Portland General Electric will build two solar projects in Eastern Oregon to meet growing demand from data center operators, the utility announced Tuesday.

PGE will spend approximately $540 million on a 125-megawatt solar facility and a 125-megawatt battery energy storage system in Sherman County. And in Morrow County, PGE will invest approximately $490 million in a 240-megawatt solar facility and a 125-megawatt battery system.

“We’re advancing critical infrastructure investments that will support economic development, both in Oregon and in Washington, and builds on a base of growing data center and high-tech customers,” PGE CEO Maria Pope said in a conference call on Tuesday.

The announcement came as PGE reported fourth-quarter and annual results. The utility is publicly traded under the stock symbol “POR.” PGE stock slipped 2.7 percent on Tuesday.

PGE also revealed a major acquisition, saying it would acquire PacifiCorp‘s Washington utility operations for $1.9 billion, in a deal financed in a partnership with Manulife Investment Management. PGE will manage the Washington utilities as a newly formed subsidiary regulated by the Washington Utilities and Transportation Commission.

“In this time of unprecedented electricity demand, PGE’s commitment to the Pacific Northwest and our excellent service and energy infrastructure will benefit Central and Southeastern Washington,” Pope said.

Construction of the new solar projects will begin this year; they’re slated to come online by the end of 2027, Pope said. They are eligible for federal tax credits between 30 percent and 40 percent, she added.

PGE is also moving forward with last year’s request for proposals for new generation resources, and a short list will be submitted to the Oregon Public Utility Commission this week, said Joseph Trpik, PGE’s chief financial officer.

The Portland-based utility’s large customer group — such as industrial users, including data centers — is expected to grow by 10 percent annually through 2030, Pope said.

Utilities nationwide have come under public pressure as data centers’ voracious appetites for power have caused residential rates to soar. In a nod to rising prices, Pope said PGE’s tariff proposal includes a 25 percent price hike for data center customers, which is expected to “reduce residential and small business customer prices.”

Data centers now account for about 6 percent of PGE’s total customer load, Pope said.

PGE’s total load increased 3.8 percent in 2025, and 4.7 percent in weather-adjusted terms. The industrial load jumped 14 percent, while the residential load fell 1.8 percent.

Trpik attributed the load increase to “diverse and growing data center and high-tech customers.” Warm weather in the fourth quarter weakened overall demand, he said.

The Washington deal will add 140,000 customers around Yakima, Walla Walla and other communities in Central and Southeast Washington, PGE officials said.

“This acquisition is a great fit,” Pope said, calling the deal an “excellent opportunity to expand our service to Washington state and acquire generation, transmission and distribution assets we know very well.”

The acquisition must be approved by regulators in Oregon and Washington. The regulatory process should require 11 to 12 months, Pope said.

The post PGE planning massive solar projects in Eastern Oregon appeared first on Daily Journal of Commerce.

Electricity demand will rise much faster than overall energy growth in the coming decades, underscoring the need for diversified energy sources, according to an analysis released Wednesday.

The report by the International Energy Agency ����������renewable energy, led by solar power, will grow faster than any other major source in the next few years. One scenario the agency anticipates is coal and oil demand peaking globally by the end of this decade — but the group also said global oil and gas demand could continue growing until 2050. The report noted that many natural gas projects were approved in 2025, due to changes in U.S. policy, indicating worldwide supply will rise even as questions remain about how it will be used. Meanwhile, global nuclear power capacity is set to increase by at least a third by 2035 after being stagnant for years.

The release of the annual World Energy Outlook coincided with U.N. negotiations in Brazil, where global leaders this week are calling for ways to curb climate change.

The IEA says building greater resilience in energy systems is especially important as data centers, heating and cooling, electrification and more drive energy demand. Investment in data centers is expected to reach $580 billion this year, exceeding investment in the oil supply, according to the report.

Growing economies including India and nations in Southeast Asia, the Middle East, Africa and Latin America, will “increasingly shape energy market dynamics in the years,” the IEA said, noting their potential for solar power.

China, meanwhile, has accounted for half the global growth in demand for oil and gas, and more than half for electricity, since 2010.

“In a break from the trend of the past decade, the increase in electricity consumption is no longer limited to emerging and developing economies,” IEA Executive Director Fatih Birol stated in a release. Electricity use is also rising in advanced economies, according to Birol.

Nations are grappling with meeting demand while preparing for the risks brought on by climate change. The IEA says the world is falling short on universal energy access and climate change goals. Around 730 million people still live without electricity, according to the IEA, and despite progress, nearly one-quarter of the global population still relies on inefficient cooking methods that hurt their health or the environment. 2024 was also the hottest year on record.

Nations should diversify their energy sources and cooperate to expand supply chains for critical minerals used to make things like batteries for electric vehicles and components for solar and wind power generation, the IEA said. This also includes making quick improvements to the grid, energy storage and broader infrastructure.

