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:
Inside episode six of Shift Key.

Few people have shaped Bidenomics more than Brian Deese.
From 2021 to 2023, Deese led the National Economic Council at the White House, serving as President Joe Biden’s top economic aide during such events as the post-pandemic recovery, Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, and the passage of the Inflation Reduction Act.
Before that, Deese was global head of sustainable investing for Blackrock and a senior political advisor to President Barack Obama. He’s now the Institute Innovation Fellow at MIT, where he helps lead the Clean Investment Monitor, a project that tracks investment in climate technology and infrastructure across the U.S. economy.
On this episode, Deese joins Shift Key for a two-part conversation. Part 1 focuses on the future of Bidenomics, Biden’s State of the Union speech, what the 2024 campaign might mean for the politics and policy of climate change.
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: I want to start by talking about the State of the Union. Jesse, I feel like you had a stronger response to the State of the Union than I did. Where I saw it and I was like, yes, the president is talking about the IRA, he's talking about big climate legislation, primarily in a jobs context. I feel like you were maybe more surprised.
Jesse Jenkins: What I was kind of expecting was Biden to lean in a bit more on the manufacturing Renaissance story. And he referenced it a couple times as sort of the high level numbers, which we can come back to, which probably came from your Clean Investment Monitor project, if I'm not mistaken. And he told the story of the Belvedere plant that was saved from bankruptcy through the UAW negotiations and is now being rebuilt as a EV manufacturing facility. But I was expecting him to say something more broadly about how we have been talking about bringing manufacturing jobs back to America for my entire lifetime, right, for decades.
And the previous president, of course, also made lots of promises about trying to support US manufacturing. And then of course, did basically nothing to do that. And Biden has an incredible track record on that front, an enormous amount of investment happening across multiple sectors, and in particular in the clean energy domain.
And maybe this is just the limits of a State of the Union address where you got to touch a lot of different issues. But I kind of expected him to lean into that a little bit more and to make it clear that it wasn't just this one plant, that there are dozens of stories like Belvedere out there across the economy that are being fueled specifically by the Inflation Reduction Act, which by the way, he did never really mention by name.
So I was curious how you saw it and if you thought he had the right balance or maybe could have leaned in more or could do so in the future.
Brian Deese: Well, I think one of the things about State of the Unions is that its quality and moments are often more important than quantity. And so I think that may be a little bit of what's going on.
But let me step back. Look, I think it was an excellent speech and I think it was delivered in an even more excellent way. And at the top line, the speech was designed to drive pace and clear contrast.
It's interesting that some of the reaction has been partisan. But if you actually go through the speech, it's really clear-eyed contrast. And a lot of the things where the contrast exists are between, as the president said multiple times, his predecessor and the vast majority of the American people. And that's smart.
And the pace was evident from the get-go and positioned President Biden to do exactly what he wanted to do, was to get in the chamber at the podium and go at this thing and demonstrate his capability, but also his enthusiasm. I think for people who actually watched it on TV, you saw not only a president who was in command, but who was having a lot of fun. And a lot of fun because I think he believed in what he was doing.
So that's the most important. And when you're structuring a speech like this, you want to say, if that's your goal is to try to have clear contrast and pace, how do you keep that going? I think in some ways the most important line which goes, Jesse, to the point you are making is he said something to the effect of, it doesn't make the news, it doesn't make the headlines, but in thousands of cities across America, people are writing the greatest comeback story never told.
And I would anticipate that in that idea, in thousands of cities and towns across America, greatest comeback story never told will be a consistent refrain and a throughline to try to get at exactly your point, which is there's an element of that, which reflects a little bit of immediate criticism, right? The greatest comeback story never told, which is why do we never hear about these things going on again?
But it also reflects the kind of great American story that these comeback stories are in fact happening. And for the people and the communities themselves, it matters.
And look, I think that that's where Belvedere fit in, which is oftentimes the best way to try to bring to life that idea is not by trying to describe or animate all of the ways in which it's happening across the country and people like the three of us get very gripped by the overarching statistics.
But the story and the story of Belvedere was one that if you look across the speech, there aren't that many moments where you can actually tell a story like that. And so there was a clear decision to say, this is a story and we are going to tell the story about clean energy manufacturing through the lens of a place and a community, which is really about jobs and grit and resilience. And for those who weren't paying line by line attention to the story of Belvedere, is Belvedere, Illinois, home of a storied Chrysler plant that was initiated in 1965 I'll continue to refer to Stellantis as Chrysler because I still can't get over the idea that we're not still referring it to as that name, but was basically for a whole bunch of reasons an auto plant that was on its back and then was closed and for a variety of reasons, including the strength of UAW's negotiating posture, but also the prospect of bringing battery manufacturing here to the U.S., Belvedere has gone from, you know, is really a Phoenix rising story in a pretty concrete way.
