One longstanding problem with the green transition is that making the switch from where we get our electricity has big upfront investments even after two decades of steeply plummeting solar panel costs. Low-income people typically don’t have the financial wherewithal to install panels and battery back-up to handle outages. Now, after two years of wrangling, California has put $280 million into the state’s old Self-Generation Incentive Program to pay for batteries and, optionally, solar panels for low-income homeowners.
As Julian Spector at Canary Media writes, homeowners can apply directly for this money. But, since this is a rebate program, they would have to pay the necessary tens of thousands of dollars upfront, and then wait several months for SGIP to reimburse them. Plenty of households simply cannot do that.
Enter Haven Energy. The startup, which has already installed backup batteries at hundreds of homes, hopes to enter new territory by providing panels and batteries to thousands of low-income homes. For homeowners, not just no money down, but no money ever. The deal is that Haven gets to own those batteries and use a network of them as grid stabilizers, releasing power when needed, such as at times when renewable generators of electricity aren’t on line. After 10 years, the batteries become the homeowner’s.
Cross-posted from The Journal of Uncharted Blue Places
You can also find me @meterblades.bskyl-social
The program does not, of course, help low-income renters with landlords disinclined to participate. But it’s a model that bears scrutinizing to explore whether it can and should be duplicated. Here’s an excerpt from a very long analysis by Spector:
It’s the latest riff on the evolving market for virtual power plants, which aggregate thousands of small energy systems into a meaningful tool to meet the energy needs of utilities or competitive electricity markets. The grid needs more energy just about everywhere in the U.S., but large-scale infrastructure construction runs into persistent delays and challenges. Adding generation and storage capacity in homes is relatively quick, and with the right incentives, can add up to a substantial tool to meet the grid’s needs.
If Haven successfully implements those incentives, it thinks it will be able to install 10 megawatts of dispatchable battery capacity across thousands of homes in the next two years. The (non-paying) customers will benefit from bill savings and backup power; to qualify for the state-funded rebate, they just need to make their batteries discharge regularly when the grid is stressed, namely in the evening hours when solar production dips and demand surges.
So what does the customer get? Lower electric bills as a result of reducing electricity demand during the priciest time of day and the obvious benefits of backup power. Customers can get batteries without getting panels, but those who use the SGIP funds to pair solar and batteries get the additional benefit of producing their own clean power, which will lower their electric bill even more.
The nation — or rather the nation’s utilities and their political and corporate allies — are eager to shut down new rooftop solar and have been for years. They argue the debunked view that rooftop solar is subsidized by ratepayers who can’t afford solar. They also assert reliability concerns over intermittency as well as the time-of-day disconnection between solar generation and electricity demand known as the “duck curve.”
Therefore, they claim, rooftop solar is getting too good a deal selling power to the grid. As a consequence, net metering has been revised in California and around the country. But with the arrival of networks of virtual power plants operating off batteries, the reliability complaint flies out the window, as does the “subsidy” complaint
As noted, Haven Energy’s approach is certainly not the only way to get low-income homeowners into the green transition. After all, the open enrollment period for signing up isn’t until May 20, so we have no idea what participation in Haven’s approach may look like. But pre-implementation, it seems an equitable approach that provides benefits all around and, after a decade, gives them up to the homeowners. In an industry that’s had its share of scams, that sounds like a good place to put some SGIP money.
—Meteor Blades
WEEKLY ECO-VIDEO
RESOURCES & ACTION
GREEN BRIEFS
Vox publishes many valuable explainers. Their latest take on clean energy is an excellent example, although I must say they’re a bit too optimistic that market forces will quickly overcome the ever-increasing number of obstacles being erected against renewables by red states and at the federal level. Consequently, there’s a slowdown in the works. For example, check out the Richard Kessler piece below.
Nonetheless, considerable optimism for the longer term is warranted. The positive indicators are plentiful. And if climate change weren’t bearing down more quickly than was generally expected, we could just relax and let market forces do the work of eventually making the essential green transition a reality. However, there’s no time for patience. Encouraging as what’s happening with clean energy is, we’re still going way too slow to meet emissions goals. Faster, please. Meanwhile, here are two of Vox’s 10 charts with excerpted analyses added via captions:
Since 2010, US wind capacity has more than tripled, spurred by federal tax incentives. But even without those incentives — which Congress may eventually try to cut — onshore wind turbines are the cheapest source of new energy, according to the research firm Lazard. In 2023, the average cost of new onshore wind projects was two-thirds lower than a typical fossil fuel alternative, per a report by the International Renewable Energy Agency.
