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:
We chatted about U.S. Wind’s project off the coast of Ocean City, oil jobs, and the future of the IRA.

I may have met the future of conservative climate politics on Tuesday, and he was standing next to piles of dead fish.
Larry Hogan, a Republican former governor of Maryland, is campaigning for an open Senate seat in one of the bluest states in the country. He faces an uphill run against Angela Alsobrooks, an acolyte of Vice President Kamala Harris and a Black woman who runs one of the state’s most populous and diverse counties, Prince George’s. Before President Biden dropped out as the Democrats’ nominee for president, internal polls indicated that Hogan had a chance; since Biden’s exit, despite Hogan’s name ID from eight years in Annapolis, his chances for victory now appear uncertain.
So I was surprised when, out of the blue, as Democrats were convening in Chicago around Harris as their nominee, Hogan’s team invited me out to a campaign stop along the Chesapeake Bay. Hogan was going to announce new plans on how he’d fight for protecting the Bay if elected, and I’d get to ask the candidate whatever I wanted about … climate. Not the usual offer from a Republican congressional campaign.
Hogan, however, has a long track record of bucking his party on climate change, and could be regarded as one of the most aggressive Republican governors on the issue in modern American history. In 2017, he signed into law one of the nation’s few state-wide fracking bans. In 2018, after then President Trump began pulling the U.S. out of the Paris Agreement, he joined with other states to meet the goals of the accord regardless. Three years later, he oversaw the creation of a plan to reduce Maryland’s emissions 50% by 2030 and achieving “net-zero” by 2045. Those emissions targets happen to be the same ones Alsobrooks has endorsed, too.
I went to his campaign website to see what it says about climate and found almost nothing. Nowhere on Hogan’s website is there a discussion of emissions or energy policy, and climate-related laws like the Inflation Reduction Act barely come up. The only possible reference I can find is one paragraph saying he’d “stand against unaffordable spending and mandates raising [the] cost of energy, food, and basic necessities.”
So I said yes. Not just because I’m a Marylander who deeply cares about the future of the planet, but also because of Hogan’s importance for the future of the IRA. If he somehow found a way to win, he’d be a crucial voice on the future of the landmark climate law, the fate of which will be decided next year as lawmakers look to rewrite tax policy.
That was why, on Tuesday I woke up at the crack of dawn and drove two hours to Tilghman Island, a bucolic enclave popular for fishing and tourism along the eastern shorelines of Maryland. It might’ve been a rural part of the state, but every now and then along my route I’d see an array of solar panels in front of a farm or a house. I arrived at the meeting place to find it was a seafood plant along the water. Hogan arrived right after me in a jet black SUV and exited in attire so casual you’d hardly recognize him as a two-term governor: a simple baseball cap, a dull blue shirt, and, believe it or not, shorts.
I walked alongside Hogan and people who ran the processing plant as they surveyed flats of oyster shells and the guts of catfish I was told were an invasive species in the area. Finally, Hogan and I settled down to chat in an open garage. There are “more Republicans who actually are more environmentally sensitive than you think,” he told me, “but they’re certainly not in the majority, and they’re not the ones getting all the attention. My hope is to try to be a voice to get them to do some of the things we did and focus on.”
Of the IRA himself, he told me, “It concerns me that it was rushed through in a very partisan way without a single Republican vote. I think there are some really good things in it. I think there’s some things that weren’t very well thought out.”
“Like what?” I asked.
“Things that are going to have a more harmful effect on the economy and killing jobs,” he said, adding that “we ought to at least look at how to tweak it.”
That statement puzzled me — recent analysis indicates at least 334,000 new jobs have been created since the law was enacted in 2022. But writ large, the transition to clean energy will mean people lose jobs in the oil and gas industry — was that what he was referring to?
“Yeah. I mean, we’re not ready,” Hogan replied. “It was going to shut down existing industries without any transition period when we didn’t have the ability to provide enough energy to accomplish what we wanted. We just gotta figure out a way to make the transition, but you can’t do it too rapidly or it’s going to have the opposite impact.”
The funny thing about Republicans talking about climate and the IRA is that you essentially need a translator to know their positions. Lawmakers will say one thing on the record to a reporter and then the next minute say the exact opposite thing off the record. The truth is — and I know this from many years of covering Capitol Hill — many Republican politicians support the vast majority of this law and will never admit it.
Most voters today still do not know much about the IRA, or even what the Biden administration has done on climate change. That’s unlikely to change soon as Democrats have so far eschewed mentioning the topic much at all, including during their convention in Chicago this week. Congressional Democrats put a lot of time and effort over the last year into messaging the law and their other signature industrial policy achievements. But for now, it seems it’ll be largely absent from the campaign trail.
