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:

Everything has a cooler name when you’re on a boat. A kitchen becomes a galley. You’re not parked, you’re at berth. There is even a fun, old-timey name for cutting emissions when you’re at port by plugging into the local power grid: cold ironing.
Right now, lots of smart people are working to lower ship emissions, and for good reason: Container ships cart between 80% and 90% of global trade, yet more than 95% of them run on petroleum products (mainly an extremely dirty sludge called bunker fuel). By one estimate, a single large ship can emit as much CO2 as 70,000 cars, as much nitrogen oxide as 2 million cars, and as much fine dust and carcinogenic particles as 2.5 million cars. By another estimate, shipping pollution is responsible for 60,000 premature deaths per year. Though fully electrifying container ships remains distant and challenging for a number of reasons (albeit not for lack of trying), alternate fuel sources ranging from liquid natural gas to ammonia to hydrogen to nuclear propulsion to that oldie but goodie, wind, are all on the table.
Until that gets sorted out, though, container ships need to keep doing what they’re doing, which is moving stuff (we can all remember what happens when they don’t!). And that means the ships need to berth at ports to transfer their cargo, idling all the while with their auxiliary engines so the crew onboard has basic power for things like emergency equipment, lights, plumbing, temperature controls, and refrigeration. This is bad for all the same reasons a car idling for days on end would be bad if that car used the energy of a small town. It’s also bad for another reason that usually only gets mentioned in passing: Idling container ships are really, really loud.
The ‘Rio de Janeiro’ ship auxiliary generator noise at 30mwww.youtube.com
When you hear about container ships being loud, it’s usually in the context of distressing whales. That’s because container ships are also noisy when they’re at sea, and most marine life depends on sound and sonar that gets drowned out by human activity. But much of the sound a ship at sea makes comes from its propellors, a design issue that will require solutions regardless of what kind of energy source is powering the ship.
At berth, though, container ships continue to make a racket. “During port stay, [the diesel generator] will often be the most predominant source of noise radiating from the ship to the surroundings,” a 2010 paper on noise pollution by the Danish Ministry of the Environment found. According to a report by Signol, a U.K.-based software company that markets its product as a potential solution for inefficient idling, “in close proximity to auxiliary engines, noise levels can reach 80-120 decibels — in comparison, a chainsaw averages 110 decibels!”
It’s a given that ports are loud: Idling ship engines join a cacophony of cranes, trucks, heavy machinery, trains, horns, and the like. Historically, this was fine, since ports were usually built away from residential areas, on land zoned for industry. But as cities grow more crowded, former industrial areas are becoming residential; some 39 million Americans lived near ports according to a 2016 EPA estimate, many of them people of color. “Complaints about noise from seagoing ships at berth are increasingly becoming an environmental issue ... mainly due to the rising population in residential areas around ports, the increase in the number of residential areas being built closer to the port itself, and changing expectations from people living in these residential areas,” explained the Noise Exploration Program To Understand Noise Emitted by Seagoing ships (NEPTUNES), a now-defunct collaboration between 11 ports in Europe, Australia, and Canada.
And whales aren’t the only mammals that hate ship noise. “Research on the effects of low-frequency noise has … shown that this is a stressor that can lead to headaches, dizziness, insomnia, depression, loss of concentration, and distortion of heart rhythm” in humans, the NEPTUNES report added.
Beyond health concerns, the noise is also just ... really annoying. In 2019, residents of Port Otago, New Zealand, were terrorized by what sounded like “a V8 running in your driveway” but were in fact 10-year-old container ships idling out in the harbor.
In Vancouver, in 2022, residents offered a similar simile for their acoustic tormentors: “It’s like having a garbage truck revving at the bottom of your driveway all day long,” one local told Vancouver Is Awesome.
When a supply-chain-related backlog forced container ships to idle off Seattle in 2021, an afflicted islander complained, “We’re getting the noise, the throbbing noise at night.”
Even in the best of circumstances, container ship noise is a persistent nuisance; some have even attributed a worldwide phenomenon called “the hum” to the racket made by container ship generators.
