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:
New guidance on the Inflation Reduction Act’s “foreign entities of concern” provision didn’t do much to clarify things.

If you’re in the market for a new car and considering cashing in on the $7,500 federal tax credit for an electric vehicle, I have good news. Also bad news.
The good news is, starting January 1, the credit will be a lot easier to claim. You won’t need to meet a certain level of tax liability to qualify or wait for your tax refund. You can transfer the credit to the dealership and take $7,500 off the sticker price right then and there.
The bad news is that suddenly, nobody knows which — if any — EVs will qualify. On Friday, the Biden administration proposed additional guidelines limiting where the components in eligible EVs are allowed to come from. Those guidelines won’t be finalized until early next year. But all signs indicate that the list of qualifying vehicles is set to shrink.
These changes aren’t coming out of nowhere — they’re part of the way the EV tax credit in the Inflation Reduction Act was designed. Over time, the law phases in additional rules that ask more of automakers in terms of onshoring their production and supply chains and minimizing their reliance on China. Beginning in 2024, if a vehicle contains any battery components that were manufactured or assembled by what’s known as a “foreign entity of concern,” it will no longer meet the requirements for the tax credit. Beginning in 2025, the same rule applies to vehicles containing critical minerals that were extracted or processed by a foreign entity of concern.
What, exactly, is a foreign entity of concern? Under U.S. law, the term applies to a company that is “owned by, controlled by, or subject to the jurisdiction or direction of” North Korea, Russia, Iran, or, yes, China. But what constitutes ownership or control is somewhat fuzzy.
“The implications are enormous because right now, it seems as if every battery that's going into an electric vehicle has some material ties to China,” Jay Turner, a professor of environmental studies at Wellesley College and author of a book on the history of batteries, told me.
In the proposal published Friday, the Biden administration recommended three criteria for interpreting the rule that it hopes will further strengthen American manufacturing of EV components and help diversify supply chains:
1. If the company producing the battery component or mineral is headquartered or incorporated in China, or if the relevant production activities occur in China, the vehicle will not qualify for an IRA tax credit.
2. If China has a 25% or more voting interest, board control, or equity interest in the company producing the component or mineral, the vehicle will not qualify.
3. If a company licenses or contracts with a Chinese firm, and the license entitles the Chinese firm to “exercise effective control” over production, the vehicle will not qualify.
This is a strict interpretation that’s likely to knock some vehicles off the eligibility list. But in a series of meetings with reporters on Wednesday, officials from the Department of the Treasury and Department of Energy said they didn’t know which or how many vehicles would be affected. “Part of the goal here is to put out this rule, and then the auto companies are going to come back to us,” said Wally Adeyomo, Deputy Secretary of the Treasury. “And then we will know which cars qualify.”
Automakers and EV experts have been anxiously awaiting guidance on the IRA’s foreign entities of concern provision. Adeyomo stressed that companies have been aware that these new rules would be coming ever since the law passed and have been making investments to ensure “that their cars would be able to qualify for this over the long term.”
Though it’s hard to fact check that claim, according to an EV supply chain database maintained by Turner and his students, at least 19 battery component factories have been announced in the U.S. and Canada since the passage of the IRA; none are yet operating, but automakers also have the option to buy components from U.S. trade partners. A report on the EV supply chain published by the International Energy Agency in 2022 notes that while China dominates cell component production, controlling 70% of capacity for cathodes and 85% of anodes, Japan and South Korea also had “considerable shares of the supply chain.”
Turner said it was conceivable that there will be models that qualify for the first phase of the rule beginning in January, which only applies to these battery components, but he was skeptical automakers would be able to continue qualifying in 2025, when the limits on critical minerals go into effect. “The further you get up the supply chain, the greater the exposure is to China,” he said. “It's not because China's got all of the critical minerals. It's that China has the processing facilities to turn those minerals into highly refined materials that are needed for the batteries.”
John Podesta, senior advisor to the president on clean energy innovation, said that Biden is “rewriting that story.” Officials pointed to a recent report from the Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, which found that the Salton Sea region in California has enough mineable lithium to support more than 375 million batteries for EVs. Turner’s database shows at least a dozen projects planned, rumored, or under construction to process minerals including lithium, cobalt, and graphite.