Should Republicans take full control of Congress and the presidency, the IRA is in legitimate danger from influential coalitions on the furthest flanks of the right-wing. Think the Heritage Foundation. The Freedom Caucus. The Marjorie Taylor Greenes and Jim Jordans and Lauren Boeberts roaming the halls of the Capitol. These power-brokers have proven through fights over the debt ceiling and government funding that they appear willing to put their votes where their mouths are to satisfy a political base of support that cares less about corporations and climate change than sticking it to liberals and the left. Hogan is correct that the IRA was passed entirely by Democrats without a single Republican vote, making it a ripe target for partisan pummeling.
And yet there’s so much in the IRA that Republicans typically should like. Climate policy that’s heavy on carrots for big business and light on penalties for corporate pollution has long been Republicans’ preferred route. Why does the most moderate Republican candidate for Senate in one of the nation’s bluest states have to bash the climate law at all, let alone claim its killing jobs? I’ll be honest, when I went out to the Bay to meet Hogan, I thought I was about to hear the first major Republican endorsement of the IRA.
I asked John Hart, a fellow Marylander who helps run the conservative climate group C3 Solutions, about why Hogan would claim the IRA is killing jobs when there’s no evidence to back that up. Hart authored a campaign messaging book for Republicans trying to talk about climate change and energy policy without denying the existence of the problem, on the one hand, or alienating their own voters on the other.
“It’s an American cultural and political problem,” Hart told me. “You have to be very cognizant of those head-scratching moments, and you have to address that very clearly.”
There’s two reasons why Republicans like Hogan have to bash the IRA even if they might support a lot of the underlying climate provisions, he said: GOP voters instinctually see such ideas as “picking winners and losers,” and the climate law has been lumped in with other policies like auto regulations that Republicans largely oppose.
“Candidates are viewing it not through the narrow lens of what that legislation alone does, but how it fits into a broader agenda,” Hart added. “With the IRA, [it becomes] part of a broader effort. A lot of Republicans do believe that the Biden administration wants to ban trucks.”
Hogan did not develop his approach to climate action overnight. While as governor, he pushed for reducing greenhouse gas emissions by 50% through 2030, he also opposed going any faster than that. (The legislature ultimately enacted the more aggressive plans without Hogan's signature.) The Alsobrooks campaign has attacked him on this, and in a statement to me said that if elected, “Larry Hogan would give [S]enate Republicans the majority they need to gut the IRA and roll back efforts to protect our environment.”
Blake Kernen, a spokesperson for the Hogan campaign, told me Hogan is “glad the [IRA] created clean energy jobs like he did as Governor in Maryland.” His concerns with the law have to do with “some of the new taxes and overspending in the bill [that] has and will contribute to inflation and job loss, and is disappointed that the bill was forced through a party line vote.”
Governor Hogan also loudly backed wind development off the Maryland coast, which is now a contentious issue along the eastern shore.
Ocean City, a popular vacation destination, is now considering legal action against the federal government if it approves efforts by U.S. Wind, a subsidiary of an Italian wind energy company, to actually build turbines off the state’s coastline. It’s a conflict that mirrors other fights waged by beach communities, resort areas, and fishing hubs against offshore wind. These parts of the country are far removed from cities and often Republican-leaning, and the loudest champions of these grievances have also been prominent GOP politicians. Most notable, of course, has been former President Donald Trump, who’s pledged to halt new permits, but Republican policymakers at all levels from New Jersey, New York, and Virginia, among others, have all been making political hay from wind farm projects in their states.
Hogan has made a name for himself in recent years as a bulwark against Trump and his brand of politics. But when I brought up Ocean City’s legal threat, his passionate support of the town led him to interrupt my question.
“They probably will and probably should [sue]. That’s an example where I was very supportive of wind energy and creating a market for that in our state to create jobs and further the production of wind energy. But on that project, there was not very much transparency. They didn’t work with the local community very much. That’s impacting the fishing industry, the tourism industry, and they’re concerned that their entire livelihoods are going to be ruined.”
Heatmap’s own polling shows the political vulnerability renewable energy faces from the environmental impacts of development. Yet earlier in our interview, Hogan had boasted about the jobs wind has brought to the transportation and logistics hub Tradepoint Atlantic in the Port of Baltimore. He spoke effusively about the jobs in industries like welding that wind development creates. (One tidbit: His campaign released an ad a few days ago featuring a Democrat-registered welder in Baltimore who says they’re voting for Hogan, with no mention of the wind industry.)
