Getting climate, energy & environment news right.

Conservatives have been vocal about our climate for years. Those voices won’t be ignored any longer.

[searchandfilter id="17558"]

Scott Bessent, the Treasury secretary who is leading trade talks with China this week, said Wednesday in an interview on Fox News that the United States and China had agreed to extend a trade truce for two more months past a November deadline.

The truce was struck in South Korea last year after President Trump imposed steep tariffs on Chinese exports and the United States and China became embroiled in a tit-for-tat trade war. The truce has involved the United States’ suspending certain tariffs and other restrictions on the Chinese economy, and China’s agreeing to provide a steady flow of rare earth minerals needed by U.S. factories making cars, semiconductors, planes, power tools and other products.

Read more in the New York Times here.

US Energy Secretary Chris Wright on Wednesday said a US ban on ​diesel exports would not work and could push up gasoline and jet fuel prices, a stance at odds with President Donald Trump, who is backing the ‌idea.

Diesel prices have surged to record highs due to the US-Israeli war with Iran and the conflict in Ukraine, angering farmers and other users of the fuel ahead of the midterm elections in November that will decide control of Congress.

Read more in Reuters here.

Poland’s state-owned nuclear power company and a consortium led by Bechtel and Westinghouse have agreed on the main commercial terms of a deal to build that country’s first nuclear power plant.

The groups on September 23 said the engineering, procurement, and construction (EPC) contract, which still must be signed, stipulates that the power station will use three Westinghouse AP1000 Generation III+ pressurized water reactors, with a total 3,750 MW of generation capacity. Both Polskie Elektrownie Jądrowe (PEJ), a special purpose vehicle 100% owned by Poland’s state treasury, and the Bechtel-Westinghouse consortium said they are committed to finishing negotiations for the EPC deal by year-end. The companies noted that the agreement “brings together American reactor technology and an American engineering and construction team, working with Polish industry on one of Europe’s most important energy infrastructure projects.”

Read more in Power Magazine here.

Chinese President Xi Jinping arrives in Washington today for a three-day state visit. Export controls will be a central focus of his meeting with President Trump. Two moratoriums, one on U.S. controls on advanced semiconductors needed by Chinese tech firms and one on the reciprocal Chinese controls on rare earth minerals, are set to expire on November 10. A major question is whether, and for how long, those moratoriums will be extended. As the visit begins, it’s worth remembering that both nations have an interest in restarting open trade in these minerals.

The economy or the climate? Why not both?

Subscribe for ideas that support the environment and the people. 

Much of the concern over critical minerals has focused on China’s dominance in the mining, refining, and processing of many minerals crucial to the modern economy. The current narrative often paints this dominance as a conscious effort to control mineral chokepoints for geopolitical purposes. State support has certainly been an important contributor to the industry’s growth. But China’s position also reflects lower labor and environmental costs and is in large part the outcome of ordinary globalization and specialization. 

China’s recent decision to use that position as a bargaining chip in the U.S.-China trade dispute shows that its advantage comes with downsides. But it is important to recognize that these restrictions have been largely reciprocal, coming in response to U.S. restrictions, especially on semiconductors. In December 2024, for example, China banned exports of gallium, germanium, and antimony to the United States right after Washington expanded its chip export controls. This and other controls underscore that Chinese dominance poses a threat to U.S. access to minerals. But they also suggest that softer export restrictions are possible if both sides are willing to de-escalate.

It’s also important to recognize that China has domestic interests to balance, which must be weighed against any international goals. Upstream miners and refiners benefit from selling to the world at world prices, while downstream manufacturers benefit when Beijing uses export restrictions to hoard minerals at home, because it gives them cheaper inputs and an edge over foreign competitors. Environmental concerns add another dimension, since mining and processing rare earths is dirty work that China has tried to clean up. Restricting exports serves some of these interests and harms others, and the goal of U.S. negotiators should be to find the places where U.S. and Chinese interests are aligned and the benefits of trade to China outweigh competing concerns.

