fox meteorologist Stephen Morgan, who is based in New York City and will be anchoring from Dallas. But at a minimum, the network plans to have correspondents on air in 10 cities along the path of totality, stretching from Eagle Pass on the Mexican border to Burlington, Vermont. “We’re excited,” Morgan told me, “but I think the elephant in the room is the fact that this is happening in the month of April, which is a very tough month when it comes to forecasting.”
Joe Rao, a longtime television meteorologist and an umbraphile who has seen 13 total solar eclipses, was even more blunt when I asked him what local weather teams would be grappling with this week. “Out of the 12 months of the year, April is probably the worst month to have an eclipse,” he told me.
April is a transitional month in North America, seasonally-speaking. It is a time when severe weather begins to ramp up; it’s the second busiest month for tornadoes. The continent’s three major west-to-east storm paths also become more active. And in places like Texas, which experts said would have the best chance of anywhere in the nation for clear skies on eclipse day, you can still get a south wind that brings moisture off the Gulf of Mexico, giving clouds a chance to develop.
Houston-based Fox meteorologist Aaron Barker is keenly aware of this. He’s been sharing radar models for Central Texas on Twitter and, as of now, the region is looking pretty dicey for cloud cover next week. Like Morgan and Cappucci, though, he said the pressure to get this particular forecast right is intense. “It’s obviously less serious than a hurricane or something like that, but the importance of the forecast for a lot of people is still very, very high,” he told me.
Ironically, that’s also part of the problem; because of the danger of storms like hurricanes and tornadoes, we’ve gotten pretty good at seeing them coming. “The science has improved remarkably over the years trying to hone in on those threats, but cloud cover — my word. That’s a tough one,” Morgan said. Clouds alone aren’t usually a life or death situation. But for people spending hundreds or thousands of dollars to chase a rare celestial phenomenon, the stakes can start to feel that high.
Cappucci gets it: “I’ve done a million kajillion tornadoes, hurricanes, the Northern Lights, the whole nine yards,” he said. “Simply nothing compares to a total solar eclipse.” As he explained, the “most important thing” you can see during an eclipse is the corona — the silvery atmosphere of the sun visible around the moon that “looks like the hairs of an angel because they’re glowing and radiating out into space.” To see it, though, you need clear skies. “Even some high cirrus clouds — yeah, they’re a nuisance, but you can still see some stuff,” Cappucci went on. “But to get overcast rain is really a showstopper.”
Unfortunately, that’s precisely what Barker has been seeing on his radar models for most of Texas, and local meteorology teams in Dallas, Oklahoma, and Arkansas have begun to dampen expectations. Wilson, the Weather Channel meteorologist, admitted that she’s a little “nervous” while cautioning that it’s still early for such predictions. Meanwhile, upstate New York and Vermont, which have the worst records of clear skies this time of year, are shaping up to have the best show in the country.
Rao, the longtime eclipse-chaser, has only been clouded out at two of his 13 experiences. (If you believe in luck, note that he plans to watch this one somewhere upstate.) He has tried to calm some of the panic around the possibility of cloud cover, explaining to me that “it’s not like you’re not going to experience anything” if the sky is overcast on April 8. During one of his cloud-outs, at his first eclipse in Quebec in 1972, he watched the sky go from “battleship gray to weird colorations of saffron and pink. At one point, it was like I was looking at the clouds through the inside of a beer bottle or an iodine bottle.”
Of course, pretty clouds are just consolation; everyone wants perfect viewing conditions. The National Weather Service has even started to post a little jingle alongside its daily cloud-cover updates: “Totality or bust, check the forecast and adjust!” The meteorologists I spoke to universally agreed that they won’t start to put too much stock in the cloud models until Wednesday or Thursday at the earliest.
Wilson said she personally won’t feel confident in the hourly models until at least three or four days out, and even then, you never really know. It was overcast when she was covering the annular eclipse in San Antonio in October and “everybody was kind of freaking out. Then, about 20 minutes before eclipse time, it cleared out.”
That is the annoying truth of modern meteorology: Not even the best computers, radars, almanacs, or atmospheric scientists can predict whether a stray cloud will wander in front of the sun in the minutes before totality.
“I’m just really hoping that April doesn’t do April things and that weather-wise, it cooperates,” Morgan said. “But April is full of surprises — and clouds.”