“When we look at the history of the energy world in recent decades, there is no other time when energy security tensions have applied to so many fuels and technologies at once,” Birol said. “With energy security front and (center) for many governments, their responses need to consider the synergies and trade-offs that can arise with other policy goals — on affordability, access, competitiveness and climate change.”

The IEA brought back an approach to this year’s outlook using what it calls current policies. It used this approach in 2019 to weigh different possible global energy outcomes, before better aligning with clean energy transition plans. This year the agency’s outlook includes the possibility of essentially regressing on the phase-out of fossil fuels.

In a conference call Wednesday, Birol said: “We will still use oil. We will still use gas. But the growth of electricity demand is spectacular.”

He noted the role transportation plays in accounting for 45 percent of global oil consumption, for example. “How the electrification of the transportation takes place, especially in countries beyond China and Europe, will determine the shape of the oil demand and growth.”

Wednesday’s edition of the yearly report is the first released since the start of U.S. President Donald Trump’s second term. Trump’s administration has for a second time opted out of the Paris agreement, rolled back dozens of climate regulations, slashed federal support for renewable energies such as wind and solar power and is reversing the “endangerment finding” that sits at the core of U.S. climate policy.

Trump has pledged his support instead to the fossil fuel industry, investing in coal and loosening restrictions on pollution.

But energy analysts said the shift to clean power is happening regardless of climate policy around the world.

“The evidence on the ground is overwhelming,” said Dave Jones, chief analyst at global energy think tank Ember. “EV sales are taking off in many emerging countries, solar is permeating even through the Middle East. Renewables and electrification will dominate the future.”

Maria Pastukhova, energy transition program lead at climate change think tank E3G, said the report makes “the choices for the global energy system and the global economy unambiguous.”

Others, however, were critical of how the outlook addressed oil and gas. Ben Backwell, CEO of the Global Wind Energy Council, said the outlook does not fully capture the momentum in renewables, and that it should have emphasized the trajectory for renewable energy is accelerating, driven by the decreasing cost of the technologies, strong policy support and the move toward electrification.

“We’re accelerating,” he added. “You can see it all around the world and we can see it in our numbers for last year, but also in our numbers for the first half of this year. It looks very, very exciting, both for wind and for solar, in fact, and for next year, even more so.”

The IEA addressed some of the criticism in the call Wednesday. It said that it sees differences economically, politically and regarding clean energy efforts across the globe, and that its analysis tries to account for those differences.

“In a nutshell, the IEA is backsliding,” said Stephan Singer, global energy senior adviser at CAN International, a global network of environmental organizations. “As a global think tank, the IEA has largely failed to represent where most countries in the (Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development) and the developing world are, as they’re supporting net zero emissions with 98 percent CO2 emissions reductions by mid-century.”

Editor’s note: Associated Press reporters Jennifer McDermott in Providence, Rhode Island, and Sibi Arasu in Bengaluru contributed to this report.

The post IEA: Electricity demand surging faster than energy production appeared first on Daily Journal of Commerce.

California’s two largest utilities routinely drag their feet connecting solar panels to the electric grid, missing state-mandated deadlines as much as 73 percent of the time, according to a formal complaint submitted by solar advocates.

The complaint filed by a solar energy advocacy group urges the California Public Utilities Commission to hold utilities accountable when they fail to meet such deadlines. The commission is formally reviewing it.

The advocates have complained for years that such delays hinder California’s transition to renewables. State utility regulators are separately revisiting the process for connecting rooftop solar to the grid, including examining whether and how the utility commission should require utilities to comply with the timelines it established years ago.

But the commission has yet to reprimand utilities for regularly missing these deadlines.

“The rule is there, but the commission hasn’t chosen to enforce (it),” said Kevin Luo, policy and market development manager for the California Solar & Storage Association, which filed the complaint.

When Californians add solar panels to their rooftops, they begin a complex “interconnection” process led by the utilities to ensure the array is correctly installed and able to provide power for both the customer and the grid, which receives power the customer does not use. For each interconnection step, the utility is allotted a certain amount of time, ranging from five business days to 90 calendar days.

The timelines for several of the more extensive steps — including design, construction and installation — were clarified in a 2020 decision after solar panel owners complained that California’s major investor-owned utilities were blowing their deadlines.

The delays can have significant financial consequences for panel owners, widening the period after they have laid out money for solar cells but before they see a reduction in their power consumption or payments from selling excess solar power back to utilities.

Pacific Gas & Electric, Southern California Edison, and San Diego Gas & Electric all report their compliance with these timelines on a quarterly basis. The reporting is for projects over 30 kilowatts, which are often for businesses, not residential homes, and account for most solar projects.

The data show that PG&E and Edison routinely exceed the allotted windows.

In the complaint, filed in late August, the California Solar & Storage Association noted the utilities take longer than permitted to connect customers between 19 percent and 73 percent of the time, depending on which stage of the process is examined.

