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:
No need for expensive imported fuel when your energy is coming from the sun.

Pakistan has long had a severely troubled economy, and a central part of the problem is its electric grid. Much of it was constructed back in the 1960s and has not been maintained or updated regularly. In the 1990s, the government enticed foreign companies (mostly from China, ironically, in light of current events) to build more power plants by promising to subsidize them even if they were not running at full capacity. But it did not invest sufficiently in transmission capacity, leading to inflated electric bills to pay for idle plants while power went undelivered. Conditions on a recent loan from the International Monetary Fund and rising fuel prices led to even further increases.
As a result, despite electricity that now costs 23 cents per kilowatt-hour — or close to twice the U.S. average in a country less than one-tenth as rich per person, where half the population subsists on $4 per day or less — rolling blackouts are common, and even the occasional country-wide grid collapse, as happened in January 2023. The power bill costs more than rent for some Pakistanis, and about anyone who can afford it has a diesel generator backup. A recent report from the Pakistan Credit Rating Agency estimated that the country’s coal consumption would double by 2030, in line with the government’s strategy to reduce fuel imports by boosting domestic production.
But things are changing, and fast. Pakistan imported a whopping 13 gigawatts of solar panels, mostly from China, in just the first half of 2024, mostly for rooftop installations for homes and businesses. That’s a mind-boggling amount of new solar for a country that only had about 50 gigawatts of installed generation capacity in total in 2023.
In the short term, solar imports are likely to cause some problems, particularly for the poorest Pakistanis. But past that, things might get a lot better.
As the Financial Times reports, the solar boom is leading to slashed utility payments, further threatening the rickety and debt-laden grid system. Poorer Pakistanis who can’t afford to buy panels are increasingly left holding the ever-more-expensive bag. Many will likely refuse to pay their power bill or simply not be able to afford to. Some provinces have resorted to handing out panels for free to poor folks. If I had to guess, I would imagine sooner or later the extant utility system will go bankrupt, and most or all of Pakistan’s investment in fossil-fuel generation will be written off. That will no doubt cause all manner of painful and lingering side effects.
But there is a promising potential future visible, should Pakistan manage to get clear of its entanglement with fossil fuel power. As noted above, for decades it has been trapped in a sandpit of underinvestment, policy mistakes, corruption, economic chaos, and austerity. The government couldn’t get it together to build and maintain a traditional power grid, leading to slanted foreign investments and IMF bailouts with stringent conditions, leading in turn to eye-watering prices for unreliable power. Meanwhile, economic problems caused in part by unreliable electricity fueled inflation and a collapsing currency that drastically increased the price of imports.
Fuel imports are one of the largest expenses for even prosperous countries. For places like Pakistan, they are a punishing economic drain. Paying for vast amounts of imported coal, gas, and oil in scarce foreign currency is hard enough in good times, but it’s disastrous when one’s currency has depreciated by about 40% over two years.
Dirt cheap solar power could ameliorate or solve many of these problems at a stroke. Panels are now so cheap, even Pakistan can afford to import them by the millions — an expense, yes, but a one-time one. And while solar is inherently intermittent, and therefore not a solution to Pakistan’s reliability problems, batteries are also plummeting in price — down about 90% between 2010 and 2023 — and can help balance out supply. Cheaper batteries also mean cheaper EVs, with (as usual) Chinese models coming out at bewilderingly low prices. And because Pakistanis mostly drive motorcycles (often manufactured domestically) over relatively short distances, electrifying the personal vehicle fleet there will be far cheaper than in America or Europe; vastly smaller batteries require vastly simpler charging infrastructure.
If all goes well, this will free up vast amounts of economic capacity for Pakistan to invest in domestic development. Businesses will have stable, reliable power supplies that will justify more investment. Households will be able to upgrade their insulation, install heat pumps, and generally spend more on things other than energy. The government will be able to upgrade legacy transmission lines to accommodate solar production from the remaining hydro and nuclear plants.
Finally, of course, there is the climate benefit. Pakistan is one of the countries most threatened by climate change. Summer heat waves are bad and getting worse, to the point where murderous wet bulb events are increasingly likely. Catastrophic warming-fueled storms in 2022 caused the worst flooding in the country’s history, inundating about a third of Pakistan’s land area, killing nearly 2,000 people and causing billions of dollars in damages.
