Electrifying Asia – where EVs are reshaping power demand and fuel use

/ Michael Förtsch - UnsplashFacebookTwitter

LinkedInTelegramFlipboardFeedly

By Mark Buckton in Taipei July 28, 2026

Asia’s electric vehicle revolution is no longer simply a transport story. Across much of East and Southeast Asia it is now becoming a major electricity story, altering how power is generated, accelerating investment in renewable energy and, over time, reducing the existing demand for imported oil and LNG. The shift is uneven though.

China dominates in scale, as might be expected, while countries such as Thailand, Vietnam and Indonesia are quickly emerging as manufacturing and policy hubs. Taiwan, meanwhile, has carved out its own distinctive niche through electric scooters and battery swapping technology.

The most immediate effect of EV adoption in recent years is largely straightforward. Every battery-powered car, bus or scooter replacing an internal combustion engine reduces petrol or diesel consumption. And what replaces those fuels depends on the electricity mix in any given country. Where coal still dominates, emissions savings are smaller – for obvious reasons. Where renewables are expanding rapidly, however, electrified transport increasingly runs on solar, wind or even hydropower.

China offers the clearest and by far the world’s best example. It is the world’s largest EV market by a wide margin and has simultaneously built the world’s largest solar and wind generation capacity. Beijing is increasingly shifting energy demand away from imported crude oil and towards domestically generated electricity, according to the International Energy Agency’s (IEA) Global EV Outlook 2026 and figures from China’s own National Energy Administration (NEA). That does not eliminate fossil fuels from the system. What it does though is change where they are consumed and in turn reduces the exposure to the ever volatile oil markets.

The interaction then between EVs and renewable electricity is becoming increasingly important. Vehicle charging typically occurs overnight when cars and scooters are not being used. This helps to absorb off-peak generation, while smart charging systems increasingly encourage motorists to recharge when renewable output is abundant – and in some cases when power being supplied to homes is cheaper. In the future it has been speculated that millions of vehicle batteries could even provide grid balancing services through vehicle-to-grid technology, although commercial deployment of such remains limited, the IEA says.

For LNG exporters, this matters – and hurts. Gas-fired generation has often been viewed as the natural partner for intermittent renewable energy because it can ramp output quickly. Yet rapid growth in battery storage in China and across Asia is beginning to challenge that assumption.

As battery costs fall – and they are, rapidly - utilities can increasingly pair solar farms with storage rather than relying solely on gas-fired peaking plants, according to BloombergNEF’s Energy Storage Market Outlook.

The IEA’s Southeast Asia Energy Outlook 2026 meanwhile, expects electricity to become the backbone of Southeast Asia’s energy system over the coming coming decades. EV sales in the region more than doubled during 2025 to about half a million vehicles, representing nearly 20% of all new vehicle sales. Electric two- and three-wheelers are expected to account for almost 60% of these sales figures by 2035.

And as electricity demand will continue rising rapidly, oil use in transport will grow much more slowly than vehicle ownership. One day it will start to drop.

Thailand has emerged as arguably Southeast Asia’s leading EV production centre. Generous incentives have attracted Chinese manufacturers including BYD, Great Wall Motor and Shanghai Automotive Industry Corporation (SAIC), alongside domestic investment in charging infrastructure. The country’s own expanding solar industry complements the transport transition, allowing an increasing share of vehicle charging to come from renewable electricity rather than imported oil, according to Thailand’s Board of Investment (BOI) and the IEA.

Vietnam is also following a similar path. Domestic manufacturer VinFast has driven rapid EV adoption across the country’s main cities of Ho Chi Minh, Hanoi and Da Nang, while the government continues expanding solar and wind capacity after one of the world’s fastest solar installation programmes. This combination is gradually shifting transport energy demand from imported fuels towards domestically generated electricity, according to the International Renewable Energy Agency (IRENA).

Indonesia to the south and Southeast Asia’s most populous nation, presents a different model. Rich in nickel reserves, it has positioned itself as a battery manufacturing hub rather than simply an EV market.

As such, Chinese and South Korean companies have invested heavily in battery plants and vehicle assembly. At the same time, Indonesia continues adding geothermal, hydropower and solar capacity, although coal still dominates electricity generation for now. As the power mix gradually decarbonises, however, the climate benefits of EVs will increase correspondingly, Indonesia’s Ministry of Energy and Mineral Resources states.

Neighbouring Malaysia and Singapore are pursuing complementary strategies. Singapore’s emphasis lies in charging infrastructure, smart grids and fleet electrification rather than vehicle manufacturing for which it simply does not have the space. Malaysia has focused on attracting investment into battery components and EV assembly as Kuala Lumpur expands solar generation through large-scale solar auctions, according to the Jakarta-based ASEAN Centre for Energy (ACE).

Taiwan, also limited in size, has taken a distinctive approach centred on two-wheel transport. Rather than prioritising electric cars, it has become synonymous with Gogoro’s battery-swapping ecosystem although there are others now trying to carve a niche for themselves. Millions of battery swaps occur every month across thousands of stations, allowing riders to exchange depleted batteries in seconds instead of waiting for charging. The model reduces range anxiety while providing a potentially valuable distributed energy asset, according to Gogoro’s annual sustainability and investor reports even if customers do complain of battery capacities, even when fully charged, gradually decreasing.

Similar battery-swapping concepts are now being explored elsewhere in Asia, including India, Indonesia and the Philippines, although none has yet matched Taiwan’s scale.

Electric scooters are particularly significant because two-wheelers dominate urban transport across much of Southeast Asia and into the South Asia region.

Indonesia, Vietnam and Thailand collectively have well over 200mn motorcycles. Even Taiwan with a population of around 24mn has 14mn registered scooters on the road.

Electrifying even a fraction of that fleet produces immediate reductions in petrol demand while requiring relatively modest battery capacity compared with passenger cars. Gogoro has reportedly sought partnerships in Indonesia, India and other regional markets to export its battery-swapping model.

And with renewable energy infrastructure increasingly following EV deployment, China remains the clear leader, manufacturing most of the world’s solar panels, batteries and EVs while continuing massive investment in wind and solar generation.

But with Vietnam an important solar manufacturing base, while Thailand and Indonesia are expanding both renewable generation and battery supply chains, these countries too increasingly see transport electrification and renewable power as parts of a single industrial strategy rather than separate sectors.

That does not mean LNG demand disappears or will, overnight. In many Asian electricity systems, gas remains the preferred flexible generation source capable of balancing intermittent solar and wind output. The IEA’s Southeast Asia Energy Outlook 2026 expects natural gas to continue playing an important role in regional power systems, particularly where coal is displaced. However, stronger renewable deployment combined with battery storage could moderate long-term LNG demand growth compared with earlier expectations. And much sooner than expected.