The guidance also raises questions about a $3.5 billion factory that Ford is building in Michigan to bring the production of safer, cheaper EV batteries to the U.S. The company is licensing technology from the Chinese company CATL, the world’s largest battery manufacturer, to produce batteries made of lithium, iron, and phosphate — which are more abundant than the cobalt and nickel used in the dominant batteries on the market. But the deal has come under scrutiny from House Republicans, who accuse CATL of having business ties to mining companies that use forced labor. Ford put construction on hold in September.
When asked about CATL, Deputy Secretary of Energy David Turk said the agency has not evaluated any individual company’s situation, but that they designed the licensing guidance to ”get at who has effective control in these kinds of situations.“
That could mean Ford is off the hook. Months ago, analysts told The Washington Post that the Chinese company will have little control over the Ford plant’s daily operations. “The way they structured this deal, they are keeping CATL at arm’s length as much as possible,” Sam Abuelsamid, head of e-mobility research at Guidehouse Insights, said.
The Biden administration is attempting to race forward on two sets of goals that are somewhat at odds with each other: speeding adoption of EVs while shifting their production away from China, thereby stimulating domestic industry and creating domestic jobs. When I spoke to Jane Nakano, a senior fellow at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, earlier this week, she said that if the Biden administration went with a strict 25% threshold for ownership, it could really accelerate automakers’ efforts to diversify sourcing away from China. “But that will take some time,” she added. “In the immediate future, many of the companies may simply try to compete without being able to access the consumer tax credit.”
Turner said that the question is not whether automakers can compete with low-cost EVs produced in China, but rather whether they can put out EVs that are cheaper than conventional cars on the market here.
“Once you get to the point that EVs are cheaper and we have a robust enough charging network that people aren't worried about running out of juice, I think that'll be the tipping point,” he said.
I should note that if you’re interested in this purely as a prospective consumer of an EV, the only thing you need to know is that your options to take advantage of the tax credit might be more limited come January. However, there is one weird trick to get around this and have a lot more options: Leasing. None of the rules around sourcing, assembly, or ownership apply to leased vehicles.
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 investment in AI booming, any business that can promise quick generation is looking pretty good right now.
It’s a good time to be selling stuff to data center developers.
That was the message from the beginning of earnings season for the renewables and the energy industry: If you can promise power to data centers quickly, you’re doing good business. (If you’re just a software business that investors think will be displaced by large language models, the value of your company has probably fallen by a quarter so far this year).
Caterpillar, while better known for its gargantuan mining and construction equipment, also sells gas turbines and reciprocating engines — basically giant car engines that run on natural gas. Its power generation business is now by far its biggest segment, outpacing oil and gas and industrial, and its revenue of $3.2 billion in the fourth quarter was 44% more than a year earlier.
“Sales increased in large reciprocating engines, primarily data center applications. Turbines and turbine-related services increased as well,” the company said in its earnings release late last month. And it’s not likely to stop: “We anticipate growth in power generation for both CAT reciprocating engines and solar turbines driven by increasing energy demand to support data center build-out related to cloud computing and generative AI.,” the company’s chief executive officer Joe Creed said on a call with analysts. We “talk to hyperscalers and large data center customers weekly and make sure we stay in line with their plans.”
And those hyperscalers are going to spend even more in 2026.
Big tech companies have some $600 billion in capital expenditures planned for this year, with the growth in spending coming largely from data centers.
And while the vast majority of the cost of owning an AI datacenter is the chips, you need power to run a data center, and the more quickly you can get that power, the sooner your data center can be up and running.
This “speed-to-power” problem has thus put a massive premium on any power generation technology that can be deployed quickly.
Like fuel cells.
