Sign In or Create an Account.

By continuing, you agree to the Terms of Service and acknowledge our Privacy Policy

Daily Briefing

A Second Act for Biden’s Green Banks?

A D.C. appeals court upheld an injunction preventing the Trump administration from clawing back $20 billion in climate grants.

•
Pillars and leaves.
Heatmap Illustration/Getty Images

One of the Biden administration’s most interesting — and contentious — climate programs might get a second lease on life.

Earlier this week, the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that the Trump administration could not end the $20 billion Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund program, which would have capitalized several national green banks. The court also ruled that the Environmental Protection Agency needed to give the nonprofits access to the funds while the case proceeded.

That would amount to a victory — if it holds. But the ball is now in the EPA’s court. If the agency appeals the ruling in the next week, then the case will go to the Supreme Court, setting up what could be a major battle over the program, according to The New York Times.

My colleague Emily Pontecorvo wrote about the background to the case last year, when the nonprofits looked more likely to lose:

Congress created the grants, known as the Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund, as part of the Inflation Reduction Act in 2022. It authorized Biden’s EPA to award $20 billion to a handful of nonprofits that would then offer financing to individuals and organizations for emission-reduction projects, mostly geared toward low-income or otherwise disadvantaged communities. The agency fully obligated the funds last August to eight nonprofits that would “create a national financing network for clean energy and climate solutions across the country.

Then Trump took office and ordered his agency heads to pause and review all funding for Inflation Reduction Act programs. EPA Secretary Lee Zeldin targeted the Greenhouse Gas Reduction Program for termination, making a big show of a covert recording of a former agency employee comparing Biden’s efforts to get climate money out the door after the election to “throwing gold bars off the edge” of the Titanic. Never mind that this particular program had been fully obligated prior to the election, and recipients had already started to announce investments as early as October.

The nonprofit awardees sued the Trump administration, and the District Court for the District of Columbia issued a temporary injunction on the EPA’s grant terminations in mid-April, mandating that the funds continue to be paid out while the case proceeded.

That’s the injunction that 10 judges on the D.C. Circuit upheld this week.

I’m curious to see what would happen if the eight nonprofits do eventually get their money. As the Times notes, the ensuing months have been tough on the organizations — the chief executive of Climate United, which would have been one of the three national green banks, left the organization last year and hasn’t been replaced.

These green banks always ran the risk of being seen as a kind of out-of-government slush fund for the Biden administration’s favorite causes. But if implemented, they had the potential to unlock a virtuous cycle where successful green investments begat more green investments. Another promising scheme would have used them to bridge the U.S. economy’s “missing middle,” the lack of financing for first-of-a-kind projects and other innovations that require long-term investment but are more than five years out from market. Such a scheme would have helped technologies like fusion, hydrogen, or plain-old nuclear make their way to market. The Trump administration has since turned to other sources of government financing to boost nuclear.

Green

You’re out of free articles.

Use code: CWNYC30 to save 30%.
Subscribe to access Heatmap’s exclusive polling and expert analysis of energy, climate change, and sustainability, now just $99/year $69.30/year.
To continue reading
Create a free account or sign in to unlock more free articles.
or
Please enter an email address
By continuing, you agree to the Terms of Service and acknowledge our Privacy Policy
Podcast

Energy Secretary Chris Wright on Trump’s Pro-Nuclear, Pro-Fossil Fuel Agenda

Plus more on nuclear, EVs, China, and more, recorded live at our Heatmap House event at New York Climate Week.

Chris Wright and Robinson Meyer.
Heatmap Illustration/Luke Liu

Since taking office last year, the Trump administration has blocked renewable energy development and attacked climate change policy, prioritized fossil fuels and encouraged nuclear energy, and started a war that led to a global oil and gas supply shock.

U.S. Secretary of Energy Chris Wright has been the face of much of that policy agenda. For this episode of Shift Key, he joined Rob for a live conversation at our Heatmap House event, part of New York Climate Week. He answered questions about the Trump administration’s war on wind, a ban on diesel fuel exports, and how China has been able to buttress global oil supplies since the spring.

Keep reading...Show less
Chris Wright and Robinson Meyer.
Heatmap Illustration/Luke Liu

This transcript has been automatically generated.

Subscribe to “Shift Key” and find this episode on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, Amazon, YouTube, or wherever you get your podcasts.

Keep reading...Show less
Spotlight

Offshore Wind’s Existential Crisis at Climate Week

Can the industry ever recover?

A wind turbine and Chris Wright.
Heatmap Illustration/Getty Images, Luke Liu

American offshore wind’s existential crisis was laid bare at this year’s Climate Week.

California and New York officials gathered on Tuesday at the New York Bar Association in Manhattan to tell attendees of the annual climate action mega-event about their efforts to hold the Trump administration to account. After Trump regulators upended wind projects off the East Coast and struck buyout trades with energy developers to ditch ocean wind leases, both states filed fresh legal action against the administration, targeting what they said were egregious abuses of taxpayer dollars that canceled once-promising projects that would’ve given gigawatts of power to grids expecting energy demand to spike.

Keep reading...Show less
Yellow