Everyone hates how container ships sound.www.youtube.com
Addressing the problem of ship noise, though, is tricky. There isn’t an international standard for how loud ships can be, and the most NEPTUNES was ultimately able to do was produce a list of unenforceable “best practices.” Many of the recommendations would also be tricky to implement on pre-existing vessels. While boats can be built to be quieter from the get-go, container ships are in circulation for decades; it might be 20 years or more before quiet fleets take over.
Ports also don’t want to rock the boat: “A strict noise policy is ... seen as a competitive disadvantage,” noted a 2013 study by Sweden’s Transport Research Institute (TRI), noting that shipowners must obey a long list of mandatory environmental regulations that they’re loathe to follow voluntary ones.
Thankfully for anyone who’s ever had to listen to the monotonous chuckling of a ship generator, two birds can be killed with one stone. Remember cold ironing? The term harkens back to the age of coal-fired ship engines: At port, the fires didn’t need to be fed, and the ship’s iron engines were allowed to go cold. Today, cold ironing refers to when a ship turns off all its engines at berth — including the smaller auxiliary ones belching sulfur oxide, nitrogen oxide, and CO2 over port cities — and instead plugs into onshore power (or “OSP,” in the industry lingo). “The overall emitted sound ... of a ship at berth could be reduced by up to 5 to 10 decibels by replacing the use of auxiliary engine(s) with external power suppliers,” NEPTUNES found.
In the EPA’s sexily titled “Shore Power Technology Assessment at U.S. Ports — 2022 Update,” the agency reported that there are currently 10 American ports that offer OSP for container and cruise ships, including the ports of Seattle, Tacoma, San Francisco, Los Angeles, San Diego, and Brooklyn (future upgrades are planned for Miami and Galveston). By all accounts, it’s working on both the environmental and the noise pollution fronts. “Port representatives report that neighbors notice when the shore power system is non-operational and vessels are emitting at-berth, compared to times when vessels are plugged in with no emissions coming from the vessel stacks and engine noise is reduced,” the EPA wrote. Unsurprisingly, “The community is strongly in support of the shore power system at the port.”
Cold ironing doesn’t reduce all port noise, of course; you can still expect the clanging of dropped containers, the vibration of ships, and the rumble of trucks and trains. There are other considerations, too: On-shore power generation needs to be low-emission, otherwise you’re just transferring pollution from the ship to the power plant. Still, the EPA is optimistic, noting that almost anything is better than ship engine emissions and that the situation will only improve as renewables roll out in force.
The possibilities only get more exciting from there. Stillstrom, a subsidiary of the Danish shipping conglomerate Maersk, is working on creating “charging buoys” that can power idling ships before they dock via underwater cables connected to offshore wind farms or onshore renewable power sources. OSP availability is rapidly expanding in the meantime. The Port of Seattle aims to install shore power at all of its major cruise and container berths by 2030. Starting this year, California will require 90% of vessels berthing at state-regulated ports to either use shore power or an approved emissions-reducing alternative. Abroad, the Port of Rotterdam is also working toward 90% shore power usage by 2030, and other European ports are pursuing OSP, too.
The impacts will be huge. The California Air Resources Board, for example, boasts its regulations will result in a 90% reduction in pollution from ships at port — and a 55% reduction in potential cancer risk.
That is, of course, great and worthy of pursuing in and of itself. “People will live longer, healthier lives” is a pretty unbeatable top line. But let’s not forget there are other laudable upsides to plugging in container ships — like living those longer lives in blessed peace and quiet.
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 year’s ocean-heating phenomenon could make climate change seem less bad than it really is — at least in the U.S.
You may have heard that we could be in for a “super” or even a “super duper” El Niño this year. The difference is non-technical, a matter of how warm the sea surface temperature in the El Niño-Southern Oscillation region of the central-eastern Pacific Ocean gets. An El Niño forms when the region is at least half a degree Celsius warmer than average, which causes more heat to be released into the atmosphere and affects global weather patterns. A super El Niño describes an anomaly of 2 degrees or higher. Some models predict an anomaly of over 3 degrees higher than average for this year.
If a super El Niño forms — and that is still a big if, about a one-in-four chance — it would be the fourth such event in just over 40 years. But the impacts could be even more severe, simply because the world is hotter today than it was in the previous super El Niño years of 1983, 1998, and 2016.
“2016 would be an unusually cold year if it occurred today,” Zeke Hausfather, the climate research lead for payment processing giant Stripe and a research scientist at Berkeley Earth, told me. “1998 would be exceptionally cold.”