For example, the utilities are given 10 business days to acknowledge someone’s request for interconnection — PG&E’s median time for this step was 20 days, with its longest being 245 days. One of the most crucial steps is a system impact study, which looks at how the addition of a customer’s solar array will affect the grid and identifies any potential issues with hookup. PG&E kept to its timeline 49 percent of the time, while Edison met its deadline 43 percent of the time, according to the complaint.

San Diego Gas & Electric typically meets its deadlines and wasn’t included in the solar association’s complaint about timeliness.

PG&E spokesperson Mike Gazda responded to the complaint by stating that “PG&E is a strong advocate for solar energy and has interconnected nearly 900,000 solar customers — more than any other U.S. utility — to support customers who have made the choice to go solar, strengthen California’s energy grid and reduce our state’s carbon footprint. We look forward to addressing the latest claims made by (the solar group) through the appropriate regulatory channels.”

Edison spokesperson Jeff Monford said the company takes “complaints seriously and (is) working with the California Public Utilities Commission to thoroughly address any issues related to our interconnection processes.”

Utilities have previously said that delays can be caused by permitting issues, unfamiliar new technologies, or other agencies needing to be involved.

So, what happens when they break the rules?

The utilities commission declined to lay out specific penalties when it clarified the timelines in 2020. It rejected a recommendation from a work group including industry representatives and consumer advocates to “clearly indicate that financial penalties” could happen if a utility fails to meet the timelines on 95 percent of projects.

“The commission must first determine whether timeline certainty is improving,” the decision said. Regulators could set out penalties in the future “if it determines such a construct would support timely interconnection.”

The commission declined to comment because the case is an “ongoing adjudicatory proceeding,” spokesperson Adam Cranfill said.

Without some kind of punishment, advocates argue, there’s not only no incentive for utilities to follow the rules but also a disincentive because of how the money flows.

“From their perspective, solar and storage is competition for them,” Luo said. “Having people with their own solar and storage reduces the need to continually expand the grid and build out transmission lines.”

California’s rooftop solar industry has been mired in controversy in recent years because of the state’s “net energy metering” program, which governs how much utilities are required to pay solar customers for extra energy their panels generate. The program is meant to incentivize adopting renewable energy and offset the significant cost of rooftop solar, but utilities argued it creates an unfair cost burden for those without solar who pay more for costs such as grid maintenance. As a result, the current iteration of the program pays out significantly less than prior versions.

Three environmental groups sued over the change, and the California Supreme Court ruled last month that the lower courts should reexamine the case’s details instead of deferring to utility regulators.

Editor’s note: This story was originally published by CalMatters and distributed through a partnership with The Associated Press.

The post Utilities missing deadlines for solar hookups in California appeared first on Daily Journal of Commerce.

Several groups and nonprofit organizations on Monday filed a lawsuit against the Environmental Protection Agency over the cancellation of a $7 billion Solar for All program intended to make solar power accessible to more than 900,000 lower-income Americans.

They say the Trump administration‘s termination of the program was illegal and they want a federal judge to direct the EPA to reinstate it. The program is affiliated with $20 billion more in green funding also terminated under President Donald Trump that EPA Administrator Lee Zeldin had characterized as a fraudulent scheme fraught with waste.

The EPA does not comment on litigation, the agency stated in an email on Monday.

The lawsuit is the latest legal action taken against the administration amid its assault on clean energy policy and related funding and programs across the country. Trump has moved to boost production of fossil fuels such as oil, natural gas and coal.

The lawsuit filed in Rhode Island by the Rhode Island AFL-CIO labor organization and others — including public interest law center Rhode Island Center for Justice and nonprofit Solar United Neighbors — detailed the program’s importance for local workforces and lower-income communities looking for access to clean-energy project funding.

Patrick Crowley, president of the Rhode Island AFL-CIO, said Monday that the program’s termination kills jobs and will drive up electricity prices.

The Solar for All money was rescinded after Trump’s massive tax and spending law passed in Congress in July. Zeldin stated via social media at the time, “the bottom line is this: EPA no longer has the statutory authority to administer the program or the appropriated funds to keep this boondoggle alive.”

The groups argued in the lawsuit that the law only revoked climate grants not yet awarded by the EPA and that these solar funds were already awarded.

“The Trump administration’s rollback of the Solar for All program is a shameless attempt to prop up fossil fuel companies at the expense of families,” said Kate Sinding Daly, senior vice president for law and policy at the Conservation Law Foundation, one of the nonprofit legal advocacy groups representing the plaintiffs.

“This program would provide families with low incomes access to clean, affordable solar power: energy that lowers bills, improves air quality, and keeps people safer during extreme heat,” she added in a statement.

The lawsuit cites previous EPA estimates that the program would have saved recipients about $400 each year on electricity bills and cumulatively reduced or avoided greenhouse gas emissions by over 30 million metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent.

