News - American Energy Alliance

Big Wind Fined After Killing Hundreds of Bald Eagles

February 20, 2026 by IER Leave a Comment

A subsidiary of one of the largest U.S. providers of renewable energy was ordered to pay over $8 million in fines and restitution, after at least 150 eagles were killed at its wind farms in eight states: Wyoming, California, New Mexico, North Dakota, Colorado, Michigan, Arizona and Illinois. ESI Energy, a subsidiary of NextEra Energy, was sentenced to five years of probation, after being charged with three counts of violating the Migratory Bird Treaty Act for the deaths of nine eagles at three wind farms in Wyoming and New Mexico. The company acknowledged that at least 150 bald and golden eagles had died at its facilities since 2012, and that 136 of those deaths were “affirmatively determined to be attributable to the eagle being struck by a wind turbine blade.” Because the bodies of the birds are not always found, officials believe the number killed is likely higher than the 150 birds cited in court documents. The deaths occurred across 50 of the 154 wind farms that the company operates in the United States.

Almost all of the eagles killed were struck by the blades of wind turbines. According to prosecutors, the company’s failure to take steps to protect eagles or to obtain permits to kill the birds gave it an advantage over competitors that did take such steps. Historically, companies have been able to avoid prosecution under the Migratory Bird Treaty Act if they take steps to avoid deaths and seek permits for those that occur. ESI Energy was warned that eagles would be killed if the company built two wind farms in central and southeastern Wyoming, and the risk to eagles when it authorized the repowering of a New Mexico wind farm, about 170 miles from Albuquerque.

Most of the eagles killed at the ESI and NextEra wind farms were golden eagles. There are an estimated 31,800 golden eagles in the Western U.S. with an estimated 2,200 killed annually due to human causes, or about 60 percent of all deaths. According to a study released by eagle researchers from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and other entities, golden eagle deaths “will likely increase in the future” because of wind energy development and other human activities.

Bird deaths are not extraordinary, with some estimates showing that cats kill as many as 2.4 billion birds annually. However, it is the type of birds and especially bats which have rapidly caught the attention of biologists. Cat predation happens among common birds with enormous populations close to the ground, while wind turbines are particularly devastating to birds of prey because of their height and to bats because of their unique physical characteristics. Bats are the leading insect eating species at night and healthy populations have a positive impact upon agriculture production and limit the need for additional pesticide use across wide areas of the nation.

ESI agreed to spend up to $27 million during its five-year probationary period on measures to prevent future eagle deaths that include shutting down turbines at times when eagles are more likely to be present. Despite those measures, the company will pay $29,623 per dead eagle should one die under their plea deal. The company will also loose government funds if they must stop operating. Wind companies receive hundreds of millions of dollars in federal tax credits from the wind power they produce—a Production Tax Credit—but get nothing if the turbine is not operating. Despite these eagle killings, President Joe Biden is pushing for more renewable energy, primarily from wind and solar power—both of which are known to kill birds, and cost the federal taxpayer enormous amounts in subsidies.

Production Tax Credit for Wind

The Energy Policy Act of 1992 enacted the renewable electricity production tax credit (PTC) at $0.015/kWh, adjusted for inflation, and available for the first 10 years of a wind turbine’s operating life. The provision was set to expire in mid-1999. Beginning in 1999, the PTC was extended 13 times and most recently in the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2021. The U.S. Congress passed a $1.4 trillion federal spending and tax extension package that included a one-year extension of the Production Tax Credit for wind power and an extension through 2025 for offshore wind tax credits.

The wind industry claims that utility-scale wind power is already cost-competitive against coal-fired power across the world and with natural-gas-fired power in many markets and yet the industry acts like they need the tax credit to exist. As Warren Buffett said, “For example, on wind energy, we get a tax credit if we build a lot of wind farms. That’s the only reason to build them. They don’t make sense without the tax credit.” Despite billions of dollars in federal subsidies over the past 30 years and state mandates requiring renewable generation, wind power provided only 8 percent of the nation’s electricity and just 3 percent of the nation’s primary energy in 2021.

According to an estimate from the Joint Committee on Taxation, the latest extension of the wind industry’s PTC will cost $1.7 billion between 2020 and 2030 and the tax credit extension for offshore wind will cost an additional $362 million. Those dollars will be added to the $34 billion in PTC that will be collected by the wind industry between 2020 and 2029, according to the Treasury Department.

