Latest news with #EvergreenAction
Fast Company
23-05-2025
- Business
- Fast Company
Trump's budget would slash 830,000 jobs and raise energy costs by more than $16 billion
President Joe Biden's Inflation Reduction Act (IRA) bill was a landmark move for the economy. One year after it was signed into law, it had already created more than 170,600 clean energy jobs and spurred private companies to announce at least 210 major new clean energy and clean vehicle projects across 39 states, representing more than $86 billion in investments. Now the House Republicans' reconciliation bill is poised to also have a drastic impact on the economy and clean energy landscape, but by gutting the IRA's gains. Instead of fostering jobs and clean energy development, the bill—which passed the House this week and has now moved to the Senate—could erase those monumental investments and lead to fewer jobs, reduced clean energy capacity, and a drop in the national GDP. The GOP's 'big, beautiful bill' will increase some things, experts say, like Americans' household expenses; it will also give tax benefits to billionaires. 'House Republicans just voted to jack up prices, kill jobs, and rip away basic lifelines from working families by taking a sledgehammer to programs and investments that make life more affordable,' Lena Moffitt, executive director of the nonprofit Evergreen Action, said in a statement. 'If passed into law, Americans will wake up to find the GOP quietly reached into their wallets and handed their hard-earned cash to corporate polluters and billionaires like Elon Musk and Donald Trump.' Here's a look at the impact of the Republican reconciliation bill by the numbers, specifically around jobs, clean energy, and household costs. The GOP's reconciliation bill could cost the U.S. more than 830,000 jobs in 2030, according to an analysis from Energy Innovation. (That includes both direct job cuts from less EV production and clean energy manufacturing, as well as indirect losses from higher fuel costs and other economic impacts.) It would also lead to less new electricity generation, especially at a time when electricity demand is growing. Over the next four years, the bill would decrease additions to new electricity capacity by 302 gigawatts. That's the same power capacity that the entire U.S. coal fleet had a decade ago. For context, 1 gigawatt can power 100 million LED light bulbs. With less new electricity being generated, wholesale power prices will increase about 50% by 2035, particularly because solar and wind are cheaper energy sources than fossil fuels. Across all American households, consumer energy costs will increase by more than $16 billion in 2030, and by more than $33 billion by 2035. 'This increase happens even if oil and gas production rise and help reduce fossil fuel prices, as envisioned by the bill,' Energy Innovation notes. Between 2026 and 2034, the bill would cumulatively reduce the national GDP by nearly $1.1 trillion. For individual households, that could mean a $110 increase to electricity costs per year, beginning in 2026, which could then rise to $290 more in annual energy costs per household by 2035. The GOP bill will drive up household costs for Americans in other ways, too. The price of gasoline will increase between 25 and 37 cents per gallon, which, on the higher end, would mean more than $200 per year for the average gas vehicle. Without the IRA's EV tax credits, Americans will also essentially see the cost of electric vehicles go up by at least $7,500 (and for used EVs, $4,000). The Republican bill also eliminates a tax credit for energy-efficient home improvements like heat pumps and water heaters. That credit has so far allowed households to save up to $990 each year on their utility bills, but Americans will now miss out on those savings. The bill has broader impacts on emissions and how climate change will worsen. Without tax credits to spur investments in clean energy and efficient appliances, the bill could increase greenhouse gas emissions by nearly 130 million metric tons of CO2 equivalent in 2030—like adding 30 million gas-powered cars to the road for one year. By 2035, that could grow to nearly 260 million metric tons, equivalent to the annual energy use of nearly 35 million homes—or the entire annual CO2 emissions from Spain. With more emissions and air pollution come more deaths. According to Energy Innovation, that could mean nearly 350 additional premature deaths annually by 2030, and nearly 670 more every year by 2035. Many of these impacts will be concentrated in Republican states. The IRA was a huge boon to Republican districts: In just two years, it added nearly 200,000 clean energy jobs and more than $286 billion in clean energy investments to congressional districts represented by Republican House members. Now those districts will likely see job losses and less economic investment because of their Republican representatives' votes. 'In their crusade to rig the system for their fossil fuel backers,' Moffitt said prior to the House bill passing, 'it's people living in Trump states—their own voters—who will pay the steepest price: lost jobs, higher energy costs, and missed economic opportunities.'
