NewzIntel.com

Category: Energy

  • MIL-OSI Submissions: How the ‘Big Beautiful Bill’ positions US energy to be more costly for consumers and the climate

    Source: The Conversation – USA (2) – By Daniel Cohan, Professor of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Rice University

    Proposed revisions to U.S. energy policy would likely raise consumer prices and climate-warming emissions. zpagistock/Moment via Getty Images

    When it comes to energy policy, the “One Big Beautiful Bill Act” – the official name of a massive federal tax-cut and spending bill that House Republicans passed in May 2025 – risks raising Americans’ energy costs and greenhouse gas emissions.

    The 1,100-page bill would slash incentives for green technologies such as solar, wind, batteries, electric cars and heat pumps while subsidizing existing nuclear power plants and biofuels. That would leave the country and its people burning more fossil fuels despite strong popular and scientific support for a rapid shift to renewable energy.

    The bill may still be revised by the Senate before it moves to a final vote. But it is a picture of how President Donald Trump and congressional Republicans want to reshape U.S. energy policy.

    As an environmental engineering professor who studies ways to confront climate change, I think it is important to distinguish which technologies could rapidly cut emissions or are on the verge of becoming viable from those that do little to fight climate change. Unfortunately, the House bill favors the latter while nixing support for the former.

    Renewable energy

    Wind and solar power, often paired with batteries, are providing over 90% of the new electricity currently being added to the grid nationally and around the world. Geothermal power is undergoing technological breakthroughs. With natural gas turbines in short supply and long lead times to build other resources, renewables and batteries offer the fastest way to satisfy growing demand for power.

    However, the House bill rescinds billions of dollars that the Inflation Reduction Act, enacted in 2022, devoted to boosting domestic manufacturing and deployments of renewable energy and batteries.

    It would terminate tax credits for manufacturing for the wind industry in 2028 and for solar and batteries in 2032. That would disrupt the boom in domestic manufacturing projects that was being stimulated by the Inflation Reduction Act.

    Deployments would be hit even harder. Wind, solar, geothermal and battery projects would need to commence construction within 60 days of passage of the bill to receive tax credits.

    In addition, the bill would deny tax credits to projects that use Chinese-made components. Financial analysts have called those provisions “unworkable,” since some Chinese materials may be necessary even for projects built with as much domestic content as possible.

    Analysts warn that the House bill would cut new wind, solar and battery installations by 20% compared with the growth that had been expected without the bill. That’s why BloombergNEF, an energy research firm, called the bill a “nightmare scenario” for clean energy proponents.

    However, one person’s nightmare may be another man’s dream. “We’re constraining the hell out of wind and solar, which is good,” said Rep. Chip Roy, a Texas Republican backed by the oil and gas industry.

    Wind turbines and solar panels generate renewable energy side by side near Palm Springs, Calif.
    Mario Tama/Getty Images

    Efficiency and electric cars

    Cuts fall even harder on Americans who are trying to reduce their carbon footprints and energy costs. The bill repeals aid for home efficiency improvements such as heat pumps, efficient windows and energy audits. Homeowners would also lose tax credits for installing solar panels and batteries.

    For vehicles, the bill would not only repeal tax credits for electric cars, trucks and chargers, but it also would impose a federal $250 annual fee on vehicles, on top of fees that some states charge electric-car owners. The federal fee is more than the gas taxes paid by other drivers to fund highways and ignores air-quality and climate effects.

    Combined, the lost credits and increased fees could cut projected U.S. sales of electric vehicles by 40% in 2030, according to modeling by Jesse Jenkins of Princeton University.

    Nuclear power

    Meanwhile, the bill partially retains a tax credit for electricity from existing nuclear power plants. Those plants may not need the help: Electricity demand is surging, and companies like Meta are signing long-term deals for nuclear energy to power data centers. Nuclear plants are also paid to manage their radioactive waste, since the country lacks a permanent place to store it.

    For new nuclear plants, the bill would move up the deadline to 2028 to begin construction. That deadline is too soon for some new reactor designs and would rush the vetting of others. Nuclear safety regulators are awaiting a study from the National Academies on the weapons proliferation risks of the type of uranium fuel that some developers hope to use in newer designs.

    The House-passed bill would protect government subsidies for existing nuclear power plants, like the one in the background, while limiting support for wind turbines.
    Scott Olson/Getty Images

    Biofuels

    While cutting funding for electric vehicles, the bill would spend $45 billion to extend tax credits for biofuels such as ethanol and biodiesel.

    Food-based biofuels do little good for the climate because growing, harvesting and processing crops requires fertilizers, pesticides and fuel. The bill would allow forests to be cut to make room for crops because it directs agencies to ignore the impacts of biofuels on land use.

    Hydrogen

    The bill would end tax credits for hydrogen production. Without that support, companies will be unlikely to invest in the seven so-called “hydrogen hubs” that were allocated a combined $8 billion under the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law in 2021. Those hubs aim to attract $40 billion in private investments and create tens of thousands of jobs while developing cleaner ways to make hydrogen.

