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:
It’s useful for more than just decarbonization.

Now that President Donald Trump has been officially inaugurated and issued his barrage of executive orders celebrating fossil fuels and shelving climate technologies such as wind energy and electric vehicles, climate tech startups are in a pickle. Federal funding can play a critical role in helping companies scale up and build out first-of-a-kind projects and facilities. So how to work with a government hostile to one of these startups’ core value propositions: aiding in the energy transition?
Talk of clean tech and electrification may be out of vogue, but its utility is not. The potential of many of these companies goes beyond mitigating climate change and into the realm of energy security and resilience — something the Department of Defense is well aware of.
The White House’s climate webpage has gone dark; the Department of Defense’s climate resilience portal lasted a little longer, but that’s now down, too. Once upon a time, though, the site read, “The changing climate is one of many threat multipliers to National Security, which adds complexity to Department of Defense decisions.” That’s a major reason why this agency can’t stop, won’t stop funding climate technologies. Another reason is that many technologies that happen to be good for the planet might also simply be the best tool for the job, meaning the DOD need not utter the word “climate” at all when justifying its decision to deploy new solutions.
“The Defense Department, so far in our experience, has framed things largely in terms of alternative benefits that our technology can have, such as fuel supply chain redundancy and reliability,” Ted McKlveen, co-founder and CEO of the hydrogen storage company Verne, told me. Verne received a $250,000 Small Business Innovation Research grant from the Army last May to work on the development of hydrogen vehicles.
Cindy Taff, CEO of the next-generation geothermal startup Sage Geosystems, told me something similar. “What the military likes to talk about is energy resilience,” she said, though she has heard the DOD tout the climate benefits of her company’s tech, too. Sage currently has multiple DOD engagements, including feasibility studies with both the Army and Navy and a $1.9 million grant to build a demonstration project for the Air Force.
That’s not to say it’s clear what the Department of Defense’s funding priorities under Trump will be. When I contacted the DOD in mid-December to request an interview for this story, a spokesperson initially told me they would help connect me to the right person. But as Trump’s inauguration drew nearer, I got a message saying the agency would have to hold off until it got more guidance, as “it remains to be seen in the next few weeks what direction the new administration is going.”
Regardless of how the priorities shake out, practically every climate-focused company and venture capitalist I talk to emphasizes that their companies will only succeed if they can make or invest in products that can compete on economics and/or quality alone, sans government support. That was true even before a second Trump turn in the White House started to look like an inevitability, and this new administration will at least partially reveal which companies can do that. But while everybody aims to be independent of federal support, they might not actually need to say goodbye to that funding stream, so long as they can tout their economic and performance benefits to the right customers.
Take Pyka, for example. When Michael Norcia co-founded the autonomous electric aircraft company in 2017, the ultimate goal was to design a passenger plane. “We want that to be our legacy, but we were also very, very realistic about the challenges associated with actually doing that,” he told me. So when the DOD took an interest in the company’s commercial cargo planes and their potential ability to deliver supplies in contested environments, the startup jumped at the opportunity, delivering its first aircraft to AFWERX, the innovation arm of the Department of the Air Force, early last year. Interest from such a lucrative government customer helped the company to close its $40 million Series B round in September.
Of course, the decarbonization benefits of electrifying military cargo delivery would be huge. But unsurprisingly, Norcia told me that the DOD primarily frames the opportunity in terms of the capabilities of all-electric or hybrid-electric planes, which could take a variety of fuels, operate quietly, and give off minimal heat, making them more difficult to detect via thermal imaging. Plus, the more equipment is electrified the better, “in terms of having them be able to operate in a highly contested environment, where moving fuel around maybe is not feasible,” Norcia explained. Not to mention the fact that if a manned aircraft is shot down, people die, meaning that in a counterfactual sense, Pyka’s tech is saving lives.
