Sign In or Create an Account.

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

Sparks

It’s Been a Very Weird 24 Hours for Biden in Michigan

Boy, are the politics of electric vehicles complicated.

President Biden on the picket line.
Heatmap Illustration/Getty Images

Is there a better illustration of the tricky politics of the electric vehicle transition than the past 24 hours in Michigan?

The day before President Joe Biden visited a United Autoworkers picket line in the state, Ford, the auto company seen as closest to reaching a deal with the striking union, said it was halting work on the multi-billion-dollar battery plant that had become a flashpoint for Republican concerns that the EV transition was too intertwined with China.

That’s a lot. Let me back up for a second.

Auto companies have announced plans for battery plants all over the country, looking to get a piece of incentives offered by the Inflation Reduction Act. Many of these plants are being planned for states that are hostile to unions and where the UAW has been unable to make inroads. The Ford battery plant in Marshall, Michigan, however, was different.

When the plant was announced earlier this year, the UAW welcomed it, with then-union president Ray Curry saying “Ford got it right by building this plant right here in Michigan.” The plant’s employees would be able to form a union via “card check,” a simpler process than a union election overseen by the National Labor Relations Board.

Almost immediately after the plant was announced, Republicans in Congress criticized Ford and the Biden administration for the company’s relationship with the Chinese battery company CATL, whose technology Ford would use in the plant.

The tussle over the Marshall plant captures in one planned facility just how politically complicated the electric vehicle transition is.


The Biden administration wants to reduce carbon emissions by electrifying the country’s automotive sector. It also wants to make the supply chain in key industries like cars and semiconductors resilient to shocks like a pandemic or escalating conflict with China. It also wants to see good jobs in states like Michigan which were key to its narrow electoral college victory in 2020.

These goals are all in some tension with each other: China is by far the world’s leader in foundational renewable energy technologies like solar panels and batteries. But if American companies are to build factories in the U.S. to try to catch up, they would rather do so in states where unions have less power than they do in Michigan. That typically means states run by Republicans who have made a point of attracting investment, like Georgia or Tennessee. But that goes against the interests of the UAW, which has subsequently grown very nervous about electrification leaving its work force behind.

Some Republicans have seized on the UAW strikes, striving to portray the Inflation Reduction Act as a massive handout to China that threatens union jobs. The Marshall plant would solve at least one, maybe two of these problems for the Democrats, as it was set up in firm UAW territory, with the support of a Democratic governor. But thanks to Republican opposition to working with Chinese companies, it quickly became the most controversial new Ford project.

While Biden’s standing with the UAW has probably received a large boost from his appearance in Romulus and his explicit support for higher wages for UAW members, the question over the Marshall plant shows just how perilous the historic tie-up between the Democratic Party and unionized autoworkers is — for both sides.

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
Sparks

Burgum Doubles Down on Renewables Permitting Freeze

The Secretary of the Interior said he “absolutely” planned to appeal a ruling that lifted blocks on wind and solar approvals.

Doug Burgum.
Heatmap Illustration/Getty Images

The Trump administration is not backing down from its discriminatory policies for approving wind and solar projects. Interior Secretary Doug Burgum testified to Congress on Wednesday that his agency would appeal a recent district court ruling blocking it from enforcing these policies.

“We reject the whole premise,” Burgum said during a House Natural Resources Committee hearing.

Keep reading...Show less
Blue
Sparks

New Jersey Admits Defeat on Offshore Wind (at Least for Now)

The state has terminated an agreement to develop substations and other necessary grid infrastructure to serve the now-canceled developments.

Mike Sherrill and Donald Trump.
Heatmap Illustration/Getty Images, Library of Congress

Crucial transmission for future offshore wind energy in New Jersey is scrapped for now.

The New Jersey Board of Public Utilities on Wednesday canceled the agreement it reached with PJM Interconnection in 2021 to develop wires and substations necessary to send electricity generated by offshore wind across the state. The board terminated this agreement because much of New Jersey’s expected offshore wind capacity has either been canceled by developers or indefinitely stalled by President Donald Trump, including the now-scrapped TotalEnergies projects scrubbed in a settlement with his administration.

Keep reading...Show less
Blue
Sparks

Federal Judge Breaks Trump’s Permitting Blockade

The opinion covered a host of actions the administration has taken to slow or halt renewables development.

Donald Trump, clean energy, and columns.
Heatmap Illustration/Getty Images

A federal court seems to have struck down a swath of Trump administration moves to paralyze solar and wind permits.

U.S. District Judge Denise Casper on Tuesday enjoined a raft of actions by the Trump administration that delayed federal renewable energy permits, granting a request submitted by regional trade groups. The plaintiffs argued that tactics employed by various executive branch agencies to stall permits violated the Administrative Procedures Act. Casper — an Obama appointee — agreed in a 73-page opinion, asserting that the APA challenge was likely to succeed on the merits.

Keep reading...Show less
Blue