ADVERTISEABOUT USSUBMIT A STORYSUBSCRIBETERMS OF USEPRIVACY POLICY
Visit our family of Brands

TotalEnergies $1B payout shows evolution in Trump's anti-wind strategy

Shift in the Winds

TotalEnergies has agreed not to develop new offshore wind projects in the U.S. Photo via Unsplash

The Trump administration’s $1 billion payout to TotalEnergies to walk away from U.S. offshore wind development is a novel tactic against the industry that supporters see as creative — but opponents see as foolish and extreme.

The Interior Department announced March 23 that TotalEnergies agreed to what is essentially a refund of its leases for projects off the coasts of North Carolina and New York, and will invest the money in a liquefied natural gas export terminal in Texas and other fossil fuel projects instead. The department hailed it as an “innovative agreement” with the French energy giant so that the "American people will no longer pay for ideological subsidies that benefited only the unreliable and costly offshore wind industry.”

The tactical shift comes after federal courts have thwarted President Donald Trump's efforts to stop offshore wind through executive action.

U.S. Sen. Chuck Schumer, a New York Democrat, told The Associated Press that the payment “sets a dangerous precedent and is a shortsighted misuse of taxpayer dollars.”

Robin Shaffer, president of the anti-offshore wind group Protect Our Coast New Jersey, applauded what he called “out of the box” thinking. Shaffer said after losing in the courts, the administration needed a way to take back leases that never should have been issued because of the harm offshore wind development causes to the marine environment.

“The Trump administration has been relentlessly creative in its efforts to stop offshore wind development in the U.S.," he said.

While the Republican president has been particularly hostile to offshore wind, he has also blocked dozens of clean energy projects and canceled billions of dollars in grants to promote clean energy, which he derides as the “Green New Scam.” This comes at a time when the U.S. is trying to boost power supplies in an artificial intelligence race against China and keep electricity bills from rising even higher.

The Iran war has also dealt a massive energy shock to the global economy by choking off most exports of crude oil and liquefied natural gas through the Strait of Hormuz.

A vow to stop offshore wind

On the campaign trail, Trump vowed to end the offshore wind industry as soon as he returned to the White House. Trump said wind turbines are horrible and expensive and pose a threat to birds and other wildlife.

Connecticut is getting power from Revolution Wind, an offshore wind project, and estimates it will lower wholesale energy costs for the state. The National Audubon Society, which is dedicated to the conservation of birds, has said climate change is a greater threat to birds.

Trump has long opposed offshore wind energy. In 2015, he lost his yearslong battle to stop an offshore wind farm near Aberdeen in eastern Scotland when Britain’s Supreme Court unanimously ruled against him. Trump claimed the 11 turbines would spoil the view from his golf course.

He wants to boost production of oil, natural gas and coal, which cause climate change, because he argues that doing so would give the U.S. the lowest-cost energy and electricity of any nation in the world.

His first day back in office, he acted on his campaign promise, signing an executive order temporarily halting offshore wind lease sales in federal waters and pausing permitting for all wind projects.

The deal comes after the administration is thwarted by the courts

U.S. District Judge Patti Saris vacated Trump’s executive order blocking wind energy projects on Dec. 8, declaring it unlawful as she sided with state attorneys general from 17 states and Washington, D.C., who challenged the order. The administration is appealing.

Two weeks later, the administration ordered that construction stop on five major East Coast offshore wind projects, citing national security concerns. Developers and states sued, and federal judges allowed all five to resume construction, essentially concluding that the government didn't show that the national security risk was so imminent that construction must halt.

TotalEnergies wasn't one of those; it had already paused its two projects soon after Trump was elected. And the company has now pledged not to develop any new offshore wind projects in the United States. CEO Patrick Pouyanné said the refunded lease fees will finance the construction of a liquefied natural gas plant in Texas and the development of its oil and gas activities, calling it a “more efficient use of capital” in the U.S.