So my takeaway from Jesse, your surprise, is that in fact, what the president did was provide a frame for going out and telling that great comeback story and going and telling it. And in fact, the way to tell it will actually be in individual stories in most cases.
Jenkins: Yeah, I think that makes sense. I guess what I was thinking was there'd be an opportunity to draw a sharper contrast, which would be pretty consistent with the rest of the speech between President Biden and his quote unquote predecessor. In the sense that really, I mean, we, we've been literally politicians have been promising to bring manufacturing back since the 70s and 80s, right.
And now we are seeing that investment really thanks to a whole suite of policies, some of them bipartisan, like CHIPS and Science, and some of them, you know, I think with broad support in the American public, like you're saying, Brian, even if the partisan nature of the congressional debate right now, you know, makes it seem more partisan than it is, it's, you know, these are broadly popular policies. So it was kind of expecting a little bit more contrast there.
This episode of Shift Key is sponsored by…
Advanced Energy United educates, engages, and advocates for policies that allow our member companies to compete to power our economy with 100% clean energy, working with decision makers and energy market regulators to achieve this goal. Together, we are united in our mission to accelerate the transition to 100% clean energy in America. Learn more at advancedenergyunited.org/heatmap
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.
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.
On Hungary’s political earthquake, mining in Argentina, and the Sam Altman attack
Current conditions: A storm corridor is set to pummel a swath of the United States from the Plains to Great Lakes for the next days • Super Typhoon Sinlaku is barreling toward Guam, where it is poised to make landfall as the equivalent of a Category 5 hurricane, while to the south Cyclone Vaianu forces hundreds of evacuations on New Zealand’s North Island • Santo Domingo, the Dominican Republic’s sprawling capital, is facing days of intense thunderstorms as floods displace cars in the Caribbean’s largest city.
Contrary to popular parlance, the Strait of Hormuz hasn’t been closed these past few weeks. It’s just been closed to any cargo not approved by the Iranian government. As I told you last week, a Wall Street analyst who went on a Gonzo reporting mission armed with Cuban cigars and packets of Zyn nicotine pouches to the Persian Gulf chokepoint concluded that billions of dollars of goods were passing through the waterway, but only on Iranian-flagged ships or Chinese vessels enjoying the benefits of political alignment with the Islamic Republic. After talks this weekend failed to reach a deal to fully reopen the Strait of Hormuz, the United States is planning a naval blockade to prevent any ships from passing and subject Tehran to the same pressure Washington is facing from the closure. That’s what President Donald Trump announced Sunday in a series of posts on Truth Social. In a reversal of last week’s ceasefire deal, Trump said the U.S. would “interdict every vessel” in international waters that passed through the Strait of Hormuz after paying Iran a toll, calling such a levy “illegal” and “world extortion.”
Oil prices spiked again in response to the president’s announcement. Already, as Heatmap’s Robinson Meyer reported last week, the war has cost Americans $17 billion at the pump. And even with the ceasefire in place, the end of the energy shock looked hazy at best, analyst Rory Johnston said on the most recent episode of the Heatmap podcast Shift Key.

For nearly two decades, Viktor Orbán ruled over Hungary with an increasingly tight-gripped fist, maintaining the closest relationship between Russia and any NATO country and providing what’s widely considered a blueprint for the West’s illiberal right to reduce checks on the power of the ruling party in a democracy. In February, his government oversaw the official start of construction on Paks II, a major new nuclear project Hungary hired the Russian state-owned Rosatom to build. Now Orbán’s 16-year tenure is coming to an end after rival conservative Péter Magyar won Sunday’s election in a landslide. During the heated campaign, which saw Vice President JD Vance visit Hungary to campaign on Orbán’s behalf in the closing days, Magyar depicted the incumbent right-wing ruler as a corrupt authoritarian selling out the country to its former Soviet imperial rulers in Moscow and vowed to rebuild Budapest’s ties with the European Union and NATO. That could spell trouble for Paks II. The project has stood out as the Kremlin’s last new commercial foothold in the West’s nuclear industry. At the start of the Ukraine war in 2022, Finland canceled a domestic joint venture with Rosatom. The U.S. nuclear giant Westinghouse, meanwhile, has cut deal after deal to supply Russian-made VVER reactors in Slovakia and Bulgaria with America-made fuel assemblies. Last summer, the Orbán administration said it had, as a result of its chummy relationship with the Trump administration, persuaded Washington to exempt Paks II from U.S. sanctions. The project’s fate under a Magyar government is uncertain, though at least one expert I spoke to on Sunday afternoon suggested the new prime minister may seek to renegotiate the deal with Rosatom to provide for more EU oversight or better terms. Canceling Paks II, which would significantly bolster the grid in a country already reliant on nuclear power for nearly half its electricity, seems unlikely at this point.
