WHAT’S HAPPENING TODAY: Good afternoon and happy Thursday, readers! If you are in the Washington, D.C., area, we hope you have been enjoying the surprisingly beautiful August weather this week! It’s been much needed after we had such a hot and humid July.
Remember back in June, when the Environmental Protection Agency said it was seeking to undo emissions standards for power plants? We could see some formal movement on that in the coming weeks and months as the deadline to submit a comment on the proposed rule is today. Keep reading to hear what some groups have already been saying.
Recommended Stories
- Daily on Energy: India tariffed, Idaho wind project axed, and solar farm controversy
- Daily on Energy: Solar for All axed, Diamondback pessimistic, and a second wave for wind?
- Daily on Energy: GOP unrest over wind and solar credits, nominees in limbo, and OPEC+ hikes production
Plus, today’s edition of Daily on Energy continues to follow the administration’s plans to claw back grants from the Biden-era Solar for All program. Even some conservative-leaning organizations are speaking out against the move. Read below to find out what they are suggesting the administration do instead.
Welcome to Daily on Energy, written by Washington Examiner energy and environment writers Callie Patteson (@CalliePatteson) and Maydeen Merino (@MaydeenMerino). Email cpatteson@washingtonexaminer dot com or mmerino@washingtonexaminer dot com for tips, suggestions, calendar items, and anything else. If a friend sent this to you and you’d like to sign up, click here. If signing up doesn’t work, shoot us an email, and we’ll add you to our list.
EPA POWER PLANT RULE OVERHAUL: Today is the last day to submit comments on the Environmental Protection Agency’s effort to roll back the Biden administration’s regulations limiting greenhouse gas emissions from fossil fuel power plants.
As part of the EPA’s major deregulatory effort, it is seeking to undo a series of standards for fossil fuel power plants. One of those standards on the chopping block requires new and existing power plants that plan to operate past 2039 to reduce 90% of their carbon pollution by 2032 by using carbon capture technology.
EPA Administrator Lee Zeldin at the time said that rolling back these standards would save Americans on electricity bills. He argued that the Biden administration’s standards sought to regulate coal, oil, and gas out of existence.
The EPA is also seeking to repeal another power plant standard that aims to reduce toxic substances like mercury. The comment period for that standard ends August 11.
Public comments: The Environmental Defense Fund argued that the EPA should extend the comment period because the public was provided 51 days for comments and offered only one virtual public hearing.
“A rulemaking that could potentially eliminate EPA’s ability to take effective action against climate-destabilizing carbon pollution from the largest stationary sources in the United States and thereby to protect the health, safety, and well-being of the public should not be taken hastily and without full public participation,” the EDF wrote.
Meanwhile, the American Coal Council wrote, “This repeal reflects a necessary shift toward policies that acknowledge coal’s indispensable role in America’s energy and industrial strength.”
“The ACC believes that fair, performance-based regulations—rather than prescriptive mandates—are essential to maintaining energy reliability, supporting domestic industry, and safeguarding national security. Repealing these standards is a step toward restoring regulatory balance, legal clarity, and a future where coal continues to fuel progress, innovation, and economic resilience,” the ACC added.
OFFSHORE WIND DEALT ANOTHER BLOW FROM TRUMP: The Trump administration is escalating its crackdown on the offshore wind industry, as the Interior Department announced it would be reviewing all regulations related to offshore wind energy to end “preferential treatment.”
The details: Within this review, the agency is primarily taking aim at the Renewable Energy Modernization Rule issued by the Interior Department in April of last year. This rule was meant to streamline the regulatory process for and reduce costs associated with deploying offshore wind projects. At the time it was issued, the Biden administration said it would save the offshore wind industry around $1.9 billion.
Trump’s Interior is also reviewing regulations regarding financial assurance requirements and decommissioning cost estimates for offshore wind projects. The review is being led by the Bureau of Land Management and Bureau of Safety and Environmental Enforcement.
Secretary Doug Burgum said today that the agency will be focused on making sure these rules comply with the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act and do not prioritize wind and other renewables over fossil fuels.
“We’re taking a results-driven approach that prioritizes reliability, strengthens national security and upholds both scientific integrity and responsible environmental stewardship,” the secretary said.
