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:
The New York City Public Housing Authority is throwing its weight around in the nascent induction stove industry — and renters everywhere stand to benefit.

Anyone considering an induction stove has probably encountered a frustrating, expensive obstacle: the need for an electrical upgrade.
Most induction stoves, those magical, electric cooking devices that use magnets to heat pots and pans and can boil water in two minutes, must be plugged into a high-voltage, 240-volt outlet. Gas stoves only require a 120-volt outlet. Making the switch usually requires an upgrade, which can cost anywhere from a few hundred dollars to thousands, depending on how far away it is from your electrical panel, and whether your panel can handle the additional power.
Induction stoves already command a premium. Despite growing awareness of the health and climate risks of cooking with gas, the added cost and headache of an electric upgrade is enough to lead homeowners and landlords to stick with the fossil fuel, as Lisa Martine Jenkins wrote about for Heatmap earlier this year. But soon, an easy, affordable solution might be coming from an unexpected place: the New York City Public Housing Authority, the biggest provider of public housing in the United States.
Get one great climate story in your inbox every day:
NYCHA, in collaboration with two New York state agencies, announced Monday they are launching the “Induction Stove Challenge.” The contest invites manufacturers to compete for a contract to install at least 10,000 induction stoves in NYCHA buildings — if they can design efficient models that do not require electrical upgrades. The idea is not just to improve the lives of NYC public housing residents, but to spur a larger market transformation that lowers the barriers to induction stoves for everyone.
“This challenge in New York is exciting because it focuses on those who deserve to transition away from gas first,” said Panama Bartholomy, the executive director of the Building Decarbonization Coalition, which was hired by New York's clean energy office to enlist other housing authorities in the effort and engage manufacturers. “But it will most certainly have a ripple effect throughout the marketplace.”
Bartholomy told me appliance companies are watching closely for an inflection point before they make any decisions to wind down gas stove production or increase their induction offerings. “Things like this are indicators of, okay, it's getting serious, the sales are going to be there. They are guaranteeing sales.”
NYCHA first pioneered this strategy in the 1990s, when it held a contest for energy-saving refrigerators. At the time, no one was selling a model that was small enough for a typical urban apartment. NYCHA was uniquely motivated to push for one, since it both supplied the appliances and paid the energy bills for most of the apartments it oversaw. In leveraging its immense purchasing power, and working with other public housing authorities in the region to place bulk orders, it was able to bring the cost down for a new, apartment-scale fridge that cut energy consumption in half.
The agency has revived this strategy for the decarbonization era, using it to solve some of the biggest challenges to getting the state’s — and the nation’s — buildings off of fossil fuels. In 2021, it launched the Clean Heat For All Challenge, a contest to design a new heat pump that could be installed in a window, like an air conditioner. Most heat pumps on the market have both indoor and outdoor components, and require costly construction work involving plumbers, carpenters, and electricians to set up. A window-unit version would not only be cheaper and easier to install, but would enable renters to take advantage of the technology.
The winners — a model from the longtime window AC manufacturer Midea America and another from a startup called Gradient — were announced last summer. Next steps include extensive testing of the designs, followed by a pilot installation of 60 units before the companies begin fulfilling a much larger order. NYCHA had originally promised a 10,000-unit contract, but the city and state said they planned to triple it to 30,000.
“Purchasing power of NYCHA is a big draw to manufacturers,“ a spokesperson for the state's clean energy office told me. “By including the potential for a large purchase order if successful in the Clean Heat for All Program, we saw a lot of interest from manufacturers because they saw the customer opportunity on the other side of the 'demonstration phase' of this program.”
The heat pump contest was, in part, inspired by a pilot program where the housing authority tried to install traditional heat pumps in a few apartments in one of its buildings in the Bronx. The project turned out to be hugely complicated, expensive, and disruptive to residents. “Each apartment was a story,” Jordan Bonomo, a senior project manager at NYCHA, told me at the time. “We quickly realized that while we like the technology, we couldn’t possibly scale that effort across our portfolio.”
NYCHA has experimented with induction stoves, too. Last year, the environmental justice group WE ACT ran a study on the air quality benefits of switching to induction cooking in NYCHA households. The group installed induction stoves in 10 apartments, and then monitored the air quality while residents cooked and compared it to 10 control apartments. They found that induction cooking lowered daily indoor nitrogen dioxide concentrations by 35 percent compared with gas cooking.
