You’re out of free articles.
Log in
To continue reading, log in to your account.
Create a Free Account
To unlock more free articles, please create a free account.
Sign In or Create an Account.
By continuing, you agree to the Terms of Service and acknowledge our Privacy Policy
Welcome to Heatmap
Thank you for registering with Heatmap. Climate change is one of the greatest challenges of our lives, a force reshaping our economy, our politics, and our culture. We hope to be your trusted, friendly, and insightful guide to that transformation. Please enjoy your free articles. You can check your profile here .
subscribe to get Unlimited access
Offer for a Heatmap News Unlimited Access subscription; please note that your subscription will renew automatically unless you cancel prior to renewal. Cancellation takes effect at the end of your current billing period. We will let you know in advance of any price changes. Taxes may apply. Offer terms are subject to change.
Subscribe to get unlimited Access
Hey, you are out of free articles but you are only a few clicks away from full access. Subscribe below and take advantage of our introductory offer.
subscribe to get Unlimited access
Offer for a Heatmap News Unlimited Access subscription; please note that your subscription will renew automatically unless you cancel prior to renewal. Cancellation takes effect at the end of your current billing period. We will let you know in advance of any price changes. Taxes may apply. Offer terms are subject to change.
Create Your Account
Please Enter Your Password
Forgot your password?
Please enter the email address you use for your account so we can send you a link to reset your password:
The United Auto Workers’ contract with the Big Three automakers is almost up. Its replacement is going to be hotly contested.

One of the dirty little secrets of the electric vehicle boom is that many of its workers are paid less and enjoy fewer benefits than those who manufacture the nation’s gas guzzlers. But if unions have their way, that won’t be the case for long.
On September 14, the United Auto Workers' contract with the Big Three automakers — GM, Ford, and Stellantis — will expire. Negotiations for a new agreement are set to begin in July, and electric vehicle jobs will be a defining issue with potential to put the 380,000-member union on strike this fall. The union’s leadership team held a town hall late last month where they laid out the stakes.
“To be clear, I and the UAW leadership support this transition, but it must be a just transition,” said vice president of the union Mike Booth. “These must not only be union jobs, but they must be jobs that maintain the wages, benefits, and safety standards that generations of UAW members have fought for.”
So far, the industry has been trending in the opposite direction. Booth pointed to the Ultium battery cell manufacturing plant in Lordstown, Ohio, which is a joint venture between GM and LG. Workers there currently start at $16.50 per hour, and can work their way up to $20 per hour after seven years. That’s well below the $32 per hour that union workers made at a nearby GM assembly plant that closed in 2019. “Meanwhile the company is receiving billions in government subsidies. This is not a just transition, and this is not an acceptable standard to set,” said Booth.
The Big Three are facing pressure to keep EV costs down amid inflation, materials scarcity, and increasing competition from international automakers — particularly from China. They also must contend with the fact that workers for other preeminent players in the nascent industry — Tesla and Rivian — aren’t unionized, although movements are cropping up to change that. While Elon Musk argues Tesla pays its workers more than their unionized counterparts, his company has been accused of serious labor violations and the National Labor Relations Board has ruled it illegally fired a worker involved in labor organizing.
The upcoming negotiations are a bellwether for many on the left's belief that the transition to clean energy can and should “create millions of good, high-wage jobs.” But as Booth’s remark suggests, union members aren’t just frustrated with the automakers, but with Biden. His signature climate policy, the Inflation Reduction Act, has begun fueling the growth of a domestic electric vehicle manufacturing industry with billions of dollars in incentives and little support for organized labor.
According to a database of clean manufacturing announcements maintained by Jack Conness, a policy analyst at the nonprofit Energy Innovation, companies have announced upwards of $70 billion in investments in U.S. battery and electric vehicle manufacturing since the law was passed.
The IRA has been hailed by labor advocates for including wage and apprenticeship requirements for many of its subsidies. But those provisions are geared at construction jobs, not manufacturing jobs. For example, while automakers must pay prevailing wages and hire apprentices to build their battery factories in order to qualify for the full “Advanced Energy Project Credit,” they do not have to make similar commitments to the workers who will actually make the batteries.
The only relevant labor requirements for those workers came in federal guidance on the tax credit for the manufacturing of clean energy parts that was published last month. It noted that the Internal Revenue Service would only consider projects recommended by the Department of Energy. That agency must base its endorsements on a set of criteria that includes having a “clear and appropriately robust plan” to engage with labor unions.