    The repealed tax credits would have subsidized hydrogen made emissions-free by using renewable or nuclear electricity to split water molecules. They also would have subsidized hydrogen made from natural gas with carbon capture, whose benefits are impaired by methane emissions from natural gas systems and incomplete carbon capture.

    However it’s made, hydrogen is no panacea. As the world’s smallest molecule, hydrogen is prone to leaking, which can pose safety challenges and indirectly warm the climate. And while hydrogen is essential for making fertilizers and potentially useful for making steel or aviation fuels, vehicles and heating are more efficiently powered by electricity than by hydrogen.

    Still, European governments and China are investing heavily in hydrogen production.

    As Congress deliberates on the One Big Beautiful Bill Act, the nation’s energy agenda is one of many issues being hotly debated.
    Kevin Carter/Getty Images

    Summing it up

    The conservative Tax Foundation estimates that the House bill would cut the Inflation Reduction Act’s clean energy tax credits by about half, saving the government $50 billion a year. But with fewer efficiency improvements, fewer electric vehicles and less clean power on the grid, Princeton’s Jenkins projects American households would pay up to $415 more per year for energy by 2035 than if the bill’s provisions were not enacted. If the bill’s provisions make it into law, the extra fossil fuel-burning would leave annual U.S. greenhouse gas emissions 1 billion tons higher by then.

    No one expected former President Joe Biden’s Inflation Reduction Act to escape unscathed with Republicans in the White House and dominating both houses of Congress. Still, the proposed cuts target the technologies Americans count on to protect the climate and save consumers money.

    Daniel Cohan receives funding from the Carbon Hub at Rice University.

    – ref. How the ‘Big Beautiful Bill’ positions US energy to be more costly for consumers and the climate – https://theconversation.com/how-the-big-beautiful-bill-positions-us-energy-to-be-more-costly-for-consumers-and-the-climate-257783

    MIL OSI –

  • MIL-OSI Submissions: How the ‘Big Beautiful Bill’ positions US energy to be more costly for consumers and the climate

    Source: The Conversation – USA (2) – By Daniel Cohan, Professor of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Rice University

    Proposed revisions to U.S. energy policy would likely raise consumer prices and climate-warming emissions. zpagistock/Moment via Getty Images

    When it comes to energy policy, the “One Big Beautiful Bill Act” – the official name of a massive federal tax-cut and spending bill that House Republicans passed in May 2025 – risks raising Americans’ energy costs and greenhouse gas emissions.

    The 1,100-page bill would slash incentives for green technologies such as solar, wind, batteries, electric cars and heat pumps while subsidizing existing nuclear power plants and biofuels. That would leave the country and its people burning more fossil fuels despite strong popular and scientific support for a rapid shift to renewable energy.

    The bill may still be revised by the Senate before it moves to a final vote. But it is a picture of how President Donald Trump and congressional Republicans want to reshape U.S. energy policy.

    As an environmental engineering professor who studies ways to confront climate change, I think it is important to distinguish which technologies could rapidly cut emissions or are on the verge of becoming viable from those that do little to fight climate change. Unfortunately, the House bill favors the latter while nixing support for the former.

    Renewable energy

    Wind and solar power, often paired with batteries, are providing over 90% of the new electricity currently being added to the grid nationally and around the world. Geothermal power is undergoing technological breakthroughs. With natural gas turbines in short supply and long lead times to build other resources, renewables and batteries offer the fastest way to satisfy growing demand for power.

    However, the House bill rescinds billions of dollars that the Inflation Reduction Act, enacted in 2022, devoted to boosting domestic manufacturing and deployments of renewable energy and batteries.

    It would terminate tax credits for manufacturing for the wind industry in 2028 and for solar and batteries in 2032. That would disrupt the boom in domestic manufacturing projects that was being stimulated by the Inflation Reduction Act.

    Deployments would be hit even harder. Wind, solar, geothermal and battery projects would need to commence construction within 60 days of passage of the bill to receive tax credits.

    In addition, the bill would deny tax credits to projects that use Chinese-made components. Financial analysts have called those provisions “unworkable,” since some Chinese materials may be necessary even for projects built with as much domestic content as possible.

    Analysts warn that the House bill would cut new wind, solar and battery installations by 20% compared with the growth that had been expected without the bill. That’s why BloombergNEF, an energy research firm, called the bill a “nightmare scenario” for clean energy proponents.

    However, one person’s nightmare may be another man’s dream. “We’re constraining the hell out of wind and solar, which is good,” said Rep. Chip Roy, a Texas Republican backed by the oil and gas industry.

    Wind turbines and solar panels generate renewable energy side by side near Palm Springs, Calif.
    Mario Tama/Getty Images

    Efficiency and electric cars

    Cuts fall even harder on Americans who are trying to reduce their carbon footprints and energy costs. The bill repeals aid for home efficiency improvements such as heat pumps, efficient windows and energy audits. Homeowners would also lose tax credits for installing solar panels and batteries.

