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:
The Environmental Protection Agency is feeling a calendar crunch.

Since President Joe Biden took office more than two years ago, the Environmental Protection Agency has been something of a sleeping giant.
Once central to President Barack Obama’s climate policy, the EPA seemed to take a backseat under Biden. As the Department of Treasury wrote rules for a dizzying number of new tax credits, and the Department of Energy became a de facto industrial-planning organization, the EPA seemed to wallow.
Then a few weeks ago, the agency came alive.
Last week, it proposed requiring that most new cars sold in the United States — and one quarter of all heavy-duty trucks — be powered solely by electricity. A week before, it tightened limits on the amount of brain-damaging mercury that coal-burning power plants can release. In March, it instructed nearly two dozen states to clean up pollution from their factories and power plants, and it slashed the amount of toxic air pollution that buses, vans, and heavy-duty trucks can legally produce.
This sudden burst of activity is in some ways just the appetizer. Within the next few weeks, the EPA is expected to propose restricting climate-warming pollution from new and existing power plants. This set of draft rules will aim to rapidly eliminate greenhouse-gas pollution from the power sector, one of the most carbon-intensive parts of the economy, in order to meet Biden’s goal of producing 100% zero-carbon electricity by 2035.
It will also face an immediate challenge in the Supreme Court, which has blocked a similar effort in the past even as it has preserved the EPA’s broad power to issue rules about the power sector.
This sudden flurry of productivity may seem to have come out of nowhere.
So why is the EPA publishing so many of these rules now?
The same reason that any of us suddenly become productive: It’s under deadline pressure. For the EPA, and for every other executive agency, the effective beginning of the end of Biden’s first term is as little as a few weeks away. Here’s why.
Under a law called the Congressional Review Act, Congress can overturn new federal rules by a simple majority vote and with the president’s signature. Most of the time, that power doesn’t matter, because presidents rarely want to repeal rules that their own administration has issued. (Last month, Biden vetoed a CRA resolution for this reason.)
But it becomes important when a new White House and Congress take over from a president of the opposite party. In 2017, a newly elected President Donald Trump and a Republican Congress repealed 16 Obama-era rules. In 2021, the new Democratic trifecta overturned three of Trump’s rules.
Biden would like to avoid the same fate befalling his own administration’s climate rules, so he’s moving fast. The key is that Congress can only activate the CRA for new rules — which, under the law, means rules that were finalized during the past 60 “legislative days,” or days when the House or Senate was in session. Because Congress isn’t in session every day, that’s a much longer period of time than it may seem — it can stretch four or five months into the past. When Biden took office in early January 2021, for instance, Congress could use the CRA on any rules that the Trump administration finalized after August 21, 2020.
“It is difficult to know with any specificity what the ‘lookback window’ will look like in 2024,” because it depends on what “the actual session of Congress looks like,” Dan Goldbeck, the director of regulatory policy at the American Action Forum, a center-right think tank, told me. In recent years, the deadline has tended to fall sometime in the late summer, but there’s no guarantee this pattern will hold next year, he said.
Let’s figure it does, though, and that the administration must finalize rules before about August 1, 2024, in order to protect them from the CRA.
We can backfill the calendar from there. As of today, the EPA has only started to circulate drafts of its most important rules, such as the clean-cars mandate. It has yet to publish these drafts in the Federal Register, the government’s official journal of rules and regulations. When they are published, the agency will open a 60-day comment period when the public can respond to any facet of the rules; it will probably extend this to 90 days as a show of good faith.
So if the EPA publishes its draft rule in the Federal Register soon — on May 1, say — then the public comment period will end three months later, on August 1. Then the agency must go over its draft again, double check its math, and respond to every public comment that it has received. This process of finalizing the rule can take about a year. Assuming it does, then suddenly it’s August 1, 2024 — and we’re at the (approximate) deadline.
In other words, the EPA must publish as many rules as possible now in order to protect them from quick repeal if, say, Ron DeSantis is inaugurated in 2025. This is part of why the EPA is moving with such haste now — and why the Biden administration’s climate policy has entered a new and more aggressive phase.
Log in
To continue reading, log in to your account.
Create a Free Account
To unlock more free articles, please create a free account.
Cities across the state are adopting building codes that heavily incentivize homeowners to make the switch.
