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:
If he loses — which, at this stage, seems likely — this will all have been for nought.
Let’s start here: Joe Biden is losing the presidential election. He is now roughly 2 points behind Donald Trump in national polls, according to the FiveThirtyEight average. Though that may sound small, no Democrat has been further behind in the polls, at this point in the election, since Al Gore in 2000.
Some of this collapse is due to fatigue with Democrats in general, part of a global wave of anti-incumbent fervor. But at least some is specific to Biden. In some swing state polls, a large gap has opened up between Biden and the Democratic Senate candidate. Senator Tammy Baldwin, for instance, is running 12 points ahead of Biden in Wisconsin, according to an AARP poll released on Tuesday. Wisconsin is one of three key states that the president must win to clinch re-election.
This is, obviously, a significant problem for Democrats. Senator Michael Bennett, a Democrat of Colorado, believes the party is on track to lose control of the House and Senate in addition to the presidency.
But it is a particular issue for those who believe the American economy should decarbonize. Biden alone among candidates in the presidential election has an impressive climate record: He fought for the passage of — and subsequently signed — the Inflation Reduction Act, the largest climate law in American history. For 30 years, Democrats had tried and failed to pass comprehensive climate legislation through the U.S. Senate; it finally happened under Biden’s watch.
The Biden administration has also used its considerable presidential powers to lower carbon emissions: The Environmental Protection Agency has proposed rules that would significantly cut heat-trapping pollution from power plants, cars and trucks, and the oil and gas sector, and the Department of Energy and the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration have each set out their own emissions-reducing rules.
The Bipartisan Infrastructure Law is also helping to establish new, multi-billion-dollar “hubs” that aim to commercialize clean hydrogen production and carbon removal technologies. The president even stepped in to block new natural gas export terminals — a move that I have more complicated feelings about, but that, in any case, a federal judge has now blocked.
I don’t need to go over the litany of Trump’s environmental misdeeds, but suffice it to say that during his time in office, Donald Trump demonstrated a distinct glee in tearing up climate regulations and blocking decarbonization. He withdrew America from the Paris Agreement, rolled back the EPA’s climate rules, and deemed climate change a “hoax.” In his second term, he again seeks to overturn the EPA’s new climate proposals, including requirements that automakers sell more electric vehicles. The Heritage Foundation’s more complete plans for a second Trump administration — dubbed Project 2025 — calls for closing dozens of government offices concerned with climate change, ending energy efficiency standards, repealing the IRA’s tax credits, and breaking up the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration.
Suffice it to say: Biden is the only serious candidate in the race who wants to do something about climate change. He is the climate candidate, and he has a climate record to run on. But Biden has miserably failed to communicate any of these policy successes to the masses. Nearly 60% of voters said they knew little or nothing about the Inflation Reduction Act, according to the Heatmap Climate Poll, conducted late last year. (A Yale and George Mason University survey found roughly similar results.)
You might think that reveals a canny strategy on the White House’s part: Perhaps it knows the IRA is divisive, and so it is only bragging about the law to the right audience. But polling shows Biden’s policies are consistently failing to reach the very Americans who should have heard about them — the subset of Americans who are worried about climate change and want to see something done about it. Of Americans who believe climate change is a “very important” issue, only 10% have heard or read a lot about Biden’s climate policies, according to an April CBS News/YouGov poll. And nearly half of Americans who rate climate change highly said that they have heard nothing or “very little” about Biden’s efforts, according to the same survey.
That is not the only poll to reach that conclusion. Another recent survey, conducted by the Associated Press and the NORC Center for Public Research, found that nearly half of Americans were more concerned about climate change this year than they were last year — but that barely any of that cohort had heard about the IRA, and few thought the legislation would affect their lives or mitigate climate change. Nearly half of the poll’s respondents either didn’t know whether the IRA would help climate change or thought it would make it worse. The IRA — and Biden’s climate agenda more broadly — is failing to break through.
