The federal government has abruptly changed from being a strong ally to a fierce foe for states that are pursuing plans to construct additional wind and solar projects.
President Donald Trump’s whirlwind of executive orders, funding freezes, agency instructions, and vocal threats about clean energy have left state officials still trying to make sense of it. The teammate who gave the ball to them now appears to be attempting to block their shot.
The Brakeson offshore wind project, which depends on having access to federal seas, has drawn criticism from Trump. Permitting for certain renewable energy projects was blocked by him. Grants and loans for anything from home weatherization aid to rooftop solar systems have been halted by him. Additionally, he has cast doubt on the tax credits, which are arguably the biggest force behind the growth of sustainable energy.
Senator Bob Smith, a Democrat from New Jersey who serves as the chair of his state’s Senate Environment and Energy Committee, stated, “Yeah, we’re in trouble.” We’re going to suffer a serious whipsawing. Does Trump pose a threat to [New Jersey’s] electricity upgrades? Of course.
Trump has consistently referred to climate change as a hoax and has long opposed the growth of wind power. He has propagated myths that wind farms are more costly than alternative energy sources and cause cancer. His main focus has been on encouraging the production of fossil fuels. Former President Joe Biden, who made investments in renewable energy a defining issue, has drastically reversed his priorities with his orders.
Shortly after taking office on January 20, Trump declared at a rally for supporters, “We’re not going to do the wind thing.”
Many of Trump’s measures, according to officials who seek to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, are illegal. They anticipate that courts would reject his attempts to halt Congress-approved funding under Biden. However, they worry that the bigger risk is that renewable energy developers and investors would decide not to support projects as a result of the federal unpredictability.
According to Patrick Drupp, director of climate policy for the Sierra Club, a nationwide environmental advocacy organization, these activities are causing a great deal of disruption. Projects have a greater chance of disappearing the longer that continues. For several of these states, reaching [clean energy] goals may be significantly impacted if developers begin to withdraw from huge projects.
Blue state leaders declare their dedication to defeating Trump’s resistance. They are certain that it will be difficult to impede progress due to basic market dynamics. Wind and solar are two of the least expensive ways to generate electricity, yet the nation’s energy needs are rapidly expanding. Citing the employment and cash generated in their districts, over a dozen Republicans in the US House have called for the preservation of the clean energy tax credits.
Is what we’re hearing from D.C. confusing us? “Yes,” replied Senator Nick Frentz of Minnesota, a Democrat who wrote the state’s clean power law and serves as the chair of the Senate Energy, Utilities, Environment, and Climate Committee. However, I have a good feeling that renewable energy will continue to be a part of Minnesota’s energy mix due to its affordability and dependability.
The growth of offshore wind is the most obvious energy victim of Trump’s second term. When Biden was in the White House, the federal government strongly supported the efforts of many Atlantic states that rely heavily on offshore turbines to supply their electricity. However, a new landlord has taken over those federal waters.
Offshore wind leases, which are governed by the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management, were immediately suspended by Trump’s executive order. Additionally, the directive encourages assessments of projects that are subject to litigation by threatening to void current leases.
Timothy Fox, managing director of the independent research firm ClearView Energy Partners LLC, indicated in an email that the Trump Administration is not likely to fiercely defend offshore wind project permits obtained by the Biden Administration. Offshore wind opponents may be encouraged to submit more legal challenges as a result of the order.
A few previously authorized projects are still in progress, such as a wind farm being built in Virginia. But under Trump, the prospects for the several other unfinished projects are bleak. New Jersey, which has made offshore wind the cornerstone of its climate efforts, is already reducing public funding for projects.
State climate ambitions could be derailed by federal antagonism that delays offshore wind development.
Smith, the legislator from New Jersey, stated in an interview that it’s a HUGE barrier, and to put it in capital letters. It’s a serious issue that will likely affect both the short and long term.
Smith said state policymakers could need to consider other possibilities, such tiny modular nuclear reactors, to support their energy ambitions. Technology, however, is ten to fifteen years away, he said.
States can still work to upgrade their ports and transmission infrastructure, according to clean energy officials, to provide the offshore sector with a solid foundation for a relaunch under a future government. However, developers and governments might now be reluctant to put money into an industry that could be completely upended following any election.
