You’ve reached your free article limit
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:
The Ways and Means Committee released its proposed budget language, and it’s not pretty for clean energy.

The House Ways and Means Committee, which oversees tax policy, released its initial proposal to overhaul the nation’s clean energy tax credits on Monday afternoon. These are separate and in addition to the extensive cuts to Inflation Reduction Act grant programs proposed by the Energy and Commerce Committee, Transportation Committee, and Natural Resources Committee in the past few weeks.
Here’s a rundown of the tax credit proposal, which, at first glance, appears to amount to a back-door full repeal of the climate law. There’s a lot that could change before we get to a final budget, let alone have a text head to the Senate. We’ll have more analysis on what these changes would mean in the days and weeks to come.
The text proposes ending the tax credit for new EVs (that is, 30D) on December 31, 2025 — with one exception. The credit would remain in effect for one year, through the end of 2026, for vehicles produced by automakers that have sold fewer than 200,000 tax credit-qualified cars between 2010 and the end of this year. That means that no Teslas would qualify for the tax credit next year, as the company has sold far more than 200,000 tax credit-eligible vehicles. A new entrant to EVs, like Honda with its Prologue model, will likely still qualify.
The committee also proposes ending the tax credit for used EVs (25E) and commercial EVs (45W) by the end of this year. This would effectively end the “leasing loophole” that allowed Americans to redeem the tax credit on vehicles that didn’t qualify for 30D because they didn’t meet domestic content requirements, meaning consumers could get discounts on leases of a wide range of makes and models.
Lastly, the draft proposes terminating the tax credit for residential EV chargers (30C) at the end of this year.
The GOP has proposed an early phase-out of the technology-neutral production and investment tax credits, which subsidize zero-emissions power generation projects including wind, solar, energy storage, advanced nuclear, and geothermal. It also proposed significant changes for the years they remain in effect.
Currently, new clean electricity projects can earn a 2.75 cents for every kilowatt-hour they produce for the first 10 years under section 45Y of the tax code. Alternatively, project developers can get a 30% investment tax credit (48E) on new projects. The Inflation Reduction Act scheduled both of these programs to phase out beginning in 2032, and expire at the end of 2035. It included a major caveat, however: that this phase-out would only happen if greenhouse gas emissions from U.S. power generation fell below 25% of 2022 levels. Otherwise, the tax credits would be maintained at their initial amounts until this target was met.
Under the GOP proposal, both credits would start to phase down in 2029, and new projects would no longer be eligible for either credit beginning in 2032. The proposal also cuts out a key provision that would have grandfathered many more projects into the tax credit. Under current law, a project only has to start construction within a certain year to qualify for that year’s tax credit amount. The draft text changes this, requiring a project to be “placed in service” before 2032 in order to qualify.
A separate tax credit for existing nuclear power generation (45U) would also phase down on the same timeline, despite Trump and other Republicans’ interest in boosting nuclear energy.
“Transferability” supercharged the nation’s clean energy tax credits by allowing project developers with low tax liability to sell their credits to another entity that stood to benefit from them. Previously, developers could only monetize their unusable tax credits through complicated tax equity deals.
Recipients of a wide range of tax credits, including those for clean manufacturing, clean fuels, carbon capture, nuclear power, and hydrogen, can all take advantage of transferability. The provision channeled new capital into the climate economy as corporations looking to reduce their tax liability began scooping up tax credits, indirectly helping to finance clean energy projects. It also helped lower the cost of wind and solar, as developers could earn a premium on tax credits compared to what they got for tax equity transfers, because the whole transaction was cheaper to do.
The proposal would get rid of this option across all of the tax credits beginning in 2028.
The proposal would also impose new sourcing requirements across all of the tax credits, prohibiting developers from using components, subcomponents, or critical minerals sourced from “foreign entities of concern,” a term that applies to companies based in China, Russia, North Korea, or Iran. The consequences would be huge, as China dominates global markets for refined lithium, cobalt, graphite, and rare earths — key materials used in clean energy technologies.
The draft text would also terminate the clean manufacturing credit (45X) in 2032 — one year earlier than under existing law. Wind energy components such as blades, towers, and gearboxes would lose their eligibility sooner, in 2028.
The text proposes repealing three tax credits for residential energy efficiency improvements at the end of 2025. Starting next year, homeowners would no longer be able to claim the Energy Efficiency Home Improvement Credit (25C), which provides up to $3,200 per year for home energy audits, energy-saving windows and doors, air sealing and insulation, heat pumps, and new electrical panels.