ADMINISTRATION MAY BE ALTERING PAST CLIMATE ASSESSMENTS: Energy Secretary Chris Wright suggested this week that the Trump administration is updating and altering previously published National Climate Assessments that were swiftly removed from government websites after President Donald Trump took office this year.
The details: Wright told CNN on Tuesday night that the administration was reviewing these assessments and planned to release “updated reports.” He accused the past reports of not being “fair in broad-based assessments of climate change.”
“When you get into departments and look at stuff that’s there and you find stuff that’s objectionable, you want to fix it,” Wright said.
The National Climate Assessment is a congressionally mandated report that has been published since 2000 with the intent of providing the latest information on climate change and its effects on the United States. The last assessment published, the fifth edition, was published in November 2023. The Trump administration did approve and release the fourth edition during Trump’s first presidency five years prior.
It remains unclear how the administration plans to update these assessments, and the Department of Energy clarified to CNN that Wright was not personally altering these reports.
Some background: Wright’s comments come as he has repeatedly questioned decades of climate science in recent weeks, claiming climate change is not making weather more dangerous and severe. The secretary played a crucial role in issuing a new federal report that downplays the effects of climate change on extreme weather as well as the efficacy of mitigation-related policies and actions.
The report, issued at the end of July, was authored by five independent scientists selected by Wright – several of whom are widely considered to be climate skeptics or contrarians.
CONSERVATIVE THINK TANK URGES ADMIN TO PRESERVE ‘SOLAR FOR ALL’ PROGRAM…WITH SOME TWEAKS: The Trump administration is facing pushback from within its own party over the EPA’s reported plans to cancel Biden’s $7 billion affordable solar program.
Quick reminder: Earlier this week, the New York Times reported that the EPA was drafting termination letters to 60 nonprofit groups and state agencies that received funding through the agency’s Solar for All program. This program is a part of the Biden administration’s Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund, established under the 2022 Inflation Reduction Act. The agency was expected to start sending the termination letters by the end of the week.
Administrator Zeldin confirmed this afternoon that the EPA would be ending the program “for good,” saying the agency did not have the statutory authority to administer the program or the appropriated funds.
The pushback: The expected decision has been widely criticized by Democrats, grant recipients, and even conservative-leaning organizations. The Joseph Rainey Center for Public Policy, a conservative think tank, released a report today calling on the administration not to axe the program entirely. Instead, it is recommending expanding the program to include alternative forms of energy rather than focusing entirely on solar.
The think tank said the EPA should rename the program as the “Energy for All” program and allow projects using geothermal, small-scale hydro, storage, microgrids, and other emerging technologies to be eligible for funding. The group is also recommending elevating state involvement and utilizing artificial intelligence to streamline oversight of the program.
“President Trump pledged to cut energy costs in half for American families,” Rainey Center President Sarah Hunt told Callie. “Changing Solar for All into Affordable Energy for All by expanding eligible technologies, rather than ending this energy affordability program outright will help the President keep his pledge to the American people.”
TRUMP URGES NATIONS TO REJECT GLOBAL PLASTIC PRODUCTION CAP: As members of the United Nations meet early this month to reach a treaty on plastic pollution, the Trump administration is reportedly urging many to reject strict caps on production.
The details: A memo and communications seen by Reuters revealed that the Trump administration sent letters to several nations detailing that the U.S. will not support a treaty focused on curbing upstream effects of plastic pollution – such as through production limits.
“We will not support impractical global approaches such as plastic production targets or bans and restrictions on plastic additives or plastic products – that will increase the costs of all plastic products that are used throughout our daily lives,” the letters, sent on July 25 by career State Department officials, reportedly read.
More than 100 nations have already said they would support limiting global levels of production, though the U.S. – widely considered to be one of the largest plastic producers worldwide – continues to remain against such a provision.
The letter sent last month indicated that the U.S. could not see “convergence” on any treaty related to the supply and production of plastic or plastic additives, including global bans or restrictions, according to Reuters.
EXODUS FROM GLOBAL CLIMATE BANKING ALLIANCE CONTINUES: Another major financial institution has exited the Net-Zero Banking Alliance, the global climate coalition which has been shedding members over the last year.
The details: UBS Group AG announced this morning that it withdrew from the banking alliance, after having been a member since the group was created in 2021. UBS said it still recognizes the role that the alliance has in helping banks establish climate targets and frameworks, and indicated that the bank no longer needs the coalition’s assistance.
