Last-ditch lobbying blitz seeks to save Biden's clean-energy tax credits
By Valerie Volcovici
WASHINGTON (Reuters) -U.S. energy industry trade groups have launched a last-minute lobbying blitz to urge Congress members to spare a slew of former President Joe Biden's clean energy tax credits from the chopping block in the Republican budget plan.
On Monday, the House Ways and Means committee proposed the phase-out or cancellation of several lucrative subsidies from Biden's signature climate law, the Inflation Reduction Act. On the block are several related to wind and solar power, hydrogen, and other technologies meant to cut greenhouse gas emissions.
Lawmakers will work over the next day or two to amend and pass their plans for the broader tax package.
Trade group Advanced Energy United, which represents a range of clean energy, transmission, technology and transportation companies including NRG, Sunrun, Enel and Microsoft, launched a national ad campaign targeting lawmakers in five states whose districts benefit from investments spurred by the IRA.
The ads, which specify how much a congressional district has received in IRA-generated private sector and manufacturing investments, will run until a final budget bill passes in the House. Speaker Mike Johnson wants the bill passed by May 26. AEU did not divulge total spending on the ads, but called it a "six-digit" campaign.
"Without these credits, American families will be worse off, and U.S. manufacturers, who have invested in domestic manufacturing, will be forced to shutter assembly lines, lay off workers, and move production abroad," Advanced Energy United's CEO Heather O'Neill said on Tuesday.
No Republicans voted for the IRA when it passed in 2022, yet districts and states led by Republicans accounted for 58% of new jobs created due to investments from the law, according to advocacy group Climate Power.
Meanwhile, dozens of hydrogen industry lobbyists hit Capitol Hill on Tuesday to urge lawmakers to salvage the federal 45V tax credit to promote hydrogen projects, which they say could support around 60,000 jobs per year between 2025 and 2035 and generate more than $12 billion in annual GDP.
The committee proposed to move the expiration of that tax credit from 2033 to 2026, making it impossible to develop longer-term projects.
In a letter to Johnson and Ways and Means chair Jason Smith, companies and trade groups including Cummins, EQT, the ports of Long Beach and Corpus Christi and the American Petroleum Institute "urgently request" that they save the credits or risk ceding an advantage to China, which has rapidly developed its own hydrogen industry.
Abigail Ross Hopper, president of the Solar Energy Industries Association, also urged member companies to pressure lawmakers to save tax credits, including the residential solar credit, which will be eliminated at year's end. She also noted that other proposed changes could hamper investment in commercial solar, and urged people to sign up to the Solar Powers America campaign, which generates letters to Congress members.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
E&E News
20 minutes ago
- E&E News
Senate axes regulation-slashing measure from megabill
A major deregulatory proposal that Republican hardliners had hoped to include in their party-line megabill was cut in the Senate. Absent from a new section of the GOP budget reconciliation bill released Thursday is language from the 'Regulations from the Executive In Need of Scrutiny (REINS) Act,' which would have given Congress final approval over certain agency rules and would have expanded Congress' ability to undo rules already in place. Initial versions of the House reconciliation bill included parts of the 'REINS Act.' But House leadership slashed it at the eleventh hour, replacing it instead with a blanket appropriation for the White House's Office of Management and Budget to conduct deregulatory actions. Advertisement The Senate Judiciary Committee's portion of the megabill, released Thursday night, included no mention of 'REINS Act,' and also excluded the funding the House wanted for the budget office.
