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:
Whatever happens to the Inflation Reduction Act, high interest rates could still hurt.
The Federal Reserve’s interest rate cuts were supposed to be a bonanza for the clean energy business. Renewables, with their high upfront costs compared to their costs of operating (the “fuel” — i.e. the wind and the sun — is free), are especially sensitive to the cost of borrowing money. When rates go up, it becomes more difficult for projects to hit the profitability targets necessary to lure investors without jacking up prices for customers beyond the realm of the possible. When rates comes down — which the Fed has been working on doing since September — suddenly those investments start to look a lot more appealing.
But there’s more to financing costs than the Fed. There’s also the president.
While much of the focus on Donald Trump’s electoral victory has been trying to discern what a Republican trifecta could do to the Inflation Reduction Act, Trump’s effect on the bond market may be just as important. We may still living in James Carville’s world, where the bond market can “intimidate everybody.” And it’s rearing its head against the president-reelect.
Since Trump came to be seen as the likely winner in the months before election day, yields on U.S. government debt — that is, the returns bondholders and issuers have to offer to entice investors — began to shoot up. Interpreting moves in the bond market is always tricky, but many market commentators interpreted the recent run-up as at least in part a reaction to Trump, whether they thought he was going to juice economic growth or stoke inflation, or some combination of the two.
“If Trump is proposing a broadly inflationary high-tariff, low-tax agenda, anyone expecting inflation is looking for a higher return,” explained Advait Arun, a climate and infrastructure finance analyst at the Center for Public Enterprise.
Each of these policies — high tariffs and low taxes — could have an inflationary effect. Tariffs could lead to higher consumer prices (especially the kind of broad-based tariffs Trump has proposed) while tax cuts act as stimulus by keeping more cash in the economy. Combined with higher defense spending and a reduced labor force if Trump follows through on his plan for mass deportations, the whole policy agenda could wind up reversing some of the progress the economy has made recovering from the high inflation of the immediate post-COVID period, or at least make it so the Federal Reserve sees no further need to cut interest rates.
“Tariffs, especially if universally placed on all imports, is broadly viewed as an inflationary policy, which may pose a risk to the outlook for lower interest rates,” Morgan Stanley analyst Andrew Perocco wrote in a note to clients. “All else equal, higher rates are seen as a headwind for the renewable energy sector due to higher financing costs.”
Yields on the 10-year Treasury note, a widely used benchmark throughout the global economy, were sitting at around 3.6% in mid-September when the Fed began cutting rates, but had risen to 4.36% the week before the election. Yields shot up again last week after Trump’s win, which confirmed the market’s suspicion that his inflationary plans will be realized. Today they’re around 4.43% and rising.
“Interest rates are moving higher in much the same way they did when he won in 2016,” aid Skanda Amarnath, executive director of Employ America told me. “There’s a Trump trade people do — the dollar gets stronger, interest rates are higher.” These policies may be “more stimulative to the economy on some level,” and in turn, “maybe this means the Fed is more cautious about lowering interest rates.”
The market certainly seems to think Trump will run the economy hot. Expectations for where the federal funds rate could end up by the end of 2025 have risen from 3% in September to about 3.8%, Gautam Jain, a senior research scholar at Columbia University’s Center on Global Energy Policy. Several analysts have scaled back their forecasts for the number of future Federal Reserve rate cuts next after the Fed lowered rates by another quarter percentage point last week. Yields on two-year Treasury notes, which are considered to be highly sensitive to expectations of Federal Reserve action, have risen from 3.55% in mid-September to 4.34% today, the highest level since July.
And sustained high rates mean sustained high costs for renewable energy companies. Jain had previously estimated that a 2 percentage point drop in the cost of debt would lower offshore wind costs by as much as $10 per megawatt-hour and utility-scale solar by as much as $12 per megawatt-hour, which would help make them more competitive even in the absence of federal subsidies. If the cost of capital stays high, that potential boost goes away.
“For renewables, they are more capital intensive, so they are more impacted” by rising rates, Jain told me. “The headwind will hurt them more.”
Bipartisan budget watchdogs have been skeptical of Trump’s policies, typically projecting larger deficit increases than would have arisen from the policy agenda of Democratic nominee Kamala Harris. That said, not everyone is worried.
The hedge-fund investor Scott Bessent, widely tipped to be Trump’s pick for Treasury Secretary, has been promoting a “3-3-3” plan — deficits reduced to 3% of gross domestic product from around 7% currently by the end of Trump’s term; annual growth kicked up to 3% from around 2.8% today; and oil production increased by 3 million barrels, all of which could allow the Federal Reserve to bring down rates.