The 2024 Clean Jobs America report by E2, a national group focused on climate solutions across industries, paints a positive picture for clean jobs. Renewable energy jobs increased by 14 percent from 2020 to 2023 — a surge boosted by the Inflation Reduction Act’s (IRA) climate-focused policies. Jobs in the solar sector have grown by 15 percent in that same period, with 12 percent growth for wind and 11 percent growth for geothermal. In just 2023 alone, 150,000 jobs in the clean energy industry were added. All together, clean energy outpaced economy-wide employment growth for the last five years.
—Meteor Blades
Like so many other appointees of our Outlaw Prez, EPA administrator Lee Zeldin is determined to kneecap the very agency he’s been chosen to lead, reneging on its mission. The ways are many, including the attempt to end $20 billion in grants released by the Biden administration, which would undercut research, and proposing gargantuan cuts in the agency’s own funding, including losing a fourth of its employees. It’s the dismantler’s philosophy. Avoid the inevitable defeat that would ensue from going to Congress to abolish the agency by just crippling it instead. A good way to force otherwise EPA friendly folks to begin wondering what the agency is really good for.
At the heart of the decades-long right-wing efforts to sabotage the EPA is greed and ideology that, greenwashing PR releases aside, is reflected in open hostility to the viewpoint that wrecking our planet by continuing to extract and burn hydrocarbons is a bad thing. And those hostiles cannot abide the EPA’s 2009 endangerment decision. Following on a 2007 Supreme Court ruling saying the EPA is obligated to adjudge greenhouse gases as harmful, the agency did exactly that 16 years ago, identifying six such gases whose emissions scientists see as threatening harm to public health.
At Zeldin’s first D.C. press conference on Monday, he noted the agency would move to formally reconsider its endangerment finding but gave no time-frame. He had announced this was coming a month ago, but now it’s officially happening.
Donald Trump, of course, is an impatient man, as can be seen in the ludicrously short deadlines placed on implementing many of his executive orders. He’d no doubt like this “reconsideration” done by, say, July 4 so he can announce it at his military parade. However, a repeal or even relaxation of the endangerment rule would normally take years given all the legal wrangling that would inevitably ensue. Perhaps there’ll be an attempt to rush it and it will wind up in the hands of the Supreme Court again. A quite different court from 2007.
How Zeldin and the other reconsiderers plan to get around the science proving harm from greenhouse gas emissions should be an interesting display. Probably it will include some talk about the so-called benefits of global warming and of carbon dioxide. If the endangerment rule were to be repealed, it would wreck the EPA’s extensive climate work. However, the slash-and-burn DOGE approach Zeldin has adopted, plus the administration’s arrogantly backwards approach to anything having to do with the climate means serious work in that arena is probably on pause for at least the next four years.
—Meteor Blades
Related: EPA Administrator Defends Sweeping Grant Terminations Amid Legal Blowback
RESEARCH & STUDIES
HALF A DOZEN OTHER THINGS TO READ (OR LISTEN TO)
OSHA Office Closure in ‘Cancer Alley’ Raises Fears About Risks to Workers by Marcus Baram at Capital & Main. Louisiana is one of the most dangerous states in the U.S. for workers. The Trump administration plans to close its lone protection unit. On the morning of March 20, Mathew Roberts was working at a chemical plant on the outskirts of Baton Rouge, Louisiana, when he was involved in an accident with a forklift. Unresponsive and in critical condition, the father of two and Iraq War veteran known for his big laugh and warm smile was taken from the Nutrien nitrogen plant to a local hospital, where he died of his injuries. The U.S. Occupational Safety and Health Administration is investigating the incident, along with local law enforcement, but Roberts’ family members said they are still waiting for answers. The workplace death is not unusual in Louisiana, which has been ranked the sixth most dangerous state for workers in the U.S., according to a study that used data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics. Former OSHA Director David Michaels said by closing the office, “those enormous oil and petrochemical facilities with significant safety and health hazards will be inspected even less frequently than they are now.” By closing the office, the government will save $109,346, according to DOGE.
Trump’s EPA Plans to Stop Collecting Greenhouse Gas Emissions Data From Most Polluters by Sharon Lerner at Pro-Publica. Climate experts expressed shock and dismay at the move. “It would be a bit like unplugging the equipment that monitors the vital signs of a patient that is critically ill,” one said.