Log in
To continue reading, log in to your account.
Create a Free Account
To unlock more free articles, please create a free account.
It would have delivered a gargantuan 6.2 gigawatts of power.
The Bureau of Land Management says the largest solar project in Nevada has been canceled amidst the Trump administration’s federal permitting freeze.
Esmeralda 7 was supposed to produce a gargantuan 6.2 gigawatts of power – equal to nearly all the power supplied to southern Nevada by the state’s primary public utility. It would do so with a sprawling web of solar panels and batteries across the western Nevada desert. Backed by NextEra Energy, Invenergy, ConnectGen and other renewables developers, the project was moving forward at a relatively smooth pace under the Biden administration, albeit with significant concerns raised by environmentalists about its impacts on wildlife and fauna. And Esmeralda 7 even received a rare procedural win in the early days of the Trump administration when the Bureau of Land Management released the draft environmental impact statement for the project.
When Esmeralda 7’s environmental review was released, BLM said the record of decision would arrive in July. But that never happened. Instead, Donald Trump issued an executive order as part of a deal with conservative hardliners in Congress to pass his tax megabill, which also effectively repealed the Inflation Reduction Act’s renewable electricity tax credits. This led to subsequent actions by Interior Secretary Doug Burgum to freeze all federal permitting decisions for solar energy.
Flash forward to today, when BLM quietly updated its website for Esmeralda 7 permitting to explicitly say the project’s status is “cancelled.” Normally when the agency says this, it means developers pulled the plug.
I’ve reached out to some of the companies behind Esmeralda 7 but was unable to reach them in time for publication. If I hear from them confirming the project is canceled – or that BLM is wrong in some way – I will let you know.
It’s not perfect, but pretty soon, it’ll be available for under $30,000.
Here’s what you need to know about the rejuvenated Chevrolet Bolt: It’s back, it’s better, and it starts at under $30,000.
Although the revived 2027 Bolt doesn’t officially hit the market until January 2026, GM revealed the new version of the iconic affordable EV at a Wednesday evening event at the Universal Studios backlot in Los Angeles. The assembled Bolt owners and media members drove the new cars past Amity Island from Jaws and around the Old West and New York sets that have served as the backdrops of so many television shows and movies. It was star treatment for a car that, like its predecessor, isn’t the fanciest EV around. But given the giveaway patches that read “Chevy Bolt: Back by popular demand,” it’s clear that GM heard the cries of people who missed having the plucky electric hatchback on the market.
The Bolt died at the height of its powers. The original Bolt EV and Bolt EUV sold in big numbers in the late 2010s and early 2020s, powered by a surprisingly affordable price compared to competitor EVs and an interior that didn’t feel cramped despite its size as a smallish hatchback. In 2023, the year Chevy stopped selling it, the Bolt was the third-best-selling EV in America after Tesla’s top two models.
Yet the original had a few major deficiencies that reflected the previous era of EVs. The most egregious of which was its charging speed that topped out at around 50 kilowatts. Given that today’s high-speed chargers can reach 250 to 350 kilowatts — and an even faster future could be on the way — the Bolt’s pit stops on a road trip were a slog that didn’t live up to its peppy name.
Thankfully, Chevy fixed it. Charging speed now reaches 150 kilowatts. While that figure isn’t anywhere near the 350 kilowatts that’s possible in something like the Hyundai Ioniq 9, it’s a threefold improvement for the Bolt that lets it go from 10% to 80% charged in a respectable 26 minutes. The engineers said they drove a quartet of the new cars down old Route 66 from the Kansas City area, where the Bolt is made, to Los Angeles to demonstrate that the EV was finally ready for such an adventure.
From the outside, the 2027 Bolt is virtually indistinguishable from the old car, but what’s inside is a welcome leap forward. New Bolt has a lithium-ion-phosphate, or LFP battery that holds 65 kilowatt-hours of energy, but still delivers 255 miles of max range because of the EV’s relatively light weight. Whereas older EVs encourage drivers to stop refueling at around 80%, the LFP battery can be charged to 100% regularly without the worry of long-term damage to the battery.
The Bolt is GM’s first EV with the NACS charging standard, the former Tesla proprietary plug, which would allow the little Chevy to visit Tesla Superchargers without an adapter (though its port placement on the front of the driver’s side is backwards from the way older Supercharger stations are built). Now built on GM’s Ultium platform, the Bolt shares its 210-horsepower electric motor with the Chevy Equinox EV and gets vehicle-to-load capability, meaning you’ll be able to tap into its battery energy for other uses such as powering your home.