In short, a path to economic development will be opened. It is by no means guaranteed, but it will be a heck of a lot easier than trying to dig out from under the debt mountain of the collapsing coal-powered system. Look around the developing world and you’ll find there are a great many nations in similar situations.
Ethiopia, for instance, has abundant solar and hydro potential, but much of its rural population is not connected to the grid. Researchers there expect both grid-connected and off-grid solar projects to proliferate over the next five years, and modest government subsidies have already catalyzed a rapid switch to electric vehicles. On the other side of the continent, solar installations in the region are projected to grow at a compound annual rate of about 30% through 2030. In Nicaragua, which has historically generated much of its power from imported oil, both rooftop solar and utility-scale solar are increasing, with President Daniel Ortega signing an agreement with a Chinese firm for a major new project earlier this year.
Developing nations still face innumerable obstacles, from unfavorable trade deals to political instability to corruption. But for many, dependence on imported carbon fuels and their wildly gyrating prices has been a shackle on their economies. Those that can shake it off will find it much easier to climb up the development ladder.
Log in
To continue reading, log in to your account.
Create a Free Account
To unlock more free articles, please create a free account.
On Trump’s dubious offshore wind deal, fast tracks, and missed deadlines
Current conditions: At least eight tornadoes touched down Wednesday between central Iowa and southern Wisconsin, and more storms are on the way • Temperatures in Central Park, where your humble correspondent sweltered in a suit jacket yesterday afternoon, hit 90 degrees Fahrenheit, shattering the previous record of 87 degrees • Mount Kanloan, a volcano on the Philippines’ Negros island, is showing signs of looming eruption with dozens of ash emissions.
The Trump administration appears to be tapping an essentially bottomless but highly restricted pool of federal money at the Department of Justice to pay the French energy giant TotalEnergies the $1 billion the Department of the Interior promised in exchange for abandoning two offshore wind projects. Heatmap’s Emily Pontecorvo got her hands on a document that suggests the fund, which is typically reserved for helping federal agencies pay out legal settlements, may have been improperly used for the deal. Tony Irish, a former solicitor in the Department of the Interior who unearthed a letter in the public docket from his former agency to TotalEnergies and shared the document with Emily, told her that the terms of the French energy giant’s lease are such that a lawsuit requiring monetary damages couldn't have been reasonably imminent. Without that, there would be no credible reason to dip into the Judgment Fund for the payout.
This morning, Emily published another banger. While listening to Secretary of Energy Chris Wright speak before the House Appropriations Committee Wednesday, she noticed the cabinet chief say that “well over 80%” of the 2,270 awards reviewed by agency were now moving forward. But there are “big holes” in that number, which doesn't account for several grants to blue states that a judge mandated be reinstated, or for energy efficiency rebates that are still in limbo.
Louisiana’s Public Service Commission voted 4-1 to fast-track a proposal from Facebook-owner Meta and the utility Entergy to build seven new gas-fired power plants, in a $16 billion investment into fossil fuel infrastructure. The project is, according to the watchdog group Alliance for Affordable Energy, one of the largest single power requests in state history. The timeline established under the vote today requires a final vote on the application by December.
The federal government, meanwhile, is getting interested in how much power data centers use. The Energy Information Administration is planning to implement a mandatory nationwide survey of data centers focused on their energy use, Wired reported, calling the move the first such effort to collect basic data on the server farms’ power demands.

Super Typhoon Sinlaku slammed into the Northern Mariana Islands as the most powerful storm on Earth so far this year, plunging the U.S. territory into darkness. It’s unclear just how many of the remote Pacific archipelago’s 45,000 residents lost grid connections amid the storm. But reports indicate island-wide blackouts. Local officials told the Associated Press it could take weeks to restore power and water service across the territory. Even if cellphones were charged, Pacific Daily News reported that wireless networks were overloaded and slow throughout the storm. Saipan, the capital, and neighboring Tinian were plunged into “total darkness,” according to Pacific Island Times.