The $7 billion Solar for All program was part of the $27 billion “green bank,” which is formally known as the Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund. It was established in the Democrat-backed climate law passed in 2022 under former President Joe Biden.

The other $20 billion, canceled by the Trump administration in March, was slated for eight community development banks and nonprofit organizations for tens of thousands of projects to combat the effects of climate change, such as residential energy efficiency projects to larger-scale investments such as community cooling.

Groups have also sued over the cancellation of that money — with a federal judge saying they must have access to some of the funds — though recently, an appeals court ruled that federal officials can move forward with its termination.

The Trump administration has targeted a host of programs and policies dedicated to clean energy.

Just last week, the administration canceled $7.6 billion in grants for hundreds of climate-friendly projects across 16 states. It has also interfered with nearly complete offshore wind developments, moved to rescind the crucial ‘endangerment finding’ that allows climate regulation, is looking to end greenhouse gas emissions reporting requirements for large polluters, and taken a slew of other deregulatory measures.

The post Groups sue EPA over cancellation of $7B Solar for All plan appeared first on Daily Journal of Commerce.

HOLLY RIDGE, La. — In a rural corner of Louisiana, Meta is building one of the world’s largest data centers — a $10 billion behemoth as big as 70 football fields that will consume more power in a day than the entire city of New Orleans at the peak of summer.

While the colossal project is impossible to miss in Richland Parish, a farming community of 20,000 residents, not everything is visible. For instance, it’s unclear exactly how much the social media giant will pay toward the cost — more than $3 billion — for new electrical infrastructure needed to power the facility.

Watchdogs have warned that in the rush to capitalize on the AI-driven data center boom, some states are allowing massive tech companies to direct expensive infrastructure projects with limited oversight.

Mississippi lawmakers allowed Amazon to bypass regulatory approval for energy infrastructure to serve two data centers it is spending $10 billion to build. In Indiana, a utility is proposing to create a data center-focused subsidiary that operates outside normal state regulations. And while Louisiana says it has added consumer safeguards, it lags other states in efforts to insulate regular power consumers from costs tied to data centers.

There is less transparency due to confidentiality agreements and rushed approvals, said Mandy DeRoche, an attorney for environmental advocacy group Earthjustice.

“You can’t follow the facts; you can’t follow the benefits or the negative impacts that could come to the service area or to the community,” she said.

Under contract with Meta, power company Entergy agreed to build three gas-powered plants that would produce 2,262 megawatts — equivalent to a fifth of Entergy’s current power supply in Louisiana. The Public Service Commission approved Meta’s infrastructure plan in August after Entergy agreed to bolster protections to prevent a spike in residential rates.

Nonetheless, nondisclosure agreements conceal how much Meta will pay.

Consumer advocates tried but failed to compel Meta to provide sworn testimony, submit to discovery and face cross-examination during a regulatory review. Regulators reviewed Meta’s contract with Entergy but were barred from revealing details.

Meta did not address AP’s questions about transparency, while Louisiana’s economic development agency and Entergy say nondisclosure agreements are standard to protect sensitive commercial data.

Davante Lewis — the only one of five public service commissioners to vote against the plan — said he’s still unclear how much electricity the center will use, if gas-powered plants are the most economical option and if the project will create the promised 500 jobs.

“There’s certain information we should know and need to know but don’t have,” Lewis said.

Additionally, Meta is exempt from paying sales tax under a 2024 Louisiana law that the state acknowledges could lead to lost revenue totaling “tens of millions of dollars or more each year.”

Meta has agreed to pay for about half the cost of building the power plants over 15 years, including cost overruns, but not maintenance and operation, said Logan Burke, executive director of the Alliance for Affordable Energy, a consumer advocacy group.

Public Service Commissioner Jean-Paul Coussan insists there will be “very little” impact on ratepayers.

But watchdogs warn Meta could pull out of its contract or not renew it, leaving the public to pay for the power plants over the rest of their 30-year life span, and all grid users are expected to help pay for the $550 million transmission line serving Meta’s facility.

Ari Peskoe, director of Harvard University’s Electricity Law Initiative, said tech companies should be required to pay “every penny so the public is not left holding the bag.”

Elsewhere, tech companies are not being given such leeway. More than a dozen states have taken steps to protect households and business ratepayers from paying for rising electricity costs tied to energy-hungry data centers.

Pennsylvania’s utilities commission is drafting a model rate structure to insulate customers from rising costs related to data centers. New Jersey’s utilities regulators are studying whether data centers cause “unreasonable” cost increases for other users. Oregon passed legislation this year ordering utilities regulators to develop new, and likely higher, power rates for data centers.

And in June, Texas implemented what it calls a ‘kill switch’ law empowering grid operators to order data centers to reduce their electrical load during emergencies.

Some Richland Parish residents fear a boom-and-bust cycle once construction ends. Others expect a boost in school and health care funding. Meta said it plans to invest in 1,500 megawatts of renewable energy in Louisiana and $200 million in water and road infrastructure in Richland Parish.