A quiet revolution in California’s building codes could turn many of the state’s summer-only air conditioners into all-season heat pumps.
Over the past few months, 12 California cities have adopted rules that strongly incentivize homeowners who are installing central air conditioning or replacing broken AC systems to get energy-efficient heat pumps that provide both heating and cooling. Households with separate natural gas or propane furnaces will be allowed to retain and use them, but the rules require that the heat pump becomes the primary heating system, with the furnace providing backup heat only on especially cold days, reducing fossil fuel use.
These “AC2HP” rules, as proponents call them, were included in a routine update of California building codes in 2024. Rather than make it mandatory, regulators put the heat pump rule in a package of “stretch codes” that cities could adopt as they saw fit. Moreno Valley, a city in Riverside County, east of Los Angeles, was the first to pass an ordinance adopting the AC2HP code back in August. A steady stream of cities have followed, with Los Gatos and Portola Valley joining the party just last week. Dylan Plummer, a campaign advisor for Sierra Club's Building Electrification Campaign, expects more will follow in the months to come — “conversations are moving” in Los Angeles and Sacramento, as well, he told me.
“This is a consumer protection and climate policy in one,” he said. As California gets hotter, more households in the state are getting air conditioners for the first time. “Every time a household installs a one-way AC unit, it’s a missed opportunity to install a heat pump and seamlessly equip homes with zero-emission heating.”
This policy domino effect is not unlike what happened in California after the city of Berkeley passed an ordinance in 2019 that would have prohibited new buildings from installing natural gas. The Sierra Club and other environmental groups helped lead more than 70 cities to follow in Berkeley’s footsteps. Ultimately, a federal court overturned Berkeley’s ordinance, finding that it violated a law giving the federal government authority over appliance energy usage. Many of the other cities have since suspended their gas bans.
Since then, however, California has adopted state-wide energy codes that strongly encourage new buildings to be all-electric anyway. In 2023, more than 70% of requests for service lines from developers to Pacific Gas & Electric, the biggest utility in the state, were for new all-electric buildings. The AC2HP codes tackle the other half of the equation — decarbonizing existing buildings.
A coalition of environmental groups including the Sierra Club, Earthjustice, and the Building Decarbonization Coalition are working to seed AC2HP rules throughout the state, although it may not be easy as cost-of-living concerns grow more politically charged.
Even in some of the cities that have adopted the code, members of the public worried about the expense. In Moreno Valley, for instance, a comparatively low-income community, six out of the seven locals who spoke on the measure at a meeting in August urged elected officials to reject it, and not just because of cost — some were also skeptical of the technology.
In Glendale, a suburb of Los Angeles which has more socioeconomic diversity, all four commenters who spoke also urged the council to reject the measure. In addition to cost concerns, they questioned why the city would rush to do something like this when the state didn’t make it mandatory, arguing that the council should have held a full public hearing on the change.
In Menlo Park, on the other hand, which is a wealthy Silicon Valley suburb, all five speakers were in support of the measure, although each of them was affiliated with an environmental group.
Heat pumps are more expensive than air conditioners by a couple of thousands of dollars, depending on the model. With state and local incentives, the upfront cost can often be comparable. When you take into account the fact that you’re moving from using two appliances for heating and cooling to one, the equipment tends to be cheaper in the long run.
The impacts of heat pumps on energy bills are more complicated. Heat pumps are almost always cheaper to operate in the winter than furnaces that use propane or electric resistance. Compared to natural gas heating, though, it mostly depends on the relative cost of gas versus electricity. Low-income customers in California have access to lower electricity rates that make heat pumps more likely to pencil out. The state also recently implemented a new electricity rate scheme that will see utilities charge customers higher fixed fees and lower rates per kilowatt-hour of electricity used, which may also help heat pump economics.
Matthew Vespa, an senior attorney at Earthjustice described the AC2HP policy as a way to help customers “hedge against gas rates going up,” noting that gas prices are likely to rise as the U.S. exports more of the fuel as liquified natural gas, and also as gas companies lose customers. “It’s really a small incremental cost to getting an AC replaced with a lot of potential benefits.”
