Blue states hope clean energy plans withstand collision with Trump
A solar array. (Robert Zullo/ States Newsroom)
For states that are pursuing plans to build more wind and solar projects, the federal government has suddenly shifted from a powerful ally to a formidable opponent.
State leaders are still scrambling to make sense of President Donald Trump's flurry of executive orders, funding freezes, agency directives and verbal threats about clean energy. It's as if the teammate who had passed them the ball is now trying to block their shot.
Trump has slammed the brakes on offshore wind development, which relies on access to federal waters. He's halted permitting for some renewable energy projects. He's frozen grants and loans supporting everything from rooftop solar panels to household weatherization assistance. And he's created uncertainty around the tax credits that are perhaps the most significant driver of clean energy development.
'Yeah, we're in trouble,' said New Jersey state Sen. Bob Smith, a Democrat who chairs his state's Senate Environment and Energy Committee. 'We're about to get whipsawed pretty badly. Are [New Jersey's] electrical upgrades at risk because of Trump? Absolutely.'
Trump has long opposed wind power development and has repeatedly called climate change a 'hoax.' He's spread falsehoods that wind farms cause cancer and are more expensive than other forms of power. He's focused heavily on promoting fossil fuel production. His orders have been a sharp reversal of priorities from former President Joe Biden, who made clean energy investments a signature issue.
'We're not going to do the wind thing,' Trump said during a rally for supporters shortly after he was sworn in on Jan. 20.
Officials who want to lower greenhouse gas emissions argue that many of Trump's actions are unlawful. They expect courts to overrule his attempts to hold back funding approved by Congress under Biden. But they fear the greater threat is that the federal volatility will push clean energy developers and financiers to stop backing projects.
'These actions are sowing a lot of chaos,' said Patrick Drupp, director of climate policy with the Sierra Club, a national environmental advocacy group. 'The longer that goes on, the more likely projects go away. If developers start pulling back from large projects, those are big parts of meeting [clean energy] goals for a lot of these states.'
Leaders in blue states say they're committed to overcoming Trump's opposition. They're confident that simple market dynamics will make it hard to hold back development. The country's energy needs are growing quickly, and wind and solar are among the cheapest sources of electricity. Pennsylvania Gov. Josh Shapiro last month announced his 'lightning plan' to reduce carbon emissions and promote innovation in nuclear and renewable energy. Meanwhile, more than a dozen U.S. House Republicans have called to preserve the clean energy tax credits, citing the jobs and revenue created in their districts.
'Are we confused by what we're hearing out of D.C.? Yes,' said Minnesota state Sen. Nick Frentz, a Democrat who chairs the Senate Energy, Utilities, Environment, and Climate Committee and authored the state's clean electricity law. 'But I'm fairly confident that affordability and reliability will continue to drive clean energy into Minnesota's energy mix.'
The most clear-cut energy casualty of Trump's second term is the development of offshore wind. Many Atlantic states have been counting on offshore turbines to provide much of their electricity, an effort that had strong federal support when Biden was in the White House. But now those federal waters have a new landlord.
Trump's executive order put an immediate halt to offshore wind leases, which are overseen by the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management. The order also threatens to undo existing leases, encouraging reviews of projects that face litigation.
'The Trump Administration is unlikely to vigorously defend offshore wind project permits issued by the Biden Administration,' Timothy Fox, managing director at ClearView Energy Partners LLC, an independent research firm, wrote in an email. '[The order] could encourage offshore wind foes to file additional legal challenges.'
A handful of previously approved projects are still moving forward, including a Virginia wind farm that's under construction. But the many more pending projects face dim prospects under Trump. Already, New Jersey — which has anchored its climate plans on offshore wind — is pulling back state financial support for projects.
Federal hostility could delay offshore wind projects, derailing state climate goals
'It's a HUGE roadblock, and put huge in capital letters,' Smith, the New Jersey lawmaker, said in an interview. 'It's a real, real problem for the immediate future and maybe even the long-term future.'
Smith said state leaders may have to look at other options to bolster their energy plans, such as small modular nuclear reactors. But he said that technology is 10 to 15 years away.