Oil on the other hand faces a more direct challenge. Every additional EV permanently removes future demand for petrol or diesel. While aviation, shipping and heavy industry will continue consuming hydrocarbons for decades, passenger road transport is steadily shifting towards electricity. According to the IEA’s Southeast Asia Energy Outlook 2026, EVs and biofuels in Asia and worldwide could eventually displace oil demand equivalent to a substantial share of the region’s crude imports under more ambitious policy scenarios.

To this end, and given that electrification, coupled with domestic renewable generation, offers greater energy security as well as lower emissions, the result is a structural shift in Asia’s energy landscape. Transport is becoming increasingly tied to electricity rather than oil, while electricity itself is becoming progressively cleaner. The winners are likely to be countries capable of building integrated ecosystems spanning renewable generation, batteries, charging networks and EV manufacturing.

Driving Influence: China’s EV Strategy In South Asia And Implications For India – Analysis

An XPeng electric car showroom at the Taikoo Li Sanlitun shopping center in Beijing, China. Photo Credit: Raysonho, Wikipedia Commons
s
July 29, 2026
Observer Research Foundation

By Aditya Gowdara Shivamurthy and Sakshi Kapoor

Key Takeaways:

China has rapidly become the dominant supplier of electric vehicles and related ecosystems (batteries, charging infrastructure, software) to South Asian countries, driven by competitive pricing, state-backed overcapacity, and alignment with local green-transition goals.

This expansion creates long-term structural dependence on Chinese technology, standards, spare parts, and critical minerals, while raising security concerns over data collection from connected vehicles and potential intelligence risks.

The trend erodes India’s traditional advantages in automobile and petroleum trade with its neighbors and challenges New Delhi’s efforts to expand its own EV manufacturing and regional influence.

In April 2026, Asia became the largest buyer of Chinese electric vehicles (EVs), as Chinese exports jumped by almost 40 percent. Within this broader trend, South Asian nations – Nepal, Bangladesh, Sri Lanka, Pakistan, Bhutan and the Maldives – are emerging as important markets. Through the export of vehicles, batteries, charging infrastructure and digital ecosystems, Beijing is steadily restructuring South Asia’s technological standards. China exports not just products but complete mobility systems designed to generate long-term structural reliance that binds importing nations to Chinese manufacturers, standards and supply chains. This will have long-term implications for the region by creating dependency and security challenges, and by eroding India’s trade advantages.
China’s Domestic EV Transformation and Global Leadership

China’s dominance of the global EV industry is the outcome of three decades of sustained state-led effort. Between 2009 and 2023, China invested over US$230.8 billion in the EV industry. Government spending has been the primary driver, accounting for 60 percent of total global spending in 2025. Schemes such as purchase tax exemptions, performance-linked incentives and scrappage schemes have accelerated adoption, while large-scale investment has enabled China to account for 80 percent of the world’s installed charging capacity. In 2025, it sold 13 million electric cars, accounting for 65 percent of global EV sales, with sales projected to reach 14 million in 2026. Chinese automobile firms – BYD, SAIC, Geely, Changan, NIO and Xpeng – have emerged as major players across the world. At the centre of this ecosystem is Contemporary Amperex Technology Co., Limited, which controls 38 percent of the global lithium-ion battery supply, exemplifying how vertical integration has solidified China’s position.


China’s drive to dominate the sector is fuelled by both ambition and vulnerability. It seeks to break the historical pattern of Western and Japanese dominance in the conventional automobile sector. EVs offer a domain in which China can set standards, shape supply chains and gain a long-term technological advantage, while reducing its exposure to oil import shocks and advancing its 2060 carbon neutralitytargets. It has built a highly integrated system spanning the mining, refining and processing of key minerals, large-scale battery and component manufacturing, and software and charging infrastructure. China controls around 70 percent of global rare earth mining, 90 percent of separation and processing, and over 80 percent of lithium-ion battery manufacturing. Additionally, China has been expanding abroad because of its overcapacity and domestic price wars amid slowing demand.

Expansion of Chinese EV Ecosystem in South Asia

South Asia has emerged as an increasingly attractive destination for China’s EV industry. The West imposes high tariffs and other non-tariff barriers on the country, whereas South Asian markets offer expanding consumer bases, favourable investment conditions and policy alignment with national green transition agendas. Nepal aims for carbon neutrality by 2045, Sri Lanka targets net-zero by 2050, Bhutan emphasises sustainability via Gross National Happiness, and Bangladesh pursues 30 percent EV deployment by 2030. Furthermore, the rising cost and risk of importing fuel, along with multiple economic shocks since COVID-19, are motivating countries to embrace this transition. This creates a window for monopolistic Chinese firms to systematically exploit South Asian markets.

Chinese EVs also stand out for their competitive pricing. In Nepal, Chinese manufacturers account for the majority of new EV sales, owing to their affordable pricing. Dealers earn higher margins on Chinese vehicles than on those of other players. A mature manufacturing supply chain, lower input costs and favourable financing conditions allow China to offer the world’s lowest battery prices. Another tool of expansion is Government-to-Government assistance. For instance, in January 2026, China donated 100 electric buses to Sri Lanka for its major Colombo-Kandy and Colombo-Galle routes; similar gestures have been extended to Nepal. Such grants build familiarity and consumer appeal, while also creating dependence on Chinese spare parts and maintenance services. Recently, Sri Lanka requested Chinese assistance in building charging stations nationwide.

Chinese firms have also pursued assembly operations in the region. In Pakistan, BYD has established a facility, but operations remain limited, with no local R&D or component manufacturing. Bangladesh shows a similar pattern. Since the 2021 National Electric Mobility Action Plan was initiated, China has continued to establish distributor networks and explore battery assembly in export zones, though investments are yet to materialise. At the same time, Bangladesh’s structural dependence on Chinese capital across sectors gives Chinese firms preferential access that Asian and European competitors lack. With supply lines and local partnerships already in place, market entry is easier for Chinese firms. This also provides a way to bundle in vehicle software and connected charging networks, and to integrate them.

There has been a significant increase in both the value and the number of Chinese EV units imported into South Asia between 2019 and 2025 (as Table 1 and Graph 1 show). The year 2019 is taken as the baseline, given the noticeable shift in EV trade that year. In Nepal and Bhutan, around 90 percent and 60 percent, respectively, of vehicles imported from China are EVs. Graph 1 shows that imports have increased significantly in Sri Lanka, and moderately in Pakistan, the Maldives and Bangladesh. The demand for EVs has fuelled an increase in total imports of Chinese vehicles since 2019, with Bangladesh as an exception. Table 2 shows that Chinese EV imports dominate the EV market in the region, with Bangladesh and the Maldives being exceptions. While Japanese vehicles and two-wheelers have dominated the Maldivian market, Bangladesh, until recently, lacked a policy framework and public appetite for EVs. This is gradually changing.

Table 1. China’s Vehicle and EV Trade with South Asia

Source: Authors’ collation from UN Comtrade and official trade statistics from respective countries’ ministries. Note: *Figures are approximate and represent average estimates, as reported values vary across sources. **Total Vehicle Imports are derived from WCO HS Code 8703: Passenger vehicles (all types), whereas EV Imports are derived from HS 870380: Battery electric vehicles (pure EVs) category.