The incident highlights the particular risk that the five populated U.S. territories face from extreme weather. All five — Puerto Rico and the U.S. Virgin Islands in the Caribbean; Guam, the Northern Mariana Islands, and American Samoa in the Pacific — are island chains vulnerable to hurricanes, typhoons, and rising seas. And all five depend on increasingly costly imports of oil and gas to generate electricity. This September will mark nine years since Hurricane Maria laid waste to Puerto Rico’s aging grid system.
Sign up to receive Heatmap AM in your inbox every morning:
Over at NOTUS, reporter Anna Kramer found that the Interior Department “has blown past a congressionally-mandated deadline to report its progress on energy projects.” Per a letter from Senate Democrats, the agency failed to submit two required reports to Congress on its reviews and approvals of energy projects, which wind and solar developers say reflects the administration’s ongoing de facto embargo on permits for renewables.
Overall, 2025 was a worse year for zero-emissions trucks than 2024. Annual total registrations of medium- and heavy-duty vehicles that don’t run on gasoline or diesel fell by 7.6%, according to new data from the International Council on Clean Transportation. But the decline wasn’t uniform across all segments: The medium-duty truck, such as a box truck or a delivery truck, saw a 61.7% surge in zero-emission vehicle registrations year over year. That held even as buses fell 32.8% and heavy-duty trucks, such as flatbeds and dump trucks, declined 20.7%.
The times, they are a-changing over at the Natural Resources Defense Council. Once a stalwart opponent of nuclear power and supporter of stricter and more onerous environmental rules, the conservation-focused litigation nonprofit first embraced the need to restart existing nuclear plants, in a major shift. Now the NRDC has thrown its weight behind permitting reform, calling on lawmakers to speed up the process for approving clean energy projects. Green groups like NRDC once derided an overhaul of the landmark U.S. environmental laws as a deregulatory assault on nature. What’s going on here? The Foundation for American Innovation’s Thomas Hochman put it simply: “Vibe shift.”
The Secretary of Energy told Congress that his agency had completed its review of Biden-era funding commitments.
Secretary of Energy Chris Wright testified in front of the House Appropriations Committee on Wednesday to defend his agency’s proposed 2027 budget. Under questioning from Democrats, Wright told the committee that his department’s review of Biden-era funding, announced in May 2025, had “finally come to a completion.”
“Well over 80%” of the 2,270 awards reviewed were moving forward, he said. Some would proceed as originally conceived, while others would be modified. “We have finished that effort, and we are keen to move forward with the majority of the projects which did pass, either straight up or through restructuring,” he testified.
But that assertion obscures the level of uncertainty that remains about the funding.
To back up his statement, Wright sent Congress a list of grants titled “Retain/modify,” which named roughly 1,950 awards — a number consistent with his “well over 80%” of 2,270 number.
But there are big holes in the data. As one example, in January, a federal judge ruled that DOE had to reinstate seven awards the agency terminated last year, ruling that the agency’s targeting of awards in blue states violated Constitutional protections against discrimination. But just one of those seven awards — which should all theoretically be “retained” — is on the list sent to Congress this week. (The single retained award is a nearly $20 million grant for Colorado State University’s Methane Emissions Technology Evaluation Center.)
Meanwhile, 18 other awards that were terminated as part of that same targeting on blue states, but which were not named in the court case, are on the new list. In other words, 18 awards that had been publicly deemed “terminated” and were not reinstated by a judge have been cleared to progress.
Wright’s stats are also misleading in that the new list doesn’t include any of the funding the DOE is statutorily required to pay out to states based on pre-set formulas, such as funding for long-established Weatherization Assistance Programs or the home energy retrofit programs created by the Inflation Reduction Act, which also fell victim to the agency’s review. As I reported last summer, many states were stuck in a holding pattern waiting for the DOE to respond to their applications for the IRA rebate funding.
During the hearing, Representative Debbie Wasserman Schultz of Florida asserted that the agency was still withholding more than $345 million in funds for her state’s energy efficiency rebate programs. Representative Rosa DeLauro of Connecticut raised the same issue.
Wright told DeLauro that the timing for releasing the funds was “in the near future,” and could be as soon as a few weeks away. Later, when Wasserman Schultz pressed him again, Wright said he didn’t know when the funds would be released.