Officials who support clean energy say states can still work to improve their ports and transmission infrastructure, to give the offshore industry a strong platform to relaunch under a future administration. But policymakers and developers may now be unwilling to invest in a sector that can be upended after any election.
'It doesn't look great,' said Alissa Weinman, ocean program manager with the National Caucus of Environmental Legislators, a collaborative nonpartisan forum for state lawmakers. 'We've seen big developers pivot towards projects in other countries. That volatility is a real concern, especially because offshore wind [in the U.S.] is still in its nascent stages.'
Trump's order also targeted onshore wind, putting a similar halt to turbine leases on federal lands. While the vast majority of onshore wind development is on private lands, even those projects may face threats from the administration. In response to another Trump order focused on fossil fuel development, for example, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers froze pending permits last week for 168 renewable energy projects on private lands.
The agency says it has since lifted the pause, but not for wind power projects, The New York Times reported.
Climate advocates note that many wind projects require permits from the Federal Aviation Administration, another potential avenue for Trump to block development.
'If it becomes the policy to just deny all of those permits, that would be a problem for the entire industry, regardless of the type of land it's on,' said Ava Gallo, climate and energy program manager with the environmental lawmakers group. 'That's a worst-case but very possible scenario. If wind takes that big of a hit, it throws [states' clean energy targets] into jeopardy.'
Clean energy advocates note the bipartisan support for wind energy and red states' reliance on it.
'Wind energy is incredibly popular and a bipartisan thing that's brought huge amounts of money to a lot of red states,' said Drupp, with the Sierra Club.
Texas, Iowa, Oklahoma and Kansas lead the nation in wind power generation. Texas Republican Gov. Greg Abbott has boasted about his state's nation-leading wind production, while also claiming Texas needs to invest heavily in 'reliable' gas-fired plants to stabilize the grid.
State leaders say it's still unclear whether Trump's aim is to uphold a blanket federal ban on permits for wind and solar projects. Such a move, they say, would be a clear overstep of his authority.
'We're going to challenge every illegal and out-of-order action by this administration and continue to work towards our goals,' said New York state Sen. Kevin Parker, a Democrat who chairs the Senate Committee on Energy and Telecommunications. 'We're trying to identify the things we can do despite federal interference, or things that we can do on our own.'
Trump has also moved to freeze funding from the Inflation Reduction Act, the climate law passed under Biden that created major grants, loans and tax credits for clean energy.
The investments have been a significant catalyst for renewable development, and a large portion of the wind and solar projects in the works are supported by its programs. Industry leaders say the law is expected to produce 550 gigawatts of wind, solar and battery storage by 2030 — more than doubling the nation's current clean energy supply.
Red and blue states have big climate plans. The election could upend them.
Climate advocates say Trump's moves overstep his authority and that only Congress can revoke funding it has previously approved. They note that the federal government has already issued contracts for many of the grants blocked by Trump.
Judges have issued orders halting Trump's attempt to pause federal spending; a federal judge ruled this week that agencies have violated his previous order by failing to restore access to the funds.
'They [Trump officials] are creating a lot of confusion, likely on purpose,' said Rachel Jacobson, lead researcher of state climate policy at the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, a liberal think tank.
So far, Trump has not yet explicitly targeted the law's clean energy tax credits for developers and consumers, which have proven popular in both red and blue states. Analysts say those credits have been a key driver in making renewable projects attractive for financiers and developers.
However, climate advocates say Trump could revise regulations from the Internal Revenue Service to limit access to the credits, or slash agency staff to delay credit approvals. Some fear he could work with Republican allies in Congress to repeal the tax credits altogether.
'Even the threat of tax credit repeal will cool the market and make it harder for project financing,' Jacobson said.
State leaders say they're still working to understand the extent of Trump's orders and how their plans will be affected. But they point to the investments they've made at the state level and the rapid growth of renewables as an affordable electricity source.
'[Federal funding] would have been immensely helpful, but our program was always built to stand alone,' said Parker, the New York lawmaker. 'Whatever roadblocks the federal government tries to put in our way, we'll try to legally deconstruct them, drive around them or drive on roads that don't have roadblocks.'
