Sign In or Create an Account.

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

Politics

Republicans Have No New Ideas About Energy

On night one of the convention, the GOP presented a platform that repackages Biden-era achievements with an all-caps flourish.

Donald Trump and J.D. Vance.
Heatmap Illustration/Getty Images

National political conventions don’t make for the best TV. Prime-time speeches are delivered by a parade of party celebrities and last for only a few minutes — typically just enough time to bash gas prices (nonsensically) and get in a few digs at the opposition. The highlight of the Republican National Convention’s broadcast out of Milwaukee on Monday night was, in fact, entirely wordless: former President Donald Trump’s walk across the floor with a conspicuous white bandage over his ear.

The only words that really mattered on Monday were reviewed and approved behind closed doors. “It’s a different kind of platform,” Tennessee Senator and Chair of the Committee on the Platform Marsha Blackburn said by way of introduction during her speech yesterday evening. Reviewing how the 2024 Republican Party Platform’s energy sections compare to the ones in 2016 (the GOP did not write a new platform for its convention in 2020), it’s clear how true that actually is.

Eight years ago, the Republican platform included “Agriculture, Energy, and the Environment” among its six chapters, describing goals such as “expedited siting processes” for transmission lines; better forest management to prevent wildfires; the “development of all forms of energy that are marketable in a free economy without subsidies, including coal, oil, natural gas, nuclear power, and hydropower” and renewable sources like wind and solar by “private capital”; as well as the rejection of “the agendas of both the Kyoto Protocol and the Paris Agreement.” The goals were reasonably detailed, at least enough so that the 2016 platform ran a full 50 pages longer than the 2024 version. (Trump, of course, has little patience for the written word.)

The 2024 Republican platform gets to its point much more quickly by design. “MAKE AMERICA THE DOMINANT ENERGY PRODUCER IN THE WORLD, BY FAR!” is fourth on the priority list. That’s an easy enough goal since the U.S. is already the world’s dominant energy producer, at least in oil and natural gas, the favored fuels of both Trump and Vance. The platform further promises to “DRILL, BABY, DRILL” its way to the U.S. becoming “Energy Independent and even Dominant again” — another easy goal since the country is already energy independent by multiple definitions. Coal, until recently a staple Republican talking point, gets just one blink-and-you’ll-miss-it reference.

The platform offers no specific plan for improving on President Biden’s record oil and gas production numbers. It does, however, state that the party will ensure “Reliable and Abundant Low Cost Energy,” a statement that, by omission, implies the party will do so without the same level of all-caps enthusiasm for electrification. This will be quite a feat as the renewable cost curve continues to trend down.

Also new to the platform in 2024 is hostility toward electric vehicles, a favorite talking point of Trump’s on the campaign trail and a longtime punching bag of Vance’s. The party claims that it can “Save the American Auto Industry” by “reversing harmful Regulations, canceling Biden’s Electric Vehicle and other Mandates, and preventing the importation of Chinese vehicles.” Given that there isn’t actually an EV mandate, that sounds pretty much “exactly like what Democrats want,” the economic columnist Noah Smith wrote in his recent breakdown of the platform.

Finally, alongside other pressingly important issues to the American public like making Washington, D.C., “the most beautiful capital city,” the 2024 Republican platform gestures toward restoring “genuine Conservation efforts.” Such a promise, buried at the end of the document, rings especially hollow given that Trump oversaw the largest reduction of protected land in U.S. history.

Of course, shabby promises are to be expected. Party platforms are non-binding and, as Smith also points out, they reveal far more about who Republicans are appealing to, and how, than what they actually plan to do once they’re in power.

The pared-down energy and climate sections in the 2024 platform don’t necessarily mean Trump will keep Biden-era policies largely intact, then. If anything, they simply leave more room for Trump to do whatever he wants if — or when? — he wins back the White House.

You’re out of free articles.

Subscribe today to experience Heatmap’s expert analysis 
of climate change, clean energy, and sustainability.
To continue reading
Create a free account or sign in to unlock more free articles.
or
Please enter an email address
By continuing, you agree to the Terms of Service and acknowledge our Privacy Policy
Spotlight

The Trump Administration Is Now Delaying Renewable Projects It Thinks Are Ugly

The Army Corps of Engineers is out to protect “the beauty of the Nation’s natural landscape.”

Donald Trump, wetlands, and renewable energy.
Heatmap Illustration/Getty Images

A new Trump administration policy is indefinitely delaying necessary water permits for solar and wind projects across the country, including those located entirely on private land.

The Army Corps of Engineers published a brief notice to its website in September stating that Adam Telle, the Assistant Secretary of the Army for Civil Works, had directed the agency to consider whether it should weigh a project’s “energy density” – as in the ratio of acres used for a project compared to its power generation capacity – when issuing permits and approvals. The notice ended on a vague note, stating that the Corps would also consider whether the projects “denigrate the aesthetics of America’s natural landscape.”

Keep reading...Show less
Yellow
Hotspots

A Data Center Dies in Wisconsin

Plus more of the week’s biggest renewable energy fights.

The United States.
Heatmap Illustration/Getty Images

Dane County, Wisconsin – The QTS data center project we’ve been tracking closely is now dead, after town staff in the host community of DeForest declared its plans “unfeasible.”

  • As I previously explained to Fight readers, this QTS project was a quintessential data center conflict. Not only was it situated in a blue county inside of a purple state, but a recent imbroglio over emails between the village mayor and QTS have made it a key example of how private conversations between tech companies and local governments can tarnish the odds of getting a data center permitted.
  • Late Tuesday, DeForest town staff issued a public statement disclosing they would recommend rejecting QTS’ petition to annex land for construction, without which the developer can’t build. A vote on whether to formally deny the petition was scheduled for February 3.
  • If the town rejects the project, the statement reads, DeForest staff expect QTS to “formally withdraw” its request for changes to land zoning plans and the annexation application. The town also cited vociferous opposition to the project, declaring: “The Village of DeForest appreciates the dedicated engagement of our community. Engagement is at the core of democracy. Reviewing public information, participating in public meetings, and discussing potential opportunities and impacts are all important civic activities.”
  • I was prepared to wait and see what happened at the public meeting before declaring this project dead in the water, but QTS itself has gone and done it : “Through our engagement, it has become clear that now is not the right time for our proposed project to move forward in DeForest.”

Marathon County, Wisconsin – Elsewhere in Wisconsin, this county just voted to lobby the state’s association of counties to fight for more local control over renewable energy development.

Keep reading...Show less
Yellow
Q&A

How Data Centers Became an Election Issue in Georgia

A conversation with Georgia Conservation Voters’ Connie Di Cicco.

The Q&A subject.
Heatmap Illustration

This week’s conversation is with Connie Di Cicco, legislative director for Georgia Conservation Voters. I reached out to Connie because I wanted to best understand last November’s Public Service Commission elections which, as I explained at the time, focused almost exclusively on data center development. I’ve been hearing from some of you that you want to hear more about how and why opposition to these projects has become so entrenched so quickly. Connie argues it’s because data centers are a multi-hit combo of issues at the top of voters’ minds right now.

The following conversation has been lightly edited for clarity.

Keep reading...Show less
Yellow