E&E News
20 minutes ago
- E&E News
Aging caverns imperil Trump push to refill petroleum reserve
President Donald Trump pledged to replenish the nation's Strategic Petroleum Reserve after the Biden administration sold nearly 200 million barrels of its stock — but that won't be as simple as buying more oil. Energy Secretary Chris Wright told the House Energy and Commerce Subcommittee on Energy this week that SPR drawdowns under former President Joe Biden resulted in structural damage to facilities. More than $100 million of repairs are needed to bring the storage facilities back to full capacity, Wright said. And nearly filling it back up could cost billions of dollars. 'The immediate thing we need to do is finish the repairs on the Strategic Petroleum Reserve. It was drawn down so quickly, and that causes some damage to the infrastructure itself,' Wright said in testimony. 'Those repairs are ongoing, and it costs a nontrivial amount of money to repair the SPR.' Advertisement Wright did not specify what was damaged or what repairs were being made. Neither the White House nor the Department of Energy responded to questions from POLITICO's E&E News about the damage. But maintenance issues with the SPR began long before the 2022 drawdowns, records show. The Strategic Petroleum Reserve, established because of the 1970s energy crisis, was created to ensure that the U.S. had emergency fuel if global or domestic fuel supplies were disrupted. Fears of possible new disruptions sent crude prices higher Thursday night as Israel launched an attack against Iran's nuclear program. The Biden administration released nearly 200 million barrels of oil from the reserves in 2022, when oil prices spiked globally after Russia invaded Ukraine. That decision provoked fierce criticism from Republicans, who said Biden was trying to keep fuel prices low in efforts to be reelected in 2024. Trump returned to the White House this year after winning the 2024 election, in part based on his pledge to lower the cost of energy and other goods. The SPR is made up of four geologic sites, two along the Texas Gulf Coast and two in Louisiana. The four sites have 60 salt caverns combined — each of which is large enough to hold Chicago's Willis Tower. Together, they had a storage capacity of up to 713.5 million barrels as of August 2024, according to the Department of Energy. The reserves stood at 401.8 million barrels on May 30 of this year, according to the U.S. Energy Information Administration. Wright said he would seek $20 billion in funding to pump reserves up to about 700 million barrels, according to an interview with Bloomberg in March. In the 2010s, government officials began sounding alarm bells that the SPR's aging surface infrastructure could 'begin to fundamentally compromise the Reserve's capabilities,' according to a long-term strategic review submitted to Congress in August 2016. Most of the infrastructure at the SPR sites was installed between 1975 and 1991. Work was done between 1993 and 2000 to extend the life of that infrastructure. In the 2016 report, SPR officials found that 70 percent of the reserve's equipment and infrastructure was exceeding its serviceable life. Congressionally mandated sales of SPR inventories tied to the Bipartisan Budget Act of 2015 and the FAST Act of 2015 were forecast to add to those issues. DOE could soon get $1.3 billion closer to that goal. The House-passed 'One Big Beautiful Bill Act' includes more than $1.32 billion to purchase petroleum products to store in the Strategic Petroleum Reserve, and an additional $218 million for maintenance and repairs to the SPR storage facilities. The Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee on Wednesday released its portion of Republicans' reconciliation bill. It proposes to appropriate $660.5 million to buy petroleum products for the SPR and allocate an additional $218 million for SPR facility maintenance and repairs. The committee also proposed repealing a section of the 2017 Tax Cuts and Jobs Act that requires DOE to sell 7 million barrels of crude from the SPR during fiscal 2026 and 2027. 'Gooey Play-Doh' Siddharth Misra, an associate professor of petroleum engineering and geophysics at Texas A&M University, said in an email that withdrawing large quantities of oil from salt caverns — like those that constitute the SPR — can cause storage sites to shrink, or compact. He said to imagine underground oil storage as giant, oil-soaked sponges. When large amounts of oil are rapidly pulled out, he said that is like squeezing the sponge dry due to stress from rocks above the storage site. A quick removal of fluid causes pressure within the reservoir wall to drop significantly and causes stress on the rock to increase as the rock above it bears down, he said. 'This compaction of the pore spaces can lead to a permanent loss of storage capacity, making it much harder to extract remaining oil and potentially causing the rock to crack under the immense pressure of the overlying layers,' Misra wrote in response to questions from E&E News. 'In simpler terms, the site might not be able to hold as much oil anymore, and future extraction becomes a more difficult and less efficient process.' The pressure on the surrounding rock when fluid is removed can also cause the barriers of the salt cavern to begin to slowly deform and squeeze inward 'like a very thick, gooey Play-Doh or taffy that's slowly moving,' Misra said. That can put tremendous pressure on steel pipes, known as casings, that run into the cavern and carry fluids up and down into the storage site. Those pipes can get bent, be crushed or break completely by the inward push of the salt in the salt domes. 