logo
Federal cuts impact plans to grow Texas grid; advanced energy options face delays

Federal cuts impact plans to grow Texas grid; advanced energy options face delays

The Hill20-03-2025
AUSTIN (KXAN) – A push toward what the Trump administration has called a ' Golden Era of American Energy Dominance ' could be in trouble.
Experts warn that the development of new energy sources, like advanced nuclear reactors and cold fusion, could be facing delays as a result of budget cuts and defunding efforts in the federal government.
'Research universities are being caught up in a broader series of actions,' said Rob Bradner, a Washington D.C.-based attorney and partner with Holland & Knight.
In January, President Trump issued an executive order calling for a pause on federal grants. In February, the judicial branch ordered the administration to unfreeze the funds.
'We are merely looking at parts of the big bureaucracy where there has been tremendous waste and fraud and abuse,' Trump said at the time.
However, according to Bradner, a pause on the issuance of new research grants is creating a pipeline problem which could see many new energy projects delayed.
'Universities are starting to take preemptive action to cut back and to reduce the number of graduate students they're bringing in for next year,' he said, meaning fewer people who can focus on research projects.
Advanced nuclear reactors
'I think that ripple (effect) is going to come through in the next year,' University of Texas associate professor Kevin Clarno said.
Clarno studies one of the new types of reactors that could power Texas. Molten salt nuclear reactors can provide greater heat than traditional nuclear reactors, produce more energy and can even be used to desalinate water.
Molten salt reactors can self seal if a leak does occur. In addition, they burn much hotter and produce more energy than a traditional reactor. (KXAN Graphic)
'In a solid fuel traditional reactor, you're worried about making sure the fuel doesn't melt. In a Molten Salt Reactor, you start out with fuel that's already melted, and so the worst case scenario is it has a leak, it has an accident. And when it hits the ground and it starts to solidify, it starts to cool off,' the professor explained.
One of these reactors will soon be built at Abilene Christian University. That reactor, built with private money, will serve as an example for future reactors. It will also provide data for engineers and researchers.
Clarno said the federal government funds several other nuclear power projects through the Department of Energy.
'They have been funding a lot of commercial companies to 'Hey, let's help you get to the process that you can commercialize these technologies,'' Clarno said.
Energy demand grows in Texas
The development of these new reactors is especially important in Texas.
In February, the Electric Reliability Council of Texas, or ERCOT, issued a new report that forecasted the Texas grid doubling in demand over the next 10 years.
'The Texas grid is about 85,000 megawatts,' Joshua Rhodes, a research scientist at the University of Texas, said. 'That's been growing over time, and it's generally expected to start growing even faster.'
Driving this demand is a push for new data centers in the Lone Star State.
'They want to have power 24/7. Power that doesn't cycle up in the afternoon and down during the night like the residential sector does,' Rhodes said.
This is another advantage with nuclear power. Unlike wind and solar, whose energy generation changes throughout the day, nuclear power is consistent.
Currently, two nuclear power plants operate in Texas and they provide 10 percent of the state's power supply.
Prioritizing new energy
The advancement of nuclear reactors is a priority of the Trump administration. At a recent press conference in Los Alamos, N.M., Energy Secretary Chris Wright said 'almost nothing' has happened in nuclear development in decades.
Wright, who served on the board of a small nuclear reactor company called Oklo prior to joining the administration, included developing advanced nuclear reactors in his list of priorities.
That list was released on Feb. 5.
When will delays hit energy development?
Clarno said the work on new nuclear power will be delayed if cuts hit the national labs. He said many private labs rely on these labs to perform necessary research as part of reactor development.
'There is risk, starting, really, in October, that the National Labs aren't going to be able to deliver on those efforts that they're doing to assist the companies,' Clarno said.
'The administration is expected to, more broadly, push for reductions in indirect costs on grants outside of (the National Institutes of Health) to National Science Foundation, Department of Energy, other major research funders,' Bradner said.
According to Bradner, the administration is also asking agencies not to pay on existing grants. He said this is mostly related to grants for green energy that were funded during the Biden administration.
'Unfortunately people are saying, 'Well, I may have to trim back on that, and I may not be able to do research that has lots of regulatory compliance or lots of other administrative burdens,'' Bradner said.
According to Clarno, all of this leads to more delays in the development of future energy.
'We're probably going to have to expand natural gas,' Rhodes said. 'You know, nuclear is probably a solution that's more at least a decade away, but the AI revolution is here today, and it needs power today.'
Solutions on Texas
There is some movement in Texas to help fund these projects. On March 7, state Sen. Tan Parker (R-Flower Mound) filed Senate Bill 2060 as part of the 89th legislative session.
Called the Texas Advanced Nuclear Deployment Act, the bill would provide the Public Utility Commission access to the Texas Energy Fund. The commission can use these funds for grants to promote the development of advanced nuclear reactor projects in Texas.
That bill has not yet been referred to a committee.
Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Pfizer CEO details talks with Trump administration on tariffs, Most Favored Nations pricing
Pfizer CEO details talks with Trump administration on tariffs, Most Favored Nations pricing