The 89%: New Media Collaboration Calls Attention to 'Climate Change's Silent Majority' by Olivia Rosane at Common Dreams. According to a global survey, 89% of people worldwide want their government to do more to address the climate crisis, yet current national policies put the world on track for 3.1°C of warming. To explore this disconnect, Covering Climate Now launched the 89% Project on Monday to encourage coverage of "climate change's silent majority" and ask some key questions. "If, in fact, a majority of people in your community care about climate change, and yet elected officials aren't responding to that, that's a deficit in democracy," CCNow co-founder Kyle Pope said. "Why is that? What's to be done about it? Where do we go from here?" The 89% Project is designed as a yearlong initiative that kicked off with a joint week of coverage coinciding with Earth Day. Another week of coverage will take place in the fall in the leadup to the United Nations climate conference (COP30) in Belém, Brazil. In between, CCNow will host webinars and gatherings, promote the project on social media, and analyze the coverage to see what newsrooms are focusing on and what support they may need to continue telling climate stories going forward.
The National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health's "L" building in Morgantown, West Virginia.
Coal miners lose safety nets as black lung programs collapse under Trump by Reuters via Fast Company. Interviews with more than a dozen people involved in medical programs serving the coal industry, and a review of internal documents from the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health, show that at least three such federal programs have stopped their work in recent weeks. A decades-old program operated by NIOSH to detect lung disease in coal miners, for example, has been suspended. Related programs to provide x-rays and lung tests at mine sites have also shut down, and it is now unclear who will enforce safety regulations like new limits on silica dust exposure after nearly half of the offices of Mine Safety and Health Administration are under review to have their leases terminated. “It’s going to be devastating to miners,” said Anita Wolfe, a 40-year NIOSH veteran who remains in touch with the agency. “Nobody is going to be monitoring the mines.”
Related: Trump touts ‘clean coal’ — but cuts programs that protect miners
Clean energy firms ax $8 billion US investment in Q1 amid doubts over Trump policies by Richard Kessler at Recharge News. Companies abandoned plans to invest almost $8 billion in US clean energy-related factories and other projects in the first quarter amid escalating market uncertainty, according to latest data from E2, a national, non-partisan clean energy group. Most projects were either cancelled or downsized, or in several cases, existing plants due for expansion or upgrade were closed. About 7,800 new jobs were lost. Projects affected included five battery/storage, five electric vehicle (EV), two hydrogen, three solar, and one wind, Prysmian’s proposed offshore cable manufacturing facility in Massachusetts.
China’s Coal Generation Dropped 5% In Q1 As Electricity Demand Increased by Michael Barnard at Clean Technica. China’s coal-fired electricity generation took an unexpectedly sharp turn downward in the first quarter of 2025, signaling a potentially profound shift in the world’s largest coal-consuming economy. This wasn’t merely a seasonal dip or economic distress signal; rather, it represented a clear and structural turning point. Coal generation fell by approximately 4.7% year over year, significantly outpacing the overall grid electricity supply decline of just 1.3%. However, electricity demand, a better measure, went up by 1%. What gives? Notably, that modest decline in grid electricity supply wasn’t evenly distributed across the entire quarter—it was confined to two of the three months, where heating requirements were softened by warmer than average months in January and February. This detail matters, indicating that the reduction in coal-generated electricity wasn’t primarily driven by a widespread drop in economic activity or power use, but rather by underlying transformations in China’s energy supply.
weekly bluesky post
ECOPINION
Trump’s latest USDA cuts undermine his plan to ‘Make America Healthy Again’ by Ayurella Horn-Muller at Grist. The abrupt cancellation of a beloved farm-to-school grant program threatens food access, school gardens, and small farms nationwide. First established by the Healthy, Hunger-Free Kids Act, passed in 2010, the Patrick Leahy Farm to School program was created by the Obama administration to address rising hunger and nutritional needs in public schools. The program has since awarded over $100 million in grants to schools that support millions of students in tribal, rural, and urban communities nationwide. Nutrition advocates and legislators are calling the USDA’s decision to cancel the farm-to-school funding contradictory to the stated goals of the Trump administration’s Make America Healthy Again commission. Many see it as a sign that the government is dismantling local food systems — hurting people and the planet. The fallout, experts say, will be gradual, but no less devastating.
Multifamily housing needs EV charging. This startup will pay for it by Jeff St. John at Canary Media. Aubrey Gunnels, CEO of 3V Infrastructure, understands the risks involved in installing and owning EV chargers in thousands of apartment building garages and condominium parking lots. She also sees the opportunity. Just look at the statistics. By 2030, EVs are expected to make up close to half of all new U.S. car sales. Today, roughly 80% of EV charging takes place at home, and roughly one-third of Americans live in multifamily housing. But only 5% of U.S. multifamily housing offers on-site EV charging, according to CBRE, one of the world’s largest property management companies and a 3V Infrastructure partner. “People really prefer to charge at home,” Gunnels said — and they’ll want to live in apartments or condos that offer that option.