Kit Kennedy, who directs the power division at the Natural Resources Defense Council, said the proposed payment to TotalEnergies was a “boondoggle” that “transfers nearly $1 billion from American taxpayers to a foreign corporation and the oil and gas industry.”

Why is the U.S. using taxpayer dollars “to not develop power when we need energy?” she asked, calling the Trump administration deal a “scam” and harmful to the U.S. economy and environment.

Carl Tobias, a University of Richmond Law School professor who has been following the lawsuits, called it “unorthodox.”

Democrats criticize stopping offshore wind when energy prices are spiking

As crude oil and gasoline prices surge, Democrats in Virginia said the U.S. should be strengthening its energy independence and resilience. Virginia started receiving power on March 23 from an offshore wind project targeted by Trump.

“Giving an energy company $1 billion of taxpayer money to pack up its jobs and invest elsewhere — in the middle of an unpopular and unwise war that is spiking energy costs — is beyond idiotic,” U.S. Sen. Tim Kaine said in a statement to AP.

U.S. Rep. Chellie Pingree, a Maine Democrat, questioned whether the payout is legal under appropriations law and said she would question Interior Secretary Doug Burgum about it at the upcoming budget hearings.

Dozens of commercial leases issued by the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management remain active for wind energy development in the U.S.

Abigail Dillen, president of Earthjustice, said she wouldn't attempt to guess whether the Trump administration will pay to stop any others, but clearly it is willing to go to extreme measures.

“Will they do this again? Maybe,” she said.

TotalEnergies is canceling its U.S. offshore wind projects. Photo via totalenergies.com

TotalEnergies strikes $1B federal deal to exit offshore wind sector

canceled projects

TotalEnergies, a French company whose U.S. headquarters is in Houston, has agreed to redirect nearly $930 million in capital from two offshore wind leases on the East Coast to oil, natural gas and liquefied natural gas (LNG) production.

In its agreement with the U.S. Department of the Interior, TotalEnergies has also promised not to develop new offshore wind projects in the U.S. “in light of national security concerns,” according to a department press release.

Federal agency hails ‘landmark agreement’

The Department of the Interior called the deal a “landmark agreement” that will steer capital “from expensive, unreliable offshore wind leases toward affordable, reliable natural gas projects that will provide secure energy for hardworking Americans.”

Renewable energy advocates object to what they believe is the Trump administration’s mischaracterization of offshore wind projects.

Under the Department of the Interior agreement, the federal government will reimburse TotalEnergies on a dollar-for-dollar basis for the leases, up to the amount that the energy company paid.

“Offshore wind is one of the most expensive, unreliable, environmentally disruptive, and subsidy-dependent schemes ever forced on American ratepayers and taxpayers,” Interior Secretary Doug Burgum said in the announcement. “We welcome TotalEnergies’ commitment to developing projects that produce dependable, affordable power to lower Americans' monthly bills while providing secure U.S. baseload power today — and in the future.”

TotalEnergies cites U.S. policy in move away from U.S. wind power

In the news release, Patrick Pouyanné, chairman and CEO of TotalEnergies, says the company was “pleased” to sign the agreement to support the Trump administration’s energy policy.

“Considering that the development of offshore wind projects is not in the country’s interest, we have decided to renounce offshore wind development in the United States, in exchange for the reimbursement of the lease fees,” Pouyanné says.

TotalEnergies redirects capital to LNG, oil, and natural gas

TotalEnergies will use the $928 million it spent on the offshore wind leases for development of a joint venture LNG plant in the Rio Grande Valley, as well as for production of upstream oil in the Gulf of Mexico and for production of shale gas.

“These investments will contribute to supplying Europe with much-needed LNG from the U.S. and provide gas for U.S. data center development. We believe this is a more efficient use of capital in the United States,” Pouyanné says.

