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:
President Biden’s climate law gets a political stress test.

For the first time since it passed last summer, the Inflation Reduction Act — President Biden’s flagship climate law — is facing a threat of repeal.
The Republican majority in the House of Representatives has proposed essentially rolling back the law in their opening bid on negotiations with the White House to extend the government's borrowing limit and prevent a calamitous default. The GOP's proposal, called the Limit, Grow, and Save Act, would raise the debt ceiling for a year while slashing trillions in federal spending over the next decade.
While the Republican bill proposes deep cuts across the board, it takes a cleaver to Biden’s climate policy. Folding in the Lower Energy Costs Act, the first bill that the new GOP majority put on the floor, the act would repeal more than two dozen of the IRA’s clean-energy tax credits, including subsidies for renewables and electric vehicles. It would also defund programs meant to open new factories in the United States and gut climate-friendly programs popular with Republicans, such as generous subsidies for nuclear energy and hydrogen production.
Now, let’s get this out of the way: Neither the bill nor the negotiations around it are likely to repeal the IRA. Yet for the next few days or weeks, the IRA will likely appear to be in danger as nobody will quite say it’s safe out loud.
The Republican bill’s chief importance is as a piece of political posturing: Speaker of the House Kevin McCarthy hopes to demonstrate that he has 218 votes to raise the debt ceiling and pass a budget, any budget, through his disorganized and dramatic caucus. Then he can open more serious negotiations with President Biden and Senate leaders about the debt ceiling and the year’s budget.
But to get there, he’ll have to keep the GOP’s right flank on his side first. McCarthy and House Republican leadership didn’t even want to include the IRA repeal in the Limit, Save, and Grow Act, but included it because the far-right House Freedom Caucus demanded it. That means House leadership must look completely serious about its intent to repeal.
At the same time, climate advocates must now mobilize around the IRA to demonstrate its importance to the public and prevent the Biden administration from sacrificing it in negotiations.
More broadly, though, this moment is a test for a few competing hypotheses about whether the IRA can survive — and about the future of climate policy in America.
To the set of political scientists, climate activists, and energy experts who championed the law, repealing the IRA would be so damaging to Republicans as to be unthinkable. That’s because Republicans’ constituents are, for now, reaping much of the IRA’s economic rewards. Up to two-thirds of green-energy investment nationwide is happening in GOP congressional districts, according to Politico. The all-important swing state of Georgia leads the country in clean-energy and electric-vehicle investments, forming the heartland of a new, vaguely banana-shaped “Battery Belt” that stretches across the largely Republican Southeast. Even beyond that region, Speaker McCarthy’s California district is one of the top two districts nationwide for utility-scale solar, wind, and battery plants.
This wasn’t an accident. The IRA is a product of the Democratic Party, so it was, yes, meant to do all those old-school Democrat things — encourage unionization, boost wages, and help revitalize the old industrial Midwest. But it was written by Democrats who see the party’s future in the Sunbelt suburbs and who prioritize decarbonization above other political goals. They knew — they couldn’t help but know — that much of the law’s investment would flow to the manufacturing centers of the American South and Southwest, where “Right to Work” laws restrict worker power and corporate-friendly policies reign.
On the other side, a set of critics allege that Republicans’ attack on the IRA doesn’t need to make political sense. Kate Aronoff, a New Republic staff writer who has been guardedly skeptical of the law, argued last week that House Republicans don’t care about the political fallout of killing the IRA because they’re protected from virtually any type of political fallout at all, thanks to gerrymandering, their deep-pocketed corporate donors, and a sharply conservative Supreme Court. In that view, the attempts to secure the IRA by appealing to Republicans’ constituents is futile: The party will simply do what it wants.
At stake here is a deep but important disagreement about the IRA. The flagship law aims to cleave fossil-fuel interests from the rest of the corporate bolus: to make it so attractive for banks, carmakers, electric utilities, steelmakers, manufacturers, and everyone else to decarbonize that they had no choice but to do so.Can that happen? Will that happen? This is the question on which the IRA’s advocates and its climate-friendly critics disagree. It is also is the question on which the fate of the IRA — and American climate policy — turns.
