The EPA puts toxic power plant emissions back on the table
This analysis and news roundup comes from the Canary Media Weekly newsletter. Sign up to get it every Friday.
On Wednesday, the U.S. EPA proposed repealing Biden administration rules that limit toxic pollutants and planet-warming emissions from coal and gas plants across the country. These plants 'do not contribute significantly' to 'dangerous' air pollution, the EPA claimed — something that many, many studies have shown isn't true. Power plants are the second-largest source of carbon emissions in the country, and they're responsible for a lot of health-harming pollutants like sulfur dioxide, nitrogen oxides, and mercury, too.
When the Biden administration first announced the rules last year, the EPA estimated they would stem 1.38 billion metric tons of carbon pollution through 2047. That's the equivalent of taking 328 million gas cars off the road for a year, and amounts to an estimated $370 billion in climate and public health benefits.
Those benefits would've helped communities surrounding gas and coal plants around the U.S., according to the Sierra Club's Trump Coal Pollution Dashboard. For example, Montana's Colstrip 3 plant would have to reduce its toxic pollution under the Mercury and Air Toxics Standard, while a slew of plants across the Midwest and Southwest would have to install carbon-capture systems or shut down under the greenhouse gas rules.
The changes will allow coal plants around the country to keep burning. In North Dakota, some state officials are celebrating what they say is a big step toward protecting jobs and the coal industry. But in Georgia, health advocates and scientists warn the preservation of coal plants in their state will fall hard on vulnerable communities, especially those surrounding the facilities.
Still, none of this is set in stone. The EPA's proposals are vulnerable to several legal pitfalls, including challenges involving the Clean Air Act, the agency's insistence that power plants don't produce 'significant' emissions, and the health, economic, and other costs of increasing pollution, E&E News reports. Analysts with TD Cowen expect the EPA to finalize the rules by early next year, but say legal challenges and uncertainty will continue through all of 2026.
'Big, Beautiful Bill' threatens rooftop solar
President Donald Trump's 'Big, Beautiful Bill' is already having big impacts on the rooftop solar industry. The bill, now undergoing negotiations in the Senate, looks to repeal tax credits for solar installations and other clean energy projects. That includes credits that allowed a North Carolina food bank to install solar panels on the roof of its headquarters, which it anticipates will save the organization $143,000 each year. Other nonprofits are looking to follow suit — but they probably won't be able to if they can't access federal incentives, Canary Media's Elizabeth Ouzts reports.
The bill is also causing problems for two solar companies. Lender Solar Mosaic filed for bankruptcy last week, specifically citing 'legislation that threatens to eliminate tax credits for residential solar' as a forthcoming challenge. Residential solar giant Sunnova followed with a bankruptcy filing over the weekend.
While both companies' difficulties predate the Trump administration, it's clear that the residential solar sector is facing a difficult and uncertain moment, one analyst told Canary Media's Jeff St. John. An analysis by Ohm Analytics estimates that the House's version of the bill would lead rooftop solar installations across the country to drop by half next year, and another from Morgan Stanley projects an 85% decrease through 2030.
Bright spots for clean energy
Amid a sea of bad news for clean energy companies, some are still finding success.
Take Sublime Systems, which recently had its $87 million federal grant cancelled: Sublime says private-sector support is allowing its $150 million low-carbon cement factory in Massachusetts to move forward anyway.
Solar panel manufacturer Qcells said it's launching a new recycling operation in Georgia to repurpose retired panels. Heirloom Carbon is meanwhile keeping its operations rolling by winning over Republican state leadership in Louisiana, where it aims to build a facility that extracts carbon dioxide from the air. Developer Intersect Power got the green light Wednesday to build what would be the biggest solar-and-storage plant in the nation.
And in the Chicago area, Sun Metalon just raised $9.1 million from investors — including Japan's Nippon Steel — to build its steel decarbonization business, Canary Media's Kari Lydersen reports. The startup has created an oven-sized box that melts down waste metal and sludge from steel and aluminum production, churning out pucks of reusable, recyclable metal.