TotalEnergies paid $133.3 million for an offshore wind lease at the Carolina Long Bay project off the coast of North Carolina and $795 million in 2022 for a lease covering a 1,545-megawatt commercial offshore wind facility off the coast of New Jersey.

“TotalEnergies’ studies on these leases have shown that offshore wind developments in the United States, unlike those in Europe, are costly and might have a negative impact on power affordability for U.S. consumers,” TotalEnergies said in a company-issued press release. “Since other technologies are available to meet the growing demand for electricity in the United States in a more affordable way, TotalEnergies considers there is no need to allocate capital to this technology in the U.S.”

Since 2022, TotalEnergies has invested nearly $12 billion to promote the development of oil, LNG, and electricity in the U.S. In 2025, TotalEnergies was the No. 1 exporter of LNG from the U.S.

Industry groups push back on offshore wind pullback

The American Clean Energy Association has pushed back on the Trump administration’s characterization of offshore wind projects.

“The offshore wind industry creates thousands of high-quality, good-paying jobs, and is revitalizing American manufacturing supply chains and U.S. shipyards,” Jason Grumet, the association’s CEO, said in December after the Trump administration paused all leases for large-scale offshore wind projects under construction in the U.S. “It is a critical component of our energy security and provides stable, domestic power that helps meet demand and keep costs low.”

Grumet added that President Trump’s “relentless attacks on offshore wind undermine his own economic agenda and needlessly harm American workers and consumers.” He called for passage of federal legislation that would prevent the White House “from picking winners and losers” in the energy sector and “placing political ideology” above Americans’ best interests.

The National Resources Defense Council offered a similar response to the offshore wind leases being paused.

“In its ongoing effort to prop up waning fossil fuels interests, the administration is taking wilder and wilder swings at the clean energy projects this economy needs,” said Pasha Feinberg, the council’s offshore wind strategist. “Investments in energy infrastructure require business certainty. This is the opposite. If the administration thinks the chilling impacts of this action are limited to the clean energy sector, it is sorely mistaken.”
Texas doesn’t have a rule to capture escaping methane emissions from energy infrastructure. Photo via Getty Images

The EPA is easing pollution rules — here’s how it’s affecting Texas

In the news

The first year of President Trump’s second term has seen an aggressive rollback of federal environmental protections, which advocacy groups fear will bring more pollution, higher health risks, and less information and power for Texas communities, especially in heavily industrial and urban areas.

Within Trump’s first 100 days in office, his new Environmental Protection Agency administrator, Lee Zeldin, announced a sweeping slate of 31 deregulatory actions. The list, which Zeldin called the agency’s “greatest day of deregulation,” targeted everything from soot standards and power plant pollution rules to the Endangerment Finding, the legal and scientific foundation that obligates the EPA to regulate climate-changing pollution under the Clean Air Act.

Since then, the agency froze research grants, shrank its workforce, and removed some references to climate change and environmental justice from its website — moves that environmental advocates say send a clear signal: the EPA’s new direction will come at the expense of public health.

Cyrus Reed, conservation director of the Lone Star Chapter of the Sierra Club, said Texas is one of the states that feels EPA policy changes directly because the state has shown little interest in stepping up its environmental enforcement as the federal government scales back.

“If we were a state that was open to doing our own regulations there’d be less impact from these rollbacks,” Reed said. “But we’re not.”

“Now we have an EPA that isn’t interested in enforcing its own rules,” he added.

Richard Richter, a spokesperson at the state’s environmental agency, Texas Commission on Environmental Quality, said in a statement that the agency takes protecting public health and natural resources seriously and acts consistently and quickly to enforce federal and state environmental laws when they’re violated.

Methane rules put on pause

A major EPA move centers on methane, a potent greenhouse gas that traps heat far more efficiently than carbon dioxide over the short term. It accounts for roughly 16% of global greenhouse gas emissions and is a major driver of climate change. In the U.S., the largest source of methane emissions is the energy sector, especially in Texas, the nation’s top oil and gas producer.