“We don’t come from a wealthy parish, and the money is much needed,” said Trae Banks, who runs a drywall business that has tripled in size since Meta arrived.

In the nearby town of Delhi, Mayor Jesse Washington believes the data center will eventually have a positive impact on his community of 2,600.

But for now, the construction traffic is frustrating residents and property prices are skyrocketing as developers try to house thousands of construction workers. More than a dozen low-income families were evicted from a trailer park whose owners are building housing for incoming Meta workers, Washington said.

“We have a lot of concerned people — they’ve put hardship on a lot of people in certain areas here,” the mayor said. “I just want to see people from Delhi benefit from this.”

Editor’s note: Brook reported from New Orleans.

The post Meta’s $10B data center project in Louisiana raises alarms appeared first on Daily Journal of Commerce.

The Oregon Museum of Science and Industry (OMSI) is transforming its 7,000-square-foot Natural Sciences Hall into a space designed to deepen public understanding of climate-related challenges and community-level actions.

The renovation will begin once the hall closes to the public on Tuesday. The updated space, expected to open in spring 2026, will be named the Nancy Stueber Natural Sciences Hall after OMSI’s former president and CEO; she retired in 2020 after 38 years at the museum.

Bearing Architecture designed the project. The team also includes structural engineer VALAR Consulting Engineering and general contractor Walsh Construction.

The hall’s current Science on a Sphere exhibit will return. Also, access through the hall to the museum’s upstairs labs will remain. The museum’s prenatal exhibit will reopen in a different area of the hall. The remainder of the space will be renovated, including construction of new walls, additions of murals, and installation of new lighting to lower energy costs. Key activations in the hall focusing on renewable energy, sustainable living and conservation were developed in partnership with Portland General Electric, a sponsor of the renovation.

A new permanent, interactive exhibition will illustrate the relationship between humans and the environment. “Climate of Change/Clima de Cambio” will feature narratives from the communities in Oregon most affected by climate change.

“We want to invite visitors to explore in hands-on participatory ways how climate change is affecting our region here in the Pacific Northwest, both in our ecosystems and in our communities,” said Ciera Iveson, OMSI’s creative director.

Key climate science concepts and climate solutions will be presented, she said.

The climate impact message carried through the project’s design. OMSI is working with Timberlab to create an entrance using reclaimed yellow cedar left over from construction sites. Inside, tan oak will be used. The team will use mainly reclaimed wood that otherwise would have become waste, Iveson said.

The project’s theme is reclaiming waste, sourcing local building materials, and minimizing use of anything that in the long run would be discarded, she added.

Hall features will include: an immersive multimedia experience developed by Tellart that highlights the interconnectedness of humans and the natural world; design showcasing the beauty of the Pacific Northwest through landscapes, textures, and ecosystems; and other interactive, hands-on elements and education modules.

“We’re putting in a story theater where we’re sharing some documentary films we’ve been shooting of local communities here in the Pacific Northwest and their solutions,” Iveson said. “That’s going to be a really beautiful part of this installation.”

Donors, trustees and sponsors in the past few years have provided support for the project, Iveson said.

The museum’s “Accelerated” campaign raised $6.75 million from 2020-2025 in support of OMSI District plans. Approximately $2 million was allocated for the Nancy Stueber Natural Sciences Hall. Officials also garnered approximately $2 million in federal grants (from the National Science Foundation and the Institute of Museum and Library Services), of which $1.5 million was rescinded, Iveson stated in an email. When the grants were terminated, OMSI reduced the project scope and allocated operational funds to its partners to ensure key exhibition elements of the exhibitions could be preserved, she added.

The post Climate-focused renovation set to start soon at OMSI appeared first on Daily Journal of Commerce.

WASHINGTON — A federal judge ruled Monday that a nearly complete offshore wind project halted by the Trump administration can resume, dealing the president a setback in his ongoing effort to restrict the fledgling industry.

Work on the Revolution Wind project for Rhode Island and Connecticut was paused Aug. 22, when the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management issued a stop-work order for what it said were national security concerns. The Interior Department agency did not specify those concerns at the time. Both the developer and the two states sued in federal courts.

Danish energy company Orsted and its joint venture partner, Skyborn Renewables, sought a preliminary injunction in U.S. District Court that would allow them to move the project forward.

At a hearing Monday, Judge Royce Lamberth said he considered how Revolution Wind has relied on its federal approval, the delays are costing $2.3 million per day and if the project can’t meet deadlines, the entire enterprise could collapse. After December, the specialized ship needed to complete the project won’t be available until at least 2028, he said. More than 1,000 people have been working on the wind farm, which is 80 percent complete.

“There is no question in my mind of irreparable harm to the plaintiffs,” Lamberth said, as he granted the motion for the preliminary injunction. In his written ruling, he said Revolution Wind had “demonstrated likelihood of success on the merits” of its claim, adding that granting the injunction is in the public interest.