Yahoo
22-05-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
How states can pick up the slack on industrial decarbonization
The Trump administration appears poised to cancel billions of dollars of federal funding meant to help U.S. industries convert to cleaner alternatives to burning fossil fuels. States can't match the federal government's spending power, but there are steps they can take to reduce industry's emissions, support jobs and economic growth in places burdened by industrial pollution, and help prepare U.S. companies for global markets increasingly demanding lower-carbon commodities and products. So says a March report from think tank RMI and environmental advocacy organization Evergreen Action that examined the industrial decarbonization plans of 25 states and Puerto Rico. The authors came up with a list of recommendations — and warnings — for states aiming to keep up the momentum on industrial decarbonization. To be clear, 'states can't just look at what other states are doing and copy it,' said Molly Freed, RMI senior associate and co-author of the report. 'What works in a steel and cement state is not going to be effective somewhere that's canning and bottling stuff.' But some common lessons can be drawn, she said. The first is not to try and recreate the federal government's 'massive capital grants,' namely, the $6 billion awarded to sites from steel mills to snack factories under the Inflation Reduction Act's Industrial Demonstrations Program, which is now potentially on the Trump administration's chopping block. 'States don't have the initial funding to do that — and they have to balance their budgets every year, so it's fundamentally not a good format for them,' Freed said. That's too bad, because many industrial companies rely on 'first mover' public financing to lower the risk of making big investments, said Melissa Hulting, director of industrial decarbonization at the think tank Center for Climate and Energy Solutions. 'Early adopters want help with these initial capital costs.' That's particularly true of certain heavy industries like steel and cement, which have massive capital assets like blast furnaces and cement kilns that will need to be replaced or significantly retrofitted to cut emissions. But other strategies represent lower-hanging fruit — in particular, replacing fossil-fueled boilers with industrial heat pumps and electric boilers, said Jeffrey Rissman, industry program director at the think tank Energy Innovation. These technologies are well-suited to electrifying steam heating for food and beverage processing, chemicals production, pulp and paper mills, and other low-temperature processes that make up roughly 30% of U.S. industrial thermal energy demands. Heat pumps, especially, are far more efficient at converting energy into heat than fossil-fueled boilers, Rissman said. These technologies are already being deployed today and can save companies money compared to fossil-fueled systems in some applications. 'It's not like we need to solve fundamental engineering challenges here,' he said. Putting some public money into the up-front costs of electrification could certainly help move things forward, Rissman said. And in some cases, states may still have access to federal dollars to make that happen. Take the $4.3 billion issued to 25 state, local, and tribal governments through the Climate Pollution Reduction Grants program. That's one of many Inflation Reduction Act initiatives that had funding frozen in the early weeks of the Trump administration but which have since seen dollars begin flowing again after court orders demanded a restart. The largest of the industrial decarbonization projects funded by those grants is Pennsylvania's $396 million Reducing Industrial Sector Emissions program, which is currently accepting applications for everything from electrification, energy efficiency, and process-emissions reductions to on-site renewable energy, low-carbon fuels, and efforts to cut fugitive methane emissions. Industry is Pennsylvania's top-emitting sector, responsible for about 30% of statewide emissions, Louie Krak, infrastructure implementation coordinator at the state Department of Environmental Protection, said at a January webinar hosted by the policy institute Center for American Progress. About 60% of that industrial climate pollution comes from the iron and steel industry, which is a much tougher sector to cut emissions from than lower-heat industrial processes, RMI and Evergreen Action's report notes. 