Solar has taken off in red states. Trump's funding freeze is causing panic

Mike Mullett strains to see through sheets of misty rain while driving through working-class neighborhoods of Columbus, a quaint town in southern Indiana.
He's trying to find the senior center, multi-family homes and rent-assisted properties – more than 530 in total – that he and many other locals hope will receive $4.42m in federal funding for solar electricity projects.
But now that money is at risk.
On 20 January, Donald Trump paused billions of dollars of federal grant funding for clean energy and other projects around the country initiated by the Biden administration's Green New Deal.
'We've been slavishly working on a plan since April 2023 that would provide solar energy to hundreds of households in two low- and moderate-income Columbus neighborhoods,' says Mullett. The project was expected to be rolled out in April, with previously approved funding thought to have been made available by 14 February.
'Unless the Trump administration makes a 180-degree turn on funding, that expectation will obviously not be met.'
Related: Record-breaking growth in renewable energy in US threatened by Trump
The funding is part of the US Environmental Protection Agency's $7bn Solar for All program, which is meant to help low-income families save money on electricity costs. About $117m was set for solar projects and initiatives in Indiana.
Communities across Indiana, a solidly Republican midwestern state, were set to benefit more than most from the Biden administration's ambitious clean energy push in what was an ultimately failed effort to win votes in Rust belt states whose voters have abandoned Democratic party politicians in recent decades.
By August 2024, $7.8bn in private investment for a host of clean energy projects including solar and battery production had come to Indiana, spurred in part by the promise of federal grants and local tax-abatement schemes.
But Trump has followed through on his election campaign promise to roll back clean energy initiatives, referring to Biden's efforts as the 'Green New Scam'.
Leading Republicans have backed his move, despite the potential economic risks to states where the president is popular.
'The executive branch of government in our system has the right to evaluate how executive branch agencies are operating,' the Republican House speaker, Mike Johnson, said on 5 February.
On 10 February, a federal judge issued an order for the Trump administration to unfreeze its funding hold.
Indiana isn't alone in its drive for solar energy.
Solar projects ranging from utility scale to single housing efforts have proved hugely popular in red states. Texas has the second-highest number of installed solar power units, after California, enough to power more than 4.5m homes. Florida follows close behind.
A quarter of a trillion dollars – 80% of the total funding for green energy manufacturing and other initiatives – was to go to projects in Republican-leaning congressional districts across the US.
At 3.4% of its total, Indiana, where Trump won by almost 19 points in November's presidential election, produces more state electricity from solar than Democrat-leaning states such as Illinois, Washington and New Hampshire, according to one industry organization.
'The $130m in total Solar for All funding awarded for Indiana would transform Indiana's solar market by allowing more than 10,000 families in low-income communities around the state to directly benefit from the electric bill savings and resilience afforded by local solar,' says Zach Schalk, the Indiana program director at Solar United Neighbors Action, a non-profit that has helped invest $7.1m in solar initiatives in the state.
'It's really a non-partisan issue if you look at the survey polling across the US. We've had elected officials of both parties [in Indiana] sign letters of support. We know that this is a popular program.'
But some question the importance of federal dollars in fueling solar's growth at the utility scale, and more broadly its ability to meet the enormous demand for electricity.
'I've had a number of the solar [utility] companies in and in many instances they are saying that [the tax rebates and other federal funding] are nice, but the industry has matured quite a bit [to the extent] that they still have enough [profit] margin without it,' says Indiana Republican representative Ed Soliday, who has backed laws supporting solar initiatives in the state.
'What's shaking out is that commercial solar is advancing far more than the rooftop equivalent. You can't run a manufacturing plant on rooftop solar panels.'
Emails sent to the Indiana Republican party and a state senator representing Columbus asking if party members believed the funding pause could risk solar electricity projects and disrupt business developments were not responded to.
In Columbus, Trump's move has been demoralizing for Mullett and others who have made a huge effort to secure funding that would see solar electricity infrastructure installed at 320 community households, 204 multi-family households and seven single-family project households.
'Most of us are retirees and volunteers,' he says. 'I would say [we've spent] 20 hours a week at a minimum; sometimes there were weeks when we were doing 40 to 60 hours a week.'
He says that if the federal funding is lost, private funding that has been committed to help pay for the project would be gone too.
'If the pending litigation in federal district courts must run its course all the way to the US supreme court, the delay in the rollout of the [funding] would certainly be measured in months, perhaps extending even into 2026,' he says.
According to one study, Indiana residents have seen the seventh-highest electricity rate increase in the country. Nearly 83% of its electricity generation is sourced by natural gas or coal plants.
Still, the time and effort Mullet and other community members have invested in the project means they aren't about to give up. He says the work will continue even as the funding remains in flux.
'Doing this in a way that low-income households can become involved, it's literally a 50-year-old dream of mine,' he says.

