The battery belt is getting skinnier
According to a new study out today, dozens of clean energy projects have slowed down or died during the first six months of the Trump administration — many of them in Republican congressional districts.
'Projects are being paused, cancelled, and closed at a rate 6 times more than during the same period in 2024,' reads the latest report out of the 'The Big Green Machine.' The website, which tracks U.S. clean energy investments, is run by Jay Turner, a professor at Wellesley College in Massachusetts, and his students.
Big projects are the hardest hit, along with those that got federal funds now marked for removal by the Trump administration. Left high and dry in the receding wave are low-income communities, which are the very people the Biden administration sought to help with the vast resources of the Inflation Reduction Act.
The report matters because it's one of the first pulse checks on how the battery industry — an emerging area of competition with China — is faring after Trump's slash-and-burn of federal aid.
The Big Green Machine also tracks projects in solar and wind energy, but nearly all the action was in EVs and batteries.
Overall, the U.S. clean energy industry is still expanding. Turner found that 68 projects, worth more than $24 billion and expected to create more than 33,000 jobs, have broken ground, stood up pilot plants or ramped production.
Some are high profile, like LG Energy Solution, which in May started up a new $1.4 billion factory in Holland, Michigan, originally meant to make EV batteries but now intended to make stationary ones. Most others are small, like a new electric-bus assembly plant outside of Peoria, Illinois.
But a countercurrent is dampening the mood. Prospects dimmed for 34 projects that are worth more than $31 billion and were expected to create almost 28,000 jobs. They either shut down, delayed timetables by six months or more, lost a significant chunk of funding or shrunk in scale.
One example is Aspen Aerogels, a maker of EV battery materials that in February killed plans for a factory in Statesboro, Georgia, that would have created more than 250 permanent jobs.
The company called off a $670 million loan guarantee from the Department of Energy and declared its intention instead to expand operations in China.
A lot of the impact is still unclear. More than 480 projects worth $234 billion show no outward signs of change.
The policies Republicans have passed are so recent that they may not have worked their way through the economy. In the last three months, Congress has passed and President Donald Trump has signed bills that removed key tax credits, taken the teeth out of fuel-economy rules and neutered California's ability to force automakers to sell EVs.
But so far, capital is draining away most quickly from the Republican congressional districts that saw the lion's share of investment. GOP districts saw 60 percent of the funding decline, while Democratic districts saw 39 percent.
The tide is turning especially in disadvantaged communities, which were a priority for investment under Biden. Census tracts with lower incomes and fewer job prospects saw 47 percent of projects slow, compared to 30 percent in more prosperous census areas.
It's Tuesday — thank you for tuning in to POLITICO's Power Switch. I'm your host, David Ferris. Power Switch is brought to you by the journalists behind E&E News and POLITICO Energy. Send your tips, comments, questions to dferris@eenews.net.
Today in POLITICO Energy's podcast: Josh Siegel breaks down how Republicans are working to sell the megalaw's energy elements.
Power Centers
EPA moves to gut climate rulesThe Trump administration is proposing to repeal the federal government's bedrock scientific declaration on the dangers of greenhouse gases, writes Alex Guillén.
The move to undo the so-called endangerment finding would run afoul of decades of research and topple most climate regulations. EPA also proposed scrapping all limits on carbon dioxide pollution from cars and trucks.
Hours before EPA released the proposal today, Administrator Lee Zeldin asserted several half-truths and inaccurate claims about the finding on a right-wing podcast. Read Jean Chemnick's fact check here.
'Learning curves' for small reactor developerKairos Power is the only U.S. company building a small nuclear reactor. But it's doing so with a technology that hasn't been commercially tested, Francisco 'A.J.' Camacho writes.
The company's use of molten fluoride salt as a coolant is a risky bet in an industry that has seen other players stumble. But Kairos executives believe they are up to the task.
