You’ve reached your free article limit
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:

President Trump has had it in for electric vehicle charging since day one. His January 20 executive order “Unleashing American Energy” singled out the $5 billion National Electric Vehicle Infrastructure program by name, directing the Department of Transportation to pause and review the funding as part of his mission to “eliminate” the so-called “electric vehicle mandate.”
With the review now complete, the agency has concluded that canceling NEVI is not an option. In an ironic twist, the Federal Highway Administration issued new guidance for the program on Monday that not only preserves it, but also purports to “streamline applications,” “slash red tape,” and “ensure charging stations are actually built.”
“If Congress is requiring the federal government to support charging stations, let’s cut the waste and do it right,” Transportation Secretary Sean Duffy said in a press release. “While I don’t agree with subsidizing green energy, we will respect Congress’ will and make sure this program uses federal resources efficiently.”
Duffy’s statement stands in sharp contrast to the stance of other federal agencies, including the Environmental Protection Agency and the Department of Energy, which continue to block congressionally-mandated spending programs.
Only time will tell whether the new guidance is truly a win for EV charging, however. It’s a win in the sense that many EV advocates feared the agency would try to kill the program or insert poison pills into the guidance. But it’s unclear whether the changes will speed up NEVI deployment beyond what might have happened had it not been paused.
“The real story to me is the needless delay,” Joe Halso, a senior attorney for Sierra Club, told me. “They took six months to produce something that they could have done in an afternoon, and that didn’t require them to halt the program in the first place. Every day of that delay stalled critical EV charging projects.”
The goal of the NEVI program was to help states install charging stations in areas that the market, on its own, was not serving. States had to submit annual plans to the FHWA for how they would deploy the funds to fill gaps in regional EV charging networks. Once those plans are approved, states could issue requests for proposals from EV charging companies to build the new charging stations and award grants to help get them financed.
In February, Duffy issued a letter to state Departments of Transportation suspending approval of their plans for all fiscal years, pending forthcoming new guidance from the agency. That meant states would not be able to issue new awards, essentially freezing the program. At the time, the agency had approved state spending plans totaling more than $3.2 billion for fiscal years 2022 through 2025. Of that money, states had committed only about $526 million to specific projects.
In early May, 16 states plus the District of Columbia challenged the DOT’s actions in court, winning a preliminary injunction that prevented the agency from suspending or revoking their previously-approved plans. While the injunction unfroze the program in the plaintiff states, about $1.8 billion for the rest of the country was still locked up. But the judge allowed a coalition of national, regional, and community groups, including the Sierra Club, to become parties in the case and fight for the funding to be restored across the board. That means that if the plaintiffs are ultimately successful, the verdict will apply to every state, not just those 16 that filed the case.
The fact that the DOT issued new guidance this week doesn’t change anything about the case, Halso of the Sierra Club told me. The move could wind up delaying the program further.
“This new guidance prolongs the freeze by forcing states to resubmit already approved plans to access money they’re already entitled to,” Halso explained. “And we don’t know if or when federal highways will approve those plans and restore states’ access to money.” The guidance gives states 30 days to submit their plans, though it does allow them to simply re-submit previously-approved versions.
In Monday’s press release, Duffy declared the program’s implementation to date a “failure,” citing the fact that only 16% of the funds had been obligated so far. It’s true that the program has been slow in getting underway. As of this week, there are at least 106 NEVI-funded charging stations with 537 ports across 17 states, Loren McDonald, the chief analyst for the EV charging data analytics firm Paren, told me. That’s a long way off pace to achieve President Biden’s stated goal of installing 500,000 by 2030.
It’s also true that the new rules are simpler. The previous guidance, which was 30 pages long, contained more than five pages of detailed “considerations” states had to follow in developing their plans, which designated specific distances between chargers, required projects to mitigate adverse impacts to the electric grid, and mandated that States target “rural areas, underserved and overburdened communities, and disadvantaged communities,” among other rules. The new guidance, by contrast, is a tight seven pages devoid of almost any obligations not explicitly required by the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law, which created the program.
Under the previous guidance, for example, NEVI-funded stations had to be built within one mile of a federally-designated EV corridor and at no greater than 50-mile increments along those corridors. The new guidance simply says that states should “consider the appropriate distance between stations to allow for reasonable travel and certainty that charging will be available to corridor travelers when needed.”