The figure below provides the federal tax subsidies for electricity generation across all technologies between 2010 and 2019. The PTC is the single most expensive energy subsidy in the federal tax code and is estimated to cost taxpayers about $40 billion from 2018 to 2027.

Dividing total federal subsidies from 2010 to 2019 by total electricity generated provides the cost of the subsidies to taxpayers per unit of electricity produced. Wind had the second largest subsidies per unit of electricity produced across technologies with solar being the highest. Nuclear and fossil fuels generate much more electricity relative to the subsidies they receive, which indicates they are less dependent on subsidies for their revenue and profitability than wind and solar. (See Figure below.)

Conclusion

The wind industry has finally been held accountable for the bird deaths that it has caused with ESI Energy being ordered to pay over $8 million in fines and restitution for over 150 eagle deaths. The wind industry has received billions of dollars in subsidies from the federal government over the past 30 years and will continue to do so as the production tax credit allows them to collect tax credits over the first ten years of a turbine’s operating life. The Biden administration advocated for more wind and solar power in Biden’s goal for net zero carbon electricity by 2035. President Trump curtailed the worst excesses of renewable subsidies through signing his One Big Beautiful Bill in 2025.

*This article was adapted from content originally published by the Institute for Energy Research on April 15, 2022.

Filed Under: Blog Tagged With: bird deaths, Build Back Better, energy subsidies, renewables, wind energy, wind power

Trump Ends Biden’s Reckless War On Coal

February 19, 2026 by IER Leave a Comment

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) announced “Phase 1” of its rollback of Biden’s “Good Neighbor” rule, which would approve the plans of eight states to address the interstate transport rules for the 2015 eight-hour ozone standards that the Biden administration rejected as insufficient. The eight states whose plans would now be accepted are Alabama, Arizona, Kentucky, Minnesota, Mississippi, Nevada, New Mexico, and Tennessee. The concept of the “Good Neighbor” rule is to prevent criteria pollutants in one state from blowing downwind, which would hinder neighboring states’ ability to meet federal air quality standards under the Clean Air Act. According to EPA Administrator Lee Zeldin, the EPA is committed to advancing “cooperative federalism” that allows states to decide for themselves how to attain air pollution goals. The roll-back of the rule could help keep existing coal plants slated for retirement online, many of which were used extensively during winter storm Fern. EPA will accept public comment for at least 30 days after the rule is published in the Federal Register.

The Clean Air Act requires each state in its State Implementation Plan to prohibit criteria emissions that would significantly contribute to non-attainment of the standards, or interfere with their maintenance in a downwind state. The criteria pollutants are carbon monoxide, lead, sulfur dioxide (SO2), nitrogen oxides (NOx), ground-level ozone, and particulate matter (PM). They are called “criteria” pollutants because the EPA sets the criteria for permissible levels.

The Biden administration imposed strict limits on nitrogen oxide (which contributes to ozone) and other emissions from power plants, pipelines, cement makers, steel mills, chemical companies, and other industries in 23 states. The standards required coal and gas-burning power plants to spend money upgrading their pollution control equipment, making it more expensive for them to operate, increasing electricity prices for consumers, and reducing the reliability of the grid. The rule was part of a suite of actions undertaken by the Biden administration in pursuit of his promise to shut down all coal plants in the United States.

In June 2024, the Supreme Court halted the Biden plan in a five to four decision while challenges to it worked through the lower courts. According to the challengers, consisting of states, industry, and trade organizations, the rule would impose unreasonable costs, destabilize power grids, put an undue burden on utility operators, and force the early retirement of crucial coal-fired plants. Those coal-fired plants performed admirably during winter storm Fern, providing 21% of electricity generation in the Lower 48 states during the storm week, up from 17% the previous week, according to the Energy Information Administration.

According to the Associated Press, along with this action, it is likely that the EPA will also withdraw proposed error corrections for state plans submitted by Iowa and Kansas. EPA also plans to address “interstate transport” obligations for the remaining states covered in the Biden administration’s “Good Neighbor” plan.

The United States Has Already Successfully Reduced Criteria Pollutants

Between 1970 and 2023, the combined emissions of the six common pollutants (PM2.5 and PM10, SO2, NOx, VOCs, CO, and Pb) dropped by 78%. This progress occurred while U.S. economic indicators remained strong; the economy improved by 321%, Americans drove more miles (194%), the population increased by 63%, and energy use increased by 42%, all while the environment became cleaner. The graph below also shows that carbon dioxide emissions, after having risen gradually for decades, have decreased since 2007. Zeldin’s actions at EPA are designed to build on this record of success while working with states to keep a reliable and affordable grid.