Yahoo

time9 minutes ago

  • Yahoo

Pfizer CEO details talks with Trump administration on tariffs, Most Favored Nations pricing

Pfizer (PFE) CEO Albert Bourla said Tuesday he has a "special relationship" with President Trump, cemented during the COVID-19 pandemic when the two were in regular contact to help speed up vaccine production. That relationship, he said, has created a direct line to discuss some of the headwinds the company faces out of Washington, D.C. In his second term, Trump is targeting the drug industry for high prices and overseas production — threatening tariffs as high as 250% on imported drugs. But Bourla told Yahoo Finance he believes Trump and other officials in D.C. are having productive conversations with industry leaders about tariffs and drug pricing. "I think [Trump] is educated, of course he doesn't go into the details, it's not his job, but he understands the dynamics [of the industry]," Bourla said. When asked about the tariff threat, Bourla shared his understanding from his ongoing discussions. "I don't want to speak for the president, but what he said today, which was very important also, was that it would be a very small tariff in the first couple of years. And then he opened the window for a grace period. Because I had this discussion with him and I had this discussion with multiple other members of the administration," Bourla said. Read more: What Trump's tariffs mean for the economy and your wallet The industry is awaiting the results of an investigation by the administration into how those tariffs will be implemented — and Bourla said the devil will be in the details. Currently, more than 90% of prescriptions in the US are from generics, which are often the cheapest drug type. Branded drugs are often the most expensive and are largely produced in the US. But some early components of the manufacturing process, key chemicals known as active pharmaceutical ingredients (APIs), are often made overseas in Europe or Asia. That will be important to understand when the final ruling for the tariffs is made. "We need to understand if the API will dictate the country of origin, or where the final product is made," Bourla said. Pfizer is also one of the companies that received a letter from Trump last week detailing demands to reduce prices for Medicare and Medicaid enrollees to match the lowest price paid by developing nations, known as Most Favored Nations (MFN). The company is currently planning for the implementation of reduced prices, as well as working on how to mitigate negative impacts, Bourla said. "We are still discussing it with the president. ... The devil could be in the details in these stages," he said. Anjalee Khemlani is the senior health reporter at Yahoo Finance, covering all things pharma, insurance, provider services, digital health, PBMs, and health policy and politics. That includes GLP-1s, of course. Follow Anjalee as AnjKhem on social media platforms X, LinkedIn, and Bluesky @AnjKhem. Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data

How US jobs data is collected — and why it's regularly revised
How US jobs data is collected — and why it's regularly revised

