Bipartisan concerns are rising around the data center boom. Photo via serverfarmllc.com

President Donald Trump, speaking alongside cryptocurrency leaders at the White House, made a statement that Republican and Democratic candidates alike wouldn't touch.

“If I were the mayor of a town or the governor of a state, and I had a chance to get a big plant in, an AI plant or a data center,” Trump said, “I would absolutely want it because the jobs are enormous and the money paid, the taxes paid, are just enormous.”

It's not the kind of message anyone is using in competitive midterm races.

The race to build data centers, which power artificial intelligence and cloud computing, has run aground amid frustration from voters who don't want to live near the massive warehouse campuses. Even the Senate Republicans' campaign arm warned that anger over data centers — some of which dwarf football stadiums and use more energy than small cities — could cost them a seat.

Opposition stretches across the political spectrum because of fears that the behemoths will jack up electricity bills, drain people's water wells, create unhealthy amounts of air and noise pollution and forever change a community's character — all while getting lucrative tax breaks from states competing for their business.

Trump has framed data centers as a necessary component of a top national and economic security priority: winning the AI race against China. However, he also has acknowledged concern over rising electricity bills, previously saying “it’s only fair” for the companies to shoulder their costs.

He also suggested this week that data centers need “a little public relations help.” In recent months, he has gotten tech giants to sign a voluntary pledge to shield U.S. consumers from higher utility bills from data centers, even as he pushes to streamline the process for companies and utilities to build their own power plants.

But building power plants doesn't happen overnight, and the immediate political reality for candidates across the country is far different.

“It is yet another dimension in which the White House appears tone deaf — tone deaf at best and indifferent to the interest of other Republican candidates at worst,” said James Henson, the director of the Texas Politics Project at the University of Texas, Austin, a nonpartisan research organization.

Republican committee issues warning over data centers in Ohio

Statewide candidates from Nevada to Pennsylvania, both Republican and Democratic, are weaponizing data centers against their opponents, and candidates who absorb those attacks are subsequently trying to distance themselves from them.

In Ohio, a data center hot spot with closely contested races for governor and U.S. Senate, the National Republican Senatorial Committee warned in a memo Tuesday that Sen. Jon Husted is vulnerable to losing his seat because of the centers.

Democratic nominee Sherrod Brown is airing attack ads against Husted that call him the “face of data centers in Ohio” as people gather signatures for a statewide referendum to ban their construction.

The Republican memo said it's been a “sleeper issue for the entire election cycle.”

“Brown is using it because it works,” the NRSC said. “More than any other thing in this race, data centers are the anchor hanging around Husted’s neck. If he loses and data centers get the blame, politicians across the country will take notice — and they will not go near the next one.”

The memo suggested voters may balk at Democratic candidates who want to stop data center construction altogether in favor of a Republican candidate who only wants data centers built if a community approves it in a local vote and it pays for its own power, water and other utilities.

Most registered voters oppose building a data center in their area, according to a July Fox News poll.

Still, the issue falls behind other voter concerns, such as cost of living, as November looms. A Quinnipiac Poll conducted in June asked voters what issues were important in deciding who to vote for in U.S. House elections, and about 4 in 10 mentioned AI data centers.

Trump’s statement already put to use in Nevada race

In Nevada, Democrat Aaron Ford quickly tied Trump’s statement to Republican Gov. Joe Lombardo, characterizing them as being in “lockstep on data centers.”

In a statement, Ford said Trump and Lombardo are “Nevada data centers’ biggest cheerleaders” who “only care about catering to their ‘billionaire friends’ while Nevadans pay the price.”

Ford this week unveiled a policy platform in which he said he would halt new state tax breaks for data centers — he estimated them at $200 million currently — while auditing existing projects to ensure they are delivering on promises. He also said he would ensure data centers pay for their electricity needs, do not deplete Nevada’s water supply and help local governments negotiate strong benefits agreements with developers.

Texas' governor changed course and got a jab from Trump

Texas Gov. Greg Abbott, who last November celebrated Google’s announcement of a $40 billion investment there by calling the state “the epicenter of AI development,” is under attack from his Democratic challenger, Gina Hinojosa, over his pursuit of data center development.

Abbott has since changed course by promising tougher action, such as removing the state’s sales tax exemption and holding up projects to review their energy usage.

Trump criticized the shift, saying “I think it's a mistake” in a recent interview with Punchbowl News.

Asked about Trump's support for data centers, Abbott's office said the governor's “top priority is to protect Texans’ safety and quality of life and ensure the integrity of our power grid and water supply.”