It also proposes killing the Residential Clean Energy Credit (25D), which offered homeowners 30% off the cost of solar panels and battery systems to store energy from those solar panels. This credit also subsidizes geothermal home heating systems.
Both of these tax credits have existed in some form since the Energy Policy Act of 2005.
The third credit that would end this year is an up to $5,000 subsidy for contractors who construct new, energy efficient homes (45L).
The proposal would not repeal the energy efficiency tax deduction for improvements made to commercial buildings (179D).
The Inflation Reduction Act created a technology-neutral tax credit for low-carbon transportation fuels, like sustainable aviation fuel and biodiesel (45Z). It operates on a sliding scale, depending on how carbon-intensive the fuel is. The credit is set to expire after 2027, however the GOP proposal would extend it for four years, through the end of 2031.
That said, it would also make a significant change to how the credit is calculated, making it much easier for projects with questionable emissions benefits to qualify. Under the Biden administration, the Treasury Department issued rules that said producers had to account for the emissions tied to indirect land use changes resulting from fuel production. That meant that corn ethanol producers, for example, had to account for the expansion of croplands resulting from the increase of biofuel production and use — which would, in most cases, disqualify corn ethanol from claiming the tax credit. But under the GOP proposal, producers would explicitly not have to account for indirect land use changes.
The GOP proposal would deal a rapid and ruthless death blow to the 45V clean hydrogen production tax credit, requiring developers to begin construction before the end of this year if they want to claim it.
Other than ending transferability, the text makes no changes to the 45Q carbon capture and sequestration tax credit.
Most of the tax credits have provisions that allow project developers to qualify for higher amounts if they pay prevailing wages, hire apprentices, build in a qualified “energy community” or a low-income community, or use a certain percentage of domestically-produced materials. This initial draft from the GOP would not change any of those provisions.
Log in
To continue reading, log in to your account.
Create a Free Account
To unlock more free articles, please create a free account.
Hint: It’s one that tends to align with utilities.
Building trades want to build.
This desire for more and better big projects has meant that unions representing construction workers, utility linemen, operating engineers, plumbers, pipefitters, and so on have spent past decade-plus ping-ponging between praise and exasperation toward major Democratic priorities, especially when it comes to climate and energy policy.
Now, with a permitting bill negotiated by two Democrats and two Republicans in the Senate, much of the hardhat union sector is signing on as eager supporters. If the rest of the Democratic coalition can sign on to the bill, it may go some way to repairing a breach that has been widening since the Obama administration.
The modern fight over U.S. energy infrastructure began with a Canadian pipeline project.
Building trades were some of the most fervent advocates for the Keystone XL pipeline, which would have brought oil from the tar sands of Canada’s Alberta province into the continental United States — a project that Presidents Barack Obama and Joe Biden both opposed and which the latter finally canceled in 2021.
In the interim, the first Trump administration tested these unions’ historic allegiance with Democrats as the left became more vocal on climate policy. After Senator Ed Markey and Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez released their Green New Deal outline in 2019, the AFL-CIO sent the two progressives a letter saying their plan “makes promises that are not achievable or realistic.” The signatories also included the United Mine Workers, the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, and eight more building trades, hardhat unions and federations that would be threatened by a rapid transition to 100% renewable energy. The signatory unions represented a little under 3 million of the AFL-CIO’s then roughly 12.5 million members.
“The broad trajectory is that the building trades unions have been supportive of building pretty much anything, whether it’s fossil, whether it’s data centers, whether it’s clean energy,” Todd Tucker, director of the industrial policy and trade program at the Roosevelt Institute, told me.
Actual Democratic policymaking turned out to be more favorable to unions, with infrastructure spending, money for domestic manufacturing, prevailing wage requirements, and subsidies for nuclear power and carbon capture all spurring infrastructure work during the Biden years. North America’s Building Trades Unions described the 2021 bipartisan infrastructure law as the “single greatest infrastructure investment in our nation’s history,” while the Laborers’ International Union of North America, a.k.a. LIUNA, praised the 2022 Inflation Reduction Act for “taking a commonsense approach to our energy needs.”
Now, it’s environmental groups that are either opposed to or mum on a piece of infrastructure legislation — the Bipartisan American Affordability and Jobs Act — while most of the building trades support it.
The United Association of Journeymen and Apprentices of the Plumbing and Pipefitting Industry of the United States and Canada, otherwise known as the UA, signed the anti-Green New Deal letter and had a project labor agreement with the developer of the Keystone XL pipeline, but came out in support of the permitting deal. So did LIUNA and the International Union of Operating Engineers.