Interior Department spokeswoman Elizabeth Peace said the ruling means Revolution Wind “will be able to resume construction” while the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management “continues its investigation into possible impacts by the project to national security and prevention of other uses on the Outer Continental Shelf.”

The administration said in a court filing this month that while BOEM approved the wind farm, it stipulated that the developer continue to work with the Defense Department to mitigate national security concerns. It said the Interior Department, to date, has not received any information that these concerns have been addressed.

Orsted said Monday that construction will resume as soon as possible, and it will continue to seek to work collaboratively with the administration.

Nancy Pyne of the Sierra Club said the court ruling “reaffirms that Donald Trump and his administration’s attacks on clean energy are not only reckless and harmful to our communities, but they are also illegal.” Trump is trying to “kneecap” renewable energy “in favor of dirty and expensive fossil fuels,” she said.

White House spokeswoman Anna Kelly said Trump was elected with a mandate to “restore our country’s energy dominance — which includes prioritizing the most effective and reliable tools to power our country. This will not be the final say on the matter.”

On the campaign trail, Trump vowed to end the offshore wind industry as soon as he returned to the White House. He has said he wants to boost production of fossil fuels such as oil, natural gas and coal for the U.S. to have the lowest-cost energy and electricity of any nation in the world.

The Trump administration has stopped construction on major offshore wind farms, revoked wind energy permits and paused permitting, canceled plans to use large areas of federal waters for new offshore wind development, and stopped $679 million in federal funding for a dozen offshore wind projects.

Last week, the administration moved to block a separate Massachusetts offshore wind farm. That was just days after the Interior Department asked a federal judge in Baltimore to cancel previous approval for construction of an offshore wind project in Maryland.

Revolution Wind is supposed to be Rhode Island’s and Connecticut’s first large offshore wind farm — capable of supplying power to more than 350,000 homes. The complex is expected to meet about 2.5 percent of the region’s electricity needs.

Connecticut Attorney General William Tong and Rhode Island Attorney General Peter Neronha, both Democrats, called the judge’s ruling a major win for workers and families, who need the project to stay on track so it can start to drive down unaffordable energy bills.

Connecticut Rep. Joe Courtney, a Democrat, said a multibillion-dollar project that is 80 percent complete and was fully permitted with input from the Pentagon is not a national security problem. The Interior Department “should take the hint and let the thousands of construction workers finish the job,” he said.

Orsted began construction in 2024 about 15 miles south of the Rhode Island coast. It says in its complaint that about $5 billion has been spent or committed, and it expects more than $1 billion in costs if the project is canceled. Rhode Island is already home to the five-turbine, offshore Block Island Wind Farm.

Editor’s note: McDermott reported from Providence, Rhode Island. AP writer Susan Haigh in Hartford, Connecticut contributed to this report.

The post Judge allows Revolution Wind construction to resume appeared first on Daily Journal of Commerce.

PROVIDENCE, R.I. — Connecticut, Rhode Island and the developer of an offshore wind farm that would power 350,000 homes in the two states said Thursday that they’re suing the Trump administration for stopping the nearly completed project.

Rhode Island Attorney General Peter Neronha accused President Donald Trump of waging an “all-out assault” on the wind energy industry. The states’ lawsuit, filed in U.S. District Court in Rhode Island, describes the Revolution Wind project as a “cornerstone” of their clean energy future, abruptly halted by federal officials without “statutory authority, regulatory justification or factual basis.”

Danish energy company Orsted filed a separate suit in U.S. District Court in Washington, D.C., also arguing that the administration lacks the legal authority to block the Revolution Wind project. Orsted said it would seek a preliminary injunction that would allow it to advance the project, which is 80 percent complete, with all underwater foundations and 45 of 65 turbines installed.

Interior Department spokesperson Elizabeth Peace said Thursday that the department doesn’t comment on pending litigation.

Work on the project was paused Aug. 22 when the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management issued a stop work order for what it said were national security concerns. They were not specified.

Trump has demonstrated hostility to renewable energy, particularly offshore wind. He has prioritized fossil fuels for electricity. Revolution Wind is the second major wind project that his administration ordered to stop. Work on the first, an offshore wind project for New York, was later allowed to resume.

In separate federal court filings, the administration said recently it was reconsidering approvals for three other wind farms: the Maryland Offshore Wind Project, SouthCoast Wind and New England Wind. Combined, those projects could power nearly 2.5 million homes in Maryland, Massachusetts and Rhode Island with clean electricity.

Sens. Ed Markey and Elizabeth Warren, both Democrats representing Massachusetts, said Trump and his Cabinet “need to end their war on American energy and jobs.”

Interior Secretary Doug Burgum told CNN that he’s concerned offshore wind turbines distort radar detection systems, which could give cover to a bad actor to “launch a swarm drone attack through a wind farm.”