    For vehicles, the bill would not only repeal tax credits for electric cars, trucks and chargers, but it also would impose a federal $250 annual fee on vehicles, on top of fees that some states charge electric-car owners. The federal fee is more than the gas taxes paid by other drivers to fund highways and ignores air-quality and climate effects.

    Combined, the lost credits and increased fees could cut projected U.S. sales of electric vehicles by 40% in 2030, according to modeling by Jesse Jenkins of Princeton University.

    Nuclear power

    Meanwhile, the bill partially retains a tax credit for electricity from existing nuclear power plants. Those plants may not need the help: Electricity demand is surging, and companies like Meta are signing long-term deals for nuclear energy to power data centers. Nuclear plants are also paid to manage their radioactive waste, since the country lacks a permanent place to store it.

    For new nuclear plants, the bill would move up the deadline to 2028 to begin construction. That deadline is too soon for some new reactor designs and would rush the vetting of others. Nuclear safety regulators are awaiting a study from the National Academies on the weapons proliferation risks of the type of uranium fuel that some developers hope to use in newer designs.

    The House-passed bill would protect government subsidies for existing nuclear power plants, like the one in the background, while limiting support for wind turbines.
    Scott Olson/Getty Images

    Biofuels

    While cutting funding for electric vehicles, the bill would spend $45 billion to extend tax credits for biofuels such as ethanol and biodiesel.

    Food-based biofuels do little good for the climate because growing, harvesting and processing crops requires fertilizers, pesticides and fuel. The bill would allow forests to be cut to make room for crops because it directs agencies to ignore the impacts of biofuels on land use.

    Hydrogen

    The bill would end tax credits for hydrogen production. Without that support, companies will be unlikely to invest in the seven so-called “hydrogen hubs” that were allocated a combined $8 billion under the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law in 2021. Those hubs aim to attract $40 billion in private investments and create tens of thousands of jobs while developing cleaner ways to make hydrogen.

    The repealed tax credits would have subsidized hydrogen made emissions-free by using renewable or nuclear electricity to split water molecules. They also would have subsidized hydrogen made from natural gas with carbon capture, whose benefits are impaired by methane emissions from natural gas systems and incomplete carbon capture.

    However it’s made, hydrogen is no panacea. As the world’s smallest molecule, hydrogen is prone to leaking, which can pose safety challenges and indirectly warm the climate. And while hydrogen is essential for making fertilizers and potentially useful for making steel or aviation fuels, vehicles and heating are more efficiently powered by electricity than by hydrogen.

    Still, European governments and China are investing heavily in hydrogen production.

    As Congress deliberates on the One Big Beautiful Bill Act, the nation’s energy agenda is one of many issues being hotly debated.
    Kevin Carter/Getty Images

    Summing it up

    The conservative Tax Foundation estimates that the House bill would cut the Inflation Reduction Act’s clean energy tax credits by about half, saving the government $50 billion a year. But with fewer efficiency improvements, fewer electric vehicles and less clean power on the grid, Princeton’s Jenkins projects American households would pay up to $415 more per year for energy by 2035 than if the bill’s provisions were not enacted. If the bill’s provisions make it into law, the extra fossil fuel-burning would leave annual U.S. greenhouse gas emissions 1 billion tons higher by then.

    No one expected former President Joe Biden’s Inflation Reduction Act to escape unscathed with Republicans in the White House and dominating both houses of Congress. Still, the proposed cuts target the technologies Americans count on to protect the climate and save consumers money.

    Daniel Cohan receives funding from the Carbon Hub at Rice University.

    – ref. How the ‘Big Beautiful Bill’ positions US energy to be more costly for consumers and the climate – https://theconversation.com/how-the-big-beautiful-bill-positions-us-energy-to-be-more-costly-for-consumers-and-the-climate-257783

    MIL OSI –

  • MIL-OSI Submissions: How the ‘Big Beautiful Bill’ positions US energy to be more costly for consumers and the climate

    Source: The Conversation – USA (2) – By Daniel Cohan, Professor of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Rice University

    Proposed revisions to U.S. energy policy would likely raise consumer prices and climate-warming emissions. zpagistock/Moment via Getty Images

    When it comes to energy policy, the “One Big Beautiful Bill Act” – the official name of a massive federal tax-cut and spending bill that House Republicans passed in May 2025 – risks raising Americans’ energy costs and greenhouse gas emissions.

    The 1,100-page bill would slash incentives for green technologies such as solar, wind, batteries, electric cars and heat pumps while subsidizing existing nuclear power plants and biofuels. That would leave the country and its people burning more fossil fuels despite strong popular and scientific support for a rapid shift to renewable energy.

    The bill may still be revised by the Senate before it moves to a final vote. But it is a picture of how President Donald Trump and congressional Republicans want to reshape U.S. energy policy.

    As an environmental engineering professor who studies ways to confront climate change, I think it is important to distinguish which technologies could rapidly cut emissions or are on the verge of becoming viable from those that do little to fight climate change. Unfortunately, the House bill favors the latter while nixing support for the former.