In her piece, Aronoff notes that fossil-fuel companies donated 13 times more to politicians in 2018 than renewable companies did. I found that to be oddly encouraging: If money alone is the issue, then the fossil-fuel industry’s alleged grip on the GOP could loosen over time. (The gap is already narrowing: Oil and gas-affiliated groups gave about six times more than renewables groups did in the most recent election cycle.)
The far more dangerous possibility for the IRA is that Republicans cannot be won over with money or argument. The party may just vibe with fossil fuels. Lawmakers and officials might feel an ideological affinity for oil and gas that goes deeper than those fuels’ economic or security benefits. During President Donald Trump’s term, he sometimes seemed to speak about fossil fuels not as a necessary evil, but as a positive good. This sometimes verged on trolling, but that was the point too: for Trump, at least, that it triggered liberals only underscored its correctitude. If that view were to break out into the party at large, it would spell an end to any kind of bipartisan shift on climate policy.
Which is all to say: Republicans probably won’t repeal the IRA this week.
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 companies just launched a major VPP play.
For all the hype surrounding virtual power plants, they’re still a niche player on the U.S. electric grid. A new partnership between three of the biggest residential energy companies in the country — Tesla, Sunrun, and Renew Home — aims to recast VPPs into a leading role.
The companies announced on Wednesday that they have more than 16 gigawatts of dispatchable VPP capacity available today to deliver to utilities and data center developers throughout the country. That’s about the same as 16 nuclear reactors, except instead of generating power round the clock from a central plant, the companies aggregate unused electricity capacity from thousands of individual home solar and battery systems and programmable thermostats, and can make it available for several hours at a time.
Today, the companies bid these resources into electricity markets as a sort of bespoke grid service. A few times per year — often in the summer months when demand spikes — the grid operator in California might ask Sunrun to switch on its VPP to prevent a blackout. That means Sunrun’s rooftop solar and battery customers all either begin exporting excess power to the grid or rely more on their energy storage systems for their own power needs, reducing strain on the grid. Tesla operates similar programs, some in partnership with Sunrun. Renew Home, which spun out of Google Nest, does the same thing but with thermostats and water heaters, nudging temperatures on thousands of devices up or down during peak demand hours.
“A lot of our assets are enrolled in a contract where they can be used up to 20 times per year,” Paul Dickson, the president and chief revenue officer of Sunrun, told me. Now the company, along with its partners, are making the pitch to utilities and hyperscalers to view VPPs as 365-day resources, and more fully integrate them into their grid planning.
It’s a “turnkey” solution, the companies wrote in a press release, “deployable in months, not years,” that requires “no additional hardware, software, interconnection, water, or land usage for offtaking parties.”
VPPs also typically kick back some of the proceeds they earn from the electricity market to the residential customers hosting the solar panels, batteries, and programmable thermostats providing the power, meaning they can meet growing energy demand while helping to lower household energy bills. Sunrun and Renew Home paid out a combined $67 million in customer rewards last year.
About 60% of the 16 gigawatts the companies have available are tied to Renew Home’s enrolled devices, with the remaining 40% coming from Sunrun and Tesla’s solar and battery assets, Dickson told me. The capacity is also spread out geographically. There’s about 1.7 gigawatts available in Texas — the second largest data center market in the country, Dickson pointed out. There’s 300 megawatts available in Virginia, which the companies expect to grow to 500 megawatts by 2030.
“Unlike a traditional power plant that's fixed in size, this number grows every single day as the combined three companies continue to add additional capacity,” Dickson said. Sunrun alone plans to more than double its energy storage capacity by the end of 2028.
If utilities and large industrial customers buy the VPP pitch, the companies will be able to expand even more quickly, he added. If regulators or utilities come back and say, we’ll take your existing capacity today, and if you can add another gigawatt in the next year, here’s what we’ll pay, Sunrun could potentially reduce the upfront cost to customers to host the solar and battery installations, driving faster adoption.