One factor in improving air quality has been the pollution-control technologies used by coal-fired power plants. Today’s coal-fired electricity generating plants produce more power with fewer emissions of criteria pollutants than ever before. According to the National Energy Technology Laboratory (NETL), a new pulverized coal plant (operating at lower, “subcritical” temperatures and pressures) reduces the emission of NOx by 83%, SO2 by 98%, and PM by 99.8%, as compared with a similar plant having no pollution controls. Air quality will continue to improve in the future due to improved technology.

Analysis

As history has shown, air quality standards improve with innovation even as economic output increases. The Biden administration’s approach would have hindered this improvement by forcing coal plants to close, raising electricity prices, and threatening the reliability of the grid. Instead of a top-down approach to controlling pollution, cooperative federalism, alongside common law protections against the harms of pollution, would be a better way forward. This strategy would give producers and states more flexibility in mitigating pollution while allowing for continued economic growth.

freeze?”

*This article was originally published on February 18, 2026 by the Institute for Energy Research.

Filed Under: Blog Tagged With: Clean Air Act, coal, coal fired electricity, Donald Trump, electricity prices, EPA, EPA regulations, Joe Biden, Lee Zeldin

Winter Weather Highlights Dangers Of Blue State Energy Policies

February 18, 2026 by IER Leave a Comment

Electricity outages across the United States reached nearly a million customers early Sunday afternoon, but by 10:30 p.m. Sunday, utility crews had reduced the number of outages to fewer than 805,000, mostly in the South, according to poweroutage.com. Utility generators had to rely on natural gas, coal, and nuclear power to keep the lights on as the lack of sun wiped out solar power and limited wind and/or freezing equipment reduced wind power output. In the Northeast, oil and wood saved the day as the lack of sufficient pipeline infrastructure limited additional gas-generated power. In the Northeast and Midwest, where more people get heat from natural gas, less of the fuel is available for power plants. More outages would have been the result if President Trump and Energy Secretary Wright had not kept coal plants from retiring.

Record-breaking temperatures are expected to last for much of the week with more than 85 million people placed under an extreme cold warning. As the temperatures dip further, demand for power is expected to rise, raising the possibility that more outages could occur. It is estimated that storm damage could result in up to $115 billion in losses, according to AccuWeather. As natural gas is in high demand and freezing conditions restrict gas output, natural gas prices have risen to above $6.20 per million British thermal units as of Monday morning, the highest since December 2022. The fuel of choice for data centers, natural gas output dropped as icy conditions forced drillers in regions such as the Permian shale basin in Texas and New Mexico to curb output due to “freeze-offs,” when water and other liquids in the gas stream freeze.

The Department of Energy ordered the manager of the Texas power grid to begin using backup generation resources at data centers and other facilities that consume large amounts of energy to help prevent blackouts. According to the agency, the order would aid the Electric Reliability Council of Texas, ERCOT, in maintaining grid operations through the “extreme temperatures and storm destruction” left by the weekend’s powerful weather event. In its 2025–2026 Winter Reliability Assessment, the North American Electric Reliability Corporation (NERC) found that the ERCOT assessment area was at elevated risk. According to NERC, above-normal winter peak and outage conditions could result in the need for operating mitigations and Energy Emergency Alerts.

According to the Wall Street Journal, the Energy Department also waived emissions rules so fossil-fuel plants could run at maximum capacity. Early Sunday morning, coal accounted for some 40% of power in the Midwest’s MISO grid, 24% in the eastern PJM Interconnection, and 18% in Texas, with most of the rest coming from natural gas and nuclear. Power plants in New England burned oil, which accounted for 40% of electricity at peak demand, and the region generated more power from burning wood and trash than from wind power. Back-up batteries for wind and solar did little as they can discharge power only for a few hours at a time and had no excess sun or wind power to recharge them.

While Texas did have some outages, the results were far better than during Winter Storm Uri in February 2021 due to changes the state made post-Uri. As of early Monday morning, the state was generating 89% of its power from reliable baseload fuels — 67% from natural gas, 14% from coal, and 7% from nuclear, with just 9% coming from wind, none from solar, and 1.5% coming from batteries.