    Renewable energy

    Wind and solar power, often paired with batteries, are providing over 90% of the new electricity currently being added to the grid nationally and around the world. Geothermal power is undergoing technological breakthroughs. With natural gas turbines in short supply and long lead times to build other resources, renewables and batteries offer the fastest way to satisfy growing demand for power.

    However, the House bill rescinds billions of dollars that the Inflation Reduction Act, enacted in 2022, devoted to boosting domestic manufacturing and deployments of renewable energy and batteries.

    It would terminate tax credits for manufacturing for the wind industry in 2028 and for solar and batteries in 2032. That would disrupt the boom in domestic manufacturing projects that was being stimulated by the Inflation Reduction Act.

    Deployments would be hit even harder. Wind, solar, geothermal and battery projects would need to commence construction within 60 days of passage of the bill to receive tax credits.

    In addition, the bill would deny tax credits to projects that use Chinese-made components. Financial analysts have called those provisions “unworkable,” since some Chinese materials may be necessary even for projects built with as much domestic content as possible.

    Analysts warn that the House bill would cut new wind, solar and battery installations by 20% compared with the growth that had been expected without the bill. That’s why BloombergNEF, an energy research firm, called the bill a “nightmare scenario” for clean energy proponents.

    However, one person’s nightmare may be another man’s dream. “We’re constraining the hell out of wind and solar, which is good,” said Rep. Chip Roy, a Texas Republican backed by the oil and gas industry.

    Wind turbines and solar panels generate renewable energy side by side near Palm Springs, Calif.
    Mario Tama/Getty Images

    Efficiency and electric cars

    Cuts fall even harder on Americans who are trying to reduce their carbon footprints and energy costs. The bill repeals aid for home efficiency improvements such as heat pumps, efficient windows and energy audits. Homeowners would also lose tax credits for installing solar panels and batteries.

    For vehicles, the bill would not only repeal tax credits for electric cars, trucks and chargers, but it also would impose a federal $250 annual fee on vehicles, on top of fees that some states charge electric-car owners. The federal fee is more than the gas taxes paid by other drivers to fund highways and ignores air-quality and climate effects.

    Combined, the lost credits and increased fees could cut projected U.S. sales of electric vehicles by 40% in 2030, according to modeling by Jesse Jenkins of Princeton University.

    Nuclear power

    Meanwhile, the bill partially retains a tax credit for electricity from existing nuclear power plants. Those plants may not need the help: Electricity demand is surging, and companies like Meta are signing long-term deals for nuclear energy to power data centers. Nuclear plants are also paid to manage their radioactive waste, since the country lacks a permanent place to store it.

    For new nuclear plants, the bill would move up the deadline to 2028 to begin construction. That deadline is too soon for some new reactor designs and would rush the vetting of others. Nuclear safety regulators are awaiting a study from the National Academies on the weapons proliferation risks of the type of uranium fuel that some developers hope to use in newer designs.

    The House-passed bill would protect government subsidies for existing nuclear power plants, like the one in the background, while limiting support for wind turbines.
    Scott Olson/Getty Images

    Biofuels

    While cutting funding for electric vehicles, the bill would spend $45 billion to extend tax credits for biofuels such as ethanol and biodiesel.

    Food-based biofuels do little good for the climate because growing, harvesting and processing crops requires fertilizers, pesticides and fuel. The bill would allow forests to be cut to make room for crops because it directs agencies to ignore the impacts of biofuels on land use.

    Hydrogen

    The bill would end tax credits for hydrogen production. Without that support, companies will be unlikely to invest in the seven so-called “hydrogen hubs” that were allocated a combined $8 billion under the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law in 2021. Those hubs aim to attract $40 billion in private investments and create tens of thousands of jobs while developing cleaner ways to make hydrogen.

    The repealed tax credits would have subsidized hydrogen made emissions-free by using renewable or nuclear electricity to split water molecules. They also would have subsidized hydrogen made from natural gas with carbon capture, whose benefits are impaired by methane emissions from natural gas systems and incomplete carbon capture.

    However it’s made, hydrogen is no panacea. As the world’s smallest molecule, hydrogen is prone to leaking, which can pose safety challenges and indirectly warm the climate. And while hydrogen is essential for making fertilizers and potentially useful for making steel or aviation fuels, vehicles and heating are more efficiently powered by electricity than by hydrogen.

    Still, European governments and China are investing heavily in hydrogen production.

    As Congress deliberates on the One Big Beautiful Bill Act, the nation’s energy agenda is one of many issues being hotly debated.
    Kevin Carter/Getty Images

    Summing it up

    The conservative Tax Foundation estimates that the House bill would cut the Inflation Reduction Act’s clean energy tax credits by about half, saving the government $50 billion a year. But with fewer efficiency improvements, fewer electric vehicles and less clean power on the grid, Princeton’s Jenkins projects American households would pay up to $415 more per year for energy by 2035 than if the bill’s provisions were not enacted. If the bill’s provisions make it into law, the extra fossil fuel-burning would leave annual U.S. greenhouse gas emissions 1 billion tons higher by then.