Graph 1. China’s Share of EVs in Imports into South Asia

Source: Authors’ own


Table 2. Chinese Dominance in the South Asian EV Market

Source: Authors’ collation from UN Comtrade and trade statistics from respective countries’ official websites. Note: *Figures are approximate and represent average estimates, as reported values vary across sources. ** Total Vehicle Imports are derived from WCO HS Code 8703: Passenger vehicles (all types), whereas EV Imports are derived from HS 870380: Battery electric vehicles (pure EVs) category.

EVs as a Diplomatic Instrument and Their Strategic Implications

China’s expanding EV footprint risks creating a new form of “dependency diplomacy,” in which technological and industrial reliance translates into long-term economic influence. Sri Lanka, for example, possesses critical minerals but lacks the processing capacity to convert them into battery-grade materials. For South Asian economies, developing even parts of the full value chain requires large investment, sustained policy action and time. Furthermore, these countries depend on China for critical minerals, advanced components and chips. When batteries degrade, nations face expensive replacements or premature retirement of vehicles, owing to a lack of battery recycling capacity. Given China’s technology-transfer restrictions, assembly lines are expected to generate only logistics and retail employment. This makes it difficult for South Asian economies to develop genuine domestic manufacturing capacity.

Security concerns also persist regarding these imports. Modern, internet-enabled Chinese vehicles generate detailed location data, driving patterns and camera feeds, which are stored on cloud servers. The most advanced variants function as ‘smartphones on wheels‘, equipped with facial recognition, AI systems and over-the-air software updates. This is further complicated by China’s National Intelligence Law, which obliges individuals and companies to assist state intelligence, opening up the possibility of Chinese authorities accessing this data. In sensitive environments, this could enable the tracking of movements near ports, diplomatic sites or military installations, as well as remote interference with vehicle fleets. Such concerns have already been raised in Norway and Denmark.


The Belt and Road Initiative’s (BRI) Green Finance Agenda, which has directed US$11.8 billion into renewable infrastructure, also feeds into China’s EV expansion. Pakistan’s BYD assembly facility, linked to the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC), illustrates how EV investments are being integrated with geopolitical objectives. Future BRI projects, especially highways, are likely to be designed with EV integration in mind. If this trajectory continues, South Asia’s transport, energy and data infrastructures will become highly vulnerable.

Finally, beyond these strategic and security challenges, Chinese dominance of the EV industry poses a significant threat to India’s trade in the region. India has traditionally been South Asia’s principal source of automobile and petroleum imports. Firms such as Tata, Mahindra, Ashok Leyland, Maruti Suzuki and TVS have built strong market positions through extensive dealer networks, joint ventures, readily available spare parts and well-established service ecosystems. As such, the growing preference for Chinese EVs is likely to affect India’s automobile and petroleum trade with all countries in the region (by 14 to 33 percent, as shown in Table 3), barring the Maldives and Pakistan.

Table 3. India’s Trade with South Asian Countries

Source: Authors’ collation from UN Comtrade and Trade Intelligence and Analytics Portal, Department of Commerce, Government of India. Note: *Total Vehicle Imports are derived from WCO HS Code 8703: Passenger vehicles (all types) **Petroleum Imports values are derived from Chapter 27 of the HS Code, which covers “Mineral fuels, mineral oils and products of their distillation; bituminous substances; mineral waxes.”

India is accelerating its EV transition to expand manufacturing and exports, and is deploying it as a foreign policy instrument — yet the scale of this expansion remains modest compared to China’s. Between 2020 and 2025, India’s EV sector attracted around US$25 billion in investment, well short of its targets, leaving China to dominate the market. At a time when India is investing significantly in energy and oil connectivity and easing trade and transit networks for its neighbours, the surge in Chinese EVs — and their potential transit through strategic regions, especially the Northeast — could add to existing economic and security risks.

China’s EV expansion in South Asia goes beyond commerce, reflecting a broader pattern of tactical economic integration. By exporting the entire EV ecosystem and offering India’s neighbours access to finance, technology and clean transport solutions, China builds leverage over them without resorting to coercion. For South Asia, affordable Chinese EVs — combined with growing climate commitments and the need to reduce dependence on imported fossil fuels — present a new set of choices. Taken together, these dynamics suggest that South Asia’s clean transport future lies as much in the realm of geopolitics as in markets and climate policy. While geography and commercial ties continue to favour India overall, these advantages alone may not be sufficient to sustain its primacy in trade.

About the authors:

Aditya Gowdara Shivamurthy is an Associate Fellow with the Strategic Studies Programme at the Observer Research Foundation.

Sakshi Kapoor is a Research Intern at the Observer Research Foundation.

Source: This article was published by the Observer Research Foundation.

Disclaimer: ChatGPT 5.5 was used to generate infographics and tables.

About Observer Research Foundation
ORF was established on 5 September 1990 as a private, not for profit, ’think tank’ to influence public policy formulation. The Foundation brought together, for the first time, leading Indian economists and policymakers to present An Agenda for Economic Reforms in India. The idea was to help develop a consensus in favour of economic reforms.

View all posts by Observer Research Foundation

Africa’s Richest Man Proposes To Build 700,000 Bpd Oil Refinery In Kenya

By Alex Kimani - Jul 22, 2026

• Dangote plans a $17 billion, 700,000 bpd refinery on Kenya’s Lamu Island, aiming to end East Africa’s reliance on imported fuels.
• 
  
• The refining hub could serve Kenya, Uganda, South Sudan, Rwanda, Burundi, and the DRC.
• 
  
• The proposal faces significant hurdles, including environmental opposition over impacts on Lamu’s UNESCO-listed ecosystem, concerns about carbon emissions and stranded assets, and fears the refinery could dominate regional fuel markets.
• 
  

East Africa has spent decades exporting one commodity and importing another. The region holds roughly 4.7 billion barrels of crude oil reserves and more than 70 trillion cubic feet of natural gas across Uganda, South Sudan, Kenya and the DRC, according to the African Energy Commission (AFREC). Yet it imports 100% of its refined fuel after Kenya Petroleum Refineries Limited (KPRL), the region’s last operating refinery, shut down in 2013. Nigerian billionaire Aliko Dangote now says he intends to reverse that equation with a $17 billion (KSh2.2 trillion), 700,000-barrel-per-day refinery on Kenya’s Lamu Island that would process crude for Kenya, Uganda, South Sudan, Rwanda, Burundi and the DRC. The refinery’s planned capacity of 700,000 barrels per day exceeds East Africa’s current refined fuel demand of roughly 450,000 bpd by about 250,000 bpd, leaving room to supply markets elsewhere on the continent. Lamu’s natural harbor, with drafts reaching 18 meters, can accommodate fully laden Post-Panamax crude tankers carrying up to 2 million barrels, vessels too large to call at Mombasa. 