Bloom Energy, the long-tenured fuel cell company, reported around $780 million in quarterly revenue in the fourth quarter, up 36% from the year before. “Our growth has been fueled by seismic changes in customer attitude towards power,” the company’s founder and chief executive, KR Sridhar, said on the company’s earnings call Thursday. “On-site power has moved from being a decision of last resort to a vital business necessity. This shift has led large power users to seek Bloom to fulfill their needs. Our demand from data centers and commercial and industrial or C&I customers is secular and growing.”
Bloom has been kicking around for two decades, but it took the data center boom for the company to really, well, bloom.
Large turbines for natural gas power are sold out through the end of the decade; meanwhile, Bloom claims to be able to get fuel cells on site before the data center itself is fully constructed. “We can ramp up and provide that additional power to that customer before they are ready,” Sridhar said. “Typically, it takes more than a year to stand up a greenfield data center. It takes more than a year to stand up a factory, from permits all the way to full implementation. We can be ready for them before then.”
While on-site power can be crucial to actually beginning operations, data centers tend to want to connect to the grid eventually, which means more demand for services from utilities and large scale developers of power. The utility and developer NextEra has long promoted the “speed to power” narrative, pointing out that it’s far easier to procure and assemble solar panels and batteries than it is gas turbines.
“Battery storage now represents almost one-third of our 30-gigawatt backlog, with nearly 5 gigawatts originated over the past 12 months. We don’t see this demand slowing. Nearly every region in the country needs capacity, and battery storage is the only new capacity resource available at scale,” NextEra chief executive John Ketchum said on the company’s earnings call late last month.
He also said that he would be “disappointed” if the company’s plans for 15 gigawatts of “data center hubs” doesn’t double to 30 gigawatts by 2035. These hubs, Ketchum said, will be powered “through a mix of new renewables, battery storage and gas generation.”
The Minnesota-based utility Xcel said it expects to have 3 gigawatts of contracted data centers by the end of this year and six by 2027.
“If you think about where we sit in sustainability goals as a company, where these hyperscalers and data centers and customers of data center developers wanna be, it’s a highly sustainable product,” Xcel’s chief executive Bob Franzel said on the company’s earnings call Thursday.
As for the companies actually making the solar panels and batteries that could power data centers, they largely haven’t reported earnings yet, although the American solar manufacturer First Solar did get a scare recently when its share price dropped 13% last Thursday — and no, not because of a change in tariffs or tax credits or permitting rules. It was because Elon Musk said he wanted to build 100 gigawatts of solar panels a year. The speed to power question, at least for Elon Musk, is not limited to Earth.
“We think the best way to add significant capability to the grid is solar and batteries on Earth and solar in space,” Musk said on Tesla’s fourth quarter earnings call last week.
And it’s blocking America’s economic growth, argues a former White House climate advisor.
Everyone is talking about affordability and the rising cost of energy to power our lives — with good reason. Leading up to Winter Storm Fern, natural gas prices skyrocketed more than 50% in just two days. Since President Trump took office, electricity prices have risen by 13%, despite his promise to cut them in half in his first year. Now, 16% of U.S households are behind on their electricity bills, and that number is expected to rise throughout the winter.
And we all know that much more energy will be needed in the years ahead to meet our electrification needs. The Trump administration and its well-funded allies in the fossil fuel industry are blocking our ability to put the cheapest, most reliable energy onto the grid. They are standing in the way of progress, pushing a false narrative that our country needs more dirty, expensive energy to bring costs down.
Our state and local leaders, environmental advocates, and businesses are the ones pushing to build more. They are the ones focused on a pro-growth agenda that invests in the U.S. economy and meets new energy demand with clean energy. Now is the time for all Americans to stand together, not in anger or frustration, but with hope, inspiration, and resilience. We already have the technologies, policies, and practices we need to deliver a cleaner, safer, and more affordable world. We just have to build it.
It’s time to push for common-sense policies that quickly scale up the cheapest forms of energy — solar, wind, and battery storage — to protect our health and natural resources. And it’s high time we let families keep their hard-earned money rather than pay to keep dirty coal and other volatile and expensive fossil fuels — including natural gas — alive.