In 2024, the Biden administration finalized long-anticipated rules requiring oil and gas operators to sharply reduce methane emissions from wells, pipelines, and storage facilities. The rule, developed with industry input, targeted leaks, equipment failures, and routine flaring, the burning off of excess natural gas at the wellhead.

Under the rule, operators would have been required to monitor emissions, inspect sites with gas-imaging cameras for leaks, and phase out routine flaring. States are required to come up with a plan to implement the rule, but Texas has yet to do so. Under Trump’s EPA, that deadline has been extended until January 2027 — an 18-month postponement.

Texas doesn’t have a rule to capture escaping methane emissions from energy infrastructure. Richter, the TCEQ spokesperson, said the agency continues to work toward developing the state plan.

Adrian Shelley, Texas director of the watchdog group Public Citizen, said the rule represented a rare moment of alignment between environmentalists and major oil and gas producers.

“I think the fossil fuel industry generally understood that this was the direction the planet and their industry was moving,” he said. Shelley said uniform EPA rules provided regulatory certainty for changes operators saw as inevitable.

Reed, the Sierra Club conservation director, said the delay of methane rules means Texas still has no plan to reduce emissions, while neighboring New Mexico already has imposed its own state methane emission rules that require the industry to detect and repair methane leaks and ban routine venting and flaring.

These regulations have cut methane emissions in the New Mexico portion of the Permian Basin — the oil-rich area that covers West Texas and southeast New Mexico — to half that of Texas, according to a recent data analysis by the Environmental Defense Fund. That’s despite New Mexico doubling production since 2020.

A retreat from soot standards

Fine particulate matter or PM 2.5, one of six pollutants regulated under the Clean Air Act, has been called by researchers the deadliest form of air pollution.

In 2024, the EPA under President Biden strengthened air rules for particulate matter by lowering the annual limit from 12 to 9 micrograms per cubic meter. It was the first update since 2012 and one of the most ambitious pieces of Biden’s environmental agenda, driven by mounting evidence that particulate pollution is linked to premature death, heart disease, asthma, and other respiratory illnesses.

After the rule was issued, 24 Republican-led states, including Kentucky and West Virginia, sued to revert to the weaker standard. Texas filed a separate suit asking to block the rule’s recent expansion.

State agencies are responsible for enforcing the federal standards. The TCEQ is charged with creating a list of counties that exceed the federal standard and submitting those recommendations to Gov. Greg Abbott, who then finalizes the designations and submits them to the EPA.

Under the 9 microgram standard, parts of Texas, including Dallas, Harris (which includes Houston), Tarrant (Fort Worth), and Bowie (Texarkana) counties, were in the process of being designated nonattainment areas — which, when finalized, would trigger a legal requirement for the state to develop a plan to clean up the air.

That process stalled after Trump returned to office. Gov. Greg Abbott submitted his designations to EPA last February, but EPA has not yet acted on his designations, according to Richter, the TCEQ spokesperson.

In a court filing last year, the Trump EPA asked a federal appeals court to vacate the stricter standard, bypassing the traditional notice and comment administrative process.

For now, the rule technically remains in effect, but environmental advocates say the EPA’s retreat undermines enforcement of the rule and signals to polluters that it may be short-lived.

Shelley, with Public Citizen, believes the PM2.5 rule would have delivered the greatest health benefit of any EPA regulation affecting Texas, particularly through reductions in diesel pollution from trucks.

“I still hold out hope that it will come back,” he said.

Unraveling the climate framework

Beyond individual pollutants, the Trump EPA has moved to dismantle the federal architecture for addressing climate change.

Among the proposals is eliminating the Greenhouse Gas Reporting Program, which requires power plants, refineries, and oil and gas suppliers to report annual emissions. The proposal has drawn opposition from both environmental groups and industry, which relies on the data for planning and compliance.