Retired U.S. Navy Cmdr. Kirk Lippold called that a “specious and false narrative” pushed by someone with an “overactive imagination in search of a solution to a problem that doesn’t exist.”

Lippold was commanding the USS Cole when al-Qaida attacked it in a Yemeni port in 2000.

If drones get so close to U.S. shores to be near a wind farm without being detected by the military, he said, “we have had a massive intelligence — a national security — failure.”

U.S. Sen. Jack Reed, a Rhode Island Democrat and national security expert, has also disputed the administration’s rationale, pointing to the Defense Department’s involvement in reviewing the project.

When the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management approved Revolution Wind in 2023, the agency said it consulted with the Defense Department at each stage of the regulatory process for the lease area assigned to the wind farm. The DOD concluded that with some site-specific stipulations, any impacts to its training and activities in the wind energy area would be “negligible and avoidable,” according to the record of decision.

The state and federal reviews took about nine years.

Trump and several Cabinet members repeatedly slammed wind power as ugly and expensive during a recent meeting. Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. talked about the failure of a massive wind turbine blade at a different offshore wind farm under construction off Nantucket, Massachusetts.

Fiberglass fragments of a blade from the Vineyard Wind project broke apart and began washing ashore last summer during the peak of tourist season. Manufacturer GE Vernova agreed to pay $10.5 million in a settlement to compensate island businesses that suffered losses due to the blade failure.

“We’re not allowing any windmills to go up unless there’s a legal situation where somebody committed to it a long time ago,” Trump said.

Revolution Wind was expected to be Rhode Island and Connecticut’s first large offshore wind farm, capable of providing about 2.5 percent of the region’s electricity needs.

Orsted began construction in 2024 about 15 miles south of the Rhode Island coast. It says in its complaint that about $5 billion has been spent or committed, and it expects more than $1 billion in costs if the project is canceled. Rhode Island already has one offshore facility: the five-turbine Block Island Wind Farm.

Rhode Island and Connecticut have said that halting construction of Revolution Wind would harm the states, their residents, investments and the offshore wind industry. More than 1,000 people have been working on the wind farm, and Connecticut committed over $200 million to redevelop State Pier in New London to support the industry.

The states said they’re counting on Revolution Wind electricity, particularly in the winter, when demand in New England spikes and natural gas is prioritized for heating. The power would cost 9.8 cents per kilowatt-hour, locked in for 20 years. That’s cheaper than the average projected cost of energy in New England.

The head of Connecticut’s top environmental and energy agency, Katie Dykes, predicts it will cost the state’s electricity ratepayers tens of millions of dollars if the wind project doesn’t come online.

Editor’s note: AP writers Matthew Daly in Washington and Susan Haigh in Hartford, Connecticut contributed to this report.

The post Rhode Island, Connecticut sue over wind farm project halt appeared first on Daily Journal of Commerce.

The Trump administration is canceling plans to use large areas of federal waters for new offshore wind development — the latest step to suppress the industry in the United States.

More than 3.5 million acres had been designated wind energy areas, as offshore locations deemed most suitable for development. The Bureau of Ocean Energy Management is now rescinding all designated wind energy areas in federal waters, announcing on Wednesday an end to setting aside large areas for “speculative wind development.”

Offshore wind lease sales were anticipated off the coasts of Texas, Louisiana, Maine, New York, California and Oregon, as well as in the central Atlantic. The Biden administration last year had announced a five-year schedule to lease federal offshore tracts for wind energy production.

Trump began reversing the country’s energy policies after taking office in January. A series of executive orders took aim at increasing oil, gas and coal production. Another early executive order temporarily halted offshore wind lease sales in federal waters and paused the issuance of approvals, permits and loans for all wind projects.

The bureau said it was acting in accordance with Trump’s action and an order by his interior secretary this week to end any preferential treatment toward wind and solar facilities, which were described as unreliable, foreign-controlled energy sources.

Robin Shaffer, president of Protect Our Coast NJ, applauded the administration for its actions and said they were long overdue. Opponents of offshore wind projects are particularly vocal and organized in New Jersey.

“It’s hard to believe these projects ever got this far because of the immensity, scale, scope and expense, compared to relatively cheap and reliable forms of onshore power,” he said Thursday. “We’re nearly there, but we haven’t reached the finish line yet.”

The Sierra Club said the administration’s “relentless obstruction of wind energy” shows it does not care about creating affordable, reliable energy for everyday Americans.

“No matter how much they want to bolster their buddies in the dirty fossil fuel industry, we will continue to push for the cleaner, healthier, and greener future we deserve,” Xavier Boatright, Sierra Club’s deputy legislative director for clean energy and electrification, stated.

Attorneys general from 17 states and the District of Columbia are suing in federal court to challenge Trump’s executive order halting leasing and permitting for wind energy projects. His administration had also halted work on a major offshore wind project for New York but allowed it to resume in May.

The nation’s first commercial-scale offshore wind farm, a 12-turbine facility called South Fork, opened last year east of Montauk Point, New York.