Meanwhile, Russia is getting some new competition from a European rival. Until recently, Rosatom was the only foreign company willing to invest in nuclear reactors in India, where a civil liability law passed in 2010 threatened to bankrupt developers if any accident occurred. In December, as I reported to you at the time, India passed legislation reforming the statute in a bid to attract more overseas investments into its growing atomic power sector. It’s working. The U.S. nuclear heavyweight Holtec International, which is attempting to build its 300-megawatt small modular reactors in Michigan, has expressed interest. Now the French nuclear giant EDF is exploring potential projects in the world’s most populous nation, World Nuclear News reported last week. In another bullish sign, regulators in South Korea, the democratic world’s most competent reactor builder, just approved the country’s latest plant to start up.
Argentina’s right-wing President Javier Milei notched a major legislative win last week after lawmakers in the lower house of the country’s legislature approved an overhaul of a landmark glacier protection law in a 137-to-11 vote. The victory opens “the door to mining near some of South America’s most important freshwater reserves,” the Financial Times reported, by giving provincial authorities greater discretion to determine which glacial areas warrant protection. The bill already passed in the Argentinian Senate, meaning Milei only needs to sign the legislation. He’s expected to do so. Milei pitched the bill as a way to free up areas “incorrectly classified as glaciers” to mineral extraction as his government seeks to tap Argentina’s rich lithium resources. But critics aren’t so sure. “This will not give investors the legal certainty they are looking for,” Andrés Nápoli, executive director of the Environment and Natural Resources Foundation, told the newspaper.
Milei signed a critical minerals pact with the U.S. in February as the Trump administration looks to secure non-Chinese supplies of key metals.
Sign up to receive Heatmap AM in your inbox every morning:
Maybe the attacker was angry about data centers. Maybe the assailant took issue with OpenAI itself, or the way Sam Altman — a lightning rod figure in the American tech industry and the subject of a recent investigation in The New Yorker that raised questions about a uniquely powerful executive’s judgment — operates. Maybe the man who threw a Molotov cocktail at Altman’s San Francisco home on Friday was just compelled by illness or altered brain chemistry to act out violently against a public figure who’s been unmissable in the media. But the fact that the incident occurred less than a week after a gunman fired bullets into the home of an Indianapolis city councilmember who spoke out in support of a data center project does appear to be part of a worrying trend of violence. As Heatmap’s Jael Holzman wrote last week, the Indianapolis shooting, in which (thankfully) the lawmaker and his young son were not hurt, was the third such incident this year, “indicating the bubbling angst against data centers really does have potential to turn violent.”
In a post on his personal blog, Altman shared a photo of his husband, Oliver Mulherin, and their 1-year-old son and said he had “underestimated the power of words and narratives” amid what he admitted was an “extremely intense, chaotic, and high-pressure few years in the artificial intelligence industry. “A lot of the criticism of our industry comes from sincere concern about the incredibly high stakes of this technology. This is quite valid, and we welcome good-faith criticism and debate,” Altman wrote. “I empathize with anti-technology sentiments and clearly technology isn’t always good for everyone. But overall, I believe technological progress can make the future unbelievably good, for your family and mine.”
Battery recycling startup Ascend Elements will file for bankruptcy this Thursday, according to Bloomberg. The Massachusetts-based company raised more than $1.1 billion in equity and grants over the past 11 years as it sought to build out production from its factory reprocessing old batteries into cathode material in Georgia. But “the financial difficulties were insurmountable,” the company said.
Last summer, I told you about an abandoned green hydrogen project in Australia amid a spate of cancellations worldwide. But now a new 1.5-gigawatt project, the Murchison Green Hydrogen facility in Western Australia, has been selected for a fast-track approval under the national government’s new pilot program to speed up permitting, according to Hydrogen Insight. The program is reserved for projects of “national significance.”
The tech giant had been by far the nascent industry’s biggest customer.