'My advice is, take advantage of federal resources while they're still around,' Krak said. That includes smaller-scale federal funding sources, he added. For example, the Department of Energy's Industrial Training and Assessment Centers program provides grants of up to $300,000 to help small and medium-sized manufacturers implement energy-efficiency projects. That's 'not an insignificant amount,' Krak said. A handful of states are looking at spending their own money to boost industrial decarbonization. One way to do that is to tap into state and regional programs that collect fees from polluting industries, such as California's greenhouse gas cap-and-trade program, the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative encompassing 11 Northeastern states, and Washington state's cap-and-invest program, RMI and Evergreen Action's report notes. In California, lawmakers are considering the state's greenhouse gas reduction fund as a source of money for AB 1280, a bill that proposes expanding programs that support factory electrification and thermal energy storage. One existing initiative that the bill would extend has already directed about $90 million to such projects over the last few years, said Teresa Cheng, California director at Industrious Labs, an advocacy group that supports the legislation. 'This is even more necessary now that federal support has backslid,' Cheng said. Roughly 35,000 polluting industrial facilities now pay into the greenhouse gas fund, and 'that money should go back into cleaning up those facilities, commensurate with their polluting profile,' she said. Another funding avenue proposed by AB 1280 is low-interest loans from the state's Infrastructure and Economic Development Bank, Cheng said. RMI and Evergreen Action's report highlights the role that state-backed 'green banks' — entities tasked with lending to projects that reduce carbon emissions and air pollution — could play in reducing capital costs for industrial decarbonization. That could eventually include part of the $20 billion in green bank funding created by the Inflation Reduction Act that has been frozen by the Trump administration and is now being fought over in court. Regardless of the outcome of that dispute, state green banks still have their own money to lend, Rissman noted. 'Buy clean' mandates now in place in nine states, which require state agencies to purchase concrete, steel, and other industrial outputs that are made via lower-carbon processes and using lower-carbon inputs, can further incentivize industries to invest in decarbonization, Rissman said. Those programs can also provide reporting and compliance structures that companies will need to meet demands for lower-carbon products from corporate buyers, he said. And U.S. firms that export to Europe will be looking to avoid the looming Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism fees on high-carbon imports, set to go into effect in the coming years. States have regulatory 'sticks' they can use to back up the 'carrots' of grants, loans, and other incentives for industrial decarbonization. Cap-and-trade or cap-and-invest programs impose costs on polluting industries, for example. Or states can implement rules like the ones passed by Southern California air regulators, which require industrial and commercial customers to replace fossil-fueled water heaters, boilers, and process heating with electric systems within the next decade, Cheng said. Colorado has both carrots and sticks in place, Wil Mannes, senior program manager of industrial decarbonization initiatives for the Colorado Energy Office, said during January's webinar. The state passed a climate law in 2021 that set emissions limits on industrial facilities, with rules mandating a 20% reduction in those emissions by 2030 compared to 2015 levels. But it has also opened a $168 million competitive tax credit program and a $25 million grant program for industrial facilities to install improvements that reduce greenhouse gases, which means Colorado is 'not heavily dependent on federal support for what we already have in the works,' Mannes said. 'Future of gas' proceedings are another way to spur industrial electrification, said Yong Kwon, senior policy advisor for the Sierra Club's Living Economy program. California, Colorado, Illinois, Massachusetts, and New York are among the states that have launched these discussions to craft long-term plans for reducing customers' reliance on fossil gas delivered through utility pipelines. In Illinois, state regulators and other stakeholders are considering proposals for industrial pilot projects that try out different rate structures for companies that switch from gas to electricity, Kwon said. 