Latest news with #energyPolicy
The Independent
a day ago
- Business
- The Independent
Electricity costs are already jolting Americans - Trump's bill could hike them another $400 a year
Amid already high, and rising, electricity prices, President Donald Trump 's broad domestic policy bill, which is up for debate in the Senate, could make the situation even worse. If the legislation passes as it currently stands, it would remove federal tax credits from the Biden presidency for sources of electricity such as solar, wind, batteries and geothermal power, The New York Times noted. Several studies from this year reveal that the energy bill of the average family could rise as much as $400 annually. For the first time in decades, demand for electricity is on the rise, in part because of the construction of data centers required for artificial intelligence. And power companies are having difficulties keeping up with the rising needs. The removal of tax breaks for wind turbines, solar panels, and batteries would make such sources of power more expensive, and their availability would decrease. As a result, the demand for power from natural gas would rise. This could lead to a rise in gas prices, which at the moment is responsible for 43 percent of U.S. electricity. The Trump administration has also taken action to sell more gas abroad, which could lead to further price rises. Additionally, Trump's levies on steel, aluminum, and other construction materials would increase the cost of transmission lines and other kinds of electrical equipment. The Clean Energy Buyers Association, which represents companies that have committed to buying renewable energy, commissioned a study that found that the repeal of clean energy credits would lead to a 13 percent increase in electricity in states such as New Jersey, North Carolina, Arizona, and Kansas. It could also lead to the loss of thousands of jobs by 2032. Trump administration and gas industry officials push back on such claims, arguing that the president's measures to make it cheaper to drill and build pipelines will lead to a decrease in electricity prices. They also argue that wind and solar have received subsidies for decades and that their continuing expansion could make the electric grid less dependable. A spokesperson for the Department of Energy told The Times that the president's 'agenda is to lower the cost of oil production in the United States, lower the cost of natural gas production in the United States — that ultimately will lead to lower average prices and at the same time profitability for businesses.' 'Prices are going to move up and down in the short term,' he added, however, noting that the administration would be focusing on policies 'that will deliver long-lasting prosperity.' Four Republican Senators wrote in a letter in April that, because of the rising demand for energy, 'it is imperative that any modifications to the tax code avoid worsening the economic pressures that American households and businesses already face.' 'For energy credits that provide a direct passthrough benefit to ratepayers, repeals would translate into immediate utility bill increases, placing additional strain on hardworking Americans,' they added. The Energy Information Administration found that since 2022, U.S. residential electricity prices have increased by 13 percent on average. In Ohio, prices are on the rise as data centers are being built in the state. Meanwhile, in California, wildfires are a source of rising costs. One of the major reasons behind rising prices is the unstable nature of natural gas prices, which rose sharply following the Russian invasion of Ukraine in 2022. After falling to record lows in 2024, gas prices are set to almost double this year and rise even more next year. This comes as demand is on the rise domestically, even as the U.S. is selling more gas overseas. Since 2022, the cost of building gas power plants has almost tripled. Gas companies are now in the midst of wait times of up to half a decade for new gas turbines. Meanwhile, drilling for natural gas has grown more expensive amid rising equipment costs due to tariffs. As of 2020, 34 million households stated that they struggled to pay their energy bills and kept their homes at unsafe temperatures because of worries about costs. This comes as the Trump administration has vowed to end the Low Income Home Energy Assistance Program, which helps 6.2 million people pay for high energy bills. The executive director of the National Energy Assistance Directors Association, Mark Wolfe, told The Times that 'We've got millions of families that are already struggling to pay their bills.' 'Now you bring in extreme temperatures, record heat, and it's a very bad situation,' he added.