Stateline is part of States Newsroom, a nonprofit news network supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity. Stateline maintains editorial independence. Contact Editor Scott S. Greenberger for questions: info@stateline.org.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Miami Herald
31 minutes ago
- Miami Herald
Florida Democrats look to stop the bleeding during annual political conference
A question loomed over Democratic party leaders and volunteers on Saturday as they pumped hip hop through the speakers at the Seminole Hard Rock Hotel and Casino Hollywood: can Florida Democrats find a way to win next election season? Democrats in Florida have faced stinging losses on the ballot, especially over the past six years. Some point to fundraising issues as the cause. Others point to shrinking voter registration numbers. At Leadership Blue, an annual Democratic conference, several elected officials and party leaders agreed on one thing: they have a messaging problem, and President Donald Trump might help them solve it. Democrats mentioned immigration, tariffs and potential cuts to healthcare as issues that have caused division in Florida districts that voted Republican. Deportations in South Florida were central to the discussion, with issues like revoking Temporary Protected Status, instating travel bans and targeting immigrants who have not committed crimes roiling Hispanic communities. 'I think what's happening from the federal government being compounded by the state government, in terms of immigration, gives us an opening,' said Samuel Vilchez Santiago, chairman of the Orange County Democrats. Last year, Trump and Florida Republicans put a message out that they were for the working class, said Santiago, who is Venezuelan-American. He said Hispanic communities in Florida, many of which helped the Republican Party win competitive districts in Miami-Dade County, believed Trump would deliver on promises to lower the cost of living. But Democrats say Trump has failed to deliver, and they plan to take advantage of it. Those unfulfilled promises, combined with growing negative sentiment toward immigration enforcement, may give them an edge during next year's midterms, Santiago said. Kentucky Gov. Andy Beshear, who paid a visit to Leadership Blue, felt the same. Beshear, a Democratic governor in a red state, thinks Florida Democrats have a way to portray themselves as people that can bring change. 'What you'll start seeing is people who don't just feel regret, but they feel betrayal,' Beshear said, speaking about Trump's campaign promises. 'Because someone who told them they were focused on them is now telling them their kids have too many toys.' As a whole, though, some admit they could have done better with reaching out this past election cycle. Millie Herrera, a longtime Democrat and part of the party's budget and finance committee, thinks the party could improve in reaching out to every Hispanic community in Florida. Herrera, who is Cuban-American, thinks it's time to organize locally and year-round, rather than just during election season. In her Hialeah community where she runs a small business, she said she often hears Hispanic people say that Trump had promised to only deport criminals. The Democrats knew that wasn't true, she said, but failed to communicate that. This time, she is confident they will do better. 'We have always been for working people,' Herrera said. 'We have always been for immigrant communities. Maybe what we need to concentrate in our message is reminding them who has been there for us.' Present at Leadership Blue and handing out blue jolly ranchers to attendees, David Jolly, the former Republican congressman who announced his run for governor of Florida as a Democrat on June 5, said Florida is ready for a change and ready to build a coalition that leads with democratic values. While previously acknowledging Democrats have failed voters in the past, Jolly is hopeful Florida is ready for a change: A Democrat governor. 'This is a Democratic party that is united, and united to win,' Jolly said. Recent ups and downs Wins have been hard to come by for Florida Democrats. In April, Democrats witnessed defeats in two special elections for Florida congressional seats despite creating a stir by outraising Republican candidates. But even in defeat, Democrats celebrated because they outdid their previous numbers in both districts, viewed as deep-red and won in November by Trump by over 30 points. Josh Weil and Gay Valimont, running to representdistricts on the eastern coast of Florida and Pensacola, respectively, narrowed the gap to under 20 points each in their races. At the time, Republican Party of Florida Chairman Evan Power likened the Democrats' campaigns to 'setting millions of dollars on fire.' But Democrats see it differently. Because they overperformed, Santiago said, it's a sign that grassroots fundraising is the right path for the party. Weil raised around $15 million, with the majority of it coming from donations that were $200 or less. Weil, who launched his campaign for the U.S. Senate last week, said the last couple of years have been tough. As a public school teacher and single father navigating the rising costs of living, he said Floridians are unsatisfied. 