Sign In or Create an Account.

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

Podcast

The Least-Noticed Climate Scandal of the Trump Administration

Rob and Jesse catch up on the Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund with former White House official Kristina Costa.

Lee Zeldin.
Heatmap Illustration/Getty Images

The Inflation Reduction Act dedicated $27 billion to build a new kind of climate institution in America — a network of national green banks that could lend money to companies, states, schools, churches, and housing developers to build more clean energy and deploy more next-generation energy technology around the country.

It was an innovative and untested program. And the Trump administration is desperately trying to block it. Since February, Trump’s criminal justice appointees — led by Ed Martin, the interim U.S. attorney for the District of Columbia — have tried to use criminal law to undo the program. After failing to get the FBI and Justice Department to block the flow of funds, Trump officials have successfully gotten the program’s bank partner to freeze relevant money. The new green banks have sued to gain access to the money.

On this week’s episode of Shift Key, Rob and Jesse talk with Kristina Costa, who has been tracking the effort to bankrupt the green banks. Costa helped lead the Inflation Reduction Act’s implementation in the White House from 2022 to 2025 — and is a previous Shift Key guest. She joins us to discuss how Trump is weaponing criminal law to block a climate program, whether there’s any precedent for his actions, and what could come next in the legal battle. Shift Key is hosted by Robinson Meyer, the founding executive editor of Heatmap, and Jesse Jenkins, a professor of energy systems engineering at Princeton University.

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: There's kind of two lines you hear from the Trump administration about this, two claims made by the Trump administration about the reason for these seizures, and I just wanna talk about them briefly because this is an unprecedented action. We should look at why the government has claimed that it needs to take this unprecedented action.

The first has to do with this video made by Project Veritas, a kind of conservative media organization …

Kristina Costa: A hit squad.

Meyer: A hit squad that recorded, unwittingly, an EPA official who described the EPA’s actions during December 2024, between the loss of the election and the inauguration, as “throwing gold bars off the Titanic.” That the agency was so eager and desperate to spend as much of the IRA down as it could before the Trump administration took office that it was like they were throwing gold bars off the Titanic — you know, a sinking ship.

The EPA administrator has fixated on this line and described it as waste and self-dealing, suggesting reckless financial mismanagement, blatant conflicts of interest, astonishing sums of tax dollars awarded to unqualified recipients and severe deficiencies of regulatory oversight.

You were involved in setting up the IRA. I wonder, first of all, just how do you reflect on this episode? And second of all, was the Biden administration doing the proverbial version of throwing gold bars off the Titanic during the post-election period?

Costa: Yeah, so I mean, it falls apart as any sort of quote-unquote evidence in what's happening with the Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund if you just believe in the linear nature of time. So, as I said, we announced EPA made the selections in April of 2024. The funds were fully obligated in August of 2024. Grantees were starting to make announcements about investments in October of 2024 — all dates which precede election day by weeks to months. And so it is just a complete fabrication on the part of Lee Zeldin that there was any sort of inappropriate action on the part of the Biden EPA or any of the other agencies in doing what Congress directed us to do, which was to award and obligate funds to recipients consistent with the provisions of the Inflation Reduction Act that authorized and appropriated funds for the programs.

We had also — and I think I might have said this when I was with you guys in December — one of the first things that we did, from the White House implementation team, was to meet with all of our grant agencies and, in September and October of 2022, set targets for them for how much funding we wanted them to try to award and obligate by the end of the administration. And we set a goal, basically, that we would be aiming to have at least 80% of the available funds obligated by the end of 2024. And we hit that. And so the idea that there was some massive acceleration post-election — like, were there some contracts that the agencies obligated in December and January that, in the event of a Kamala Harris administration, they would've maybe obligated in February and March instead? Sure. I'm not going to say otherwise, but those grants had been made already. There wasn't this rush of actual decision-making.

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
Energy

Is U.S. Clean Energy Manufacturing Booming or Busting?

Two new reports out this week create a seemingly contradictory portrait of the country’s energy transition progress.

Solar manufacturing.
Heatmap Illustration/Getty Images

Two clean energy reports out this week offer seemingly contradictory snapshots of domestic solar and battery manufacturing. One, released Wednesday by the Rhodium Group’s Clean Investment Monitor, shows a distinct decline in investment going into U.S. factories to make more of these technologies. The other, released today by the trade group American Clean Power Association, shows staggering recent growth in production capacity.

So which is it? Is U.S. clean energy manufacturing booming or busting?

Keep reading...Show less
Green
Q&A

How to Build a Socially Responsible Data Center

Chatting with DER Task Force’s Duncan Campbell.

The Fight Q&A subject.
Heatmap Illustration/Getty Images

This week’s conversation is with Duncan Campbell of DER Task Force and it’s about a big question: What makes a socially responsible data center? Campbell’s expansive background and recent focus on this issue made me take note when he recently asked that question on X. Instead of popping up in his replies, I asked him to join me here in The Fight. So shall we get started?

Oh, as always, the following conversation was lightly edited for clarity.

Keep reading...Show less
Yellow
Hotspots

The Indiana City Saying ‘Tech Yeah!’ to Data Centers

Plus the week’s biggest development fights.

The United States.
Heatmap Illustration/Getty Images

1. LaPorte County, Indiana — If you’re wondering where data centers are still being embraced in the U.S., look no further than the northwest Indiana city of LaPorte.

  • LaPorte’s city council this week unanimously approved the expansion of a data center campus already under construction. Local elected officials were positively giddy at the public hearing on the vote, with city mayor Tim Doherty donning an orange t-shirt exclaiming a pro-AI pun: “TECH YEAH!”
  • Doherty explained his enthusiasm at the hearing in simple dollars and cents. State cuts to education had “put our local schools in an impossible position,” he said, asking: “Will the 15% in revenue sharing give our kids a superior education and the best chance at a future in this tech-driven world?”
  • That revenue sharing Doherty referenced was Microsoft’s deal in March with LaPorte’s school corporation, which stated 15% of the data center’s property tax revenue would go to the corporation for 20 years. So good was that deal some city councilors were vocally defiant against those who were opposed to the project expansion.
  • “Microsoft seems like they’re going to be a good partner for the city. They care. They’re presenting what I think is a good deal and trying to take care of people around them. So I’m all for it and if anybody wants to vote me out, hey, go for it,” councilor Roger Galloway told the hearing room.
  • The lesson? Give lots of money to education and you’re more likely to get a permit. Tale as old as the mining industry.

2. Cumberland County, New Jersey — A broader splashback against AI infrastructure is building in South Jersey.

Keep reading...Show less
Yellow