Verne’s North Star is also decarbonization. And given that the military is the world’s largest oil consumer, McKlveen was excited to partner with the Army to put its hydrogen storage tech to use in medium and heavy-duty vehicles. The company stores hydrogen (ideally green hydrogen, produced via renewables-powered electrolysis) at high density as a cold, compressed gas, making it possible to build hydrogen vehicles with greater range and lower cost than has traditionally been done. Similar to Pyka, the Army is enthused that these vehicles would be difficult for adversaries to detect, as they’re quiet and give off little heat. Likewise, McKlveen told me that hydrogen power could replace the Army’s notoriously noisy generators.
While Verne has also partnered with the Department of Energy and its R&D arm, ARPA-E, McKlveen said that working with the DOD has been unique in a few ways. “The key difference is the DOD is a customer and a grant provider. So they can say both what their needs are as a potential customer and represent a potential customer,” he explained. This, along with the agency’s clear, phased approach that it puts companies through, helps bring a level of transparency to the whole process, from pilot to full-fledged military implementation, that McKlveen appreciates.
And lest we forget, “they also have a very large budget,” he told me. For fiscal year 2025, the DOD has requested $849.8 billion, while the DOE, by comparison, has requested a mere $51.4 billion.
“I find military people to be get-it-done type of people,” Taff of Sage Geosystems told me. “So I think that helps to create a sense of urgency and also push things along a lot faster than you would see with maybe other organizations.” Sage uses drilling technologies adopted from the oil and gas industry to access heat for clean electricity production across a wide variety of geographies. This is an especially attractive option for the DOD as the majority of geothermal infrastructure is underground, and thus well protected from attack. And unlike other renewables, this tech can provide 24/7 energy no matter the weather conditions. So it’s no surprise that the military is pouring money into this sector, pursuing partnerships with other big names in the geothermal space such as Fervo Energy and Eavor.
Electric planes, hydrogen, and geothermal all felt intuitively justifiable to me from a defense standpoint, but I was more surprised to learn that the DOD has gotten into the alternative proteins, a.k.a. “fake meat”, industry. Though meat substitutes won’t power tankers or keep the lights on, the Defense Department’s $1.4 million grant to The Better Meat Co. is intended to strengthen the American supply chain. China’s Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Affairs views lab-grown meat as critical to its five-year agricultural plan. “So we don’t want to have the United States be importing clean protein in the way that we’re currently dependent on Asia for our semiconductors and photovoltaics,” Paul Shapiro, the company’s CEO, told me.
The Better Meat Co. produces a protein called Rhiza that’s derived from microscopic fungi, which it then sells as an ingredient to other companies to make either 100% animal-free meat or a meat blend. “This isn’t an alternative protein program. It’s a domestic biomanufacturing program,” Shapiro told me when I asked if military funding for meat substitutes could be at risk under Trump. Looking at some of the other companies that got grants through the same program, he said, “it’s literally like bio manufacturing things for military planes and jet lubricants and chemical catalysts for bullets.” That is, probably not Republican targets for defunding. “It’s clearly solely about wanting the U.S. to be a leader in biomanufacturing for the products that the world is going to depend on in the future.”
The DOD also sees promise in numerous other clean energy technologies, including nuclear microreactors for their portability and ability to provide off-grid energy in remote locations and alternate battery chemistries that could help the U.S. move away from a dependence on Chinese-produced lithium-ion batteries.
But despite the deep well of funding and pragmatic approach to deployment that the Department of Defense offers, agreeing to work with the DOD isn’t always an obvious choice. Many fear their company’s tech could be used in ways and in wars that they oppose. In 2018, for example, thousands of Google employees signed a letter opposing the company’s participation in Project Maven, a partnership with the Pentagon that uses artificial intelligence to improve the accuracy of drone strikes. Supporters of the project said it would lead to fewer civilian deaths, while protestors argued that Google “should not be in the business of war.” Google did not renew the contract. More recently, employees at Microsoft, Google, and Amazon have signed petitions opposing their company’s provision of cloud computing and AI services to the Israeli government.