These kinds of provisions, like requiring developers to put their plans for workforce and community engagement in their applications, may help give unions a leg up. David Madland, a senior fellow at the Center for American Progress, a liberal D.C. policy think tank, pointed to the recent unionization of the Blue Bird electric school bus factory in rural Georgia. The company received funding from the EPA that required it to be “committed to remain neutral in any organizing campaign.”
“The Biden administration is doing a lot to ensure the jobs created by industrial policy are good jobs,” Madland told me in an email. “But more work needs to be done.”
Recently-elected insurgent president of the UAW Shawn Fain sent a memo to the union’s 380,000 members in early May warning that the shift to EVs was “at serious risk of becoming a race to the bottom.” He stated that the union would not endorse Biden for re-election until he does more to support labor standards in the transition.
It’s not yet clear whether the transition to EVs will result in a net loss or gain of manufacturing jobs. Industry studies have noted that electric vehicles have fewer parts, and will therefore require fewer workers, than internal combustion engine vehicles. Ford CEO Jim Farley made waves in November when he said the job required 40% less labor, a statistic that echoes a similar warning by the UAW back in 2020
But some researchers and analysts have contested the idea. Carnegie Mellon engineers analyzed production data from leading automotive manufacturers and found that although EVs have fewer parts, their components collectively require more labor-hours than conventional vehicle parts. But the researchers note that despite this, the shift to electric vehicles could still lead to job losses in certain regions depending on where companies choose to locate new battery factories.
While the IRA has seemingly given automakers enough incentives not to move these facilities abroad, many of them are building their plants in southern states where organized labor has always struggled to gain a foothold.
Outside analysts predict the negotiations will break down and lead to a strike. Four years ago, when the union went on strike against GM for 40 days during the last round of negotiations, it cost the company $3.6 billion. Workers lost nearly $1 billion in wages.
UAW leadership began to prepare its members for that possibility during its town hall last month.
“I want to be clear on this, and I know this might sound crazy, but the choice of whether or not we go on strike is up to the Big Three,” said UAW Secretary-Treasurer Margaret Mock. “We are clear about what we want.”
Log in
To continue reading, log in to your account.
Create a Free Account
To unlock more free articles, please create a free account.
The companies just launched a major VPP play.
For all the hype surrounding virtual power plants, they’re still a niche player on the U.S. electric grid. A new partnership between three of the biggest residential energy companies in the country — Tesla, Sunrun, and Renew Home — aims to recast VPPs into a leading role.
The companies announced on Wednesday that they have more than 16 gigawatts of dispatchable VPP capacity available today to deliver to utilities and data center developers throughout the country. That’s about the same as 16 nuclear reactors, except instead of generating power round the clock from a central plant, the companies aggregate unused electricity capacity from thousands of individual home solar and battery systems and programmable thermostats, and can make it available for several hours at a time.
Today, the companies bid these resources into electricity markets as a sort of bespoke grid service. A few times per year — often in the summer months when demand spikes — the grid operator in California might ask Sunrun to switch on its VPP to prevent a blackout. That means Sunrun’s rooftop solar and battery customers all either begin exporting excess power to the grid or rely more on their energy storage systems for their own power needs, reducing strain on the grid. Tesla operates similar programs, some in partnership with Sunrun. Renew Home, which spun out of Google Nest, does the same thing but with thermostats and water heaters, nudging temperatures on thousands of devices up or down during peak demand hours.
“A lot of our assets are enrolled in a contract where they can be used up to 20 times per year,” Paul Dickson, the president and chief revenue officer of Sunrun, told me. Now the company, along with its partners, are making the pitch to utilities and hyperscalers to view VPPs as 365-day resources, and more fully integrate them into their grid planning.
It’s a “turnkey” solution, the companies wrote in a press release, “deployable in months, not years,” that requires “no additional hardware, software, interconnection, water, or land usage for offtaking parties.”
VPPs also typically kick back some of the proceeds they earn from the electricity market to the residential customers hosting the solar panels, batteries, and programmable thermostats providing the power, meaning they can meet growing energy demand while helping to lower household energy bills. Sunrun and Renew Home paid out a combined $67 million in customer rewards last year.
About 60% of the 16 gigawatts the companies have available are tied to Renew Home’s enrolled devices, with the remaining 40% coming from Sunrun and Tesla’s solar and battery assets, Dickson told me. The capacity is also spread out geographically. There’s about 1.7 gigawatts available in Texas — the second largest data center market in the country, Dickson pointed out. There’s 300 megawatts available in Virginia, which the companies expect to grow to 500 megawatts by 2030.