But the project required installing new breakers and outlets, and the building’s limited electrical capacity restricted which apartments could participate.
“In partnership with WE ACT, we studied and understand that electric induction stoves are healthier for indoor environments compared to gas cooking, and we can’t allow the costs of retrofits to constrain us in acting on this strategy,” Vlada Kenniff, NYCHA’s senior vice president for sustainability, said in a press release. “This is our next attempt to create a solution that will allow us to abandon often failing gas lines, while providing a healthier, more reliable cooking option for our residents.”
There are already a few startups, like Impulse Labs and Channing Street Copper, trying to eliminate the electrical upgrade obstacle for induction stoves. They are getting around the issue by designing models that have built-in batteries that enable them to run on a 120-volt outlet. Most cooking can be conducted using the lower voltage, but when more is needed, the battery can supply it. These companies are close to putting their products on the market, but they are unlikely to be cheaper than an electrical upgrade. Channing Street Copper’s product is expected to cost nearly $6,000.
I asked Bartholomy why the legacy manufacturers that make induction stoves weren’t trying to solve this problem, and he said he doesn’t think there has been enough demand yet to justify the manufacturing costs.
Maybe a 10,000-unit order will be enough to change their minds.
Read more about induction stoves:
Log in
To continue reading, log in to your account.
Create a Free Account
To unlock more free articles, please create a free account.
Utilities are bending over backward to convince even their own investors that ratepayers won’t be on the hook for the cost of AI.
Utilities want you to know how little data centers will cost anyone.
With electricity prices rising faster than inflation and public backlash against data centers brewing, developers and the utilities that serve them are trying to convince the public that increasing numbers of gargantuan new projects won’t lead to higher bills. Case in point is the latest project from OpenAI’s Stargate, a $7-plus-billion, more-than-1-gigawatt data center due to be built outside Detroit.
The project was announced Thursday by Michigan Governor Gretchen Whitmer, who focused heavily on the projected economic benefits of the projects while attempting to head off criticism that it would lead to higher costs. In the first sentence of her press release, she said that the project will “create more than 2,500 union construction jobs, more than 450 jobs on site and 1,500 more across the county.” Also, it “will be one of the most advanced AI infrastructure facilities in the U.S., especially when it comes to its efficient use of land, water, and power.” Oh, and it “will not require any additional power generation to operate.”
The utility set to power the project, DTE Energy, released its quarterly earnings Thursday, as well, which described a 1.4-gigawatt project it had already executed. In a presentation for analysts and investors, DTE said that the new data center would pay for “required storage through a 15-year energy storage contract,” and that it would “support affordability for existing customers as excess capacity is sold.”
On a call with analysts, DTE Energy chief executive Joi Harris further asserted that the project has “meaningful affordability benefits to our existing customers.” As the data center ramps up, she explained, it can use existing excess capacity on the grid. By the time it reaches full strength, it will enjoy the benefits of “nearly $2 billion of incremental energy storage investments and additional tolling agreements to support this data center load.”
Who will pay for energy storage and tolling agreements? A DTE spokesperson, Jill Wilmot, clarified in an email that “DTE will meet the 1.4 gigawatts of demand from the data center with existing capacity,” and that “new energy storage will be built — and paid for by the customer” — that is, Stargate — “to help augment times of peak demand, ensuring continued reliability for all customers.”
Data centers help spread out the fixed costs of the grid more widely, Wilmot went on. “Data center development in DTE’s electric service territory will not increase customer rates,” she said, adding that “DTE is ensuring the data center will absorb all new costs required to serve them — in this case, battery storage. Our customers will not pay.”
That said, Wilmot did not answer a question about whether there would be any network or transmission upgrades necessary. She told me that she expected DTE would make a filing for the project with Michigan regulators later Friday.
Consumer advocates were skeptical of the utility’s claims. “When you are talking about new demand as massive as what would be created by this data center, we can’t afford to just take DTE at its word that other customers won’t be affected,” Amy Bandyk, the executive director of the Citizens Utility Board of Michigan, told me in an email. She called for Michigan regulators “to require DTE and the data center customer to agree on a tariff specific to that customer that includes robust protections against cost-shifting and provisions that any incremental costs will be solely covered by this new customer.”