'People are really disappointed in what they have right now, particularly in our red districts here in Florida,' Weil said. But becoming competitive again in Florida will be a challenge. Florida Democrats have increasingly lost ground in a state that was once considered purple. Over the past six years, Republicans have won by wider and wider margins in elections for both state and national office. The 2018 midterms were the last to deliver something resembling success for the Florida Democrats. They gained two Congressional seats, seven Florida Legislature seats and one statewide seat — with current party Chairwoman Nikki Fried winning the race for commissioner of agriculture. Since then, Republicans have surged in the state, securing super-majorities in the Florida Legislature, expanding GOP dominance in the Florida congressional delegation and ending the days when Florida was known as the nation's largest swing state. Trump and Gov. Ron DeSantis — who likes to compare the Florida Democratic Party to roadkill — both won their most recent races in the state by double digits. In November, Miami-Dade County voted Republican for the first time in a presidential election since 1988. Alongside Miami-Dade, other left-leaning metro areas in the state swung red as well: Hillsborough County, Pinellas County, Duval County and Osceola County. Pouring salt on the wound, state Sen. Jason Pizzo, who served as the Senate Democratic leader in the Florida Legislature, told his colleagues earlier this year that he was changing his party affiliation, saying the Democratic Party is 'dead' in Florida. Pizzo now says he'll run for governor as an independent candidate. Still, Fried — who said Pizzo's resignation as party leader was 'one of the best things to happen to the party in years' — said Democrats in Florida are united and the party's message is succinct. She said she wants people to know that the Democrats are not giving up on them. Despite disdain or criticism from former members of the party, Fried said the party embraces a culture of respect where everyone is welcome, feels seen, is listened to and has a say. 'We talk with one voice, and we really have created a coalition in our state that people feel like you don't have to always agree with everybody inside the party,' Fried said. 'That's what the benefit of being a Democrat is — we are a big tent, which means there's going to be different sides of the spectrum.'
Newsweek
39 minutes ago
- Newsweek
Map Shows Where US Strikes Hit in Iran
Based on facts, either observed and verified firsthand by the reporter, or reported and verified from knowledgeable sources. Newsweek AI is in beta. Translations may contain inaccuracies—please refer to the original content. A map shows where the U.S. struck three of Iran's main nuclear sites on Saturday, bringing the U.S. directly into the conflict between Iran and Israel after speculation over whether America's self-styled role as peacemaker-in-chief would embroil Washington in Israel's large-scale attacks. Trump said on Saturday evening that the U.S. had carried out "massive precision strikes" to take out Tehran's nuclear enrichment facilities and its ability to make a nuclear weapon. The strikes were a "spectacular military success," Trump said. "Iran's key nuclear enrichment facilities have been completely and totally obliterated." The U.S. struck Fordow, Natanz and Isfahan, Trump said. Israel launched attacks on Iran's nuclear facilities and scientists—as well as the country's ballistic missile sites and other military assets—late on June 12 U.S. ET. Among those targets were Natanz, Iran's most significant nuclear enrichment site, and Isfahan, to the southwest of Natanz. North to south: a Newsweek map shows Iran's key nuclear facilities of Fordow, Natanz, and Isfahan. North to south: a Newsweek map shows Iran's key nuclear facilities of Fordow, Natanz, and Isfahan. Newsweek But Israel could not effectively target Iran's nuclear program at Fordow, which Iran built under a mountain south of Tehran. Only the U.S.'s B-2 heavy stealth bombers and massive munitions work for that type of attack, experts said. An unnamed U.S. official told Reuters that B-2s were involved in the strikes on Saturday after the news agency reported that the U.S. had moved heavy bombers to the Pacific island of Guam. The U.S. hit Natanz and Isfahan with Tomahawk submarine-launched cruise missiles, two senior Pentagon officials told CBS News. Iran says its nuclear program is peaceful, but senior officials have