“Unlike a traditional power plant that's fixed in size, this number grows every single day as the combined three companies continue to add additional capacity,” Dickson said. Sunrun alone plans to more than double its energy storage capacity by the end of 2028.
If utilities and large industrial customers buy the VPP pitch, the companies will be able to expand even more quickly, he added. If regulators or utilities come back and say, we’ll take your existing capacity today, and if you can add another gigawatt in the next year, here’s what we’ll pay, Sunrun could potentially reduce the upfront cost to customers to host the solar and battery installations, driving faster adoption.
The new partnership follows a similar announcement earlier this month from the VPP company Voltus, which signed a three-year agreement with Google. Voltus will provide up to 100 megawatts per year of capacity for Google in PJM, the country’s largest (and most constrained) electricity market covering much of the Midwest and mid-Atlantic. In that case, however, Voltus is using the deal with Google to finance the VPP, with the capacity set to come online by 2027.
The Tesla/Sunrun/Renew Home group is simply announcing they are open for business — they haven’t signed up any offtakers yet. Dickson told me the companies wanted to “make everybody aware that there is this uncontracted capacity, and make sure that it goes to the place that it can be most impactful.” Wednesday’s announcement is accompanied by a live map that shows where the capacity is. The companies did, however, already bid over a gigawatt of capacity into PJM, the larger energy market that Virginia is a part of, as part of its emergency procurement to meet near-term load growth in the region, and are waiting to hear if they were selected.
Last year, the electrification advocacy group Rewiring America published a paper arguing that hyperscalers could free up grid capacity for at least a third of the load growth expected from data centers if they paid for residential households to get heat pumps. All of that capacity would simply be the result of swapping inefficient appliances for more efficient versions, reducing the overall energy use of the homes. If hyperscalers also financed residential solar and storage upgrades, they could more than meet data center demand, the report posited.
That’s not how these VPP proposals are going to work — residential customers will still have to pay something to Sunrun and Tesla for their solar panels and batteries. But Ari Matusiak, the executive director of Rewiring America, told me he viewed these new VPP partnerships as a step in that direction. Today, energy markets are largely bifurcated between residential market activity and large industrial customers. “Where we are going is toward a world where we think about the household as actual energy infrastructure and not simply an end of the line billpayer,” he said. “Once you start doing that, it changes the economics of how those household upgrades are treated and what the opportunities are.”
Current conditions: The warehouse fire in Boyle Heights is raging for a third day, spewing dark smoke over the Downtown Los Angeles skyline • The death toll from Western Europe’s heatwave has reached into the dozens • An 18-wheeler carrying more than 400 beehives overturned in eastern Texas and filled a small neighborhood with more than 2 million honeybees.
Wally World is soon to be powered by the atom. On Tuesday, Walmart announced a 15-year deal with Constellation, the nation’s largest operator of nuclear plants, for a chunk of the electricity coming from the Dresden Clean Energy Center in Illinois. The agreement included about 176 megawatts of wholesale supply from the two-reactor station southwest of Chicago, including 30 megawatts of expanded generating capacity through “uprates” — upgrades that allow operators to get more power out of an existing unit. Over the past two years, tech giants such as Google, Microsoft, and Meta, have bought shares of the power coming from nuclear power stations as the companies sought steady supplies of clean electricity for their burgeoning data centers. But the Walmart deal stands out as one of the first to involve a major brick-and-mortar retailer. “We’re constantly evaluating new capabilities and energy solutions that help ensure the electricity we rely on is dependable, responsibly produced, and built to support long-term growth,” Shayne Wahlmeier, Walmart’s senior vice president of energy, said in a statement.
The Trump administration just unveiled one of its biggest bets on nuclear power yet. The Department of Energy announced $17.5 billion in low-interest loans for utilities to pay for the equipment needed to order new Westinghouse AP1000 reactors. The program marks arguably the most significant effort yet to reclaim U.S. control over its flagship reactor design. While the two 1,100-megawatt units completed at Southern Company’s Alvin W. Vogtle Generating Station in 2023 and 2024 were the first installed in the U.S., China has been building its own version of the reactors at an industrial scale for years. The program will support up to 10 reactors, including two per venture with as many as five utilities. The power companies, currently in talks with the administration, have not yet been named. But Dan Sumner, the chief executive of Westinghouse Electric, told The Wall Street Journal the deal “really kick-starts fleet-scale nuclear development in the United States.” As my colleague Robinson Meyer wrote last night: “I hesitate to praise the project's climate bonafides at the risk of discouraging the Trump administration, but it is worth noting that if this project were to succeed, it would be one of the largest state-assisted build-outs of zero-carbon electricity in recent American history. But it would still take some time to arrive: These reactors aren’t forecast to come online til 2035.”
