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 900 Plug-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.
With a permitting deal seemingly on the horizon, Republican Gabe Evans and Democrat Scott Peters may be about to see their partnership pay off.
The fate of permitting reform legislation that could smooth the way to all kinds of new and improved energy infrastructure — including transmission lines and renewables — is currently hostage to opaque discussions between Senate committee chairs. Rhode Island Senator Sheldon Whitehouse, the Democratic ranking member of the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee, told a Rhode Island business group earlier this week that “we’re actually in a pretty good place on permitting reform,” and that there was “maybe another week of negotiations.” Whitehouse’s Republican counterpart on the EPW committee, West Virginia Senator Shelly Moore-Capito, told Semafor on Friday that any bill has “got to pop out of here in the next 48 hours.”
If that’s going to happen, it will be because Republicans and Democrats have decided it’s worth it to get along. Any deal will eventually have to be voted on by the House, which has already produced several bills on a bipartisan basis, and even passed one — the SPEED Act — late last year.
Two of the busier House members on this issue are Scott Peters, a Democratic former environmental lawyer from San Diego, and Gabe Evans, a first term Colorado Republican representing a suburban and rural district north of Denver that includes wind farms and crude oil production. “The district that I represent truly is an all of the above energy district,” Evans told me.
Their latest effort is a bill aimed at smoothing out permitting for transmission development, especially interregional transmission. Last week, the two congressmen unveiled the CLEAR Act, seeking to apply a stricter set of standards for lawsuits against transmission projects that aligned with how natural gas and hydropower projects are treated under the Federal Power Act (it’s much harder to sue to stop these projects). Earlier this year, the two also sponsored the CERTAIN Act, a more comprehensive streamlining of federal permitting for energy infrastructure projects.
“We’re proud to have a lot of our work as the foundation for this, and I think if they send us over something that includes this, it’s got a really good chance of passing in the House,” Peters told me. Evans added that bringing forward bipartisan bills “gives a little bit more impetus to the Senate to know that the House is looking for these things.”
While the Senate’s deal will be up to the senators, Peters told me he envisions a broad permitting package that could include reforms to the National Environmental Policy Act to shorten permitting timelines, preventing the president from nixing individual projects, and reform Section 401 of the Clean Water Act which effectively devolves power to tribes and states to block a variety of interstate projects. “I think it’s coming together pretty well,” Peters said. “Obviously, we’re waiting for white smoke from the Senate.”
A permitting reform package may be one of the last major bills several bipartisan-minded House members get to vote on.
Election day is about six weeks off, and while Peters will likely have an easy time getting reelected for this eighth term, Evans is in a tough race. His purple-hued district is a target for the House Democratic campaign arm, which is hoping to flip it to former Colorado House of Representatives member Manny Rutinel, who worked as a lawyer at the environmental group Earthjustice. The Cook Political Report rates the race as toss-up, and Nate Silver gives Rutinel a roughly 75% to win.
But Rutinel won’t be getting any campaign help from Peters.
When I asked Peters about the timing of releasing a bill that could boost an endangered Republican’s bipartisan bona fides less than two months before an election, Peters told me that he and Evans had been working on it “for a while,” and that “my colleagues know that I’ve worked with Republicans to get problems solved.”
He said he wasn’t “participating in Gabe’s election” and wasn’t giving any money to his campaign, but also that he wouldn’t campaign Evans’ challenger, despite the opportunity to bolster his own caucus.
Peters is not shy about praising Evans. “What I appreciate about Gabe is that it takes a little bit of initiative to separate yourself from the majority — particularly when you’re in the trifecta — and do your own thing. He’s been a good partner in helping find ways to reduce process and make things go faster,” he told me.
Evans told me that he and Peters met early in this Congress, as Evans was getting settled into his new office in the Longworth building. “We’ve built the relationship over the last two years with a lot of the different areas that we’ve collaborated on.”
“I always try to meet the members of my committee and find out who will work with me. And I was fortunate to find Gabe,” Peters said.
“I do want to win the majority in the next Congress,” Peters went on, but “the norm should be that we figure out ways to work together to solve problems, and, you know, we’ll let the voters of Colorado 8 decide who to send me.”
Evans, for his part, told me that he had to work with Democrats to get anything passed as a member of a minuscule Republican minority in the Colorado statehouse, and that the 40-plus members of the bipartisan Problem Solvers Caucus have agreed not to campaign against each other. “There’s 385 other members that you can go pick fights with,” he said.
A new analysis by a one-time atomic energy opponent makes a bull case for big reactors.
