“A wind power farm in the mountains of far-Northern California was the first through the door of a new permit streamlining program that came with a lofty promise to renewable energy developers: Once a permit application was complete, the California Energy Commission would make a final ruling on the project within 270 days.
It’s been more than 650 days since Fountain Wind completed its application. But the agency still hasn’t made a final ruling, after fierce local opposition successfully derailed the permit review.”
“it’s not the policy that’s holding nuclear back: It’s the industry. All the incentives and permitting reforms the government can muster won’t change the basic economics that have led to just three new nuclear plants getting built in the U.S. this century: It takes too long, is too expensive and is only getting pricier.”
…
” The nuclear industry has as much going for it right now as it’s ever had. U.S. electricity demand is growing for the first time in 20 years as data centers and artificial intelligence companies proliferate.”
…
“The average cost of large-scale solar has fallen 84 percent since 2009, to $58 per megawatt-hour, while nuclear power has risen 47 percent, to $180”
…
“the problem isn’t limited to the U.S. The U.K., France and Finland have all seen major cost and timeline overruns with their most recent plants. China, which is building more nuclear than anyone, has gotten its timelines down the farthest but is still around 7 years,”
“Stable power is retiring faster than its replacements can show up—stuck in queues, lawsuits, or supply chain hell. We’ve spent a decade subsidizing volatility, penalizing reliability, and crossing our fingers that storage will arrive on time. Meanwhile, the slow, steady, heavy machines that actually hold the grid together are being dismantled.”
“La Porte, Indiana, is a small city between South Bend, Indiana, and Chicago, Illinois. The recent announcement that Microsoft is investing over a billion dollars into a vast new data center campus in La Porte is expected to be transformational for the town of 22,000 people.
Microsoft was given a 40-year tax abatement on equipment, a renewable state sales tax exemption through 2068, and just $2.5 million of payments in lieu of taxes (PILOT) over four years—roughly 30 percent of what it would normally owe. After that? Nothing. Local utilities would cover the infrastructure.”
…
“there’s infrastructure. Data centers demand massive utility upgrades: power lines, substations, water lines, fiber, and roads. These are usually paid for by local utilities, state infrastructure grants, or ratepayers. In Kansas City, Evergy announced it would build two new power plants largely to meet data center demand—costs to be passed on to customers. In Northern Virginia, Dominion Energy’s data center grid upgrades are now a line item in statewide electric rate hikes.”
…
“these deals are struck behind closed doors, insulated from scrutiny, and built on the assumption that any growth is good—even if it’s paid for by reaching into your neighbor’s wallet.”
…
“Analysts project that data center capacity will more than triple by 2030 and estimate the U.S. will need to reach 35 gigawatts of capacity by then—double today’s total. The surge is largely driven by artificial intelligence (AI), which alone could account for 70 percent of all data center demand by 2030. These facilities already draw more electricity than some nations, and Goldman Sachs projects they’ll consume up to 9 percent of U.S. power by decade’s end. New builds are booming—yet much of that construction is being underwritten, piece by piece, by state and local governments chasing the illusion of growth.
Data centers are not a menace. Left to the market, they’re a genuine asset—critical infrastructure in a country trying to stay competitive in the age of AI. We don’t need to bribe the richest companies on earth to build them.”
“Coal’s decline was not caused by a federal plot to transition away from coal, like Trump thinks, but rather by markets and innovation. Advancements in renewable energy technologies—which were, and continue to be, supported by subsidies—made the energy source more attractive to investors. Breakthroughs in horizontal drilling in the early 2000s brought a flood of cheap and abundant natural gas to the market. These technologies priced coal out, which lowered energy bills for consumers and significantly reduced greenhouse gas emissions in the United States.
The energy source is also not as cost-effective as the executive order claims. Coal plants are expensive to build and operate, and transportation costs can exceed the price of coal at the mine. These economic factors have informed investors and utilities not to build coal-fired power plants—the most recent large plant was built in 2013—which has made the current fleet of these power plants less efficient than other energy sources.
To be sure, some regulatory barriers, including federal air quality standards and state-level bans, have made coal less competitive. However, “it is the market that explains coal’s decline better than regulations,” Philip Rossetti, an energy policy analyst at the R Street Institute, tells Reason.”