That gives the refinery direct access to long-haul crude imports while providing an export outlet for surplus gasoline, diesel and jet fuel. Construction and operation are projected to create more than 60,000 jobs, making the project one of the largest industrial employers ever proposed for Kenya’s coast.

Situated along the strategic LAPSSET Corridor, the project is already sparking major cross-border private sector partnerships.

Tanzanian billionaire Mohammed Dewji has expressed intent to inject $100 million into the development. 

The giant refinery will also test the feasibility of intra-African industrial integration under the African Continental Free Trade Area (AfCFTA). The refinery would be able to process crude from East African producers such as Uganda, South Sudan and Kenya as regional production expands, while also accepting cargoes from larger exporters including Nigeria and Angola. Refined fuels and petrochemical feedstocks could then be sold across the African Continental Free Trade Area (AfCFTA), a 55-country market with 1.4 billion people and a combined GDP of roughly $3.4 trillion that is gradually removing tariffs and other trade barriers on intra-African commerce.

Kenya’s new mega-project will be encouraged by the success story of Nigeria's Dangote refinery. The Dangote Refinery has transformed Nigeria from an import-dependent nation into an energy-secure hub by eliminating the need to import refined fuel. Commissioned in 2023, the 650,000 bpd refinery meets 100% of Nigeria's total domestic requirements for gasoline, diesel, and jet fuel, stabilizing structural supply shocks with local marketers now able to buy and sell directly. By slashing refined product import bills, the refinery has significantly improved Nigeria's balance of payments. This improved external financial position directly led to Nigeria receiving its first sovereign credit rating upgrade to B in 14 years, helping the country secure loans on more attractive terms. Local refining retains wealth domestically, alleviating massive demand for foreign exchange and helping stabilize local currency fluctuations.

Beyond energy, the facility produces Dangote fertilizer, creating thousands of jobs and reshaping trade flows by exporting clean fuel to other African countries and global markets. And, it has also helped lower Nigeria's emission: by processing crude domestically rather than exporting it to carbon-intensive refineries overseas, the highly energy-efficient plant is expected to eliminate over one million metric tonnes of CO? emissions annually.

As you might expect, Kenya’s proposed project is already facing mounting criticism and opposition. Activists from Greenpeace Africa and local community groups have vigorously rejected the project, warning it could destroy Lamu's delicate UNESCO world heritage marine ecosystem, including vital mangrove forests and coral reefs that sustain local tourism and fisheries. Critics have warned the facility risks becoming a stranded asset as global energy transitions accelerate, potentially locking Kenya into decades of heavy carbon emissions. Human rights and constitutional lawyers have threatened High Court cases, demanding the Kenyan government pause all work until exhaustive, impartial Environmental and Social Impact Assessments (ESIAs) and transparent public participation are fully executed.

Meanwhile, economists note that Dangote Industries' demand for robust anti-dumping protections and tax incentives could spark local backlash if it is perceived to unfairly corner the regional fuel market or stifle fair competition. After all, the Dangote Petroleum Refinery has previously faced legal and regulatory battles with the Nigerian state oil firm (NNPC) and major markers after the company sought to nullify rival import licenses to protect its dominant share, with regulators and marketers arguing it exposes the market to monopoly control.

By Alex Kimani for Oilprice.com

Piketty Offers a Vision for Sharing What We Have Left, But How Do We Convince the 1%?

EXPROPRIATE THEM

It’s inspiring to see the World Inequality Lab researchers directly engage in the post-growth debate with a grand vision of global economic convergence. We can only hope it spurs a peaceful mass citizens’ movement to overcome the inevitable opposition of the ultra rich.

A participant holds a sign at a climate march.
Photo by Erik McGregor/LightRocket via Getty Images

Adam Parsons
Jul 21, 2026

Share the World's Resources


At the World Inequality Conference in June, the renowned economist Thomas Piketty and a team of 45 researchers from the World Inequality Lab unveiled the Global Justice Report. It’s a highly impressive and eloquent proposal to achieve “equality and prosperity within planetary boundaries” by the end of the century. Based on a fully quantified road map derived from extensive macroeconomic analysis, the 135-page report sets forth an ambitious vision: to construct a global economy that shares global wealth and achieves high well-being for all while rapidly decarbonizing energy systems, thereby maintaining emissions within the relatively safe limits of 1.8°C.

This hopeful outlook provides a welcome antidote to our times, in which the world is already reeling from climate breakdown, geo-economic confrontation, and a widening structural economic divide.

The core aim of the proposal is to achieve full income convergence across all countries by 2100, centered around a target level of €5,000 (about $5,700) per month for every person. To achieve this, the bottom 50% of humanity need to increase their global wealth share from 2-30%. The top 0.001%, in contrast, would see their wealth fall from 6% to 0.05%—a “striking redistribution,” to quote the report, which would essentially abolish the billionaire class.

A Global Justice Fund serves to administer this immense effort at international economic sharing, financed by a global wealth tax and a top income tax levied on the richest 1% of the world’s population. Some of the revenue raised would go into a World Sovereign Fund, which is projected to accumulate assets equivalent to 60% of world GDP and replace tax revenue as the main source of financing. Country dividends are designed to be distributed on an equal per-capita basis, therefore providing more resources to poorer than richer countries and vastly more resources than currently allocated to development aid. These funds also come with strong conditionalities in terms of climate investments, inequality targets, and health and education expenditures.





A Vision of Sufficiency

The main novelty of the report is to put the concept of sufficiency at the center of its analysis, rightly arguing that we cannot stay within a 2°C carbon budget if the entire human population adopts a rich-world lifestyle of high private consumption. Sufficiency, as the report defines it, therefore requires more than halving average working time to 1,000 hours, roughly the equivalent of a two-and-a-half-day standard week.

This needs to be accompanied by a significant shift from material to immaterial sectors, such as health and education, which in turn would help refocus the economy toward low-consumption activities. A substantial change in food habits and reduced meat consumption could also allow for a strict deforestation ban, freeing up arable land while scaling down high-emitting agricultural practices. At the same time, sufficiency in production and consumption patterns must be combined with rapid decarbonization of the energy system, as spurred and enabled by the Global Justice Fund.

All this can read, at times, as a wish list of sustainability concepts and policies long espoused by environmental thinkers. But the work of the Global Justice Project is far wider in scope than Piketty’s best-selling tome, Capital in the 21st Century, which famously used vast historical and economic data to argue the case for a progressive global tax on wealth. Back in 2015, we at Share the World’s Resources and others criticized the book for failing to take seriously the ecological limits to growth and planetary boundaries. So it’s inspiring to see the World Inequality Lab authors directly engaging in this debate, fully denouncing the rhetoric of “green growth“ that assumes we can address environmental challenges by indefinitely increasing the size of the pie without reducing inequality, consuming less, or sharing resources globally.