>>>READ: How America Should Respond to China’s Industrial Dominance Playbook

For decades, China resolved its internal tensions mostly in favor of openly trading minerals. That openness is a big reason the U.S. economy relies so heavily on rare earths and other minerals from China. American manufacturers built products and supply chains around a steady supply of cheap Chinese inputs, and consumers enjoyed the lower prices that followed. Restarting that trade would benefit American consumers and many of the very manufacturing industries the Trump administration wants to keep or bring back to the United States.

This doesn’t mean Washington should simply back down. But it does mean the controls on rare earths and other minerals need to be viewed in the broader context of a U.S.-initiated trade dispute. There are legitimate geopolitical concerns about China, particularly its military pressure on Taiwan, its expansive territorial claims in the South China Sea, and its human rights abuses in Xinjiang and Hong Kong. For example, China restricted rare earth and other dual-use exports to Japan after Japanese Prime Minister Sanae Takaichi suggested Japan could respond militarily to a Chinese attack on Taiwan. U.S. negotiators should continue to object to that ban. 

Nor should the U.S. lose focus on longer-term goals. Structural fixes to U.S. permitting and regulatory systems, broader removal of trade restrictions on allies and alternative sources of minerals, and national security stockpiles should all be pursued. But much of the current scramble for new domestic or allied mining and processing may be unnecessary as long as Washington prioritizes restoring access to Chinese minerals. 

Amid this urgency, policymakers have reached for loans, equity stakes, and price floors to build alternative supply chains quickly, in the name of national security and with little regard for the potential downsides. Those tools put taxpayers at risk and may cost more than the disruptions they aim to prevent. Instead of rushing into sweeping reforms, policymakers should focus on narrow, targeted responses to legitimate national security needs and pursue measured, long-term fixes. In the short term, they should prioritize removing the immediate source of the disruption.

The quickest short-term fix is right in front of the two leaders this week. They should recognize that both countries gain from de-escalation, and that both would gain from rolling back their export controls.

America’s broadband providers deployed $92.6 billion last year alone to expand, upgrade and modernize our national communications infrastructure. Yet for a family or small business owner in rural America still waiting for reliable internet, the question isn’t about macro stats — it’s simple and urgent: When will that investment reach my front door?

The answer too often depends on how long it takes for the required government permits to be issued.  

And in too many cases — that means months, if not years. 

Read more in AgriPulse here.

China’s restrictions on exports of crucial rare-earth metals and rare-earth magnets remain one of the most difficult unresolved issues as President Trump and Xi Jinping prepare to meet this week.

For months, manufacturers in the United States, Europe, Japan and India have complained about difficulties in obtaining enough rare-earth metals from China, which dominates global production. The materials are essential for making products ranging from cars and wind turbines to semiconductors, computer displays and military equipment.

Read more in the New York Times here.

America’s rural population of 66 million could benefit immensely from emerging technologies and a future of abundance. In particular, long-duration energy storage (LDES) could unlock cheaper, more reliable electricity for rural Americans all over the country. Unfortunately, regulatory problems could slow down or even prevent progress on LDES. Now is the time to fix these issues and pave the way for solutions.

The economy or the climate? Why not both?

Subscribe for ideas that support the environment and the people. 

LDES is a term for systems capable of storing and supplying electricity for at least 8 to 12 hours (depending on who you ask). These systems could reduce energy waste and scale more easily. Most existing batteries need expensive components to increase storage, but LDES technologies could add storage easily and at a low additional cost. Estimates vary on how soon LDES could become a widespread reality, but if current trends continue, we could get there within a decade.

To be clear, LDES is a work in progress. The technology itself is still in development, and questions remain about how LDES providers would be compensated and which authorities would regulate it. But it still has potential: Form Energy signed an agreement to deliver LDES systems starting in 2027 to power AI data centers. Additionally, Google and ESS Tech are developing another LDES project.

LDES may be able to address challenges all over the country, but rural Americans stand to gain the most. To start, rural populations endure some of the worst energy conditions in the United States. These Americans spend a disproportionately high amount of their income on electricity bills, and they experience far more outages than urban and suburban households. LDES could reduce the financial burden of these problems, as it can store energy (including locally produced energy) for longer than typical batteries. The batteries can charge during low-demand periods and provide electricity during high-demand periods and outages, providing a valuable backup.

