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:
Oh, he’d never self-identify as an environmentalist. But not even climate activists have had the courage to propose a 10% tax on energy.

Dear Donald Trump,
I will be honest with you. I doubted at first. I didn’t understand the plan. But now that I see what you are doing, I have to say: I underestimated you. I was not really familiar with your game.
Yes, I finally see it all now. Even though you have attacked environmentalists for years, even though you have called climate change a “hoax” and a “scam,” and even though you have given climate deniers access to the highest echelons of your administration, I finally appreciate your peculiar genius.
You say that your big and beautiful tariffs are meant to bring about a new American golden age, but I know you’re hiding the truth. With your unprecedented tariffs on Canadian and Mexican imports — and your levies on building materials of all sorts — you are doing what nobody else has had the courage to do.
You are trying to engineer the shock decarbonization of America — no matter the peril, no matter the cost.
Yes, it might seem crazy. But think about it. For years, whenever environmentalists have gathered in secret — and I’m talking the real radicals here, not the ones who send out mailers or go on TV — they plot about a vast agenda to remake America. They hate the fossil fuel industry, of course. But they go further than that. They loathe driving, so they want to destroy the auto industry. They hate big trucks, especially SUVs and pickups. They want to make gasoline more expensive. And really, if we’re being honest, they want to force everyone to live in cities.
I don’t go for such a radical agenda, myself. I’m much more of a moderate. But I have to admit: I know a secret radical environmentalist when I see one. And you, Mr. Trump — well, I won’t say it out loud. But as one former Democratic climate official texted me (and this is real), it might be time to start talking about a “GREEN NEW DONALD.”
Just think about it. Transportation is the most carbon-intensive sector of the U.S. economy, and big personal vehicles — SUVs and pickups — are responsible for the largest share of that pollution. Selling those big trucks to Americans is what drives Ford and General Motors’ profits, and those two companies have developed complex supply chains that can cross the U.S., Mexican, and Canadian borders half a dozen times before their vehicles’ final assembly. The biggest trucks — like the Chevy Silverado — have a particularly arcane value chain, spanning Canada, Mexico, Germany, and Japan.
Environmentalists have struggled to figure out how to deal with Americans’ affinity for these big cars. But you, Mr. Trump, you knew just what needed to be done. You slapped giant tariffs on cars and trucks and auto parts, which could spike new car prices by $4,000 to $10,000, according to Anderson Economic Group.
There’s even a good chance that price hike could hit internal combustion cars worse than it hits EVs — in part because the internal-combustion car supply chain has existed for longer and has had more time to ooze across North America. This widespread damage could prompt layoffs at Ford and GM — but you didn’t hesitate for the climate’s sake, comrade! You were ruthless.
But Mr. Trump, you didn’t stop there. As you surely know, roughly a third of America’s greenhouse gas emissions come from natural gas. It is the prize jewel of fossil fuels, and it’s absolutely core to the U.S. energy system — and Mr. Trump, you did not hesitate to tax it directly. Thanks to your new 10% tariff on Canadian energy imports, American consumers can now expect to pay an extra $1.1 billion a year for natural gas, according to the American Gas Association. Those higher costs will be concentrated in western states and New England.
Your tariffs are also going to make electricity prices go up, particularly in some of the swingiest congressional districts around the Great Lakes. Electricity will also get more expensive in Maine, which has a Senate race in 2026. Mr. Trump, this is an act of true political courage. Normally, environmentalists wouldn’t support raising electricity prices, because it might discourage people from buying EVs or electrifying their homes. But since you’re raising electricity and natural gas and oil prices at the same time, you’re practically begging Americans to buy heat pumps, induction stoves, and invest in energy efficiency technologies essential for decarbonization. And to do so even though it might put your own party’s control of the Senate at risk? You are one hell of an environmental zealot.
Even your steel and aluminum tariffs and your new levies on Canadian lumber are inspired by your climate fervor. By raising the cost of new construction, you are discouraging single-family home construction and all but forcing more Americans to live in multi-family buildings, which are more energy efficient and have lower emissions. Mr. Trump, you really think of everything! I never should have doubted. You are going to make us live in the pods! And with your steep agricultural tariffs, you might even make us eat the bugs!
The most impressive thing you’ve done, though, is your sly little attack on the American oil industry.