Yahoo

time9 minutes ago

  • Yahoo

How US jobs data is collected — and why it's regularly revised

Recent data on the health of the nation's job market cost Erika McEntarfer, the commissioner of the Bureau of Labor Statistics, her own employment after President Trump lashed out when revisions to earlier months' numbers suggested the economy could be in worse shape than previously thought. 'Last weeks Job's Report was RIGGED,' Trump wrote on Truth Social Monday. The July employment numbers, released last week, showed the US added 258,000 fewer jobs in May and June than what was reported previously. Economists were quick to note the changes, while larger than normal, are routine, factoring in survey data from employers that's slower to arrive, while Trump's actions risk politicizing a crucial economic indicator. Here's how the jobs report is pieced together and why data within it is regularly updated. How 'jobs data' works Every month, the Bureau of Labor Statistics publishes an 'employment situation' report that includes employment, hours, and wage data for workers on nonfarm payrolls from an 'establishment survey' of businesses representing varied sectors of the economy. The report also includes data from a separate 'household survey' on the labor force, employment, and unemployment. The report is closely watched by economists, traders, and businesspeople because it can move markets, influence monetary policy, and reflect the overall health of the economy. The revisions that upset Trump were from the establishment survey, which relies on a survey of about 121,000 businesses and government agencies across the week or pay period that includes the 12th of the month, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics. Estimated data from this survey is always revised twice in the succeeding two months after it's initially published 'to incorporate additional sample receipts from respondents in the survey and recalculated seasonal adjustment factors,' the BLS says in a 'frequently asked questions' page. Put simply, some businesses are slow to respond, so their survey answers are added as they're received, leading to revisions — up or down — in the estimates of new jobs. Importantly, the most recent revisions were within the BLS's confidence interval — the measure of uncertainty in its own estimates — of 'plus or minus 136,000' for the monthly change in total nonfarm employment, said Ryan Sweet, chief US economist at Oxford Economics. May payroll data was revised down by 125,000 jobs to 19,000 jobs gained, while June was revised down by 133,000 to 14,000 jobs gained. Sweet noted that 'if you look at the size of the revisions relative to total employment, they're not significantly larger than what we've seen historically.' In a blog post earlier this year, Michael Madowitz, principal economist for the Roosevelt Institute, wrote that while revisions can lead to some confusion, it's worth reflecting on 'why incurring some temporary confusion, in this case, contributes to the universally respected economic statistics that are central to the long-term stability of the US financial system.' The BLS is showing its work, he noted, which is a good thing. The payroll estimates from establishment surveys are also revised annually to account for wage and employment data from state unemployment insurance tax records. One of these revisions made waves last August when the BLS announced the economy had 818,000 fewer positions in the 12 months ending in March 2024 than initially reported, though that revision itself was also revised earlier this year to 598,000 fewer jobs. Trump has referenced the 818,000 data point as another example of what he perceives as data manipulation to favor Democrats, though it wasn't exactly great news for the Biden administration. 'We were pretty devastated that in August of 2024 in an election year — right kind of in the home stretch there when people were starting to pay attention — BLS did its annual benchmark revision and found that we had added 800,000 fewer jobs than we had thought at that point,' said Alex Jacquez, a former Biden official and the chief of policy and advocacy at the Groundwork Collaborative, a progressive group. Why are the revisions happening? A bigger likely problem than data manipulation is fewer businesses answering the survey. Response rates for the establishment survey have declined sharply in recent years, leading to some worries that the data is becoming more vulnerable to errors. Still, researchers from the Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco wrote in March of the monthly employment gains through 2024 that 'despite the substantial decline in response rates, the incoming data are reassuringly not subject to greater noise, and thus greater uncertainty, than in the past.' But 'it's becoming less of a clear picture of how the labor market is doing in the first estimate' due to the lower survey responses, Sweet said. That's not a knock on the BLS, he added. 'These revisions are normal,' Sweet said. 'It's the nature of the beast of trying to measure a $30 trillion economy.' Additionally, big revisions have occurred in other times of economic weirdness, including the 2008 financial crisis and the COVID-19 pandemic. 'This is why we had massive upwards revisions in the early months of the Biden administration, when a ton of people were coming back into the labor force after COVID lockdowns,' Jacquez said. The US indeed has some weirdness right now, including tariffs, business uncertainty, and immigrant workers leaving the labor force. '(Major revisions) tend to coincide with idiosyncratic times in the labor market, which would make sense. If there's a big recession, there's a bunch of churn and a bunch of things happening in the labor market that wouldn't normally be captured by the standard analysis and regressions that you pull out of the data,' he added. Sign up for the Mind Your Money weekly newsletter By subscribing, you are agreeing to Yahoo's Terms and Privacy Policy Keep watch That's not to say the revisions aren't worth examining, though: the two-month revision was the biggest since 1968 when excluding recessions, economists at Goldman Sachs have said, and could point to some strain in the economy. Even before the most recent jobs report, economists had been watching for recession risks and a slowing job market, making reliable data all the more crucial. In a video appearance on Yahoo Finance, William Beach, McEntarfer's predecessor, said the BLS commissioner has nothing to do with the estimation or preparation of the jobs data, but 'the damage is done' — people who don't follow the BLS that closely may struggle to trust the numbers. 'We're going to take a long time to recover from this,' Beach said. Emma Ockerman is a reporter covering the economy and labor for Yahoo Finance. You can reach her at Sign up for the Mind Your Money newsletter

What's known and not yet known about the Justice Department's scrutiny of Trump-Russia probe origins
What's known and not yet known about the Justice Department's scrutiny of Trump-Russia probe origins

Boston Globe

time10 minutes ago

  • Boston Globe

What's known and not yet known about the Justice Department's scrutiny of Trump-Russia probe origins