Sharing Environmental Space

Their new report argues that technology alone is not enough to achieve rapid decarbonization. They acknowledge that to manage the green transition globally within a strict carbon budget, it will be necessary for today’s richest countries to radically downscale their resource and energy demands with near-zero growth in GDP. This will clear the ecological and carbon space needed for poorer countries of the Global South to continue growing their economies, enabling a fast energy transition while guaranteeing essential public services and a decent standard of living to all people.




It is hardly a novel framing of the issue, but the report emphasizes how their Sustainable Convergence Scenario entails a form of “class-based reparatory justice,” in that the very rich—who have benefited the most from fossil-based global economic growth in recent decades—will primarily fund the Global Justice Platform. What’s more, the proposal is somewhat aligned with the concept of climate equity, and effectively translates the principle of “common but differentiated responsibilities” into quantitative policies for addressing climate change.

Another strength of the report is how it connects macroeconomic and environmental projections directly to questions of international institutional reform. It centrally highlights the need for a broader overhaul and democratization of the global economic and monetary system, including the reconstitution of the International Monetary Fund into a United Nations Central Bank that issues its own reserve currency. This would eliminate the exorbitant privilege of the US dollar and other major currencies that can borrow at much lower rates, ending a massive reverse redistribution of wealth from Global South countries to the Global North.

All other international institutions would be governed by strict rules and equal voting rights, further eradicating the special privileges and veto powers of dominant nations. A new international order would include the reform of World Trade Organisation rules and a reset of dispute settlement mechanisms. And the large financial resources allocated to the Global Justice Fund would de facto underwrite a major restructuring of the entire UN system, strengthening its many agencies, human rights protections and international laws.





From Plutocracy to Democracy

As the report affirms, these proposals to transform global governance from “plutocracy to democracy” are closely related to many other existing frameworks and initiatives. The Bridgetown Initiative in 2022, for example, also stresses the complementary role of global wealth taxation and international monetary reform. The UN Tax Convention process also focuses on democratizing the international tax system and curbing illicit financial flows, while the G20 initiatives led by Brazil and South Africa also champion global wealth taxes to fund climate policies and green energy transitions.

There are numerous other networks and organizations that aim toward similar tax and governance reforms, such as the work of Progressive International with their Program of Action on the Construction of a New International Economic Order. The Stiglitz Commission of 2010 and Brandt Commission of 1980 are gladly cited by the Global Justice Report as complementary discussions surrounding the reform of the international monetary and reserve system.

Above all, the report authors deservedly mention the Roadmap for Eradicating Poverty Beyond Growth—a major project coordinated by the former UN Special Rapporteur on Extreme Poverty and Human Rights, Olivier De Schutter, that puts forward an exhaustive policy toolkit for building a global economy with human rights and ecological justice at its core. Thomas Piketty and many other prominent economists have put their names to this plan, which is one of the most comprehensive policy documents of recent years to define “living well within planetary boundaries” through increased South-South cooperation, reparative climate finance, and support for universal social protection floors. De Schutter’s pioneering proposal for a Global Fund for Social Protection is arguably a less utopian prospect for closing chronic financing gaps in low-income countries, building upon existing structures like the UN’s International Labour Organisation, and seeking more immediately viable sources of international financing.

The operative question, as always, is how the political conditions will arise to implement these policies as an alternative to the far-right techno-authoritarian vision being championed by reactionary political elites and their billionaire supporters. It’s certainly true, as Piketty and his team write in a Guardian op-ed, that technical impossibility is not what is standing in the way but rather “the absence of a shared vision of social progress, at once concrete and radical.” And both the Piketty and De Schutter road maps make clear that formidable forces will oppose any socioeconomic shift toward global sustainable convergence, with the fiercest resistance coming from the ultra rich.

Both reports also briefly outline the need to build countervailing power from the grassroots, explicitly supporting collective action from progressive political parties, labor unions, and civil society organisations. The Global Justice Report even gives its conclusion the subtitle: “A global citizen movement for social justice,” and it modestly proffers its analysis to the broader collective mobilization that is already (if all too slowly) advancing at the world scale. So whatever limitations and shortcomings these reports may contain, we can only hope they spur the massive groundswell of popular support that is urgently needed to share the world’s finite resources before it’s too late.

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 License.

Adam Parsons
Adam Parsons is the editor at Share The World's Resources, (STWR), a London-based civil society organization campaigning for a fairer sharing of wealth, power and resources within and between nations. He can be contacted at adam@sharing.org
Full Bio >

The FIFA World Cup: Private Jet Pollution Spikes

A new private jet emissions tracker shows 136 kilotonnes of additional emissions before the final match.

The World Cup Trophy is brought within the 2022 FIFA World Cup Trophy Tour by Brazilian former football player Juliano Belletti at Bahrain International Airport in Manama, Bahrain on June 4, 2022.
(Photo by Ayman Yaqoob/Anadolu Agency via Getty Images)

Chuck Collins
Jul 19, 2026

Institute for Policy Studies


As fans gather for the FIFA World Cup final match, pitting Spain against defending champion Argentina, New York City has been engulfed in a shroud of wildfire smoke.

At the same time, thousands of wealthy fans are arriving in luxury private jets, the most carbon-emissions polluting form of transportation. This seems an appropriate image for what may prove to be the most polluting sports tournament in world history, thanks in part to private jet excess.

The wildfire smoke, from several hundred uncontrolled blazes across Ontario and northern Minnesota, have contributing to air quality emergencies across the northern U.S. On Thursday, the city of Detroit registered a whopping 724 on the Air Quality Index. Index ratings over 300 are considered a health emergency for all living things.

Scientists are often cautious about attributing blame to climate change, but there is little doubt these wildfires are supercharged by global climate change, as forests dry out and atmospheric rain cycles are disrupted.

On Saturday, the air quality in East Rutherford, New Jersey registered 157, an “unhealthy” level. The pollution index is anticipated to improve for the Finals, with weather shifts and a thunderstorm scrubbing the air. This may bring the pollutant index to 100, considered “moderate” but posing risks for sensitive groups including older adults, children, and those with lung or heart disease.

Compounding the injustice, ordinary fans, taxpayers, and the flying public subsidize the pollution spewing activity of the high-flying private jet class. Private jets don’t chip in their fair share of the cost of airspace, let alone their environmental impact. And last year, the U.S. Congress slathered on more tax breaks for private jets and their ultra-wealthy users.

These tax breaks don’t even address the biggest subsidy: the ability of private jets to avoid any responsibility for the health and environmental costs of their pollution impacts.

With an assist from our new IPS Private Jet Emission Tracker, designed to assess the impact of special events, we know that thousands of private jets have already attended the first 102 matches of the FIFA World Cup. Prior to the final match, the private jets attending the tournament have spewed an estimated 136 kt of additional carbon pollution into the atmosphere, the equivalent of driving 31,723 gasoline powered cars for a year. The Tracker looks at private jet activity in match-host cities over five years and documents the spike in activity.