The American fossil fuel industry imports more than a million barrels of oil from western Canada every day. This sulfurous sludge is important to the U.S. refining industry because it complements the lighter oil that comes roaring out of American fracking wells. By combining America’s lighter oil with Canada’s heavy crude, U.S. refineries can cheaply churn out a range of high-value products, including gasoline, diesel, and jet fuel.
It’s really important that these American refineries have easy access to as much western Canadian oil as they need as its easy availability lets them ramp up and down different types of fuel production depending on what the market requires at the moment. That’s why they have invested tens of billions of dollars in equipment specially designed to process heavy, sulfur-rich Canadian oil.
In the past, Canadian companies have tried to expand these exports. As you remember, more than a decade ago, one Canadian company wanted to build a pipeline known as Keystone XL. But this came with downsides for the climate: Canadian crude is some of the most carbon-intensive oil in the world, and burning it in large quantities could have meant it was “game over for the climate,” according to journalist-turned-activist Bill McKibben.
The goal of fighting the Keystone XL pipeline was to raise the cost of importing Canadian crude oil, hopefully keeping it in the ground, while undercutting U.S. refinery profit margins. Activists won that fight — and they had your help, Mr. Trump. After the Biden administration revoked Keystone XL’s construction permit in 2021, its developer sued the U.S. government in international trade court and lost. Ironically, it may have had a better shot at winning its case under NAFTA than under its Trump-negotiated replacement, the United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement.
But of course, even that didn’t unwind America’s and Canada’s decades of economic integration. The United States still imports hundreds of millions of barrels of Canadian oil a year, and all that oil damages the climate while simultaneously keeping U.S. gasoline prices low.
But Mr. Trump — you are now attacking this too! You astound me. You have bashed those Canadian oil imports with a 10% energy tax. This will prove even more effective at hurting the North American fossil fuel industry and raising American gasoline prices than blocking the Keystock XL pipeline did, because it will knock refineries right in their profit margins. If you play your cards right, you might even raise the cost of diesel and jet fuel too!
Now, Mr. Trump: I realize you can’t come out and say all this. In fact, you claimed last week that you wanted to revive Keystone XL, even though its developer has given up on it.
This struck many people as silly, but I know just what you are doing here. With your words, you are trying to look like a fossil-fuel-friendly Republican to please your base. But with your actions, you are actually raising taxes on the U.S. fossil fuel industry. What other explanation is there? Surely nobody would be so silly as to propose making it cheaper to import Canadian crude oil at the same time that they deliberately make it more expensive. And surely nobody would say they support autoworkers while actually destroying the U.S. auto industry. That would be truly self-defeating — and Mr. Trump, you are a winner!
Some people — well, really, just your Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick — have implied that you might lift these tariffs as soon as tomorrow. I don’t believe them. I know what you’re up to here. You are not going to fold so soon. You are trying to keep talking the talk even as you whack away at cars, oil, and gas. I might even say that you are like a moldy strawberry: “Republican red” on the outside but “deep green” on the inside.
Now, you could go even further. Conservatives have long observed, however sarcastically, that since carbon emissions correlate with GDP in so many countries (although not in the U.S.), the fastest way to fight climate change is to engineer a giant recession. Some might assume this would be going too far for you — it would be going much too far for me. But on Tuesday, the International Chamber of Commerce warned that your tariffs could set off spiraling trade wars, putting the country in “1930s trade-war territory” and triggering a new Great Depression. Just think of how the emissions will fall from that!
Oh, Mr. Trump! You really ARE a Green New Donald. You truly are willing to sacrifice anything for the climate — even if it means kneecapping the American economy, bamboozling the world, and even ending industrial civilization to do it! Oh, Mr. Trump, I am overcome. You astound, captivate, and enthrall me. Now I understand how JD Vance feels.
Log in
To continue reading, log in to your account.
Create a Free Account
To unlock more free articles, please create a free account.
The North Carolina-based clean energy company has been on an expansion tear, even as the Trump administration has axed support for renewables.
The clean energy company Palmetto is buying The Cool Down, a climate and sustainability news site known for its lifestyle focus and how-to guides.
The North Carolina-based Palmetto, which leases solar panels, batteries, heat pumps, and other electrified technology to consumers, has been expanding fast in recent months. The acquisition marks the company’s first foray into the media business.
“By bringing our companies together, we’re pairing trusted consumer education with real, accessible energy solutions. Together we intend to empower households to take control of their energy future and benefit from the transition that’s already underway,” Chris Kemper, the founder and CEO of Palmetto, said in a statement.