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Learn with AIFact CheckingText to SpeechAI Summary

Related Articles

Politico

42 minutes ago

• Politico

Israel presses ahead with strikes as Trump's 2-week deadline looms

Israeli officials insisted Friday that they will keep up their bombing campaign against Iran, even as President Donald Trump has given Tehran a two-week deadline to come to some sort of diplomatic deal that reins in its nuclear program. Israel's ambassador to the United Nations, Danny Danon, laid out his country's case at the U.N. Security Council, facing off Friday with Iranian representatives who urged the world to stop the Israeli strikes. 'Israel will not stop. Not until Iran's nuclear threat is dismantled, not until its war machine is disarmed, not until our people and yours are safe,' Danon declared. The Israeli assertions highlight how Trump's statement that he'll decide 'in the next two weeks' whether to strike Iranian nuclear sites provides an opportunity to Israel as much as it puts pressure on Iran. For Iran, it's two weeks to come to some sort of diplomatic deal with the U.S. that constrains its nuclear, and possibly other, programs. For Israel, it's a focused timeframe to do as much damage as it can to Iran's nuclear and broader military infrastructure before the U.S. may pressure it to accept a diplomatic solution. The more damage Israel does, the more it could weaken an enemy and improve the odds that Iran will capitulate to U.S. demands in the diplomatic process. The strikes themselves couldthreaten the survival of Iran's Islamist regime. Trump told reporters on Friday that he wasn't about to push Israel to halt its assault in Iran while he weighs what the U.S. should do. 'It's very hard to make that request right now,' Trump said. 'If somebody is winning, it's a little bit harder to do than if somebody is losing, but we're ready, willing and able, and we've been speaking to Iran, and we'll see what happens.' A senior administration official, granted anonymity to speak about the president's thinking, said 'everything is still on the table.' 'This is about giving this a little time and seeing if things look any different in a couple weeks,' the official said. Trump's 'two-week' window was delivered Thursday by press secretary Karoline Leavitt, who said, quoting Trump, that his delay in determining whether to join Israel's attack on Iran was 'based on the fact that there's a substantial chance of negotiations that may or may not take place with Iran in the near future.' Trump often says he'll make decisions in two weeks, only to extend his deadline again or never follow through. Still, Israel and Iran appear to believe the next two weeks will be a crucial phase. Iranian officials showed up for nuclear talks with European officials on Friday in Geneva; Israel pressed ahead with its bombing campaign against Iran, which is responding with missiles. Iranian officials met Friday with European envoys in Geneva in an attempt to revitalize the diplomatic process. The talks ended on an ambiguous note. Iranian officials have said their participation in future talks would hinge on Israel stopping its attacks. Some European representatives said talks should continue regardless, even as they urged both sides to avoid escalation. 'We invited the Iranian minister to consider negotiations with all sides, including the United States, without awaiting the cessation of strikes, which we also hope for,' French foreign minister Jean-Noel Barrot said. For Israel, the most critical, but perhaps toughest, official objective is eliminating Iran's nuclear facility at Fordo. That facility is buried deep underground, and Israel has been hoping Trump will enter the fight and use special, massive U.S. bombs to destroy it. There are concerns, however, including among Republicans, that Iran could retaliate against U.S. assets if America enters the conflict on any level, dragging America into another Middle Eastern war. Trump campaigned on avoiding such wars. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has hinted that Israel has means to destroy Fordo on its own. It's not clear what those methods could involve, but Israel has significant intelligence operations inside Iran and it has often surprised even Washington with its capabilities. Either way, current and former Israeli officials said they saw no reason for Israel to back off its strikes now, despite calls for deescalation from some world capitals. The more Israel degrades Iran's capabilities, the less able Tehran will be to mount retaliatory attacks on Israel or the United States, should the latter choose to enter the war. From the beginning, 'the Israeli planning was based on the assumption that we have to do it alone,' said a former Israeli diplomat familiar with the situation. The person, like others, was granted anonymity to discuss highly sensitive issues. It's unclear whether there is any deal with Iran that Israel would deem strong enough. There is tremendous distrust of Iran's Islamist regime within Israel's security establishment, leading to a sense that Iran would cheat on any deal. Another unsettled question is whether a deal with Iran will cover only its nuclear program or also curb its ballistic missile initiative and support for proxy militias in the region. Some analysts have argued that Netanyahu decided to begin attacking Iran last week because he was worried earlier nuclear talks between Iran and the Trump administration would yield too weak a deal. If new efforts at diplomacy yield fruit, Trump could pressure Netanyahu to accept whatever deal emerges, potentially even by threatening to withhold weapons and other equipment Israel needs to defend itself against Iran. The war is costly for Israel, which has been fighting on multiple fronts — in particular against Hamas militants in the Gaza Strip — since October 2023. As one Israeli official said, Iranian missile attacks feel like 'Russian roulette' to Israeli citizens.