Norcia noted that most, but not all of his employees were neutral to positive when it came to working with the Air Force, while “for a small minority of the company, it unfortunately was not something that they really wanted to devote their life to.” While he understands that perspective, Norcia does believe that Pyka’s work with the DOD is a net positive for the world. “If you assume wars are going to keep happening — which, unfortunately, I think is the reality — I’d rather have it be the case that they’re more of a robot war than a human war,” he told me. And at the end of the day, passenger planes are still the goal.
As for his team at Verne, McKlveen told me everybody was on board. “The Defense Department has led to some of the biggest innovations of the last century, whether that’s the internet or GPS. And our team knows that.” Plus, even if the DOD doesn’t talk much about the climate benefits of sustainability-focused tech, that doesn’t negate them. A 2019 study revealed that the Pentagon purchases an average of 100 million barrels of oil per year, so from that perspective, “it’s hard to find a bigger customer that we can address,” McKlveen told me.
Norcia agreed. “I think the gains of your impact get turned way up if you’re doing work with the DOD,” he said, “as opposed to, you know, building an app that makes something incrementally more efficient or more addictive.”
Editor’s note: This story has been updated to reflect that DOD’s climate resilience portal has been taken down.
Log in
To continue reading, log in to your account.
Create a Free Account
To unlock more free articles, please create a free account.
This is an edition of Heatmap Daily, an evening review of the day’s news written by our executive editor. Sign up for it here.
El Niño is here.
The world’s largest ocean slipped into the weather pattern in the spring, according to the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, and the sea surface is now significantly warmer than average in one important region. When you chart ocean temperatures on a map, the “El Niño tongue” (yes, that is what scientists call it) clearly appears:

It might be more accurate to describe El Niño as something that happens to the planet, though. The Pacific occupies about one-third of Earth’s surface. When that third becomes unusually warm, it transforms weather around the world, driving wetter conditions in California, Central America, and South America; and drier weather in Asia, Africa, and Australia.
So far, so normal. El Niño is a standard fluctuation in the Earth’s climate system; we experienced the last one in 2023 and 2024.
But that is roughly where what’s normal about this year’s El Niño ends.
For one, this El Niño is far more intense than we should expect at this time of year. In an El Niño, the Pacific’s average temperature usually rises through the end of December or so; the phenomenon’s original name in Spanish, El niño de Navidad, alluded to the surprising arrival of warm currents in South America around Christmas. In the modern satellite era, the warmest El Niño ever measured happened in 2015, and ocean temperatures peaked at 3.1 degrees Celsius in November and December of that year. We called that a “Super El Niño” for just how abnormal it was.
Yet the Pacific is already more than 2.6 degrees Celsius (or nearly 5 degrees Fahrenheit) above normal — making this the third strongest El Niño ever measured in the satellite era — and it is only August. We still have four months to go, and this El Niño is already a record-smasher. More ominously, models expect that this El Niño could eventually grow to more than 4 degrees Celsius, or 7 degrees Fahrenheit, above normal.
What will that mean for the world? According to a recent Science study, the average El Niño can cost the global economy more than $3 trillion. The world is richer now than it was a decade or two ago, which should make it better able to withstand disaster. But this El Niño is so far out of sample that it’s hard to know what it could do.
And perhaps more importantly — as the climate scientist Zeke Hausfather, the guest of our new episode of Shift Key says today — it will offer a kind of preview of what the planet’s normal climate will resemble a decade from now. This El Niño is likely to push 2027’s average temperature above 1.5 degrees Celsius, the nominal threshold at which countries hoped to limit warming as part of the Paris Agreement (although, as you’ll hear, it is slightly more complicated than that).
