Energy
Scoop: Clearway Asks Trump to Swap Solar Farm for Data Center and Gas Plant
The large renewables developer changes tack “in response to federal energy objectives.”
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 large renewables developer changes tack “in response to federal energy objectives.”
The data center boom is everywhere you look in U.S. economic and emissions data.
On Meta quits, Elon Musk’s solar plans, and federal coal reserves
Trump’s new tariffs seem to make few exemptions for clean energy.
A new 60-home pilot program aims to expand vehicle-to-grid charging.
On Trump’s power pledge, America’s offshore nuclear, and Japan’s offshore wind
Current conditions: A new heat dome is spreading temperatures above 100 degrees Fahrenheit across the Central United States, from Texas north to the Dakotas • Tropical Storm Bertha made landfall over southern Louisiana with winds of up to 45 miles per hour • Tasmania is facing a cold front with freezing wind chills.

On December 8, 1953 — just eight years after the United States demonstrated the destructive power of splitting atoms in the form of a mushroom cloud over Hiroshima — then-President Dwight D. Eisenhower pledged to lead the world in harnessing fission to constructive ends. In his famed “Atoms for Peace” speech, he vowed to help other nations build nuclear power stations that he believed would bring about a new era of global prosperity built atop a foundation of abundant electricity. Under the law Congress passed the next year to lay the groundwork for a nuclear buildout, Washington didn’t make it easy for foreign countries to import American technology. Before any U.S. nuclear company can sell its wares abroad, the Senate needs to approve what’s known as a 123 Agreement, essentially a treaty in which the partner nation agrees not to use the technology for weapons proliferation. When Abu Dhabi set out to build the Arab world’s first nuclear power station, the U.S. struck a new, special 123 Agreement with the United Arab Emirates in 2009, in which the Gulf monarchy swore off ever enriching or recycling its own fuel. That deal became the gold standard for U.S. nuclear pacts — and one Washington had planned to make a requirement for any other countries in the region. Saudi Arabia, however, wasn’t happy with those restrictions, particularly as its rival Iran pressed ahead with construction of its second and third reactors at its debut Russian-made nuclear station. With the Biden administration putting up resistance, Riyadh began flaunting talks with Beijing to buy Chinese reactors, in what would mark a major entry of the People’s Republic into the nuclear export market.
All of which you needed to know to appreciate what a huge deal the latest news is. On Wednesday, The Wall Street Journal, The New York Times, and the Associated Press confirmed that Saudi Arabia had reached a deal with the Trump administration that would likely allow Riyadh to enrich and recycle its own fuel on its soil. While a formal announcement is expected this week, Secretary of State Marco Rubio already acknowledged the deal by telling reporters any such agreement would not lead to weapons proliferation. On the face of it, the deal is a major win for the U.S. over its arch adversaries. Russia dominates global nuclear exports, and is currently building the debut plants in Bangladesh, Egypt, and Turkey. China, meanwhile, has dramatically brought down the cost and time it takes to build its own domestic reactors, which are based on the leading American design, and Beijing is widely expected to make an export push in the coming years. The U.S. has managed to win deals in Eastern Europe to build Poland’s first nuclear plant. But so far, American technology has struggled to compete on both price and construction competence. A moment when Iran is firing missiles at America’s Arab allies may seem ill-suited to embarking on a civilian nuclear program, but the Atlantic Council researcher Allison Minor, who previously served as a U.S. deputy special envoy to Yemen, said the war had added urgency to brokering the Saudi-U.S. deal. “By keeping the door open for uranium enrichment inside Saudi Arabia, the nuclear deal sends a powerful message to Tehran,” she wrote in a blog post. “By securing a 123 agreement that appears to have more preferable terms than the United Arab Emirates and dozens of other U.S. partners have committed to, Riyadh also signals its role as a major global player, even if it is not among the ranks of nuclear-armed nations.”
In March, the White House organized a voluntary industry pledge in which hyperscalers and data centers developers promised to pay above and beyond the normal rate for electricity to ease the strain on Americans. On Thursday, the Trump administration plans to announce a vast expansion of the pact to include the nation’s largest utilities, Reuters reported. Utilities NextEra Energy and Duke Energy joined data center developers Equinix and Digital Realty along with roughly 200 other entities on a list of signatories The Wall Street Journal obtained.
The move comes a day after ratepayer advocates accused the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission of failing to address the cost of upgrading infrastructure in its latest order meant to ease the impacts of data centers, Utility Dive reported. Polling from Heatmap Pro has shown repeatedly that public support for data centers is collapsing.
