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:
I thought the conference would be a pseudo-event. I didn’t think it would be like this.

The third day of events are ending here at COP28 in Dubai. If you read any international coverage of the conference, you probably saw that King Charles III of the United Kingdom and President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva of Brazil spoke at the main session today, along with many other world leaders. “The planet is tired of climate agreements and goals that were not fulfilled,” Lula said. “How many world leaders are, in fact, committed to save the planet?”
Vice President Kamala Harris is in town and expected to address the summit tomorrow.
I will be honest: I did not see the king or the president, and (Biden administration officials: stop reading now) I’m not sure whether I’ll see the VP tomorrow. I trusted that my colleagues in the media could ably cover their speeches, so instead I wandered the conference site and spoke to other attendees. Dubai is holding COP at what it calls the “Expo 2020” site, a massive campus that hosted a world’s fair-type event two years ago. At its center is the Al Wasl Plaza Dome, a 22-story hemisphere that acts as a surface for enormous, climate-themed projections. The scale of the grounds is huge, evoking Las Vegas or Disney World. Like a Disney park, the landscaping is immaculate and vaguely “global,” vaguely inspiring background music is piped into the environment at all times. It is easy to forget you are surrounded on all sides by parking lots.
I share this context not to extol the scale of Emirati infrastructure — they get enough of that already — but to give you a sense of the scale of COP. If you count delegates, staff, other attendees, and day visitors, more than 100,000 people will go to the climate conference this year, the UN climate director Simon Stiell announced yesterday. The campus absorbed many, perhaps most, of those people today. And most of them had absolutely nothing to do with whatever King Charles said at the plenary. Instead, they spent the day much as I did, attending other programming, meeting new people, catching up with old colleagues, and gawking.
Before I came to COP, I knew that it was — to borrow the late historian Daniel Boorstin’s phrase — a pseudo-event, a spectacle that exists partially to be covered in the press. The Paris Agreement’s central mechanism is the “naming and shaming” of climate underperformers, an idea that implies a press to name and a public sphere where the shaming can happen.
What I did not realize is that many of the main COP proceedings are a kind of pseudo-event within a pseudo-event — a media-driven story that acts as an organizing narrative for the larger conference. Yesterday, the big news out of COP was that countries launched the long-awaited loss and damage fund. But many people here had little to do with that accomplishment, and they learned the news of its adoption in more or less the same way that you did.
None of this is to disparage COP. Even though it might be a pseudo-event, it can still change the world — it has changed the world. I’ll write about how and why in the next few days.
This is Robinson Meyer’s third dispatch from Dubai, where he is attending COP28. Read the first here and second here, or sign up to receive the next one in your inbox with Heatmap Daily:
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 state has terminated an agreement to develop substations and other necessary grid infrastructure to serve the now-canceled developments.
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.
“New Jersey is now facing a situation in which there will be no identified, large-scale in-state generation projects under active development that can make use of [the agreement] on the timeline the state and PJM initially envisioned,” the board wrote in a letter to PJM requesting termination of the agreement.
Wind energy backers are not taking this lying down. “We cannot fault the Sherrill Administration for making this decision today, but this must only be a temporary setback,” Robert Freudenberg of the New Jersey and New York-focused environmental advocacy group Regional Plan Association, said in a statement released after the agreement was canceled.
I chronicled the fight over this specific transmission infrastructure before Trump 2.0 entered office and the White House went nuclear on offshore wind. Known as the Larrabee Pre-Built Infrastructure, the proposed BPU-backed network of lines and electrical equipment resulted from years of environmental and sociological study. It was intended to connect wind projects in the Atlantic Ocean to key points on the overall grid onshore.
Activists opposed to putting turbines in the ocean saw stopping the wires as a strategy for delaying the overall construction timelines for offshore wind, intensifying both the costs and permitting headaches for all state and development stakeholders involved. Some of those fighting the wires did so based on fears that electromagnetic radiation from the transmission lines would make them sick.
The only question mark remaining is whether this means the state will try to still proceed with building any of the transmission given rising electricity demand and if these plans may be revisited at a later date. The board’s letter to PJM nods to the future, asserting that new “alternative pathways to coordinated transmission” exist because of new guidance from the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission. These pathways “may serve” future offshore wind projects should they be pursued, stated the letter.
Of course, anything related to offshore wind will still be conditional on the White House.
The opinion covered a host of actions the administration has taken to slow or halt renewables development.
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.
The ruling is a potentially fatal blow to five key methods the Trump administration has used to stymie federal renewable energy permitting. It appears to strike down the Interior Department memo requiring sign-off from Interior Secretary Doug Burgum on all major approvals, as well as instructions that the Interior and the Army Corps of Engineers prioritize “energy dense” projects in ways likely to benefit fossil fuels. Also struck down: a ban on access to a Fish and Wildlife Service species database and an Interior legal opinion targeting offshore wind leases.
Casper found a litany of reasons the five actions may have violated the Administrative Procedures Act. For example, the memo mandating political reviews was “a significant departure from [Interior] precedent,” and therefore “required a ‘more detailed justification’ than that needed for merely implementing a new policy.” The “energy density” permitting rubric, meanwhile, “conflicts” with federal laws governing federal energy leases so it likely violated the APA, the judge wrote.
What’s next is anyone’s guess. Some cynical readers may wonder whether the Supreme Court will just lift the preliminary injunction at the administration’s request. It’s worth noting Casper had the High Court’s penchant for neutralizing preliminary injunctions in mind, writing in her opinion, “The Court concludes that the scope of this requested injunctive relief is appropriate and consistent with the Supreme Court’s limitations on nationwide injunctions.”
Fights over AI-related developments outnumber those over wind farms in the Heatmap Pro database.
Local data center conflicts in the U.S. now outnumber clashes over wind farms.
More than 270 data centers have faced opposition across the country compared to 258 onshore and offshore wind projects, according to a review of data collected by Heatmap Pro. Data center battles only recently overtook wind turbines, driven by the sudden spike in backlash to data center development over the past year. It’s indicative of how the intensity of the angst over big tech infrastructure is surging past current and historic malaise against wind.
Battles over solar projects have still occurred far more often than fights over data centers — nearly twice as many times, per the data. But in terms of megawatts, the sheer amount of data center demand that has been opposed nearly equals that of solar: more than 51 gigawatts.
Taken together, these numbers describe the tremendous power involved in the data center wars, which is now comparable to the entire national fight over renewable energy. One side of the brawl is demand, the other supply. If this trend continues at this pace, it’s possible the scale of tension over data centers could one day usurp what we’ve been tracking for both solar and wind combined.