Regulatory issues could inhibit these benefits. For one, LDES technologies could be at the back of a long interconnection line when they’re ready. At the end of 2025, over 2,000 gigawatts of generation and storage capacity were seeking grid connection. Interconnection wait times often take several years. Connecting remote and rural communities to existing transmission systems is already slow, expensive, and sometimes treated as a low priority.

>>>READ: Energy‑Only, Not Energy‑Never: A Better Path for Generator Interconnection

Even if wait times were less of an issue, LDES solutions would still be in uncharted territory for regulation. Since LDES can both provide electricity and act as insurance during outages, it doesn’t fit into any one existing market or revenue type, making regulation difficult. To end this confusion, regulators should create simpler rules that would let LDES operate in a clear and consistent regulatory environment, recognizing that the technology can provide multiple services at once.

A workaround to these existing issues could be islanding, which lets smaller grids operate independently of the larger grid. Complemented with LDES, islanding could be a good solution, especially during outages. But even if islanding were only a backup during outages, it would cause regulatory issues. Utilities often have exclusive rights to deliver electricity, making islanding difficult. Rural communities can suffer disproportionately from these problems, as they might not have the same backup options during outages as urban communities with more reliable access to the grid. One solution could be softening exclusivity rights for smaller grids to enable more islanding and LDES connections. 

Some might say that there’s no point in addressing these problems now since LDES solutions aren’t quite ready for deployment yet. But these same regulatory roadblocks have caused setbacks for other emerging technologies and should be preemptively addressed. For example, distributed energy resources like smaller batteries and EV chargers deal with many of the same slow and complicated interconnection rules. These problems exist even though the technologies themselves are ready for use. If similar regulatory issues were solved earlier for distributed energy resources, more Americans might have been able to access these technologies. The same logic applies to LDES development.

These difficult regulatory conditions won’t just be problems in the future. They might also discourage innovation now. Some experts have already noted that a patchwork approach of changing regulations has made investors wary of financing battery storage initiatives in recent years. Rather than grid operators changing the rules individually, national leaders should work together to encourage consistency. Without a predictable and innovation-friendly approach, battery projects could miss out on vital capital, pushing their timeline back.

>>>READ: More Current, Less Cost: Why Advanced Conductors are an Overlooked Grid Capacity Tool

The good news is that even with open questions about when LDES technologies might be ready for large-scale usage, they could be the next technology to solve longstanding electricity problems. Slow responses and other priorities might make these solutions seem unimportant, but they could make the lives of Americans much easier. If our citizens and leaders realize the value of LDES solutions, as well as what’s holding them back, this kind of deregulation could be a reality.

LDES has potential for rural populations and could be a solution to many of their problems. It’s not the only improvement that’s necessary — grids still need to be upgraded, and transmission lines need to be built — but it’s a promising technology that’s worth exploring. Rather than waiting for these solutions to be realized, the country should act now to dismantle regulatory barriers that could slow down its success. It would be a shame if governance issues inhibit LDES, a technology with tremendous investment, years of development, and potential to help people.

The Trump administration plans to start refilling the nation’s emergency crude reserves in just a matter of months, after releasing more than 130 million barrels of oil and causing inventories to fall to the lowest levels in decades. 

“It’ll start being refilled in the next few months,” Energy Secretary Chris Wright said of the Strategic Petroleum Reserve on Monday on Bloomberg TV.

Read more in the Washington Examiner here.

large data center

The House on Tuesday passed a bill aimed at shielding Americans from increased electricity costs associated with data centers.

The bill requires states to consider taking up standards that would force tech companies to shoulder the electricity cost increases associated with large data centers but doesn’t actually require them to regulate.

Read more in The Hill here.

Thank you for signing up

Help us promote sensible solutions for both planet and prosperity.

Subscribe to our exclusive email designed for conservatives who care about climate.

Help us promote free market solutions for climate change.

5 Incredible Ways Economic Freedom Helps the Planet.

Sign up for our newsletter now to get the full list right in your inbox.

Download Now