Good morning and happy Friday,

Another week and another wild ride as the White House continues its campaign of chaos. For energy wonks, one particularly attention-grabbing move came when President Trump signed an executive order claiming authority over FERC and other independent regulatory agencies, prompting one energy industry advocate to remark “'I have unprintable thoughts.”

Meanwhile, as the DOE prepares to fire 2,000 probationary employees, the layoffs of hundreds of workers at the Bonneville Power Administration last week prompted a former official to liken the situation to playing ‘Russian roulette’ with the Northwest power grid. By this week, 30 BPA workers had their jobs back. 

Across the pond, the administration continued its European charm offensive as the newly minted energy secretary, Chris Wright, rebuked Britain, “calling the country’s target to reduce emissions of planet-heating gases a ‘sinister goal.’”

For its part, China’s 2024 investments in clean energy ($940 billion) were almost as much as global investments in fossil fuels ($1.12 trillion). Nǐ de Zhōngwén zěnmeyàng? (How’s your Chinese?)

Read on for more.

Last weekend the Trump administration moved to claw back almost 50 years of NEPA regulations; a few days later, 600+ “energy emergency” projects were fast-tracked. Meanwhile, the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee met to kick-start permitting negotiations, but the top Democrat issued a reality check. Here are some additional details about these interrelated stories:

• Trump’s plans to gut NEPA – aka the “magna carta” of environmental laws – are designed to make it easier to permit fossil fuel projects, but will likely trigger massive legal challenges, creating a “field day in court” for environmental groups.
• The Army Corps of Engineers announced it has identified more than 600 energy and infrastructure projects that could bypass the normal environmental review process under the “National Energy Emergency” Trump declared on February 3.
• On Wednesday, EPW convened a hearing on federal environmental reviews as they sought to “resurrect” elements of the 2024 Manchin-Barrasso permitting reform bill. Over on the House side, Bruce Westerman (R-AR), chair of the Natural Resources committee, says he has “restarted bipartisan talks.”

Not so fast. Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse (D-RI), threw cold water on the permitting lovefest, saying that Democrats “would go nowhere near” a deal until the other White House ends its “lawless regard for congressional authority and judicial orders.” Nevertheless, “many Democrats have continued to inch closer to support changing old-school environmental laws,” and “lawmakers on both sides of the aisle are in near-universal agreement that more generation is needed for an energy-hungry nation.”

About 65 million people depend on PJM Interconnection for electricity, but the potential for shortfalls in supply “may put grid reliability at risk” by 2030. Last week, FERC approved two plans to increase power supplies; clean energy advocates say one plan is far superior to the other. Here’s the skinny:

• The Reliability Resource Initiative has received widespread criticism from clean energy supporters who say it’s “unfair and won’t work.” The main objection is that it fast-tracks dispatchable resources, which gives fossil generation an advantage.
• The lone FERC Commissioner to dissent in the 3-1 ruling in favor of RRI noted several reasons why it fails to address the problem at hand, including that it prioritizes projects that take the longest time to build, instead of incentivizing projects that can be brought online quickly to meet surging demand.
• A much better solution than RRI is SIS – as in, Surplus Interconnection Service. This is the other plan FERC approved, and it’s geared toward “more fully using available interconnection capacity” by squeezing generation in where it’s needed most.

Broad support. Unlike RRI, SIS has received broad support from clean energy supporters. According to RMI, by 2030 “projects using SIS could add between 5.3 GW and 13.2 GW of ‘unforced capacity;’” another 3.3 GW to 10.2 GW of unforced capacity could be added through “generator replacement interconnection,” wherein clean energy projects reuse grid connections left open when older power plants (usually coal-fired) are retired. Both practices are already in widespread use in other states and by other interconnections.

• Key Trends: Sustainable Energy in America 2025 Factbook
• Contract, Schmontract: Anti-wind activists have a big ask for the Big Man 
• What’s the Safe Word?!: White House launches ‘energy dominance’ council to promote fossil fuels 
• Coded: An emergency appeal to save the hydrogen tax credit 
• Rare Procedure: Dems secure vote to overturn Trump ‘energy emergency’ 
• Resource Not Found: Bill Gate’s Breakthrough Energy is slashing its climate grantmaking budget 
• Go Defense: Battery trade association BCI asks Congress to defend US energy storage supply chain 
• Trickle-Down Effect: Trump hostility to US offshore wind reverberates through supply chain 
• Surprise: Rural Ohioans oppose solar farms, right? Not so, developer finds
• On a Binge: California may soon crack down on power-guzzling data centers 
• Doubling Down: MidAmerican files plans for hundreds of megawatts of new solar, gas 
• Tripling Down: As power demand surges, VA lawmakers seem ready to add more energy storage to the grid 
• Speedbump: Trump’s grand energy plans still have to survive Congress
• Bookmark This: BESS decommissioning and end-of-life planning: Why care today? 
• Not Top of Mind: Most in US worry about global warming – but their votes tell a different story 
• ERAS Tour: MISO wants to fast track energy storage projects. Can participating states interconnect as quickly as CAISO and ERCOT? 
• Correction: Commerce updates its preliminary tariff amounts in solar AD/CVD investigation 
• Record Breaking: Community solar installations increased by 35% in 2024 
• All In: Faith groups mobilize to keep fighting climate change as Trump pulls U.S. out of Paris accord
• Deep Uncertainty: What Trump’s offshore wind energy freeze could cost states 
• Cold Open: Pennsylvania Gov. Shapiro sues Trump administration, citing frozen IRA funding 
• Feb 25 Webinar: Boon or bane: What will data centers do to the grid?

• AZ: Board of Adjustment grants special use permit for McFarland solar project
• IA: Midamerican Seeks Approval For Solar And Turbine Projects
• IL: Shelby County Board tables moratorium on solar and wind facilities
• MD: Worcester Co. Commissioners table emergency legislation which could nix some US Wind plans
• MI: Proposed solar farm in Grass Lake faces backlash as plans resume
• NM: Utility-scale Sandoval County solar project gets approval despite opposition
• NY: Yonkers extends battery storage system moratorium
• NY: New Hartford Town Board strikes down Chapman Road community solar proposal
• OK: County rejects Cass County Solar
• OR: Ogle County Board approves solar development southeast of Polo
• PA: Proposed solar farm approved for Mahoning Twp.
• WY: Natrona County commissioners deny permit for 2K-acre solar farm northwest of Casper

Dispatch readers may recall that back in September – a lifetime ago!! – we told you that the California-based direct-air capture (DAC) company CarbonCapture had scrapped plans to build a massive DAC facility in Wyoming because it couldn’t lock down enough clean energy supply.

Fast-forward to last Friday, when the company announced the DOE had given them a $10 million valentine in the form of funding for a major DAC hub in Louisiana, effectively relocating and reviving the Wyoming project.

We’ve told you before that Louisiana is a potential hotbed for hot gas storage. According to Louisiana Economic Development the Bayou State “offers favorable geology for CO2 injection and storage with confining layers of shale and clay, minimal seismic activity and deep layers of sand.” 

The state is all over this new industry like gumbo on shrimp, although not everyone is thrilled about that, and as of last July, a legislative task force was five months overdue in producing a report on the potential impacts of carbon capture and storage. Many residents are concerned.

Looking at the big picture, however, the critical issue for DAC is simply that it requires gobs of energy – and the whole point of a DAC plant is that it captures more carbon that it releases. That’s an increasingly tall order, particularly given the interconnection logjams facing most clean energy projects. Will there be enough power to remove carbon from the sky? Stay tuned.