Analysis

Winter Storm Fern has further revealed the importance of connecting reliable generation resources to the grid, without which numerous lives and dollars would be lost. State-level policies forcing the retirement of coal plants and preventing the construction of natural gas and nuclear plants have led to the current situation facing the grid, where power plants are burning oil, wood, and trash, as the Wall Street Journal reports. Reducing carbon emissions by increasing renewable generation may sound good in theory, but the fact that solar and wind can’t provide the same capacity during poor conditions makes their inclusion on the grid duplicative and expensive. As the Journal’s Editorial Board asks, “Is the goal to reduce carbon emissions by making Americans freeze?”

*This article was originally published on January 27, 2026 by the Institute for Energy Research.

Filed Under: Blog Tagged With: Blackouts, electricity prices, Energy Security, New England, The Grid, Winter

Cold Weather Shows Dangers Of EV-For-All Policies

February 17, 2026 by IER Leave a Comment

Electric vehicle owners reported a loss of range of as much as 30 percent when the polar vortex swept through the Midwestern and Northeastern states in late January. The reason is that lithium-ion batteries are generally most efficient at about 70 degrees. While it varies from vehicle to vehicle, operating in subzero temperatures can cut the range of electric vehicles by as much as half. There are a variety of technical reasons why battery cars routinely deliver less range in extreme weather conditions. These include the extra power required from the battery to either heat or cool the cabin, or to defrost the windows, or to heat the seats. Also, the battery charges more slowly in cold weather. Even in optimum weather, lithium-ion batteries lose about one percent of range every day. The fix may come with the next generation of electric vehicle batteries, which are expected to improve performance, although “solid state” batteries are not expected to be mass produced until 2022 or later.

Lithium-Ion Batteries

While electric vehicle batteries are referred to as “lithium-ion,” they are composed of over a dozen compounds that contain different formulations of materials such as cobalt, iron, and manganese. These materials respond to temperature in different ways. Batteries can overheat and damage their chemistry and shorten their life. At colder temperatures, the internal components of a lithium battery become more resistant to passing current. The flow of energy is reduced and capacity is lost.

Also, the battery pack contains hundreds of individual battery cells and they are designed differently by the various electric vehicle manufacturers. The Nissan Leaf uses a simple and relatively inexpensive air-cooling system. The I-Pace, Tesla Model 3, and many other electric vehicles rely on more expensive liquid-cooled systems. A disadvantage with this type of system is that they use more energy on their own, especially on very hot or cold days. On the plus side is that these liquid-cooled battery packs can remain closer to their optimum operating temperature.

Conditioning the Battery

Most battery electric vehicles can be “preconditioned” when they are plugged into a charger. That means a motorist can start warming the vehicle’s cabin before they leave home or office, saving a few kilowatts of battery power since the energy comes from the grid. Some owners find that this improves a car’s range on a frigid morning by about 10 percent. But, it is not only the amount of energy stored in the battery pack that is impacted by cold weather.

Conventional hybrids like the Toyota Prius, plug-ins like the Chevrolet Volt, or a pure battery electric vehicle like the Nissan Leaf use regenerative braking to maximize range. Where normal brakes slow a vehicle by friction, turning energy into heat, regenerative brakes are small generators where the kinetic energy gathered when slowing down is turned back into electric current and returned to the batteries. Those brake generators lose efficiency when it gets very cold, thus also reducing consumers’ expected range because of less on-board generation. This is a “double whammy” for electric vehicle owners in cold conditions.

Next Generation Batteries

The prospective next-generation batteries are known as “solid state” or “lithium-air,” which will replace the liquid slurry inside lithium-ion cells with a solid ceramic material that is expected to speed up charging, improve range, reduce costs, and better handle cold temperatures. These next-generation batteries have been demonstrated so far only in the research laboratory. Some energy experts predict solid-state batteries will be ready for production by 2022, while others expect that date to be closer to the end of the decade.

Tesla’s Door Handle Problem

Tesla Model 3’s handles are flush with the exterior of the car and require customers to push on one side, then pull on the other to open them. Ice makes opening those car doors difficult for drivers. The owners have tweeted solutions and Elon Musk tweeted last month that Tesla was preparing over-the-air software updates that would improve how its cars were holding up in cold weather.

Conclusion

Electric vehicles have a range problem compared to internal combustion engines, which is made worse when temperatures are frigid. During the polar vortex, electric vehicle drivers lost about 30 percent of vehicle range due to the cold weather. Pre-conditioning a vehicle can help with that problem, but it is more likely to be fixed by the next generation of battery technology, whenever that emerges.

*This article was adapted from content originally published by the Institute for Energy Research.