“Simply put, Texans must come first,” Abbott's office said.

Data centers complicated Wisconsin governor race

While Trump embraces data centers, even some of his allies are using them for political attacks. U.S. Rep. Tom Tiffany, running for Wisconsin governor, released a TV ad this week branding his Democratic opponent as “Data Center David Crowley.”

The ad includes a clip of Crowley saying Wisconsin could become the “AI and data hub not only for the entire country, but for the entire globe.”

Crowley has said local communities must have veto authority while also calling data centers a part of the modern economy that could bring significant economic benefits to the state.

Tiffany, who Trump has endorsed, has also said positive things about data centers. In January, Tiffany called data centers “exciting new technology,” in an interview with PBS Wisconsin. And last December, he voted for a bipartisan bill known as the SPEED Act, which is designed to accelerate construction of new AI infrastructure projects like data centers. It hasn't passed the Senate.

Neither Tiffany nor Crowley support a moratorium on new data center construction.

Tiffany has called for repealing the state tax incentive for data centers, while Crowley has not. They both have called for stricter regulation.

Crowley, at an event Wednesday where he received the endorsement of the environmental group Clean Wisconsin, downplayed the attacks Tiffany has made against his data center position.

“He’s getting very good at saying one thing and doing something different,” Crowley said, pointing to Tiffany’s votes in support of the SPEED Act.

“What Congressman Tom Tiffany’s doing is lying because he’s trying to run away from his record in Congress,” Crowley said.

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

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

Shift in the Winds

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.

Ad Placement 300x100
Ad Placement 300x600

CultureMap Emails are Awesome

SLB to expand data center cooling business via $4 billion acquisition

cool deal

Houston’s SLB has announced plans to acquire German thermal management and heat exchange technology organization Kelvion for approximately $4 billion.

SLB reports in a news release that the acquisition is expected to boost its Data Center Solutions business, as thermal management technologies are key to cooling artificial-intelligence-related infrastructure. Data centers continue to pose numerous challenges, but SLB believes thermal management technology can help ease energy burdens.

“Data centers are becoming more sophisticated and energy-intensive, and customers are increasingly looking for partners that can optimize how critical systems work together across the facility and help bring new capacity online faster,” Gavin Rennick, president of SLB’s New Energy and Industrial business, said in the release. “Thermal management is central to that challenge, and this acquisition allows us to address it directly by delivering more integrated cooling solutions, accelerating innovation, optimizing thermal efficiency, and more directly embedding thermal management into our modular infrastructure offering.”

SLB will acquire Kelvion from funds managed by New York-based financial services group Apollo Global Management Inc. for approximately $3.4 billion in cash and will assume about $700 million of debt, according to the release. The deal is expected to close in Q1 of 2027.

SLB says the acquisition will help it dramatically scale revenue generated by the data center sector.

“This transaction accelerates our ambition to become an industrial technology partner to the data center industry and help customers address the growing infrastructure complexity required to scale AI,” Olivier Le Peuch, CEO of SLB, added in a news release. “Kelvion advances our path toward more integrated data center infrastructure solutions, expands our addressable market — more than doubling our revenue opportunity per gigawatt of delivered capacity — and allows us to scale both our offerings and the global reach of the business.”

SLB reports that it expects its Data Center Solutions business revenues to grow by more than 90 percent annually between 2024 and 2026.

If the acquisition is approved, the combined company will target revenue of $4.5 billion to $5 billion for its data center solutions business in 2028, according to the release.

Kelvion has previously served customers in AI infrastructure, energy system transformation and energy/ industrial markets. Its past work focuses on heat pumps, renewables, carbon capture and processing solutions for thermal management. According to the news release, Kelvion's data center revenue is expected to reach about $1.2 billion in 2026, and the sector is considered the company’s "largest and fastest-growing end market.

Tesla files plans for Houston-area solar plant & more top energy news

Trending news

Editor's note: Houston energy news in August was fueled by Tesla solar plans, a massive deal for ERock, and Halliburton Labs' newest cohort. Below are the five most-read EnergyCapitalHTX stories published during the second half of the month.

Telsa eyes Houston area for $10 billion solar manufacturing plant

Electric vehicle and clean energy company Tesla is considering building a new $10.1 billion solar cell manufacturing facility in Fort Bend County, according to documents filed with the Texas Comptroller’s Office. If approved, the plant, called Project Sun City, would be located on a 3,050-acre site off FM 762 and FM 1994 in Richmond, Texas. Tesla aims to finish construction in 2028, with the plant being operational by early 2029. Continue reading.