publicly debated developing a nuclear weapon. The United Nations' nuclear watchdog, the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), said just ahead of the start of Israel's strike campaign that Tehran was not cooperating with its nuclear obligations for the first time in 20 years. Iran said it would get a new enrichment site in a "secure location" up and running. Israel and the U.S., as well as other countries allied with Washington, have insisted it is not acceptable for Iran to gain a nuclear weapon. What Has Iran Said? Iran's supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, had threatened the U.S. with "irreparable damage" if Washington became involved in strikes on the country. Iran's foreign minister, Abbas Araghchi, said in the hours before the U.S. strikes that Washington's involvement would be "very, very dangerous." "The events this morning are outrageous and will have everlasting consequences," the minister said in later remarks posted to social media on Sunday. Trump, in his own post to the Truth Social platform, said any Iranian retaliation against the U.S. would bring fresh American attacks "GREATER THAN WHAT WAS WITNESSED TONIGHT." Fordow, the Site Israel Couldn't Reach "A full payload of BOMBS was dropped on the primary site, Fordow," Trump said in a post to Truth Social late U.S. time on Saturday. Experts said it would likely take several of American GBU-57/B bombs—weighing in at a massive 30,000 pounds—to take out more than just the entrance to Fordow. Manan Raeisi, an Iranian lawmaker in the city of Qom, close to the site, told the country's semi-official Tasnim news agency that "critical infrastructure remains intact" at Fordow. Satellite imagery captured by Maxar on July 30, 2025, and provided by Google Earth shows the entrance to Iran's Fordow underground nuclear facilities. Satellite imagery captured by Maxar on July 30, 2025, and provided by Google Earth shows the entrance to Iran's Fordow underground nuclear facilities. Maxar/Google Earth "What was hit was mostly on the ground and fully restorable," Raeisi said. "Trump's bluff about destroying Fordow is laughable." Israel's president, Isaac Herzog, told the BBC on Sunday that Iran's nuclear program "has been hit substantially." The IAEA said on Sunday it had not detected any increase in off-site radiation after the strikes on the three sites. Iranian state media reported key nuclear sites had been evacuated ahead of U.S. attacks, with enriched uranium moved "to a safe location." Satellite imagery captured by Maxar, a space technology firm, on Thursday and Friday showed "unusual" vehicle activity at the entrance to the underground facility at Fordow.
New York Times
an hour ago
- New York Times
Live Updates: Trump Claims Success After U.S. Bombs Key Iran Nuclear Sites
Top Republicans in Congress swiftly rallied behind President Trump on Saturday after he ordered strikes on three Iranian nuclear sites, even as senior Democrats and some G.O.P. lawmakers condemned it as an unconstitutional move that could drag the United States into a broader war in the Middle East. In separate statements, the leading Republicans in Congress, Speaker Mike Johnson and Senator John Thune of South Dakota, the majority leader, commended the military operation, calling it a necessary check on Iran's ambitions of developing a nuclear weapon. Both men had been briefed on the military action before the strike was carried out, according to three people familiar with the matter who were not authorized to discuss it publicly. Mr. Johnson and Mr. Thune both argued that the airstrikes were necessary after Iran had rejected diplomatic overtures to curb its nuclear program. 'The regime in Iran, which has committed itself to bringing 'death to America' and wiping Israel off the map, has rejected all diplomatic pathways to peace,' Mr. Thune said. Image Senator John Thune, Republican of South Dakota, said that Iran rejected pathways to peace. Credit... Tierney L. Cross/The New York Times Mr. Johnson argued that the military action was consistent with Mr. Trump's muscular foreign policy. 'President Trump has been consistent and clear that a nuclear-armed Iran will not be tolerated,' he said. 'That posture has now been enforced with strength, precision and clarity.' But top Democrats, who were given only perfunctory notice of the strikes before they occurred, harshly criticized the move. 'President Trump misled the country about his intentions, failed to seek congressional authorization for the use of military force and risks American entanglement in a potentially disastrous war in the Middle East,' Representative Hakeem Jeffries, Democrat of New York and the minority leader, said in a statement. He said the president 'shoulders complete and total responsibility for any adverse consequences that flow from his unilateral military action.' Senator Chuck Schumer, Democrat of New York and the minority leader, demanded 'clear answers' from Mr. Trump on the operation and called for an immediate vote on legislation that would require explicit authorization from Congress for the use of military force. 