Filed Under: Blog Tagged With: auto mandate, batteries, electric vehicles, EVs, Tesla, Winter

Historic Victory: President Trump Rescinds 2009 GHG Endangerment Finding

February 12, 2026 by AEA Press Office Leave a Comment

WASHINGTON DC (2/12/26) – Today, President Donald J. Trump stood with EPA Administrator Lee Zeldin to announce the repeal of the 2009 Greenhouse Gas Endangerment Finding. The EPA announced its proposal to rescind the Endangerment Finding in July 2025.

American Energy Alliance President Tom Pyle released the following statement:

“Thank you, President Trump and Administrator Zeldin, for this historic victory for American energy freedom, economic prosperity, and commonsense policymaking that serves the interests of American workers, families, and businesses. Since its inception, the Endangerment Finding has been weaponized against projects and goods that deliver affordable, reliable energy to the American people. It has affected investment and infrastructure decisions in ways that have harmed U.S. competitiveness, purely to advance a political ideology.

“The EPA’s continued attempt over the last decade and a half to regulate greenhouse gases through the Clean Air Act represented a sweeping expansion of authority never granted by Congress and stretched the law far beyond its original purpose. Its basis rested heavily on speculative projections rather than direct, immediate harms, and the policy was not supported by clear scientific data or a sound legal basis. The result has been an endless string of confusing and conflicting mandates for families, companies, and manufacturers, complicating life for all Americans.

“Major policy decisions of this scale have no place in the hands of unelected government agents. Rescinding the rule is an opportunity to reset policy, respect congressional intent, and ensure that any future framework is debated and decided by the people’s actual elected representatives. The decision to expand the scope of the Clean Air Act or any other statute rests with Congress and Congress alone. We are confident that the Supreme Court will affirm this should they be in a position to consider the merits of this sound rulemaking.”

AEA Experts Available For Interview On This Topic:

Additional Background Resources From AEA:

For media inquiries please contact:
[email protected]

Filed Under: Press Releases Tagged With: Donald Trump, endangerment finding, EPA, EPA regulations, Lee Zeldin, Obama Administration, regulations

President Trump Liberates America From Obama-Era “Endangerment Finding”

February 12, 2026 by IER Leave a Comment

President Trump’s Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is set to rescind an Obama-era ruling that currently serves as the legal basis for federal greenhouse-gas regulation. The 2009 “endangerment finding” determined that six greenhouse gases pose a threat to public health and welfare. Despite Obama’s EPA indicating the rule was based on science, there is no scientific evidence that carbon dioxide is a pollutant or a danger to human health. Criteria pollutants (e.g., lead, sulfur dioxide, PM2.5) are a danger to public health, which was the reason for the passage of the Clean Air Act and their containment. Representative John Dingell, a co-author of the Clean Air Act, confirmed that carbon dioxide was not meant to be regulated under the act.

The finding, however, provided the legal underpinning for the EPA’s climate rules, which limited carbon dioxide emissions from power plants and tightened fuel-economy standards for vehicles under the Clean Air Act. It was used during the Obama and Biden administrations to heavily regulate greenhouse gas emissions from vehicles, power plants, and large industrial facilities. Despite these Democratic administrations claiming that they are for helping the poor, the “endangerment finding” is a regressive tax that hits poor households the hardest.

According to the Wall Street Journal, the final rule that the Trump EPA is preparing will remove the regulatory requirements to measure, report, certify, and comply with federal greenhouse-gas emission standards for motor vehicles. It also repeals associated compliance programs, credit provisions, and reporting obligations for industries. It is not expected to apply to rules governing emissions from power plants and other stationary sources such as oil-and-gas facilities, but repealing the finding could eventually roll back regulations that affect those facilities. The Trump EPA claims that the rollback of the “endangerment finding” would result in more than $1 trillion in regulation cuts and an average per-vehicle cost savings of more than $2,400.

It is expected that environmental groups will challenge the rescission in the court system and it will likely take years before the litigation is resolved. According to the Wall Street Journal, the Trump administration could decline to enforce rules and fines during the legal process. Several unsuccessful attempts to revise or repeal the “endangerment finding” have previously been undertaken.

Additionally, the Journal reports that President Trump will release a new executive order that directs the Defense Department to enter into agreements to buy electricity from coal-fired power plants. The administration will also provide funding to five coal plants in West Virginia, Ohio, North Carolina, and Kentucky to recommission and upgrade the facilities. According to Energy Secretary Wright, revitalizing the U.S. coal industry would provide energy for artificial intelligence and re-industrialization and help contain the rise in electricity prices. The Tennessee Valley Authority is also expected to keep two coal plants operating after they were previously slated to shut down.