Vehicle emissions blowback: A group of 11 states sue after President Trump signs a congressional resolution rolling back California's vehicle emissions standards, which several other states have adopted. (The Hill)
Budget bill update: Democrats — and some Republicans who voted for the House-passed version of the 'Big, Beautiful Bill' — look to convince Senate Republicans to preserve clean energy tax credits as budget discussions continue. (The Hill, Politico)
Community electrification: California researchers report success and lessons learned from an experiment aimed at cutting electrification costs by upgrading multiple households in a single neighborhood, which saved contractors time and allowed residents to buy products in bulk. (KQED)
GM reverses on EVs: While General Motors is still ramping up EV production, its new plan to spend $4 billion on mostly gasoline-powered cars means the company has given up on a goal to make only EVs by 2035, analysts say. (E&E News)
Texas' gas commitment: A study finds developers have proposed more than 100 gas-fired power plants totaling 58 gigawatts in Texas, which have the potential to emit an estimated 115 million metric tons of greenhouse gases every year. (Inside Climate News)
Charging forward: A J.D. Power survey finds fewer attempts to charge at public EV stations are ending in failure than in years past, and that the total number of public chargers is rapidly expanding. (New York Times)
Batteries' battle: U.S. battery recyclers face 'a limbo moment' because the Trump administration has endorsed efforts to produce critical minerals while also imposing tariffs and threatening to repeal clean energy tax credits. (Grist)
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
A Very Different Anniversary Celebration
The Atlantic Daily, a newsletter that guides you through the biggest stories of the day, helps you discover new ideas, and recommends the best in culture. Sign up for it here. As tanks roll through Washington today to mark the U.S. Army's 250th birthday—and the 79th birthday of President Donald Trump—Europe is commemorating a different anniversary, not with combat vehicles but with a passenger liner moored near a riverbank. Dignitaries from across Europe are gathering in Schengen, a riparian village in Luxembourg, to celebrate the creation of an international agreement to abolish controls at their countries' common borders. The agreement, signed on June 14, 1985, turned the little-known village into a landmark of European integration; today, Schengen is synonymous with the experiment the agreement spawned—an area of borderless travel that has grown to encompass 29 nations and more than 450 million people. The anniversary celebration in Schengen features artifacts of the treaty-making process, including the MS Princesse Marie-Astrid, the refurbished cruise ship where diplomats from the five original signatory states—France, West Germany, Belgium, Luxembourg, and the Netherlands—convened on the Moselle River to dismantle border controls. Their aims were practical: The Schengen Agreement was intended to make life more convenient for people—to send a message to workers and vacationers to 'pass, pass, pass,' as one of the signers told me during research for my book about Schengen. 'In principle, you can pass; and we presume that you're honest.' [Read: What Europe fears] But the agreement took on greater symbolic meaning. Schengen embodied the values of liberal internationalism that were ascendant at the so-called end of history, fulfilling the promise of a community of nations where people, goods, capital, and information all would circulate freely. If the Abrams tank is the key symbol of American military might on display today in Washington, the passenger ship anchored in Schengen showcases a very different vision of the international order, one premised on mobility, connection, and cross-border exchange—on the right 'to travel, to migrate, to circulate, to receive and be received,' as one Senegalese migrant in Paris put it in the years after Schengen's founding. Of course, both visions are legacies of the defeat of fascism and the end of the Cold War: a strong United States that vanquished enemies of freedom, a peaceful Europe where erstwhile adversaries worked to eradicate borders that once stood as battle lines. For a time, these visions coexisted. Now they seem to be coming apart. That's all too clear in the contempt that senior members of the Trump administration have expressed for longtime allies; the defense secretary, Pete Hegseth, called Europe 'PATHETIC' in a private chat on the Signal messaging app. It's also clear in the administration's escalating crackdown on immigration, and in the deployment of Marines in response to protests in Los Angeles. The vision of free movement animating Schengen is not one shared by Stephen Miller, to say the least. But Schengen is a peculiar creation, in a way befitting our disorienting times. As I explore in my book, the agreement hardly envisioned unrestricted mobility. Instead, it paired the free movement of European citizens with the exclusion of unwanted outsiders, termed 'undesirable' and ranked according to the level of risk they posed to Europe. The agreement assigned participating nations new responsibilities to police the Schengen Area's borders. And it gave them the authority to reintroduce internal controls in the event of a serious threat to 'public policy' or national security. [T. H. Breen: Trump's un-American parade] Nations have done so repeatedly over the past decade, since Europe was jolted by the arrival of an estimated 1.3 million asylum seekers in 2015. A series of deadly terrorist attacks added to the impetus to crack down. Unrelenting emergencies over the past five years—the coronavirus pandemic, Russia's war in Ukraine, and spasms of violence in the Middle East—have put still more pressure on European states to step up border checks. Recently, Germany vowed to maintain controls at all nine of its land borders, citing 'high levels of irregular migration and migrant smuggling,' as well as the country's strained asylum system and the 'global security situation.' The Netherlands closed its borders in part because of the 'pressure on public services' from an influx of migrants and asylum seekers. Multiple Nordic countries, meanwhile, point to the threat of Russian sabotage, among other destabilizing cross-border activities, to justify renewed border checks. Yet 40 years on, the Schengen Agreement is so interwoven into the fabric of European life that nations no longer have the resources or logistical capabilities necessary to seal their borders. There are border checks, at least in some places, but moves to reintroduce controls on a large scale have been mostly symbolic. And for all the opposition to mass migration, which has fueled far-right politics on both sides of the Atlantic, the free movement of people and goods remains one of the European Union's most popular policies. Perhaps that reflects Schengen's origins as an innovation designed to improve everyday life, not a show of force or revolutionary transformation. Or perhaps it reveals that values of peace and pluralism are still deeply held by large parts of Western society. Both, in fact, define the view of Robert Goebbels, who, as Luxembourg's delegate to the negotiations 40 years ago, helped draft the agreement and chose Schengen as the site of the signing ceremony. I wrote to Goebbels, who has since gone on to serve as a government minister and then a member of the European Parliament, on the eve of today's twin anniversary celebrations. Schengen, he told me, is a 'peace project,' binding nations once engaged in bloody conflict and 'offering liberties and well-being to 450 million Europeans.' Trump, meanwhile, 'celebrates himself.' Article originally published at The Atlantic
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
US warship arrives in Australia ahead of war games, summit
By Kirsty Needham SYDNEY (Reuters) -A key U.S. warship arrived in Australia on Saturday ahead of joint war games and the first summit between Prime Minister Anthony Albanese and President Donald Trump, which is expected to be dominated by military issues. The America, the U.S. Navy's lead amphibious assault ship in the Indo-Pacific, entered Sydney Harbour as the first of three ships in a strike group carrying 2,500 sailors and marines, submarine-hunting helicopters and F-35B fighter jets. More than 30,000 personnel from 19 militaries have begun to arrive in Australia for Talisman Sabre, the largest Australian-U.S. war-fighting exercise. It will start next month and span 6,500 km (4,000 miles), from Australia's Indian Ocean territory of Christmas Island to the Coral Sea on Australia's east coast. The commander of the America, Rear Admiral Tom Shultz, said exercising in Australia was critical for the U.S. Navy's readiness, while the Australian fleet commander, Rear Admiral Chris Smith, said the "trust and robust nature" of the bilateral relationship allowed the two allies to deal with change. "The diversity of how we view the world is actually a real great strength in our alliance," Smith told reporters, adding that Australia also had strong relationships with nations across the region. Albanese and Trump are expected to meet on the sidelines of a summit in Canada of the Group of Seven economic powers, which starts on Sunday. Washington's request for Canberra to raise defence spending to 3.5% of gross domestic product from 2% is expected to dominate the discussion. The Pentagon said this week it was reviewing its AUKUS nuclear submarine partnership with Australia and Britain. Australian Defence Minister Richard Marles said on Saturday this was "not a surprise", adding the two countries continued to work closely. But Michael Green, a former national security adviser to President George W. Bush, said it was unusual for the review into AUKUS to be conducted solely by the Pentagon and that Trump might link it to the spending request or to tariffs. "It is unusual to make the review unilateral and public right before a summit, even if the Australian side knew. That is not good alliance management - it jams the Australian side," said Green, president of the United States Studies Centre in Sydney. Support for AUKUS in the Congress and U.S. Navy is considerable, however, and the review is unlikely to result in the submarine program being cancelled, he said. India will participate for the first time in Talisman Sabre, along with a large contingent from Europe, said the exercise's director, Brigadier Damian Hill. Australia, Singapore, the U.S. and Japan will hold large-scale live firings of rocket and missile systems, he said. "It is the first time we are firing HIMARs in Australia, and our air defence capability will work alongside the United States Patriot systems for the first time, and that is really important," Hill added.