The AC2HP idea dates back to a 2021 Twitter thread by Nate Adams, a heat pump installer who goes by the handle “Nate the House Whisperer.” Adams proposed that the federal government should pay manufacturers to stop producing air conditioners and only produce heat pumps. Central heat pumps are exactly the same as air conditioners, except they provide heating in addition to cooling thanks to “a few valves or ~$100-300 in parts,” Adam said at the time.
The problem is, most homeowners and installers are either unfamiliar with the technology or skeptical of it. While heat pumps have been around for decades and are widespread in other parts of the world, especially in Asia, they have been slower to take off in the United States. One reason is the common misconception that they don’t work as well as furnaces for heating. Part of the issue is also that furnaces themselves are less expensive, so heat pumps are a tougher sell in the moment when someone’s furnace has broken down. Adams’ policy pitch would have given people no choice but to start installing heat pumps — even if they didn’t use them for heating — getting a key decarbonization technology into homes faster than any rebate or consumer incentive could, and getting the market better acquainted with the tech.
The idea gained traction quickly. An energy efficiency research and advocacy organization called CLASP published a series of reports looking at the potential cost and benefits, and a manufacturer-focused heat pump tax credit even made its way into a bill proposal from Senator Amy Klobuchar in the runup to the 2022 Inflation Reduction Act. While rules that target California homeowners obviously won’t have the nation-wide effect that Adams’ would have, they still have the potential to send a strong market signal, considering California is the fifth largest economy in the world.
The AC2HP codes, which start going into effect next year, will help smooth the road to another set of building electrification rules that will apply in some parts of the state beginning in 2029. At that point, households in the Bay Area will be subject to new air quality standards that require all newly installed heating equipment to be zero-emissions — in other words, if a family’s furnace breaks down, they’ll have to replace it with a heat pump. State regulators are developing similar standards that would apply statewide starting in 2035. The AC2HP rule ensures that if that same family’s air conditioner breaks between now and then, they won’t end up with a new air conditioner, which would eventually become redundant.
The rule is just one of a bunch of new tools cities are using to decarbonize existing buildings. San Francisco, for example, adopted an even stricter building code in September that requires full, whole-home electrification when a building is undergoing a major renovation that includes upgrades to its mechanical systems. Many cities are also adopting an “electrical readiness” code that requires building owners to upgrade their electrical panels and add wiring for electric vehicle charging and induction stoves when they make additions or alterations to an existing building.
To be clear, homeowners in cities with AC2HP laws will not be forced to buy heat pumps. The code permits the installation of an air conditioner, but requires that it be supplemented with efficiency upgrades such as insulating air ducts and attics — which may ultimately be more costly than the heat pump route.
“I don’t think most people understand that these units exist, and they’re kind of plug and play with the AC,” said Vespa.
Current conditions: The Pacific Northwest’s second atmospheric river in a row is set to pour up to 8 inches of rain on Washington and Oregon • A snow storm is dumping up to 6 inches of snow from North Dakota to northern New York • Warm air is blowing northeastward into Central Asia, raising temperatures to nearly 80 degrees Fahrenheit at elevations nearly 2,000 feet above sea level.
Heatmap’s Jael Holzman had a big scoop last night: The three leading Senate Democrats on energy and permitting reform issues are a nay on passing the SPEED Act. In a joint statement shared exclusively with Jael, Senate Energy and Natural Resources ranking member Martin Heinrich, Environment and Public Works ranking member Sheldon Whitehouse, and Hawaii senator Brian Schatz pledged to vote against the bill to overhaul the National Environmental Policy Act unless the legislation is updated to include measures to boost renewable energy and transmission development. “We are committed to streamlining the permitting process — but only if it ensures we can build out transmission and cheap, clean energy. While the SPEED Act does not meet that standard, we will continue working to pass comprehensive permitting reform that takes real steps to bring down electricity costs,” the statement read. To get up to speed on the legislation, read this breakdown from Heatmap’s Emily Pontecorvo.

