Watt’s Happening aims to provide breaking news, sharp analysis, and thoughtful commentary from the cutting edge of the energy sector as this dynamic area of the world continues to expand and grow before our eyes.
Weekly Highlights:
Nuclear Energy on the Moon?
While it seems like the stuff of science fiction, NASA really is thinking about generating nuclear power on the Moon. Secretary of Transportation Sean Duffy pitched the idea for a nuclear reactor to be sent to the Moon by 2030. Such a reactor would have limited energy-generating capacity — only 100 kilowatts of electricity — but its impact would be much greater, including helping humans to travel through space and live on the Moon and Mars, where days are longer and daylight weaker. More immediately, allowing satellites and probes to be fueled by nuclear power, rather than by batteries, would allow for more sophisticated scientific instruments to be put on board. Of course, the feasibility of 2030 as the target date is a separate question, and it remains to be seen if it is a realistic target date.
Some Winners Emerge from the “Big, Beautiful Bill”
I’ve discussed the energy dimensions of President Trump’s “Big, Beautiful Bill” several times in these columns, but now that we have a more accurate picture of its winners and losers, we can finally identify what falls in each camp. The good news is that the nuclear, geothermal, and battery storage sectors have mostly passed through unscathed, as have biofuels (due to the strength of the farm lobby). This is not a surprise, as the administration has labeled them as “affordable, reliable, and secure energy technologies.” The losers, at least initially, seemed to be solar and wind power. But less ready access to finance due to both governmental cost-cutting measures and higher interest rates, as well as supply chain problems due to geopolitical problems and the ongoing tariffs will certainly affect even the winners.
Both Sides to Blame in California’s Solar Power Problems
The Trump administration’s antipathy toward solar power is well known, but its decision to terminate the funding for a California solar plan needs further elucidation. First, a lesser-known part of the Inflation Reduction Act was the Solar for All Program, which allowed individuals who could not afford to have solar panels placed on their house to tap into nearby mid-sized solar installations for green energy. The federal government gave the California Public Utilities Commission $250 million for the program, but it has distributed almost nothing and has become bogged down by special interest groups and its desire to require applicants to file more paperwork. It is this plan that President Trump is planning to cancel.
Costs Rise for Keeping Coal in Play
On the other hand, the fact that President Trump “digs” coal is also no secret. His executive order, issued back in April, gave the Department of Energy the authority to keep coal plants open, even after energy companies and the state government in which the plant is located ordered them closed. Since then, the department has blocked the closure of two plants — one in Pennsylvania and one in Michigan — arguing that closing the plants places the country at greater risk of blackouts. Critics have argued that the DOE’s solution is a solution to a problem it has manufactured and also ignores the many, many gigawatts of green energy due to come online in the near future.
“The Sky is Falling?” Not in Massachusetts
The opponents of natural gas bans and more rigorous energy usage standards have often used a “the sky is falling” approach in their arguments against them, claiming that both will delay construction and/or make it more expensive and time-consuming to build new homes. At a time when the country is facing a housing shortage, such delays are costs the United States cannot afford to pay. Evidence from Lexington, Massachusetts, at least, has proven the Chicken Littles of the world wrong, at least for now. While the city imposed stringent regulations, including banning natural gas hookups in new buildings in 2024, the city has seen a construction boom of 1,100 new units of housing. However, the question of if this can be extended to the rest of the country remains open.
About the Author: Toni Mikec
Toni Mikec is the Managing Editor for Energy World, a publication of the Center for the National Interest. Before that, he worked as a political consultant for Your Voter Guide in Sacramento and as a Senior Editor at Eagle Financial Publications in Washington DC. He holds a B.A. in International Relations (summa cum laude) from the University of California, Davis and a M.A. in International Relations and International Economics from the Johns Hopkins School of Advanced International Studies.
Image: Shutterstock/earthphotostock