Now, I don’t labor under the impression that climate change is a particularly potent or popular electoral issue. I’ve come to think that climate, if not actively deleterious to Democrats, is at least an electoral sideshow to the more enduring issues at the center of American politics: the economy, interest rates, taxes, health care, and national security. (Of course, climate change could vastly reshape the American economy and the public’s health, but other, more immediate concerns — such as employment, inflation, or abortion access — understandably remain more front-of-mind for voters.)
But as a climate journalist, I’ve still found the past two years perplexing. Why do so few people seem to understand the IRA’s goals? Why has the Biden administration struggled so much to communicate the IRA’s most popular aspect — namely, that it will reduce electricity costs (if not inflation itself) for voters? Consider the bare political record here: The Biden administration passed a law called the Inflation Reduction Act, and inflation subsequently came down. A more competent administration would be all over that simplistic, but still potent, victory. So why don’t more people seem to know about what Biden is doing? How is the federal government doing so much on climate change and nobody — not even climate-concerned Democrats — seem to care?
These questions have an easy answer: The candidate is not capable of communicating these victories, so they are not breaking through. Biden, in his diminished state, is not a skilled, crisp, or even very decipherable communicator. As Ezra Klein has observed, Biden is not generating the kind of memorable moments or sterling speeches that Democrats can share among themselves. He is barely speaking in complete sentences. In today’s fragmented media landscape, where first-person accounts and viral videos can go much further than news stories or wonky analysis, the candidate must be the chief champion of his or her victories. Judging from Biden’s disastrous performance at the first presidential debate — and his relative lack of lengthy, unscripted public appearances since then, and the account of those who have interacted with him — he seemingly cannot meet that standard.
Biden’s tremendous climate legacy rests on whether he can sell his accomplishments to the public and win the 2024 election. And that ability is faltering, to say the least.
Log in
To continue reading, log in to your account.
Create a Free Account
To unlock more free articles, please create a free account.
It all happened today at Heatmap House, part of New York Climate Week.
If you’ll allow us to toot our own horn for a moment, Heatmap House — our first-ever daylong series of panels with the most influential voices in climate, clean energy, and sustainability, part of New York Climate Week — had everything. Senator Chuck Schumer kicked things off with an emphatic call to action for climate advocates at the top of the day. Then a series of industry leaders in clean energy manufacturing gave us a forecast for the future of American decarbonization, followed by investors and technologists including Tom Steyer and Dawn Lippert telling us how exactly we might find the funding for that future.
Here’s a quick recap, in case you weren’t able to make it out to New York City for the event. Our first session of the day, “The Big (Green) Apple,” centered on New York’s efforts to future-proof the state. Schumer began the day with what my colleague Katie Brigham described as a “rousing condemnation of the Trump administration’s climate policies and a call to action for climate advocates everywhere.”
“New York remains the climate leader, but Donald Trump is doing everything in his power to kill solar, wind, batteries, EVs and all climate friendly technologies while propping up fossil fuels, Big Oil, and polluting technologies that hurt our communities and our growth,” Schumer said.
Among the various sessions that followed, Heatmap’s Emily Pontecorvo spoke with Uchenna Bright, a commissioner on the New York State Public Service Commission, about New York’s evolving energy system and how to keep it affordable for New Yorkers. Later, Emily spoke with Elijah Hutchinson of the NYC Mayor’s Office of Climate and Environmental Justice about the city’s specific climate goals, and how those are inextricably tied with advancing equality for all the city’s residents.
Other speakers from the morning session included Andrew Bowman, CEO of Jupiter Power, and Jon Powers, co-founder of CleanCapital, who spoke with Heatmap’s Matthew Zeitlin about the nuts and bolts of power generation. Meanwhile Ben Furnas, executive director at Transportation Alternatives, emphasized the importance of clean, efficient ways of getting around the city in conversation with executive editor Robinson Meyer.
Our midday session, “Built to Scale,” was a lesson in pragmatism. Senator Brian Schatz of Hawaii, along with other clean energy voices including Ricardo Falu, chief operating officer at AES, argued that the global fight to decarbonize is going on with or without the United States. “It is best for people to operate under the assumption that the United States, at least for the next three years, will be a destructive force on collective climate action,” Schatz said to Rob.