Which is all to say: I encourage you to listen to our new episode, which is available on Apple, Spotify, or RSS. (A transcript is also available for Heatmap subscribers.) We tackle questions including:
There’s one thought that I didn’t include in the episode, however. Since late 2023, political discussion of climate change has decreased. This isn’t a phenomenon limited to any one faction of the Democratic Party — the progressives Abdul El-Sayed and Zohran Mamdani have downplayed climate policy roughly as much as, say, moderates like Mary Peltola and James Talarico have — but it is a clear trend. The American media’s coverage of climate change has declined during the same period. This “climate hushing” is not because politicians stopped caring per se, I think, but because nobody is sure how to talk about the issue in a politically useful way anymore, especially after the “climate = jobs” rhetoric that underpinned the Biden administration’s policy failed to retain voters in 2024.
I don’t believe (and think that political science has disproven) that extreme weather can “awaken” the public to climate change. Even against a gradually warming baseline, the weather — and public attention — shift far too often for that. But media coverage is loosely responsive to events. When the super El Niño of 2015 and 2016 smashed the then-record for the hottest year ever measured, it helped initiate a new era of public and elite concern about climate change. That El Niño’s heat waves, wildfires, and mass coral bleaching previewed the far worse disasters of the decade that followed. This El Niño’s disasters and broken temperature records could be worse — and even less ignorable.
On copper prices, nuclear’s jellyfish woes, and Leo DiCaprio’s Chilean NIMBYism
Current conditions: The death toll from Colombia’s earthquake has risen beyond 250 • A severe thunderstorm flipped a car in Columbus, Ohio, as a large system swept across the Midwest • A partial solar eclipse is set to occur the Northeast.

David Crowley, a moderate Democrat and local official in Milwaukee, narrowly defeated Francesca Hong, a leftist state lawmaker and former ramen chef, in the Democratic gubernatorial primary in Wisconsin last night. The race marked one of the most significant tests of Democratic voters’ willingness to elect a member of the ascendant Democratic Socialists of America, now the most popular socialist group in U.S. history. Her campaign promised to make childcare and school lunches free, repeal anti-union laws, and give renters more protections against eviction. She also pitched what she called her “control-alt-delete” plan to eliminate tax credits for data centers and put a statewide moratorium on permits for new artificial intelligence facilities.
Ahead of Tuesday’s primary, the AI developers Vantage, Oracle, and OpenAI announced a $60,000 community investment in Port Washington, which my colleague Jael Holzman described as “the most controversial data center development area in the state.”
Just last week, the Trump administration agreed to pay the energy giant RWE more than $1.2 billion to abandon an offshore wind project, the latest in a series of deals in which taxpayers hand over billions to not receive new sources of clean electricity they badly need. On Tuesday, Senators Alex Padilla, the California Democrat, and Angus King, the independent from Maine, introduced a bill that would give companies that reject Trump’s payouts an expedited route to more development. “The Trump Administration is doing everything it can to kill California’s offshore wind future, handing energy companies billions of taxpayer dollars to walk away from projects that would have powered millions of homes,” Padilla said in a press release. “This bill makes sure their destructive approach doesn’t waste what’s already been invested so we can get these leases back to work, create the jobs Trump killed, and keep energy bills low for working families instead of letting his war on renewables cost Californians even more.”
The bill has one potential flaw, other than the fact that Republicans are unlikely to pass it and President Donald Trump is even less likely to sign it. That, as my colleague Robinson Meyer wrote this week, is that the roughly $4 billion in payouts so far went to projects that were “already dead or dying.” The money spent, in other words, is “for nothing.”
Please read the following two sentences in the tone of the famous scene of Tony Soprano defending Christopher Columbus: In this newsletter, Ea-nāṣir, the Mesopotamian copper merchant from Bronze Age-era Ur whose stone-carved complaints about a subpar metal shipment remain readable millennia later, is a hero. End of story! Why, you might ask? Because we are once again living through an age where copper, the basic building block of all things electric, is in high demand. Copper soared back to within half a cent of its record high Tuesday of nearly $14,000 per metric ton after an outage at a major smelter in Indonesia rattled global prices, Mining.com reported.