But it’s the price that’s the real wow factor. Bolt will launch with an RS version that gets the fancier visual accents and starts at $32,000. The Bolt LT that will be available a little later will eventually start as low as $28,995, a figure that includes the destination charge that’s typically slapped on top of a car’s price, to the tune of an extra $1,000 to $2,000 on delivery. Perhaps it’s no surprise that GM revealed this car just a week after the end of the $7,500 federal tax credit for EV purchases (and just a day after Tesla announced its budget versions of the Model Y and Model 3). Bringing in a pretty decent EV at under $30,000 without the help of a big tax break is a pretty big deal.
The car is not without compromises. Plenty of Bolt fans are aghast that Chevy abandoned the Apple CarPlay and Android Auto integrations that worked with the first Bolt in favor of GM’s own built-in infotainment system as the only option. Although the new Bolt was based on the longer, “EUV” version of the original, this is still a pretty compact car without a ton of storage space behind the back seats. Still, for those who truly need a bigger vehicle, there’s the Chevy Equinox EV.
For as much time as I’ve spent clamoring for truly affordable EVs that could compete with entry-level gas cars on prices, the Bolt’s faults are minor. At $29,000 for an electric vehicle in the U.S., there is practically zero competition until the new Nissan Leaf arrives. The biggest threats to the Bolt are America’s aversion to small cars and the rapid rates of depreciation that could allow someone to buy a much larger, gently used EV for the price of the new Chevy. But the original Bolt found a steady footing among drivers who wanted that somewhat counter-cultural car — and this one is a lot better.
“Old economy” companies like Caterpillar and Williams are cashing in by selling smaller, less-efficient turbines to impatient developers.
From the perspective of the stock market, you’re either in the AI business or you’re not. If you build the large language models pushing out the frontiers of artificial intelligence, investors love it. If you rent out the chips the large language models train on, investors love it. If you supply the servers that go in the data centers that power the large language models, investors love it. And, of course, if you design the chips themselves, investors love it.
But companies far from the software and semiconductor industry are profiting from this boom as well. One example that’s caught the market’s fancy is Caterpillar, better known for its scale-defying mining and construction equipment, which has become a “secular winner” in the AI boom, writes Bloomberg’s Joe Weisenthal.
Typically construction businesses do well when the overall economy is doing well — that is, they don’t typically take off with a major technological shift like AI. Now, however, Caterpillar has joined the ranks of the “picks and shovels” businesses capitalizing on the AI boom thanks to its gas turbine business, which is helping power OpenAI’s Stargate data center project in Abilene, Texas.
Just one link up the chain is another classic “old economy” business: Williams Companies, the natural gas infrastructure company that controls or has an interest in over 33,000 miles of pipeline and has been around in some form or another since the early 20th century.
Gas pipeline companies are not supposed to be particularly exciting, either. They build large-scale infrastructure. Their ratemaking is overseen by federal regulators. They pay dividends. The last gas pipeline company that got really into digital technology, well, uh, it was Enron.
But Williams’ shares are up around 28% in the past year — more than Caterpillar. That’s in part, due to its investing billions in powering data centers with behind the meter natural gas.
Last week, Williams announced that it would funnel over $3 billion into two data center projects, bringing its total investments in powering AI to $5 billion. This latest bet, the company said, is “to continue to deliver speed-to-market solutions in grid-constrained markets.”
If we stipulate that the turbines made by Caterpillar are powering the AI boom in a way analogous to the chips designed by Nvidia or AMD and fabricated by TSMC, then Williams, by developing behind the meter gas-fired power plants, is something more like a cloud computing provider or data center developer like CoreWeave, except that its facilities house gas turbines, not semiconductors.
The company has “seen the rapid emergence of the need for speed with respect to energy,” Williams Chief Executive Chad Zamarin said on an August earnings call.
And while Williams is not a traditional power plant developer or utility, it knows its way around natural gas. “We understand pipeline capacity,” Zamarin said on a May earnings call. “We obviously build a lot of pipeline and turbine facilities. And so, bringing all the different pieces together into a solution that is ready-made for a customer, I think, has been truly a differentiator.”