Perhaps no issue continues to aggravate President Donald Trump more than the assessment by intelligence officials that Russia interfered in the 2016 election on his behalf and the investigation by law enforcement into whether his campaign colluded with Moscow to tip the outcome of the contest. Robert Mueller, the former FBI director tapped as special counsel by Trump's first Justice Department to investigate, found that Russia had waged a multi-prong operation in Trump's favor and that the Republican president's campaign welcomed the aid. But Mueller did not find sufficient evidence of a criminal conspiracy between Russia and the Trump campaign. Get Starting Point A guide through the most important stories of the morning, delivered Monday through Friday. Enter Email Sign Up As president for a second time, Trump has made no secret of his desire to use the Justice Department as a weapon of retribution against perceived political adversaries he sees as having smeared him, including by calling for Obama-era officials to be jailed. Advertisement And his administration, now more broadly and across multiple agencies, has been engaged in a effort to reopen the long-accepted conclusion — including among prominent Republicans — of Russian interference and to scrutinize the officials involved in reaching that assessment. A Bondi grand jury directive Bondi, a Trump loyalist, has directed Justice Department prosecutors to present evidence related to the Russia inquiry to a grand jury. Grand juries are tools used by prosecutors to issue subpoenas for records and prosecutors and to produce indictments based on the evidence they receive. Advertisement The bar is low for an indictment given that the presentation of evidence by prosecutors is one-sided, though grand juries do have the option to decline to indict and have done so in the past. A person familiar with the matter confirmed Bondi's directive to The Associated Press but key questions remain. It was not disclosed, for instance, which prosecutors are pursuing the investigation, where the grand jury that might hear evidence is located and whether and when law enforcement officials might seek to bring criminal charges. The Justice Department, in an unusual statement last month, appeared to confirm the existence of an investigation into former FBI Director James Comey and former CIA Director James Brennan but provided no details or specifics. Potential targets of probe remain unclear It's not clear who might be targeted in the investigation, but the Trump administration has been aggressively challenging intelligence community conclusions about Russia's actions and intentions that had long ago seemed settled. It's been a welcome diversion for the administration as it confronts a wave of criticism from Trump's base and conservative influencers over the handling of records from the Jeffrey Epstein sex trafficking investigation. In the last month, Trump administration officials and allies have released a series of documents aimed at casting doubt on the extent of interference and at portraying the original Russia investigation as an Obama administration frame-job. The documents have been hailed as incontrovertible proof of a conspiracy, but a close inspection of the records shows they fall well short of that. Among the documents released by Tulsi Gabbard, the administration's director of national intelligence, are emails from 2016 showing that Obama administration officials recognized in 2016 that Russians had not hacked state election systems to manipulate votes in favor of Trump. Advertisement But the absence of evidence that votes were switched — something the Obama administration never alleged — has no bearing on the ample evidence of other forms of Russia interference, including a hack-and-leak operation involving Democratic emails and a covert social media campaign aimed at sowing discord and spreading disinformation. Last week, Sen. Chuck Grassley, the Republican chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, released a previously classified annex of a 2023 report by John Durham, the special counsel appointed by the first Trump administration to hunt for government misconduct in the Russia probe. The annex included a series of emails, including one from July 2016 that was purportedly sent by a senior staffer at a philanthropic organization founded by billionaire investor George Soros, that referred to a plan approved by then-Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton to falsely link Trump to Russia. But Durham's own report took pain to note that investigators had not corroborated the communications as authentic and said the best assessment was that the message was 'a composites of several emails' the Russians had obtained from hacking — raising the likelihood that it was a product of Russian disinformation. Fresh scrutiny has also centered around the intelligence community assessment on Russian election interference, which was published in January 2017. An annex in a classified version of the assessment contained a summary of the so-called Steele dossier — a compilation of opposition research that included uncorroborated rumors and salacious gossip about Trump and Russia. Advertisement The latest in a series of investigations Just as Russian interference has been heavily scrutinized, so too has the U.S. government's response to it. Multiple government reports, including not only from Mueller but also a Republican-led Senate intelligence committee that included current Secretary of State Marco Rubio, have documented Russia's activities in sweeping details. To be sure, reports from the Justice Department inspector general and Durham also identified significant flaws in the FBI's Russia investigation, including errors and omissions in applications the Justice Department submitted to a secretive surveillance court to eavesdrop on a national security adviser to the 2016 Trump campaign. But Durham found no criminal wrongdoing among government officials, bringing three criminal cases — two against private citizens that resulted in acquittals at trial and a third against a little-known FBI lawyer who pleaded guilty to doctoring an email. It is unclear if there is any criminal wrongdoing that exists that Durham, who launched his investigation in 2019 and concluded it four years later, somehow missed during his sprawling inquiry.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store