The Colorado River’s largest reservoirs, Lake Mead and Lake Powell, hit record lows in what experts described to the Los Angeles Times this week as a “five-alarm fire.” On Tuesday, Secretary of the Interior Doug Burgum met with the governors of seven states virtually ahead of his agency’s anticipated release of a plan to cut back on water use to ease shortages. That states appear to be welcoming a federal intervention marks a break with more than a century of Western states fighting to manage their water supplies among themselves with minimal oversight from Washington. Yet “far from a brash commandeering of the system,” E&E News reported, Burgum’s plan “is effectively a kick-the-can exercise for managing the drought-riddled river that supplies water” for one in 10 Americans. “At best, the Trump administration’s plan will leave economies — from the bucolic ranches of the Rocky Mountains to the mansions of Los Angeles, the tech hub of Phoenix and the powerhouse farms along the border with Mexico — in a state of limbo, without clear rules for who will have access to vital supplies in the years to come,” reporter Annie Snider wrote. “At worst, it dares the region’s political leaders — most especially Arizona Governor Katie Hobbs, who is facing one of the country’s closest gubernatorial races in the fall — to launch a destabilizing court fight.” As former Heatmap reporter Neel Dhanesha wrote in 2023, sometimes plans can at least buy some time.
Sign up to receive Heatmap AM in your inbox every morning:
Russia officially kicked off the global race for small modular reactors in 2019 with the launch of its first floating nuclear station, which is still pumping out power in an Arctic port today. Since then, dozens of companies have proposed small reactors on land, and a handful of startups has looked to build nuclear-propelled civilian ships. But no one has really attempted any major offshore nuclear energy projects yet. Still, the Trump administration is preparing for the potential new sector. On Wednesday, the Department of the Interior’s Marine Minerals Administration — the agency recently formed out of combining the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management with the Bureau of Safety and Environmental Enforcement — signed a memorandum of understanding with the Nuclear Regulatory Commission to “responsibly respond to industry requests” and support new technologies.
“Submerged reactor systems have been safely deployed in naval applications for decades, demonstrating their potential as a reliable source of energy in demanding marine environments,” Matt Giacona, the acting director of the Marine Minerals Administration, said in a statement. “While no commercial deployment on the Outer Continental Shelf is planned or approved at this time, it could greatly strengthen America’s energy security in the future.”
China unveiled a new set of rules for the solar industry last week that are expected to “do a good job in cutting out low-cost, outdated technology across the value chain,” according to a new report from the research division at the magazine PV Tech. The new national regulations, set to take effect on January 1, 2027, phase out weaker panels and conventional polysilicon products. “These new restrictions are very interesting as the Chinese government now sees a need to stop the oversupply, maybe coming from lowered deployment in China in the first half of the year,” Joe Hennessy, co-author of the report and analyst at PV Tech Research, told PV Tech. “This will affect the smaller producers the most, as they are less likely to have upgraded lines during the period of losses.” Larger solar manufacturers are already producing panels with efficiency rates of up to 24%, the report found.
This is a story I’m planning to keep a close eye on, given the forthcoming results of the Department of Commerce’s 232 investigation into whether domestic U.S. producers of polysilicon need new tariffs to protect them against Chinese imports. My best-placed sources say the agency is on track to release its findings by next month, though others close to the process say the 74-day government shutdown could give the administration until early September to meet its legal deadlines.”
Koloma, the startup seeking to tap into naturally occurring hydrogen deposits, has a third exploration deal in the Philippines. On Thursday, Heatmap editorial fellow Ameya Hadap broke news that the company has inked an agreement for exclusive rights to a roughly 817-square-mile area of Luzon’s Zambales Province. The Colorado-based firm now has the rights to more than 1,600 square miles of the country.
The spinoff of Lawrence Livermore National Lab has a new 10-point plan to get onto the grid by the 2030s.
One of fusion energy’s newest startups, Inertia Enterprises, is betting that the fastest route to commercial fusion runs through one of the field’s oldest ideas. The company, which raised a $450 million Series A earlier this year, plans to build a power plant based on the laser-driven fusion system pioneered at Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory’s — the only tech yet to have produced more energy from a fusion reaction than it took to initiate it. Now, Inertia has shared its commercialization roadmap exclusively with Heatmap, detailing the 10 near-term capabilities it must demonstrate before this landmark experiment can become a grid-scale power plant by the mid-2030s.
The roadmap offers a route from the national lab’s impressive but commercially impractical fusion demonstrations to an economical power plant capable of producing electricity for the grid. At its core are a set of milestones — mostly aimed at developing cheap, mass-manufacturable components — that Inertia says it must clear before those individual systems can be integrated into a working plant. This road is not necessarily linear, however, as various teams will likely be working on many of these goals simultaneously.