'The danger of wider, longer, and more devastating war has now dramatically increased,' he said. Representative Jim Himes, the ranking Democrat on the Intelligence Committee, condemned the operation as unconstitutional and warned that it could drag the United States into a larger conflict. 'Donald Trump's decision to launch direct military action against Iran without congressional approval is a clear violation of the Constitution, which grants the power to declare war explicitly to Congress,' he said in a statement. 'It is impossible to know at this stage whether this operation accomplished its objectives. We also don't know if this will lead to further escalation in the region and attacks against our forces, events that could easily pull us even deeper into a war in the Middle East.' While Senator Tom Cotton, Republican of Arkansas and the chairman of the Intelligence Committee, called Mr. Trump's move 'the right call,' the top Democrat on the panel, Senator Mark Warner of Virginia, said he had taken steps that could drag the United States into a war 'without consulting Congress, without a clear strategy, without regard to the consistent conclusions of the intelligence community, and without explaining to the American people what's at stake.' Leading national security Democrats on Capitol Hill were not informed of the strikes until after Mr. Trump had posted about them on social media, according to three people familiar with the matter who would discuss it only on the condition of anonymity. And one high-profile Democrat, Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, called the operation grounds for impeachment. 'He has impulsively risked launching a war that may ensnare us for generations. It is absolutely and clearly grounds for impeachment,' Ms. Ocasio-Cortez of New York said in a post on social media. Democrats widely condemned the surprise attack as unconstitutional. But Ms. Ocasio-Cortez was the first on Saturday to say it was grounds for Trump's removal, breaking with party leaders who have avoided talk of impeachment since the president returned to the White House, after two failed attempts to remove him during his first term. The Constitution gives Congress the authority to declare war, but in modern times, presidents of both parties have unilaterally carried out attacks on other countries without congressional authorization. It has been decades since Congress voted on whether to authorize military force, and efforts to claw back the legislative branch's war powers have repeatedly stalled. Most of the praise immediately following the operation in Iran came from Republicans, many of whom argued that the bombings would not lead to a ground deployment of American forces in the region. 'To those concerned about U.S. involvement — this isn't a 'forever war' in fact, it's ending one,' Senator Markwayne Mullin, Republican of Oklahoma, said on social media. Senator Roger Wicker, the Republican chairman of the Armed Services Committee, called Mr. Trump's decision to strike in Iran 'deliberate' and 'correct.' 'We now have very serious choices ahead to provide security for our citizens and our allies and stability for the Middle East,' Mr. Wicker said in a statement. Senator John Fetterman of Pennsylvania, whose unqualified support for Israel has put him at odds with other members of his party, was one of the few Democrats to offer an immediate statement of support. He wrote on social media that the military action 'was the correct move.' 'Iran is the world's leading sponsor of terrorism and cannot have nuclear capabilities,' Mr. Fetterman added. 'I'm grateful for and salute the finest military in the world.' Other lawmakers, many of them Democrats who had already expressed concerns that the Trump administration was considering sidestepping Congress's constitutional power to declare war, immediately criticized the strikes on the nuclear sites. Image Representative Thomas Massie, center, said the strikes were not constitutional. Credit... Eric Lee/The New York Times Mr. Trump, 'did not come to Congress to explain his reasons for bombing a sovereign nation and to seek authorization for these strikes,' Representative Diana DeGette, Democrat of Colorado, said in a statement. 'These reckless actions are going to put the lives of American service members and American citizens at risk.' Representative Thomas Massie, Republican of Kentucky, who earlier this week introduced a bipartisan resolution that would require congressional approval before U.S. troops could engage in offensive attacks against Iran, wrote on social media that the attack was 'not Constitutional.' Carl Hulse and Megan Mineiro contributed reporting.