'This not only makes it harder to get oil or gas out but can also lead to dangerous failures, reducing the cavern's lifespan and safety,' Misra wrote. A decade ago, officials began a program to upgrade equipment and facilities that were approaching or near a projected 25-year life span, according to a 2023 annual SPR report from DOE to Congress. That SPR program — known as Life Extension 2 — is still ongoing. Kevin Book, a managing director at the ClearView Energy Partners research firm, said DOE contractors are still working through a backlog of deferred maintenance projects. 'There's still more to do,' Book said. That maintenance, and some issues with logistics and pipeline dynamics, made it difficult for the Biden administration to refill the SPR after the 2022 withdrawals, Book said. 'If you look at the solicitations that happened during the Biden administration, they posted what they said were the sort of formal nameplate capacities for filling the reserves,' Book said. 'But when you look at what they actually were able to take in when they did the procurement, it never got above even half that.' The Biden administration sought to replenish the SPR through several solicitations after the 2022 drawdowns, although it canceled some purchases when crude prices rose above $79 a barrel. U.S. benchmark West Texas Intermediate crude had settled at about $68 per barrel in futures trading Thursday, but it later rose above $70 per barrel in the wake of Israel's attack on Iran. Former Deputy Energy Secretary David Turk said in late 2023 that the Energy Department was limited to purchasing about 3 million barrels a month due to SPR constraints. 'That is the physical limit of how much we can buy back,' Turk said in a Bloomberg TV interview reported on by the news service. 'We hope we can bring more capacity online at these price levels to buy as much as we can to refill. We will buy back as much as we possibly can, but there are some physical constraints.' At that rate, it would take more than five years and three months for the SPR to reach the same level of storage it had on tap at the end of 2021, and nearly 10 years to reach roughly 700 million barrels in reserves — the goal mentioned by Wright in March. Wright on Tuesday said refilling the SPR is a matter of national security and global perceptions. 'It's a reduction in our security right now because we have meaningfully less oil stored in our Strategic Petroleum Reserve, and I think it's a reduction in confidence in the seriousness of the United States,' Wright testified. 'Strategic petroleum reserves are for strategic challenges that may arise in our future that we need to be prepared for.' Reporter Andy Picon contributed.
Yahoo
21 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Trump Wants to Make It More Expensive to Sue Over His Policies
(Bloomberg) -- President Donald Trump and his allies are pursuing an alternative strategy to defend against mounting court orders blocking his policies: Raise the financial stakes for those suing the administration. Shuttered NY College Has Alumni Fighting Over Its Future Trump's Military Parade Has Washington Bracing for Tanks and Weaponry NYC Renters Brace for Price Hikes After Broker-Fee Ban Do World's Fairs Still Matter? NY Long Island Rail Service Resumes After Grand Central Fire Republicans want to force people suing the US to post financial guarantees to cover the government's costs if they win a temporary halt to Trump's policies but ultimately lose the case. A measure in the House's 'big, beautiful' tax-and-spending bill would condition a judges' power to hold US officials in contempt for violating their orders to the payment of that security. A new proposed version of the bill announced by Senate Republicans on Thursday removes the contempt language but would broadly restrict judges' discretion to decide how much of a security payment to order from challengers who win initial pauses to Trump's policies, or to waive it altogether. While the legislation faces hurdles, the push to make suing the government more expensive is gaining steam. Critics say it's part of a broader effort to discourage lawsuits against the Trump administration. In addition to the tax bill provision, Republican lawmakers have introduced a plan to require plaintiffs who lose suits against the administration to cover the government's legal costs. Meanwhile, Trump has directed the Justice Department to demand bonds from court challengers when judges temporarily halt his policies. Trump has also targeted law firms over everything from past work for Democratic rivals to their diversity policies. Courts historically haven't required bonds to be put up in lawsuits against the government. In recent cases, the Trump administration's bond requests included $120,000 in litigation over union bargaining and an unspecified amount 'on the high side'' in a fight over billions of dollars in frozen clean technology grants. Judges in those and other cases have denied hefty requests or set smaller amounts, such as $10 or $100 or even $1. 