More utilities and data center developers are trying to explicitly head off claims that data centers are driving up electricity rates. In another recent data center announcement for a multi-billion-dollar project in West Memphis, Arkansas, Google and the Arkansas Economic Development Commission said that “Google will be covering the full energy costs for the West Memphis facility and will be ramping up new solar energy and battery storage resources for the facility.”
Drew Marsh, the chief executive of Entergy, the utility serving the project, confirmed on an earnings call earlier this week that Google “will protect energy affordability for existing customers by covering the full cost of powering the data center in West Memphis.” He also said that in Mississippi, where Amazon has announced a $16 billion project, “customer rates would be 16% lower than they otherwise would have been due to these large customers.”
So why are utilities — which, after all, get paid by ratepayers for the investments they make in their systems — telling their investors about all the money they’re not charging ratepayers?
In short, utilities and developers know they’re on political thin ice, and they don’t want to kill the golden goose of data center development by stoking a populist backlash to rising electricity prices that could result in either government-mandated slashing of their investment plans, caps on the rates they can charge, or both.
“Looking ahead, we anticipate the central issue will be how utilities protect residential customers from costs associated with large-load customers, or else face potential consequences from regulators,” Mizuho analyst Anthony Crowdell said in a note to clients earlier this week. “Data centers, and their associated load, have the potential” to “cause political push-back.”
This is already happening across the country. The frontrunner in the New Jersey gubernatorial race, Democrat Mikie Sherrill, for example, has promised to freeze electricity rates, which have seen a sharp runup in recent years. Indiana Governor Mike Braun, a Republican, said in a recent statement that “we can’t take it anymore,” in reference to rate hikes. Indiana has also rejected a number of proposed data centers, as I covered earlier this year.
This means that utilities will have to think carefully about how and to whom they allocate costs arising from data center development and operation.
“Allocation of cost will be pivotal as the current ’pocketbook issues driving a lot of the U.S. political debate could create some challenging regulatory outcomes should data centers put pressure on customer bills,” Crowdell wrote.
But what’s said in an announcement to the media or to investors may not always reflect the reality of utility cost allocation, Harvard Law School professor Ari Peskoe told me.
“Don’t trust a utility press release or comment from a CEO of a monopoly that says Hey, these rates are good for you,” he told me.
Peskoe told me to pay close attention to the regulatory fillings utilities make for their data center projects, not just what they tell the press or investors. “Are the utilities themselves actually making these claims as strongly as their CEOs are making them in investor calls? And then once we do have a regulatory process about it, are they being transparent in that regulatory process? Are they hiding a lot of details behind the confidentiality claims so that only the participants in that proceeding actually get to see the details?”
Peskoe also pointed to other costs that might be incurred in the course of data center development that get socialized across the rate base but aren’t necessarily directly tied to any one development, like the transmission and network upgrades, that have contributed to large price increases in the PJM Interconnection territory.
“What you’re looking for is a firm contract that ensures the data center is going to be paying for every penny that the utility is incurring to provide service, so that it’s paying for all the new infrastructure that’s serving it,” Peskoe said. Without that, all you have is a press release.
The state formerly led by Interior Secretary Doug Burgum does not have a history of rejecting wind farms – which makes some recent difficulties especially noteworthy.
A wind farm in North Dakota – the former home of Interior Secretary Doug Burgum – is becoming a bellwether for the future of the sector in one of the most popular states for wind development.
At issue is Allete’s Longspur project, which would see 45 turbines span hundreds of acres in Morton County, west of Bismarck, the rural state’s most populous city.
Sited amid two already operating wind farms, the project will feed power not only to North Dakotans but also to Minnesotans, who, in the view of Allete, lack the style of open plains perfect for wind farms found in the Dakotas. Allete subsidiary Minnesota Power announced Longspur in August and is aiming to build and operate it by 2027, in time to qualify for clean electricity tax benefits under a hastened phase-out of the Inflation Reduction Act.
On paper, this sounds achievable. North Dakota is one of the nation’s largest producers of wind-generated power and not uncoincidentally boasts some of cheapest electricity in the country at a time when energy prices have become a potent political issue. Wind project rejections have happened, but they’ve been rare.
