Hit it right on the head. There doesn’t seem to be any legitimate economic or environmental argument for, not just removing subsidies, but actively taxing renewable energy. It seems like this administration just associates renewable energy with liberals, and therefore it must be destroyed. Just a ridiculous way to govern.
I work for the EPA doing energy modeling, and all of our models (without this new tax) project fossil fuel use plummeting and renewables progressively taking a larger share of energy production by 2050. Why? Because it’s simply the least-cost way to meet future energy demand. From a purely economic standpoint, renewables are the cheapest way forward. They do not care about what scientists, economists, etc. think at all on this. Instead, we get emails from Lee Zeldin celebrating the return of “Beautiful, Clean Coal!”(Yes, that was an actual email), which is the dirtiest and probably most expensive fossil fuel energy source (at least certainly pricier than natural gas), and something we’re already rapidly phasing out in favor of natural gas and renewables.
Over and over again it feels like this administration just wants to go back in time. Bring back more factory work, bring coal back as a foundation of our energy production, promoting more conservative gender roles… I think they just really wish they could go back to the 50s and 60s.
This is why green banks are important. They need public capital to join up project by project with private capital in order to expedite construction of cheap new power. They have the ability to decide how to have the biggest impact. For that reason, they are superior to a tax credit policy that delegates all decisions to the private sector.
This is an excellent essay. I live in Texas. I have been here since 2014. My husband I lived through the wretched storm of 2021 when the electrical grid failed. We survived, but it was really cold, there was no heat or water for days, and it was extremely unpleasant. Since then, both in winter and in summer, I keep a link to the grid available on my phone to check it as the day progresses. It tells me when there is sufficient, adequate, or sub-adequate energy available. The past two years have been blessedly without blackouts and the grid has been in the green most of the time, and that is because of renewable energy sources. Wind and solar have made up the shortfalls in the grid. Texas generates huge amounts of renewable energy--there is a massive amount of sun and wind here. Why go backwards? I have known since the 1970's that we needed to stop relying on fossil fuels. I understand how and why the oil industry created massive obstacles to change, but I don't understand why people in general can't or won't see how foolish and shortsighted we are being by curtailing efforts in renewable energy.
The federally-owned TVA is the largest energy provider in the Tennessee Valley, covering around 10 million people. A large part of TVA's energy supply comes from nuclear power - we have three nuclear plants close to where I live. According to that report, TVA applied for a construction permit in May to build the nation's first mall modular reactor in Oak Ridge, TN. But guess what, TVA currently can't make any decisions because they do not have enough directors to approve projects due to Trump firing so many. Directors are appointed by the president and Trump most recently fired one of them because, ostensibly, they were a former chief of staff to Al Gore. Killing energy policy to own the libs, baby!
By contrast, here’s Mark Zuckerberg a few months ago:
“We now have a U.S. administration that is proud of our leading companies, prioritizes American technology winning and that will defend our values and interests abroad and I am optimistic about the progress and innovation that this can unlock.”
I wonder if the business sector—especially tech, which needs reliable energy—will feel as burned by Trump on renewables as on tariffs.
Way more important than Reagan's policies were Carter's anti-nuclear stance. We were on the path to 100% clean, cheap nuclear energy until the late 70s reversed everything.
If you are not pro-nuclear you are not a serious person.
Hit it right on the head. There doesn’t seem to be any legitimate economic or environmental argument for, not just removing subsidies, but actively taxing renewable energy. It seems like this administration just associates renewable energy with liberals, and therefore it must be destroyed. Just a ridiculous way to govern.
I work for the EPA doing energy modeling, and all of our models (without this new tax) project fossil fuel use plummeting and renewables progressively taking a larger share of energy production by 2050. Why? Because it’s simply the least-cost way to meet future energy demand. From a purely economic standpoint, renewables are the cheapest way forward. They do not care about what scientists, economists, etc. think at all on this. Instead, we get emails from Lee Zeldin celebrating the return of “Beautiful, Clean Coal!”(Yes, that was an actual email), which is the dirtiest and probably most expensive fossil fuel energy source (at least certainly pricier than natural gas), and something we’re already rapidly phasing out in favor of natural gas and renewables.
Over and over again it feels like this administration just wants to go back in time. Bring back more factory work, bring coal back as a foundation of our energy production, promoting more conservative gender roles… I think they just really wish they could go back to the 50s and 60s.
Typed on my phone, excuse any typos.
This is why green banks are important. They need public capital to join up project by project with private capital in order to expedite construction of cheap new power. They have the ability to decide how to have the biggest impact. For that reason, they are superior to a tax credit policy that delegates all decisions to the private sector.
This is an excellent essay. I live in Texas. I have been here since 2014. My husband I lived through the wretched storm of 2021 when the electrical grid failed. We survived, but it was really cold, there was no heat or water for days, and it was extremely unpleasant. Since then, both in winter and in summer, I keep a link to the grid available on my phone to check it as the day progresses. It tells me when there is sufficient, adequate, or sub-adequate energy available. The past two years have been blessedly without blackouts and the grid has been in the green most of the time, and that is because of renewable energy sources. Wind and solar have made up the shortfalls in the grid. Texas generates huge amounts of renewable energy--there is a massive amount of sun and wind here. Why go backwards? I have known since the 1970's that we needed to stop relying on fossil fuels. I understand how and why the oil industry created massive obstacles to change, but I don't understand why people in general can't or won't see how foolish and shortsighted we are being by curtailing efforts in renewable energy.
You can take it a step further beyond just policy. Look no further than an article in my hometown newspaper yesterday: https://www.timesfreepress.com/news/2025/jun/30/all-tva-nuclear-reactors-at-full-power-for-first/.
The federally-owned TVA is the largest energy provider in the Tennessee Valley, covering around 10 million people. A large part of TVA's energy supply comes from nuclear power - we have three nuclear plants close to where I live. According to that report, TVA applied for a construction permit in May to build the nation's first mall modular reactor in Oak Ridge, TN. But guess what, TVA currently can't make any decisions because they do not have enough directors to approve projects due to Trump firing so many. Directors are appointed by the president and Trump most recently fired one of them because, ostensibly, they were a former chief of staff to Al Gore. Killing energy policy to own the libs, baby!
By contrast, here’s Mark Zuckerberg a few months ago:
“We now have a U.S. administration that is proud of our leading companies, prioritizes American technology winning and that will defend our values and interests abroad and I am optimistic about the progress and innovation that this can unlock.”
I wonder if the business sector—especially tech, which needs reliable energy—will feel as burned by Trump on renewables as on tariffs.
Source: https://www.latimes.com/business/story/2025-02-03/mark-zuckerberg-once-a-trump-critic-cozies-up-to-the-president
Way more important than Reagan's policies were Carter's anti-nuclear stance. We were on the path to 100% clean, cheap nuclear energy until the late 70s reversed everything.
If you are not pro-nuclear you are not a serious person.
The provision adding a tax on renewables rolled out after 2027 was removed. This post is not up to date.
Speaking of China and future shock https://www.jstor.org/stable/26673042