![[Episode #269] – Trump’s War on the Energy Transition](/cdn-cgi/image/width=3840,quality=75,format=auto,fit=cover/https://cdn.xenetwork.org/ets/wp-content/uploads/sites/2/powerpress/ETS-PodcastArtwork-full.png)
The Energy Transition Show with Chris Nelder
[Episode #269] – Trump’s War on the Energy Transition
The Energy Transition Show with Chris Nelder
•February 11, 2026•27 min
0
The Energy Transition Show with Chris Nelder•Feb 11, 2026
Why It Matters
Understanding the legal battles over Trump’s energy policies is crucial because they determine the pace at which the United States can meet its climate and energy security objectives. The episode reveals how judicial pushback can protect the energy transition, making the stakes of these lawsuits directly relevant to investors, policymakers, and anyone concerned about the future of clean power.
Key Takeaways
- •Trump orders keep six coal plants operating despite retirement plans
- •DOE uses emergency provision of Federal Power Act ambiguously
- •States sue, arguing “emergency” definition is too broad
- •Courts likely to set precedent limiting federal preemption
- •Energy transition progresses overseas while US faces legal setbacks
Pulse Analysis
The episode opens with a stark picture of President Trump’s aggressive push to keep aging coal‑fired generators online. Six plants in Indiana, Michigan, Colorado, Pennsylvania and Washington have received a series of 90‑day emergency orders from the Department of Energy, extending operations well beyond the retirement dates set in state‑approved Integrated Resource Plans. Host Chris Nelder and Harvard Law’s Ari Pesco detail how these orders cite a vague "national energy emergency" and resource‑adequacy warnings from NERC, despite no request from utilities, grid operators, or state regulators. This unilateral federal action sits at the heart of what the hosts call Trump’s war on the energy transition.
The legal battle centers on Section 202C of the Federal Power Act, a rarely invoked clause meant for short‑term crises like hurricanes. The hosts explain that the statute’s definition of "emergency" is unsettled, and the Trump administration appears to be stretching it to preempt state‑level climate goals and IRP‑driven retirements. Lawsuits filed by Michigan, Illinois, Minnesota and other states argue that the orders overstep federal authority and ignore established state and regional planning processes. Pesco predicts the Michigan case will become the controlling precedent, potentially forcing courts to narrow the emergency definition and curtail further DOE preemption.
Beyond the courtroom, the discussion underscores broader market dynamics. While U.S. policymakers wrestle with legal wrangling, offshore wind auctions in Europe set records, China’s coal usage trends shift, and battery storage projects surge in PJM. These signals suggest the global energy transition is accelerating despite domestic setbacks. The hosts conclude that the outcome of the federal lawsuits will shape the pace of clean‑energy deployment in the United States, determining whether federal power can be used to stall or support the shift toward renewables.
Episode Description
Can the energy transition in the US survive President Trump’s attacks on it?
Show Notes
Free mini‑episode – Length: 27:20
In the first year of his second term, President Donald Trump waged an all‑out war on the energy transition. His administration canceled hundreds of projects created under the Inflation Reduction Act, IIJA, and CHIPS Act, blocked offshore wind farm development, and forced aging fossil‑fueled power plants to continue operating after their utility owners planned to shut them down. It weaponized every federal agency from Interior to the Department of Commerce against renewable energy, seized Venezuela’s oil, and pulled the US out of participation in key UN climate bodies.
The results have been staggering. Over 22 GW of wind and solar projects have been thwarted or thrown into limbo, and fully half of the country’s planned new power capacity, some 117 GW, is at risk of delay. The Department of Energy has issued “emergency” orders to keep six aging coal and gas plants open, invoking a provision of the Federal Power Act originally written for wartime. None of these federal interventions were requested by a utility, grid operator, or state regulator. Courts have been pushing back hard, calling these actions arbitrary, capricious, unreasonable, and seemingly unjustified.
Whether any of these executive actions will survive is the central question. In today’s conversation, we are rejoined by Ari Peskoe, Director of the Electricity Law Initiative at Harvard Law School, to walk through dozens of Trump’s energy interventions and assess which ones are likely to hold up against the growing wave of legal challenges being brought against them. As we discuss, the courts are doing a surprisingly effective job of striking down the administration’s illegal maneuvers. But every project delayed or canceled while the cases grind through court is inflicting real damage on the energy transition.
Guest
Ari Peskoe – Director of the Electricity Law Initiative at Harvard Law School. He has written extensively about electricity regulation, on issues ranging from rooftop solar to constitutional challenges to states’ energy laws.
-
Twitter: @AriPeskoe
Recording date: January 21, 2026
Air date: February 11, 2026
Geek rating: 1 ★ (see FAQ)
0
Comments
Want to join the conversation?
Loading comments...