“In our industry, uncertainty means one thing: unemployment,” UA General President Mark McManus said in a statement. “It is long past time that Congress enacts meaningful permitting reform to put UA members to work faster.”
LIUNA’s president Brent Booker described BAAJA in a statement as a “monumental bipartisan permitting reform bill,” and urged “lawmakers in both parties to seize this moment, pass the Bipartisan American Affordability and Jobs Act of 2026, and finally deliver meaningful permitting reform.”
John Downey, the president of the Operating Engineers union, which signed a letter imploring the Biden-Harris transition team to maintain the Keystone pipeline’s permits, said in a statement that the union “applauds the bipartisan effort” on BAAJA, and that the “Operating Engineers look forward to working with Congress to pass this critical bipartisan bill.” Other Keystone XL supporters including the National Association of Manufacturers and the Chamber of Commerce have also come out in support of BAAJA.
There are a few industry and union players, however, that have been notably more circumspect: groups representing utilities and the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers.
The Edison Electric Institute, the trade group for investor-owned utilities, has in the past supported overhauling the National Environmental Policy Act and Clean Water Act, which the bill would do. The group’s chief executive, Drew Maloney, told reporters after the release of the bill text that it was “encouraged” by the permitting provisions in BAAJA and was “reviewing” the transmission provisions.
The transmission provisions are largely seen as hostile to incumbent utilities. Many in Washington — especially Republicans — see them as a sign of decreasing utility clout. The bill would encourage and enable greater state and federal oversight of utilities’ infrastructure buildouts and would restrict the utilities’ “right of first refusal” on building new transmission lines. Many ratepayer advocates argue that these projects do more to build out the utility rate base than to increase grid reliability
This stance — supportive of permitting reforms, wary of grid provisions — puts utilities in a kind of mirror image with big environmental groups like the Natural Resources Defense Council, which is friendly to the transmission portions of the bill but skeptical of the permitting portions.
Senator Kevin Cramer, a North Dakota Republican and himself a former utility regulator, warned utilities to “not get carried away” in trying to push for changes to the deal, Punchbowl News reported.
“What I’m really watching these days around the Senate BAAJA bill is where does the IBEW end up,” Tucker told me.
An IBEW spokesperson told me the union is “reviewing the language and holding discussions with stakeholders across our industries. We represent workers across affected industries (utilities, transmission, construction, etc.), so the details are very important.”
The IBEW has just over 900,000 members, including construction electricians, utility linemen, technicians, and operators, with particularly strong representation within utilities. The union also has special political influence due to its large and widespread membership — anywhere there’s a power line, there’s likely one of the IBEW’s more than 800 locals.
Utility watchdogs like David Pomerantz, executive director of the Energy and Policy Institute, are not surprised to see utilities and the IBEW taking similar (non-)stances toward the bill.
He told me the IBEW is a particularly potent force on issues affecting utilities because “they’re a more acceptable face to the Democratic electorate,” referring to their lobbying in blue states and of Democratic politicians. “Among Democrats, the IBEW right now is much more palatable than the utilities.” The IBEW has been a counterweight to the Democrats’ and the public’s increasingly harsh turn against data centers, for instance, opposing moratoria in New England, the Mountain West, New York, and the Kansas City area.
The IBEW has also weighed in on more fine-grained utility policy, including right-of-first-refusal, well before the release of BAAJA. A union policy brief describes these as policies that “prioritize unionized utilities for critical projects, safeguarding labor standards and ensuring safe and efficient energy infrastructure development.” In Illinois, an IBEW local intervened in a rate case to oppose a proposed cut in the return on equity for local utility ComEd.
But the IBEW has also won project labor agreements for the type of long distance, high-voltage transmission projects that many climate and clean energy advocates hope the bill encourages.
“Some of their members work for the utilities and the utilities are getting rolled by this legislation, but some of the members work in construction and building,” Tucker told me.
The question going forward for the union, he said, is “do you align your union strategy with the current business model of your current employers? Or do you make a bet that these new jobs that are getting created and new builds are going to net out positive?”
On Indonesia’s climate win, hacking renewables, and John Cena’s ad
Current conditions: A tropical rainstorm in the southwestern Gulf of Mexico, likely strengthening into what would become Tropical Storm Isaias, is poised to dump rain on the southeastern United States and may become the Atlantic’s first major hurricane of the year • Italy is bracing for a type of heavy rainstorm known as a nubifragio, set to soak Naples and Rome later this week • The Dome Fire in Yosemite National Park has burned about 7,000 acres, and officials determined it was sparked by humans.
