Good news! The energy transition persists, in spite of President Trump: #Solar is gaining ground on Western states’ grids — Jonathan P. Thompson (LandDesk.org)

A pronghorn hangs out among Wyoming wind turbines. Jonathan P. Thompson photo.

Click the link to read the article on The Land Desk website (Jonathan P. Thompson):

August 7, 2026

🌞 Good News! 😎

It’s safe to say that the Trump administration has been waging a war on solar and wind energy, both to spite its political adversaries and to bolster the fossil fuel industries.

After all, it froze utility-scale solar and wind permitting on public lands; cut federal tax incentives for both utility-scale and rooftop solar; clawed back federal grants for clean energy manufacturing, transmission upgrades, and climate programs; spent $4 billion (so far) in taxpayer funds to pay offshore wind developers to give up their leases; and halted Defense Department reviews of proposed onshore wind developments, thus stalling them indefinitely. That an administration is actively quashing new energy development even as it declares an “energy emergency” to try to prop up the dying coal industry and further pad petroleum corporations’ pockets is especially absurd.

The data show, however, that Trump’s war on clean energy isn’t going much better than the fight he picked with Iran. For one thing, courts keep slapping down many of his initiatives because, well, they’re illegal. More than that, though, solar and wind generation are making big gains on many state’s electrical grids and, in some cases, are outpacing both coal and natural gas generation, even in fossil fuel strongholds.

That’s in part because there were a lot of projects in the pipeline when Trump took office, such as Pattern Energy’s massive SunZia wind power facility in eastern New Mexico, which added a whopping 3.65 gigawatts to the grid when it came online a couple of months ago. Developers have also been scrambling to get projects built before the federal incentives expire, bringing more capacity online. And, even though federal land permitting has slowed, developers have been bringing new projects online on private land, including fallowed farm fields, with surprising frequency.

And there’s a lot more of that on its way: The Westlands Water District in California is moving forward with its Valley Clean Infrastructure Plan, which will develop a 20-gigawatt solar and battery storage project on more than 100,000 acres of water-constrained ag land in the Central Valley. As Land Desk reader Fred Porter often preaches, these increasingly arid times call for farmers to: “Stop irrigating, plant solar, harvest electrons.”

By putting these huge installations on already disturbed former farmland, it reduces the pressure to put them on more sensitive, ecologically rich public lands. Less irrigating will leave more water in the rivers. As solar and wind displace coal and natural gas generation, they’ll also reduce the need for water in those thermal power plants. And, generating more power will offset the electrons lost if/when hydropower generation stops at Glen Canyon Dam and/or Hoover Dam.

For the blurbs below, I’ve used a snapshot of energy use by state in May of this year, mostly because that’s the most recent data available for all of these states. Keep in mind that electricity demand, and the output of various energy sources, varies from month to month. May is a good month for solar because the sun’s shining, the days are long, and the sky is not obscured by wildfire smoke. Meanwhile, it’s usually not hot enough yet for air-conditioning-related demand spikes. 

I’ve only included energy sources that provided 1% or more of a state’s total electricity use that month. In the states below, “other renewables” is geothermal…

California, as one might expect, is leading the clean energy charge. In May of this year, solar generation accounted for 51% of California’s total electricity production, a new world record (wind accounted for another 8%). Meanwhile, fossil fuels — which in California means natural gas — provided less than 15% of the state’s power in May. Hydropower, nuclear, and biofuels filled in the remaining 26%. A surge in grid-scale battery energy storage capacity in the state over the last few years has helped smooth out the solar “duck curve”; plentiful afternoon solar tops off the batteries, which can then discharge in the evening when solar drops off. There are still challenges, however: California’s grid operator continues to curtail solar generation, meaning it forces arrays to shut down or to pay other states to take it, because at times there’s more solar output than the grid can handle.

  • Solar: 51%
  • Gas: 15%
  • Hydro: 12%
  • Wind: 8%
  • Nuclear: 8%
  • Other renewables: 5%

Arizona should be the leader in solar, given how sunny it is, but its clean energy progress has been hampered by Trumpian state lawmakers and utility regulators, who tend to favor fossil fuels for reasons that confound me (I have no idea how energy sources became partisan or why). Still, solar is making huge gains, providing about 27% of the state’s electricity in May, compared to just 12% in 2021. That’s about the same share as nuclear’s, which is somewhat remarkable given that the state is home to the Palo Verde Nuclear Plant. 