Colin Leyden, Texas state director and energy lead at the nonprofit Environmental Defense Fund, said eliminating the program could hurt Texas industry. If methane emissions are no longer reported, then buyers and investors of natural gas, for example, won’t have an official way to measure how much methane pollution is associated with that gas, according to Leyden. That makes it harder to judge how “clean” or “climate-friendly” the product is, which international buyers are increasingly demanding.

“This isn’t just bad for the planet,” he said. “It makes the Texas industry less competitive.”

The administration also proposed last year rescinding the Endangerment Finding, issued in 2009, which obligates the EPA to regulate climate pollution. Most recently, the EPA said it will stop calculating how much money is saved in health care costs as a result of air pollution regulations that curb particulate matter 2.5 and ozone, a component of smog. Both can cause respiratory and health problems.

Leyden said tallying up the dollar value of lives saved when evaluating pollution rules is a foundational principle of the EPA since its creation.

“That really erodes the basic idea that (the EPA) protects health and safety and the environment,” he said.

___

This story was originally published by The Texas Tribune and distributed through a partnership with The Associated Press.

Trump and Republicans in Congress say the rate reset will boost energy production, jobs and affordability. Photo via Getty Images

States brace for Trump's push to make oil drilling cheap again

Energy news

A Republican push to make drilling cheaper on federal land is creating new fiscal pressure for states that depend on oil and gas revenue, most notably in New Mexico as it expands early childhood education and saves for the future.

The shift stems from the sweeping law President Donald Trump signed in July that rolls back the minimum federal royalty rate to 12.5%. That rate — the share of production value companies must pay to the government — held steady for a century under the 1920 Mineral Leasing Act. It was raised to 16.7% under the Biden administration in 2022.

Trump and Republicans in Congress say the rate reset will boost energy production, jobs and affordability as the administration clears the way for expanded drilling and mining on public lands.

States receive nearly half the money collected through federal royalties, depending on where production takes place. The environment and economics research group Resources for the Future estimates a roughly $6 billion drop in collections over the coming decade.

The stakes are highest in New Mexico, the largest recipient of federal mineral lease payments. The state could could forgo $1.7 billion by 2035 and as much as $5.1 billion by 2050, according to calculations by economist Brian Prest at Resources for the Future.

More than one-third of the general fund budget in the Democratically-led state is tied to the oil and gas industry.

“New Mexico’s impact is way bigger than Wyoming or Colorado or North Dakota,” Prest said, “and that’s just because that’s where the action is on new development.”

The effects will unfold gradually, since federal leases allow a 10-year window to begin drilling and production. Still, state officials say they're already prepping for leaner years.

“It all hurts when you’re losing revenues," said Democratic state Sen. George Muñoz of Gallup, who said lawmakers still hope to invest more in mental health care and support Medicaid, even if federal royalty payments decline. “We’ve learned that until the chicken’s got feathers, we’re not even looking at it."

The higher federal royalty rate was in place for roughly three years while leasing activity was muted, Prest said. New Mexico budget forecasters never tallied the additional income.

New Mexico's nest-egg strategy

A nearly five-fold surge in local oil production since 2017 on federal and state land in New Mexico delivered a financial windfall for state government, helping fund higher teacher salaries, tuition-free college, universal free school meals and more.

The state set aside billions of dollars in investment trusts for future spending in case the world’s thirst for oil falters, including a early childhood education fund to help expand preschool, child care subsidies and home wellness visits for pregnancies and infants.

The state's investment nest egg has grown to $64 billion, second only to Alaska's Permanent Fund. Earnings from the trusts are New Mexico's second-biggest source for general fund spending.

That sturdy financial footing shaped a defiant response to this year’s federal government shutdown, when lawmakers voted to subsidize the state’s Affordable Care Act exchange, cover food assistance and backfill cuts to public broadcasting.

But lawmakers reviewing state finances learned that predictable income fell 1.6% — the first contraction since the start of the COVID-19 pandemic.