And yet in a strange twist, a 2026-2027 El Niño event might actually make Americans care less about climate change. Though many parts of the world are likely to get clobbered by El Niño’s characteristic combination of hotter, drier weather, the phenomenon has the potential to alleviate some of the extreme weather we’ve seen recently in the United States.
For example, warmer, wetter conditions in the southern U.S., milder winters in the north, and increased wind shear in the Atlantic hurricane basin are all classic El Niño signatures in North America.
“It may actually mean a better snow season for the Western U.S. and the mountains, hopefully recovering our snowpack if it’s not too warm,” Hausfather said. “We might benefit from higher rainfall” next winter, which could help lift widespread drought conditions in the southwest. High wind shear usually results in reduced hurricane activity in the Atlantic by depriving the storm systems of their heat engines and causing them to be too lopsided to organize into a full-blown cyclone.
Though the body of evidence for climate change remains incontrovertible, the temporary reprieve in some of its more visible effects will almost certainly make some Americans less concerned. Blame it on evolutionary biology. Brett Pelham, a social psychologist at Montgomery College who researches egocentrism and biases, told me that humans are hardwired to pay attention to the conditions happening directly around them. “That’s great if you’re living 20,000 or 80,000 years ago,” he said. “But today, we’re pumping tons of greenhouse gases into the atmosphere, and it’s a recipe for disaster because people only care deeply about that problem if they feel the heat on a pretty chronic basis where they live.”
People are generally less likely to believe the planet is warming on a snowy day in March than they are in the summer, and a lower average state temperature is about as reliable a predictor of climate change skepticism as being a Republican, even when controlling for income, party affiliation, education, and age. Given that it is, in theory, easier to convince someone living in scorching hot Phoenix that greenhouse gases are warming the atmosphere than someone living by a lake in Minnesota, if an El Niño mellows out some extreme weather trends in the U.S. this year and next, it could also mellow some of the sense of urgency to act.
“It’s a definite implication of my work that day-to-day variation, monthly variation, and geographical variation matter,” Pelham said.
“If my data are true,” he added, “it’s going to be true on average that in places that have an unseasonably cool summer or winter, there’s going to be a temporary shift in the average attitude.”
Such shifts affect the average by just a few points either way — “they’re not night and day, like ‘I believed in climate change and now I don’t,’” Pelham stressed. But it’s undoubtedly ironic — and concerning — that heading into what could be one of the hottest years on the planet in recent history, Americans may be predisposed to feeling relatively safe.
Other parts of the world won’t have such luxury. Even a normal-strength El Niño, which looks all but certain to form this year, could cause major damage, from wildfires in parched Indonesia to catastrophic floods in East Africa to water rationing in South America. In Peru and Ecuador, El Niño is already a “current event,” Ángel F. Adames Corraliza, an atmospheric researcher at the University of Wisconsin-Madison and a 2025 MacArthur Fellow, told me. Warm coastal conditions off the continent — a known, albeit not guaranteed, global El Niño precursor — are causing deluges, landslides, and heat waves in the upper northwest corner of South America. “You can see how the impacts start extending towards other parts of the world until it reaches us,” he said.
It is possible to combat local biases. Pelham told me other researchers have found that images can break through our egocentrism. So “if we see more pictures of melting glaciers or waters rising in our own backyards, we would start to say, ‘Oh my goodness, we really have to do something about this global problem,” he said.
But to that end, coverage of climate change that might have this effect is becoming rarer. Stories about global warming have dropped about 38% since 2021; even people working in climate-related industries have “a kind of exhaustion with ‘climate’ as the right frame through which to understand the fractious mixture of electrification, pollution reduction, clean energy development, and other goals that people who care about climate change actually pursue,” my colleague Robinson Meyer wrote based on the results of latest Heatmap Insiders Survey.
Of course, there is no promise that the U.S. will skirt disaster because of El Niño. Increased rainfall means more floods and landslides; if the El Niño pushes temperatures up too high, snowpack will once again be an issue next winter. All it takes is one big hurricane forming and making landfall for it to be considered a bad storm year, which is as much a roll of the dice as anything else. And because El Niño releases ocean heat into the atmosphere, the periods immediately following it are often about two-tenths of a degree Celsius warmer, increasing the severity of heat waves and droughts. Compounded by climate change, that puts 2027 on track to be potentially the hottest year the planet has seen in human history.