McDonald told me that some states had been frustrated with the 50-mile siting requirement and would likely welcome that change. NATSO and SIGMA, two industry associations that represent rest stops, travel centers, and fuel marketers, issued a joint statement praising the “flexible, consumer-oriented approach.” They also specifically applauded the guidance for encouraging states to prioritize projects that are built and operated by the site owner. Some NEVI projects were being developed by a third party, such as Tesla, which had to sign a long-term lease with the site owner, like a grocery store or hotel. These agreements took time to work out, and would sometimes fall apart, McDonald told me.
But from McDonald’s vantage point, what was slowing down the program most was the fact that every state had different requirements and a different process for soliciting and scoring proposals from developers. Also, while a few states already had previous experience administering EV charging grant programs, many lacked staff and expertise in the subject. “I don’t mean this the way it’s going to come out,” McDonald said. “But they barely knew how to spell EV charging. A lot of the state DOTs really just were about building roads and bridges, and they had never had to deal with any charging.”
The new DOT guidance doesn’t seek to address either of those issues. “I’m not seeing anything in here that’s going to lead to a significant reduction in time,” McDonald said. “It seems to sort of miss where the lengthy processes were.”
The Zero Emission Transportation Association, an industry group, had a more positive outlook. Research associate Corey Cantor told me the new guidance is “workable” for the industry and provides regulatory certainty. When I asked Cantor if the changes the agency made to the guidance would help get more money out the door, he said it “remains to be seen on the implementation side,” but that states had been asking for more flexibility.
Cantor emphasized that it was important for state DOTs to have regulatory certainty and to get the funds flowing again. “Charging anxiety, after the upfront cost of EVs, is one of the highest cited barriers for entry for new adopters of electric vehicles,” he said. “And so getting the charging network filled out is key to helping us move to this next stage of the transition.”
Log in
To continue reading, log in to your account.
Create a Free Account
To unlock more free articles, please create a free account.
Hint: It’s one that tends to align with utilities.
Building trades want to build.
This desire for more and better big projects has meant that unions representing construction workers, utility linemen, operating engineers, plumbers, pipefitters, and so on have spent past decade-plus ping-ponging between praise and exasperation toward major Democratic priorities, especially when it comes to climate and energy policy.
Now, with a permitting bill negotiated by two Democrats and two Republicans in the Senate, much of the hardhat union sector is signing on as eager supporters. If the rest of the Democratic coalition can sign on to the bill, it may go some way to repairing a breach that has been widening since the Obama administration.
The modern fight over U.S. energy infrastructure began with a Canadian pipeline project.
Building trades were some of the most fervent advocates for the Keystone XL pipeline, which would have brought oil from the tar sands of Canada’s Alberta province into the continental United States — a project that Presidents Barack Obama and Joe Biden both opposed and which the latter finally canceled in 2021.
In the interim, the first Trump administration tested these unions’ historic allegiance with Democrats as the left became more vocal on climate policy. After Senator Ed Markey and Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez released their Green New Deal outline in 2019, the AFL-CIO sent the two progressives a letter saying their plan “makes promises that are not achievable or realistic.” The signatories also included the United Mine Workers, the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, and eight more building trades, hardhat unions and federations that would be threatened by a rapid transition to 100% renewable energy. The signatory unions represented a little under 3 million of the AFL-CIO’s then roughly 12.5 million members.
“The broad trajectory is that the building trades unions have been supportive of building pretty much anything, whether it’s fossil, whether it’s data centers, whether it’s clean energy,” Todd Tucker, director of the industrial policy and trade program at the Roosevelt Institute, told me.
Actual Democratic policymaking turned out to be more favorable to unions, with infrastructure spending, money for domestic manufacturing, prevailing wage requirements, and subsidies for nuclear power and carbon capture all spurring infrastructure work during the Biden years. North America’s Building Trades Unions described the 2021 bipartisan infrastructure law as the “single greatest infrastructure investment in our nation’s history,” while the Laborers’ International Union of North America, a.k.a. LIUNA, praised the 2022 Inflation Reduction Act for “taking a commonsense approach to our energy needs.”
Now, it’s environmental groups that are either opposed to or mum on a piece of infrastructure legislation — the Bipartisan American Affordability and Jobs Act — while most of the building trades support it.
The United Association of Journeymen and Apprentices of the Plumbing and Pipefitting Industry of the United States and Canada, otherwise known as the UA, signed the anti-Green New Deal letter and had a project labor agreement with the developer of the Keystone XL pipeline, but came out in support of the permitting deal. So did LIUNA and the International Union of Operating Engineers.