Microsoft has begun telling suppliers and partners that it is pausing future purchases of carbon removal, according to two people who have been informed of its plans.
The news deals a potentially major setback to the fledgling carbon removal industry, which has relied on Microsoft’s voluntary corporate buying as an anchor source of early demand. The technology giant has made the overwhelming majority of carbon removal purchases in recent years.
It’s not yet clear whether the company could still increase its investment in existing projects or when it might resume purchases in the future.
In a statement, a Microsoft spokesperson denied that the company was indefinitely pausing all of its purchases. “We continually review and assess our carbon removal portfolio along with market conditions for the optimal balance on our path to carbon negative,” she said.
Industry data suggests that Microsoft has done more than any other private company — and arguably any organization on Earth — to support early-stage technologies that could withdraw or eliminate carbon dioxide from the atmosphere.
It has purchased 45 million tons of carbon removal, according to its own releases. The next-largest buyer of carbon removal credits — Frontier, a coalition of large companies led by the payments processing firm Stripe — has bought 1.8 million tons of carbon removal.
Microsoft made 90% of all carbon removal purchases worldwide last year, according to data from the third-party industry monitor CDR.fyi. The company is generally cited as making somewhere between 79% to 90% of all historic carbon removal purchases.
Microsoft also published guidelines about what it considered “ideal” carbon removal projects, setting de facto early industry standards for technologies including direct air capture, soil carbon management, and enhanced rock weathering.
The tech company has backed carbon removal in large part to meet its aggressive internal climate goals. Microsoft has pledged to become “carbon negative” by 2030, meaning that it must remove more greenhouse gases from the atmosphere than it emits within four years. The company also aims to eliminate its half century of historic carbon emissions by 2050.
Like other major tech firms, including Google and Meta, Microsoft has struggled to square its years-old climate goals with the urgent need to power energy-hungry AI data centers. But it has generally been seen as more environmentally friendly than other tech firms.
When Heatmap polled climate insiders late last year, Microsoft and Google were seen as the two AI tech developers who were “best” on climate. (Meta and Amazon got failing marks.)
Microsoft was making carbon removal announcements as recently as this week. It announced its most recent purchase of CDR credits only three days ago, when it bought more than 620,000 tons of credits from an indigenous-owned bioenergy carbon capture and storage project in Saskatchewan, Canada.
The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change considers carbon removal — technologies and methods that can reduce the amount of heat-trapping pollution in the atmosphere on century-long time scales — to be essential to meet the Paris Agreement’s climate goals.
By 2050, the world will need to remove 7 to 9 billion tons of carbon dioxide each year in order to hold to its Paris targets, according to an independent 2024 report.
Microsoft’s apparent pause comes at a lean time for the carbon removal industry, because the Trump administration has declined to spend — and in some cases even reassigned — funds previously authorized to encourage the development of the technology. For instance, the Energy Department says it plans to use more than $500 million in carbon removal funding to prop up aging coal plants.
Congress has been more generous to carbon removal, which has historically drawn more bipartisan support than other clean energy technologies. The 2026 federal spending law included more than $116 million to support carbon removal research and set up a federal purchasing program. With Microsoft’s shift, that purchasing scheme will be more important than ever.
On ARPA-E’s record commitment, and more of the week’s fundraising news
I don’t have any AI deals to bring you this week, but luckily I can still count on fusion to generate a steady stream of announcements. This time, the funding is coming from the federal government. At its annual innovation summit, ARPA-E announced it’s committing $135 million to address key barriers to fusion commercialization — a single allocation that exceeds the total amount that the agency has previously devoted to the tech after a decade of continuous funding.
There’s also, somewhat surprisingly, still venture enthusiasm for sustainable aviation fuels. And just like last week, membrane-based industrial separations tech also secured fresh capital. Could this be one of the hottest boring industries around? On the non-venture side, the industrial waste upcycling company Sedron secured a $500 million equity investment from the decarbonization-focused firm Ara Partners.
ARPA-E Makes Record Funding Commitment to Fusion Energy
The Department of Energy’s Advanced Research Projects Agency–Energy, better known as ARPA-E, has propelled research and development efforts across a broad set of potentially transformational energy technologies, from thermal energy storage to advanced geothermal systems and — of course — fusion. According to the Fusion Industry Association, the agency has backed 69 fusion projects across 34 universities, 14 national labs, and 27 companies. Seven fusion startups have emerged directly from ARPA-E programs, including Zap Energy and Thea Energy. But ARPA-E thinks there’s still so much more it can do.