If you can’t wait a decade or more for a new Westinghouse AP1000 or one of the small modular reactors under development, your best bet to get more nuclear electricity is probably to upgrade an existing reactor to squeeze more power out of it, a process known as “uprating.” In February, the Department of Energy gave out its largest-ever loan to Southern Company to fund up to 6 gigawatts of uprates across the utility’s nuclear fleet. Last week, Amazon inked a 20-year deal with Constellation, the nation’s largest operator of nuclear reactors, to buy power from and uprate the Calvert Cliffs plant in Maryland. Google has now signed a deal with Constellation aimed at wringing out 890 megawatts of new power from 11 reactors across PJM Interconnection, the nation’s second-largest and arguably most stressed grid system. Asked whether the uprates are a sufficient replacement for building new reactors, Raiford Smith, Google’s head of power and energy for the cloud, said there was plenty of demand to go around. “New data centers are coming on at a gigawatt a clip,” he told me yesterday. “That means even with all the uprates, there’s still more to come.” Software giant Oracle also announced a deal last week to buy $300 million of nuclear power from a NextEra nuclear plant in Wisconsin to help fund its increased fuel costs.
In a sign of progress on the country’s leading SMR design, the Texas grid has officially received an application for one of GE Vernova Hitachi Nuclear Energy’s BWRX-300 reactors. The 300-megawatt unit borrows from GE’s decades-long history of building boiling water reactors, and has a leg up on other SMRs given that Ontario Power Generation and the Tennessee Valley Authority, two of the continent’s biggest state-owned utilities, are building the first and second BWRX-300s, respectively. But the application to connect to the Electric Reliability Council of Texas’ power lines comes, per Bloomberg, from Blue Energy Global, a developer that has promised to build out modular power stations that convert seamlessly from gas to nuclear. While the company considers itself “reactor-agnostic,” it’s first focused on building out plants with the BWRX-300.
The Indonesian government has halted the clearing of an area of rainforest in Papua roughly the size of Maryland to make way for farmland to grow crops for food and biofuels. In twin announcements at a sustainability forum in Jakarta, Hashim Djojohadikusumo, President Prabowo Subianto’s special envoy for climate and energy, said the government would shift rice and sugarcane projects to degraded land, delivering a victory to both conservationists who sought to preserve vital habitats and carbon sinks and activists who sought to preserve indigenous cultures who depend on the forests. “This decision renews Indonesia’s leadership in showing how to expand agriculture while protecting nature,” Glenn Hurowitz, the founder and chief executive of the advocacy group Mighty Earth, said in a statement. In a post on X, journalist Michael Grunwald, who authored a landmark book about the climate impact of food production, called the news “a massive victory for the planet.”
For the past 18 years, John Murdock, an attorney and self-described conservative Christian, has served in the legal division at the Department of the Interior. But he resigned abruptly last month over what he called the Trump administration’s “deeply troubling assault on the rule of law.” Under the administration, he wrote in a blistering resignation letter obtained by the investigative site Public Domain, the “all of the above” energy strategy “has seemingly morphed into ‘one of the above,’ solely focused on fossil fuels.” Murdock highlighted “recent decisions to shutter nearly complete offshore wind projects and to pay TotalEnergies hundreds of millions of dollars to renounce wind leases” as examples of “an assault on logic and the American taxpayer.” He added: “We are headed in the wrong direction.
Sign up to receive Heatmap AM in your inbox every morning:
About a week ago, I told you the European Union was considering delaying implementation of its methane rule by a year to avoid jacking up prices on imported gas even higher when exporters inevitably fell short of the bloc’s strict reporting requirements for emissions throughout the fossil fuel supply chain. Well, it’s happened. European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen told EU lawmakers the postponement would save money. Her energy minister, Dan Jørgensen, cautioned that “we do not foresee this to be more than one year,” Reuters reported.
Meanwhile, Dutch researchers at the internet-scanning firm Modat told Reuters that hackers could seize full control of roughly 181 wind and solar sites around Europe and tamper with the administrative systems of thousands more. One wind turbine’s web page showed live data, “start,” “stop,” and “reset” buttons, and the turbine locations. “What we can map in hours, an attacker can map in hours too,” the report said. The researchers encouraged operators to take admin interfaces off the internet immediately.