“In our industry, uncertainty means one thing: unemployment,” UA General President Mark McManus said in a statement. “It is long past time that Congress enacts meaningful permitting reform to put UA members to work faster.”
LIUNA’s president Brent Booker described BAAJA in a statement as a “monumental bipartisan permitting reform bill,” and urged “lawmakers in both parties to seize this moment, pass the Bipartisan American Affordability and Jobs Act of 2026, and finally deliver meaningful permitting reform.”
John Downey, the president of the Operating Engineers union, which signed a letter imploring the Biden-Harris transition team to maintain the Keystone pipeline’s permits, said in a statement that the union “applauds the bipartisan effort” on BAAJA, and that the “Operating Engineers look forward to working with Congress to pass this critical bipartisan bill.” Other Keystone XL supporters including the National Association of Manufacturers and the Chamber of Commerce have also come out in support of BAAJA.
There are a few industry and union players, however, that have been notably more circumspect: groups representing utilities and the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers.
The Edison Electric Institute, the trade group for investor-owned utilities, has in the past supported overhauling the National Environmental Policy Act and Clean Water Act, which the bill would do. The group’s chief executive, Drew Maloney, told reporters after the release of the bill text that it was “encouraged” by the permitting provisions in BAAJA and was “reviewing” the transmission provisions.
The transmission provisions are largely seen as hostile to incumbent utilities. Many in Washington — especially Republicans — see them as a sign of decreasing utility clout. The bill would encourage and enable greater state and federal oversight of utilities’ infrastructure buildouts and would restrict the utilities’ “right of first refusal” on building new transmission lines. Many ratepayer advocates argue that these projects do more to build out the utility rate base than to increase grid reliability
This stance — supportive of permitting reforms, wary of grid provisions — puts utilities in a kind of mirror image with big environmental groups like the Natural Resources Defense Council, which is friendly to the transmission portions of the bill but skeptical of the permitting portions.
Senator Kevin Cramer, a North Dakota Republican and himself a former utility regulator, warned utilities to “not get carried away” in trying to push for changes to the deal, Punchbowl News reported.
“What I’m really watching these days around the Senate BAAJA bill is where does the IBEW end up,” Tucker told me.
An IBEW spokesperson told me the union is “reviewing the language and holding discussions with stakeholders across our industries. We represent workers across affected industries (utilities, transmission, construction, etc.), so the details are very important.”
The IBEW has just over 900,000 members, including construction electricians, utility linemen, technicians, and operators, with particularly strong representation within utilities. The union also has special political influence due to its large and widespread membership — anywhere there’s a power line, there’s likely one of the IBEW’s more than 800 locals.
Utility watchdogs like David Pomerantz, executive director of the Energy and Policy Institute, are not surprised to see utilities and the IBEW taking similar (non-)stances toward the bill.
He told me the IBEW is a particularly potent force on issues affecting utilities because “they’re a more acceptable face to the Democratic electorate,” referring to their lobbying in blue states and of Democratic politicians. “Among Democrats, the IBEW right now is much more palatable than the utilities.” The IBEW has been a counterweight to the Democrats’ and the public’s increasingly harsh turn against data centers, for instance, opposing moratoria in New England, the Mountain West, New York, and the Kansas City area.
The IBEW has also weighed in on more fine-grained utility policy, including right-of-first-refusal, well before the release of BAAJA. A union policy brief describes these as policies that “prioritize unionized utilities for critical projects, safeguarding labor standards and ensuring safe and efficient energy infrastructure development.” In Illinois, an IBEW local intervened in a rate case to oppose a proposed cut in the return on equity for local utility ComEd.
But the IBEW has also won project labor agreements for the type of long distance, high-voltage transmission projects that many climate and clean energy advocates hope the bill encourages.
“Some of their members work for the utilities and the utilities are getting rolled by this legislation, but some of the members work in construction and building,” Tucker told me.
The question going forward for the union, he said, is “do you align your union strategy with the current business model of your current employers? Or do you make a bet that these new jobs that are getting created and new builds are going to net out positive?”
On Indonesia’s climate win, hacking renewables, and John Cena’s ad
Current conditions: A tropical rainstorm in the southwestern Gulf of Mexico, likely strengthening into what would become Tropical Storm Isaias, is poised to dump rain on the southeastern United States and may become the Atlantic’s first major hurricane of the year • Italy is bracing for a type of heavy rainstorm known as a nubifragio, set to soak Naples and Rome later this week • The Dome Fire in Yosemite National Park has burned about 7,000 acres, and officials determined it was sparked by humans.
