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:

It isn’t just bad vibes: Electric vehicle sales are slumping in the United States. Fewer than 300,000 EVs were sold nationwide during the first three months of 2024 — although it could be more than 350,000, depending on how you count and whose data you trust. That’s a slight decline from last quarter at a time when EV sales need to be accelerating.
What caused the slump, and what can be done about it? And could hybrids or plug-in hybrids help solve the problem? In this week’s episode, Rob and Jesse chat with Corey Cantor, an EV analyst at BloombergNEF. They talk about Tesla’s spiraling problems, whether Detroit can pull its EV strategy together, and whether plug-in hybrids can co-exist with a climate strategy. Shift Key is hosted by Robinson Meyer, executive editor of Heatmap, and Jesse Jenkins, a Princeton professor of energy systems engineering.
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.
Here is an excerpt from our conversation:
Robinson Meyer: The PHEV story is really interesting here, and the hybrid story is interesting here, because three years ago, four years ago, Toyota was talking about how hybrids and plug-in hybrids were going to be the bridge for consumers. And what we have seen is that plug-in hybrid and hybrid sales have increased.
Now, what’s funny is that Toyota has actually not really been selling those plug-in hybrids. It’s like a Stellantis story, right? It’s Jeep. Ford sells a very expensive plug-in hybrid. Toyota actually doesn’t sell plug-in hybrids. In fact, if Toyota made more plug-in hybrids, if they made more Prius Primes, this amazing-looking recent car for them — it’s a plug-in hybrid — then they would sell them. But they don’t make enough. So Toyota has kind of won this discursive cycle, but not actually made the plug-in hybrids that they were advocating for, you know, two or three years ago.
Jesse Jenkins: Yeah. I mean, if you look at the numbers, about half of all the plug-in hybrids sold are Stellantis vehicles, right? Across the Jeep, Chrysler, Dodge, and Alfa Romeo brands, they don’t sell hybrids. They only sell plug-in hybrids. And they also don’t sell any, BEVs yet, either. They’re coming, later than the end of this year, probably, their first U.S. battery electric vehicle.
So, you know, Stellantis’ only offerings right now are a set of plug-in hybrids, and they’ve been selling them very effectively, partly because I think the tax credits from the Inflation Reduction Act make them very competitively priced relative to the conventional Jeep or, Chrysler Pacifica minivan, or whatever else you’re looking at in the market. Why not get the plug-in hybrid, even if you don’t plug it in?
But if you look at it, so they’ve sold about 46,000 plug-in hybrids in the first quarter of the year. Toyota, who talks about it more than anybody, only sold 11,600. So they sold like a quarter as many as Stellantis did —
Meyer: Which is so crazy because also, the Toyota plug-in hybrids are great. They’re awesome cars. They should be making more of them!
Jenkins: Yes, they should be selling 50,000 of them a quarter.
Meyer: Yeah, exactly. But they treat them — it’s so funny. The Toyota plug-in hybrids are central to the Toyota argument, and then they treat them like compliance cars. They don't make enough, even though they’re like, this is what consumers want.
And it’s funny: They were right. That is seemingly what consumers want. And it does seem like the availability of BEVs has like defanged plug-in hybrids and hybrids for consumers in a way that maybe we didn’t expect. Toyota’s not making them. It’s like they won the discourse cycle, but they’re not actually selling vehicles.
Jenkins: Yeah. I mean, Toyota Group and Honda are really the undisputed kings or queens of hybrid electric vehicles. They sell far more than anybody else. But on the plug-in side, Stellantis is the No. 1 by far. They’re like half of the market, just themselves.
Corey Cantor: I was just going to say, to Rob’s point on just how much better the Toyota plug-in hybrids are, they’re getting 40-mile electric range between the Prius Prime and the RAV4 Prime — which by the way: RAV4, Model Y, you could have a RAV4 Prime-Model Y-off every quarter if Toyota was selling enough of those.
For those Stellantis PHEVs, the other one that’s big is the Chrysler Pacifica minivan, which, I know how much you guys love your minivans, here. Those are in the low 20-mileage. So what you’ve seen policymakers in California advocate for is really going towards a 50-mile minimum to begin to count PHEVs in what's called Advanced Clean Cars II. Which, in the kind of conventional popular media is often referred to as California’s ban of gas cars, which actually isn’t a ban of gas cars because even in 2035, you could sell 20% PHEVs if they meet a 50-mile electric range minimum.
My hope, from a climate standpoint, is if PHEVs are going to be a part of the story — and again, data-wise, they’re just not in the U.S. In some European countries ... or BYD, for example, you see 50-50 split between BEV and PHEV. Here, it’s remained 80-20.
Just better PHEVs — just automakers delivering better PHEVs with 40[-mile] all-electric range, or 50[-mile]. I do think Hyundai and Kia might move in that direction, where they’re delivering those better PHEVs over time. But not to just take the, kind of, spin on them, and just say, wow, because Toyota or whatever automaker says PHEVs are great, that consumers should buy them. The PHEVs now just aren’t as good as they should be, and they can be better, and automakers can still make a profit off of it.