News.com.au
26-05-2025
- Business
- News.com.au
A senior Liberal says net zero should be reconsidered following the election wipe-out
A senior Liberal is calling for the party to reconsider the 'straitjacket' of net zero, weeks after the party's election disaster as push back comes from Nationals MPs. The commitment to reach net zero emissions by 2050 has long been a point of contention within conservative parties, and tensions continue to bubble within the Liberals over the promise and whether it aligns with the party's future. Opposition frontbencher Andrew Hastie – who has been touted as a future leader – says it's one policy that should be reconsidered. 'I think the question of net zero, that's a straitjacket that I'm already getting out of,' he told Four Corners on Monday night on the future of the party. 'The real question is should Australian families and businesses be paying more for their electricity? 'And should we allow this sort of hypocrisy at the heart of our economy to continue whereby we sell coal and gas to India and China, and we deny it to our own people? 'That's the question that I think we need to answer.' New Liberals leader Sussan Ley says the party will be reviewing all policies post the May 3 election wipe-out, including the commitment to nuclear energy while also trying to repair the Coalition blown-up by the Nationals last week. While negotiations on restoring the 80-year-old Coalition with the rural and regional-based party continues, several of their high-profile members are actively campaigning against net zero. Nationals senate leader Bridget McKenzie said the National were committed to net zero, but had been upset by Ms Ley's announcement to review all policies the Coalition had taken to the election without consultation. 'Our party position is that we are committed to net zero by 2050 until that's obviously reviewed and stays or doesn't stay,' she said. 'If you are serious about net zero, then you have to get serious about nuclear.' But Liberal Senator Maria Kovacic told 4 Corners nuclear should be dumped, but said net zero mattered to voters. 'Most young Australians believe that climate change is real and we have to deliver energy policies that ensure that we reach our net zero targets and that we deliver stable power … that is as cheap as possible' she said. Nationals leader David Littleproud has revealed the minor party will review its positions on such policies, saying a sensible energy mix was needed in Australia. 'We've got a party room position on this but obviously during this period of parliament, like in the last period, we'll continue to review some of those policies, including net zero,' he told Sky News. 'I think we've got to understand that the world is finding it increasingly more difficult to achieve net zero by 2050 and the serious economic impact.' High profile Nationals, including Barnaby Joyce and Matt Canavan, have been vocal in their calls for net zero to be dumped. Meanwhile, the Four Corners program canvassed a number of Liberals reflecting on what went so wrong with the campaign under former Opposition Leader Peter Dutton, who also lost his own seat on election night. Failure to outline policies or late announcements and too much focus on other issues failed to attract voters, MPs said. Tasmanian frontbencher Jonno Duniam said 'fatally flawed' polling was a significant issue. 'Something went off the rails,' he said. 'It's like having a compass telling you to go in one direction. In fact, you know you should be going in another. And that's what we did. We made decisions based on bad polling.' Education spokeswoman Sarah Henderson said her education policy was 'buried' by the campaign. 'On Thursday night (before the election), the policy was uploaded onto the website … my media release was withdrawn and a lot of incredible hard work by my team and many others right across the Coalition, unfortunately, didn't see the light of day,' she said. She said too much attention was put on the cost of living during the campaign, and not enough on 'values-based' policies. Mr Hastie warned the Liberal Party's problems were so deep that without serious change, it may cease to exist. 'There's no reason to think that we won't disappear over time if we don't get our act together. That's how serious this challenge is for the Liberal Party,' Mr Hastie said.
Wall Street Journal
22-05-2025
- Business
- Wall Street Journal
Rooftop Solar Takes Gut Punch in House Tax Bill
The struggling rooftop solar industry faces a potentially fatal blow after the House of Representatives passed a tougher version of President Trump's expansive tax-and-spending package. The bill sunsets renewable energy credits, as expected, but includes more stringent provisions and rollback dates that were seen as especially bleak for rooftop solar. Credits for rooftop solar would end this year, while those for larger solar and wind energy projects would end by 2028, instead of a slower phaseout through 2031.