Houston’s data center capacity set to grow 80%, report says

Houston stands to benefit from constraints dogging data center markets elsewhere in Texas, a new report indicates. This comes against the backdrop of Texas surpassing Virginia as the country’s top state for data centers — and amid deepening opposition to these facilities. The report, published by commercial real estate services provider JLL, foresees Houston continuing to gain traction in data center development as occupants seek “scalable alternatives” to Texas markets experiencing supply-and-demand imbalances. Continue reading.

EV surge could shutter 40 refineries by 2040, Wood Mackenzie report warns

The rise of electric vehicles could spell trouble for Houston’s oil and gas sector, a new report suggests. But the oil and gas industry stands to benefit from potential sluggishness in U.S. adoption of EVs. If worldwide EV adoption rises as expected, global oil demand could fall by five million barrels per day by 2040, accelerating the closure of about 40 oil refineries, says the report, published by energy research and consulting firm Wood Mackenzie. The firm’s North American hub is in Houston. Continue reading.

ERock scores Anthropic deal, sees order backlog soar to $1.7B

Two months after its $400 million IPO, Houston-based ERock (NYSE: EROC) has landed a power-generator deal with AI powerhouse Anthropic, owner of the Claude platform. In its Q2 earnings report, ERock says it will provide equipment to Anthropic with a 470-megawatt capacity. ERock specializes in utility-grade, onsite microgrid power systems for data centers and other customers. The company previously did business as Enchanted Rock. Continue reading.

Halliburton Labs adds 3 energy, materials startups to Houston incubator

Three new companies have joined Halliburton Labs, the incubator for early-stage energy and hardtech startups run by Houston energy giant Halliburton. Halliburton Labs provides the emerging companies with mentorship, industry connections, laboratory access and other resources as they work toward commercialization. The latest companies to join the incubator focus on battery materials, resource recovery and gas separation solutions to address some of the "key bottlenecks in the energy and industrial landscape." Continue reading.

Houston geothermal startup bumps Series B to $180M with Nabors investment

fresh funding

Houston-based geothermal startup Quaise Energy has closed its Series B fundraising round at $180 million after inking a significant investment from another local energy leader.

Quaise, which is developing a 50-megawatt superhot geothermal plant in Oregon, announced a "first close" of the round last month at $134 million, led by San Francisco-based investment firm Prelude Ventures. The $46 million bump has been fueled by a $35 million investment from Houston-based Nabors Industries.

The funding will go toward the continued development of the company's superhot geothermal plant, Project Obsidian, as well as the commercialization of Quaise's millimeter-wave drilling system, according to a news release.

“We are unlocking the most powerful clean energy source on Earth, and the Series B signals deep conviction across a wide range of investors,” Carlos Araque, Quaise CEO and president, said in the release. “Nabors is an invaluable partner as we move millimeter wave drilling to full commercial operations at Project Obsidian and beyond.”

Nabors, a repeat investor in Quaise, has also entered into a strategic framework agreement with Quaise. Under the agreement, Quaise will have access to a dedicated Nabors land rig and drilling platform. Nabors will also provide expertise in reservoir modeling, well design and drilling strategy.

Last year, Quaise drilled to a depth of about 330 feet using its millimeter-wave technology at its field site in Central Texas. Canary Media previously reported that Quaise plans to drill to nearly 3,300 feet later this year and to deploy its millimeter-wave technology at its power plant in 2027. The plant is expected to deliver power to the Pacific Northwest in 2030.

Quaise and Nabors say the partnership will improve drilling performance, reduce costs and accelerate project timelines.

“Superhot geothermal has the potential to make clean energy ubiquitous. That is why we are excited about our close relationship with Quaise,” Anthony Petrello, president and CEO of Nabors, added in the release. “Quaise’s millimeter wave technology changes the equation entirely by reaching superhot rock at temperatures and depths that are inaccessible with conventional drilling, transforming geothermal from a location-dependent resource into a global energy solution. Combined with Nabors’ drilling expertise and infrastructure, we see a path to gigawatt-scale geothermal power that no other company can offer today.”

Quaise reports that with the latest funding, it has now raised $280 million. It raised $21 million in a Series A1 financing round in 2024 and a $52 million Series A in 2022.

The company announced in March that it was aiming to raise $200 million for Project Obsidian through $100 million in Series B funding, plus an additional $100 million from grants, debt and project-level finance.