In our assessment, Red Card for Private Jets at the FIFA World Cup, we document the excessive emissions and the costs to everyone else. We call on FIFA to ban private jets at matches and live up to their pledge to be carbon neutral by 2040.

FIFA should also stop designing tournaments that span continents and cater to the ultra-wealthy private jet class and not ordinary fans. The 2030 FIFA World Cup will be played in six different countries, with most matches in Morocco, Portugal, and Spain. But in honor of the 100th anniversary of the World Cup, the opening matches will be played in the South American nations of Uruguay, Argentina and Paraguay.

FIFA is clearly competing to produce the world’s most polluting sport competition. They must do more to protect the players, the fans, and our planet. The World Cup belongs to everyone, not just the private jet class.


© 2023 Institute for Policy Studies

Chuck Collins
Chuck Collins is co-founder of CARP and author of Burned by Billionaires: How Concentrated Wealth and Power are Ruining Our Lives and Planet.
Full Bio >

Greentech New Deals in the Cities

By Jeremy Brecher

July 17, 2026

Source: Originally published by Z. Feel free to share widely.

Image in public domain

In Trump’s America the Greentech Revolution is being waged from below.

Although Trump’s attacks have slowed the advance of fossil-free technologies in the US, they have not prevented communities, cities, and states from creating their own Greentech New Deals. They are taking advantage of the enormous reduction in the cost of renewable energy and of technologies that use it despite Trump’s attempts to obliterate them.

Alongside the widespread pro-democracy resistance to Trump and MAGA, there is a constructive program being developed and implemented from below, utilizing the Greentech Revolution to make Green New Deals practical and affordable. Greentech and climate protection are at its core. But it also includes the full range of pro-people, pro-social programs represented by the Green New Deal.

Back in 2007, Xcel Energy won backing from the governor of Minnesota for a gas power plant in Becker, near Minneapolis, designed to replace coal-fired generators scheduled for shutdown in the mid-2020s. But clean energy advocates campaigned for better and cheaper alternatives, and regulators eventually baulked at the $1 billion price tag. Xcel gave up on the gas plant plan and instead proposed the Sherco Energy Hub, a 710-megawatt solar facility which includes a 600-megawatt storage system, the largest battery energy storage system in the Midwest. An Xcel spokesperson said, “Batteries help us store energy when it’s inexpensive to produce and dispatch it when needed, allowing us to continue delivering reliable electricity to customers while keeping bills low.” The site will also provide grazing for nearly 2,000 sheep, reducing mowing costs while also letting local sheep farmers expand their herds. Xcel also announced plans to close all its remaining coal fired plants in the region. Sherco’s solar plant will start producing electricity in 2026.

Sherco shows how Greentech’s reduction in the cost of energy and facilitation of battery storage opens the door for communities and governments to demand that fossil fuels be replaced by renewable energy. As climate journalist Tina Casey commented on CleanTechnica, the Sherco facility “demonstrates how community efforts and basic economics can push the needle on the energy transition.”

Manchester Public Schools is a suburban school district outside of Hartford CT with 17 schools, four of which are Title I schools serving low-income communities. While the state had many solar programs, by 2020 private solar developers had concluded that Manchester would “never do a project.” But in 2022, with support from the Connecticut Green Bank, solar panels were installed at 6 of Manchester’s 17 public schools, adding 1.6 MW to the town’s solar energy capacity. Now Manchester has three net-zero energy school buildings and is adopting cutting-edge technologies like ground source heat pumps. Manchester also has additional ongoing investments in net-zero buildings, including a new library. Solar installations are projected to save the Town of Manchester approximately $100,000 annually. Beyond financial savings, these renewable energy systems are now valuable educational tools, reportedly sparking curiosity and environmental awareness among students.

In Seattle, drayage trucks contribute significantly to air pollution, disproportionately impacting low-income communities along freight corridors in the Duwamish Valley. According to Seattle’s then-mayor Bruce Harrell, “Seattle’s port is the backbone of our economy, but diesel drayage trucks that transport goods are some of the Duwamish Valley neighborhoods’ heaviest polluters.” Seattle has now developed a Heavy Duty Electric Trucks Pilot to provide incentives for purchasing electric drayage trucks. The program results in part from interviews conducted with drayage truck drivers who pointed out electric trucks were too expensive for them to buy. The drivers’ insights helped shape a new approach that, according to the city’s Office of Sustainability and Environment, “centers equity to ensure a just transition for truck drivers, particularly independent owner-operators, who are critical to our region’s supply chain and who bear disproportionate environmental and economic burdens.”

Funding for the program comes from Seattle’s JumpStart Payroll Expense Tax on extremely high salaries. The funding was recommended by Seattle’s Green New Deal Oversight Board, which develops budget and policy recommendations for environmental initiatives in partnership with communities. Said then-Mayor Harrell, “Through the Heavy Duty Electric Trucks Pilot, we’re investing in the technology that will ultimately reduce emissions in frontline communities while also supporting drivers to ensure they have real opportunities in the zero-emission economy.” The trucks are expected to be in operation by the end of 2026.

The drayage truck program is only one small component of Seattle’s much broader community participation climate effort. For example, Greenspace, Seattle’s Office of Sustainability & Environment, partnered with Seattle’s Green New Deal Oversight Board, the Martin Luther King Jr. County Labor Council (MLK Labor), and the Urban League of Metropolitan Seattle to pilot “climate community assemblies” that included union members and workers, community members, and social justice and youth advocates to make decisions, influence government, and shape solutions. The Urban League’s neighborhood-based assembly focused on climate preparedness for BIPOC and working-class community members. MLK Labor, a labor council representing more than 100,000 workers in King County, led a worker assembly focused on workplace safety, green job standards, and improving public infrastructure to be ready for extreme weather. A follow-on project will turn ideas developed by the assemblies into policies for the city. And future community assemblies will help shape Seattle’s Climate Action Plan Update.

On the site of an abandoned psychiatric hospital in Southeast Washington, DC, a renewable energy project called Sycamore & Oak has just opened a “microgrid” — a self-contained system that includes energy generation and consumption. Solar panels provide electricity during daylight hours and charge batteries that continue to provide electricity during the night. The project’s workforce development program trained a cohort of 10 local residents, most of whom are from Ward 8 where the project is located, for the installation. According to Jordan Taylor of GRID Alternatives, the nonprofit that provides solar installation and workforce development for the project, “Ultimately the Black-owned businesses that are supported by Sycamore & Oak get to receive lower-cost power.” With fuel-based energy, “you’re emitting fossil fuel pollution into the local community,” which is “usually a low-income or disadvantaged community.” Taylor said that improvements in building science are not only better for the environment, but more cost-effective. These range from construction techniques to long-term energy usage over the lifetime of a building. “We can build the same structure for 90% less energy consumption. That’s both a cost-savings measure, as well as an energy efficiency and ecologically friendly one.”