Trump “understands financial markets and the bond markets. He would not want deficits to get out of control,” Stephen Miran, a fellow at the Manhattan Institute and former Trump Treasury official told me. “There's a lot of focus to rein that in.”
Log in
To continue reading, log in to your account.
Create a Free Account
To unlock more free articles, please create a free account.
Can Musk pull another market miracle out of his MAGA hat?
It’s long been clear that Elon Musk’s primary talent is not dreaming up electric cars, reusable rockets, or tunnel-boring machines. It is reshaping reality in a way that always seems to keep Tesla’s stock price high, which made him the world’s richest man.
That stock price has been taking a beating of late. A groundswell of Tesla resentment has arisen since Musk hitched his wagon to Donald Trump and began dismantling the American government. Public rage has taken the form of protests, vandalized Superchargers, and, most importantly to the man himself, sliding sales of Tesla vehicles. All of this has combined to send the company’s market value tumbling this year, to the delight of Musk-haters everywhere eager to see his net worth implode. Its share price has fallen more than 5% today alone.
Even so, Musk carries on as Trump’s right-hand man as if his fortunes are immune from Tesla’s ups and downs. Could this time be different?
Tesla saw plenty of dark times during its march to EV dominance, such as the notorious “manufacturing hell” needed to bring the Model 3 to fruition. Likewise, there have been plenty of times when Tesla’s soaring stock valuation appeared to be untethered from its business reality — it became the world’s most valuable automaker while building only a tiny fraction as many cars as Toyota or General Motors.
The difference in those days was that Tesla — current profits and losses aside — was clearly on the rise. Overcoming that manufacturing problem, for example, allowed the EV-maker to build lots and lots of Model 3s and Model Y and put it on the path to worldwide electric car dominance. Today that upward trajectory is not so clear. Tesla sales in the U.S. plateaued last year even before Elon’s misadventures with MAGA. This year, sales in Europe and Australia are in freefall, seemingly in response to Musk’s embrace of the far right. Tesla is down 71% this quarter in Germany and Australia.
It would be easier for Tesla to cast this dip as a blip if something new and exciting were waiting right over the horizon. But the only new vehicle to arrive since 2020 is the Cybertruck, the metallic embodiment of Musk’s conversion on the road to Mar-a-Lago. The brand’s biggest hope for improving sales is the recently revealed redesign of the Model Y, code-named “Juniper,” which follows a similar update to the Model 3.
The company’s future is pegged not to any new EV with widespread appeal, but rather to the notion that Tesla will solve autonomous driving and dominate the next automotive era with its Cybercab and similar self-driving vehicles. Whether Musk will actually win the future is beside the point. What it achieves in the present is freeing Musk from being judged on hard sales numbers like an ordinary car company CEO and keeping him in the character of visionary innovator, able to keep his stock price afloat through his own genius.
That doesn’t mean Musk can dismiss the power of dollars and cents with a wave of his hand. Investors are once again furious with the CEO for taking a ketamine-powered journey into the abyss rather than trying to build Tesla’s business in a practical way. And even if he can keep their anger at bay, a sales tumble really is a multi-pronged problem for Tesla.
For one thing, Musk’s political machinations have cost him all the market gains he earned via Trump’s electoral victory. Tesla’s valuation soared from around $800 billion to $1.5 trillion in December, when it became clear the CEO would become the president-elect’s right hand man. Since that moment, the company’s value has fallen by more than $600 million, effectively erasing the bump in Tesla’s market cap.
Still, Tesla — and Musk by extension — remains incredibly valuable. The carmaker’s true concern is that a big drop in sales could be a double-whammy for Tesla revenue. Recall that the company’s most reliable revenue stream is not really its sales of electric cars, but rather the carbon credits generated by those EVs under California’s auto emissions regulatory scheme, which it can sell to other automakers who’ve yet to meet their emissions targets. Even as Tesla’s reputation foundered in 2024, its revenue stream from selling credits reached $2.76 billion, up 50% from 2023.
That stream of free money helps to stabilize Tesla’s balance sheet in times of trouble. It is not inevitable. If automakers like Stellantis got their act together and started to sell a high volume of low-emissions vehicles, they’d need to buy fewer credits from Tesla. Tesla’s tumbling sales in the wake of Musk’s antics could reduce the amount of credits it could sell to others, since the credits are tied to sales of low-emissions vehicles. And it’s not out of the question that Musk’s political ally, President Trump, could attack the carbon market as part of his offensive against EVs, which could eliminate this revenue stream for Tesla. (If this seems unlikely, consider that Musk pursued this alliance knowing full well that Trump campaigned on eliminating federal tax credits for EVs that benefit Tesla buyers.)