Yet last week, zoning officials in Morton County bucked the state’s wind-friendly reputation and voted to reject Longspur after more than an hour of testimony from rural residents who said they’d had enough wind development – and that officials should finish the job Donald Trump and Doug Burgum started.
Across the board, people who spoke were neighbors of existing wind projects and, if built, Longspur. It wasn’t that they didn’t want any wind turbines – or “windmills,” as they called them, echoing Trump’s nomenclature. But they didn’t want more of them. After hearing from the residents, zoning commission chair Jesse Kist came out against the project and suggested the county may have had enough wind development for now.
“I look at the area on this map and it is plum full of wind turbines, at this point,” Kist said, referencing a map where the project would be situated. “And we have a room full of people and we heard only from landowners, homeowners in opposition. Nobody in favor.”
This was a first for the county, zoning staff said, as public comment periods weren’t previously even considered necessary for a wind project. Opposition had never shown up like this before. This wasn’t lost on Andy Zachmeier, a county commissioner who also sits on the zoning panel, who confessed during the hearing that the county was approaching the point of overcrowding. “Sooner or later, when is too many enough?” he asked.
Zachmeier was ultimately one of the two officials on the commission to vote against rejecting Longspur. He told me he was looking to Burgum for a signal.
“The Green New Deal – I don’t have to like it but it’s there,” he said. “Governor Burgum is now our interior secretary. There’s been no press conferences by him telling the president to change the Green New Deal.” Zachmeier said it was not the county’s place to stop the project, but rather that it was up to the state government, a body Burgum once led. “That’s probably going to have to be a legislative question. There’s been nothing brought forward where the county can say, We’ve been inundated and we’ve had enough,” he told me.
The county commission oversees the zoning body, and on Wednesday, Zachmeier and his colleagues voted to deny Longspur’s rejection and requested that zoning officials reconsider whether the denial was a good idea, or even legally possible. Unlike at the hearing last week, landowners whose property includes the wind project area called for it to proceed, pointing to the monetary benefits its construction would provide them.
“We appreciate the strong support demonstrated by landowners at the recent Commission meeting,” Allete’s corporate communications director Amy Rutledge told me in an email. “This region of North Dakota combines exceptional wind resources, reliable electric transmission infrastructure, and a strong tradition of coexisting seamlessly with farming and ranching activities.”
I personally doubt that will be the end of Longspur’s problems before the zoning board, and I suspect this county will eventually restrict or even ban future wind projects. Morton County’s profile for renewables development is difficult, to say the least; Heatmap Pro’s modeling gives the county an opposition risk score of 92 because it’s a relatively affluent agricultural community with a proclivity for cultural conservatism – precisely the kind of bent that can be easily swayed by rhetoric from Trump and his appointees.
Morton County also has a proclivity for targeting advanced tech-focused industrial development. Not only have county officials instituted a moratorium on direct air capture facilities, they’ve also banned future data center and cryptocurrency mining projects.
Neighboring counties have also restricted some forms of wind energy infrastructure. McClean County to the north, for example, has instituted a mandatory wind turbine setback from the Missouri River, and Stark County to the west has a 2,000-foot property setback from homes and public buildings.
In other words, so goes Burgum, may go North Dakota? I suppose we’ll find out.
And more of the week’s top news about renewable energy conflicts.
1. Staten Island, New York – New York’s largest battery project, Swiftsure, is dead after fervent opposition from locals in what would’ve been its host community, Staten Island.
2. Barren County, Kentucky – Do you remember Wood Duck, the solar farm being fought by the National Park Service? Geenex, the solar developer, claims the Park Service has actually given it the all-clear.
3. Near Moss Landing, California – Two different communities near the now-infamous Moss Landing battery site are pressing for more restrictions on storage projects.
4. Navajo County, Arizona – If good news is what you’re seeking, this Arizona county just approved a large solar project, indicating this state still has sunny prospects for utility-scale development depending on where you go.
5. Gillespie County, Texas – Meanwhile out in Texas, this county is getting aggressive in its attempts to kill a battery storage project.
6. Clinton County, Iowa – This county just extended its moratorium on wind development until at least the end of the year as it drafts a restrictive ordinance.