In June 2026, Montgomery County MD announced 20 clean energy and energy efficiency projects. According to the Montgomery County Executive, the initiatives will “support practical projects that improve energy efficiency, strengthen emergency preparedness, and create more resilient public spaces, particularly in communities that are more vulnerable during extreme weather events. These investments will lower long-term operating costs for taxpayers while helping the County make meaningful progress toward our climate goals.”

The projects have a strong Greentech element. They include solar-powered backup systems at seven recreation centers; an agrivoltaics demonstration project at the Agricultural History Farm Park; and building automation system upgrades. County official David Dise says, “We are proudly advancing Montgomery County’s climate goals through innovative green energy solutions, including microgrids and resilience hubs.”

In the Bryant community in Ann Arbor MI, a quarter of residents spend more than a third of their incomes on utilities. After years of campaigning by local energy activists, 80% of Ann Arbor voters approved a new Sustainable Energy Utility. Operating alongside the existing privately-owned utility, the SEU will purchase, install, and maintain solar panels, battery backup systems, and other fossil-free energy infrastructure in residents’ homes. Those who choose to join pay a small monthly fee – far less than they save from their free solar installation. The city will own the facilities, but residents can sell whatever electricity they don’t need themselves. The plan will pilot in Bryant and spread to other locations in the city. The SEU could also build its own microgrids, for example putting solar panels on schools to provide power during school hours and then supplying other SEU users when school is out. Derrick Miller of the nonprofit Community Action Network says, “When we started having a conversation about how to decarbonize the neighborhood about four years ago, it felt outlandish. Now, it doesn’t feel like anyone can stop us.”

Alongside the Cow Palace arena just south of San Francisco, construction has begun on the Cormorant Energy Storage Project, whose 250-megawatt capacity will make it the largest battery array in any major US urban area. It will supply energy to MCE, a community choice aggregator which purchases electricity on behalf of local residents as an alternative to for-profit utilities. The battery will bring $73 million of property tax revenue to Daly City; the developer will donate $1.5 million in community benefits.

These are only a small sampling of the Greentech-facilitated programs in American cities, but they illustrate the diversity of such initiatives. They show that Greentech-facilitated programs are in place in every region of the country, in jurisdictions large and small, and in localities blue and red, exhibiting myriad forms of both energy production and energy consumption.

Such initiatives have been retarded by Trump’s attempts to wipe out Greentech. They have also met resistance from local MAGA and NIMBY forces. But as these examples show, they are continuing to bloom.

These initiatives are significant for several reasons. They directly improve the lives of the people they affect and reduce the emission of climate-destroying greenhouse gases. They demonstrate concretely how climate protection, racial and economic justice, grassroots democracy, and quality of life can be combined. They show that people acting together can overcome Trump’s anti-Greentech counter-revolution. And looking forward, they lay a foundation for the triumph of a Greentech New Deal once Trumpian resistance is overcome.

Greentech Revolution in the States

By Jeremy Brecher

July 16, 2026

Source: Originally published by Z. Feel free to share widely.

A barn and wind turbines in rural Illinois. (Wikimedia Commons)

While Trump conducts his war against Greentech, many US states are forging ahead with energy expansion based on sun, wind, and water. Greentech’s slashing of the cost of renewable energy production and use has made states turn to it not only to protect the climate but to make energy affordable for their people.

A photo of Donald Trump in the Oval Office with several of his Executive Orders, January 20, 2025. Photo credit: The White House, public domain.

The US federal system gives states a powerful position in energy policy. States regulate electric generation, local distribution of electricity, and infrastructure siting. They can set policy in myriad other areas from urban planning to public transit to housing that can help shape the utilization of climate-protecting Greentech.

Meanwhile, recent headlines have publicized retrenchment in state climate policies. New York state abandoned its commitment to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by 40% from 1990 levels by 2030, substituting weaker and squishier targets. California also relaxed requirements for emission reductions – although the change continues to be contested in the state legislature. In both cases energy affordability was given as a reason, although advocates of both changes acknowledged that they would not bring down energy prices any time soon. Both New York and California changes were preceded by heavy fossil fuel industry lobbying.

Such retreats register the reality that Trump’s attacks are restricting the development of the Greentech New Deal. Federal defunding of climate-protecting initiatives has made them more expensive; regulatory changes and subsidies have advantaged fossil fuels; and legal attack has undermined the Greentech revolution. But these retreats should not conceal the advances the Greentech Revolution has made in US states even during the first year-and-a-half of the Trump era.

Today’s Greentech advances in the states typically combine climate protection with affordability. That’s possible because Greentech has made production and use of renewable energy so much cheaper – rendering fossil fuels non-competitive.

California–Two steps forward, one step back?

California’s electricity is increasingly coming from solar. Photo credit: Tom Brewster Photography, Wikimedia Commons, CC BY 2.0. Data Source: US Energy Information Administration

California, now the world’s fourth largest economy, illustrates the collision of the irresistible force of the Greentech Revolution with the immovable object of the Trumpian fossil fuel counter-revolution. In recent years it has faced devastating heatwaves, droughts, storms, wildfires, and other extreme weather conditions resulting from global warming. Not surprisingly, an overwhelming proportion of Californians worry about climate change and back policies to fight it. In 2006 California passed AB 32, the Global Warming Solutions Act, which set targets for greenhouse gas emissions and sets a declining limit on total emissions by the state’s major polluters. Over the next twenty years California substantially raised its targets and implemented many other climate protection policies. From 2001 to 2019, California reduced its carbon emissions by 25%, leaving a typical Californian emitting only half as much as other Americans.

In 2024, California’s natural gas generation fell by 8%; coal is expected to soon be eliminated entirely from its electrical supply. By the end of 2025 the state had 2.5 times more battery storage available than it did in 2022.

As soon as Trump was inaugurated president, he began a massive attack on California’s climate protection efforts. For example, he attacked the state’s first-in-the-nation ban on the sale of new gas-powered cars by 2035. The state sued to preserve the ban. In 2025 it extended the cap and trade program, renamed cap and invest, by 15 years. Then Governor Newsom, under heavy lobbying from California’s oil industry, announced a new plan which offers free pollution permits worth as much as $4 billion to oil refineries and other major polluters. Legislative leaders are refusing to accept the plan, however, and have refused to fund many of Newsom’s other programs until he abandons his plan. Contested negotiations are expected to continue until the legislative session ends in September. The result is hanging in the balance.

Other states go Greentech

The California climate drama should not obscure what is happening in other states.

Soon after Trump’s inauguration, Massachusetts Gov. Maura Healey issued an executive order that directs the state to procure 10 GW of clean energy and 5 GW of battery storage by 2035. The governor’s office projects up to $10 billion in savings for residents and businesses. Massachusetts also announced $180 million in immediate utility rate reductions. This cut residential electricity bills by up to 25 percent for two months.