It’s one of those big myths, where it’s like, you see so many people say, “Have you considered a PHEV?” And it’s like, which PHEV? Because it’s really just the Jeep Wrangler and the Pacifica.
This episode of Shift Key is sponsored by…
KORE Power provides the commercial, industrial, and utility markets with functional solutions that advance the clean energy transition worldwide. KORE Power's technology and manufacturing capabilities provide direct access to next generation battery cells, energy storage systems that scale to grid+, EV power & infrastructure, and intuitive asset management to unlock energy strategies across a myriad of applications. Explore more at korepower.com.
Watershed’s climate data engine helps companies measure and reduce their emissions, turning the data they already have into an audit-ready carbon footprint backed by the latest climate science. Get the sustainability data you need in weeks, not months. Learn more at watershed.com.
Music for Shift Key is by Adam Kromelow.
Log in
To continue reading, log in to your account.
Create a Free Account
To unlock more free articles, please create a free account.
Catching up with the American Council on Renewable Energy’s Ray Long.
Today’s chat is with Ray Long, CEO of the American Council on Renewable Energy. We first discussed the odds of permitting reform a year and a half ago, for one of the first Q&As in The Fight. Flash forward and we’re still in the same situation, but now also wrestling with added demand for electricity to power data centers. I wanted to talk again about whether he thought the rise of artificial intelligence would increase the odds of some federal deal happening any time soon. The result: a wide-reaching conversation about the future of the electric grid, the struggles to win community buy-in and the sclerotic nature of the U.S. Congress.
The following conversation was lightly edited for clarity.
Do you think the buildout of our energy grid is entwined with the rise of the nation’s data center buildout?
When you look at what we need over the next four years — 166 gigawatts, 15 times the peak load of New York City — that’s a lot of power to build. Roughly half of that is for data center and AI growth.
There are five things we can build in the next four years at scale to address that collective amount. First, it’s transmission — the transmission buildout will help to get a modern grid to enable power flow to where it’s needed in a much more effective way. That’s the first step because if we just build all that power, the current grid can’t handle it.
Second, there are four supply technologies that can be built: solar, batteries, wind, and natural gas. All four of those technologies, we know there’s enough equipment here in the U.S. available for purchase that we can build at volume. And I’ll say this — natural gas is only about 10% of all those gigawatts because of the availability of turbines from suppliers. You can’t get enough over the next four years. So when I talk about decarbonization, most of what is built to address this issue is zero-carbon resources, renewable energy resources.
If you were to compare the current conversation around data center development to the debate over developing renewable energy in the U.S. — or energy in general — do you see any similarities or differences?
There are always issues with permitting projects. Communities are always going to have concerns about what’s built in their backyards.
What’s new — and your polling shows this — is the level of concern communities have. But here’s the thing: Most of this can be overcome by developers going in, listening to what the needs of the communities are, then responding and through the permitting process addressing those concerns. You can’t do that 100% of the time. But my experience is, when you take that sort of approach, you can overcome a lot of it.
Most of the large data centers are actually doing the things I’m discussing — going in and saying, Look, we want to be grid interconnected because grid connection at the end of the day means the resources we’re bringing to bear are also going to make a stronger grid. Number two, it's investing in power generation sources like the ones I said — and those power sources will be on the grid, so they’ll solve for the increased power demands of a community.
Third, water. They should bring the water solutions. You’re seeing data centers coming in and saying it head on now, that they have closed-loop systems or whatever the solution is. At the end of the day, the communities they’re proposing these in have a real negotiating opportunity to make sure they’re holding the data center developers accountable to the needs of the community.
For a community to say we don’t want it here misses a real opportunity for those communities to get the power they need, the grid they need, and the ability to bring down energy costs.
How is the data center debate affecting permitting reform conversations in Washington, from your perspective?
Permitting reform in the U.S. at the state and federal level has been broken for years. The SunZia transmission project? It took 17 years to permit. Ribbon-cutting is in a week or two and there’s still litigation around it. From a business perspective, it’s just untenable, and it’s a miracle that the project is getting built. Developers need a chance to come in and have their project evaluated. Both the community and the developer should be able to get to a go or no-go in a couple of years on one of these projects.
How is data center growth affecting the permitting reform discussion? It’s a very hot issue right now. Right now I think in part because the data center issue is so huge — because we’ve only got four years to solve for the first really big tranche of power we need and prices across the board for electricity are escalating — this is coming to a head. The data center load is a part of the catalyst to get people talking about it [permitting reform].
Do you expect legislating in Congress on permitting reform this year? Anything beyond more conversation?
My hope is that we get a bill. A few weeks ago someone from the administration was quoted as saying they wanted a framework for a bill by the end of May, and it’s June now. We haven’t seen both sides or the administration coalesce around a final project yet.
We’re in a midterm election cycle. Typically it’s very difficult during these cycles to move bills like this. At the same time, with electricity prices increasing and the need to build more, to fix this, I’m very hopeful something will come together. And look at the Senate — you’ve got Republicans and the Democratic ranking members talking about this. It’s all good signs.