'What if we selected a demonstration site and funded the facility to adopt the technologies, and also worked with utilities to provide them with preferential rates based on studies we've done? What would be the result of that, both on public health and on the cost to the industrial user?' Regulations and up-front financing are both important policy levers. But widespread industrial decarbonization won't take off unless companies are confident that the investments they're making will eventually pencil out financially. 'The operational costs are really key,' Hulting said. 'If we can get those down, I think we'll see a lot of implementation happening because these electrified technologies are largely more efficient. It's an energy-efficiency boost.' Electric industrial heating faces a core challenge in the U.S. — the spark gap, or the cost difference between fossil gas and electricity. Cheap domestic gas supplies have undercut the economics of industrial electrification over the past two decades, and while gas prices have been rising over recent months, so have electricity costs. Underneath these broad averages lie significant regional differences, however. Low spark gaps have spurred electric industrial heating investments in certain parts of the country, according to the American Council for an Energy-Efficient Economy, which tracks such projects across the U.S. And most utilities offer industrial rates and pricing structures that can shift the balance toward electrification. Narrowing the spark gap down to where it encourages industrial electrification relies on two important variables, Kwon said — 'making electricity cheaper and making gas more expensive.' Policies that drive up gas costs aren't exactly a political winner, however. So industrial electrification advocates have focused on making electricity cheaper. One way to do that is to 'give industry access to wholesale electricity rates,' he said. Over the long run, increasingly cheaper renewable energy will drive down electricity costs at large, he explained. But power generated by solar and wind is already quite cheap when it exceeds grid demand. In fact, grid operators are being forced to curtail excess renewable energy at certain times of the year in sun- and wind-rich parts of the country, which sometimes see wholesale electricity prices drop into negative territory. That's why industrial electrification proponents are eager for states to create routes for industrial customers to access these cheap wholesale prices, rather than remaining on the retail utility rates that shield customers from these price swings. Access to bulk electricity price differentials is particularly essential for making the business case for thermal-energy storage technologies, which convert electricity to heat and store it for long durations. In return, big industrial customers can act similarly to utility-scale batteries on the grid, Kwon said — storing excess power when prices are low and using it to reduce their grid demands when power is scarce. That's already happening in Northern European countries such as Denmark, where variable electricity rates that offer inexpensive off-peak pricing encourage industries to use and store ample wind power, he said. 'That's essential — and that's a place where we hope states will pick up.' Just how this concept can be applied depends on what kind of utility rates and energy market structures different states have, Rissman said. For decades, utilities have negotiated special rate structures with particularly large and power-hungry facilities, such as steel furnaces and aluminum smelters. And competitive energy markets like those in Texas, or across some Northeastern and Midwestern states, allow large customers to contract with retail energy providers in ways that let them access wholesale energy market prices, he said. But these arrangements are largely kept private since they constitute a competitive advantage for the industries that are getting them, he noted. What's more, rate programs still need to protect factories or facilities from being exposed to the enormous price spikes that can occur at times of power shortage or grid emergency — at least, for all but the handful of industrial players willing to take the risks involved. At the same time, wholesale pricing structures shouldn't allow industrial customers to avoid paying their fair share of power grid investments or other costs that are bundled into retail rates. In California, advocates have proposed regulations to allow industrial decarbonization projects to access low-cost renewable energy through some kind of exposure to or pass-through of the state's wholesale energy market, Cheng said. Last year, state regulators launched a proceeding to explore the potential for such 'flexible' rate structures for large industrial companies, she noted. But 'it's pretty early on — we don't have the answers yet.'