Falu, whose company has succeeded in getting clean energy projects off the ground abroad, concurred. “In Chile, we pay 12 cents for a solar panel. Here in the U.S., it’s 36 to 37 [cents]. Why is that?” he said in conversation with Emily. “In many other countries, you don’t need incentives for renewables. They are competitive.”
But many of the panelists remained cautiously optimistic about the future of decarbonization in the U.S. These included Jake Oster of Amazon, who told Katie that energy efficiency is at the forefront of Amazon’s data center growth efforts. Carla Peterman, chief sustainability officer of PG&E, told my colleague Matthew Zeitlin that she was confident data center demand will eventually bring down electricity rates for consumers. Other speakers highlighted the need for clarity from lawmakers in order for clean energy projects to advance, including Julien Dumoulin-Smith of Jefferies, who talked to Matthew about the clean energy financing equation.
Our final session of the night, “Up Next in Climate Tech,” focused on the future of climate tech investment. Climate investor and philanthropist Tom Steyer sat down with Rob to discuss what needs to happen for climate innovation to finally achieve deployment. Steyer is confident that a “huge, powerful wave” is still driving renewable energy.
“For the people who never look at the numbers, for the people who don’t pay attention to actual investment decisions, costs, profit margins, you can say whatever you want. But I’ll tell you this: The rig count is down 10% to 20% in 2025 in America,” Steyer said.
Dawn Lippert, CEO of Elemental Impact, then talked with Rob about the biggest potential challenge facing renewables deployment, even in the face of such unstoppability — that is, “bankability,” otherwise known as the “missing middle” in climate tech investment.
“It takes quite a lot of capital, and there’s no one to hand it out on the financial infrastructure side. They’re not ready for infrastructure investors. They’re definitely not ready for banks,” Lippert said.
Rounding out our last session were Christian Anderson, co-founder of the carbon accounting platform Watershed, and Rick Needham, chief commercial officer of Commonwealth Fusion, who discussed what makes a climate tech unicorn with Katie. Sublime Systems CEO Leah Ellis, whose company makes low-carbon cement, and Microsoft’s Katie Ross, talked with Emily about how their companies are partnering up to produce low-carbon cement.
The bottom line? Circumstances for clean energy deployment may be particularly tough at the moment, but there are thousands of creative people finding innovative ways to reach our decarbonized future.
The current policy environment “doesn’t mean that collective climate action can’t continue,” said Schatz. “It doesn’t mean that American companies, American governors, American nonprofits, American journalists, can’t be part of this whole movement to solve this generational challenge.”
At Heatmap House’s third session of the day, “Up Next in Climate Tech,” investors Tom Steyer and Dawn Lippert chart a path forward for the clean energy economy.
Tom Steyer is still riding the wave.
The climate investor and philanthropist told the audience at Heatmap House’s third session of the day, “Up Next in Climate Tech,” that he started his investment firm Galvanize in 2021 because “there’s a huge, powerful wave behind us.” And now, after the One Big Beautiful Bill Act and the Trump administration’s regulatory assault on renewables? “Does any of that change? No, it’s better,” Steyer said.
Steyer was skeptical that the oil and gas industry could ultimately compete with clear energy, even with the current administration’s support.
“For the people who never look at the numbers, for the people who don’t pay attention to actual investment decisions, costs, profit margins, you can say whatever you want. But I’ll tell you this: The rig count is down 10% to 20% in 2025 in America. That’s a statement about future profitability” of the oil industry Steyer said, pointing to declining domestic drilling.
For Steyer, the math is simple. A huge portion of demand for oil comes from the transportation sector, and the movement towards electric vehicles is “unstoppable.”
“We’re talking about a commodity with a worldwide price where we’re the biggest producers of oil in the world,” Steyer said. He noted that the U.S. is also the “high-cost producer” compared to countries like Saudi Arabia, which can produce oil more cheaply than in the U.S. shale patch.
So if there’s such a huge market opportunity for clean energy businesses, can they get funded? That’s the challenge fellow investor Dawn Lippert is trying to solve. Lippert is the founder and chief executive of Elemental, a non-profit climate investment firm. The trick she’s trying to perfect is to attract investors beyond the specialized, earlier stage investor group that typically seeds decarbonization, who can fund actual, steel-in-the-ground projects.