The post Plans for new U.S. offshore wind projects canceled appeared first on Daily Journal of Commerce.

GALENA, Alaska — Eric Huntington built his dream cabin nestled in the wilderness of central Alaska, eventually raising two daughters there. But over the years, he learned that living in this quiet, remote village came with a hefty cost.

Every year, the Huntington family spent about $7,000 on diesel to heat the cabin during bone-chilling winters. And a few years back, a power outage at the town’s diesel plant left residents temporarily freezing in minus 50 degrees Fahrenheit. When power finally returned hours later, water pipes had frozen, leaving about two dozen homes without running water for days.

“We just didn’t open our door all morning until the lights came back on,” said Huntington, a member of the local Louden Tribe.

In Galena, a sprawling village of 400 people on the banks of the Yukon River, a community built around a former military base is shifting to clean energy to reduce its reliance on expensive, imported diesel. Local leaders say their nearly completed solar farm, along with an existing biomass plant, will boost the town’s savings and protect residents from blackouts during extreme weather. The facilities have the potential to provide clean backup power in emergencies and improve the power grid’s resiliency, all while diversifying the village’s energy sources and providing job opportunities for locals.

The projects come at a precarious time for renewable energy transition in the United States. The Trump administration has canceled billions of dollars of clean energy grants to bolster fossil fuel production, and billions of dollars more in investments have been scrapped or delayed this year. So far, the village’s federal grants for the solar array haven’t been impacted, but local leaders know the risk remains. Whatever the future of public funding, the village is an example of how renewable energies can save costs, boost reliability during extreme weather and create jobs.

Once online, the solar array will ensure that the village’s power grid has a backup system, said Tim Kalke, general manager of Sustainable Energy for Galena Alaska — or SEGA — a nonprofit that will operate it. Then a power outage won’t result in tens of thousands of dollars in repairs, he added, and heat will be guaranteed in times of extreme cold.

“You’re dealing with life, health and safety,” he said.

In May, dozens of high school students in navy blue caps and gowns stood with nervous excitement in a locker-brimmed hallway, each waiting their turn to walk through yellow tinsel into a packed auditorium. It was graduation day for Galena Interior Learning Academy.

The school’s vocational training courses and cultural offerings attract some 200 students annually from across Alaska, boosting the village’s population and energy needs.

Students here can take classes on sustainable energy, aviation, carpentry and much more. But to keep the school running — especially during long, cold winters — it needs heat.

That’s where the biomass project comes in. Every winter since 2016, trees (mostly paper birch) are locally harvested and shredded into wood chips that fuel a large boiler plant on campus, offsetting use of about 100,000 gallons of diesel annually for the school district and the city, said Brad Scotton, a Galena City Council member who also serves on SEGA’s board. It’s notable as one of the state’s first large-scale biomass plants and the most rural, he added.

Cost savings from use of biomass has allowed the Galena City School District to hire certified professionals in trade jobs and do upkeep on campus facilities, district superintendent Jason R. Johnson stated in an email.

It’s also created a local workforce, and a job base the village never used to have.

“It’s keeping the money that used to go outside within the community and providing pretty meaningful jobs for people,” Scotton said.

In rural areas of Alaska, the costs for many goods can be high, as they must be brought in. Galena burns just under 400,000 gallons of diesel annually to produce electricity, and an energy price hike around 2008 helped the village realize something needed to change. Scotton remembered when a gallon of diesel was $1.64 and then skyrocketed to $4.58 another year. At that wholesale price, the city was paying more than $1.8 million to keep the lights on.

“It was really quite a shock to everybody’s system in terms of trying to operate with those elevated costs,” Scotton said. “So that really got the community assessing whether or not we could continue business as usual with that reliance.”

That’s when they started looking for grants to build a solar array.

On an overcast May day, on a field flanked by boreal forests, workers in reflective safety vests slotted rectangular panels onto a metal grid. They were working on the nearly completed, 1.5-megawatt solar farm that will connect to a battery system.

The community will eventually be able to turn off its diesel engines and run on 100 percent clean, renewable energy on sunny summer days. Any excess power will be stored for nights, emergencies or heating the local indoor pool. The solar array will allow diesel operations to be shut off between 800 to 1,000 hours per year, saving about 100,000 gallons.

The solar farm won’t necessarily lower people’s electricity bills. But like the biomass plant, the hope is that it will stabilize energy costs, allowing those savings to go back into the community, all while providing work opportunities for residents like Aaren Sommer. Last year, the 19-year-old graduated from the academy, where he learned about solar energy. Now he’s helping to install the solar array.

“That’s going to reduce the diesel usage a whole bunch over at the power plant, which is going to help us out,” he said.

Editor’s note: Pineda reported from Los Angeles. Associated Press journalist Alyssa Goodman in New York contributed to this report.

The post Alaska village swaps diesel for solar and biomass power appeared first on Daily Journal of Commerce.