Yahoo
22-04-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
A simple tweak to tax law has helped bring solar power to the communities that need it most
Last year, the Boston Community Solar Cooperative announced plans for its first community solar project: 81 kilowatts of panels atop an affordable housing complex in a low-income, historically Black Boston neighborhood. The success of the project depends, in large part, on tax credits the Inflation Reduction Act established in 2022. Because the solar panels will sit on a subsidized apartment building in a low-income community, up to 50 percent of the project's cost could ultimately be recouped through tax credits. But, in all likelihood, once the project's completed, the Boston Community Solar Cooperative won't actually receive those credits — and that's by design. Instead, the cooperative intends to sell its tax credits as soon as it can, said Gregory King, the organization's president. This will bring in more cash early on, reduce the amount of debt required, and improve the financial outlook of the project. In the past, a scheme like this would have required whoever purchased the credits to retain an ownership stake in the project for at least five years — an unthinkable prospect for a cooperative that aims to provide its member-owners, primarily Black and brown residents of disinvested areas of Boston, with a modest passive income from the energy generated by the panels. But the Inflation Reduction Act, or IRA, not only revamped old tax credits and introduced fresh ones, it also made these credits transferable. In other words, anyone developing a clean energy project who didn't have enough tax liability to take full advantage of the tax credits could sell them to a company that did, without ceding ownership. This change has enabled countless clean energy projects to get off the ground. Wind farms, geothermal plants, large-scale battery facilities, electric vehicle charging banks, manufacturing projects, and even mining operations for critical minerals have all taken advantage of the tax credits markets that emerged and matured in just a year and a half after transferability went into effect. Crux Climate, one of the companies that built a platform to facilitate tax credit transfers, estimates that $24 billion worth of IRA-related credits were exchanged in 2024 alone. 'Before the IRA passed, it was very difficult for a lot of renewable energy developers to take full advantage of the tax credits,' said Charles Harper, a senior policy lead with the climate advocacy nonprofit Evergreen Action. This is because tax credits work as a form of discount on a business or individual's annual tax bill, allowing them to cut a chunk out of what they owe the government based on the dollar value of the credit. This can save a lot of money — if you owe enough taxes in the first place. 'Tax credits are only good if you have enough tax liability that you owe the government to remove,' Harper said. The IRA made it easier for project developers without major tax liabilities, like the Boston Community Solar Cooperative, to sell their credits at a discount before breaking ground on a solar or wind project. This allows the developers to bring in much-needed cash to pay for equipment and labor. Meanwhile, buyers — which can include banks, companies, and even some high net-worth individuals — get an additional write-off on their own hefty tax statements. It was technically possible to shift tax credits from one entity to another before the IRA, but the process was complicated and onerous, meaning very few players had the appetite to sell or buy credits. 'The largest banks make up the overwhelming share of that market,' said Alfred Johnson, CEO of Crux Climate. This limited how many developers could actually sell their tax credits and often made the deals inaccessible to small developers and community-based projects. 'Transferability was a godsend in many ways, because it simplified the process,' said Derek Silverman, co-founder of Basis Climate, another site for trading tax credits. Before a clean energy developer can list a credit for sale on an exchange like Crux Climate, they must first get their credits pre-approved by the Treasury Department. To do so, they need to submit paperwork showing that they control the site where the project will be developed and that they have a contract with a customer who will purchase the electricity once it's flowing. The process isn't frictionless, but it's no longer as difficult as it was before the IRA. Now, instead of navigating complex legal agreements to move tax credits from developer to investor, 'it's like going and buying a Walmart gift card for 85 cents on the dollar,' said Jon Abe, CEO of the clean energy investment firm Sunwealth, 'but with a lot more paperwork.' That 85-cents-on-the-dollar discount is what attracts buyers to these markets. On Crux Climate's platform, the actual per-dollar markdown shifts based on the size of the transaction, from 89 cents or less for the smallest deals to 95 cents for the largest. But even if the developers of smaller projects sell their tax credits for a deeper discount, it can still make a pronounced impact. Based on King's estimates, Boston Community Solar Cooperative could bring in around $150,000 from its tax credit sales. And last year, Basis Climate helped the solar service provider Navajo Power Home sell credits for $355,000 to support a project that is bringing solar and battery systems to Navajo Nation and providing electricity to more than 100 homes that would otherwise have to rely on diesel generators. 