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
The Number of Retirees Filing for Social Security Is Surging Under President Donald Trump -- and It's an Ominous Warning
More than 1.8 million retired workers have filed to collect Social Security since 2025 began, which is up almost 18% from the comparable period in 2024. Social Security's worsening financial outlook, which includes the prospect of benefit cuts in as little as eight years, appears to be encouraging earlier claims. Statistically, early filers may be jeopardizing their financial foundation. The $23,760 Social Security bonus most retirees completely overlook › Social Security represents more than just a monthly check for most retired Americans. It's a financial foundation that many, admittedly, would struggle to live without. In each of the previous 23 years, Gallup surveyed retirees to gauge how important their Social Security income is to making ends meet. Consistently, between eight and nine out of 10 retirees have noted this income is needed, in some capacity, to cover their expenses. In other words, getting as much as possible out of Social Security isn't a luxury -- it's practically a necessity for America's aging workforce. But ever since President Donald Trump took office for his nonconsecutive second term, we've witnessed an abrupt shift in Social Security claiming habits for retirees -- and it's nothing short of an ominous warning for the program, as well as those jumping at the opportunity to collect their benefit. Every month, the Social Security Administration (SSA) provides data on the exact number of retirement insurance applications it receives. In 2024, it collected 1,533,671 retired-worker benefit applications from Jan. 1 through May 31. But over the same five-month timeline in 2025, the SSA has received 1,802,836 retired-worker benefit applications, which equates to an increase of almost 18%! Some of this surge in filing activity may have to do with the Trump administration enacting a host of changes during the president's first 100 days in office. Though this is far from an encompassing list, these changes have included: An executive order to end paper Social Security checks by Sept. 30, 2025. All payments are to be made by electronic fund transfer, such as direct deposit. Altering personal identification methods. For instance, changing your direct deposit information can, with a few exceptions, only be done online through a "my Social Security" account with two-factor authentication, or in person at an SSA office. A reduction of 7,000 jobs at the SSA to 50,000 employees, as well as the closure of some of the administration's offices. The expected reimplementation of Social Security garnishments of up to 15% for beneficiaries who are delinquent on their federal student loans by "sometime this summer." An end to the Biden-era overpayment and recovery rules, which capped at a 10% garnishment. Under the Trump administration, up to 50% of benefits can be clawed back per month until an overpayment is fully recovered. It's possible this flurry of changes may have prompted some retirees to file for benefits now, given the perceived uncertainties associated with application wait times. While it's easy to blame this filing surge on numerous changes enacted under President Donald Trump, the far more plausible explanation behind the record pace of retired workers filing for benefits has to do with the steadily worsening financial outlook for Social Security. Since the first retired-worker benefit check was mailed in 1940, the Social Security Board of Trustees has published an annual report that intricately details how the program is funded and where those dollars ultimately end up. But what tends to be more valuable is the financial projections regarding the sustainability of existing payout schedules over the long term (i.e., the next 75 years). The Trustees take into account shifts in fiscal and monetary policy, along with a myriad of demographic changes, such as net migration and birth/death rates, to determine how financially sound America's leading social program will be. Every Trustees Report for the prior 40 years has pointed to a long-term unfunded obligation. In plain English, projected income collection in the 75 years following the release of a report is believed to be insufficient to cover outlays, which primarily includes benefits, but also takes administrative