“I do not have a specific answer to that at the tip of my tongue,” Wright said. “I know a lot of these broad scale rebate programs, we’ve gone through to look at carefully, to make sure we get rid of fraud on these things …”
“$345 million is a lot of damn money,” Wasserman Schultz said, cutting him off. “And $8,000 to $14,000 grants are the kinds of things that help struggling homeowners dealing with high electric bills to try to reduce those costs. I would think that you would know at least something about what I’m talking about when you are withholding that much money.”
In response, Wright argued that there was “an incredible amount of fraud” in the programs and “DEI stuff put in,” referring to diversity, equity, and inclusion programs, against which the Trump administration has mounted a crusade. The rebate programs were specifically designed by Congress, in statute, to help lower- and moderate-income households afford home upgrades like heat pumps.
Wright did not provide any information to Congress about which projects were being “modified” versus approved as-is, or describe how the “modified” projects were changing course. He did, however, indicate that the agency was still open to reconsiderating grants that had been terminated. During the hearing, Representative Mike Levin of California brought up his state’s canceled ARCHES hydrogen hub, which had been eligible for up to $1.2 billion in DOE funding. He asked whether Wright would “commit to engage in good faith” with the hub’s leadership, who “want to work collaboratively with you.”
“Absolutely,” Wright replied. He said that the ARCHES hub failed to prove it had a viable pathway to meet its cost goals, but that he was “absolutely open for that dialogue.”
Rob follows up on his scoop with Jack Andreasen Cavanaugh of Columbia University’s Center on Global Energy Policy.
For the past few years, Microsoft has basically carried the carbon removal industry on its shoulders. The software company has purchased 72 million tons of carbon removal, more than 40 times what any other organization has financed, according to third-party sources.
Now it’s pulling back. As we reported last week, Microsoft has told suppliers and partners that it’s pausing new purchases. Though the company says that its program “has not ended,” even a temporary pullback will have significant implications for the nascent carbon removal industry. What happens next for these companies? And is a bloodbath on the way? On this week’s episode of Shift Key, Rob speaks to Jack Andreasen Cavanaugh from Columbia University’s Center on Global Energy Policy about Microsoft’s singular importance and what could come next.
Shift Key is hosted by Robinson Meyer, the founding executive editor of Heatmap News.
Subscribe to “Shift Key” and find this episode on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, Amazon, or wherever you get your podcasts.
You can also add the show’s RSS feed to your podcast app to follow us directly.
Here is an excerpt from their conversation:
Jack Andreasen Cavanaugh: To your original question about where to go forward from now, you could have another surplus of what you just described come up — climate commitments could kick back up again, and we would just do this whole thing over again. We would run it back, and we would be having this conversation, you know, five years from now, or whenever that is. And the way to hedge against that from happening — and to some extent stop it from happening — is to have federal governments across the globe pass durable policy that either compels the regulation or incentivizes the deployment of carbon dioxide removal. And that ... because carbon dioxide removal — outside of the co-benefits of some pathways, which are fantastic, just removing carbon from the atmosphere for pure carbon’s sake is the tragedy of the commons in a single climate technology entity. Like, this is something that will need federal support in the long run, to some extent, in a way that other climate technologies don’t. That’s true of most of the carbon management world, but it is uniquely true of CDR.
Robinson Meyer: But it’s a form of waste management. Trash and recycling also require ongoing government support. Now, at this point, it tends to come from the state and local level. But governments still pay to handle waste. That’s part of what we expect governments to do. It’s just that this waste happens to be in the atmosphere and requires a particularly high form of technology to dispel.
Cavanaugh: Yeah, it’s a very costly trash pickup service. And it also is contingent upon people caring about the trash. There is a relatively large constituency around the world that is unconvinced that the trash is an issue. And that is the big challenge.
You can find a full transcript of the episode here.
Mentioned:
Our initial Friday story: Microsoft Is Pausing Carbon Removal Purchases
Jack’s take: The Private Sector Built the Market, Time for Us to Scale It
Heatmap’s Emily Pontecorvo on Ctrl-S, the startup trying to save CDR intellectual property
This episode of Shift Key is sponsored by ...
Lunar Energy is building the technology to turn homes into active participants in the power system. Learn more about Lunar’s vision of the future at lunarenergy.com.
Music for Shift Key is by Adam Kromelow.