Upon her inauguration, New Jersey Gov. Mikie Sherrill declared a state of emergency on utility costs. An executive order directed the New Jersey Board of Public Utilities to pursue rate relief by pausing new hikes and delivering residential bill credits. Another ordered rapid expansion of solar and battery storage and streamlining of the permitting process. In March, the BPU approved the expansion of the state’s community solar program, adding 3 GW of new capacity, with low-income households guaranteed a discount of at least 25 percent on their bills. According to American Progress, this expansion was the largest of a state-run program in the country’s history, and the program has already delivered more than $70 million in bill credits to households across the state. The governor also signed a measure that increases transmission-scale storage across the state, helping store low-cost clean energy and deploy it during peak demand to reduce price spikes and improve reliability.

In Pennsylvania, the PA EDGE (Pennsylvania Economic Development for a Growing Economy) creates tax credit programs for billions of dollars in energy and advanced manufacturing investment, including clean energy technologies. In June 2026 the Pennsylvania House put a cap on profits from utility company investments in infrastructure and eliminated nearly $1.7 billion in taxes that electricity companies now pass along to consumers as part of their bills.

In Virginia, a clean energy package includes streamlining solar siting, expanding storage connections to the grid, limiting carbon-emitting backup generators at data centers, and expanding virtual power plant programs that let utilities draw on distributed clean energy sources such as rooftop solar and home batteries.

The obstacles fall

One of the main objections to renewable energy has always been that it becomes unavailable when the sun doesn’t shine or the wind doesn’t blow. This objection has been largely overcome by Greentech’s radical reduction in the cost of energy storage. As a result, the most recent wave of state programs has put battery storage front and center.

Illinois’s Clean and Reliable Grid Affordability Act instructs the state to procure three gigawatts of new battery storage by 2030 to help stabilize electricity prices. It also includes a “storage for all” program that provides incentives for income-qualified households and businesses to install battery systems co-located with solar projects. The Illinois Power Agency expects the act to save customers $13.4 billion over two decades.

Pennsylvania is investing $22 million to help battery manufacturer Eos Energy Enterprises expand battery manufacturing operations in the Pittsburgh area. The expansion is expected to create 735 new jobs in Allegheny County. Last year the workers at Eos Energy voted to join the United Steelworkers Union. Eos also announced a plan to develop energy storage projects across Pennsylvania.

New technology doesn’t always mean greater complexity. Witness the emergence of small solar systems that hang on a balcony and plug right into a wall socket. More than a million homes in Germany now have such “balcony power plants,” but they are forbidden in the US. Last year the Utah legislature voted unanimously to let residents use plug-in collectors. 23 other state legislatures are now considering similar bills. According to the New York Times, such legislation would “eliminate one of the technology’s biggest barriers in the United States”: homeowners or renters could install plug-in systems “without approval from their local utility.”

A common complaint against large-scale solar projects is that they use up land that would otherwise be available for agriculture. However, solar projects are now actually supporting agriculture by the new techniques known as agrivoltaics. State policies are now promoting agrivoltaics. Last year, the New Jersey Board of Public Utilities launched a new dual-use pilot project to organize and accelerate agrivoltaics development in the state. The three-year pilot program calls for up to 200 megawatts of solar power, with Rutgers University applying its agrivoltaics research to develop best practices and guidelines. Connecticut, Maryland, and Virginia also have agrivoltaics programs under way.

Renewable energy projects can also contribute to improved land use by utilizing currently degraded spaces like landfills and contaminated industrial sites. An example is New Jersey’s Brownfields Redevelopment Incentive Program, accompanied by a Landfill to Solar online guide for local governments and solar developers, created by the Governor’s Office of Climate Action and the Green Economy. An already completed example is the Toms River project, the largest solar power plant in New Jersey and also the largest solar array on a Superfund site anywhere in the US.

Beyond the blue

Wolf Ridge Wind Farm in Muenster, Texas. Photo credit: Ben (Out with the Old, In with the New), Wikimedia Commons, CC BY-SA 2.0.

The expansion of Greentech in the Trump era has by no means been limited to blue states. Some of the most extensive installations of Greentech are in red states – witness Texas. Utility-scale solar plants produced 45 terawatts from January through September, 2025, up 50% from 2024 and nearly four times what they generated in 2021. Wind power also continued to climb, producing 87 terawatts through September – a 4% increase from 2024 and 36% more than in 2021. Together, wind and solar supplied more than a third of Texas’ electricity in the first 9 months of 2025. Battery use is also growing. Three of the four largest US battery storage projects scheduled to open in 2026 are in Texas. Solar collection and battery storage are now being systematically combined: one dual project is adding 837 megawatts of solar power and 418 megawatts in battery energy storage capacity.

In Nevada, generally regarded as a “purple” state, a third of all energy demand is now met by solar panels. The state has the highest solar electricity generation per capita in the country, as well as the most solar-industry jobs per capita. The goal of producing half of its electricity from renewables by 2030 is enshrined in the state’s constitution. The Las Vegas region has the highest concentration of residential rooftop solar in the continental US. The city’s chief sustainability officer attributes this in part to the city’s easy permitting. “You’re pretty much in and out of our office with a permit in 30 minutes.”

In the absence of federal support, states are reaching out to each other to create regional alliances to implement Greentech. For example, thirteen states have formed the Geothermal Power Accelerator collaboration to rapidly expand geothermal power development. Another example: The California State Legislature passed Assembly Bill 825 to begin the process of establishing a regional electricity partnership across the West. In late June, the state of Washington joined the partnership along with California and Quebec. And, after briefly withdrawing, Virginia rejoined the 11-member northeastern Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative.

In some states like Texas, the Greentech boom is occurring without much attempt to reap its potential social benefits. But in many states, as we will see in a subsequent commentary in this series, the Greentech revolution is enabling a broader program for jobs and justice that embodies the principles of the Green New Deal. That in turn is laying the basis for a national Greentech New Deal to come.

Looming over recent climate politics has been the issue of energy affordability. Because Greentech has made the production and use of renewable energy so much less costly than fossil fuel energy, states have accelerated their introduction of it. But the energy cost squeeze on consumers has in some cases also led states to shortsightedly reduce investment in Greentech and unleash fossil fuels.

These dynamics are now being exacerbated by the escalation in fossil fuel prices and the threat of energy insecurity that have accompanied the Iran war. The relative expense and unreliability of fossil fuel energy is likely to accelerate Greentech in the states. States that don’t want to render their economies “stranded assets” should go all out for the Greentech revolution right now.

This article also appears in Jeremy Brecher’s STRIKE! newsletter.

Email

Jeremy Brecher

Jeremy Brecher is a historian, author, and co-founder of the Labor Network for Sustainability. He has been active in peace, labor, environmental, and other social movements for more than half a century. Brecher is the author of more than a dozen books on labor and social movements, including Strike! and Global Village or Global Pillage and the winner of five regional Emmy awards for his documentary movie work.