Neither side disclosed a purchase price. But Dave Finocchio, the company’s cofounder and CEO, told me that he considered the deal “a successful outcome for us.” Finocchio was a cofounder and CEO of Bleacher Report, the popular sports news site now owned by Warner Bros. Discovery.
The Cool Down launched in 2021 and raised a $5.7 million seed round the following summer led by Upfront Ventures. Bill Simmons, the prominent podcaster and founder of the sports and culture website The Ringer, was an angel investor.
Although many news sites cover sustainability issues (including, full disclosure, this one), The Cool Down aimed to set itself apart by bringing in a larger and more mainstream audience and building an online marketplace with product recommendations where consumers could buy heat pumps, induction stoves, and smaller eco-friendly products like deodorant.
The site has averaged 35 million to 40 million users a month in recent months, Finocchio told me. Over time, the site has found that consumers are particularly interested in “saving money long-term by doing upgrades,” such as by buying rooftop solar panels or a new heating and cooling system, Finocchio said.
Those big appliances drive an outsize share of a household’s energy use — and its carbon footprint, he said. But they can’t be shopped for like a normal consumer product, and they can’t easily be sold through the kind of marketplace that The Cool Down once envisioned.
“It’s great if someone wants to switch from paper towels to Swedish dish cloths — I don’t want to put down anyone’s positive steps,” Finocchio said. But “there are more steps to installing an HVAC or putting a heat pump in your home … than simply buying a product over Amazon that just arrives at your house,” he said.
As a part of Palmetto, The Cool Down hopes to be able to provide consumers with more support to make that kind of switch, Finocchio said. The news site already refers readers to Palmetto’s solar leasing program, describing it as a way consumers can “get solar panels without buying them.”
“We’ve had a partnership in place for over a year, and Chris’s vision for essentially disrupting how homeowners think about energy and residential — and making it more accessible for the average person who is able to make a financial commitment to lease solar or lease HVAC — lined up really well with our mission to help make these bigger clean lifestyle decisions,” Finocchio said.
The Cool Down will maintain its editorial independence after the sale, he added, although Palmetto will have access to its data on sustainability trends.
The Cool Down’s cofounders included Finocchio; Ryan Alberti, a Bleacher Report alum and U.S. Army veteran; and Anna Robertson, a former executive at ABC and Yahoo News.
The acquisition adds to a team that has expanded aggressively despite a chilling policy environment created by the Trump administration. Social Capital — a venture capital firm led by Chamath Palihapitiya, the host of the All In podcast and a major Trump fundraiser — made its single largest investment ever in Palmetto, and Palihapitiya sits on its board of directors. (He has endorsed the company to his roughly 1.9 million X followers, casting it as a way consumers can avoid the AI boom’s higher power prices.)
Palmetto also recently hired Neil Chatterjee, who led the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission during Trump’s first term, as its head of government affairs.
The company raised $1.2 billion last year. Will it use that cash to build up its journalistic presence? Jessica Appelgren, the company’s vice president of communications, told me that the company had no interest in entering the media business.
Editor’s note: This story has been updated to include co-founder Ryan Alberti.
On ‘modernizing’ coal, 2.8 degrees of warming, and Spain’s nuclear phaseout
Current conditions: Hurricane Melissa passed by Bermuda on its way northward, leaving at least 30 dead in its wake across the Caribbean • Tropical Storm Kalmaegi is strengthening as it approaches the eastern shore of the Philippines • Colombia and Venezuela are bracing for flooding from heavy rainfall up to 2 inches above average.
The Environmental Protection Agency has quietly walked back its plans to eliminate Energy Star, the popular program that costs just $32 million in annual budget but saves Americans more than $40 billion each year. In May, EPA Administrator Lee Zeldin announced that his agency would end the program. The proposal drew swift backlash from industry groups and Republicans in Congress, as I wrote in a July newsletter. Now Zeldin is reconsidering the move, four unnamed sources with direct knowledge of the agency’s plans told The New York Times. Federal records show the agency renewed four contracts with ICF, the consulting firm that helps oversee the program, including one deal that stretches through September 2030.