Muñoz said matters would be worse if the state had not raised its own royalty rates this year to 25%, from 20%, for new leases on prime oil and gas tracts, while ending a sales moratorium, under legislation he co-sponsored this year.

Encouraged in Alaska

After New Mexico, the states receiving the most federal oil and gas royalties are Wyoming, Louisiana, North Dakota and Texas.

Texas, the nation’s top oil producer, shares the bountiful Permian Basin with New Mexico but has far less federal land and therefore less exposure to changes in royalty policy.

In Alaska, state officials say they are encouraged by the royalty cut, seeing potential for increased development in places like the National Petroleum Reserve-Alaska, where the massive Willow project — approved in 2023 and now under development — is viewed by some as a catalyst for further activity. The reserve is expected to hold its first lease sales since 2019.

“If reduced federal royalty rates stimulate new leasing, exploration and production, that also could increase other kinds of revenue,” said Lorraine Henry, a spokesperson for Alaska’s Department of Natural Resources.

In North Dakota, federal royalties are split evenly between the state and county governments where drilling occurs. State Office of Management and Budget Director Joe Morrissette said the industry’s future remains difficult to forecast.

“There are so many variables, including timing, price, availability of desirable tracts, and federal policies regarding exploration activities,” Morrissette said.

A federal judge has thrown out President Trump's executive order blocking wind energy development, calling it 'arbitrary and capricious.' Photo by Moritz Lange via Unsplash.

Federal judge strikes Trump order blocking wind energy development

wind win

In a win for clean energy and wind projects in Texas and throughout the U.S., a federal judge struck down President Donald Trump’s “Day One” executive order that blocked wind energy development on federal lands and waters, the Associated Press reports.

Judge Patti Saris of the U.S. District Court for the District of Massachusetts vacated Trump’s executive order from Jan. 20, declaring it unlawful and calling it “arbitrary and capricious.”

The challenge was led by a group of state attorneys general from 17 states and Washington, D.C., which was led by New York Attorney General Letitia James. The coalition pushed back against Trump's order , arguing that the administration didn’t have the authority to halt project permitting, and that efforts would critically impact state economies, the energy industry, public health and climate relief efforts.

White House spokesperson Taylor Rogers told the Associated Press that wind projects were given unfair treatment during the Biden Administration and cited that the rest of the energy industry suffered from regulations.

According to the American Clean Power Association, wind is the largest source of renewable energy in the U.S. It provides 10 percent of the electricity generated—and growing. Texas leads the nation in wind electricity generation, accounting for 28 percent of the U.S. total in 2024, according to the U.S. Energy Information Administration.

Several clean-energy initiatives have been disrupted by recent policy changes, impacting Houston projects.

The Biden era Inflation Reduction Act’s 10-year hydrogen incentive was shortened under Trump’s One Big Beautiful Bill Act, prompting ExxonMobil to pause its Baytown low-carbon hydrogen project. That project — and two others in the Houston region — also lost federal support as part of a broader $700 million cancellation tied to DOE cuts.

Meanwhile, Texas House Democrats have urged the administration to restore a $250 million Solar for All grant that would have helped low-income households install solar panels.

Houston U.S. representatives and others from Texas are pushing the Trump administration to reinstate a portion of the $7 billion Biden-era Solar for All program, which aimed to help low-income families reduce their energy costs.. Photo via Pixabay

Texas House Democrats urge Trump administration to restore $250M solar grant

solar grants

Eight Democratic members of the U.S. House from Texas, including two from Houston, are calling on the Trump administration to restore a nearly $250 million solar energy grant for Texas that’s being slashed by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

In a letter to Lee Zeldin, head of the EPA, and Russell Vought, director of the federal Office of Management and Budget (OMB), the House members urged the two officials to reinstate the nearly $250 million grant, which was awarded to Texas under the $7 billion Biden-era Solar for All program. The Texas grant was designed to assist 28,000 low-income households in installing solar panels, aiming to reduce their energy bills.