According to Alissa Weinman, manager of the ocean program for the National Caucus of Environmental Legislators, a cooperative, nonpartisan forum for state legislators, it doesn’t appear promising. Large developers have shifted their focus to projects in other nations. Given that offshore wind [in the U.S.] is still in its infancy, that volatility is a serious worry.
Trump’s directive also prohibited turbine leases on federal lands, targeting onshore wind. Even though the great majority of onshore wind projects are located on private property, the government may nevertheless threaten those projects. For instance, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers last week blocked outstanding licenses for 168 renewable energy projects on private lands in reaction to another Trump order centered on the development of fossil fuels.
The pause has subsequently been lifted, according to the government, but not for wind power projects, according to The New York Times.
Climate activists point out that Trump may also impede development by requiring permits from the Federal Aviation Administration for many wind projects.
GET THE HEADLINES FOR THE MORNING.
No matter what kind of land the enterprise is on, it would be a problem if the administration were to simply reject all of those licenses, according to Ava Gallo, climate and energy program manager with the environmental legislative organization. Even if that is the worst-case scenario, it is quite plausible. It puts [states’ renewable energy ambitions] in peril if wind takes that significant a damage.
Proponents of clean energy point out that wind energy is supported by both parties and that red states depend on it.
Drupp, from the Sierra Club, stated that wind energy is very popular and a bipartisan issue that has brought enormous sums of money to many red states.
The top four states in the country for wind power generation are Texas, Iowa, Oklahoma, and Kansas. In addition to boasting about his state’s nation-leading wind production, Republican Governor Greg Abbott of Texas has stated that Texas must make significant investments in dependable gas-fired power plants in order to maintain the system.
State officials say it’s still unclear if Trump wants to enforce a federal prohibition on wind and solar project approvals. They claim that doing so would be a blatant abuse of his power.
Sen. Kevin Parker, a Democrat from New York who chairs the Senate Committee on Energy and Telecommunications, stated, “We will continue to work toward our goals and challenge every illegal and out-of-order action by this administration.” We’re attempting to determine what we can accomplish independently or in spite of federal intervention.
Additionally, Trump has attempted to block funds from the Inflation Reduction Act, the climate measure signed into law by Biden that established significant clean energy subsidies, loans, and tax credits.
Many of the wind and solar projects currently under development are funded by its initiatives, and the investments have been a major driver of renewable development. By 2030, the law is predicted to generate 550 gigawatts of wind, solar, and battery storage, more than tripling the country’s present renewable energy output, according to industry leaders.
Both blue and red states have ambitious climate goals. They might be overthrown by the election.
Climate activists claim that Trump has overreached himself and that only Congress has the power to withdraw funds that it has already authorized. They point out that many of the grants that Trump has rejected have already been awarded contracts by the federal government.
Trump’s attempt to restrict federal spending has been blocked by court rulings; last week, a federal judge declared that agencies had broken his earlier order by neglecting to restore access to the cash.
According to Rachel Jacobson, chief researcher of state climate policy at the leftist think tank Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, “they [Trump officials] are creating a lot of confusion, probably on purpose.”
Trump hasn’t yet specifically attacked the law’s renewable energy tax credits for consumers and developers, which have been well-liked in both blue and red states. According to analysts, the credits have played a significant role in attracting developers and investors to renewable projects.
Climate activists, meanwhile, claim that Trump might change Internal Revenue Service rules to restrict access to the credits or reduce agency employees to postpone credit applications. Some worry that he would collaborate with congressional Republicans to completely eliminate the tax credits.
According to Jacobson, even the prospect of tax credit repeal will depress the market and make project financing more difficult.
State officials say they’re still trying to figure out how much Trump’s orders will impact their preparations. However, they highlight their state-level investments and the quick rise of renewable energy sources as a cost-effective source of electricity.
According to Parker, the legislator from New York, “federal funding would have been tremendously beneficial, but our program was always built to stand alone.” We will attempt to lawfully demolish whatever obstacles the federal government tries to place in our path, drive around them, or travel on roads free of roadblocks.
OUR WORK IS MADE POSSIBLE BY YOU.
Eliot Pierce is a dedicated writer for ChiefsFocus.com, covering local crime and finance news. With a keen eye for detail and a passion for storytelling, Eliot aims to provide his readers with clear and insightful analysis, helping them navigate the complexities of their financial lives while staying informed about important local events. His commitment to delivering accurate and engaging content makes him a valuable resource for the community.