'Solar is pretty capital-intensive. So to the degree that you could use someone else's money and not have to take on debt to bring that capital to your project,' King said, 'you're much more likely to have projects that pencil,' or make financial sense. In addition to making material improvements in disadvantaged communities, the transferable tax credits have spurred private investments that create jobs and expand domestic manufacturing, all while helping big businesses lighten their tax load. Yet these tax credits are under threat as congressional Republicans work through budget reconciliation, a special legislative process that allows Congress to fast-track spending legislation and bypass the Senate filibuster. (The IRA itself was adopted through budget reconciliation.) Right now, the main priority for Republicans in this process is extending tax cuts worth $4.5 trillion over a decade that would primarily benefit the wealthy, and reducing federal spending by at least $1.5 trillion to make up some of the difference. It's not yet clear what might get cut, but the IRA tax credits are being considered. In February, House Speaker Mike Johnson told reporters that his approach to repealing the IRA would 'be somewhere between a scalpel and a sledgehammer.' But an estimated 85 percent of IRA-related investments have flowed into Republican districts, inspiring four Senate Republicans to come out in favor of the tax credits this month. This came after nearly two dozen House Republicans co-signed a letter in March in defense of the law's tax provisions. 'If at least a handful of those 21 House members are serious about protecting investment and jobs in their districts that the [IRA tax credits] are providing,' said Harper, 'then that would be huge.' This story was originally published by Grist with the headline A simple tweak to tax law has helped bring solar power to the communities that need it most on Apr 22, 2025.
Yahoo
20-04-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
New poll uncovers surprising unity on controversial proposal: 'They are standing firm in their support'
Michigan voters want to keep the state moving forward on more affordable energy, per a new survey from Data for Progress in collaboration with Evergreen Action. The result solidifies the clear momentum for policies that make energy more affordable and sustainable for residents. The poll, conducted in January among 566 likely Michigan voters, tied into a 2023 law that commits Michigan to using 100% clean energy by 2040. The results show most voters support investing in more affordable energy. That includes 85% of voting Democrats and 61% of Independents who back Michigan's plan to fully transition to clean energy by 2035. Voters from all parties also support bringing clean energy jobs to the state and expanding local manufacturing, with 79% on board. Most also want to grow programs that help lower energy bills at home, like repair programs that could save families around $145 per year. Voters want at least half of Michigan's electricity to come from more affordable energy by 2030. They're also in favor of giving people rebates for making upgrades that save energy at home. These efforts can help lower energy costs and reduce pollution. Most voters want eco-friendly energy projects to get approved more quickly, while only 21% say it's not that important. Around four in five also want state leaders to focus on communities facing consistently high levels of pollution. Clean transportation is another top priority. The survey found strong support for increased access to public transport and improved quality of transit. These results reflect support for broader efforts to reduce carbon pollution from homes and transit systems and make communities healthier. Per a press release, Evergreen Action's Midwest deputy director Courtney Brady said Michigan voters are "standing firm in their support of the state's leadership in addressing climate change and building a sustainable energy future." Do you think America could ever go zero-waste? Never Not anytime soon Maybe in some states Definitely Click your choice to see results and speak your mind. "Michigan voters continue to favor climate policies that will lower costs, create jobs, and hold bad actors accountable," Data for Progress executive director Danielle Deiseroth added. "And these policies have bipartisan support — a sign that building towards a clean energy future does not have to be a partisan endeavor in the state." If you would also support these kinds of policies in your state, voting for pro-climate politicians is one of the best ways to influence legislation. You can also help by focusing your spending on companies that already align with an eco-friendly future. Join our free newsletter for good news and useful tips, and don't miss this cool list of easy ways to help yourself while helping the planet.