    No one expected former President Joe Biden’s Inflation Reduction Act to escape unscathed with Republicans in the White House and dominating both houses of Congress. Still, the proposed cuts target the technologies Americans count on to protect the climate and save consumers money.

    Daniel Cohan receives funding from the Carbon Hub at Rice University.

    – ref. How the ‘Big Beautiful Bill’ positions US energy to be more costly for consumers and the climate – https://theconversation.com/how-the-big-beautiful-bill-positions-us-energy-to-be-more-costly-for-consumers-and-the-climate-257783

    MIL OSI –

  • MIL-OSI Submissions: How your air conditioner can help the power grid, rather than overloading it

    Source: The Conversation – USA (2) – By Johanna Mathieu, Associate Professor of Electrical Engineering & Computer Science, University of Michigan

    Could this common home machinery help usher in more renewable energy? Holden Henry/iStock / Getty Images Plus

    As summer arrives, people are turning on air conditioners in most of the U.S. But if you’re like me, you always feel a little guilty about that. Past generations managed without air conditioning – do I really need it? And how bad is it to use all this electricity for cooling in a warming world?

    If I leave my air conditioner off, I get too hot. But if everyone turns on their air conditioner at the same time, electricity demand spikes, which can force power grid operators to activate some of the most expensive, and dirtiest, power plants. Sometimes those spikes can ask too much of the grid and lead to brownouts or blackouts.

    Research I recently published with a team of scholars makes me feel a little better, though. We have found that it is possible to coordinate the operation of large numbers of home air-conditioning units, balancing supply and demand on the power grid – and without making people endure high temperatures inside their homes.

    Studies along these lines, using remote control of air conditioners to support the grid, have for many years explored theoretical possibilities like this. However, few approaches have been demonstrated in practice and never for such a high-value application and at this scale. The system we developed not only demonstrated the ability to balance the grid on timescales of seconds, but also proved it was possible to do so without affecting residents’ comfort.

    The benefits include increasing the reliability of the power grid, which makes it easier for the grid to accept more renewable energy. Our goal is to turn air conditioners from a challenge for the power grid into an asset, supporting a shift away from fossil fuels toward cleaner energy.

    Adjustable equipment

    My research focuses on batteries, solar panels and electric equipment – such as electric vehicles, water heaters, air conditioners and heat pumps – that can adjust itself to consume different amounts of energy at different times.

    Originally, the U.S. electric grid was built to transport electricity from large power plants to customers’ homes and businesses. And originally, power plants were large, centralized operations that burned coal or natural gas, or harvested energy from nuclear reactions. These plants were typically always available and could adjust how much power they generated in response to customer demand, so the grid would be balanced between power coming in from producers and being used by consumers.

    But the grid has changed. There are more renewable energy sources, from which power isn’t always available – like solar panels at night or wind turbines on calm days. And there are the devices and equipment I study. These newer options, called “distributed energy resources,” generate or store energy near where consumers need it – or adjust how much energy they’re using in real time.

    One aspect of the grid hasn’t changed, though: There’s not much storage built into the system. So every time you turn on a light, for a moment there’s not enough electricity to supply everything that wants it right then: The grid needs a power producer to generate a little more power. And when you turn off a light, there’s a little too much: A power producer needs to ramp down.

    The way power plants know what real-time power adjustments are needed is by closely monitoring the grid frequency. The goal is to provide electricity at a constant frequency – 60 hertz – at all times. If more power is needed than is being produced, the frequency drops and a power plant boosts output. If there’s too much power being produced, the frequency rises and a power plant slows production a little. These actions, a process called “frequency regulation,” happen in a matter of seconds to keep the grid balanced.

    This output flexibility, primarily from power plants, is key to keeping the lights on for everyone.

    Power plants, like this one in Utah, adjust their output to match demand from electricity customers.
    Jason Finn/iStock / Getty Images Plus

    Finding new options

    I’m interested in how distributed energy resources can improve flexibility in the grid. They can release more energy, or consume less, to respond to the changing supply or demand, and help balance the grid, ensuring the frequency remains near 60 hertz.

    Some people fear that doing so might be invasive, giving someone outside your home the ability to control your battery or air conditioner. Therefore, we wanted to see if we could help balance the grid with frequency regulation using home air-conditioning units rather than power plants – without affecting how residents use their appliances or how comfortable they are in their homes.

    From 2019 to 2023, my group at the University of Michigan tried this approach, in collaboration with researchers at Pecan Street Inc., Los Alamos National Laboratory and the University of California, Berkeley, with funding from the U.S. Department of Energy Advanced Research Projects Agency-Energy.

    We recruited 100 homeowners in Austin, Texas, to do a real-world test of our system. All the homes had whole-house forced-air cooling systems, which we connected to custom control boards and sensors the owners allowed us to install in their homes. This equipment let us send instructions to the air-conditioning units based on the frequency of the grid.