In my mind, at least, failing to build those turbines could present a bigger risk to Ocean City in the long run than building them. If we didn’t construct them, it would take away an opportunity to dramatically increase the amount of renewable energy available for Maryland to wean off of carbon-based power. Failing to do so would pose a longer-term threat to the town of Ocean City from sea level rise and intensifying extreme weather.
So I told Hogan that while, as a Marylander, I couldn’t imagine wind turbines at Ocean City, I also couldn’t stop thinking about the trade-offs. I asked him, how does he view those tradeoffs?
Hogan stood firm. “I think you can accomplish the goals without putting them on the beach. I think you move them further out. It’s a pretty simple process. The federal government required them to put them in a place that no one wants. There’s no reason for it.”
This began to sound like some sort of Republican party line, trying to sell voters on a vision of the future that derails the energy transition along the way. But as one of my personal favorite Republican-splainers on energy, Sarah Hunt of the Rainey Center, explained to me, this kind of misconstrues how politics ordinarily works.
The normal thing is that constituents go to their representatives and voice their concerns, and a lot of these beach towns and fishing areas just happen to be Republican. In other parts of the country like Louisiana, where the politicians are more open to offshore oil, they’re similarly supportive of offshore wind.
“I think that is individual to Maryland and specific areas of Maryland,” Hunt told me. “I think offshore wind is a wonderful thing. I think it’s legitimate to say it doesn’t belong everywhere, and I think it’s reasonable to have a process for communities to provide input into the placement of such projects.”
After Hogan and I concluded our interview, I drove home in the gas-powered car I inherited from my late grandparents and passed more solar paneling in front of rural homes. Driving over the Chesapeake Bay, I tried to imagine seeing wind turbines on the horizon one day, and a world where Republicans support tax credits for renewables while fighting to make sure those projects adhere to the Clean Water Act. May we live in interesting times, I guess.
Editor’s note: This story has been updated to reflect that Maryland was already a member of the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative when Hogan became governor.
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 number of data centers canceled after pushback set a record in the first quarter of the year, new data from Heatmap Pro shows.
Data centers are getting larger and larger. But even so, few are as large as the Sentinel Grove Technology Park, a proposed data center near Port St. Lucie, Florida.
The proposed facility — which became known as Project Jarvis — was set to be built on old agricultural land. It would use up to 1 gigawatt of electricity, enough to power a mid-size city, and bring in up to $13.5 billion in investment to the county.
The project was immediately controversial. But its developers anticipated issues: They would build their own self-contained, self-provided water facilities to service the project, and they agreed to set its 60-foot buildings back far enough from the road so that they couldn’t be seen by drivers.
It wasn’t enough. The project lost a key vote in the planning board in October. And in February, Project Jarvis’s developers withdrew their land use application entirely after Governor Ron DeSantis proposed AI regulation in the statehouse.
The facility was the largest data center project canceled after facing opposition in the first quarter of 2026. But it wasn’t the only one.
At least 20 proposed data center projects were canceled after local pushback during the first three months of 2026, smashing a record set only in the previous quarter, according to a review of press accounts, public records, and project announcements conducted by Heatmap Pro.
These canceled projects accounted for more than $41.7 billion in investment and represented at least 3.5 gigawatts of electricity demand.
The cancellations reveal the rapidly expanding backlash to data center construction has not yet peaked. From Georgia to Pennsylvania, locals have rebelled against newly proposed data centers, even when the planned facilities are not planning to run artificial intelligence models.

If anything, fights over data centers are surging now. Heatmap Pro’s researchers added roughly 100 new data center fights to their database during the first three months of the past year, a new record.
These fights are succeeding in terminating projects. Last year, roughly 25 data center projects were canceled nationwide after facing some type of local opposition, according to Heatmap Pro data. The country is likely to break that record in 2026 over the next few weeks, our data suggests — only five months into the year.
At least $85 billion in data center projects have been canceled over the past three years, according to Heatmap Pro data.

These numbers haven’t been previously reported. Over the past year, researchers at our intelligence platform Heatmap Pro have conducted a comprehensive national survey of local opposition to data center construction. They have regularly called every U.S. county to tally data center cancellations and any new rules limiting data center construction.
This data is normally available to companies and individuals who subscribe to Heatmap Pro, but we periodically publish a high-level summary of this data. We last released our results in January.