The fight over North America’s only major cobalt refinery, meanwhile, is heating up. The mining giant Glencore made a bid for control of Sherritt International, which has taken a beating from U.S. sanctions due to its 50% stake in Moa, a joint venture with the Cuban government. The joint venture’s assets include the Canadian refinery and Moa nickel-cobalt mine in Cuba. The Glencore-backed consortium is up against Gillon Capital, the family office of Ray Washburne, a Republican fundraiser and former Trump official, according to the Financial Times.
Sign up to receive Heatmap AM in your inbox every morning:
Weeks after Europe’s latest heat wave forced inland nuclear stations to pare down output for lack of cooling water in the continent’s rivers, a “massive influx” of jellyfish has forced France’s EDF to shut down three units at its Gravelines nuclear station and cut power from a fourth. That’s taken at least 3.2 gigawatts of capacity offline, Bloomberg reported, right as temperatures are expected to surpass 104 degrees Fahrenheit in the coming days. The unusually hot temperatures off France’s shores have encouraged jellyfish populations to “bloom,” clogging the pumping stations through which coastal nuclear plants like Gravelines pull in cooling water.
In Egypt, meanwhile, construction crews working on the country’s first nuclear station hit a critical milestone. The containment vessel for the Russian-designed El Dabaa plant’s first unit is nearly completed, according to World Nuclear News.
Digging deep enough into the bedrock around New York City to tap into lava-hot rocks for electricity production is probably still years away, despite the progress that next-generation geothermal companies such as Fervo Energy have recently made. But thermal networks that maintain a steady environment year-round by circulating air at a constant temperature are increasingly popular ways for New Yorkers in private homes outside the city to stay warm in winter and cool in summer. Now the city itself is seeing whether a large-scale version could work for the subway system and municipal buildings. A study is set to begin soon into whether a thermal energy network could be built along subway routes to capture, store, and redirect excess heat that accumulates in the Brooklyn Bridge-City Hall and Chambers Street station complex to municipal buildings above ground. “Radiant cooling technology will absorb heat from the subway platforms and transfer it to geothermal boreholes drilled beneath Chambers Street,” reporter Carlo Cariaga wrote for Think Geo Energy. “This excess heat will then be stored underground until it can be used for supply to nearby municipal buildings during winter.” The contract for the feasibility study is due to be awarded in the fall, with work scheduled to start in early 2027.
“It seems like it’s a good place to test geothermal solutions because it sounds like there is a part of the tracks that isn’t being used, so they don’t have to stop service,” Jack Klein, the citizen researcher who conducted his own gonzo Subway heat study last year, told my colleague Jeva Lange this week.
Leonardo DiCaprio has long been a major donor to environmental causes. But rarely has the actor taken as clear a stance against green development if it comes at any ecological cost as this. On Tuesday, Bloomberg reported that the Oscar winner had told his nearly 60 million Instagram followers that fewer than 1,000 Pehuenche spiny-chest frogs remain in the wild, and that construction of the proposed Chile-Argentina transmission line threatens the amphibians’ habitat. “Conservationists are not asking for the transmission project to be stopped,” the celebrity wrote in the post over the weekend. “They are asking for it to be built where it does not put a Critically Endangered species at even greater risk.”
Rob checks in on this season’s supercharged ocean temperatures with climate researcher Zeke Hausfather.
Every few years, the Pacific Ocean’s surface waters become especially warm near the equator, a climatic phenomenon known as El Niño.
El Niño is a normal part of the climate system, but even in a normal year, it can trigger extreme weather around the world. Forecasters are worried that the current El Niño — which just began a few weeks ago — is going to be anything but normal. Models suggest that we could soon see the hottest El Niño ever measured, with unpredictable and catastrophic effects for ecosystems and societies around the world.
What does that mean? And why does this El Niño look so bad? On this episode of Shift Key, Rob is joined by Zeke Hausfather, a climate research lead at Stripe and a research scientist at Berkeley Earth. They discuss what forecast models are saying about this El Niño, why it gives us a glance at the future, and whether climate change itself is accelerating.