Salt River Project, the utility that serves most of the Phoenix metro area, continues to add both solar and battery storage. Meanwhile, Arizona Public Service plans to convert its currently shuttered Cholla coal plant near Holbrook to run on natural gas. This was one of the coal plants Trump said would reopen as part of his coal-fetish initiatives. It did not reopen, at least not to burn coal.

  • Gas: 34%
  • Solar: 27%
  • Nuclear: 27%
  • Wind: 4%
  • Hydro: 4%
  • Coal: 4%

Colorado. Just a decade ago, coal-fired generation dominated Colorado’s grid, accounting for about 50% of all generation in 2016. Stronger clean energy policies and the rising cost of coal has unseated the dirty fuel, with wind power taking over the top spot. Coal’s decline, however, has been slowed in the state by Trump administration orders blocking planned plant retirements, and by projections of data center-driven electricity demand increases.

  • Wind: 30%
  • Gas: 28%
  • Solar: 22%
  • Coal: 16%
  • Hydro: 4%

Idaho: Way back in 2006, when coal-fired generation was near its peak in the United States and the Powder River Basin mines were kicking out 1 billion tons of the stuff each year, Ray Ring wrote a story for High Country News about a band of Idaho residents pushing back on a new coal plant. The “West’s New Revolutionaries” ultimately prevailed. And not only did this one facility not get built, but the state has managed to stay off coal altogether. Nowadays, though, rural Idahoans are just as likely to be pushing back against solar and wind installations, the state’s largest utility is hostile toward rooftop solar, and multiple new gas plants are in the pipeline. So don’t expect solar and wind to crowd out other energy sources too soon.

  • Hydro: 50%
  • Gas: 19%
  • Solar: 15%
  • Wind: 14%

Montana’s state lawmakers and utility regulators have a fondness for fossil fuels. Plus, it’s a big coal mining state and is home to the Colstrip coal power plant, one of the nation’s worst polluters. Nevertheless, coal doesn’t dominate the energy mix here, hydropower does. Wind, however, is making a run for the top spot.

  • Hydro: 50%
  • Wind: 26%
  • Coal: 17%
  • Solar: 3%
  • Gas: 3%

New Mexico produces oodles of methane, i.e. natural gas. The San Juan Basin was once one of the world’s largest gas fields, and in the Permian Basin oil fields the fuel is so plentiful (as an “associated gas” that comes up with the crude) that they just burn it off instead of putting it to use. Still, gas plants generated just 19% of the state’s electricity, while wind and solar combined accounted for 63%. That’s in part because New Mexico has good wind and solar potential, but more importantly it has forward-thinking, progressive policies such as the Energy Transition Act, which not only encourage renewable energy, but also provides a safety net to help coal communities, miners, and power plant workers transition away from the dirty fuel.

  • Wind: 43%
  • Solar: 20%
  • Gas: 19%
  • Coal: 18%

Nevada’s largest utility started moving away from coal years ago, and some of NV Energy’s biggest customers — Las Vegas casino resorts — have demanded clean energy to help them green up their brands. That, combined with Nevada’s large tracts of solar-ready public lands has helped utility-scale solar generation vie with gas as the leader of the state’s energy mix. With several large solar and geothermal projects in the pipeline, shares of those energy sources should continue to grow. The biggest hurdle standing in the way of the Silver State’s energy transition is the Big Data Center Buildup, which threatens to double or even triple overall electricity demand in the next decade or so. NV Energy plans to build more gas generation to keep up.

  • Solar: 44%
  • Gas: 41%
  • Other renewables: 8%
  • Hydro: 5%
  • Coal: 2%

Oregon, like other Northwest states, relies heavily on hydropower from the Columbia River’s dams, but it has also added wind capacity at a fairly rapid rate. Like in many other Western states, Oregon’s energy supply is likely to be strained by data center-driven demand.

  • Hydro: 50%
  • Wind: 21%
  • Gas: 17%
  • Solar: 10%
  • Bioenergy: 2%

Utah’s Republican-dominated legislature is packed with fossil fuel folks, who have devoted a lot of time and energy trying to keep the coal industry going. Gov. Spencer Cox, meanwhile, is a big nuclear fan, and is courting reactor startups and vying to host a Department of Energy “Nuclear Lifecycle Innovation Campus” that would include nuclear fuel fabrication, enrichment, and radioactive waste storage to add to the existing uranium mining and milling industry.

But for the month of May, at least, solar sat atop the state’s energy mix, bolstered by the new 400-MW Green River solar-plus-storage project, with coal falling to third place. While there’s a lot of talk about nukes, there is real action on the geothermal front in Utah, with Fervo advancing its Cape Station enhanced geothermal project in Beaver County. I’d bet that geothermal’s share climbs long before a reactor comes online in the state.