'It does take time to stand up these capabilities, but when you stand them up and you've actually gone through those kinds of learning curves and those kinds of scar tissues that you get, we now have a very capable team that's able to deliver and do a lot more,' Edward Blandford, Kairos' co-founder and chief technology office, told A.J.
Is $750B EU energy pledge possible?The EU landed a trade deal with the U.S. in part by pledging to buy $750 billion worth of American energy — an almost impossible task, Victor Jack reports from Brussels.
The bloc spent €76 billion on energy imports from the U.S. last year, meaning it would need to essentially triple that amount over three years, said Laura Page, a senior analyst at the Kpler commodities firm. Meanwhile the U.S. exported just $166 billion in oil and gas last year, she said.
The headline figure is 'completely unrealistic,' Page said. 'The numbers are just beyond wild.'
In Other News
Split the bill? Power hungry data centers are sparking a fight over who will pay for the extraordinary amount of electricity they need.
Scottish roots: Trump's loathing for wind turbines started with a Scottish court battle.
Subscriber Zone
A showcase of some of our best subscriber content.
The Senate confirmed David Wright to be chair of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission as Democrats voiced concerns over the agency's future.
The National Science Foundation is eliminating senior staff positions as the Trump administration restructures the agency and eyes major cuts to the federal workforce.
The EU says it will include nuclear reactors and other technology exports in its $750 billion energy pledge that was part of its U.S. trade agreement.
America's network of rapid-charging electric vehicle stations is growing despite the Trump administration's pullback of support.
That's it for today, folks! Thanks for reading.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
New York Times
a few seconds ago
- New York Times
Does Japan Want American Cars? Trump's Push to Open Foreign Markets Faces Test.
Last month's pledge by Japan to open its markets to more American cars allowed President Trump to declare victory in a goal he had chased for decades. For Mr. Trump, the ubiquity of Japanese car brands in the United States is aggravating, when Japan buys virtually no American cars. The disparity has long fed his conviction that the openness of the U.S. economy is not fairly reciprocated, contributing to a persistent trade deficit. Now, in his second term, Mr. Trump is raising tariffs steeply and pressuring other countries into dismantling barriers that range from taxes on American beef and soybeans to car-safety and local-content requirements in Japan and Indonesia. Some trade experts question this strategy's efficacy. They say that countries have in some cases agreed to address specific grievances of Mr. Trump's, like sales of cars in Japan, that are unlikely to result in a flood of new American exports. Automotive experts and industry veterans who have worked for U.S. carmakers in Japan said the pledge to remove trade barriers might do little to boost sales. But in the view of supporters of Mr. Trump's policies, dismantling foreign obstacles to American trade — a longtime goal shared by both Republican and Democratic administrations — is overdue for a more forceful approach. 'Big trade partners have long had rules and regulations in place that lock us out of the market,' said Wilbur Ross, the Secretary of Commerce during the first Trump administration. 'The president knows he can go a lot farther than we went last time to rectify those,' he said. Since World War II, American car companies have never managed to gain a significant foothold in Japan, which hasn't put tariffs on imported vehicles since the late 1970s. Ford Motor pulled out of Japan in 2016, citing no path to profitability. Last year, American brands like General Motors made up less than 1 percent of sales. Mr. Trump blames unfair regulations in Japan for making it 'impossible' for American companies to sell cars in the market. These include Japan's unwillingness to accept vehicles that pass U.S. safety standards, which are different than international ones. Mr. Trump sought to change this in his first term. Late last month, he succeeded. In exchange for a 15 percent across-the-board U.S. tariff on its goods — lower than the previously threatened 25 percent — Japan agreed to invest hundreds of billions of dollars in the United States. Mr. Trump was keen on another concession. 