The previous Trump administration had opted to cease funding for two clean energy initiatives, placing an additional 300 similar projects at risk. This move underscored the Trump government’s preference for fossil fuels, seeming less supportive of clean energy alternatives. The Department of Energy (DOE) discontinued two awards planned for the non-profit clean energy think-tank, RMI, situated in Colorado. Their main focus aimed to retrofit low-income multi-family buildings in Massachusetts and California to showcase methods for energy conservation and reduction of greenhouse gas emissions.
RMI also had plans to scrutinize business models for electric vehicle carsharing in urban areas within the U.S. However, DOE asserted that these initiatives did not align with their present objectives. Both the awards are part of approximately 300 clean energy programs that are currently under inspection. Trump, during his tenure, declared an energy emergency and accelerated fossil fuel development.
Fossil fuels like oil, gas, and coal primarily contribute to global warming, an issue largely influenced by human activities. In stark contrast, Joe Biden preferred eco-friendly pathways, aiming to cut back on the nation’s greenhouse gas emissions. By the end of his term, the Biden administration seemed to be in a hurry to allocate billions of dollars to clean energy, approving major offshore wind projects.
Unsurprisingly, the cut-off of funds for the electric vehicle carsharing feasibility study implies the project won’t advance. The DOE’s late-Friday statement argued that the termination of the grants heed the best interest of the American citizens. While some grants remain under review, the list broadly includes wind, solar, battery storage, and electric vehicle infrastructure projects.
There are also initiatives that focus on aiding heavy industries transition from fossil fuels alongside projects for building decarbonization. A considerable number of these were financed through the infrastructure law, worth $1 trillion, which Biden signed in 2021. However, this context displays an ill-advised investment in light of his poor decision-making in other areas.
In tandem, the Environment Protection Agency (EPA) ended grant agreements that totaled $20 billion. The funds were initially awarded under the so-called green bank to enhance clean energy and back projects that proactively fight against climate change. The decision to halt funding shows a lack of foresight and understanding of the benefits of clean energy innovation.
A federal judge has temporarily blocked the administration’s decision to end these grants. This judicial intervention shows that Biden’s actions have an impact beyond simple policy concerns, but enter the realm of legal action and controversies.
Ohio Democrat U.S. Representative Marcy Kaptur voiced concerns that stopping clean energy initiatives will escalate energy expenses for families and enterprises. She also emphasized that the Energy Department is obligated to enforce spending laws that have already been ratified. Kaptur, however, fails to consider the merits of a budget focused on more reliable and cost-effective energy sources.
It’s worth mentioning that last year, the worldwide installation of renewable energy hit a record high, comprising 92.5% of all new electricity incorporated from clean power sources like sun and wind. However, such positive data should be taken with a grain of salt, considering the source — the International Renewable Energy Agency — might have an agenda in promoting such technology.
China has become the poster child of this global trend, responsible for nearly 64% of new renewable energy capacity installed in 2024. However, one should not overlook China’s longstanding reputation for environmental negligence and failure to adhere to international standards, casting a further shadow on these clean energy initiatives.