If you can’t wait a decade or more for a new Westinghouse AP1000 or one of the small modular reactors under development, your best bet to get more nuclear electricity is probably to upgrade an existing reactor to squeeze more power out of it, a process known as “uprating.” In February, the Department of Energy gave out its largest-ever loan to Southern Company to fund up to 6 gigawatts of uprates across the utility’s nuclear fleet. Last week, Amazon inked a 20-year deal with Constellation, the nation’s largest operator of nuclear reactors, to buy power from and uprate the Calvert Cliffs plant in Maryland. Google has now signed a deal with Constellation aimed at wringing out 890 megawatts of new power from 11 reactors across PJM Interconnection, the nation’s second-largest and arguably most stressed grid system. Asked whether the uprates are a sufficient replacement for building new reactors, Raiford Smith, Google’s head of power and energy for the cloud, said there was plenty of demand to go around. “New data centers are coming on at a gigawatt a clip,” he told me yesterday. “That means even with all the uprates, there’s still more to come.” Software giant Oracle also announced a deal last week to buy $300 million of nuclear power from a NextEra nuclear plant in Wisconsin to help fund its increased fuel costs.
In a sign of progress on the country’s leading SMR design, the Texas grid has officially received an application for one of GE Vernova Hitachi Nuclear Energy’s BWRX-300 reactors. The 300-megawatt unit borrows from GE’s decades-long history of building boiling water reactors, and has a leg up on other SMRs given that Ontario Power Generation and the Tennessee Valley Authority, two of the continent’s biggest state-owned utilities, are building the first and second BWRX-300s, respectively. But the application to connect to the Electric Reliability Council of Texas’ power lines comes, per Bloomberg, from Blue Energy Global, a developer that has promised to build out modular power stations that convert seamlessly from gas to nuclear. While the company considers itself “reactor-agnostic,” it’s first focused on building out plants with the BWRX-300.
The Indonesian government has halted the clearing of an area of rainforest in Papua roughly the size of Maryland to make way for farmland to grow crops for food and biofuels. In twin announcements at a sustainability forum in Jakarta, Hashim Djojohadikusumo, President Prabowo Subianto’s special envoy for climate and energy, said the government would shift rice and sugarcane projects to degraded land, delivering a victory to both conservationists who sought to preserve vital habitats and carbon sinks and activists who sought to preserve indigenous cultures who depend on the forests. “This decision renews Indonesia’s leadership in showing how to expand agriculture while protecting nature,” Glenn Hurowitz, the founder and chief executive of the advocacy group Mighty Earth, said in a statement. In a post on X, journalist Michael Grunwald, who authored a landmark book about the climate impact of food production, called the news “a massive victory for the planet.”
For the past 18 years, John Murdock, an attorney and self-described conservative Christian, has served in the legal division at the Department of the Interior. But he resigned abruptly last month over what he called the Trump administration’s “deeply troubling assault on the rule of law.” Under the administration, he wrote in a blistering resignation letter obtained by the investigative site Public Domain, the “all of the above” energy strategy “has seemingly morphed into ‘one of the above,’ solely focused on fossil fuels.” Murdock highlighted “recent decisions to shutter nearly complete offshore wind projects and to pay TotalEnergies hundreds of millions of dollars to renounce wind leases” as examples of “an assault on logic and the American taxpayer.” He added: “We are headed in the wrong direction.
Sign up to receive Heatmap AM in your inbox every morning:
About a week ago, I told you the European Union was considering delaying implementation of its methane rule by a year to avoid jacking up prices on imported gas even higher when exporters inevitably fell short of the bloc’s strict reporting requirements for emissions throughout the fossil fuel supply chain. Well, it’s happened. European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen told EU lawmakers the postponement would save money. Her energy minister, Dan Jørgensen, cautioned that “we do not foresee this to be more than one year,” Reuters reported.
Meanwhile, Dutch researchers at the internet-scanning firm Modat told Reuters that hackers could seize full control of roughly 181 wind and solar sites around Europe and tamper with the administrative systems of thousands more. One wind turbine’s web page showed live data, “start,” “stop,” and “reset” buttons, and the turbine locations. “What we can map in hours, an attacker can map in hours too,” the report said. The researchers encouraged operators to take admin interfaces off the internet immediately.
Japanese automakers may be notoriously behind China on making electric vehicle batteries. But Suzuki has just released its first electric kei car — that beloved category of ulta-compact Japanese vehicles — using BYD’s batteries but undercutting the Chinese auto giant’s cheapest EV. The new Suzuki e-SKY will beat out BYD’s Racco as Japan’s cheapest mini EV, starting at about $13,500, according to Electrek.