If everyone’s talking about energy and affordability during this election, isn’t that a good thing for action in the next Congress?
I’ll say this: You’re seeing the catalyst for it right now with prices rising, and almost every grid operator around the country has raised concerns about shortages at some point this year or next year. It’ll hopefully be enough to have policymakers do something about it this year.
Plus more of week’s biggest development fights.
1. Ohio — This state might just be the most important flashpoint in the national fight over advanced energy and tech infrastructure.
2. Laramie County, Wyoming — The Cowboy State’s capital city is one of the few to reject a data center moratorium. But tech companies. don’t get your hopes up too high.
3. Los Angeles County, California — Elsewhere, we saw the first city in California vote to ban data centers … once and for all.
4. Charles County, Maryland — This populous county south of D.C. is now out of reach for data center development.
5. Baldwin County, Alabama — There will be a vote at the end of this month on whether to ban solar in the county whose opposition nearly prompted a statewide moratorium on development.
6. Hopkins County, Texas — I have one last update related to a large data center legal fight we’ve been covering closely.
The national AI data center moratorium has momentum.
As I’ve been documenting for months here at The Fight, data center opposition is surging across the country. Our latest Heatmap Pro poll puts some very hard numbers behind that picture. More than 7 in 10 Americans oppose new data center construction near where they live, up from just over 4 in 10 last fall. Part of what’s driving that opposition: More than half of respondents hold data centers largely responsible for rising electricity prices, and nearly half are pessimistic about the effect artificial intelligence will have on their lives.
Here’s yet another data point from our poll that underscores the intensity of the opposition: A majority of Americans now say they support a nationwide halt to new data center construction.
Digging into demographics, support for a national AI data center moratorium breaks predictably based on age and gender — younger people are more likely to back the idea, as are women. Americans are just as likely to back moratoria in their own states as they are a national stop to development, indicating the public relations rot may run deep amongst its critics in the public.
The notion of an AI data center moratorium comes from the political left, specifically Senator Bernie Sanders and Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, who introduced the first bill to enact such a pause earlier this year. Yet its appeal straddles political lines. Among Democrats, 66% said they’d back a national moratorium, compared to just 19% opposed; in the Republican camp, 55% said they backed the idea, compared to 28% opposed. Independents echoed those views as well, with answers falling neatly in between the two sides (58% support, 21% oppose).
The surge in support for a country-wide stop to new data centers stands in contrast to the more hesitant attitude politicians of all stripes have shown toward the opposition movement. That includes the White House, which until this week embraced a deregulatory approach to fostering AI tech before abruptly changing course this week and seeking early access to new models.
A good example of this political distance exists in Missouri, where Republican Governor Mike Kehoe last month proudly declared that Google was investing $15 billion in a hyperscale data center project in the rural town of New Florence in Montgomery County. After Kehoe’s announcement, the White House’s rapid response media account joined in on celebrating this economic investment, touting the potential for “thousands of construction jobs and hundreds of permanent jobs” from the Google project.
Among the hoi polloi, however, discontent was rife. This was actually the second large data center project in New Florence, and locals in and around this town of fewer than 1,000 residents have been busy suing the county to halt a separate Amazon data center proposed directly across from Google’s project.
Montgomery County is incredibly conservative politically and “has voted red since I can’t even remember,” Sabrina Cope, an organizer with opposition group Preserve Montgomery County, told me over the phone. “They’re turning up their nose at the White House’s support for these kinds of projects. This isn’t an issue solely Democrats or Republicans are upset about.” (The White House did not respond to a request for comment.)
The political mismatch here is also bipartisan.
In New York, state legislators on Thursday passed legislation to enact a one-year pause on new data center permitting. The bill now goes to the desk of New York’s governor, Democrat Kathy Hochul, who has signaled she’s against a broad moratorium. “This is a local decision for municipalities,” Hochul told reporters last month, according to a Politico report. “It’s not a statewide approach, necessarily, but it’s something I’m looking at intensely.”
The scene in the Empire State feels eerily similar to what happened in the Pine Tree State when Maine Democrats sought to enact a moratorium, only to be stymied by a veto from Governor Janet Mills, also a Democrat. Should Hochul spurn the state legislature, it would defy what our polls say is the overwhelming political opinion.
Our poll also found rural voters are almost 10 points more likely than suburban and urban denizens to support a moratorium on new data centers. Knowing how often land use conflicts occur in upstate New York, where voters skew Republican, the yeoman’s calculus in both parties might lead more politicians to support temporarily stopping or stalling data center industry growth.
In Illinois, we’re starting to see policy start to align at least a little more closely with what Democratic voters want. On Friday, Governor J.B. Pritzker announced he would pause data center tax breaks and ask the state legislature to enact a new statute governing the industry’s water and energy use as well as deployment of non-disclosure agreements. If Illinois is a harbinger of things to come in blue states, we’ll see more action like this.