  • Solar: 33%
  • Gas: 32%
  • Coal: 28%
  • Hydro: 3%
  • Wind: 2%
  • Other renewables: 1%

Washington is a hydropower state, naturally, thanks to big dams on the Columbia River and its tributaries. It’s also one of the few Western states with a notable share of power generated by nuclear reactors. Coal is notably absent, in part due to state policy, despite the Trump administration’s order to keep the Centralia coal plant running past its December 31, 2025, retirement date. Centralia will convert to run on natural gas in coming years.

  • Hydro: 73%
  • Nuclear: 9%
  • Wind: 8%
  • Gas: 7%
  • Solar: 2%

Wyoming has become synonymous with coal production ever since the Powder River Basin mines went big time back in the 1970s. It’s also big on coal-generation: In 2003, coal-fired power plants produced 97% of Wyoming’s electricity. Today, the gaping mines in the Powder River Basin continue to produce a lion’s share of the nation’s coal, but the fuel’s stature in the state’s energy mix is declining, while wind power excels.

  • Coal: 43%
  • Wind: 34%
  • Gas: 17%
  • Hydro: 4%
  • Solar: 2%
May 6, 2023 – Volunteers with the National Renewable Energy Laboratory’s (NREL’s) ESCAPES (Education, Stewardship, and Community Action for Promoting Environmental Sustainability) program lend a hand to Jack’s Solar Garden in Longmont, Colo. Bethany Speer (left) goes back for more while Nancy Trejo distributes her wheelbarrow load to the agrivoltaic plots. (Photo by Bryan Bechtold / NREL)

#ClimateChange must not disrupt business as usual: Don’t believe the hype – we are still firmly on course towards climate catastrophe — Technosphere Earth

Golfers play while a wildfire rages, 2017. Source: Beacon Rock Golf Course/Facebook.

Please remember, as I first heard friend of Coyote Gulch Laurna Kaatz say, “Climate Change is water change.” Right now there may or may not be elections this fall, and the results may or may not be heeded, but if elections do occur, please vote for candidates that are serious about the Climate Crisis.

Click the link to read the article on the Technosphere Earth website (James Dyke). Here’s an excerpt:

August 7, 2026

As I write, vast regions of Europe are on fire as heatwave after heatwave pummels the continent. The UK has just experienced its driest July ever. Not a drop of rain has fallen in London for over a month. The situation is so bad that even the otherwise reliably climate-denying Telegraph has published articles that say climate change is real and humans are to blame. Previously, sea level rise inundating small island nations and crop failures in sub-Saharan Africa would barely merit a shrug from this right wing publication. Perhaps seeing Bordeaux’s vineyards go up in smoke was for them the moment when climate change got real. Pray mercy for Merlot, and think of the Chablis – something must be done!

Namely, the rapid phase out fossil fuels, while also making herculean efforts to adapt societies to the hotter and more dangerous world we are entering. This adaptation needs to go well beyond sea walls and AC. I am becoming increasingly concerned that what we regard as tipping points may actually be fracture points; the point at which key institutions and systems break from intense and cumulative stress. It’s this failure of social systems that concerns me just as much as Earth system collapse. They have the potential to amplify initial climate shocks via negative social tipping points. At systemic levels this has the potential to lead to what we call derailment risks – efforts to stop future heating are degraded because of lack of institutional capacity given increasing social, political, and economic disruption. Derailment risks are one of the reasons I am so baffled as to how proponents of solar geoengineering can blithely claim that future societies will be able to continue to operate planetary-scale cooling operations for centuries – but more on that in the future.

I am more than baffled at what some sections of the climate science community have been doing in the midst of this crisis. Over the past few years we have seen the quite astonishing spectacle of this community tying itself up in knots trying to decide what constitutes a worst case scenario when it comes to future heating…

You often hear: another world is possible. Well I am here telling you that another world is inevitable. We either decide to stop burning fossil fuels or the Earth system will stop us. We are well beyond incremental, so-called policy relevant pathways. Think wartime mobilisation, and the command of entire economies. None of the climate scenarios capture this. They are all constrained by what politicians would find palatable, which ultimately is whatever maintains economic growth. This means it is still very much business as usual when it comes to our reckless meddling with the Earth’s climate.

Exxon’s private prediction of the future growth of carbon dioxide levels (left axis) and global temperature relative to 1982 (right axis). Elsewhere in its report, Exxon noted that the most widely accepted science at the time indicated that doubling carbon dioxide levels would cause a global warming of 3°C. Illustration: 1982 Exxon internal briefing document