The new partnership follows a similar announcement earlier this month from the VPP company Voltus, which signed a three-year agreement with Google. Voltus will provide up to 100 megawatts per year of capacity for Google in PJM, the country’s largest (and most constrained) electricity market covering much of the Midwest and mid-Atlantic. In that case, however, Voltus is using the deal with Google to finance the VPP, with the capacity set to come online by 2027.
The Tesla/Sunrun/Renew Home group is simply announcing they are open for business — they haven’t signed up any offtakers yet. Dickson told me the companies wanted to “make everybody aware that there is this uncontracted capacity, and make sure that it goes to the place that it can be most impactful.” Wednesday’s announcement is accompanied by a live map that shows where the capacity is. The companies did, however, already bid over a gigawatt of capacity into PJM, the larger energy market that Virginia is a part of, as part of its emergency procurement to meet near-term load growth in the region, and are waiting to hear if they were selected.
Last year, the electrification advocacy group Rewiring America published a paper arguing that hyperscalers could free up grid capacity for at least a third of the load growth expected from data centers if they paid for residential households to get heat pumps. All of that capacity would simply be the result of swapping inefficient appliances for more efficient versions, reducing the overall energy use of the homes. If hyperscalers also financed residential solar and storage upgrades, they could more than meet data center demand, the report posited.
That’s not how these VPP proposals are going to work — residential customers will still have to pay something to Sunrun and Tesla for their solar panels and batteries. But Ari Matusiak, the founder and CEO of Rewiring America, told me he viewed these new VPP partnerships as a step in that direction. Today, energy markets are largely bifurcated between residential market activity and large industrial customers. “Where we are going is toward a world where we think about the household as actual energy infrastructure and not simply an end of the line billpayer,” he said. “Once you start doing that, it changes the economics of how those household upgrades are treated and what the opportunities are.”
Current conditions: The warehouse fire in Boyle Heights is raging for a third day, spewing dark smoke over the Downtown Los Angeles skyline • The death toll from Western Europe’s heatwave has reached into the dozens • An 18-wheeler carrying more than 400 beehives overturned in eastern Texas and filled a small neighborhood with more than 2 million honeybees.
Wally World is soon to be powered by the atom. On Tuesday, Walmart announced a 15-year deal with Constellation, the nation’s largest operator of nuclear plants, for a chunk of the electricity coming from the Dresden Clean Energy Center in Illinois. The agreement included about 176 megawatts of wholesale supply from the two-reactor station southwest of Chicago, including 30 megawatts of expanded generating capacity through “uprates” — upgrades that allow operators to get more power out of an existing unit. Over the past two years, tech giants such as Google, Microsoft, and Meta, have bought shares of the power coming from nuclear power stations as the companies sought steady supplies of clean electricity for their burgeoning data centers. But the Walmart deal stands out as one of the first to involve a major brick-and-mortar retailer. “We’re constantly evaluating new capabilities and energy solutions that help ensure the electricity we rely on is dependable, responsibly produced, and built to support long-term growth,” Shayne Wahlmeier, Walmart’s senior vice president of energy, said in a statement.
The Trump administration just unveiled one of its biggest bets on nuclear power yet. The Department of Energy announced $17.5 billion in low-interest loans for utilities to pay for the equipment needed to order new Westinghouse AP1000 reactors. The program marks arguably the most significant effort yet to reclaim U.S. control over its flagship reactor design. While the two 1,100-megawatt units completed at Southern Company’s Alvin W. Vogtle Generating Station in 2023 and 2024 were the first installed in the U.S., China has been building its own version of the reactors at an industrial scale for years. The program will support up to 10 reactors, including two per venture with as many as five utilities. The power companies, currently in talks with the administration, have not yet been named. But Dan Sumner, the chief executive of Westinghouse Electric, told The Wall Street Journal the deal “really kick-starts fleet-scale nuclear development in the United States.” As my colleague Robinson Meyer wrote last night: “I hesitate to praise the project's climate bonafides at the risk of discouraging the Trump administration, but it is worth noting that if this project were to succeed, it would be one of the largest state-assisted build-outs of zero-carbon electricity in recent American history. But it would still take some time to arrive: These reactors aren’t forecast to come online til 2035.”
