‘Major blow' for clean energy: Project cancellations snowball
April saw $4.5 billion in cancellations and delays of clean energy projects in the U.S., highlighting pressure on the renewable and low-carbon sectors as Congress weighs cutting billions of dollars in tax credits, according to a new report.
Clean energy business group E2 reported Wednesday that the scrapped investments — the second-highest monthly amount since the passage of the Inflation Reduction Act — affected electric vehicle, offshore wind and battery projects. The nixed projects included a Stellantis $3.3 billion battery plant in Illinois and RWE's halting of offshore wind development in the United States.
'What the House delivered the other day was worse than anyone expected, so I think you are going to continue to see cancellations,' said Bob Keefe, E2 executive director.
Advertisement
The group found that since January, approximately $14 billion in announced clean energy investments have been canceled or delayed, affecting 10,000 jobs.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
CNN
16 minutes ago
- CNN
‘We have to take what we can get right now": House Republican chair on budget package
House Republican Chairwoman and Michigan Rep. Lisa McClain joined "The Situation Room" to discuss Trump's spending bill, which the House has passed and the Senate is taking up starting this week.
Axios
25 minutes ago
- Axios
Jewish lawmakers fear they're next after antisemitic attacks
Jewish members of Congress are worried by a spate of attacks aimed at Jews — and are openly saying they may be next on the target list. Why it matters: There has been a sharp rise in antisemitism and threats against lawmakers in recent years. For some Jewish representatives, the two trends are eerily correlated. "The number of times in the course of a week I'm called a 'Jewish demon' is pretty unsettling," Rep. Greg Landsman (D-Ohio) told Axios. Landsman said "most" Jewish members are "facing these very unsettling and potentially dangerous situations," pointing to the pro-Palestinian encampment that was erected outside his house in Cincinnati. Driving the news: Capitol Hill was rocked last month when two Israeli embassy staffers were fatally shot outside an American Jewish Committee meeting at the Capital Jewish Museum in Washington, D.C. The suspect, Elias Rodriguez, shouted "free, free Palestine" as he was arrested by police. "I have had a hard time getting the image of being shot and killed out of my head. It happens almost every time I'm in a big crowd now," Landsman said in a statement after the shooting. The incident came after a man who set fire to Pennsylvania Gov. Josh Shapiro's official residence cited the Jewish governor's stance on the war in Gaza as a factor. State of play: Concerns about Jewish safety spiked again this week after a man yelling "free Palestine" threw Molotov cocktails at attendees of a Boulder, Colorado, rally advocating for the release of hostages held by Hamas. The attack left at least eight people — four women and four men, aged 52 to 88 — hospitalized. What they're saying: Rep. Brad Schneider (D-Ill.) said in a phone interview that he "increased our investment in security" after the D.C. attack. "It's a dangerous world," he told Axios. "I will not let this become normal ... and I will not let this force me to back away or fail to do what I need to do representing all my constituents in the 10th district." Rep. Steve Cohen (D-Tenn.) said: "I've always thought we were in jeopardy and jeopardized when we were on the Capitol campus." And Rep. Laura Friedman (D-Calif.) added: "The Jewish community is very much on edge ... and elected officials in general, I think, are feeling less safe." Zoom out: Beyond their personal safety, several lawmakers previewed a renewed push to fund the Nonprofit Safety Grant Program, particularly to provide security for houses of worship and faith-based organizations.
Los Angeles Times
41 minutes ago
- Los Angeles Times
Trump shows that loyalty is all that matters to him
Last week, the Court of International Trade delivered a blow to Donald Trump's global trade war. It found that the worldwide tariffs Trump unveiled on 'Liberation Day' as well his earlier tariffs pretextually aimed at stopping fentanyl coming in from Mexico and Canada (as if) were beyond his authority. The three-judge panel was surely right about the Liberation Day tariffs and probably right about the fentanyl tariffs, but there's a better case that, while bad policy, the fentanyl tariffs were not unlawful. Please forgive a lengthy excerpt of Trump's response on Truth Social, but it speaks volumes: 'How is it possible for [the CIT judges] to have potentially done such damage to the United States of America? Is it purely a hatred of 'TRUMP?' What other reason could it be? I was new to Washington, and it was suggested that I use The Federalist Society as a recommending source on Judges. I did so, openly and freely, but then realized that they were under the thumb of a real 'sleazebag' named Leonard Leo, a bad person who, in his own way, probably hates America, and obviously has his own separate ambitions. … In any event, Leo left The Federalist Society to do his own 'thing.' I am so disappointed in The Federalist Society because of the bad advice they gave me on numerous Judicial Nominations. This is something that cannot be forgotten!' Let's begin with the fact that Trump cannot conceive of a good explanation for an inconvenient court ruling other than Trump Derangement Syndrome. It's irrelevant that the International Emergency Economic Powers Act, the 1977 law the administration invoked to impose the relevant tariffs, does not even mention the word 'tariff' or that Congress never envisioned the IEEPA as a tool for launching a trade war with every nation in the world, the 'Penguin Islands' included. Also disregard the fact that the decision was unanimous and only one of the three judges was appointed by Trump (the other two were Reagan and Obama appointees). (The decision has been paused by an appeals court.) Trump is the foremost practitioner of what I call Critical Trump Theory — anything bad for Trump is unfair, illegitimate and proof that sinister forces are rigging the system against him. No wonder then that Trump thinks Leonard Leo, formerly a guiding light at the Federalist Society, the premier conservative legal organization, is a 'sleazebag' and 'bad person.' Note: Leo is neither of those things. But Trump's broadsides at Leo and the Federalist Society are portentous. Because Congress is AWOL, refusing to take the lead on trade (and many other things) as the Constitution envisions, it's fallen to the courts to restrain Trump's multifront efforts to exceed his authority. That's why the White House is cynically denouncing 'unelected' and 'rogue' judges on an almost daily basis and why Trump's political henchman, Stephen Miller, is incessantly ranting about a 'judicial coup.' The supreme, and sometimes seemingly sole, qualification for appointments to the Trump administration has been servile loyalty to Trump. But that ethos is not reserved for the executive branch. Law firms, elite universities and media outlets are being forced to kneel before the president. Why should judges be any different? Trump has a history of suggesting 'my judges' — i.e., his appointees — should be loyal to him. That's why he recently nominated Emil Bove, his former personal criminal lawyer turned political enforcer at the Department of Justice, for a federal judgeship. The significance of Trump's attack on the Federalist Society and Leo, for conservatives, cannot be exaggerated. The legal movement spearheaded by the Federalist Society has been the most successful domestic conservative project of the last century. Scholarly, civic-minded and principled, the Federalist Society spent decades developing ideas and arguments for re-centering the Constitution in American law. But now Trump has issued a fatwah that it, too, must bend the knee and its principles to the needs of one man. The law be damned, ruling against Trump is ingratitude in his mind. Speaking of ingratitude, the irony is that the Federalist Society deserves a lot of credit — or blame — for Trump being elected in the first place. In 2016, the death of Antonin Scalia left a vacancy on the Supreme Court. Many conservatives did not trust Trump to replace him. To reassure them, Trump agreed to pick from a list of potential replacements crafted by the Heritage Foundation and Federalist Society. That decision arguably convinced many reluctant conservatives to vote for him. In the decade since, the Heritage Foundation has dutifully reinvented itself in Trump's image. The Federalist Society stayed loyal to its principles, and that's why the Federalist Society is in Trump's crosshairs. @JonahDispatch
