So, where exactly does the US energy transition stand?

This analysis and news roundup come from the Canary Media Weekly newsletter. Sign up to get it every Friday.

Glass half-empty or glass half-full?

The classic question is now gripping the policy wonks who are trying to measure the damage President Donald Trump has inflicted on the U.S. energy transition — and to figure out what direction to take climate policy from here.

In July, the MIT Center for Energy and Environmental Policy Research released a report arguing that, when it comes to cutting emissions from the electricity sector, the glass remains half full despite Trump’s policies. Report author Lily Bermel found that U.S. power sector emissions are still on track to decline substantially by 2035.

Other analysts and energy modelers are more pessimistic. Amanda Levin of the Natural Resources Defense Council published a rebuttal in Heatmap this week, highlighting a recent peer-reviewed study and modeling from Energy Innovation that finds the U.S. will achieve less than half of the emissions reductions it would have under Biden-era policies. (To be clear: Those are economywide figures, while Bermel is focused on the power sector.)

Let’s state the obvious: No one really knows how full or empty the glass is. The factors that will make or break the next decade of the energy transition are incredibly hard to model.

Right now, clean energy is booming. Yes, Trump eliminated tax credits for wind and solar, but lots of projects were able to grandfather in their incentives so long as they finish construction in four years. Most modelers expect clean-energy deployment to look pretty healthy until 2030, though it’s possible Trump’s persistent efforts to stymie permitting for solar and especially wind will lead to more cancellations.

But after 2030, as Canary Media’s Julian Spector put it in a July article on the Rhodium Group’s analysis of this question, all bets are off.

The range of possibilities in Rhodium’s report is astonishing: In the most optimistic of its three scenarios, the U.S. continues building clean power at the blazing speed of roughly 53 gigawatts per year from 2030 to 2040. In the most pessimistic scenario, in which Rhodium assumes lower natural gas prices and higher clean energy costs, renewable additions drop to an average of just 3 GW per year. There’s also the wild card of data centers, which are driving big but uncertain demand for new gas power plants.

The early 2030s are the hinge years. And their outcomes depend on a medley of unknowable future market forces — and on the results of the 2028 U.S. presidential election.

That brings us to the second leg of this debate: Given where the energy transition is at, what should Democrats do if they regain power in 2029?

Bermel argues that the Dems should forget about reinstating the tax credits for mature wind and solar tech. In her view, it’s time to move on and prioritize permitting reform as well as efforts to boost earlier-stage ​“clean firm” tech like geothermal and advanced nuclear.

Levin at NRDC agrees that permitting reform should be a priority. But she makes the case that wind and solar tax credits are still important because they guarantee that these carbon-free technologies will beat fossil fuels — namely gas — on price. Plus, tax credits mean utility customers pay less for large-scale clean energy projects, which is crucial as bills rise and Trump’s policies make renewables more expensive.

That last point about affordability has been echoed by some in the industry. Kevin Smith, CEO of the clean energy developer Cypress Creek Renewables, made a similar case during a recent conference. ​“We can compete without tax credits right now,” he said of clean energy companies. ​“The issue is affordability. And I think the Democrats will start pushing tax credits as an affordability issue, and they may have a point.”

More big energy stories

Tesla’s solar roof shingles are officially toast

Nearly a decade ago, Elon Musk borrowed the set of ​“Desperate Housewives” to show off Tesla’s newest product: solar-generating tiles that cover a rooftop like shingles. Tesla would be putting the solar tiles on 1,000 roofs a week by 2020, Musk predicted at the time. But by the time 2022 rolled around, Tesla had only installed about 3,000 solar roofs, and the tiles only made up 0.17% of residential solar capacity installed in the U.S. that year.

Now, as Julian Spector and Dan McCarthy report, Tesla is discontinuing its solar shingles, and will instead double down on traditional solar panels. The company recently announced plans to build a $10.1 billion solar cell factory in Texas that it says will be able to churn out 100 GW of integrated solar panels each year.

That would be a huge deal — if it happens. Altogether, every solar factory in the U.S. can only make a combined 65 GW of panels each year, so Tesla would have to take its manufacturing capacity through the roof to make that happen.

Clean energy is on track for a war-spurred milestone

Despite stagnant investment, renewables are still on track to hit a global milestone in 2026.

According to a fresh BloombergNEF analysis, the world invested about $327.5 billion into solar, wind, and other renewable energy sources in the first six months of 2026 — about the same amount as in the second half of 2025. Investment in standalone utility-scale solar power actually shrank to its lowest level in years, but investment in solar-plus-storage hit a record of more than $25 billion, while residential solar investment also skyrocketed.

While coal power generation has rebounded this year amid oil and gas shortages spurred by the war in Iran, clean power sources are expected to produce more electricity than coal for the first time ever this year, the International Energy Agency estimates — and surging demand for rooftop solar is a big reason why.

Clean energy news to know this week

Trump’s electrical blackout: President Donald Trump bans the ​“acquisition, importation, transfer, or installation” of foreign-made bulk-power electrical equipment from certain countries, though the DOE will first have to determine targeted equipment’s risk before the order can bar their import. (Project Finance)

The Army goes nuclear: The U.S. Army plans to award up to $2.2 billion to five companies to build small nuclear reactors at military bases around the country, with Antares Nuclear, General Atomics, and Westinghouse among the awardees. (New York Times, Axios)

Canada fights back: Ontario Premier Doug Ford threatens to slow or halt power exports to the U.S. in response to the Trump administration’s new tariffs on a range of Canadian goods. (Utility Dive)

Data-center gas-plant update: Around 189 gigawatts of natural gas capacity to power data centers has been announced, entered pre-construction, or started being built, up from 97 GW at the end of last year. (Heatmap, Global Energy Monitor)

Wind’s Maine event: After nearly two decades spent trying to build utility-scale wind power in its far northern reaches, Maine has finally approved an 800-MW array and a 1.2-GW transmission line that will be built near the Canadian border. (Canary Media)

Not-so-public comment: The U.S. EPA looks to eliminate a federal requirement that states seek public input on applications for air pollution permits for data centers and other industrial facilities. (New York Times)

Solar saves Europe’s summer: Europe has seen record heat and drought this year that has jeopardized power production from nuclear, fossil fuel, and wind sources, but solar performed better than normal and helped keep ACs running amid sky-high temperatures. (Grist)