“This administration has improperly withheld billions in congressionally appropriated funding that was intended to benefit everyday Americans,” the letter stated.

The letter claimed that numerous court rulings have determined the EPA cannot repeal already allocated funding.

“Congress made a commitment to families, small businesses, and communities across this country to lower their utility bills and reduce harmful pollution through investments in clean energy. The Solar for All program was part of that commitment, and the EPA’s actions to rescind this funding effectively undermine that congressional intent,” the House members wrote.

The six House members who signed the letter are:

  • U.S. Rep. Sylvia Garcia of Houston
  • U.S. Rep. Al Green of Houston
  • U.S. Rep. Greg Casar of Austin
  • U.S. Rep. Jasmine Crockett of Dallas
  • U.S. Rep. Lloyd Doggett of Austin
  • U.S. Rep. Julie Johnson of Dallas
  • U.S. Rep. Marc Veasey of Fort Worth

The nearly $250 million grant was awarded last year to the Harris County-led Texas Solar for All Coalition.

In a post on the X social media platform, Zeldin said the recently passed “One Big Beautiful Bill” killed the Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund, which would have financed the $7 billion Solar for All program.

“The bottom line is this: EPA no longer has the statutory authority to administer the program or the appropriated funds to keep this boondoggle alive,” Zeldin said.

Ad Placement 300x100
Ad Placement 300x600

CultureMap Emails are Awesome

Property Showcase

Oxy CEO Vicki Hollub to retire, Reuters reports

retirement plans

Vicki Hollub, CEO of Houston-based Occidental (Oxy), is set to retire this year, Reuters first reported Thursday.

Hollub has held the top leadership position at Oxy since 2016 and has been with the oil and gas giant for more than 40 years. Before being named CEO, she served as chief operating officer and senior executive vice president at the company. She led strategic acquisitions of Anadarko Petroleum in 2019 and CrownRock in 2024, and was the first woman selected to lead a major U.S. oil and gas company.

Reuters reports that a firm date for her retirement has not been set. Richard Jackson, who currently serves as Oxy's COO, is expected to replace Hollub in the CEO role.

Oxy is leading a number of energy transition projects.

It's subsidiary 1PointFive is developing a $1.3 billion direct air capture (DAC) project in the Midland-Odessa area that is slated to be the largest facility of its kind in the world. Known as STRATOS, it's designed to capture up to 500,000 metric tons of CO2 per year.

The company shared recently that Phase 1 of the project is expected to go online in Q2, with Phase 2 ramping up through the remainder of 2026.

“We are immensely proud of the achievements to date and the exceptional record of safety performance as we advance towards commercial startup,” Hollub said of Stratos last year.

“We believe that carbon capture and DAC, in particular, will be instrumental in shaping the future energy landscape,” she added.

Oxy was one of the first to set ambitious net-zero goals. In a 2020 interview during CERAWeek, Hollub outlined Oxy's future as a “carbon management company.”

“Ultimately, I don’t know how many years from now, Occidental becomes a carbon management company, and our oil and gas would be a support business unit for the management of that carbon. We would be not only using [CO2] in oil reservoirs [but] capturing it for sequestration as well,” Hollub said.

Oxy opened its Oxy Innovation Center in the Ion last year, focused on advancing low-carbon technology. It also operates Oxy Low Carbon Ventures, which focuses DAC, carbon sequestration and low-carbon fuels through businesses like 1PointFive, TerraLithium and others.

Hertha Metals named world's  No. 1 most innovative manufacturing co. of 2026

top innovators

Led by Conroe-based Hertha Metals, five organizations in the Houston area earned shoutouts on Fast Company’s list of the World’s Most Innovative Companies of 2026.

Hertha Metals ranked No. 1 in the manufacturing category.