“We might be at 1.45 degrees Celsius [above preindustrial levels] next year from human activity, and we might end up at 1.65 degrees because there’s a very strong El Niño,” Hausfather said. But for context, “we are seeing that much warmth added to the climate system from human activity roughly every decade,” he told me. That is, “— we’re adding a permanent super El Niño-worth of heat to the climate system” via the continued burning of fossil fuels.
There couldn’t be a worse time to let up on our collective sense of climate urgency, to put it mildly. But if El Niño makes conditions in the U.S. appear any better, then even if there’s disaster elsewhere, “you’re going to give a sigh of relief,” Pelham predicted. “You’re going to feel like [climate change is] not as bad as people have hyped it up to be.”
Current conditions: Wildfires are raging across the Southeast, with more than 27,000 acres alight in southern Georgia alone • At least two separate blazes have also broken out in Japan’s northeastern Iwate prefecture • A late blizzard is dumping as much as 20 inches of snow on northern Manitoba, Canada.
Yet another French energy giant is lining up for a payout from the Trump administration to abandon its offshore wind projects in the United States. Utility giant Engie is in talks with the federal government about a “possible refund” for its U.S. offshore wind leases as President Donald Trump looks to halt expansion of an energy source that’s quickly growing in Europe and Asia. Since Trump returned to office last year, the company has paused development on three offshore wind projects and already took a loss on its joint venture Ocean Winds. In an interview with Reuters, Engie CEO Catherine MacGregor confirmed that the utility was pursuing the kind of deal that French oil and gas giant TotalEnergies negotiated in recent weeks. “We’ll see about these terms. An agreement is possible depending on the discussions.” She noted that she wasn’t against offshore wind. “Economically and also in terms of public acceptance, I strongly believe in offshore wind power. Of course, you have to plan the projects well, you have to involve the fishermen,” she added. Still, “new offshore wind projects are going to be complicated regardless of the administration.”
The $1 billion TotalEnergies deal may also stand on shaky ground. As Heatmap’s Emily Pontecorvo reported in back-to-back scoops, documents suggest the Trump administration’s legal argument for drawing on a federal settlement fund rests on shaky ground. Other documents show that TotalEnergies isn't required to make any new investments in U.S. oil and gas under the agreement, contrary to what Trump officials said about the deal.

Long accused of maintaining an overcapacity of factories to churn out solar panels, China’s photovoltaic output is now in soaring demand as the world scrambles to cope with the energy shock brought on by the Iran War’s closure of the Strait of Hormuz. New data from the think tank Ember shows that China’s solar exports reached a record 68 gigawatts in March, double the previous month. When Ember analyzed the Chinese customs authority data, its researchers found that the exports are equivalent to Spain’s entire solar capacity, surpassing the previous record set in August 2025 by 49%. At least 50 countries — you read that right — set all-time records for Chinese solar imports in March, with another 60 seeing the highest levels in six months. Compared to February numbers (the war began on February 28), Chinese solar exports grew by 141% to India, 384% to Malaysia, 391% to Ethiopia, and 519% to Nigeria.
“Fossil shocks are boosting the solar surge,” Euan Graham, senior analyst at Ember, said in a statement. “Solar has already become the engine of the global economy, and now the current fossil fuel price shocks are taking it up a gear. Countries are importing solar panels at record levels, and building up their own domestic assembly and manufacturing capabilities to address surging global demand.”
Elon Musk is betting even bigger on artificial intelligence. Tesla plans to boost spending to $25 billion this year as the electric automaker cum battery and solar giant invests in self-driving taxis, zero-emissions trucks, robots, and a sweeping new chip factory to power its AI ambitions. During a call with investors on Thursday, Musk said there would be a “very significant increase in capital expenditure” this year, which “will be well justified considering substantially increased revenue streams,” according to the Financial Times. The forecast is nearly triple the $8.5 billion Tesla spent last year.
The shift comes as the U.S. faces what Heatmap contributor Andrew Moseman called the “great American EV contraction” that took place after the Trump administration ended federal tax credits for electric vehicles last fall.
