Between Changpeng Zhao and reporting on the Trump Admin trying to force WB to sell to Skydance, today was a bad day for America as a free market economy and a good day for gangster capitalism.

Roselle partner @mfarmer.bsky.social outlines thoughts on DOE's start of a rulemaking process at FERC on large load interconnection.

This is MUCH better than the last time the Trump Admin kicked off a rule making process at FERC (in 2017 aimed at keeping piles of coal around)

Trump’s H-1B visa fee isn’t just about immigration, it’s about fealty Trump’s H-1B visa fee isn’t just about immigration, it’s about making tech companies bend the knee in exchange for a pass.

So, let's say, save $50k by going to CAVA instead of paying DHS?

www.theverge.com/report/78228...

Starbucks-obsessed 4 year old, who has never seen the movie but has suffered through the soundtrack on the rare occasion I get to pick what's on the radio:

"can you tell me a cake pop demon hunters story?"

Share it here when you're ready. Definitely need more Approps law scholarship!

and yet also a large part of recent cost increases is on the distribution side.

Makes sense. Seems like then there is a way to highlight clean energy support while loudly opposing certain energy restrictions.

And maybe opens door to characterizing GOP anti-climate obsession (anti-solar/wind) as leading to cost increases for purely ideological reasons (GOP's version of "woke")

And to be clear, I'm talking about energy/climate qua IRA not opposition to fraking. Though of course that then raises the question of why anti-climate is "good" rather than like Senimas corporatist heterodoxy.

Feels like there's just a lot of handwaving on that issue in particular.

One piece that I'd love to see more discussion here is why "climate" and "energy" have been consistently thrown into the category of helpful to take heterodox positions. They're not social issues (or, I guess if they are that raises the second order question of what is social vs econ).

Very underdeveloped area of academic legal inquiry, imo. Looking forward

Consumers Energy spends millions keeping coal plant open per fed order The utility expects the cost to be shared by customers in the north and central regions of the Midcontinent Independent System Operator.

Turns out forcing old, uneconomic coal plants to remain online when the operator wanted to retire them is expensive. Keeping Campbell running in MI has cost $29 million over 5 weeks: www.detroitnews.com/story/busine...

Um... Check my bio. I'm talking about chargers literally at the White House.

We had such a hard time again like 6 EV chargers. Good luck

Such a doctrinal perspective Madison. It's that the make-up of the Court that created Loper will lead to a different outcome.

Why Your Energy Bill Has Gotten So Expensive (and What Can Be Done About It) | KQED We explore the steps we can take to make California's electrical grid more sustainable.

Trump's electricity tax hike is bad. @costasamaras.com explains on KQED Forum www.kqed.org/forum/201010...
🔌💡

As someone with several papers cited, I can say that - at least for the sections I know most about - this "report" is full of selectively chosen studies, misrepresentations and half-truths, specious logic, and dated science

This report is just a bunch of warmed over 10 years old climate skeptic talking points.

bsky.app/profile/blka...

😡

This is an embarrassment for the sterling reputation all of the real scientists at the U.S. Department of Energy. Shame on Chris Wright.

Saying otherwise is wrong. And saying otherwise by way of official government regulatory action is contrary to law.

But, for the record, greenhouse gases significantly contribute to dangerous climate change. Lowering US emissions will be meaningful to Americans and the world, directly and by way of what they mean for technological and international leadership.

There will be lots of debate today about climate action, and how it affects politics and whether Democrats should remain steadfast in their advocacy for it or instead focus on other things (or perhaps even actively disclaim the importance of action) as a path to political power.

One final note. The EO speaks of the importance of transmission (and specifically high voltage transmission). This is extremely correct. We need much more for data centers, reliability etc.

But it's quite ironic to highlight the importance of high voltage transmission today of all days.

One nugget: I think this is the first time a specific threshold is set for the percent of federal $ that triggers NEPA (50%), though many questions remain for how one calculates this (particularly in the context of loans, tax credits, etc).

Both talk about permitting streamlining through tools like categorical exclusions and FAST-41.

The Trump EO has more on avoiding ESA, Clean Air Act, Clean Water Act, CERCLA, TSCA.

Both support data centers and also the generation needed to power them. Biden required carbon-free power sources (wind, solar, nuclear, geothermal, hydro, CCS) and storage.

The Trump EO references nat gas, coal, nuclear, and geothermal (not hydro storage or of course wind or solar)

Both call on agencies to identify financial tools that can encourage buildout of these data centers and power.

Though the Biden EO is much more detailed about what authorities DOE can use (particularly on grid)

A few interesting notes:
This EO finally repeals the Biden AI Infrastructure EO issued just days before the end of his term. Many of the concepts in this new EO are similar to what was in the Biden EO, but Wario versions.

Both would use DOI DOE and DOD lands for data centers and associated power.

Accelerating Federal Permitting of Data Center Infrastructure By the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and the laws of the United States of America, it is hereby ordered: Section  1.  Policy and

In addition to the AI Action Plan, a few new AI-related EOs out this evening. The most interesting for energy nerds is the Data Center Infrastructure EO.

www.whitehouse.gov/presidential...