Sign In or Create an Account.

By continuing, you agree to the Terms of Service and acknowledge our Privacy Policy

Podcast

The Early Lessons of Trump’s ‘Energy Dominance’

Rob and Jesse sort through their feelings after Trump's second first month in office.

The White House.
Heatmap Illustration/Getty Images

Congress is still debating the fate of the Inflation Reduction Act, but the Trump administration has already torn up energy and climate policies across the federal government. It’s time to step back and try to take stock. How much damage has the Trump administration already done to decarbonization? What’s most worrying? What was going to happen anyway? And what might still be saved?

On this week’s episode of Shift Key, Rob and Jesse go agency by agency to understand the most important changes and try to understand the deeper agenda — including potential points of incoherence or disagreement. Shift Key is hosted by Jesse Jenkins, a professor of energy systems engineering at Princeton University, and Robinson Meyer, Heatmap’s executive editor.

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 think one thing that is also, when you zoom out, is that this is the kind of broader incoherence of their agenda, right? So the U.S. is scheduled to gain a massive addition of new liquefied natural gas export terminals at the end of the Trump term — in the last two years of the Trump term. The Trump administration is quite keen to further expand that expansion and approve another set of terminals that would come on in the late 2020s and early 2030s.

I want to observe a few things about that. I think one thing is that the Trump administration is, to quote a think tank analyst I was talking to recently, is pattern-matching to the late 2010s experience. The U.S. added LNG export capacity during the first Trump administration and gas prices didn’t go up because natural gas production in the U.S. basically scaled with export capacity.

We are going to significantly increase that again. I think we’re basically going to double LNG capacity toward the end of the Trump term. And they are basically assuming that the U.S. will just continue to scale gas extraction capacity at the same time that, presumably, they’re going to expand the power grid’s reliance on natural gas with their power policies. They’re really setting up an environment to be surprised by a natural gas price spike if their supposition is wrong, that the U.S. can’t just expand gas capacity in line with its export capacity.

Jesse Jenkins: Or even if it can expand it, it seems like the market needs higher prices to support that expansion. So maybe we can add enough supply to supply new LNG terminals, but we’ll do so at a higher domestic price because that’s what’s needed to get this production onto the market. Otherwise, it would already be there.

Meyer: And also, globally, natural gas prices are much higher than they are in the U.S. That’s one reason U.S. electricity prices are so cheap. If we build so much LNG that we hook our domestic natural gas market into global LNG markets, then like …

Jenkins: Prices become more volatile.

Meyer: Prices become more volatile, exactly.

Music for Shift Key is by Adam Kromelow.

🔒

You’ve reached your free article limit

Subscribe to Heatmap News for unlimited access to daily energy and climate coverage.
To continue reading
Create a free account or sign in to unlock more free articles.
or
Please enter an email address
By continuing, you agree to the Terms of Service and acknowledge our Privacy Policy
A data center.
Heatmap Illustration/Getty Images

This is Heatmap Daily, a weekday digest written by our executive editor. Subscribe here.

My colleague Emily Pontecorvo has a fascinating story today about Net Power, an energy and power development company whose technology once seemed key to decarbonizing the country’s electricity grid.

Keep reading...Show less
Energy

Net Power Surrendered Its Clean Dreams to Data Center Demand

The zero-emission pioneer is doing the dirty work for the AI boom.

A gas plant and a data center.
Heatmap Illustration/Getty Images

All kinds of companies have refashioned themselves to exploit the AI boom. A bitcoin miner became a data center developer, a shoemaker is building GPUs, and an electric vehicle company is integrating its powertrains into server racks.

Now, a company that once aspired to build one of the lowest-emitting power plants has pivoted to building one of the dirtiest in order to meet data centers’ requirement for speed to power above all. Net Power was founded to pioneer a new form of natural gas power plant with zero emissions, but it has given up on that technology and recently acquired 10 natural gas reciprocating engines that it plans to co-locate with a data center on the site intended for its first commercial plant.

Keep reading...Show less
Yellow
Politics

The Surprisingly Exciting Race to Be California’s Next Insurance Commissioner

Ben Allen wants to reform the existing market. Jane Kim wants a revolution.

California Insurance Commissioner candidates.
Heatmap Illustration/Getty Images, Ben Allen, Jane Kim

From Crescent City to Coronado, California voters are facing decisions on a down-ballot strewn with over a dozen propositions and a series of statewide Democrat-versus-Republican races with mostly foregone conclusions.

And then there’s the insurance commissioner.

In the race to oversee California’s insurance market, a $452 billion-in-premium-volume monster imperiled by insurer defections and disaster risks, Democratic State Senator Ben Allen, whose district includes Pacific Palisades, is facing off against Jane Kim, a progressive former San Francisco supervisor.

Kim has the support of Vermont Senator Bernie Sanders — it’s the first thing you see about her when you Google her campaign. She previously served as his California political director during the 2020 presidential race, and she appeared earlier this month at an event with the senator in support of the state’s proposed billionaire wealth tax.

Allen, by contrast, won the endorsement of the state’s Democratic Party and its two incumbent senators.

There has been little public polling of the race, but one September survey showed Kim leading Allen 25% to 18%, with more than half the electorate undecided.

“My opponent and I are not even running for the same office,” Kim told me. “He’s running for what this office used to be, and I’m running for what this office could be.”

Allen wasn’t worried about Kim’s characterization in my interview with him, telling me, “I want to fix the market that we have and make it work. My opponent wants to build a new state insurer that nobody has priced.”

Keep reading...Show less