This week, ARPA-E announced an additional $135 million in funding for fusion. This exceeds the agency’s total prior cumulative commitment to the technology — which stands at roughly $134 million and has helped catalyze an additional $1.5 billion in private follow-on investment. This latest capital will target what ARPA-E describes as “the toughest technical barriers” to commercialization, including the development of low-cost plasma heating systems, advanced fuels, next-generation power conversion systems, and novel plant and component designs aimed at improving durability while lowering overall costs.
“The question is no longer whether fusion is possible. The question is how fast we get fusion-generated power on the grid, and whether America leads that achievement,” said ARPA-E director Conner Prochaska at the agency’s annual Energy Innovation Summit this week. Today, there are over 50 fusion companies globally, collectively backed by about $10 billion in private investment. The agency framed this latest announcement in terms of strengthening U.S. “energy dominance” while guaranteeing an “affordable, reliable, secure energy supply.” Perhaps it slipped their minds, but it bears mention that fusion would also be a zero-carbon energy source.
Sora Fuel Gets $14.6 Million Boost Amidst a Struggling SAF Market
At the beginning of last year, I wrote about the money pouring into the search for sustainable aviation fuels that could help decarbonize medium- to long-distance flights. Even then, however, investment levels remained well below what experts say is needed to meet the aviation sector's 2050 net-zero target — and the situation hasn’t improved. The Trump administration’s infamous One Big Beautiful Bill reduced the SAF tax credit from up to $1.75 per gallon to $1.00 per gallon, dampening enthusiasm in the sector.
And yet there are still glimmers of momentum in the early-stage venture landscape, highlighted this week by Sora Fuel’s $14.6 million fundraise. The startup is basically trying to turn air into fuel. It’s developing a system that captures CO2 and then converts it directly into a syngas, which can then be upgraded into synthetic hydrocarbon fuels suitable as drop-in replacements for conventional jet fuel.
Unlike most DAC systems, Sora’s process doesn’t rely on energy-intensive sorbent regeneration — thermally or chemically cleaning the sorbents for reuse — which the company says allows it to avoid over 90% of conventional DAC costs. The startup claims it will be able to deliver captured CO2 at under $50 per ton — though that’s actually a substantial increase from the $20 per ton target that it cited in 2024. But if either number proves achievable at scale, that would be huge, not just for the sustainable fuels sector but the broader carbon capture market.
Sora will use the new capital to build a pilot facility, which it expects to have up and running within 18 to 24 months. "We've gone further, faster, and with less capital than anyone in the e-fuels space," said Gareth Ross, Sora’s co-founder and CEO.
MTR Secures $27 Million to Accelerate Membrane-Based Carbon Capture
Fresh on the heels of last week’s membrane funding news, which saw Via Separations raise a $36 million round, this week brought another tranche of capital into the decidedly unglamorous but essential world of industrial separations — that is, the process used to isolate specific chemicals or materials from a mixture. Membrane Technology and Research, better known as MTR, announced a $27 million Series B round led by the oil and gas-backed venture firm Climate Investment.
The startup develops membrane materials and systems for gas and liquid separations, and maintains a business division specifically devoted to carbon capture. With support from the Department of Energy, MTR is piloting its tech at a coal plant in Wyoming that it describes as the world’s largest membrane-based carbon capture system.
As I noted a few weeks ago, Climate Investment itself is flush with $450 million in new financing, having recently closed a growth fund aimed at helping decarbonization technologies bridge the “missing middle” in climate tech funding — the notorious gap between a company’s early-stage rounds and commercial deployment. The MTR investment comes out of this new fund.
Ara Partners Acquires Waste Upcycler Sedron, Invests $500 Million To Scale Its Tech
This week, the decarbonization-focused equity investor Ara Partners acquired a controlling stake in the industrial-scale waste processing and upcycling company Sedron. The new influx of capital will go towards scaling the company’s tech, which processes biosolids such as municipal sewage sludge and livestock manure into usable outputs such as clean water, fertilizer products, and supposedly renewable energy — though the company has not explained how the latter process works.
Sedron’s system combines multiple capital-intensive waste treatment steps — typically handled across separate units — into a single continuous processing platform. Sedron says this integration allows it to use 10 times less energy than conventional treatment approaches — although its own website used to claim a 30x reduction.
This new funding will go towards accelerating the company’s project development pipeline and expanding deployment across North America. Sedron is currently preparing to begin construction on a biosolids processing facility in Florida this spring, while also aiming to begin commercial operations at a large dairy manure project in Wisconsin this summer.