Vinnie Rotondaro
Playing With Fire: What Trump—and the Left—Still Don’t Understand About Coal Country by Vinnie Rotondaro at Common Dreams. To many on the left, Trump’s talk of coal is laughable—an empty promise rooted in a vanished world. But underneath the nostalgia is something profoundly real. Trump’s coal rhetoric taps into a collective memory where coal once formed the bedrock of community and identity—a memory that has been relentlessly mocked, even as it continues to shape political reality. As Ben Bradlee Jr. wrote in The Forgotten: How the People of One Pennsylvania County Elected Donald Trump and Changes America, “They feel like everyone’s punching bag, and that their way of life is dying.” This is where the MAGA movement began. It’s also where my family’s story began, in Luzerne County, which Bradlee profiled. It’s a region shaped by defiance, resilience, and a submerged identity that still burns. The people who feel drawn to Trump aren’t simply imagining something lost—they’re remembering something true, even if buried beneath contradiction.
We passed the 1.5C climate threshold. We must now explore extreme options by David King at The Guardian. One of the greatest challenges of climate science today is that many of the necessary levers to regain control are uncomfortable, even controversial. Ideas such as thickening sea ice to prevent collapse or brightening marine clouds to reflect sunlight may once have seemed extreme. Yet, as we contend with an escalating crisis, we must at least explore these possibilities. We do not have the luxury of rejecting solutions outright before we have thoroughly investigated their risks, trade-offs and feasibility. As scientists, we must never advocate for deploying unproven interventions. Any repair or removal techniques must undergo rigorous research and assessment before we evaluate full-scale suitability. However, we must also be clear: these investigations must happen with urgency. The longer we delay, the fewer options remain on the table and the more likely that deployment will happen without the proper due diligence at a point of desperation. Privately, many scientists acknowledge the need to advance research into these solutions, but there is a widespread reluctance to say so publicly.
US LNG Flies in the Face of Mainstream Climate Analysis: the Department of Energy must stop all expansion now by the staff at Oil Change International. Along with frontline communities, and other partners, OCI has provided ample evidence for the need to end LNG expansion. But if we needed further evidence that permitting more US LNG export capacity is a surefire way to cook the planet, we certainly got it with the International Energy Agency’s latest annual report. This [2024] World Energy Outlook dedicated over 10 pages to the looming LNG supply glut, its potential impact on the clean energy transition, and, crucially, how even the LNG export terminals that have already begun construction — which would represent a near 50% increase in the world’s LNG capacity — do not align with our climate goals. Indeed, for the first time, the WEO made clear that the coming wave of new LNG export capacity not only fails the 1.5°C (2.7°F) test but also undermines governments’ current energy policy pledges and commitments that aren’t even enough to maintain the crucial 1.5°C threshold.
Yes, Your Friends and Neighbors Want to Talk to You About Climate Change by John A. Platt at The Revelator. In these divided times, it seems everyone is ready to start an argument at the drop of a hat, especially on topics that have been made so politically polarizing, like climate change. But is that true? Are conversations about climate change really doomed before they even start? As it turns out, they’re not — we just think they are, so we avoid having these conversations in the first place. Here’s the reality: According to multiple surveys and scientific studies, between 80-89% of people want the world’s governments to take stronger action against climate change. At the same time, the people who want action don’t realize they’re in the majority because not enough people are talking about it — especially in the media. One new study, published April 17 in PLOS Climate, found that this lack of media coverage contributes to a negative feedback loop that perpetuates “climate silence.”
OTHER GREEN STUFF
Police Department Saves Thousands Of Dollars Each Month Using Electric Vehicles • Climate Change Will Increase Arsenic Levels in Rice, Study Finds • FERC: Solar + wind made up 98% of new US power generating capacity in Jan-Feb 2025 • Several hundred workers who keep invasive pests out of the US accept Trump’s buyouts • 15 years after the BP oil spill disaster, how is the Gulf of Mexico faring? Why the Best Place for Climate Science Might Be at the Department of Defense • Ahead of Fire and Hurricane Season, FEMA Moves to End a Major Disaster-Preparedness Program • The Trump administration is sabotaging your scientific data • Climate Crisis Deniers Explain Why They Like U.S. Energy Secretary Chris Wright • The Government’s Chemical Disaster Tracking Tool Just Went Dark