In June, Heatmap’s Matthew Zeitlin explained how New York State was attempting to overcome the biggest challenge to building a new nuclear plant — its deregulated electricity market — by tasking its state-owned utility with overseeing the project. It’s already begun staffing up for the nuclear project, as I reported in this newsletter. But it’s worth remembering that the New York Power Authority, the second-largest government-controlled utility in the U.S. after the federal Tennessee Valley Authority, gained a new mandate to invest in power plants directly again when the 2023 state budget passed with measures calling for public ownership of renewables. On Tuesday, NYPA’s board of trustees unanimously approved a list of projects in which the utility will take 51% ownership stakes in a bid to hasten construction of large-scale solar, wind, and battery facilities. The combined maximum output of all the projects comes to 5.5 gigawatts, nearly double the original target of 3 gigawatts set in January.
But that’s still about 25% below the 7 gigawatts NYPA outlined in its draft proposal in July. What changed? At a hearing Tuesday morning, NYPA officials described headwinds blowing from three directions: Trump’s phaseout of renewable tax credits, a new transmission study that identified which projects would cost too much to patch onto the grid, and a lack of power purchase agreements from offtakers. One or more of those variables ultimately led private developers to pull out at least 16 projects that NYPA would have co-owned.
Sign up to receive Heatmap AM in your inbox every morning:
During World War II, the Lionel toy train company started making components for warships, the Ford Motor Company produced bomber planes, and the Mattatuck Manufacturing Company known for its upholstery nails switched to churning out cartridge clips for Springfield rifles. In a sign of how severe the shortfall of equipment to generate gas-powered electricity has become, would-be supersonic jet startups are making turbines. While pushing to legalize flights of the supersonic jets his company wants to build, Blake Scholl, the chief executive of Boom Supersonic, said he “kept hearing about how AI companies couldn’t get enough electricity,” and how companies such as ChatGPT-maker OpenAI “were building their own power plants with large arrays of converted jet engines.” In a thread on X, he said that, “under real world conditions, four of our Superpower turbines could do the job of seven legacy units. Without the cooling water required by legacy turbines!”
The gas turbine crisis, as Matthew wrote in September, may be moving into a new phase as industrial giants race to meet the surging demand. In general, investors have rewarded the effort. “But,” as Matthew posed, “what happens when the pressure to build doesn’t come from customers but from competitors?” We may soon find out.
It is, quite literally, the stuff of science fiction, the kind of space-based solar power plant that Isaac Asimov imagined back in 1940. But as Heatmap’s Katie Brigham reported in an exclusive this morning, the space solar company Overview Energy has emerged from stealth, announcing its intention to make satellites that will transmit energy via lasers directly onto Earth’s power grids. The company has raised $20 million in a seed round led by Lowercarbon Capital, Prime Movers Lab, and Engine Ventures, and is now working toward raising a Series A. The way the technology would work is by beaming the solar power to existing utility-scale solar projects. As Katie explained: “The core thesis behind Overview is to allow solar farms to generate power when the sun isn’t shining, turning solar into a firm, 24/7 renewable resource. What’s more, the satellites could direct their energy anywhere in the world, depending on demand. California solar farms, for example, could receive energy in the early morning hours. Then, as the sun rises over the West Coast and sets in Europe, ‘we switch the beam over to Western Europe, Morocco, things in that area, power them through the evening peak,’” Marc Berte, the founder and CEO of Overview Energy, told her. He added: “It hits 10 p.m., 11 p.m., most people are starting to go to bed if it’s a weekday. Demand is going down. But it’s now 3 p.m. in California, so you switch the beam back.”
In bigger fundraising news with more immediate implications for our energy system, next-generation geothermal darling Fervo Energy has raised another $462 million in a Series E round to help push its first power plants over the finish line, as Matthew wrote about this morning.
When Sanae Takaichi became the first Japanese woman to serve as prime minister in October, I told you at the time how she wanted to put surging energy needs ahead of lingering fears from Fukushima by turning the country’s nuclear plants back on and building more reactors. Her focus isn’t just on fission. Japan is “repositioning fusion energy from a distant research objective to an industrial priority,” according to The Fusion Report. And Helical Fusion has emerged as its national champion. The Tokyo-based company has signed the first power purchase agreement in Japan for fusion, a deal with the regional supermarket chain Aoki Super Co. to power some of its 50 stores. The Takaichi administration has signaled plans to increase funding for fusion as the new government looks to hasten its development. While “Japan still trails the U.S. and China in total fusion investment,” the trade newsletter reported, “the policy architecture now exists to close that gap rapidly.”