Even with this dire financial picture, it’d be foolish to bet against Musk. The man has overcome more harrowing market conditions — and that was before America’s unelected chief consultant managed to entrench himself as Hand of the King. But seeing his supply of easy money wither because of his political stances might be just the thing to hit the man where it hurts.
On exemptions, lots of new EVs, and Cyclone Alfred
Current conditions: A smattering of rainfall did little to contain a massive wildfire raging in Japan • Indonesia is using cloud seeding to try to stop torrential rains that have displaced thousands • At least 22 tornadoes have been confirmed this week across southern states.
The Trump administration said yesterday that automakers will be exempt from the new 25% tariffs on imports from Mexico and Canada – but just for a month. The announcement followed a meeting between administration officials and the heads of Stellantis, GM, and Ford – oh, to be a fly on the wall. As Heatmap’s Robinson Meyer explained, the tariffs are expected to spike new car prices by $4,000 to $10,000, and could hit internal combustion cars even worse than EVs, and prompt layoffs at Ford and GM. “At the request of the companies associated with [the United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement], the president is giving them an exemption for one month so they are not at an economic disadvantage,” Trump said in a statement. Stellantis thanked Trump for the reprieve and said the company “share[s] the president’s objective to build more American cars and create lasting American jobs.” Around 40% of Stellantis cars currently sold in the U.S. are imported from Canada and Mexico.
The Supreme Court has rejected President Trump’s request to withhold roughly $2 billion in congressionally-approved payments to the U.S. Agency for International Development for foreign aid work that has already been completed. On his first day back in office, Trump ordered a 90-day pause on all foreign aid so programs could be reviewed to ensure they align with his agenda. The administration then eliminated funding for the majority of USAID’s contracts, including at least 130 that related to climate and/or clean energy. This week’s SCOTUS decision was “a welcome but confusing development for humanitarian and development organizations around the world,” The New York Timesreported, “as they waited to see if thousands of canceled contracts would be restarted.”
Speaking of cars, there has been a lot of EV news in the last few days:
Rivian announced plans to expand internationally. CFO Claire McDonough also said the company is working “around the clock” to roll out the new R2, R3, and R3X models, with production for the R2 set to start early next year. She said international expansion plans would kick off after the R2 production ramps up.
Volkswagen unveiled the ID. EVERY1. The concept-car version of its ultra-affordable EV “will be the first to roll out with software and architecture from Rivian,” TechCrunchreported. Production is slated for 2027, and the car will start at around 20,000 euros (or $21,500). No word on a U.S. release, though.
The ID. EVERY1Volkswagen
Volvo showed off the ES90. What is it? Good question. “Some might say it is a sedan,” the company said in its press release. “Others will see a fastback, or even hints of an SUV. We’ll let you be the final judge – all we know is that the new, fully electric Volvo ES90 carves out a new space for itself by eliminating the compromises between those three segments, which puts it in a class of its own.” InsideEVscalled it the company’s “most advanced EV to date,” because it can charge for 186 miles of range in 10 minutes on a fast charger.
Cadillac introduced a very long electric SUV. The electric Escalade IQL will go into production this year. With an overall length of 228.5 inches, it will be the longest SUV, uh, ever. It’ll start at $132,695.
On a related note, Tesla sales continue to plummet worldwide. They were down 76% last month in Germany, with sharp declines across other European countries, too. In Australia, sales were down 72%.
Global sea ice levels were at an all-time low last month, according to researchers at the Copernicus Climate Change Service. Arctic sea ice cover was 8% below average in February, the lowest since records began in 1979, and “the third consecutive month in which the sea ice extent has set a record for the corresponding month.” Antarctic sea ice cover was 26% below average. “One of the consequences of a warmer world is melting sea ice, and the record or near-record low sea ice cover at both poles has pushed global sea ice cover to an all-time minimum,” said Samantha Burgess at the European Centre for Medium-Range Weather Forecasts. Melting sea ice contributes to sea level rise and ocean acidification, harms polar ecosystems, and creates a global-warming feedback loop by reducing albedo, which is the Earth’s ability to reflect sunlight back to space.