    Before I explain how the system worked, I first need to explain how thermostats work. When people set thermostats, they pick a temperature, and the thermostat switches the air-conditioning compressor on and off to maintain the air temperature within a small range around that set point. If the temperature is set at 68 degrees, the thermostat turns the AC on when the temperature is, say, 70, and turns it off when it’s cooled down to, say, 66.

    Every few seconds, our system slightly changed the timing of air-conditioning compressor switching for some of the 100 air conditioners, causing the units’ aggregate power consumption to change. In this way, our small group of home air conditioners reacted to grid changes the way a power plant would – using more or less energy to balance the grid and keep the frequency near 60 hertz.

    Moreover, our system was designed to keep home temperatures within the same small temperature range around the set point.

    Smart thermostats could have frequency regulation capabilities available to interested consumers, to help balance the electricity grid.
    Danielle Mead/iStock/Getty Images Plus

    Testing the approach

    We ran our system in four tests, each lasting one hour. We found two encouraging results.

    First, the air conditioners were able to provide frequency regulation at least as accurately as a traditional power plant. Therefore, we showed that air conditioners could play a significant role in increasing grid flexibility. But perhaps more importantly – at least in terms of encouraging people to participate in these types of systems – we found that we were able to do so without affecting people’s comfort in their homes.

    We found that home temperatures did not deviate more than 1.6 Fahrenheit from their set point. Homeowners were allowed to override the controls if they got uncomfortable, but most didn’t. For most tests, we received zero override requests. In the worst case, we received override requests from two of the 100 homes in our test.

    In practice, this sort of technology could be added to commercially available internet-connected thermostats. In exchange for credits on their energy bills, users could choose to join a service run by the thermostat company, their utility provider or some other third party.

    Then people could turn on the air conditioning in the summer heat without that pang of guilt, knowing they were helping to make the grid more reliable and more capable of accommodating renewable energy sources – without sacrificing their own comfort in the process.

    Johanna Mathieu works for the University of Michigan. She has received funding from the National Science Foundation, Department of Energy, ARPA-E, and the Alfred P. Sloan Foundation. She is affiliated with the IEEE.

    – ref. How your air conditioner can help the power grid, rather than overloading it – https://theconversation.com/how-your-air-conditioner-can-help-the-power-grid-rather-than-overloading-it-256858

    MIL OSI –

  • MIL-OSI Submissions: Energy Star, on the Trump administration’s target list, has a long history of helping consumers’ wallets and the planet

    Source: The Conversation – USA (2) – By Magali A. Delmas, Professor of Management, Institute of the Environment and Sustainability, Anderson School of Management, University of California, Los Angeles

    The blue Energy Star label is widely recognized across the U.S. Alex Tai/SOPA Images/LightRocket via Getty Images

    Since the early 1990s, the small blue Energy Star label has appeared on millions of household appliances, electronics and even buildings across the United States. But as the Trump administration considers terminating some or all of the program, it is worth a look at what exactly this government-backed label means, and why it has become one of the most recognizable environmental certifications in the country.

    Energy Star was launched by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency in 1992 and later expanded in partnership with the Department of Energy with a simple goal: making it easier for consumers and businesses to choose energy-efficient products, helping them reduce energy use and save money, without sacrificing quality or performance.

    As a scholar of energy conservation, I have studied the Energy Star program’s development and public impact, including how it has shaped consumer behavior and environmental outcomes.

    According to the EPA, it has saved consumers an average of US$15 billion a year on energy costs since its inception, a massive return on a program that costs taxpayers an estimated $32 million a year.

    How Energy Star works

    When you see an Energy Star label on a product, it means that product has met strict energy efficiency standards set by the EPA in collaboration with the U.S. Department of Energy, which tests how much energy appliances use. The federal agencies also consult with product manufacturers, utilities and others to figure out how best to improve products and determine how cost-effective changes might be.

    Products that earn the Energy Star certification typically use significantly less energy than standard models, often between 10% and 50% less. The energy – and financial – savings can add up quickly, especially when homes or buildings have multiple Energy Star appliances and systems.

    Energy Star itself does not manufacture or sell products. Instead, it acts as a trusted third-party certifier, providing consumers and businesses with reliable information and clear labeling. It also offers information to help people estimate energy savings and compare long-term costs, making it easier to identify high-performing, cost-effective options. Manufacturers participating in Energy Star seek to improve their environmental reputation and increase their market share, giving them a strong incentive to meet the program’s efficiency criteria.

    Today, the label appears on refrigerators, dishwashers, laptops, commercial buildings and even newly built homes. The government says people in more than 90% of American households recognize the label.

    Energy Star-certified appliances include upright freezers, clothes washers and many other types of home equipment, which use between 10% and 50% less energy than uncertified items.
    AP Photo/Joshua A. Bickel

    People don’t always choose efficient products

    Energy Star seeks to tackle a wide range of problems that can result in people deciding not to buy energy-efficient products.