Some states, including Massachusetts, New York, and California, are opposed to the proposed rescission of the “endangerment finding,” arguing it would violate current law, Supreme Court precedent, and, allegedly, scientific consensus. These states could enact legislation themselves to regulate greenhouse gas emissions in the absence of a federal standard for regulating them. If this were the case, blue states would again be increasing energy prices for their residents, as they are already doing with electricity prices and gasoline prices. This would increase the costs of goods and services in these states, in turn making life less affordable.

Background

According to MLive, the Clean Air Act was enacted in 1970 with a focus on criteria pollutants (e.g., sulfur oxides, nitrogen oxides, particulates, carbon monoxide) to address industrial and vehicle-specific emissions from these pollutants. Congress did not view the common compounds in the atmosphere — nitrogen, oxygen, and carbon dioxide — as air pollutants. When the first major amendments to the Clean Air Act were enacted in 1977, Congress chose not to pursue climate change under the act.

The EPA was given the authority to regulate greenhouse gases under the Clean Air Act by the Supreme Court in the case of Massachusetts v. EPA in 2007, in which the court found that greenhouse gases qualify as air pollutants. Massachusetts and several other states had petitioned the EPA to regulate greenhouse gas emissions from new motor vehicles, indicating that they cause climate change and are harmful to the public’s health.

Analysis

Under the Obama and Biden administrations, EPA regulations sanctioned by the Endangerment Finding had little to no effect on the global environment, while causing hardships for Americans by limiting technological choice and raising domestic energy prices. U.S. regulatory policies to limit greenhouse gas emissions result in manufacturers and energy producers moving offshore, resulting in those emissions moving elsewhere, and often to countries with less efficient technology. As we explain in the 2026 Environmental Quality Index, “Given its high standards and significant output, U.S. energy production supports both economic growth and environmental quality more effectively than that of other countries.” Therefore, politicians should be encouraging more domestic energy production if they want to lower emissions, not stymie it.

For a more detailed review of what this reform means for policy makers see this brief prepared by AEA’s Kenny Stein on behalf of the Institute for Energy Research.

EPA Revokes Endangerment Finding: What You Need to Know

*This article was adapted from content originally published by the Institute for Energy Research.

Filed Under: Blog Tagged With: endangerment finding, Environmental Protection Agency, EPA, Lee Zeldin, Obama Administration, regulations, Trump administration

AEA Surveys

February 11, 2026 by AEA Leave a Comment

The American Energy Alliance has conducted and sponsored a number of surveys in recent years to reveal public sentiment on key energy issues.

Survey Title and Link	Release Date
New Survey, Same Results: Americans Reject Carbon Dioxide Taxes	January 2024
New Survey, Same Results: Voters Prefer Affordable Energy over Climate Agenda	June 2023
Voters Don’t Want to Pay for Biden’s Global Warming Agenda	April 2021
American Voters Concerned about Economy, Not Climate	May 2020
Voters to Congress: Make a U-Turn on Special Vehicle Preferences	October 2019
New Survey Results Find Voters (Still) Don’t Favor EV Subsidies	May 2019
New Survey Finds Voters Skeptical of Government Action on Climate Change	March 2019
New Survey: Voters (Still) Find Vehicle Subsidies “Unfair”	June 2018
IER-ACU Foundation Energy & Environment Survey	October 2017
Survey: Americans Don’t Want to Pay for Neighbor’s EV	September 2015
Americans Skeptical of Federal Energy Dictates	September 2014
IER Survey Finds Broad-Based Opposition to Carbon Tax	June 2013
IER Survey: Government Transparency Demanded By Taxpayers	May 2013
Carbon Tax Survey	December 2012
IER National Survey	September 2008

If you are looking for a specific survey sponsored by AEA and don’t see it on this list contact AEA’s press office ([email protected]) for assistance.

Filed Under: Blog Tagged With: survey

Behind The Green Facade, Coal Powers China

February 10, 2026 by IER Leave a Comment

The Statistical Review of World Energy reports that coal accounted for 58% of China’s primary energy consumption in 2024. Oil was at 20% and natural gas at 10%. That means that 88% of China’s energy came from fossil fuels. Carbon-free energy (nuclear, hydroelectric, solar, wind, and most other renewables) only provided 12%. Since 2000, China has more than tripled its coal consumption and now uses more coal than the rest of the world’s combined usage, burning 56% of the world’s coal. As Doomberg points out, China consumes almost 20 times the combined consumption of coal by the 27 member states of the European Union, based on 2024 data.