Japanese automakers may be notoriously behind China on making electric vehicle batteries. But Suzuki has just released its first electric kei car — that beloved category of ulta-compact Japanese vehicles — using BYD’s batteries but undercutting the Chinese auto giant’s cheapest EV. The new Suzuki e-SKY will beat out BYD’s Racco as Japan’s cheapest mini EV, starting at about $13,500, according to Electrek.

The renewables industry is tapping in a WWE champion to make its case. John Cena stars in a new ad series backed by a consortium of wind and solar companies. “How powerful is clean energy?” he asks. “Pretend this is solar,” he says, flexing his right bicep. Flexing the left, he says: “And this is wind.” He then proceeds to obliterate a boulder by punching it into a statue of himself. It’s funny and charming.
Rob talks with the U.S. auto giant”s VP of batteries and sustainability, Kurt Kelty.
There are two big trends in the American battery sector at the moment. The first is that the electric vehicle market is deteriorating. GM, for instance, sold just 25,000 EVs in the third quarter of this year. Ford sold 6,000 EVs. Even the long-awaited return of the Chevy Bolt sold just 8,000 units — a small fraction of the vehicle’s already-limited production run. At the same time, the data center boom and the return of electricity growth is boosting batteries of all kinds not designed to power EVs.
Our guest today is in charge of navigating those opposing trends and figuring out what comes next. Kurt Kelty started his career at Panasonic in 1993, where he led the company’s battery research lab. He then went on to Tesla, helping to build the first Gigafactory. Since February 2024, he’s been vice president of battery and sustainability at GM. We talked about manufacturing generally, how the U.S. battery manufacturing sector should look, and how companies should be structured to compete globally, even though they’re making batteries for a mostly U.S. audience.
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, YouTube, 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 their conversation:
Robinson Meyer: In 2024, GM retired the Ultium brand, except for the Ultium cells. And I would say that as an outsider, unlike other domestic automakers, the whole GM stack — where you have a single battery design that you then slot into different vehicles — seems to be working, and certainly seems to be producing profitable vehicles in a way that other automakers’ approaches were not.
So why retire the Ultium name? In traditional automakers, you talk about platforms and different cars designed on the same platform. But are there going to be a few platforms at GM, each with their own chemistry, and then you design different vehicles on top of that? Why get rid of Ultium when it seemed to be working?
Kurt Kelty: Yeah, so the way I look at the future when EV volumes really start to ramp up, we’re going to need prismatic form factor, pouch form factor, cylindrical form factor. We’re going to need nickel cell, high-nickel cells. We’re going to need some LMR cells. We’re going to need some LFP cells. We’re going to need it all. What we do here at GM is we design the right battery for the right application. And generally, depending on the need, you may need high-nickel. You may need LFP. Most likely, you’re going to need LMR in most of our applications. That’s what we think. And in some cases, the prismatic form factor will work best. In other cases, the cylindrical form factor will work best.
I do not see a future where we’re standardizing on a single chemistry or a single form factor. We tried to do that in the battery industry in the late ’90s when I was in the business, and all the laptop companies got together and said, we’re going to make a standard form factor, so we’re going to drive down costs. We made the form factor. Everybody signed up for it. Nobody used it. And nobody used it because it was ... The way to really customize your laptop was the battery. Everything else had been standardized.
At that point they had the hard drive, you had the floppy and the screen, and all those were standard components. The battery was the way you made it custom. And with EVs, it’s the same thing. The battery is going to decide your driving range, your acceleration, your space in the car, your safety of the car. I mean, it just determines so much about how fast you can charge it. All these things are determined by the battery. And so you’re not going to see a standard.
And so at GM, we are preparing for that by having this battery innovation center, this electrification powerhouse that we’ve got. It’s something that we’re really proud of. And in the future, we’re going to really take advantage of this.
You can find a full transcript of the episode here.
Mentioned:
The Senate’s Big Bipartisan Permitting Deal, Explained
On Rivian’s record-setting Q3
Previously on Shift Key: Data Centers Are Creating a New Kind of Battery Monster
This episode of Shift Key is sponsored by ...
RE+ 26 is the largest clean energy event in North America, happening November 16th through 19th at the Las Vegas Convention Center. Register at re-plus.com and use code SHIFTKEY20 to save 20% off a Full Conference pass.
Every year Giving Green researches the top climate nonprofits and sends 100% of every dollar donated to its Giving Green Fund straight to them. Make your first gift before the new year, and it will be matched up to $500. Go to GivingGreen.earth/Shift.
Formed through a joint venture between Wärtsilä and RCT Solutions, Valo helps utilities, independent power producers, and developers navigate market and grid complexity without sacrificing system performance. Learn more at valoenergy.com.