7 hours ago
- Business
- Wall Street Journal
The U.S. Gave Up Its Lead in Clean Energy Sectors Before. It Might Be Doing It Again.
The U.S. is the world leader in clean hydrogen and carbon-capture production, but President Trump's move to roll back green-energy subsidies could mean giving up that position to rivals.
It wouldn't be the first time the country has fallen from the top spot in the clean-energy sector.
Right now, the U.S. is the unambiguous leader in just a few energy-transition technologies, said Julio Friedmann, chief scientist at Carbon Direct, a consulting firm focusing on decarbonization. 'We have surrendered leadership on EVs, on batteries, on wind and on nuclear,' Friedmann said, adding the U.S. was also once a key player in solar energy. 'In all these cases we had led significantly, and we abdicated that leadership.'
The Manhattan Project played a crucial role in the advancement of nuclear energy. The first practical solar cell was developed by Bell Labs in the 50s. The first large-scale wind farm was built in California in the 80s. In the 90s, the U.S. led the world on electric-vehicle battery development—in 2008, Tesla made the first EV able to travel more than 200 miles.
More recently, under the Biden administration, a combination of tax credits, subsidies and grants have helped the U.S. to take the lead in clean hydrogen and carbon capture, even as China remains the largest producer of clean energy overall.
According to a study published last year by consulting firm group McKinsey & Co., North America is set to produce 52% of the world's clean hydrogen by 2030, while China is on course for 30%. When it comes to carbon capture and storage technology, nearly half of all projects are set to be based in North America by 2030, according to the International Energy Agency, with Europe next highest with 31% of projects. Most of the North American projects are in the U.S., largely in Republican States and counties.
But over the past month, the Trump administration has set about rolling back Biden's incentives, canceling grants and removing tax credits that helped to spur production across the country.
'On their current course, the administration will again abdicate leadership,' Friedmann said.
Last month, Energy Secretary Chris Wright moved to cut $3.7 billion of grants and subsidies authorized under the previous administration that were designed to get clean-energy projects off the ground. Those included a carbon capture and storage project in Indiana, plastics recycling projects in Texas and a green cement project in California.
Under the 'Big Beautiful Bill' proposal, hydrogen tax credits are set to end by the end of the year and clean-energy tax credits face a de facto repeal for projects coming online next year and in 2027. The Trump administration said the technologies were costly, burdening ratepayers and consumers, calling the sector a scam.
Gregory Nemet, author of the book 'How Solar Energy Became Cheap,' likened the current rollback to policies that were put in place by President Richard Nixon but rolled back in 1981 by President Ronald Reagan, when subsidies for solar were axed. The U.S. had been the leader in solar technologies, thanks to research from NASA. But withdrawal in government-led support meant the industry moved abroad, he said.
'That was the end of the line for the U.S. solar industry for quite a while. Japan picked it up, then Germany, then China,' Nemet said.
Currently, China dominates production of solar equipment, making up nearly 75% of modules, 85% of cells and 97% of wafer production, according to data from the International Energy Agency. It is a similar situation in batteries, with 70% of all electric vehicle batteries ever produced coming from China.
'The main loss is the reset in market expectations,' Nemet added. 'There was a market for clean technologies that was huge and growing. If you were going to make a long-term investment based on long-term incentives, the last four years was meant to build that and this is a pretty big setback to those incentives.'
For carbon capture and storage in particular, a number of startups like Climeworks, Heirloom and Air Products had looked to base their first-of-a-kind plants in the U.S. That was in part because of its favorable geography, including plentiful underground storage, but also because of the funding and research on offer at America's universities.
'The U.S. federal government began investing in technologies like direct air capture back in 2015, 2016, way before anyone else was thinking about this, and it really led in public investment and innovation,' said Giana Amador, executive director at the Carbon Removal Alliance, a non profit promoting carbon removals.
She said this led to companies wanting 'to build their first-of-a-kind projects here, and doing so in partnership with the federal government and in particular the Department of Energy.' Amador pointed to programs like the 45Q tax credit, the carbon negative shot pilots program, and other policies that support carbon removal.
But climate startups in the clean energy sector have already started to feel the effects of Trump's push against clean tech. Battery recycler Li-Cycle has filed for bankruptcy, while job cuts have been seen at direct air capture startups Climeworks and Heirloom. Meanwhile, Group14, a Seattle-based silicon-battery maker said it was delaying opening its battery factory in Moses Lake, Washington, due to uncertainty over Trump's tariffs. Share prices have fallen sharply too, with hydrogen startup Plug Power down about 50% this year.
Industrial-gases supplier Air Products & Chemicals had planned to build a $4.5 billion hydrogen facility in Louisiana, but that project price tag has now ballooned to $8 billion, the construction timeline has slipped and the company is still seeking customers. Similarly, Nel Hydrogen has hit the brakes on a $400 million factory in suburban Detroit, due to policy uncertainty.
'This is an investment in the U.S. going forward and that's got to be in the mind of those who are making final decisions,' said Frank Wolak, president of the Fuel Cell and Hydrogen Energy Association. 'If we don't make this investment now, we will be looking at more and more Chinese and even European activities, and you won't be able to recover that ground. This is an investment in the U.S. future.'
For local policymakers, the move to push back against green energy production has also resulted in thousands of job cuts. So far 45 announced projects have been canceled, closed or downsized resulting in 20,000 jobs being lost and $16.7 billion in investments abandoned according to environmental policy advocacy group E2.
Of those, 72% of all jobs and 82% of investments were located in Republican congressional districts, E2 added.
One of the other notable parts of the previous policy program was that it also had strong backing from fossil fuel, chemicals and other heavy polluting industries. The axed projects by Energy Secretary Wright included carbon capture and hydrogen proposals from Exxon Mobil, Eastman and Heidelberg Cement.
'With the current situation, the whole of this is in jeopardy,' said Sunita Satyapal, former Director of the U.S. DOE's hydrogen and fuel cell office. She said that in particular the 45V tax credit had made U.S. hydrogen production some of the cheapest in the world — an important driver in jump-starting the industry and encouraging industries to use the fuel source. 'Regardless of the technology, industry always needs a runway before take off and that is what subsidies provide.'
Satyapal added that in the wake of the U.S.'s possible move away from the sector, regions like Canada and China could stand to benefit. China already makes up 65% of global electrolyser capacity, a key component in hydrogen production. Meanwhile, Canada's new Prime Minister Mark Carney has indicated supporting carbon capture projects tied with oil production.
'Companies are going to go where business is most favorable and I think that that in itself is a policy choice,' Carbon Removal Alliance's Amador said. 'The U.S. is at this critical window where we either continue to create a market and a policy environment that helps companies scale solutions here, or we give up that leadership and let other countries take the helm.'
Write to Yusuf Khan at