    One problem is that efficient models often come with higher up-front costs. While efficient models save money over time, that higher purchase price can discourage buyers. Energy Star helps counter this problem by clearly showing how much money can be saved on energy costs over the lifetime of the product – as compared with noncertified products – and by offering rebates that reduce the initial expense.

    Another problem involves what economists call “split incentives.” A landlord might not want to pay a higher price up front for energy-efficient appliances if the tenants are the ones who will save money on the utility bills. And renters may not want to spend a lot of money on appliances or equipment in a place they do not own. Energy Star tries to bridge this divide by promoting whole-building certifications, which encourage landlords to invest in their buildings’ energy efficiency with the goal of making their properties more attractive to tenants.

    The countless varieties of refrigerators, dishwashers, air conditioners and other items on the market can also create confusion. Consumers who just look at manufacturers’ promotional material may find it very hard to determine which appliances truly deliver better energy efficiency. The Energy Star label makes this comparison easier: If the label is there, it is among the most efficient choices available.

    And consumers are often skeptical of manufacturers’ claims – especially when it comes to new technologies or environmental promises. Energy Star’s status as a program backed by the government, rather than a private company, gives it a level of independence and credibility that many other labels lack. People know the certification is based on science, not sales tactics.

    Lastly, Energy Star helps overcome the problem that many people are not aware of how much energy their appliances consume, or how those choices contribute to climate change. By connecting everyday products to larger environmental outcomes, Energy Star helps consumers understand the effects of their decisions, without needing to become energy experts.

    The program delivers real results

    Since its inception, more than 800,000 appliance models have earned Energy Star certification based on the criteria for their type of product.

    The same principles that make the label valuable for consumer appliances – independent certification, clear metrics and a focus on results – have proved equally effective in real estate. Nearly 45,000 commercial buildings and industrial plants have earned certification. And there have been more than 2.5 million Energy Star-certified homes and apartments built in the U.S.

    In 2023 alone, over 190,000 new homes and apartments were certified, representing more than 12% of all new residential construction nationwide.

    Energy Star-certified homes are designed to be at least 10% more energy efficient than those built to standard building codes, with more insulation and windows and lights that are energy-efficient, as well as appliances. These enhancements can translate to better quality, comfort and long-term cost savings for homeowners.

    Commercial buildings, which account for about 18% of total U.S. energy use, have also benefited substantially. Research I was involved in found that certified commercial buildings use an average of 19% less energy than their noncertified counterparts.

    Computers can sleep, too – not just cats. Both types conserve energy.
    Markus Scholz/picture alliance via Getty Images

    Why government leadership matters

    Energy Star’s status as a government-led label contributes to its credibility as a more neutral and science-based source of information than commercial labels.

    Energy Star’s government connections also bring scale: By requiring federal purchases to have Energy Star certifications, the federal government can influence manufacturers. For example, a federal executive order in 1993 required government agencies to purchase only computers that had been Energy Star-certified, which required them to have energy-saving sleep functions.

    In response, manufacturers began including the feature so they could sell their products to the government. Consumers soon came to expect the sleep feature on all computers.

    A quiet success story in energy and climate

    Energy Star does not grab headlines. It does not rely on regulation or mandates. Yet it has quietly become one of the most effective tools the U.S. has for improving energy efficiency across homes, offices and public buildings.

    That said, the program is not without its limitations. Some critics have pointed out that not all certified products consistently perform at the highest efficiency levels. Other critics note that the benefits of Energy Star are more accessible to wealthier consumers who can afford up-front investments, even with available rebates. And the EPA itself has, at times, struggled to manage the certification process and update standards in line with the latest technological advances.

    At a time when energy costs and climate concerns are rising, Energy Star stands out as a rare example of a practical, nonpartisan program that delivers real benefits. It helps individuals, businesses and communities save money, lower emissions and take part in a more sustainable future – one smart decision at a time.

    Magali Delmas received funding from the US EPA in 2002 for research on Environmental Management Strategies and Corporate Performance.

    – ref. Energy Star, on the Trump administration’s target list, has a long history of helping consumers’ wallets and the planet – https://theconversation.com/energy-star-on-the-trump-administrations-target-list-has-a-long-history-of-helping-consumers-wallets-and-the-planet-258152

    MIL OSI –

  • MIL-OSI Submissions: Energy Star, on the Trump administration’s target list, has a long history of helping consumers’ wallets and the planet

    Source: The Conversation – USA (2) – By Magali A. Delmas, Professor of Management, Institute of the Environment and Sustainability, Anderson School of Management, University of California, Los Angeles

    The blue Energy Star label is widely recognized across the U.S. Alex Tai/SOPA Images/LightRocket via Getty Images

    Since the early 1990s, the small blue Energy Star label has appeared on millions of household appliances, electronics and even buildings across the United States. But as the Trump administration considers terminating some or all of the program, it is worth a look at what exactly this government-backed label means, and why it has become one of the most recognizable environmental certifications in the country.