Yet another behemoth solar farm has come online. On Tuesday, the developer rPlus Energies said its Green River Energy Center had started operations. The facility in central Utah with 400-megawatts of solar panels and 1,600 megawatt-hours of batteries is now the largest solar-and-storage plant within PacifiCorp’s six-state territory out west, including Oregon, Washington, California, Utah, Wyoming, and Idaho. “Operation Gigawatt is about ensuring Utah has the reliable, homegrown energy needed to power opportunity for generations,” Utah Governor Spencer Cox, a Republican, said in a statement. “Green River Energy Center represents the kind of large-scale energy investment we need to deliver reliable energy, support rural Utah, and help power the next generation of prosperity across our state.”
The opening comes as solar is now generating more U.S. power than coal, as I told you recently.
Sign up to receive Heatmap AM in your inbox every morning:

The Supreme Court ruled Tuesday that Exxon Mobil has the right to sue a Cuban-owned company to recoup more than $70 million in 1960 dollars from an oil complex seized by the Cuban government after Fidel Castro’s revolution. Havana later transferred the ownership of the refinery, terminals, plants, and service stations to Corporación Cimex, the state-owned conglomerate. The lawsuit could now see the oil major try to recover more than $1 billion in losses. “Today’s decision is a critical moment in a 60 year effort to be compensated for what the Cuban government illegally seized,” Exxon spokesperson Todd Spitler told E&E News in an emailed statement. “It reflects two things: the merits of our argument and the fact that our company will fight a good fight for as long as it takes.”
The Trump administration understands the importance of refining cobalt — that’s why, as I reported last year, the Pentagon’s Defense Logistics Agency is pumping money into a startup that promises a new and cheap way to process the mineral. Canada’s Sherritt International started shutting down its Fort Saskatchewan refinery after the U.S. expanded sanctions on Cuba, halting exports of a feedstock supply needed for the plant in Alberta, Canada. The move, in addition to the Supreme Court ruling, come amid intensifying pressure by Washington on the Cuban regime.
California is once again following a New York trend. Just weeks after Albany sued to stop the Trump administration’s bid to pay TotalEnergies to give up its offshore wind projects, Sacramento is joining the litigation. “At a time when the country needs more reliable and sustainable power supply, the Trump Administration is busy using taxpayer money to strike backroom buyouts that make clean-energy projects disappear,” California Attorney General Rob Bonta said in a statement. “California won’t stand idly by as the Trump Administration illegally strikes deals to kill offshore wind projects and replace them with more windfalls for his fossil fuel friends; we’re putting the Administration on notice that we intend to sue.”
Rob checks in with Commodity Context’s Rory Johnston as the Iran War (hopefully) draws to a close.
When Iran closed the Strait of Hormuz earlier this year, experts projected oil prices would go to $200 a barrel. But then… they didn’t. In fact, while gasoline prices rose in the United States, and Europe and Asia suffered higher costs, the resulting energy crisis wasn’t even as bad as what followed Russia’s 2022 invasion of Ukraine.
Why? China. The country seems to have absorbed the costs of Trump’s war of choice by releasing hundreds of millions of barrels from its strategic stockpile. On this episode of Shift Key, Rob is joined by Rory Johnston, an oil markets researcher and the author of the Commodity Context newsletter. They discuss China’s massive (and quiet) intervention, why it’s “the most important thing we learned” from the Iran War, and what it means for the future of energy and geopolitics. Shift Key is hosted by Robinson Meyer, the founding executive editor of Heatmap News.
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.
Mentioned:
China Oil Demand Doubts, Rory’s 2023 article about Chinese strategic stockbuilding
Previously on Shift Key: Why the Iran Ceasefire Hasn’t Ended the Energy Crisis, featuring Rory
This episode of Shift Key is sponsored by ...
Heatmap Pro brings all of our research, reporting, and insights down to the local level. The software platform tracks all local opposition to clean energy and data centers, forecasts community sentiment, and guides data-driven engagement campaigns. Book a demo today to see the premier intelligence platform for project permitting and community engagement.
Music for Shift Key is by Adam Kromelow.