Calling the initial plan to eliminate Energy Star “vexing,” RE Tech Advisors’ Deb Cloutier, one of Energy Star’s original architects, told Heatmap’s Jeva Lange, “There are a lot of lobbying efforts that I’m personally aware of within the commercial real estate industry and the manufacturing industry, where folks are reaching out and doing calls to action for the House and Senate Appropriations majority members — similar activities to what we did eight years ago when Energy Star was directly under fire.” She added, “I know that there are many, many representatives, both Republican and Democrats, who support Energy Star. We’ve had 35 years of bipartisan support, and it has been earmarked in congressional law many times, through multiple George H.W. and George W. Bush administrations.”
The world is on track to warm by an average of 2.8 degrees Celsius by the end of the century, the Rhodium Group predicted in its latest forecast. The consultancy said its modeling showed a 67% likelihood that global temperatures will rise between 2.3 degrees and 3.4 degrees thanks to the current trajectory of planet-heating pollution. That’s a significant improvement on the dire predictions issued a decade ago. But if decarbonization doesn’t pick up pace, the probability of limiting warming to 2 degrees — the more modest target set in the Paris Agreement — is below 5%. Still, the findings don’t deviate much from Rhodium’s projections before Trump returned to office. As Heatmap’s Emily Pontecorvo wrote this morning, “in the long run, Trump might not mean much for the climate’s trajectory.”
Nevertheless, the overshoot beyond 2 degrees is partly why Bill Gates took a more moderate stance on climate change in his latest memo, as Heatmap’s Robinson Meyer wrote last week. It’s also why, as Rob explained in a big story, private companies promising to commercialize technology to geoengineer the world’s temperature are raising large sums of money.
The Department of Energy is stepping up its efforts to keep aging coal plants online. The agency on Friday announced plans to offer up to $100 million to owners of coal-fired power stations that plan to modernize the stations with upgrades that “improve efficiency, plant lifetimes, and performance of coal and natural gas use.” In a press release, Secretary of Energy Chris Wright praised President Donald Trump for having “ended the war on American coal” and “restoring common sense energy policies that put Americans first.”
Despite Trump’s promises to revive American coal production and use, exports fell 11% in the first half of this year due to China buying less of the fuel amid ongoing trade negotiations, according to an analysis published Friday by the Energy Information Administration.

In the latest sign that Wall Street is heeding Trump’s calls to veer away from investment initiatives that cut out fossil fuels, lending giant State Street’s asset management arm withdrew its U.S. operations from what was once a leading climate action group for the industry. The company said “it had decided that only its units serving UK and European clients would remain part of the Net Zero Asset Managers” group, the Financial Times reported. BlackRock, Vanguard, and JP Morgan Asset Management had already left the group known as NZAM in the U.S. JP Morgan and State Street had already also quit another green investor group, Climate Action 100+, last year.
Months after Taiwan shut down its final reactors earlier this year, a plurality of voters approved a referendum calling for the last atomic plant to be turned back on. Years after Germany completely exited nuclear power, the new government has reversed Berlin’s position and has now joined France in supporting atomic energy again as it considers ways to restore its fleet. Switzerland and Belgium, meanwhile, reversed plans to shut down nuclear plants, and Italy — the first country in the world to end its nuclear power production years ago — is working on reviving its industry. That leaves only Spain still stubbornly planning to close its nuclear plants starting in 2027.
The tides may be turning. In February, a majority of lawmakers in Spain’s parliament approved a resolution condemning Socialist Prime Minister Pedro Sanchez’s phaseout plans. Now the board of Spain’s Centrales Nucleares Almaraz-Trillo has officially requested a three-year extension on the operating license for units one and two of the Almaraz Nuclear Power Plant. If granted, the extension would allow the reactors to stay online through 2030. The station currently supplies 7% of Spain’s electricity.
Fusion energy, the joke goes, is the energy source of tomorrow — and always will be. But recent laboratory breakthroughs have unleashed billions of dollars in private financing to commercialize fusion energy for real, with companies promising to open power plants in the next decade. There’s a big bottleneck, however: Many of the materials needed for fusion reactors are scarcely produced right now. New bipartisan legislation aims to change that by extending the 45X tax credit for clean manufacturing — one of the few parts of the Inflation Reduction Act retained in Trump’s One Big Beautiful Bill Act — to producers of vanadium, deuterium, helium-3, and other materials needed for fusion power to take off.
It’s an off-off-cycle election year, but there are still a handful of key elections going on in Georgia, New Jersey, and Virginia.