Our federal government is propping up polluting sources of energy that are draining our economy. They are forcing coal plants to stay open while costing ratepayers millions. In fact, Trump’s U.S. Department of Energy just extended its order to keep Michigan’s JH Campbell coal plant running for four more months, forcing consumers to pay a whopping $113 million in costs so far, despite the state’s utility saying that “no energy emergency exists.”
Trump’s Environmental Protection Agency is stripping states and Tribes of their authority to protect water resources that their communities depend on to allow more oil and gas pipelines and other fossil fuel infrastructure to be built, doubling down on the very problem that is driving prices up. Retail natural gas prices have risen 11% year over year, far outpacing inflation. Moreover, gas price spikes have been a major factor in rising retail electricity bills, particularly in the Northeast and Southeast. We’re seeing similar cost increases as a result of Trump’s liquified natural gas export policies and his constant attacks on the Inflation Reduction Act.
Let me be clear: Renewable energy is the fastest and cheapest option to add power to the grid. Period. Full Stop. Already nearly 80% of planned power plant capacity is tied to renewable sources, according to Cleanview.co. Solar made up 98% of new capacity this fall. States with the highest levels of wind and solar generation, like Iowa and Oklahoma, have the lowest utility bill rate increases in America. States like New Mexico are already ahead of schedule to meet their clean energy goals, while also keeping rates down.
So don’t buy what the Trump administration is selling. We can have long-term, stable economic growth built on cheap, clean energy that doesn’t trash our watersheds and destroy the places we love. In Nevada and Utah, the Sierra Club worked alongside Fervo to secure a new deal to supply 24/7 carbon-free energy to a large Google data center built with new environmental principles for advanced geothermal. And in Michigan and Illinois, a broad coalition of environmental leaders worked with industry stakeholders to achieve common sense permitting reform to facilitate faster adoption of more affordable energy onto the grid in the Midwest.
We all know from experience that the fossil fuel industry will do everything it can to force us to stick with the status quo. They aren’t going to stand idle and give up their foothold on dirty energy, which they have long enjoyed. That’s why we must deliver pro-growth solutions and stand up against those blocking progress to line their pockets with families’ hard-earned money.
It’s time for us to take charge and build a clean, affordable energy future. We need to call on our policymakers in states and cities to stand up for their constituents. And we need business leaders to invest in our economic future. Now is the time to demand the healthy, low-cost, clean energy future that empowers all of us.
Plus, consolidation in carbon removal.
On Wednesday, I covered a major raise in the virtual power plant space — a sector that may finally be ready to make a tangible impact on the grid after decades of theorizing. Beyond that, investors continued to place bets on both fusion and fission, as the Trump administration continues pushing for faster deployment of new nuclear reactors. This week also saw fresh capital flowing to fleet electrification and climate-resilience solutions, two areas that have benefited less, shall we say, from the president’s enthusiasm.
The fusion startup Avalanche Energy raised $29 million to develop its tabletop-sized microreactors and scale its fusion test facility, FusionWERX, in Washington State. Led by RA Capital Management and joined by existing climate tech-focused backers such as Congruent Ventures and Lowercarbon Capital, this funding round follows what CEO Robin Langtry described to me as multiple breakthroughs in stabilizing the company’s fusion plasma and ridding it of impurities such as excess oxygen.
“Now we really have a very straight technical path to get to this Q > 1 fusion machine,” Langtry told me, referring to the point at which a fusion reaction produces more energy than was used to initiate it, often called “scientific breakeven.” Now that the pathway to commercial viability is coming into focus, Avalanche is starting to invest in expensive, longer-lead-time equipment such as superconducting magnets and systems to manage the fusion fuel, which it expects to arrive at the FusionWERX facility in early 2027. At that point, the startup will begin running tests that could achieve breakeven.
Avalanche is pursuing a technical approach called magneto-electrostatic fusion, a lesser-known method that uses strong magnetic and electric fields to accelerate ions into fusion-producing collisions while keeping the plasma contained. The startup aims to commercialize its tech, which Langtry says has numerous defense applications, in the early 2030s. In the meantime, much of the latest funding will go toward scaling the FusionWERX facility, where other fusion entrepreneurs and academics can test their own technologies — offering the startup a nearer-term revenue opportunity.