“With that work advanced and with our in-house capabilities strengthened, we have decided to withdraw from the NZBA, like a number of our global peers,” UBS said, adding that its commitment to sustainability and lower carbon emissions remains unchanged.
Some background: UBS joins over a dozen other U.S., Canadian, and U.K. banks that have withdrawn from the global climate group. Barclays and HSBC were the most recent to jump ship this summer, indicating that the group was no longer fit for purpose as so many other firms have left. Other major departures include JPMorgan Chase, Citigroup, Bank of America, Morgan Stanley and Goldman Sachs.
At its peak, the banking alliance had a membership of more than 140 banks. As of Thursday, that number had dropped to 125 firms. Only three U.S. institutions remain a part of the group: Amalgamated Bank, Areti Bank, and the Climate First Bank
FRANCE SUFFERS LARGEST WILDFIRE IN DECADES: Firefighters in Southern France are battling the country’s largest wildfire in decades, which has burned over 16,000 hectares, or 40,000 acres, of land since it started on Tuesday.
The wildfires in Southern France have been considered the country’s largest wildfire in eight decades, forcing about 2,000 residents to evacuate. BBC reports that officials said today that 13 people have been injured and one woman has died. Two people, including a firefighter, are in critical condition.
French Prime Minister François Bayrou said the fire is a “catastrophe on an unprecedented scale.”
TRUMP ADMINISTRATION SEEKING TO REPLACE TOP IEA OFFICIAL: The Trump administration is seeking to replace a top-ranking official at the International Energy Agency, E&E News reports.
Former U.S. official and industry insiders told E&E News that the administration is looking to replace Mary Warlick, the agency’s second in command. The plan comes as the administration and Republicans have criticized the Paris-based organization for providing analysis, data, and policy recommendations not only on fossil fuel, but renewables as well.
A Republican energy lobbyist told E&E News, “They want to get operatives in there, whether they’re career or political, who can actually move the needle,” referring to the administration.
“They’re going to get someone they trust and that person is going to fight from the inside out,” the lobbyist added.
Last month, House Republicans approved a bill to stop funding the IEA, claiming it has drifted away from its mission. The IEA receives about $6 million a year from the U.S. Additionally, Wright has also warned that the U.S. could leave the group if changes were not made.
ICYMI – SOUTH CAROLINA CITY CLIMATE LAWSUIT DISMISSED: In a win for Big Oil, a judge in Charleston, South Carolina, has dismissed a lawsuit filed by the city against oil and gas companies over their role in contributing to climate change.
The details: As with similar lawsuits filed across the country, the city accused major oil and gas companies like Exxon Mobil and Chevron of engaging in a disinformation campaign to discredit climate science while also failing to inform the public about the negative impacts of fossil fuels.
Yesterday, Judge Roger Young ruled in favor of the industry, saying federal law preempts state law claims and that the court lacked jurisdiction for out-of-state companies included in the suit. Young pointed to numerous similar rulings issued by circuit court judges across the country that all came to the same conclusion.
“Most state courts that have addressed the question have come to the same conclusion, holding that these cases seek damages for interstate and international emissions and, as a result, state-law claims are preempted and precluded by the U.S. Constitution’s structure,” the ruling reads.
Some reaction: The fossil fuel industry has since celebrated the ruling, with Chevron Corp. attorney Theodore J. Boutrous Jr. saying it affirms that states and municipalities cannot pursue such climate lawsuits under state laws.
“This ruling adds to a ‘growing chorus’ of climate lawsuit dismissals by federal and state courts, including in Delaware, Maryland, New Jersey, New York, Pennsylvania, and California,” he said in a statement, adding, “Judge Young rejected Plaintiffs’ ‘artful’ attempts to frame its claims as solely about consumer deception, holding that ‘Plaintiff cannot avoid that its claims turn on emissions.’”
RUNDOWN
Bloomberg The Bullish Case for Oil Is Real — But Far, Far Away
The Guardian US national parks staff in ‘survival mode’ to keep parks open amid Trump cuts
ProPublica How the Rapid Spread of Misinformation Pushed Oregon Lawmakers to Kill the State’s Wildfire Risk Map