Current conditions: The East Coast’s Acela corridor is cooling down this week, with temperatures dropping from 85 degrees Fahrenheit in Philadelphia yesterday to the 60s for the rest of the week • Cape Agulhas is under one of South Africa’s Orange Level 6 warnings for damaging winds and dangerous waves • Floods and landslides in Brazil’s northern state of Pernambuco have left six dead and thousands displaced.
The Securities and Exchange Commission has advanced a measure to formally end Biden-era climate disclosure rules for publicly-traded companies. The regulator sent the proposal to the White House’s Office of Management and Budget for review on May 4, according to a post on a government website first spotted by Bloomberg. The Wall Street watchdog’s 2024 disclosure rule mandated that publicly traded companies report on the material risks climate change poses to their business models, including the financial impact of extreme weather. Some large companies would have been required to disclose Scope 1 emissions, which are produced by the firm’s own operations, and Scope 2 emissions, which are produced by companies with which the firm does off-site business such as electricity. The rule had already been watered down before its finalization to remove Scope 3 emissions, which come from suppliers up and down the value chain and from customers who use a product such as oil.
In an even bigger move, the SEC also proposed scrapping mandatory quarterly reporting for U.S.-listed companies, instead switching to a twice-yearly filing. The idea, which President Donald Trump first floated years ago as a way of getting companies to focus on longer-term goals, “would provide companies with increased regulatory flexibility,” SEC chair Paul Atkins told the Financial Times. “Public companies have an obligation under the federal securities laws to provide information that is material to investors. Yet, the rigidity of the SEC’s rules has prevented companies and their investors from determining for themselves the interim reporting frequency that best serves their business needs and investors.” While cast as part of a larger deregulatory push, the move could actually be a boon to climate action. Supporters of decarbonization have long lamented how quarterly reporting norms disincentivized costly bets that take longer than three months to pan out.
If you have ever body surfed in the ocean — or observed how docks and peers weather over time — it’s easy to intuit why harnessing renewable energy from waves is so tricky. Among experts who often list wave energy along with tidal power as two sources of underdeveloped but potentially promising renewable energy, the latter has long been considered the more commercially viable, with turbines harnessing tidal flows already in operation in France and elsewhere. Wave energy, by contrast, has been perceived as a riskier frontier in the energy industry.
That didn’t stop wave-energy startup Panthalassa from raising $140 million in a Series B round led by Silicon Valley billionaire Peter Thiel this week as the company looks to develop floating data centers that can operate in open ocean. The financing will fund the completion of the company’s pilot manufacturing facility near Portland, Oregon, and speed up deployment of its Ocean-3 series of facilities that “will perform AI inference computing at sea” with power generated from ocean waves.
“There are three sources of energy on the planet with tens of terawatts of new capacity potential: solar, nuclear, and the open ocean,” Panthalassa CEO and co-founder Garth Sheldon-Coulson said in a statement. “We’ve built a technology platform that operates in the planet’s most energy-dense wave regions, far from shore, and turns that resource into reliable clean power. We’re now ready to build factories, deploy fleets, and provide a sustainable new source of energy for humanity.” The deal, per the Financial Times, values the company at about $1 billion. “The future demands more compute than we can imagine,” Thiel said in a press release. “Extra-terrestrial solutions are no longer science fiction. Panthalassa has opened the ocean frontier.”
The company has some competition. Earlier this year, the San Francisco-based Aikido Technologies launched a new line of floating platforms for deep-water offshore wind turbines that include data centers built into the ballasts.
Allow me to give you a glimpse into the anxious mind of a young father: Sometimes, I distract myself from my fear over what global weather patterns might look like by the time my one-year-old daughter is my age with my more urgent terror over what particulate matter is entering her perfect little lungs and what microplastics sneak into even her home-cooked meals. Well, worry not! Turns out the two aren’t mutually exclusive. In theory, I knew this was always the case, since the rise of plastic pollution is at least somewhat spurred on by oil and gas companies making big money off the feedstocks for the cheap, single-use plastics that break down into dangerous tiny particles in our environment. But new research shows that microplastics in the atmosphere are actually magnifying the effects of climate change. In a new paper published in the journal Nature Climate Change, scientists in China and the U.S. outlined how tiny, colored plastic bits absorb sunlight as the wind blows them around the world, trapping heat and adding to temperature rise. “The plastic problem is not just in our blue oceans, it is also in the invisible skies above us,” Hongbo Fu, a co-author of the study and an atmospheric scientist at Fudan University in Shanghai, said at a press conference, per Bloomberg. “Climate models need to be updated.”