Last year, Hertha unveiled a single-step process for steelmaking that it says is cheaper, more energy-efficient and just as scalable as traditional steel manufacturing. It started testing the process in 2024 at a one-metric-ton-per-day pilot plant.

At the same time, Hertha announced more than $17 million in venture capital funding from investors such as Breakthrough Energy, Clean Energy Ventures, Khosla Ventures, and Pear VC.

“We’re not just reinventing steelmaking; we’re redefining what’s possible in materials, manufacturing, and national resilience,” Laureen Meroueh, founder and CEO of Hertha, said at the time.

Meroueh was also recently named to Inc. Magazine's 2026 Female Founders 500 list.

Hertha, founded in 2022, says traditional steelmaking relies on an outdated, coal-based multistep process that is costly, and contributes up to 9 percent of industrial energy use and 10 percent of global carbon emissions.

By contrast, Hertha’s method converts low-grade iron ore into molten steel or high-purity iron in one step. The company says its process is 30 percent more energy-efficient than traditional steelmaking and costs less than producing steel in China.

Last year, Hertha said it planned to break ground in 2026 on a plant capable of producing more than 9,000 metric tons of steel per year. In its next phase, the company plans to operate at 500,000 metric tons of steel production per year.

Here are Fast Company’s rankings for the four other Houston-area organizations:

  • Houston-based Vaulted Deep, No. 3 in catchall “other” category.
  • XGS Energy, No. 7 in the energy category. XGS’ proprietary solid-state geothermal system uses thermally conductive materials to deliver affordable energy anywhere hot rock is located. While Fast Company lists Houston as XGS’ headquarters, and the company has a major presence in the city, XGS is based in Palo Alto, California.
  • Houston-based residential real estate brokerage Epique Realty, No. 10 in the business services category. Epique, which bills itself as the industry’s first AI brokerage, provides a free AI toolkit for real estate agents to enhance marketing, streamline content creation, and improve engagement with clients and prospects.
  • Texas A&M University’s Nanostructured Materials Lab in College Station. The lab studies nano-structured materials to make materials lighter for the aerospace industry, improve energy storage, and enable the creation of “smart” textiles.

CERAWeek crowns winners of 2026 clean tech pitch competition

top teams

Twelve teams from around the country, including several from Houston, took home top honors at this year's Energy Venture Day and Pitch Competition at CERAWeek.

The fast-paced event, held March 25, put on by Rice Alliance, Houston Energy Transition Initiative and TEX-E, invited 36 industry startups and five Texas-based student teams focused on driving efficiency and advancements in the energy transition to present 3.5-minute pitches before investors and industry partners during CERAWeek's Agora program.

The competition is a qualifying event for the Startup World Cup, where teams compete for a $1 million investment prize.

PolyJoule won in the Track C competition and was named the overall winner of the pitch event. The Boston-based company will go on to compete in the Startup World Cup held this fall in San Francisco.

PolyJoule was spun out of MIT and is developing conductive polymer battery technology for energy storage.

Rice University's Resonant Thermal Systems won the second-place prize and $15,000 in the student track, known as TEX-E. The team's STREED solution converts high-salinity water into fresh water while recovering valuable minerals.

Teams from the University of Texas won first and second place in the TEX-E competition, bringing home $25,000 and $10,000, respectively. The student winners were:

Companies that pitched in the three industry tracts competed for non-monetary awards. Here are the companies named "most-promising" by the judges:

Track A | Industrial Efficiency & Decarbonization

Track B | Advanced Manufacturing, Materials, & Other Advanced Technologies

  • First: Licube, based in Houston
  • Second: ZettaJoule, based in Houston and Maryland
  • Third: Oleo

Track C | Innovations for Traditional Energy, Electricity, & the Grid

The teams at this year's Energy Venture Day have collectively raised $707 million in funding, according to Rice. They represent six countries and 12 states. See the full list of companies and investor groups that participated here.

View All Listings