If you know anything about the cost of nuclear energy in America, you probably are aware that the most recent reactors built — the only two new ones designed, planned, and constructed since the 1990s — were budget busters. Units 3 and 4 of Southern Company’s Alvin W. Vogtle Generating Station in eastern Georgia were the first of a new generation of reactor technology ever to be deployed in the U.S. Construction delays, changes to the design, and corporate bankruptcies ultimately sent the price of the pair of Westinghouse AP1000s — the Ford Mustang of American nuclear technology, with safety features that essentially make them not just powerful but also meltdown-proof — to nearly $40 billion, or about $16,350 per kilowatt.
But the U.S. once built reactors for half that — and it did so in the chaotic aftermath of the nation’s worst civilian nuclear accident, when mounting regulations made atomic power construction more onerous than ever before.
That’s the landmark finding of a new report by a veteran nuclear researcher, who quantified and broke down the cost of constructing nearly every civilian atomic power station the U.S. built in the 20th century. Adjusting the dollar figures using the Handy-Whitman Index, a specialized formula for calculating inflation in the utility sector’s construction costs, the analysis — shared exclusively with Heatmap — concluded that 47 reactors built in the U.S. between the 1979 partial meltdown at Pennsylvania’s Three Mile Island nuclear plant and the turn of the millennium came in at an average of $8,200 per kilowatt.
“Costs are only going to come down from that,” Charles Komanoff, the economist and energy policy analyst whose consultancy conducted the study on behalf of the Clean Air Task Force, told me.
The paper carves out a pathway down the cost curve that runs counter to the industry’s broader consensus at the moment on the best way to make nuclear less of a luxury choice compared to other generating sources. Billions of dollars have flooded into companies promising to commercialize small modular reactors that generate 300 megawatts or less. The concept is a bet on what Komanoff calls the economies of duplication, meaning that if customers need more individual reactors, developers can ride that repetition to lower prices. But the paper suggests that the way developers have historically reduced nuclear costs — through economies of scale — achieves the same per-kilowatt savings with one gigawatt-sized, water-cooled reactor as 20 smaller reactors would net.
Some small and microreactor developers say that using alternative coolants — molten salt, liquid sodium, high-temperature gases such as helium — could further raise the efficiency of their technologies, allowing them to make up for whatever they lose on economies of scale. But large, traditional reactors such as the AP1000 are “a proven technology” that, unlike next-generation reactors with far less operating experience, won’t have to overcome “teething problems” to reach maximum efficiency levels, Komanoff told me.
There are other options to the AP1000, such as the ABWR that the parent companies of GE Vernova Hitachi Nuclear Energy built in Japan and Taiwan in the 1990s. One was planned for Texas, but abandoned a decade ago amid declining interest in nuclear power post-Fukushima. The technology is approved by the NRC, but GE-Hitachi has since turned its attention to its 300-megawatt BWRX-300. Given that no ABWR was built in the U.S., James Boucher, the former Deloitte nuclear consultant who co-authored the paper, said the AP1000 is the reactor best positioned to replicate the country’s successful buildout of the 1980s.
“We have two AP1000s. They're fully built. They’re operating. They’re doing, as far as I can tell, quite well. And they are like these reactors in our sample,” Boucher told me. “If we wanted to build 20, 30, 50 more AP1000s, I think we’d have a good shot.”
The Nuclear Company, a startup developer that hired much of the team behind the Vogtle buildout in a bid to become the go-to project manager for future AP1000s, called Komanoff’s report “promising because it demonstrates how cost can come down when we don’t focus on building first-of-a-kind projects.”
“There was a 30% overnight capital cost reduction just moving from Unit 3 to Unit 4 on the Vogtle project — there is no reason we can’t continue down the learning curve on the next AP1000s built in this country,” Joe Klecha, The Nuclear Company’s chief nuclear officer and president, told me after reviewing the report I sent him. “Especially with our mix of experience building these reactors and advancements in technology we’re leveraging to scale, achieving below $10,000 per kilowatt is just the beginning for us. We believe we can execute safer, faster, and at lower cost than we’ve achieved in the past.”
Back in the 1980s, the military-like regimentation common at nuclear plants and construction sites wasn’t yet as ingrained in the industry. The Nuclear Regulatory Commission had replaced the Atomic Energy Commission, which was seen as too deferential to the companies it oversaw, and spent the decade tightening rules on constructing and operating nuclear plants. New accident scenarios were being discovered, requiring new plants and existing ones up for relicensing to change operating protocols, upgrade equipment, and conduct additional research.