Sign up to receive Heatmap AM in your inbox every morning:
Like wave and tidal power, geothermal was once a sleepy corner of the clean energy world. But next-generation startups that promised to use new drilling techniques to harness geothermal energy in more places than ever thought possible are radically upending an industry that saw its largest power station — the Geysers in California — built in the 1960s and hitherto hadn’t aimed higher. Until a few years ago, next-generation geothermal drilling was esoteric even among energy nerds. But things change quickly in the modern energy business. Fervo Energy, the first major next-generation startup to prove that fracking technology could be used to revolutionize geothermal power, is now eyeing a $6.5 billion valuation. That’s according to a document the company filed with the SEC this week as it prepares to raise more than $1.3 billion in an initial public offering of its stock.
Fervo sees a big market. As Heatmap’s Matthew Zeitlin wrote last month when the company first filed to go public, Fervo told investors its reviewed leases represent over 40 gigawatts of energy. That’s equal to about 15% of all installed solar capacity in the U.S.

The United Arab Emirates already ranks as the world’s seventh-largest producer of crude, and could ascend as the country’s exit from the Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries frees Abu Dhabi to pump for oil. The UAE’s debut atomic power plant — the four-reactor, Korean-built Barakah station in Abu Dhabi — set a new standard for nuclear construction in a Western-aligned nation and vaulted the federation of monarchies to the forefront of global discussions about fission. Now the UAE is making a big move on solar. Abu Dhabi’s state-owned renewables developer Masdar has signed a deal with Emirates Water and Electricity Company to deploy more than 30 gigawatts of solar capacity and 8 gigawatts of batteries. “As the driving force behind the UAE’s energy transition, EWEC is at the forefront of a global shift towards sustainable, utility-scale power and water production,” Ahmed Ali Alshamsi, the utility chief in charge of the Emirates Water and Electricity Company, told PV Tech. “This CFA with Masdar is a pivotal strategic tool that empowers us to accelerate this transformation and meet 60% of Abu Dhabi’s total energy demand from renewable and clean sources by 2035.”
Norway led the world in electric vehicle adoption. It’s now at the forefront of autonomous vehicle adoption. Europe’s first self-driving bus without a supervisor onboard is set to be rolled out in the southwestern city of Stavanger following a recent regulatory change. While the bus still requires preparation by a human before operating, the project has been underway since 2022 and represents Europe’s most advanced public deployment of the technology.
Rob talks with the billionaire investor and philanthropist about how energy, Chinese EVs, and why he’s “very optimistic” that Congress will pass permitting reform this year.
If you work around climate or clean energy, you probably know about John Arnold. Although he began his career as a natural gas trader, Arnold has since become one of the country’s most important clean energy investors. He’s the chairman of Grid United, a transmission development firm undertaking some of the country’s most ambitious power line projects, and he is an investor in the advanced geothermal startup Fervo. He and his wife Laura run the philanthropic organization Arnold Ventures.
On this week’s episode of Shift Key, Rob talks with Arnold about the current energy chaos and what might come next. They discuss Arnold’s first trip to China, whether Congress might pass permitting reform this year, and what clean energy companies should learn from the fossil fuel industry.
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.
Here is an excerpt from our conversation:
Robinson Meyer: What needs to change or what needs to happen between now and, say, the end of the year for [a permitting deal] to actually get done?
John Arnold: So I think on an election year, it's very unusual for any big piece of bipartisan legislation to get passed, really, the whole year. And so what we're really looking at is most likely is that it would get passed after the election in the lame duck period. And so you start working backwards from there and really need to have language that's agreed upon in the next 45 days. It's hard to work over the summer. Congress scatters. Everybody scatters. Then you come back. There's a little bit of work time in September, and then everybody's focused on the elections. So the bill needs to get written today. And then again, in the next 45 days, and there's a lot of work happening behind the scenes. So again, sometimes it's hard to know exactly where it is, but everybody's saying the right things. There's been fits and stops to date, particularly when the administration hit the pause on offshore wind. They've made some changes. They brought Senator Whitehouse back to the negotiating table, for instance. So again, everything I think is looking good, but getting anything passed in D.C. these days might be a long shot.
You can also find a complete transcript of the episode on Heatmap.
This episode of Shift Key is sponsored by Salesforce.
Salesforce is the No. 1 AI CRM, where humans with agents drive success together. We invest in bold climate technologies and leverage agentic AI to accelerate nature-based solutions that benefit people and the planet. Learn more. You can also learn more about Salesforce's investments in watersheds here.
Music for Shift Key is by Adam Kromelow.