Associated Press

42 minutes ago

• Associated Press

Trump says Gabbard was 'wrong' about Iran and Israeli strikes could be 'very hard to stop'

WASHINGTON (AP) — President Donald Trump said Friday that his director of national intelligence, Tulsi Gabbard, was 'wrong' when she previously said that the U.S. believed Iran wasn't building a nuclear weapon, and he suggested that it would be 'very hard to stop' Israel's strikes on Iran in order to negotiate a possible ceasefire. Trump has recently taken a more aggressive public stance toward Tehran as he's sought more time to weigh whether to attack Iran by striking its well-defended Fordo uranium enrichment facility. Buried under a mountain, the facility is believed to be out of the reach of all but America's 'bunker-buster' bombs. After landing in New Jersey for an evening fundraiser for his super political action committee, Trump was asked about Gabbard's comments to Congress in March that U.S. spy agencies believed that Iran wasn't working on nuclear warheads. The president responded, 'Well then, my intelligence community is wrong. Who in the intelligence community said that?' Informed that it had been Gabbard, Trump said, 'She's wrong.' In a subsequent post on X, Gabbard said her testimony was taken out of context 'as a way to manufacture division.' 'America has intelligence that Iran is at the point that it can produce a nuclear weapon within weeks to months, if they decide to finalize the assembly,' she wrote. 'President Trump has been clear that can't happen, and I agree.' Still, disavowing Gabbard's previous assessment came a day after the White House said Trump would decide within two weeks whether the U.S. military would get directly involved in the conflict between Israel and Iran. It said seeking additional time was 'based on the fact that there's a substantial chance of negotiations that may or may not take place with Iran in the near future.' But on Friday, Trump himself seemed to cast doubts on the possibility of talks leading to a pause in fighting between Israel and Iran. He said that, while he might support a ceasefire, Israel's strikes on Iran could be 'very hard to stop.' Asked about Iran suggesting that, if the U.S. was serious about furthering negotiations, it could call on Israel to stop its strikes, Trump responded, 'I think it's very hard to make that request right now.' 'If somebody is winning, it's a little bit harder to do than if somebody is losing,' Trump said. 'But we're ready, willing and able, and we've been speaking to Iran, and we'll see what happens.' The president later added, 'It's very hard to stop when you look at it.' 'Israel's doing well in terms of war. And, I think, you would say that Iran is doing less well. It's a little bit hard to get somebody to stop,' Trump said. Trump campaigned on decrying 'endless wars' and has vowed to be an international peacemaker. That's led some, even among conservatives, to point to Trump's past criticism of the U.S. invasion of Iraq beginning in 2003 as being at odds with his more aggressive stance toward Iran now. Trump suggested the two situations were very different, though. 'There were no weapons of mass destruction. I never thought there were. And that was somewhat pre-nuclear. You know, it was, it was a nuclear age, but nothing like it is today,' Trump said of his past criticism of the administration of President George W. Bush. He added of Iran's current nuclear program, 'It looked like I'm right about the material that they've gathered already. It's a tremendous amount of material.' Trump also cast doubts on Iran's developing nuclear capabilities for civilian pursuits, like power generation. 'You're sitting on one of the largest oil piles anywhere in the world,' he said. 'It's a little bit hard to see why you'd need that.' ____

The Hill

42 minutes ago

• The Hill

Trump: ‘Maybe I'll have to change my mind' about firing Powell

President Trump on Friday floated the possibility of firing Federal Reserve Chairman Jerome Powell as part of his latest round of intense criticism of the leader of the central bank over its decision not to lower interest rates. Trump, in a lengthy post on Truth Social, railed against Powell, labeling him a 'numbskull,' 'a dumb guy,' 'and an obvious Trump Hater.' Trump appointed Powell to the post in 2017. 'I fully understand that my strong criticism of him makes it more difficult for him to do what he should be doing, lowering Rates, but I've tried it all different ways,' Trump posted. 'I've been nice, I've been neutral, and I've been nasty, and nice and neutral didn't work!' The post included a graphic showing how the United States' central bank rate compared to other nations. 'I don't know why the Board doesn't override this Total and Complete Moron!' Trump added 'Maybe, just maybe, I'll have to change my mind about firing him? But regardless, his Term ends shortly!' Powell's term ends in 2026. He said last November he would not step down if Trump asked, and that it is 'not permitted under the law' for the president to fire or demote him or any of the other Fed governors with leadership positions. Trump in April said he had no intention of firing Powell, though he has in recent days ratcheted up his criticism amid frustration over the Fed's handling of interest rates. Fed officials kicked off the year expecting to continue cutting interest rates as inflation drifted back toward its ideal annual level of 2 percent. But the bank has held off through the first half of 2025 amid the uncertainty driven by Trump's tariff plans. Powell reiterated his call for patience Wednesday, after the Fed kept rates steady once again.