At least the physics of Inertia’s approach are already proven, the startup’s CEO Jeff Lawson told me, pointing to the fusion experiments at Lawrence Livermore’s National Ignition Facility as a proof-of-concept. The lab’s demonstration of net energy gain caps more than six decades and $30 billion (in 2026 dollars) of U.S. fusion research. The remaining challenges, he argued, are all engineering-related, requiring “elbow grease, hard work, and smart people” rather than breakthroughs in fusion science.
"It seems to us like a startup or a commercial company of any variety should be focused on commercializing a proven scientific result, as opposed to actually trying to demonstrate the basic science to begin with," Lawson told me. Basic science, he argues, is better left to national labs and universities, where researchers can pursue "unbounded problems" that don’t align with the expectations and timelines of venture-backed startups.
Indeed, no fusion startup has yet achieved scientific breakeven, the milestone Lawrence Livermore first hit in 2022, and has since repeated numerous times. But leading players such as Commonwealth Fusion Systems and Helion Energy maintain that it’s only a matter of time before they validate the physics behind their own reactor designs, which they claim will be highly cost-competitive.
Lawson, on the other hand, readily acknowledged that Lawrence Livermore’s tech is uneconomical in its current form. His bet is simply that the more predictable path to a commercial reactor is to drive down the cost of the lab’s validated fusion approach, known as inertial confinement. This system relies on high-powered lasers firing at a millimeter-scale pellet of fusion fuel, compressing it to extreme temperatures and pressures until the atoms fuse. Today, the National Ignition Facility makes each individual fusion target by hand, a workable solution given that it only uses about a dozen per year.
That production model, however, isn’t remotely plausible for a grid-scale power plant. Because each fusion reaction lasts just a fraction of a billionth of a second, a commercial facility must fire its lasers at a fresh target about 10 times per second to generate continuous electricity — requiring the production of hundreds of millions of targets each year.
Scaling production to roughly a million pellets per day and making them inexpensive enough for commercial operation without compromising the strength or precision required for fusion ignition is central to Inertia’s roadmap. That includes goals five, seven, eight and nine — industrializing the manufacturing of the carbon shells that hold the fusion fuel, making the thin films that hold those carbon shells both durable and cheap, scaling up and automating fusion target assembly, and speeding up how fast targets are filled with the requisite deuterium-tritium fuel.
The other central focus of the roadmap is the laser system, which will ultimately consist of 1,000 individual units operating in concert to compress and heat the fusion fuel. Key priorities include reducing the system’s cost (goal two), dramatically increasing its firing cadence (goal three), and bolstering its durability to withstand high-intensity operations (goal four). Goal six also complements these efforts, calling for the development of a control system capable of tracking moving fusion targets to precisely align each laser shot.
Goals one and 10 bookend the journey with some broader milestones. The first focuses on increasing the fusion target’s energy gain — the ratio of fusion energy produced to laser energy delivered — to more than 25 times ignition. Today, the National Ignition Facility’s best-performing laser shot has yielded a gain of just over four times what it took to start the reaction. Goal 10 then zooms out to the ultimate objective: integrating all these technologies into a commercially viable power plant that can deliver either electricity or industrial heat to end customers.
To reach that point, Inertia has embarked on an industrial engineering hiring spree, recruiting folks with experience taking complex hardware systems from prototype to mass production, “not unlike the processes that are used in the semiconductor or consumer electronics world,” Lawson explained. The company has been making progress on its component development goals since the beginning of the year, he told me, and expects to announce the successful demonstration of a few of these milestones in the coming months. Lawson ultimately expects Inertia to complete the core components of its laser and target manufacturing systems by the middle of next year.
The team will spend the next two to three years integrating these individual pieces into two fully operational subsystems, a prototype laser system and a target manufacturing line. Around 2030, the company will begin combining those subsystems into a first-of-a-kind fusion power plant, which will also serve as the proving ground for the target chamber, tritium fuel breeding system, and power conversion system that turns fusion heat into electricity. By the middle of the next decade, Inertia aims to be generating power from this first plant, setting the stage for the company to build and connect additional grid-scale commercial power plants.
There are plenty of engineering trade-offs that the company will have to solve for. Take the decision around how to size the target chamber, for example. “If you make it bigger, your walls have an easier time and survive longer, but it’s more expensive. If you make it smaller, your walls have a tougher time because they’re closer to all the heat and energy that the fusion reaction is creating, but now your power plant costs less to build.”
But to Lawson, this represents exactly the type of problem Inertia was built to solve: complex engineering issues that come to the fore once scientists have demonstrated the fundamental physics are sound. He thinks other fusion companies may someday reach this stage, as well — though he’s unwilling to hazard a guess on exactly what approach or startup is best positioned to do so.
“There have been generations of scientists who’ve made their predictions about fusion energy and gotten it wrong,” he told me. “I’m not going to pretend to be smarter than them. All I’m here to say is, just knowing that one did work, we can commercialize it.”