'Having to put that money up is going to prevent people from being able to enforce their rights,' said Eve Hill, a civil rights lawyer who is involved in litigation against the administration over the treatment of transgender people in US prisons and Social Security Administration operations. The Trump administration has faced more than 400 lawsuits over his policies on immigration, government spending and the federal workforce, among other topics, since his inauguration. A Bloomberg analysis in May found that Trump was losing more cases than he was winning. White House spokesperson Taylor Rogers said in a statement that 'activist organizations are abusing litigation to derail the president's agenda' and that it is 'entirely reasonable to demand that irresponsible organizations provide collateral to cover the costs and damages if their litigation wrongly impeded executive action.' Dan Huff, a White House lawyer during Trump's first term, defended the idea but said the language needed fixes, such as clarifying that it only applies to preliminary orders and not all injunctions. Huff, whose op-eds in support of stiffer injunction bonds have circulated among Republicans this year, said that Congress wanted litigants 'to have skin in the game.' Some judges have already found in certain cases that the administration was failing to fully comply with orders. Alexander Reinert, a law professor at Cardozo School of Law, said the timing of Congress taking up such a proposal was 'troubling and perverse.' 'Defy Logic' Some efforts by the Trump administration to curb lawsuits have already paid off. By threatening probes of law firms' hiring practices, the White House struck deals with several firms that effectively ruled out their involvement in cases challenging Trump's policies. Other aspects of the effort have been less successful. Judges have overwhelmingly rebuffed the Justice Department's efforts that plaintiffs put up hefty bonds. A judge who refused to impose a bond in a funding fight wrote that 'it would defy logic' to hold nonprofit organizations 'hostage' for the administration's refusal to pay them. Several judges entered bonds as low as $1 when they stopped the administration from sending Venezuelan migrants out of the country. In a challenge to federal worker layoffs, a judge rejected the government's push for a bond covering salaries and benefits, instead ordering the unions that sued to post $10. The clause in the House tax bill tying contempt power of judges to injunction bonds was the work of Trump loyalists. Representative Andy Biggs, a Republican member of the House Judiciary Committee, pushed to include the provision, Representative Jim Jordan told Bloomberg News. Jordan, who chairs the committee, said Biggs and Representative Harriet Hageman, another Republican, were 'very instrumental in bringing this to the committee's attention.' Biggs' office did not respond to requests for comment. Hageman said in a statement that the measure will 'go a long way in curbing this overreach whereby judges are using their gavels to block policies with which they disagree, regardless of what the law may say.' Liberals have slammed the proposed clause in the tax-and-spending bill as an attack on the judiciary, but it may not be the controversy that dooms it in the Senate. Reconciliation, the process lawmakers are using to pass the bill with only Republican support, requires the entire bill to relate directly to the budget. 'Make It Happen' Several Republicans have expressed skepticism the measure can survive under that process. But, Jordan, the House judiciary chair, said Republican lawmakers will seek an alternative path to pass the measure if it's ruled out in the Senate. 'I'm sure we'll look at other ways to make it happen,' Jordan said. The bond fight stems from an existing federal rule that says judges can enter temporary restraining orders and preliminary injunctions 'only if' the winning side posts a security that the court 'considers proper.' The bond is to cover 'costs and damages' if they ultimately lose. University of Notre Dame Law School professor Samuel Bray, a proponent of injunction bonds, said courts should account for whether litigants have the ability to pay. Still, he said, defendants should be able to recover some money if a judge's early injunction — a 'prediction' about who will win, he said – isn't borne out. 'If courts routinely grant zero dollars, what they are doing is pricing the effect of a wrongly granted injunction on the government's operations at zero,' Bray said. Courts have interpreted the rule as giving judges discretion to decide what's appropriate, including waiving it, said Cornell Law School Professor Alexandra Lahav. The bond issue usually comes up in business disputes with 'clear monetary costs,' she said, and not in cases against the federal government. 'It's not clear to me what kind of injunction bond would make sense in the context of lawsuits around whether immigrants should have a hearing before they're deported,' Lahav said. 'I'm not really sure how you would price that.' (Updates with Senate proposal in the third paragraph.) American Mid: Hampton Inn's Good-Enough Formula for World Domination The Spying Scandal Rocking the World of HR Software New Grads Join Worst Entry-Level Job Market in Years As Companies Abandon Climate Pledges, Is There a Silver Lining? US Tariffs Threaten to Derail Vietnam's Historic Industrial Boom ©2025 Bloomberg L.P. 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