With the Trump administration disassembling climate policy across the federal government, state elections are arguably more important to climate action than ever.
Here are the key races we’re watching where clean energy, public transit, and other climate-oriented policies are on the ballot.
There are only 10 states in the country that hold elections for a Public Service Commission, a small group of regulators who oversee utility companies, and Georgia is one of them. As Charles Hua, the executive director of the nonprofit PowerLines, recently put it, these officials are the “Supreme Court justices” of energy. They preside over what kinds of infrastructure gas and electric utilities will build, where they’ll build it, and how much rates will go up as a result.
The election in Georgia is long overdue after being held up by a lawsuit the last two election cycles. Two of the five current commissioners have served three extra years without being re-elected by voters. During that time, the commission has approved six rate increases for customers of Georgia Power, the largest utility in the state, in part to pay for major cost overruns on new nuclear reactors at Plant Vogtle. Now Georgia Power is proposing a major expansion of natural gas power — about 10 nuclear reactors’ worth — mostly to meet data center demand.
The two seats are held by Republicans Fitz Johnson and Tim Echols. They are being challenged by Democrats Peter Hubbard and Alicia Johson, who have vowed to push for Georgia Power to meet demand with clean energy.
Energy costs are at the center of the governors’ races in New Jersey and Virginia this year, and Democrats and Republicans are making opposite arguments about how to lower them. In New Jersey, Democrat Mikie Sherrill has vowed to freeze utility rates and clear red tape to “open the floodgates on new cheaper and cleaner energy projects,” including solar, battery storage, and nuclear. Her opponent, Jack Ciattarelli, thinks the key to lower prices is pulling out of the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative, a 13-state cap and trade program that incentivizes cleaner power generation and raises money for climate-friendly projects. He also wants to repeal the state’s electrification goals for vehicles and buildings and ban offshore wind development.
A similar fight is playing out in Virginia, although there it’s tied more to the state’s rapidly multiplying data centers. Virginia is already home to 13% of global data center capacity, with more coming online. A recent state legislative report warns that customers are looking at increases of $14 to $37 per month by 2040 as a result.
The Democratic candidate for governor, former U.S. Representative Abigail Spanberger, wants to expand solar and wind power and invest in building efficiency. She’s also advocated for data centers to “pay their fair share” of new energy infrastructure, and said she will encourage them to pilot advanced clean technologies like small modular nuclear reactors and hydrogen. She’s running against Winson Earle Sears, the current lieutenant governor of Virginia, who has questioned the reliability of renewable energy, arguing for an all-of-the-above strategy that includes “clean coal.” While “beautiful clean coal,” may be one of Trump’s favorite energy sources, the reality is, it’s still just coal.
The governor’s seat isn’t the only one that’s up for grabs in Virginia. Whoever wins will need the House of Delegates on their side. Democrats currently have a razor thin 51-seat majority, and all 100 seats are on offer. Even a blue wave in the House doesn’t guarantee strong climate action, however, according to the nonprofit advocacy group Climate Cabinet. “Which candidates win will determine whether Virginia expands on” its climate law, the Clean Economy Act, “or backslides,” the group said in a “races to watch” memo.
Voters in Charlotte, North Carolina, and the whole of Mecklenburg County, will be asked whether to increase their sales tax by 1% to fund new transportation projects. Roughly 60% of the estimated $20 billion raised by the tax will go toward the expansion of rail and bus service. Charlotte is among the fastest-growing cities in the country. During a legislative hearing this summer, State Senator Mujtaba Mohammad said an average of 130 people move to the area each day. “We are experiencing longer commutes, more car accidents, higher car insurance premiums, more pedestrian-related accidents and less revenue to address our crumbling critical infrastructure,” he said.
The Charlotte Area Transit System finalized a new long-range plan this year to foster “transit-oriented communities,” by increasing bus frequency, extending service hours, adding microtransit options to underserved neighborhoods, and adding 43 miles of new rail. But the plan is only possible with funding from the sales tax.
Sales tax increases are a common way to raise money for public transit systems — legislators in California recently voted to put a sales tax increase on next year’s ballot to address a looming fiscal cliff for transit in the Bay Area. Illinois also voted last week to increase the sales tax in the Chicago area by 0.025% to raise money for its ailing transit system, among other measures.
A few smaller elections where climate is also on the ballot this year, according to Climate Cabinet: