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:
On green energy investment, Biden’s Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund, and heavy batteries

Current conditions: In Chile, Santiago’s 11-day heatwave has ended • Storm Kathleen could bring gale-force winds to the UK • New York City is littered with downed trees after a strong storm.
Vice President Kamala Harris and EPA administrator Michael Regan are in Charlotte, North Carolina, this morning to announce the award of $20 billion dollars for climate mitigation and adaptation projects. This is the official launch of the Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund, a $27 billion program that was part of the Inflation Reduction Act — in fact, it is the single largest and most flexible program in the IRA, reported Heatmap’s Emily Pontecorvo. The money will go to eight organizations and help “create a national clean financing network for clean energy and climate solutions.” The general idea is to funnel the money into green lending programs, colloquially known as “green banks,” that will offer low-cost loans and other financing options for consumers, community organizations, businesses, and local governments. Projects financed through the fund could do everything from residential electrification, to green public transit, to solar on schools, to storm water management.
A big report out today finds that even though the world is breaking records for new renewable energy installations, we’re not adding enough capacity to limit the global temperature increase to below 1.5 degrees Celsius. The findings, which come from Paris-based think tank REN21, show renewable capacity additions shot up by 36% last year, to about 473 gigawatts (GW). This is a record-breaking increase, but well below the 1,000 GW of new capacity needed each year to meet climate commitments. “We aren’t even reaching 50% of what’s needed annually,” said Rana Adib, REN21's executive secretary. “Governments have committed, but this needs to be followed by action.” The problem is that energy demand is increasing, and the current rate of renewables expansion isn’t keeping pace due to a lack of investment in grid infrastructure. Global investment in renewables needs to total at least $1.3 trillion every year through 2030 – last year it sat at $623 billion. “We have the technology,” Adib said. “But we need the political will.” The report calls for phasing out fossil fuel subsidies and prioritizing financing the energy transition in developing countries.
Tropical forest loss in Brazil and Colombia declined significantly last year compared to 2022, according to the World Resources Institute’s Global Forest Review. Brazil’s forest loss dropped by 36% to its lowest level since 2015; Colombia’s plummeted by 49%. Both trends coincide with new leadership, showing that political will can create meaningful change. But “the frontiers of forest loss are shifting,” WRI said. The progress was offset by increases in forest loss elsewhere, especially Bolivia, Laos, and Nicaragua.
Bolivia’s losses came mainly from fires that were initially set by humans but that grew out of control in exceptionally hot and dry conditions. Agriculture expansion is another major driver of losses. Overall, tropical forest loss last year hit 3.7 million hectares, which is like losing 10 soccer fields per minute. This deforestation resulted in 2.4 gigatonnes of carbon dioxide being released into the atmosphere. For comparison, that’s about half the total annual emissions produced by the entire United States. The report also looks at tree cover outside the tropics, and finds that Canada’s devastating wildfires increased global tree cover loss by 24%.
About 80% of carbon dioxide emissions produced since 2016 came from a mix of 57 countries and businesses, according to a new analysis from London-based think tank InfluenceMap. Most fossil fuel companies (and especially state-owned ones) have ramped up production in the years since the Paris Agreement was signed. The top three emitters between 2016 and 2022 were Saudi Aramco, Russia’s Gazprom, and Coal India. “We’e seeing an increase in concentration in terms of a smaller number of producers being linked to an even larger portion of global fossil CO2 emissions,” InfluenceMap’s program manager Daan Van Acker told Axios.
EV batteries will have to lose about half their weight over the next decade in order to limit their environmental impact, the CEO of automaker Stellantis said yesterday. Speaking at the company’s Freedom of Mobility Forum, Carlos Tavares said battery packs can weigh about 1,000 pounds and require huge amounts of raw materials. This isn’t the first time Tavares has lamented bulky batteries, and the company has said it aims to reduce the weight of its own EV batteries by 50% by 2030. Last year Stellantis invested in Lytten, a company developing lithium-sulfur batteries.
“They’re essentially livestock.” –Eliza Grames, an entomologist at Binghamton University, says an increase in beehives tended to by well-meaning beekeepers is producing “domesticated” honeybees that threaten North America’s native bee species.
Log in
To continue reading, log in to your account.
Create a Free Account
To unlock more free articles, please create a free account.
Things in Sulphur Springs are getting weird.
Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton is trying to pressure a company into breaking a legal agreement for land conservation so a giant data center can be built on the property.
The Lone Star town of Sulphur Springs really wants to welcome data center developer MSB Global, striking a deal this year to bring several data centers with on-site power to the community. The influx of money to the community would be massive: the town would get at least $100 million in annual tax revenue, nearly three times its annual budget. Except there’s a big problem: The project site is on land gifted by a former coal mining company to Sulphur Springs expressly on the condition that it not be used for future energy generation. Part of the reason for this was that the lands were contaminated as a former mine site, and it was expected this property would turn into something like a housing development or public works project.
The mining company, Luminant, went bankrupt, resurfaced as a diversified energy company, and was acquired by power giant Vistra, which is refusing to budge on the terms of the land agreement. After sitting on Luminant’s land for years expecting it to be used for its intended purposes, the data center project’s sudden arrival appears to have really bothered Vistra, and with construction already underway, the company has gone as far as to send the town and the company a cease and desist.
This led Sulphur Springs to sue Vistra. According to a bevy of legal documents posted online by Jamie Mitchell, an activist fighting the data center, Sulphur Springs alleges that the terms of the agreement are void “for public policy,” claiming that land restrictions interfering with a municipality’s ability to provide “essential services” are invalid under prior court precedent in Texas. The lawsuit also claims that by holding the land for its own use, Vistra is violating state antitrust law by creating an “energy monopoly.” The energy company filed its own counterclaims, explicitly saying in a filing that Sulphur Springs was part of crafting this agreement and that “a deal is a deal.”
That’s where things get weird, because now Texas is investigating Luminant over the “energy monopoly” claim raised by the town. It’s hard not to see this as a pressure tactic to get the data center constructed.
In an amicus brief filed to the state court and posted online, Paxton’s office backs up the town’s claim that the land agreement against energy development violates the state’s antitrust law, the Texas Free Enterprise and Antitrust Act, contesting that the “at-issue restriction appears to be perpetual” and therefore illegally anti-competitive. The brief also urges the court not to dismiss the case before the state completes its investigation, which will undoubtedly lead to the release of numerous internal corporate documents.
“Sulphur Springs has alleged a pattern of restricting land with the potential for energy generation, with the effect of harming competition for energy generation generally, which would necessarily have the impact of increasing costs for both Sulphur Springs and Texas consumers generally,” the filing states. “Evaluating the competitive effects of Luminant’s deed restrictions as well as the harm to Texans generally is a fact-intensive matter that will require extensive discovery.”
The Texas attorney general’s office did not respond to multiple requests for comment on the matter. It’s worth noting that Paxton has officially entered the Republican Senate primary, challenging sitting U.S. Senator John Cornyn. Contrary to his position in this case, Paxton has positioned himself as a Big Tech antagonist and fought the state public utilities commission in pursuit of releasing data on the crypto mining industry’s energy use.
A solar developer gets into a forest fight in California, and more of the week’s top conflicts around renewables.
1. Sacramento County, California – A solar project has become a national symbol of the conflicts over large-scale renewables development in forested areas.
2. Sedgwick County, Kansas – I am eyeing this county to see whether a fight over a solar farm turns into a full-blown ban on future projects.
3. Montezuma County, Colorado – One southwest Colorado county is loosening restrictions on solar farms.
4. Putnam County, Indiana – An uproar over solar projects is now leading this county to say no to everything, indefinitely.
5. Kalamazoo County, Michigan – I’m eyeing yet another potential legal challenge against Michigan’s permitting reform efforts.
A conversation with Renee Grabe of Nature Forward
This week’s conversation is with Renee Grabe, a conservation advocate for the environmental group Nature Forward who is focused intently on data center development in Northern Virginia. I reached out to her for a fresh perspective on where data centers and renewable energy development fits in the Commonwealth amidst heightened frustration over land use and agricultural impacts, especially after this past election cycle. I thought her views on policy-making here were refreshingly nuanced.
This transcript was lightly edited for clarity.
Tell me more about how you started focusing on data centers.
So, in Fairfax County, in 2020 or 2021, people were pursuing the construction of an indoor ski facility on a landfill. From a climate perspective, to build something that would need to be cooled 24/7 for indoor skiing seemed like a very bad proposal in terms of energy usage. And for what kind of gain?
Then our friends at the Sierra Club were saying, indoor ski slopes? Bad, yes. But data centers? Way, way worse. Those aren’t cooling to support snow but are cooling much larger areas on a much larger scale, dwarfing the area of that one ski slope. This was around the time the Prince William Digital Gateway was showing up – they were saying all these acres of agricultural lands and single-family housing zones were about to be rezoned. This was a big deal, and Sierra Club led the way in opening our eyes to this. The rezoning ultimately passed. The data centers were sued and the people who filed the lawsuit won, but pre-planning for the centers is still allowed to take place.
The way we think about the impacts of data centers, besides the loss of natural lands and the amount of energy that’s going to be needed to power these things, has been diesel generators. These are the things that are backup generation and the camel’s nose under the tent is trying to get them to be primary power.
Now I want to ask you a provocative question: is there any middle ground between letting these projects be built unfettered and outright bans on their development?
We have no regulation today. From our standpoint, these things are coming, they’re here. We know a lot more now than we did in 2022. As we make decisions about how and where to build these facilities we all need – I mean we’re using one right now. I use a data center all day at work. Teams conferencing. ChatGPT to answer a question. We need these. So if we’re going to build them, let’s not give a pass to some of the world’s largest and richest companies. Let’s ask them to put the guardrails on to protect our residences and our infrastructure to make sure they’re as sustainable as possible.
Okay, so what are the guardrails then?
The costs of what was going to go into a data center need to be more transparent. We need to bring accountability to the forefront right away as they’re being built.
In Ohio, they passed a law requiring data center companies to pay for a high percentage of the power they’re using. That cut a significant number of the projects in Ohio. This industry is so speculative and a land grab and a rush to be first to get the most.
You have this dichotomy of land values for residences being inundated, while land values for developers are skyrocketing. We have an affordability crisis going on and we are all on the hook for paying for the infrastructure to power these things.
So when you think about what regulation might make data center development more reasonable, it’s asking for the costs happening to be borne by the industry making them. Let’s get rid of some of the incentives for power users. We don’t need to be encouraging the loss of state revenue, either – we’re leaving money on the table to bring these facilities here.
Lastly, our readers love to get hyperlocal. I know you’re intently focused on Fairfax County right now which has been a big part of the data center boom in Virginia – what’s happening there?
There are a couple things that have happened over the course of this past year. Fairfax County passed a data center zoning ordinance amendment – minimum requirements a data center will have to adhere to. The big thing with that one is, you have to have a special exception if you build within a mile of a Metro station. When you think about good land use and building a data center within a walkable distance of a Metro, that’s eye-openingly poor land use policy and a missed opportunity for transit-oriented development. It doesn’t mean they can’t be built near one but you have to get a special exception.
Some things can’t be regulated at the local level. Like generators. That’s in the hands of the state.
Last night, we had a public hearing at the Fairfax County board level for our policy plan – our comprehensive plan providing guidance for developers who want to get a special exception or rezoning. It is not law. It is not required. It is a visionary document that helps us get to better. They’ve added a section for data centers in that. In May, staff put forward something pretty good, making sure data centers met a minimum level of efficiency. But our chairman of the county board said it went above and beyond our zoning ordinance and said he didn’t think it was appropriate, so staff rewrote that section and stripped out a lot of the specificity and higher standards that were in that document.
At the hearing, they deferred a decision, listening to the public but not having a discussion at the board level. They’ve left the record open through December 9th.