Yahoo
24-03-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
Trump's tariffs and gas-first agenda may make electric heat more expensive — here's what homeowners should know
Earlier this year, President Donald Trump spoke out against Joe Biden's energy conservation policies that mandate newly imported or manufactured tankless gas water heaters to save heat with condensing technology. While this technology uses gas, not electricity, he announced that Biden wanted all residential gas heaters replaced with electric heaters. I'm 49 years old and have nothing saved for retirement — what should I do? Don't panic. Here are 5 of the easiest ways you can catch up (and fast) Nervous about the stock market in 2025? Find out how you can access this $1B private real estate fund (with as little as $10) Americans with upside-down car loans owe more money than ever before — and drivers can't keep up. Here are 3 ways to cut your monthly costs ASAP Trump went on to push gas energy during a news conference, stating, "[Biden] wants everybody to have an electric heater instead of a gas heater … Gas heat[ing] is much less expensive …They don't want you to have the gas where you don't have the problems of the electric. … The source is plentiful … They work much better, they look much better." Tankless water heaters are indeed less prevalent than their standard gas or electric water counterparts. However, the Appliance Standards Awareness Project notes over 60% of tankless gas water heaters sold today use condensing technology and therefore already comply with the new standard. So, even if some people turn to heat pumps or electric technology, that doesn't mean gas water heaters will be replaced with electric alternatives. What is of concern is how Trump's new tariffs might impact the cost of cleaner energy sources and ultimately which heat source you choose. For those looking to switch to heat pumps, it's important to note that tariffs currently being put in place will raise their production cost. Plus, rebates are also potentially on the chopping block. But what does this potentially mean for your bottom line? Take Canada, for instance. As America's largest supplier of oil, electricity and natural gas, the country provided 61% of its crude oil imports in 2021, as well as 98% of its natural gas imports and 93% of its electricity imports in 2020. The 10% tariffs levied on Canadian energy mean companies there will incur higher costs that will inevitably trickle down to everyday Americans (particularly those in the Midwest, which shares an electrical grid with Canada and heavily relies on their trade, according to Evergreen Action). A big reason you'll feel it is becasue the industry's supply chain is slow to move and change. For example, it takes a lot of time, effort and capital to change operations, so you won't quickly see new infrastructure like pipelines and refineries. Also, new rare earth minerals and elements are scarce, making clean energy projects pricier as electricity demand boosts. This means Americans in states heavily dependent on Canadian hydropower and electricity (like the Pacific Northwest, Minnesota, New England, New York and Michigan) will experience higher electricity bills. Read more: Gold just hit a historic high of $3,000/ounce on Trump's tariff moves — while US stocks got slaughtered. Here's 1 simple way to prevent more pain within minutes Other clean energy products may get pricier as tariffs hit the solar, battery, wind and electric vehicle industries. As the Scientific American (SciAm) reported, The American Clean Power Association (ACPA) trade group said it was "concerned that increasing the costs of energy production inputs will put upward pressure on consumer energy costs and diminish our capacity to unleash energy abundance." The countries impacted by Trump's tariffs happen to be major players in the clean energy sectors that create products Americans have come to rely on, like solar panels and electric vehicles. According to SciAm, China, Canada and Mexico have a major role in creating the components required to upgrade the electrical grid and grow clean energy. For example, some machinery parts that help create renewable resources are made in Canada and Mexico. Both countries supply a significant amount of America's steel, which comprises about 75% of a wind turbine. Mexico is a growing electric vehicle production hub, Canada provides roughly half of the refined nickel in the U.S. — a key part of batteries — and China produces about three-quarters of the lithium-ion batteries used in electric vehicles, according to the International Energy Agency. The foreign manufacturer in all of these cases is likely to experience higher production costs, which eventually get passed down to American consumers. Want an extra $1,300,000 when you retire? Dave Ramsey says this 7-step plan 'works every single time' to kill debt, get rich in America — and that 'anyone' can do it Rich, young Americans are ditching the stormy stock market — here are the alternative assets they're banking on instead Protect your retirement savings with these 5 essential money moves — most of which you can complete in just minutes This article provides information only and should not be construed as advice. It is provided without warranty of any kind.