“We are trying to finance the energy transition with venture capital,” referring to the broader financing community. “It’s a total mistake.”
Venture capital has catalyzed “a huge wave of technology, invention, and technologies that are really working,” Lippert added. What’s happening now is that those companies are “trying to deploy, they’re trying to build their first plants, trying to build their second plants. It takes quite a lot of capital, and there’s no one to hand it out on the financial infrastructure side. They’re not ready for infrastructure investors. They’re definitely not ready for banks.”
This problem of “bankability,” or the “missing middle,” has bedeviled the climate tech sector for years, as technologically innovative energy projects struggle to get funding from infrastructure investors who want projects that can produce predictable cash flows, not risky venture-stage experiments.
Elemental developed an investment vehicle called a D-SAFE — a.k.a. a Development Simple Agreement for Future Equity — to help solve this problem. The D-SAFE is an investment agreement that can unlock future investment by pointing investment directly at development costs. “A development SAFE says, I’m going to give you dollars, and I’m going to get those dollars back when you hit specific milestones,” Lippert said.
So far, Elemental has done nine D-SAFEs. “We’re trying to create much simpler financial infrastructure so that financial innovation can catch up to where technology innovation is, and we can stop slowing things down,” Lippert said.
The challenge for American climate technology and infrastructure companies will be to compete with state-supported Chinese businesses, Lippert said. “China actually does have a very methodical way of putting a ton of state capital into these companies to get them all the way through. We don’t have that in this country, so we have to be much more creative and make sure that companies where technology is working are not falling into a scale gap just because we can’t get our act together.”
At Heatmap House’s second session, speakers including Senator Brian Schatz of Hawaii looked overseas to spot the clean energy future.
None of the speakers at Heatmap House’s second session at New York Climate Week, “Built to Scale,” minced words when it came to describing the current U.S. policy environment. The global fight to decarbonize is still happening, our guests emphasized — but it might happen without the U.S.
Senator Brian Schatz of Hawaii emphasized in his discussion with Heatmap’s Robinson Meyer that in previous years, he would assure his international colleagues that the U.S. was still fully invested in the climate fight. What about now? “I would say we will be back — but do not wait for us,” Schatz said.
Ricardo Falu, executive vice president and chief operating officer at AES corporation, touched on a similar point while speaking with my colleague Emily Pontecorvo. His company, which invests in clean energy projects in addition to natural gas at home and abroad, has found particular success in Chile, where the regulatory environment has proved especially fruitful for renewables. “In many other countries, you don't need incentives for renewables. They are competitive,” Falu pointed out. “You don’t need the government financing or the government to be involved.”
This isn’t to say that there’s no hope whatsoever for climate progress in the U.S., our speakers made sure to highlight. We might just have to refrain from calling it “climate progress.” Schatz pointed out that the language of affordability will come to define clean energy projects moving forward, echoing what Senator Chuck Schumer said earlier in the day. “Cheap is clean, and clean is cheap,” said Schatz. “We don't have to make a complicated argument.”
This framing from Schatz and Schumer makes perfect sense in the context of the new package of energy proposals from House Democrats announced this morning, fittingly called the Cheap Energy Act. As my colleague Robinson wrote today, “Democrats have reoriented to talking about energy chiefly as an affordability problem.” Schatz summed up the strategy thusly: “We have to just say, ‘See that spike in electricity prices? It’s their fault. Solar is cheap.’”
Data centers and the rapid growth of AI were also top of mind for panelists. The tension between AI growth objectives and renewables didn’t seem to be an issue, however. Rather, our speakers pointed out, data center growth could be an opportunity to invest in a stronger renewables rollout. Jake Oster, director of sustainability at Amazon, told Heatmap’s Katie Brigham that “the first thing we're focused on is energy efficiency in our facilities.”
Carla Peterman, executive vice president at PG&E, was even more unequivocal in her support. “We know that our communities, our society will benefit from having that load and having those data centers,” she remarked. “We don’t want to block bringing them on.”