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’re out of free articles.

Subscribe today to experience Heatmap’s expert analysis 
of climate change, clean energy, and sustainability.
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
Climate

Climate Change Won’t Make Winter Storms Less Deadly

In some ways, fossil fuels make snowstorms like the one currently bearing down on the U.S. even more dangerous.

A snowflake with a tombstone.
Heatmap Illustration/Getty Images

The relationship between fossil fuels and severe weather is often presented as a cause-and-effect: Burning coal, oil, and gas for heat and energy forces carbon molecules into a reaction with oxygen in the air to form carbon dioxide, which in turn traps heat in the atmosphere and gradually warms our planet. That imbalance, in many cases, makes the weather more extreme.

But this relationship also goes the other way: We use fossil fuels to make ourselves more comfortable — and in some cases, keep us alive — during extreme weather events. Our dependence on oil and gas creates a grim ouroboros: As those events get more extreme, we need more fuel.

Keep reading...Show less
Blue
Spotlight

Secrecy Is Backfiring on Data Center Developers

The cloak-and-dagger approach is turning the business into a bogeyman.

A redacted data center.
Heatmap Illustration/Getty Images

It’s time to call it like it is: Many data center developers seem to be moving too fast to build trust in the communities where they’re siting projects.

One of the chief complaints raised by data center opponents across the country is that companies aren’t transparent about their plans, which often becomes the original sin that makes winning debates over energy or water use near-impossible. In too many cases, towns and cities neighboring a proposed data center won’t know who will wind up using the project, either because a tech giant is behind it and keeping plans secret or a real estate firm refuses to disclose to them which company it’ll be sold to.

Keep reading...Show less
Yellow
Hotspots

Missouri Could Be First State to Ban Solar Construction

Plus more of the week’s biggest renewable energy fights.

The United States.
Heatmap Illustration/Getty Images

Cole County, Missouri – The Show Me State may be on the precipice of enacting the first state-wide solar moratorium.

  • GOP legislation backed by Missouri Governor Mike Kehoe would institute a temporary ban on building any utility-scale solar projects in the state until at least the end of 2027, including those currently under construction. It threatens to derail development in a state ranked 12th in the nation for solar capacity growth.
  • The bill is quite broad, appearing to affect all solar projects – as in, going beyond the commercial and utility-scale facility bans we’ve previously covered at the local level. Any project that is under construction on the date of enactment would have to stop until the moratorium is lifted.
  • Under the legislation, the state would then issue rulemakings for specific environmental requirements on “construction, placement, and operation” of solar projects. If the environmental rules aren’t issued by the end of 2027, the ban will be extended indefinitely until such rules are in place.
  • Why might Missouri be the first state to ban solar? Heatmap Pro data indicates a proclivity towards the sort of culture war energy politics that define regions of the country like Missouri that flipped from blue to ruby red in the Trump era. Very few solar projects are being actively opposed in the state but more than 12 counties have some form of restrictive ordinance or ban on renewables or battery storage.

Clark County, Ohio – This county has now voted to oppose Invenergy’s Sloopy Solar facility, passing a resolution of disapproval that usually has at least some influence over state regulator decision-making.

Keep reading...Show less
Yellow