In 2024, China released 11,173 million metric tons of carbon dioxide — 31.5% of the world’s total. That was about 4.5 times as much as the European Union and almost 2.5 times the amount that the United States released.

News reports are touting that renewable energy, including hydroelectricity, has overtaken coal as the primary source of electricity around the world, indicating a shift in the global reliance on fossil fuels based on data for the first half of 2025. That shift is not surprising, since 2024 data shows that once renewable data is supplemented by hydro data, coal and renewables plus hydro had generation shares that were very close. In 2024, coal produced 33.95% of the world’s electricity, while renewables plus hydro produced 31.6%. Thus, coal outproduced renewables plus hydro by slightly more than two percentage points.

In the first half of 2025, Ember found that renewable energy plus hydroelectricity contributed 34.3% of all global electricity generated, while coal generated 33.1%. Ember claims that populous developing countries like China and India “led the charge in adding more renewable energies,” according to an NPR report. But, in 2024, China produced 57.8% of its electricity from coal and 33.7% from renewables and hydropower. It is unlikely that China has since switched those numbers so radically when it expanded the capacity of coal-fired plants more in the first half of 2025 than at any time in the past nine years, according to DW. It did so by adding between 80 and 100 gigawatts of new coal power to its grid in 2025, with 21 gigawatts of those gigawatts added in the first half of 2025.

Similarly, in 2024, India produced 74.8% of its electricity from coal and just 19.6% from renewables plus hydroelectricity. India added 221,813 megawatts of coal as of March 2025. While both countries added more renewable capacity than coal, the efficiency of wind and solar power at a quarter or a third of that of coal, meaning their contribution would not make a radical change in terms of the fuel driving the economies of China or India. Capacity factors for wind and solar are much lower than those of other sources.

One reason that China has added renewable generating technologies is to manufacture and sell them to countries that have goals of reducing greenhouse gas emissions and are instituting policies to enforce those goals. Europe, in particular, is touting the growing share of generation they are getting from renewable energy. This is occurring while their electricity costs are skyrocketing and their industry is moving overseas because European industries can no longer compete with countries with much lower energy costs. Wind and solar power are not the cheap power sources that many have hyped because they add to system costs, including increased transmission costs and duplicate generating capacity from the need to provide back-up power when the wind is not blowing, and the sun is not shining. Back-up power is supplied by very expensive batteries or coal and natural gas generating units that are forced to play second fiddle by only generating power when wind and solar power cannot perform, meaning that the fossil technologies cannot recover their full costs due to less generating time. Building duplicate systems because of renewable energy’s inherent intermittency is expensive, while consuming more resources and making the system less efficient.

Analysis

Despite the growing prominence of renewable energy generation, which is mostly buttressed by hydropower — a more reliable source than wind and solar — coal still remains the dominant source of electricity for China and India. Even if these countries continue to increase renewable generation, it’s unlikely that they’ll move off coal anytime soon. The reason that China and India will not divest themselves of coal is that they need affordable and reliable power for their industries and for their residents. With the advent of artificial intelligence data centers that are energy hungry, China will be relying on its vast coal-fired grid — larger than all the generating capacity in the United States — to lead the race. It also needs coal capacity to process the rare earth and other critical minerals that the world needs for “green” technologies. It currently dominates the world in their supply and processing, having spent decades to gain that edge.

*This article was adapted from content originally published by the Institute for Energy Research.

Filed Under: Blog Tagged With: China, coal, Global Energy Issues, Green Energy, Paris agreement, renewable

Europe’s EV Mania Reveals Dangers Of Auto-Market Manipulation

February 10, 2026 by IER Leave a Comment

Sales of electric vehicles (EVs) overtook those of gasoline-powered vehicles in the European Union in December 2025 for the first time, with “hybrid” vehicles outselling both. The European Automobile Manufacturers’ Association found that registrations of battery electric vehicles reached 217,898, up 51% year-on-year from December 2024, with a market share of 22.6%. Sales of gasoline-powered cars in the EU fell 19% year-on-year, from 267,834 in December 2024 to 216,492 in December 2025, with a market share of 22.5%. Hybrids had the largest share of sales at 44% in December. The figures exclude hybrid vehicles that run on gasoline with regenerative braking and plug-in hybrid vehicles that also have battery power. Despite the good showing in December, for the 2025 calendar year, EV sales in the EU were 17.4% of the market, up from 13.6% in 2024. Registrations of gasoline-powered cars fell by 18.7% in 2025, with all major markets in the EU seeing a decrease. Total EU car sales rose 5.8% to almost one million vehicles in December, and by 1.8% to 10.8 million for the year.