The Verge
21-05-2025
- Business
- The Verge
Energy efficiency rollbacks could cost Americans $43 billion in higher utility bills
The Trump administration's attempts to gut 12 energy efficiency standards could cost Americans billions of dollars in higher electricity bills. The Department of Energy (DOE) recently announced that it plans to rollback dozens of policies in what it called its 'largest deregulatory effort in history.' While the DOE claims that getting rid of 'burdensome and costly' rules would save $11 billion, that doesn't take into account the costs Americans would bear if they have to use more energy-hungry appliances. Adding up those costs, the deregulation spree would ultimately lead to about $43 billion in higher electricity bills for households and businesses, according to an analysis by the Appliance Standards Awareness Project (ASAP) that was first shared with The Verge. 'The department is looking at the savings these rollbacks would provide while completely ignoring the costs.' 'The department is looking at the savings these rollbacks would provide while completely ignoring the costs. It turns out that the costs would be nearly five times greater than the savings,' says Joanna Mauer, deputy director of ASAP. ASAP compiled data on 12 of the efficiency standards DOE targeted, for which the department had previously published its own estimates for costs and savings it expected the rules to generate for consumers. A common criticism of energy efficient appliances is that they often cost more to purchase than a less efficient alternative. Upon finalizing the efficiency standard for portable air conditioners in 2020, for example, the DOE expected the cost of buying more efficient technologies to add up to $1 billion for consumers who purchase those products during the 30 years following the rule going into effect. Taking those costs into account adds up to the roughly $11 billion in savings the DOE says it's achieving by getting rid of those 12 standards. But that's an incomplete picture, ASAP argues. When the DOE finalizes a standard, it typically also calculates the cumulative savings consumers would benefit from with a more efficient appliance. Those savings primarily come from lower energy bills (although the metric also considers other potential costs like repairs). The portable air conditioner standard, for instance, was expected to save consumers $4.1 billion over the lifetime of products purchased during the same 30 year time period. That leads to a net savings of $3.1 billion for consumers as a result of the efficiency standard for portable air conditioners. The net savings the DOE has previously estimated for the 12 rules on the chopping block now add up to $43.2 billion — which is what ASAP says is the more important number to consider. Those standards apply to an array of common products including microwave ovens, conventional cooking tops and ovens, air purifiers, dehumidifiers, external power supplies, battery chargers for phones and other devices, and more. The DOE didn't immediately respond to The Verge's press inquiry. 'We are bringing back common sense — slashing regulations meant to appease Green New Deal fantasies, restrict consumer choice and increase costs for the American people,' Secretary of Energy Chris Wright said in the agency's announcement last week. Its proposals are likely to face legal challenges because energy efficiency standards are subject to an anti-backsliding provision within the Energy Policy and Conservation Act (EPCA). Earlier this month, President Donald Trump signed a presidential memorandum directing the Secretary of Energy to stop enforcing a slate of efficiency rules the administration plans to rescind or revise. News also broke this month that the Environmental Protection Agency plans to shutter the Energy Star program that can save a typical household $450 a year on energy bills.
National Post
16-05-2025
- Business
- National Post
Jamie Sarkonak: Of course Steven Guilbeault would cling to the myth of peak oil
The first notable act of our newly-minted culture minister, Steven Guilbeault, was to recite to media scribes the myth of peak oil. Asked whether pipelines would continue to be a disruptor to Alberta-Ottawa relations, he replied: Article content Article content 'The Canadian energy regulator, as well as the International Energy Agency, are telling us that probably by 2028, 2029, demand for oil will peak globally and it will also peak in Canada.' Article content 'So… before we start talking about building an entirely new pipeline, maybe we should maximize the use of existing infrastructure.' He went on to claim that the Trans Mountain Expansion Project (TMX), which came online in 2024, was running at only 40 per cent capacity. This was wildly incorrect: in 2024, TMX ran at 77 per cent capacity, and that share is projected to grow over the years to reach 96 per cent in 2028. Article content Article content As for peak oil, Guilbeault was also very likely wrong. For years, activists have claimed that the highest volumes of oil consumption were just over the horizon, only to be proven wrong time and time again. Just like how the deadline on COVID restrictions of 'two weeks to flatten the curve' was stretched to two years, the impending decline of oil constantly moved farther and farther out. Article content The theory was first put forward in 1956. Geologist and Shell researcher M. King Hubbert put forward a paper predicting the beginning of the end of U.S. oil production somewhere between 1965 and 1971. This was a fearsome prospect because life in the developed world was dependent on cheap, readily available energy, and its absence (and subsequent increase in price) could reverse hard-fought economic progress. Article content Article content For a time, he appeared to be right: when the early 1970s hit, oil production in the United States began falling slowly — but the bottom of this trough was hit in 2006, and U.S. production surpassed historic highs around 2014. Article content Article content Globally, Hubbert predicted a production peak for 2000. In reality, production hit what is now a mini-peak in 1979, sinking to early '70s levels during the early '80s — but it later picked up speed and steadily climbed over the years. No ceiling was hit in 2000; production kept on rising. It did hit a trough in 2020, but that was due to worldwide COVID shutdowns and the price shock they caused to oil contracts. Article content Had technology never advanced past the achievements of the 1950s, Hubbert may well have been proven right. But humans continued to innovate and eventually found new ways of extracting harder-to-reach hydrocarbons from the earth's crust. Article content Doomsday predictors continue to be fooled by humanity's ability to improve technology and find new ways to consume. 'Peak Oil Production May Already Be Here,' read one 2011 headline in Science. One 2005 paper sponsored by the U.S. government laid out a number of other failures following Hubbert: an Iranian oil executive thought 2006, a California Institute of Technology vice-provost thought 2010 or earlier, various oil company geologists predicted somewhere between pre-2009 and 2020.