Komanoff was among those pushing for the changes. In reports he authored on behalf of Greenpeace, an arch opponent of nuclear power, he dissected the fiscal woes atomic energy developers faced, making the economic case for shutting down electrical stations that his fellow activists battled on ecological or moral grounds. Eventually, Komanoff moved on to advocating for a carbon tax as the fairest and clearest way to guide the economy away from fossil fuels and toward decarbonization. While serving as director of the Carbon Tax Center, which he co-founded, he noticed a trend among nuclear plants: They were getting better at operating.
The regulatory changes that followed Three Mile Island succeeded in raising the operating efficiencies of nuclear plants. In the 1970s, reactors had a capacity factor — a measure of how frequently a generating source actually produces electricity — of about 50%. Yet by 1991, that number had risen to 70%, putting atomic energy on par with the most efficient fossil fuel and hydroelectric plants. In 2002, that national average hit 90%. In 2019, it rose to 94%. When the final reactor at Indian Point, the nuclear station that served Komanoff’s native New York City, closed in 2021 due to political opposition to its relicensing, it had just set a world record for an uninterrupted 753-day run of electricity production.
Gradually, Komanoff came to see nuclear power as a vital tool for decarbonization. But, ensconced in the climate movement through his carbon tax advocacy, he found it easier to stay mum on his conversion, lest he ruffle the feathers of fellow activists who remained stalwart anti-nuclearists. After all, he thought, if a carbon tax passes, nuclear plants will benefit, so why bother speaking up specifically for atomic energy? Indian Point’s early shutdown, however, caused Komanoff pangs of regret.
“It just forced me to confront the consequences of not advocating for nuclear power,” he said. “I felt the way I imagined I would feel if a climbing partner — I used to be a sort of mountaineer — had died because of some negligence on my part. I really took personal responsibility because I imagined that — and maybe I’m just in a complete fantasy about my shamanistic power — as someone who had argued 40 years ago for shutting Indian Point, that if I had gone public say ‘Don’t do it,’ that I might have been able to begin turning the tide.”
While $8,200 per kilowatt is half of what Vogtle cost, it’s still nearly four times the cost of building a new natural gas-burning power plant with combined-cycle turbines, which itself rose to $2,157 per kilowatt last year from less than $1,500 in 2023. But the “regulatory churn” that kept the price of nuclear high, Komanoff said, is unlikely to return for new nuclear plants using proven designs such as the AP1000.
“Part of my optimism about nuclear being less subject to regulatory churn going forward is because it’s not a whipping boy,” he said. “It’s really hard to overstate the aura of incompetence that surrounded the nuclear power sector in the United States in the ‘70s into the ‘80s. But when you’ve got plants that are averaging 90% or higher capacity factors, things change.”
Current conditions: Oman’s Ayn Athum Waterfalls burst to life this week as rain battered the Gulf nation’s southwestern Dhofar governorate • Severe monsoon flooding has deluged parts of the American Southwest, including Navajo Nation, where at least three people have died • Tropical Storm Dujuan is barreling toward Japan, where it threatens flooding and landslides in Tokyo and Chiba.
When the Houthis stormed Yemen’s Red Sea coast last week, the Iran-backed rebels gained new ground from which to attack boats passing through the vital shipping lane, extending Tehran’s reach from the Persian Gulf’s hotly contested Strait of Hormuz to the waterway on the opposite side of the Arabian peninsula. In response, oil prices surged. But the price per barrel of crude is slipping again as the United States has rebuked Saudi Arabia’s requests for help routing the militants, instead seeking a deal that keeps the Bab al-Mandab Strait open to American and Israeli ships. Over the weekend, U.S. diplomats met with Houthi officials in neutral Oman, Reuters reported. Following the talks, the Times of Israel reported that Houthis promised not to attack any Israeli or commercial ships of any kind, only those linked to Saudi Arabia, which has funded the Yemeni government’s campaign against the rebels.
Satellite images published by the investigative site Hunterbrook showed workers building a bypass on Saudi Arabia’s East-West Pipeline, its main conduit for circumventing oil exports around the Strait of Hormuz, to get around the pumping station damaged by a Houthi attack. But the promise of free movement through the Red Sea sent the price of oil down by between 1% and 4% on Thursday.
Just yesterday, I told you that the Trump administration had moved to drastically change how the government interprets the Endangered Species Act to only consider deaths of protected animals illegal if the creatures were intentionally targeted. Such a shift would exclude the vast majority of deaths linked to energy companies, such as when birds land in toxic oil ponds or collide with wind turbines. Whether federal enforcement ultimately reflects that interpretation depends on the outcome of a forthcoming lawsuit. Already, Earthjustice has vowed to file litigation challenging the Trump administration’s legal memo directing federal agencies on its new view of the nation’s bedrock conservation law. “The government’s new legal position is a prescription for extinction. It says that as long as you claim you didn’t mean to kill an endangered species, the law can’t and won’t stop you,” Earthjustice attorney Ben Levitan said in a press release. “That’s ridiculous — and a totally illegal, active misreading of the Endangered Species Act. We’ll see the Trump administration in court about this.”