'Perhaps most importantly,' Mr. Trump wrote in a social media post, 'Japan will open their Country to Trade including Cars and Trucks.' That means Japan would allow the import of American-made cars without the unique safety standards and testing it usually requires, the country's chief trade negotiator said at a recent news conference. Mr. Trump made a similar declaration last week when announcing a trade deal with South Korea. He said that, in exchange for the same 15 percent tariff rate as Japan, South Korea would begin accepting more American cars and trucks into its market without imposing duties on them. In South Korea, similar to Japan, American brands make up a very small percentage of sales. In Japan's case, industry analysts say that safety and testing requirements can add up to tens of thousands of dollars to the cost of American cars imported into the country. However, some industry experts said they doubt that changes to the standards and testing requirements will boost sales. In Japan, where streets are narrow and often congested, most consumers prefer small, fuel-efficient vehicles, typically with steering wheels on the right. Domestic brands like Toyota, Honda and Nissan offer a wide array of such options. For American carmakers in Japan, 'trade barriers have never been the problem,' said Tsuyoshi Kimura, a professor at Chuo University in Tokyo, who used to work at General Motors from the late 1990s through the early 2000s. Japan is a relatively small and already saturated car market, he said, so most American automakers have not put effort into designing models for the country. The lineups of American manufacturers are packed with bulky sports-utility vehicles and trucks in part because they struggle to make smaller cars profitably. 'Thinking about the basic needs of the market, their cars just don't fit,' Mr. Kimura said. 'Even if it's been declared that Japan's opening its car market, it's unlikely that American cars will sell.' Mr. Trump's fixation on American car sales in Japan echoes his past trade negotiation tactics such as his emphasis on U.S. dairy exports during his first-term formulation of the United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement, according to Alan Wolff, a senior fellow at the Peterson Institute for International Economics. 'What could have been negotiated could have been far-reaching, and perhaps more important,' Mr. Wolff said. For example, addressing topics such exchange rates, he said. However, he added, securing agreements to open specific export sectors have 'political salience' for Mr. Trump. 'They matter to him, and therefore they matter to the United States,' he said. Mr. Ross, the former commerce secretary, agreed with this sentiment. He spent years as chairman of the Japan Society, a nonprofit dedicated to strengthening U.S.-Japan relations. He said he doubted that regulatory changes would sell customers on American cars. Still, for Mr. Ross, removing trade barriers in countries like Japan was a matter of principle. He likened the situation to a negotiation he had with a European Union official during Mr. Trump's first term about the trade bloc's ban on U.S. chicken sterilized with chlorinated wash. 'I asked, why do you have these trade barriers, and she said 'Oh, Europeans will never eat those foods,'' Mr. Ross recalled. 'I said, well, let's put them on grocery shelves and clearly mark them and if you're right, then Europeans won't eat them, we'll stop selling them, and we won't have to argue about it.' The current Trump administration has continued to pressure the European Union to buy American chickens. As part of its recent trade deal, the European Union agreed to work to address 'barriers affecting trade in food and agricultural products,' without detailing further. For others in Japan, these latest trade negotiations feel somewhat like a rerun of the 1980s and 1990s, when the United States and Japan seemed on the brink of a trade war, in part over the issue of American versus Japanese car sales. In 1995, Japan agreed to several measures, including encouraging greater dealership access for foreign cars. American sales in Japan ultimately didn't budge. But Japanese automakers at the time were investing heavily in producing vehicles in the United States and discussions about autos largely faded from U.S.-Japan trade talks. Around that time, Glen S. Fukushima, then an executive at AT&T and a vice president of the American Chamber of Commerce in Japan, was leaving a meeting with Walter Mondale, the U.S. Ambassador to Japan, when the diplomat noticed that Mr. Fukushima's company car in Tokyo was a Nissan. Given the recently concluded agreement aimed at securing more market access for American automakers in Japan, the ambassador suggested to Mr. Fukushima that his driver really should be driving an American car. Mr. Fukushima took the suggestion and tried out a Cadillac Fleetwood. However, it proved much too large for the turns near his Tokyo residence. He ultimately went back to his Nissan Cima and returned to Mr. Mondale to explain the situation. 'He was a reasonable man,' Mr. Fukushima said. 'He understood.' Hisako Ueno contributed reporting.