C3S
Forecasters are growing increasingly concerned about Cyclone Alfred, which is swirling off the coast of eastern Australia and is expected to arrive Friday or Saturday as a category 2 storm, or perhaps even a category 3. Alfred will be the first cyclone in 50 years to make landfall in this part of Australia. The storm has slowed as it approaches land, which means it will spend more time over very warm waters, soaking up even more moisture to dump on land. “The northeastern Coral Sea, where Cyclone Alfred formed, experienced the fourth-hottest temperatures on record for February and the hottest on record for January,” a group of climate change researchers wrote at The Conversation. Residents in and around Brisbane have been told to prepare to evacuate.
American drivers spent more time on the road last year than ever before, logging a record 3.28 trillion miles.
On boasts and brags, clean power installations, and dirty air
Current conditions: Strong winds helped spark dozens of fires across parched Texas • India’s Himalayan state of Uttarakhand experienced a 600% rise in precipitation over 24 hours, which triggered a deadly avalanche • The world’s biggest iceberg, which has been drifting across the Southern Ocean for 5 years, has run aground.
President Trump addressed Congress last night in a wide-ranging speech boasting about the actions taken during his first five weeks in office. There were some familiar themes: He claimed to have “ended all of [former President] Biden’s environmental restrictions” (false) and the “insane electric vehicle mandate” (also false — no such thing has ever existed), and bragged about withdrawing from the Paris climate agreement (true). He also doubled down on his plan to boost U.S. fossil fuel production while spouting false statements about the Biden administration’s energy policies, and suggested that Japan and South Korea want to team up with the U.S. to build a “gigantic” natural gas pipeline in Alaska.
On the same day as the speech, new tariffs on imports from Canada, Mexico, and China came into effect, triggering retaliatory duties and causing stock markets to plunge. Experts are busy trying to figure out what it all means for American businesses and consumers. As Heatmap’s Robinson Meyer explained, the tariffs are likely to make electricity prices go up, raise construction costs, make gas more expensive at the pump, and make new cars costlier. Fossil fuel firms aren’t thrilled. The American Gas Association said the 10% tariff on Canadian natural gas “indicates potential impacts totaling at least $1.1 billion in additional costs to American consumers per year.” Chet Thompson, CEO of the American Fuel & Petrochemical Manufacturers, said that “imposing tariffs on energy, refined products, and petrochemical imports will not make us more energy secure or lower costs for consumers.”
Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick has implied Trump might lift these tariffs as soon as today, but TBD.
The Trump administration has ended a program that monitored the air quality at more than 80 U.S. embassies and consulates around the world, citing “budget constraints.” The program started in 2008 with the U.S. embassy in Beijing and expanded from there. The data collected, which was posted on the AirNow website, has been used in academic studies and credited with helping reduce pollution levels in the host countries, leading to better health outcomes. This move “puts the health of foreign service officers at risk” and could hinder research and policy, Dan Westervelt, a research professor at Columbia University’s Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory, toldThe New York Times.
Clean power installations soared in the fourth quarter of 2024, sending total operational capacity above and beyond the 300 gigawatt mark, according to a new report from the American Clean Power Association. “It took more than 20 years for the U.S. to install the first 100 GW of clean power, five years to install the next 100 GW, and three years to install the most recent 100 GW,” the report says. Here are some takeaways:
ACPA
China plans to ramp up its efforts to rein in emissions, expanding its emissions trading system beyond power plants to to include industries such as steel, aluminum, and cement, Premier Li Qiang said in a report this week. “Li also confirmed China intends to continue to play a key role in diplomacy on emissions reduction, as the U.S. retreats from international cooperation,” Bloombergreported. The country plans to roll out major climate projects such as offshore wind farms, “new energy bases” across its deserts, with a goal of reaching peak emissions before 2030. China is the world’s largest emitter of greenhouse gases, and while it has been rapidly expanding renewable power generation, it also struggles to wean itself off coal.
The Supreme Court yesterday watered down the Environmental Protection Agency’s authority to regulate water pollution, siding with the city of San Francisco in an unusual lawsuit pitting the liberal hub against the environmental authority. In a 5-4 decision, the justices said the agency had overstepped its authority under the Clean Water Act when it issued permitting for a San Francisco wastewater treatment plant that empties into the Pacific. The permit included provisions that would have made San Francisco authorities responsible for ensuring the water quality in the Pacific met EPA standards. Justice Samuel Alito essentially wrote that the permitting rules were too vague. “When a permit contains such requirements, a permittee that punctiliously follows every specific requirement in its permit may nevertheless face crushing penalties if the quality of the water in its receiving waters falls below the applicable standards,” Alito wrote. The ruling will make it harder for the EPA to limit water pollution. Next up on the SCOTUS docket: nuclear waste!
Bernard Looney, the former CEO of oil giant BP, is the new boss of an AI startup that tells businesses how to cut their emissions.