The Paris-based small modular reactor company Newcleo announced an $88 million growth investment, as existing European investors doubled down and new EU-based industrial backers jumped aboard, bringing its total funding to over $760 million. The startup, which is now eyeing expansion into the U.S., differentiates itself by running its reactors on recycled nuclear waste and cooling them with liquid lead, which is intended to be safer and more efficient than conventional standard water- or sodium-cooled reactors.
The startup is already investing $2 billion in a strategic partnership with the Sam Altman-backed SMR company Oklo to develop the infrastructure needed to produce and reprocess advanced nuclear fuel in the U.S. Newcleo’s CEO, Stefano Buono, told The Wall Street Journal that he expects to benefit from the Trump administration’s push to expedite domestic nuclear development, which he hopes will help Newcleo speed up its own commercialization timeline. Currently the company plans to complete its first commercial units sometime after 2030.
The company also has a number of creative collaborations underway with Italian firms. These include partnerships with the shipbuilder Fincantieri, which is exploring the potential of nuclear-powered vessels, engineering giant Saipem which is looking to develop floating nuclear plants, and the metals equipment company Danieli, which aims to use SMRs for green steel production.
Mitra EV, a commercial vehicle fleet electrification platform, just raised $27 million in a funding round that includes an equity investment from Ultra Capital and a credit facility from the climate-focused investment firm S2G Investments.
The startup focuses on small- and medium-sized businesses, which often face capital constraints and lack a dedicated fleet manager. While the financials of fleet electrification often pencil out for these companies, the real barriers frequently lie in the maze of logistics — acquiring electric vehicles, building charging infrastructure, coordinating with utilities, and navigating a web of incentive programs. Mitra EV aims to streamline all these tasks through a single platform, claiming to offer immediate cost reductions of up to 75%.
The new capital will help Mitra to expand its suite of offerings, which includes EV leasing, overnight charging infrastructure, and access to a network of shared fast-charging hubs designed specifically for fleets. For now the company operates exclusively in California, but it plans to deepen its presence across the state before expanding into additional regions. Other states such as Oregon, Colorado, Michigan, and New York have also adopted zero-emissions fleet mandates, creating ready markets for the company if it continues to grow.
The software startup Forerunner raised $39 million to scale its platform for local governments to manage and mitigate environmental risk. The company’s AI-powered tools help to centralize detailed geospatial data such as land parcels, infrastructure, inspection records, permitting information, hazard zones, and more into a single system, allowing communities to run stronger risk assessments, stay compliant with environmental regulations, and coordinate responses when floods, storms, or other emergencies hit. The startup works with over 190 local and state agencies across 26 U.S. states.
The round includes a $26.3 million Series B led by Wellington Management, alongside a previously unannounced $12.7 million Series A led by Union Square Ventures. Forerunner first gained traction by helping governments manage floodplains, and this new capital will help fuel its expansion into new areas such as infrastructure management, wildfire risk, and code enforcement.
All of this is unfolding as the Trump administration slashes staff at the Federal Emergency Management Agency, even as extreme weather events are becoming more frequent. The result is mounting pressure on state and local governments, who often still rely on fragmented, outdated systems to get a comprehensive view of their communities and the environmental hazards they face.
Carbon removal company Terradot has acquired the assets, intellectual property, projects, and removal contracts of one of its former competitors, Eion. Both are pursuing a method of carbon removal known as “enhanced rock weathering,” which accelerates the natural process by which CO2 in rainwater reacts with silicate rocks, forming a stable bicarbonate that can permanently lock away CO2 when it’s washed out to sea.
While typically this process takes thousands of years, spreading crushed minerals like basalt or olivine on agricultural fields can dramatically accelerate the process — though precise measurement and reporting remains a challenge. Terradot’s early projects have focused on basalt rocks in Brazil, whereas Eion operates in the U.S. doing olivine-based weathering. This deal could signal a forthcoming wave of mergers and acquisitions in the sector, where there’s a plethora of startups vying to commercialize novel methods of permanent carbon removal.