Forbes
a few seconds ago
- Forbes
3 Important Ways The Big Beautiful Bill Impacts US Innovation And R&D
Since the passage of the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act in 2017, there has been considerable tension and concern among companies heavily concentrated in innovation and R&D. The One Big Beautiful Bill Act, signed into law on July 4th, 2025, by President Trump alleviates some of these concerns. This article discusses the key innovation-related issues at play from the prior passage of the TCJA. I then discuss the three primary ways that the Big Beautiful Bill will impact innovation and R&D moving forward. Innovation And R&D Before The Big Beautiful Bill In the U.S., R&D expenses have typically been able to be immediately expensed as incurred, according to The Tax Adviser. This deduction allows companies to expense qualifying R&D activities (also known as specified research and experimentation (SRE)) for tax purposes, resulting in significant tax benefits. These tax benefits primarily come in the form of time value of money benefits, as they allow the company to take a tax deduction immediately, rather than capitalizing the costs and having to wait many years for the expense to be fully expensed. As shown by GBQ, these time value of money benefits can be material for most innovative firms. There are also natural benefits from a cash flow perspective. The TCJA changed this treatment considerably. Starting in 2022, companies must now capitalize and amortize their R&D expenses over five years for domestically sourced R&D and 15 years for R&D performed outside of the U.S. The Bipartisan Policy Center argues that this change 'threatens the survival of some small businesses that are research-intensive and not yet profitable.' For instance, a company trying to get off the ground might not be able to part with the cash flows and tax benefits of an R&D project for up to 15 years. 3 Key Ways The Big Beautiful Bill Affects Innovation And R&D The Big Beautiful Bill made a critical change to Section 174 of the Internal Revenue Code by allowing companies to immediately expense domestic R&D. As I previously discussed in a Forbes article, the change to expensing rules surrounding R&D is among the most impactful changes to businesses and corporations out of the entire Big Beautiful Bill. This change was celebrated widely across innovative industries as it now allows U.S. companies to have the innovation edge that they had previously grown accustomed to having. There are three critical impacts that the Big Beautiful Bill has on R&D: (1) The Big Beautiful Bill Allows For Immediate Expensing For Domestic R&D As discussed by Anchin, the Big Beautiful Bill now allows companies to immediately expense domestically-sourced R&D in the year in which the costs were incurred. This means that companies will no longer have to wait a full five years to recover all of their R&D costs, which is the rule that was enacted starting in 2022. However, the Big Beautiful Bill still allows companies to capitalize and amortize costs if they choose to do so. This act would mean that the company would choose the period length of the R&D project (or a period of at least 60 months) and amortize the costs over that period. This useful tool enables companies with financial flexibility to recognize costs and manage earnings as they see fit. (2) The Big Beautiful Bill Makes No Changes To Expensing For Foreign R&D While the immediate expensing of R&D accrues for domestic R&D, no such changes are being provided for foreign R&D. Notably, the TCJA requires foreign R&D to be expensed over 15 years, leading to significant costs for U.S. companies that house their R&D outside of the U.S. Even though the TCJA created an innovation wedge by allowing differential tax benefits for domestic versus foreign R&D, the Big Beautiful Bill has only grown the wedge by not requiring domestic R&D to be capitalized and amortized. According to RSM, these impacts are substantial to the point that companies will need to actively determine whether their foreign R&D should be moved back to the U.S. Given other R&D-related tax costs (i.e., the GILTI and BEAT tax provisions), companies will need to factor in this increased wedge of tax benefits for domestic versus foreign R&D. (3) Under The Big Beautiful Bill, Companies Can Retroactively Expense Domestic R&D From Prior Years While the capitalizing and amortizing effects from the TCJA took effect in 2022, the Big Beautiful Bill allows for the retroactive implementation of the expensing. This effect means that the domestic R&D costs that were capitalized and amortized in 2022, 2023, and 2024 can now be expensed. However, the way that these costs can be expensed depends primarily on the company's size. According to The Tax Foundation, eligible small businesses, defined as companies with annual