Yet another behemoth solar farm has come online. On Tuesday, the developer rPlus Energies said its Green River Energy Center had started operations. The facility in central Utah with 400-megawatts of solar panels and 1,600 megawatt-hours of batteries is now the largest solar-and-storage plant within PacifiCorp’s six-state territory out west, including Oregon, Washington, California, Utah, Wyoming, and Idaho. “Operation Gigawatt is about ensuring Utah has the reliable, homegrown energy needed to power opportunity for generations,” Utah Governor Spencer Cox, a Republican, said in a statement. “Green River Energy Center represents the kind of large-scale energy investment we need to deliver reliable energy, support rural Utah, and help power the next generation of prosperity across our state.”
The opening comes as solar is now generating more U.S. power than coal, as I told you recently.
Sign up to receive Heatmap AM in your inbox every morning:

The Supreme Court ruled Tuesday that Exxon Mobil has the right to sue a Cuban-owned company to recoup more than $70 million in 1960 dollars from an oil complex seized by the Cuban government after Fidel Castro’s revolution. Havana later transferred the ownership of the refinery, terminals, plants, and service stations to Corporación Cimex, the state-owned conglomerate. The lawsuit could now see the oil major try to recover more than $1 billion in losses. “Today’s decision is a critical moment in a 60 year effort to be compensated for what the Cuban government illegally seized,” Exxon spokesperson Todd Spitler told E&E News in an emailed statement. “It reflects two things: the merits of our argument and the fact that our company will fight a good fight for as long as it takes.”
The Trump administration understands the importance of refining cobalt — that’s why, as I reported last year, the Pentagon’s Defense Logistics Agency is pumping money into a startup that promises a new and cheap way to process the mineral. Canada’s Sherritt International started shutting down its Fort Saskatchewan refinery after the U.S. expanded sanctions on Cuba, halting exports of a feedstock supply needed for the plant in Alberta, Canada. The move, in addition to the Supreme Court ruling, come amid intensifying pressure by Washington on the Cuban regime.
California is once again following a New York trend. Just weeks after Albany sued to stop the Trump administration’s bid to pay TotalEnergies to give up its offshore wind projects, Sacramento is joining the litigation. “At a time when the country needs more reliable and sustainable power supply, the Trump Administration is busy using taxpayer money to strike backroom buyouts that make clean-energy projects disappear,” California Attorney General Rob Bonta said in a statement. “California won’t stand idly by as the Trump Administration illegally strikes deals to kill offshore wind projects and replace them with more windfalls for his fossil fuel friends; we’re putting the Administration on notice that we intend to sue.”
Rob checks in with Commodity Context’s Rory Johnston as the Iran War (hopefully) draws to a close.
When Iran closed the Strait of Hormuz earlier this year, experts projected oil prices would go to $200 a barrel. But then… they didn’t. In fact, while gasoline prices rose in the United States, and Europe and Asia suffered higher costs, the resulting energy crisis wasn’t even as bad as what followed Russia’s 2022 invasion of Ukraine.
Why? China. The country seems to have absorbed the costs of Trump’s war of choice by releasing hundreds of millions of barrels from its strategic stockpile. On this episode of Shift Key, Rob is joined by Rory Johnston, an oil markets researcher and the author of the Commodity Context newsletter. They discuss China’s massive (and quiet) intervention, why it’s “the most important thing we learned” from the Iran War, and what it means for the future of energy and geopolitics. 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.
Mentioned:
China Oil Demand Doubts, Rory’s 2023 article about Chinese strategic stockbuilding
Previously on Shift Key: Why the Iran Ceasefire Hasn’t Ended the Energy Crisis, featuring Rory
This episode of Shift Key is sponsored by ...
Heatmap Pro brings all of our research, reporting, and insights down to the local level. The software platform tracks all local opposition to clean energy and data centers, forecasts community sentiment, and guides data-driven engagement campaigns. Book a demo today to see the premier intelligence platform for project permitting and community engagement.
Music for Shift Key is by Adam Kromelow.