As Carbon Brief reports, in 2025, four countries accounted for 62% (1,880,370) of the EV registrations: Germany, the Netherlands, Belgium, and France. Registrations of gasoline-powered cars in 2025 totaled 2,880,298 in the EU. France accounted for the steepest decline in gasoline-powered vehicle registrations at 32%, followed by Germany (-21.6%), Italy (-18.2%), and Spain (-16%).

Hybrid vehicles fueled by gasoline or diesel with regenerative braking are the largest segment of the EU car market, with sales rising 5.8% from 307,001 in December 2024 to 324,799 in 2025. Battery electric vehicles and plug-in hybrids grew faster, with sales up 51% and 36.7% in December 2025, respectively.

According to Carbon Brief, the EU’s new climate proposal for autos requires a 90% cut in tailpipe carbon dioxide emissions from 2021 levels by 2035. Previously, the EU planned on banning the sale of gas cars starting in 2035. The new proposal requires that the remaining 10% of emissions be compensated through the use of low-carbon steel made in the EU or from e-fuels and biofuels. According to European automakers, the EU’s rigid car and van emission targets for 2030 and 2035 were no longer feasible as Europe’s top automakers face a global market challenged by Chinese EV imports and American trade barriers. Despite the slightly relaxed policy proposed, auto manufacturers had already geared up for the more stringent rules, which may have affected overall EV sales in the EU, particularly in December.

Tesla Leads EV Market Sales

According to The News Wheel, among Europe’s best-selling electric vehicles in 2025, the Tesla Model Y held the top position with registrations at 151,331 units, despite a 28% drop in sales. The Skoda Elroq, made by the Czech automaker Skoda, came in second with 94,106 sales, followed by Tesla’s Model 3 with 86,261 units. Also in the top five were the Renault 5 E-Tech and the Volkswagen ID.4, with 81,517 and 80,123 sales, respectively. Volkswagen had three models in the top seven: ID.4, ID.3 (78,667 units), and ID.7 (76,368 units). BMW and Kia also had models in the top ten, with the iX1 and EV3, while the Skoda Enyaq closed the list at 65,787 units sold.

Worldwide EV Growth

Electric vehicle demand grew across almost every region in 2025, except North America, where sales were down 4%. Global EV sales rose 20% to 20.7 million units, with China accounting for 12.9 million units, a 17% increase. China has minimal oil resources and provides lucrative subsidies for EVs.

EV sales were up only 1% in the United States, affected by the elimination of federal tax credits as of September 30, 2025, changes to the Corporate Average Fuel Economy standards that dropped fines to zero, and the introduction of policies to onshore vehicle production and supply chains. EV sales in Canada fell by 41% due to the removal of subsidies early in 2025. In contrast, EV sales in Mexico grew by 29%, with the majority of this growth driven by imports of electric vehicles from China. To protect its auto industry and at the urging of President Trump, Mexico upped its tariff on Chinese vehicles to 50%.

Analysis

In contrast with the U.S., Europe is moving full steam ahead with the transition to EVs, backed by stringent emissions standards. As we’ve written previously, “Subsidies have played a significant role in increasing the prominence of EVs globally, and data indicate that EVs become less popular when subsidies are removed. To ensure consumers have access to the cars that best suit their needs, governments should step out of the way by cutting subsidies and regulations promoting certain vehicle types over others, allowing price signals to guide market decisions.”

*This article was adapted from content originally published by the Institute for Energy Research.

Filed Under: Blog Tagged With: Automakers, China, electric vehicles, electricity prices, Europe, European Union, EVs

The Unregulated Podcast #262: Alternative Worlds

February 9, 2026 by AEA Leave a Comment

On this episode of The Unregulated Podcast Tom Pyle and Mike McKenna discuss the diverging worldview between climate catastrophists, including the latest class of carbon tax advocates, and people living in the real world.

Links:

Filed Under: Podcast Tagged With: carbon tax, carbon taxes, climate alarmism, John Curtis, Prove It Act