The renewables industry is tapping in a WWE champion to make its case. John Cena stars in a new ad series backed by a consortium of wind and solar companies. “How powerful is clean energy?” he asks. “Pretend this is solar,” he says, flexing his right bicep. Flexing the left, he says: “And this is wind.” He then proceeds to obliterate a boulder by punching it into a statue of himself. It’s funny and charming.
Rob talks with the U.S. auto giant”s VP of batteries and sustainability, Kurt Kelty.
There are two big trends in the American battery sector at the moment. The first is that the electric vehicle market is deteriorating. GM, for instance, sold just 25,000 EVs in the third quarter of this year. Ford sold 6,000 EVs. Even the long-awaited return of the Chevy Bolt sold just 8,000 units — a small fraction of the vehicle’s already-limited production run. At the same time, the data center boom and the return of electricity growth is boosting batteries of all kinds not designed to power EVs.
Our guest today is in charge of navigating those opposing trends and figuring out what comes next. Kurt Kelty started his career at Panasonic in 1993, where he led the company’s battery research lab. He then went on to Tesla, helping to build the first Gigafactory. Since February 2024, he’s been vice president of battery and sustainability at GM. We talked about manufacturing generally, how the U.S. battery manufacturing sector should look, and how companies should be structured to compete globally, even though they’re making batteries for a mostly U.S. audience.
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, YouTube, 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:
Robinson Meyer: In 2024, GM retired the Ultium brand, except for the Ultium cells. And I would say that as an outsider, unlike other domestic automakers, the whole GM stack — where you have a single battery design that you then slot into different vehicles — seems to be working, and certainly seems to be producing profitable vehicles in a way that other automakers’ approaches were not.
So why retire the Ultium name? In traditional automakers, you talk about platforms and different cars designed on the same platform. But are there going to be a few platforms at GM, each with their own chemistry, and then you design different vehicles on top of that? Why get rid of Ultium when it seemed to be working?
Kurt Kelty: Yeah, so the way I look at the future when EV volumes really start to ramp up, we’re going to need prismatic form factor, pouch form factor, cylindrical form factor. We’re going to need nickel cell, high-nickel cells. We’re going to need some LMR cells. We’re going to need some LFP cells. We’re going to need it all. What we do here at GM is we design the right battery for the right application. And generally, depending on the need, you may need high-nickel. You may need LFP. Most likely, you’re going to need LMR in most of our applications. That’s what we think. And in some cases, the prismatic form factor will work best. In other cases, the cylindrical form factor will work best.
I do not see a future where we’re standardizing on a single chemistry or a single form factor. We tried to do that in the battery industry in the late ’90s when I was in the business, and all the laptop companies got together and said, we’re going to make a standard form factor, so we’re going to drive down costs. We made the form factor. Everybody signed up for it. Nobody used it. And nobody used it because it was ... The way to really customize your laptop was the battery. Everything else had been standardized.
At that point they had the hard drive, you had the floppy and the screen, and all those were standard components. The battery was the way you made it custom. And with EVs, it’s the same thing. The battery is going to decide your driving range, your acceleration, your space in the car, your safety of the car. I mean, it just determines so much about how fast you can charge it. All these things are determined by the battery. And so you’re not going to see a standard.
And so at GM, we are preparing for that by having this battery innovation center, this electrification powerhouse that we’ve got. It’s something that we’re really proud of. And in the future, we’re going to really take advantage of this.
You can find a full transcript of the episode here.
Mentioned:
The Senate’s Big Bipartisan Permitting Deal, Explained
On Rivian’s record-setting Q3
Previously on Shift Key: Data Centers Are Creating a New Kind of Battery Monster
This episode of Shift Key is sponsored by ...
RE+ 26 is the largest clean energy event in North America, happening November 16th through 19th at the Las Vegas Convention Center. Register at re-plus.com and use code SHIFTKEY20 to save 20% off a Full Conference pass.
Every year Giving Green researches the top climate nonprofits and sends 100% of every dollar donated to its Giving Green Fund straight to them. Make your first gift before the new year, and it will be matched up to $500. Go to GivingGreen.earth/Shift.
Formed through a joint venture between Wärtsilä and RCT Solutions, Valo helps utilities, independent power producers, and developers navigate market and grid complexity without sacrificing system performance. Learn more at valoenergy.com.