Another day, another emerging energy or climate technology gets Google’s backing. This morning, the carbon removal startup Ebb inked a deal with Google to suck 3,500 tons of CO2 out of the atmosphere. Ebb’s technology converts carbon dioxide from the air into “safe, durable” bicarbonate in seawater and converting “what has historically been a waste stream into a climate solution,” Ben Tarbell, chief executive of Ebb, said in a statement. “The natural systems in the ocean represent the most powerful and rapidly scalable path to meaningful carbon removal … Our ability to remove CO2 at scale becomes the natural outcome of smart business decisions — a powerful financial incentive that will drive expansion of our technology.”
The Series E round will fund the enhanced geothermal company’s flagship Cape Station project.
The enhanced geothermal company Fervo is raising another $462 million, bringing on new investors in its Series E equity round.
The lead investor is a new one to the company’s books: venture capital firm B Capital, started by Facebook co-founder Eduardo Saverin. Fervo did not disclose a valuation, but Axios reported in March that it had been discussing an IPO in the next year or two at a $2 billion to $4 billion valuation.
Much of the capital will be devoted to further investments in its Cape Station facility in Utah, which is due to start generating 100 megawatts of grid power by the end of 2026. A smaller project in Nevada came online in 2023.
Fervo’s last equity round was early last year, when it raised $255 million led by oil and gas company Devon. It also raised another $206 million this past summer in debt and equity to finance the Cape Station project, specifically, and reported faster, deeper drilling numbers.
“I think putting pedal to the metal is a good way to put it. We are continuing to make progress at Cape station, which is our flagship project in Southwest Utah, and some of the funding will also be used for early stage development at other projects and locations to expand Fervo’s reach across the Western U.S.,” Sarah Jewett, Fervo’s senior vice president of strategy, told me
“Enhanced geothermal” refers to injecting fluid into hot, underground rocks using techniques borrowed from hydraulic fracturing for oil and gas. Along with the geothermal industry as a whole, Fervo has found itself in the sweet spot of energy politics. It can provide power for technology companies with sustainability mandates and states with decarbonization goals because it produces carbon-free electricity. And it can host Republican politicians at its facilities because the power is 24/7 and employs labor and equipment familiar to the oil and gas industry. While the Trump administration has been on a warpath against solar and (especially) wind, geothermal got a shoutout in the White House’s AI Action Report as an electricity source that should be nurtured.
“Being clean and operating around the clock is just a really strong value proposition to the market,” Jewett said. “Utilizing an oil and gas workforce is obviously a big part of that story; developing in rural America to serve grids across the West; producing clean, emissions-free energy. It's just a really nice, well-rounded value proposition that has managed to maintain really strong support across the aisle in Washington despite the administration shift.”
But bipartisan support on its own can’t lead to gigawatts of new, enhanced geothermal powering the American west. For that Fervo, like any venture-backed or startup energy developer, needs project finance, money raised for an individual energy project (like a solar farm or a power plant) that must be matched by predictable, steady cashflows. “That is, obviously the ultimate goal, is to bring the cost of capital down for these projects to what we call the ‘solar standard,’’’ Jewett said, referring to a minimum return to investors of below 10%, which solar projects can finance themselves at.
While solar power at this point is a mature technology using mass-manufactured, standardized parts having very good foreknowledge of where it will be most effective for generating electricity (it’s where the sun shines), enhanced geothermal is riskier, both in finding places to drill and in terms of drilling costs. Project finance investors tend to like what they can easily predict.
“We are well on our way to do it,” Jewett said of bringing down the perceived risk of enhanced geothermal. “This corporate equity helps us build the track record that we need to attract” project finance investors.
Whether enhanced geothermal is price competitive isn’t quite clear: Its levelized cost of energy is estimated to be around twice utility scale solar's, although that metric doesn’t give it credit for geothermal’s greater reliability and lack of dependence on the weather.
While Cape Station itself is currently covered in snow, Jewett said, construction is heating up. The facility has three power plants installed, a substation and transmission and distribution lines starting to be put up, putting the facility in line to start generating power next year, Jewett said.By the time it starts generating power for customers, Fervo hopes to have reduced costs even more.
“Cost reductions happen through learning by doing — doing it over and over and over again. We have now drilled over 30 wells at the Cape Station field and we’re learning over time what works best,” Jewett said.