gross receipts of $31 million or less for the prior three years, can amend prior returns and claim full deductions for the years 2022, 2023, and 2024. For all other firms, the capitalized and amortized R&D expenses can be spread out over the 2025 and 2026 tax years. This retroactive implementation means that many businesses (particularly those that rely on innovative activities) can expect cash windfalls by way of significant expensing of these activities. While the R&D expensing rules under the Big Beautiful Bill will significantly impact when and to what extent companies can expense their R&D costs, the law does not substantively change R&D tax credit rules. As companies will have significantly greater R&D tax benefits through immediate expenses, these tax law changes are expected to lead to significantly greater innovation outputs, resulting in lower costs for innovative activities. For instance, under the Big Beautiful Bill, companies will now be able to immediately expense their R&D leading to both increased tax and cash flow benefits. These benefits naturally make R&D cheaper, leading to innovative companies increasing their investments in innovation. However, these tax and cash flow benefits from the Big Beautiful Bill came with the caveat of an increased wedge between foreign and domestic R&D. Notably, companies with significant R&D activities overseas will not benefit as much from these tax law changes since they will have to continue amortizing foreign R&D over 15 years. Meanwhile, their competitors with more domestic innovation activities will receive considerable benefits under the new rules. Consequently, some companies will need to assess the financial implications of onshoring their R&D activities.
Business Insider
a few seconds ago
- Business Insider
Trump doubles down on his decision to fire BLS chief after disappointing jobs report
President Donald Trump isn't backing down from his controversial firing of the head of the Bureau of Labor Statistics after a disappointing jobs report. "It is antiquated, but it is also very political," Trump said about the position Tuesday morning on CNBC's "Squawk Box." Co-host Joe Kernen tried to convince Trump that firing Dr. Erika McEntarfer after a disappointing jobs report could "undermine confidence" in future reports, given the context of McEntarfer's ouster. The monthly jobs report is considered one of the most important measures of the US economy. Trump was unconvinced. "So, look, it is a highly political situation. It is totally rigged. Smart people know it. People with common sense know it, and a lot of people like to keep their heads under the covers," Trump said. In explaining his decision to fire McEntarfer, who was originally appointed by President Joe Biden and received broad bipartisan support during her Senate confirmation, Trump has reupped his previous complaints about BLS data. The president has presented no evidence showing that the data was "rigged" against him. William Beach, a former Commissioner of Labor Statistics during Trump's first term, has been a vocal critic of Trump's decision. Beach, who now works as an economist, has said that commissioners have little actual sway over the jobs numbers, which are already finished before they reach their desks. "The totally groundless firing of Dr. Erika McEntarfer, my successor as Commissioner of Labor Statistics at BLS, sets a dangerous precedent and undermines the statistical mission of the Bureau," Beach wrote on X on Friday. Kevin Hassett, Trump's National Economic Council director, has defended Trump's move. Hassett said the BLS needed "a fresh set of eyes." "There have been a bunch of patterns that could make people wonder," Hassett said Sunday on "Meet the Press." And I think the most important thing for people to know is that it's the president's highest priority that the data be trusted and that people get to the bottom of why these revisions are so unreliable." Part of the reason that the BLS has issued significant revisions in recent years is that the response rates to its surveys continue to decline. Trump also discussed his plans to replace Fed Chairman Jerome Powell, whose term leading the central bank ends next year. Trump said that he is looking closely "both Kevins," a reference to former Fed Gov. Kevin Warsh and Hassett. "He's very good," Trump said of Warsh, when asked if he had watched Warsh's recent CNBC appearance. When pressed, Trump said he would choose between one of four people: "The two Kevins are doing well, and two other people are doing well." It's unclear who the other two people are. Trump did appear to rule out Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent, whose name has been reported as a potential Powell replacement. "He does not want it," Trump said. "He likes being Treasury Secretary. He's doing a really great job."