Sign up to receive Heatmap AM in your inbox every morning:
In a nuclear industry filled with startups promising to reinvent the reactor, Blue Energy stands out as a company promising instead to transform how good old-fashioned light water reactors are built. The firm wants to prefabricate its small modular reactors in a factory, making each one as uniform and replicable as possible. “For the first time, a nuclear project is designed so that it doesn’t need to rely primarily on taxpayer dollars and ratepayers to backstop risk,” Jake Jurewicz, Blue Energy chief executive and co-founder, told S&P Global. In a press release, Jurewicz called its forthcoming debut facility, a 1.5-gigawatt complex in Texas, “the first project-financeable nuclear plant.”
Shares in GE Vernova spiked 14% on Wednesday after the energy industrial giant reported surging demand for its gas turbines and nuclear reactors to power the AI boom in its latest quarterly earnings. As I told you yesterday, GE Vernova’s head of government affairs and policy, Roger Martella, said this week that the project to build North America’s first small modular reactor at Ontario Power Generation’s Darlington plant was on track to produce power by 2030. In a note to investors, the investment bank Jeffries said soaring gas demand and “green-shoots for nuclear” sent the price upward.
If online gambling services like Kalshi and Polymarket allow people to bet on something, do the incentives for the worse outcome change? Turns out, obviously, the answer is yes. Just consider this example. Polymarket allowed people to bet on daily temperatures from some official weather stations. Now Météo-France, the official French meteorological agency, is accusing someone of using an artificial heat source to manipulate reads at a station and win bets.
Rob dives into Fervo’s S-1 filing with Princeton professor Jesse Jenkins and Heatmap’s Matthew Zeitlin.
Fervo Energy has become a darling of the clean energy industry by using workers and technology from the oil and gas sector to unlock zero-carbon, all-day geothermal electricity. Last week, Fervo filed to go public, giving us the first deep look at its finances and long-term expansion plans. What’s the bull case, the bear case, and the fine print?
On this week’s episode of Shift Key, Rob is joined by Jesse Jenkins, a professor of energy systems engineering at Princeton University, as well as Heatmap’s Matthew Zeitlin to discuss the big news from Fervo’s new filing. Why are people so excited about Fervo? What are the biggest financial questions in its growth plans? And why does it need to go public now?
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 of their conversation:
Robinson Meyer: Jesse, one of the things that people are most excited about with Fervo — and one of the things, frankly, that you got me excited about with regard to Fervo and other enhanced geothermal companies — is that this is dispatchable power. It’s not only that it’s 24-7, but much like like we currently flex gas plants up or down to meet demand on the grid, we might be able to flex geothermal plants up and down. Can you just describe like how that would work and why it’s important to kind of overall value of this energy technology?
Jesse Jenkins: Yeah, so most people think of geothermal as a kind of zero marginal cost resource. It has no fuel cost, right? It’s producing power that’s on the margin, basically free. And so it would make sense to operate it like a “baseload resource” running 24-7, because why would you ever turn off?
The reality is that if you are deploying geothermal in a world with lots of cheap solar, for example, or wind in other parts of the West, there are many hours when power is literally worthless or very inexpensive, right? You’ve got wind and solar flooding the market at also zero marginal cost. And so producing power in those hours, you can do it, but why would you? It’s not valuable. When it’s valuable is the times when the sun is setting and the wind is dying down and you would otherwise have to fire up gas power plants.
So one of the cool things about enhanced geothermal is that you’re basically engineering a fracture network inside a very impermeable rock, right? You basically have a container around it of granite. And that means that very little fluid or pressure will leak out of the reservoir if you inject more fluid into it. And so you’ve basically built yourself a pumped hydrate reservoir underground for free, because that’s what you needed to create your heat exchanger to get the heat out for your power plant.
You can find a full transcript of the episode here.
Mentioned:
From Heatmap: 8 Things We Learned From Fervo’s IPO Filing
Jesse’s report on how to scale geothermal nationwide through experience-induced cost reductions
Jesse’s report on how geothermal can be a flexible resource, like natural gas
This episode of Shift Key is sponsored by ...
Salesforce is the No. 1 AI CRM, where humans with agents drive success together. We invest in bold climate technologies and leverage agentic AI to accelerate nature-based solutions that benefit people and the planet. Learn more.
Music for Shift Key is by Adam Kromelow.