The toll wind turbines take on migratory birds is a favorite talking point of the energy source’s opponents. But relief from the responsibility to avoid killing birds would be cold comfort to the wind industry as developers wait for the Trump administration to follow a court ruling requiring it to continue processing applications for turbines. As my colleague Jael Holzman wrote yesterday, the administration has continued delaying. At least one other legal fight within the offshore wind industry has, meanwhile, come to a conclusion. Vineyard Wind and its turbine supplier GE Vernova, announced an “amicable settlement” this week that resolves “all outstanding litigation,” the New Bedford Light reported. The developer sued the supplier in April, accusing GE Vernova of an $800 million breach of contract following a blade failure in 2024.

The U.S. needs more long-term energy storage, and few technologies are better tested by time than using excess electricity to pump water into a reservoir, where it can be released downhill and run through turbines to generate huge bursts of power when it’s needed. Back when the U.S. had lots of nuclear power, pumped hydro plants harvested the unused electrons during the night. With solar now producing more electricity during the day in some parts of the country than the grid demands, pumped hydro is seeing a potential renewal. But the U.S. hasn’t built any pumped hydro facilities since the 1990s. A project that looked likely to break that dry spell is now on pause as the Trump administration heeds opponents’ concerns and orders a new study on its environmental impact.
The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission has delayed its decision on whether to license the $3 billion project to add a pumped hydro facility to the Seminoe Reservoir, a lightning bolt-shaped waterway in southern Wyoming. The Bureau of Land Management said it will conduct a supplemental environmental impact statement and open the door to more public comments and input from local officials. “This feels like a small victory,” CiCi Oliver, a fly-fishing shop owner who opposed the project over its potential disruptions to the ecology of the reservoir, told WyoFile this week.
Sign up to receive Heatmap AM in your inbox every morning:
At the start of the Iran War, some interpreters of President Donald Trump’s supposed four-dimensional geopolitical chess moves suggested that shutting down the Strait of Hormuz was an intentional move to show China’s vulnerable underbelly: Beijing’s dependence on oil imports. And yet, China’s vast oil stockpiles and refining capacity, plus its array of alternative energy sources, allowed the country to slash oil purchases by 23% in the first six months of the war compared to the same period last year, according to a New York Times analysis of customs data. “This is a power that nobody thought China had,” said Erica Downs, a senior research scholar at Columbia University’s Center on Global Energy Policy. “Going forward, it’s going to be really interesting to see: What does China do with this newfound power?” The heaviest answer to that question now weighing on Western officials involves China considering the ramifications of a potential invasion of Taiwan to be less worrying than before.
That’s especially true because Taiwan, by contrast, is more vulnerable to losing access to oil and gas imports than ever before. After completing its decades-long mission last year to shut down the nuclear fleet that powered the island’s 20th century transformation into the world’s premiere chipmaker, Taiwan’s ruling Democratic Progressive Party — which advocates for the republic’s continued de facto independence — left the nation dependent on imported liquified natural gas and crude for the vast majority of its energy. Now, according to Nikkei, the government is hastening its efforts to potentially bring at least one nuclear station back online.
Yet another state is considering a moratorium on data centers — one close to the epicenter of the artificial intelligence boom. Maryland, which shares a grid and a border with northern Virginia’s data center megacluster, could see a ban come into effect as early as next year if state legislators pass a bill in the next session. Governor Wes Moore, a Democrat, said he “will absolutely sign” a statewide ban “if it’s coming from local legislators.” Speaking to Punchbowl News, he suggested that any moratorium would come with loopholes for projects that meet high standards. “I believe local jurisdictions should have a say. There are certain local jurisdictions who want it,” he said. “I just need them to understand I have very strict guidelines for what is actually going to get state approval.”
A startup founded by members of the team of U.S. government scientists that first achieved net-energy gain from a fusion reaction has hit a new milestone that should raise the eyebrows of even skeptics of the so-called holy grail of clean power. Less than two months after publicizing its roadmap to commercial fusion, Inertia Enterprises ran a simulation demonstrating that its first commercial plant will be capable of producing 25 times more energy than the laser needed to trigger the reaction, the company told my colleague Katie Brigham in an exclusive.