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, 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: How much, at this point, are we in an El Niño that is record-breaking? Like, how much do we see in observations, physical observations of the ocean or the atmosphere and the rest of the climate system, and how much do we think from the models that it is going to get even hotter?
Zeke Hausfather: So the way that we track the strength of an El Niño — there’s a few different ways to track it. But the most common one is from this particular region of the tropical Pacific called the Niño 3.4 region, which is sort of like about a third of the way into the Pacific off the coast of Chile, right around the equator. And that’s where this tongue of warm water forms during El Niño events. That’s sort of the characteristic signal of El Niños. And temperatures in that region, as of today, are at 2.8 degrees centigrade above normal, normal meaning the average of the last 30 years. So it’s sort of a sliding window that tries to remove some of the human-caused warming.
Robinson Meyer: Are we comparing temperatures from that region to another region? Or they’re just in that region two or more degrees above normal?
Zeke Hausfather: So it’s a good question. The traditional way that El Niño has been defined is to just compare that region to itself, but with a 30-year moving average applied to remove the effects of human-caused warming. There is another metric that was introduced by NOAA last year called the Relative El Niño Index, which is a variant where you sort of subtract out the average over the tropical ocean as a whole from that region, so you’re looking at the difference between that region and the rest of the tropics.
There’s pros and cons of that approach. Arguably, it removes the human warming signal a bit better, but it also can overly penalize really strong El Niño events that reach outside of that region because they start warming the whole tropics. So anyway, the details are technical, but the point on the observations is that we’re already seeing a very strong event occurring there today. You know, temperatures as of today, when we’re recording, August 10, are 2.8C above normal. To put that in perspective, the strongest ever anomalies we’ve recorded, at least daily in the satellite record since the 1980 or so, were in 2015, 2016, and those were about 3.1 degrees above normal. And so as of today, by itself, it would be the third strongest El Niño signal ever recorded in that region.
But what’s different is that El Niño almost always peaks near the end of the year. So if you look at all the El Niño events on record, there’s been one or two that have peaked in October, but the vast majority peak in November or December, and a couple as late as January. It’s a very persistent pattern of these events. And so the fact that it’s only the beginning of August now and we’re already at this extremely high level, we’re essentially running two to three months ahead of any other El Niño on record in terms of how quickly it’s developing, which is one of the reasons why we’re increasingly convinced that this is going to be a record-setting event. It’s going to blow any event we’ve seen previously out of the water. And if you look at the latest models that came out this morning, actually, it’s good timing. They’re predicting a peak of around 4C in the Niño 3.4 region, which will be, you know, more than a degree above the previous record and could end up being the strongest El Niño in 500 or 1,000 years. We don’t have great proxy estimates going back, but, it certainly is something well outside of anything we’ve seen since records began in 1850.
Robinson Meyer: The swimmer Katie Ledecky swims a race sometimes in the Olympics and she’ll be out swimming and then behind her there’s a computer-generated line which is the current world record, and she’s way out in front of the current world record, and you’re watching her and then she does she turns around in the pool and then the world record is behind her. That is the current El Niño. This is the Katie Ledecky-style El Niño.
You can find a full transcript of the episode here.
Mentioned:
NOAA’s El Niño page and the relative El Niño index
An Assessment of Earth's Climate Sensitivity Using Multiple Lines of Evidence, the 2020 paper where Zeke was a coauthor
Zeke’s blog post on AI emissions: The real energy use of agentic AI
John Bistline’s post on AI emissions at Watershed
Heatmap’s coverage of AI emissions: A New Guesstimate for Corporate AI Emissions
This episode of Shift Key is sponsored by ...
Discover the Yale Clean and Equitable Energy Development online certificate program at the Yale Center for Business and the Environment. In this fully online, 5-month program, you’ll learn from leading experts, develop practical skills, and grow a powerful network. Visit cbey.yale.edu to learn more and apply.
Music for Shift Key is by Adam Kromelow.