Williams is already behind the Socrates project for Meta in Ohio, described in a securities filing as a $1.6 billion project that will provide 400 megawatts of gas-fired power. That project has been “upsized” to $2 billion and 750 megawatts, according to Morgan Stanley analysts.
Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg has said that “energy constraints” are a more pressing issue for artificial intelligence development than whether the marginal dollar invested is worth it. In other words, Zuckerberg expects to run out of energy before he runs out of projects that are worth pursuing.
That’s great news for anyone in the business of providing power to data centers quickly. The fact that developers seem to have found their answer in the Williamses and Caterpillars of the world, however, calls into question a key pillar of the renewable industry’s case for itself in a time of energy scarcity — that the fastest and cheapest way to get power for data centers is a mix of solar and batteries.
Just about every renewable developer or clean energy expert I’ve spoken to in the past year has pointed to renewables’ fast timeline and low cost to deploy compared to building new gas-fired, grid-scale generation as a reason why utilities and data centers should prefer them, even absent any concerns around greenhouse gas emissions.
“Renewables and battery storage are the lowest-cost form of power generation and capacity,” Next Era chief executive John Ketchum said on an April earnings call. “We can build these projects and get new electrons on the grid in 12 to 18 months.” Ketchum also said that the price of a gas-fired power plant had tripled, meanwhile lead times for turbines are stretching to the early 2030s.
The gas turbine shortage, however, is most severe for large turbines that are built into combined cycle systems for new power plants that serve the grid.
GE Vernova is discussing delivering turbines in 2029 and 2030. While one manufacturer of gas turbines, Mitsubishi Heavy Industries, has announced that it plans to expand its capacity, the industry overall remains capacity constrained.
But according to Morgan Stanley, Williams can set up behind the meter power plants in 18 months. xAI’s Colossus data center in Memphis, which was initially powered by on-site gas turbines, went from signing a lease to training a large language model in about six months.
These behind the meter plants often rely on cheaper, smaller, simple cycle turbines, which generate electricity just from the burning of natural gas, compared to combined cycle systems, which use the waste heat from the gas turbines to run steam turbines and generate more energy. The GE Vernova 7HA combined cycle turbines that utility Duke Energy buys, for instance, range in output from 290 to 430 megawatts. The simple cycle turbines being placed in Ohio for the Meta data center range in output from about 14 megawatts to 23 megawatts.
Simple cycle turbines also tend to be less efficient than the large combined cycle system used for grid-scale natural gas, according to energy analysts at BloombergNEF. The BNEF analysts put the emissions difference at almost 1,400 pounds of carbon per megawatt-hour for the single turbines, compared to just over 800 pounds for combined cycle.
Overall, Williams is under contract to install 6 gigawatts of behind-the-meter power, to be completed by the first half of 2027, Morgan Stanley analysts write. By comparison, a joint venture between GE Vernova, the independent power producer NRG, and the construction company Kiewit to develop combined cycle gas-fired power plants has a timeline that could stretch into 2032.
The Williams projects will pencil out on their own, the company says, but they have an obvious auxiliary benefit: more demand for natural gas.
Williams’ former chief executive, Alan Armstrong, told investors in a May earnings call that he was “encouraged” by the “indirect business we are seeing on our gas transmission systems,” i.e. how increased natural gas consumption benefits the company’s traditional pipeline business.
Wall Street has duly rewarded Williams for its aggressive moves.
Morgan Stanley analysts boosted their price target for the stock from $70 to $83 after last week’s $3 billion announcement, saying in a note to clients that the company has “shifted from an underappreciated value (impaired terminal value of existing assets) to underappreciated growth (accelerating project pipeline) story.” Mizuho Securities also boosted its price target from $67 to $72, with analyst Gabriel Moreen telling clients that Williams “continues to raise the bar on the scope and potential benefits.”
But at the same time, Moreen notes, “the announcement also likely enhances some investor skepticism around WMB pushing further into direct power generation and, to a lesser extent, prioritizing growth (and growth capex) at the expense of near-term free cash flow and balance sheet.”
In other words, the pipeline business is just like everyone else — torn between prudence in a time of vertiginous economic shifts and wanting to go all-in on the AI boom.
Williams seems to have decided on the latter. “We will be a big beneficiary of the fast rising data center power load,” Armstrong said.