expenses to oversee Social Security into account. From 2024 to 2098, this long-term funding deficit is estimated to be $23.2 trillion. But there's a far more immediate issue that potentially prompted this surge in retirement benefit filings. The 2024 Trustees Report also projects the asset reserves for the Old-Age and Survivors Insurance Trust Fund (OASI) will be depleted by 2033. This is the trust fund responsible for dishing out monthly checks to retired workers and survivors of deceased workers. To be abundantly clear, the OASI doesn't need a dime in its asset reserves to remain solvent or pay benefits to eligible recipients on a monthly basis. Social Security generates more than 91% of its income from the 12.4% payroll tax on earned income. If Americans keep working and paying their taxes, Social Security benefits will continue to be doled out. However, the exhaustion of the OASI's asset reserves would mean the existing payout schedule, inclusive of cost-of-living adjustments (COLAs), isn't sustainable. If lawmakers in Congress and/or the president fail to reform Social Security, sweeping benefit cuts of up to 21% may be needed in eight years to sustain payouts through 2098 without the need for any further cuts. Claiming benefits now may be viewed as a way to front-run any potential cuts to Social Security payouts by 2033. To reiterate -- because this is an extremely important point -- Social Security is in no danger of going bankrupt or becoming insolvent based on how the program is currently funded. Regardless of whether you've been receiving benefits for decades or are just entering the labor force, Social Security will be there for you. However, your claiming decision plays a monumental role in determining whether or not you'll maximize what you'll receive from America's leading retirement program. Based on a study published six years ago, there's a very slim chance of an early collection age paying off for retired-worker beneficiaries. In 2019, the researchers at United Income published The Retirement Solution Hiding in Plain Sight, which extrapolated the claiming decisions of 20,000 retired workers using data from the University of Michigan's Health and Retirement Study. United Income aimed to see if one or more ages within the traditional claiming range of 62 through 70 offered a higher probability of optimizing (i.e., maximizing) what beneficiaries would receive during their lifetime (keyword!). Though only 4% of the 20,000 workers examined had optimized their Social Security lifetime benefit, the bigger takeaway was the textbook inversion between actual and optimal claims. On one end of the spectrum, United Income found that while 79% of the 20,000 retired workers chose to collect their payout at ages 62, 63, or 64, only 8%, on a combined basis, made an optimal decision at these three collection ages. This means a lot of today's early filers are statistically unlikely to optimize their lifetime payout from Social Security. In comparison, while only a small percentage of retirees waited until 70 to initially collect their payout, this age would have been optimal for an overwhelming 57% of the 20,000 retired workers analyzed. For a majority of retirees, waiting pays off handsomely. While there's no guarantee lawmakers will be able to avoid an eventual cut to Social Security benefits, history has shown that bipartisan reforms are typically passed during the 11th hour. The Social Security Amendments of 1983 are an example of a bipartisan reform staving off potential benefit cuts. The significant uptick in Social Security filings we're witnessing in 2025 is an ominous sign for the health of the program and a potential threat to the financial foundations of early filers. If you're like most Americans, you're a few years (or more) behind on your retirement savings. But a handful of little-known could help ensure a boost in your retirement income. One easy trick could pay you as much as $23,760 more... each year! Once you learn how to maximize your Social Security benefits, we think you could retire confidently with the peace of mind we're all after. Join Stock Advisor to learn more about these Motley Fool has a disclosure policy. The Number of Retirees Filing for Social Security Is Surging Under President Donald Trump -- and It's an Ominous Warning was originally published by The Motley Fool Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data