    Energy Star was launched by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency in 1992 and later expanded in partnership with the Department of Energy with a simple goal: making it easier for consumers and businesses to choose energy-efficient products, helping them reduce energy use and save money, without sacrificing quality or performance.

    As a scholar of energy conservation, I have studied the Energy Star program’s development and public impact, including how it has shaped consumer behavior and environmental outcomes.

    According to the EPA, it has saved consumers an average of US$15 billion a year on energy costs since its inception, a massive return on a program that costs taxpayers an estimated $32 million a year.

    How Energy Star works

    When you see an Energy Star label on a product, it means that product has met strict energy efficiency standards set by the EPA in collaboration with the U.S. Department of Energy, which tests how much energy appliances use. The federal agencies also consult with product manufacturers, utilities and others to figure out how best to improve products and determine how cost-effective changes might be.

    Products that earn the Energy Star certification typically use significantly less energy than standard models, often between 10% and 50% less. The energy – and financial – savings can add up quickly, especially when homes or buildings have multiple Energy Star appliances and systems.

    Energy Star itself does not manufacture or sell products. Instead, it acts as a trusted third-party certifier, providing consumers and businesses with reliable information and clear labeling. It also offers information to help people estimate energy savings and compare long-term costs, making it easier to identify high-performing, cost-effective options. Manufacturers participating in Energy Star seek to improve their environmental reputation and increase their market share, giving them a strong incentive to meet the program’s efficiency criteria.

    Today, the label appears on refrigerators, dishwashers, laptops, commercial buildings and even newly built homes. The government says people in more than 90% of American households recognize the label.

    Energy Star-certified appliances include upright freezers, clothes washers and many other types of home equipment, which use between 10% and 50% less energy than uncertified items.
    AP Photo/Joshua A. Bickel

    People don’t always choose efficient products

    Energy Star seeks to tackle a wide range of problems that can result in people deciding not to buy energy-efficient products.

    One problem is that efficient models often come with higher up-front costs. While efficient models save money over time, that higher purchase price can discourage buyers. Energy Star helps counter this problem by clearly showing how much money can be saved on energy costs over the lifetime of the product – as compared with noncertified products – and by offering rebates that reduce the initial expense.

    Another problem involves what economists call “split incentives.” A landlord might not want to pay a higher price up front for energy-efficient appliances if the tenants are the ones who will save money on the utility bills. And renters may not want to spend a lot of money on appliances or equipment in a place they do not own. Energy Star tries to bridge this divide by promoting whole-building certifications, which encourage landlords to invest in their buildings’ energy efficiency with the goal of making their properties more attractive to tenants.

    The countless varieties of refrigerators, dishwashers, air conditioners and other items on the market can also create confusion. Consumers who just look at manufacturers’ promotional material may find it very hard to determine which appliances truly deliver better energy efficiency. The Energy Star label makes this comparison easier: If the label is there, it is among the most efficient choices available.

    And consumers are often skeptical of manufacturers’ claims – especially when it comes to new technologies or environmental promises. Energy Star’s status as a program backed by the government, rather than a private company, gives it a level of independence and credibility that many other labels lack. People know the certification is based on science, not sales tactics.

    Lastly, Energy Star helps overcome the problem that many people are not aware of how much energy their appliances consume, or how those choices contribute to climate change. By connecting everyday products to larger environmental outcomes, Energy Star helps consumers understand the effects of their decisions, without needing to become energy experts.

    The program delivers real results

    Since its inception, more than 800,000 appliance models have earned Energy Star certification based on the criteria for their type of product.

    The same principles that make the label valuable for consumer appliances – independent certification, clear metrics and a focus on results – have proved equally effective in real estate. Nearly 45,000 commercial buildings and industrial plants have earned certification. And there have been more than 2.5 million Energy Star-certified homes and apartments built in the U.S.

    In 2023 alone, over 190,000 new homes and apartments were certified, representing more than 12% of all new residential construction nationwide.

    Energy Star-certified homes are designed to be at least 10% more energy efficient than those built to standard building codes, with more insulation and windows and lights that are energy-efficient, as well as appliances. These enhancements can translate to better quality, comfort and long-term cost savings for homeowners.

    Commercial buildings, which account for about 18% of total U.S. energy use, have also benefited substantially. Research I was involved in found that certified commercial buildings use an average of 19% less energy than their noncertified counterparts.

    Computers can sleep, too – not just cats. Both types conserve energy.
    Markus Scholz/picture alliance via Getty Images

    Why government leadership matters

    Energy Star’s status as a government-led label contributes to its credibility as a more neutral and science-based source of information than commercial labels.

    Energy Star’s government connections also bring scale: By requiring federal purchases to have Energy Star certifications, the federal government can influence manufacturers. For example, a federal executive order in 1993 required government agencies to purchase only computers that had been Energy Star-certified, which required them to have energy-saving sleep functions.

    In response, manufacturers began including the feature so they could sell their products to the government. Consumers soon came to expect the sleep feature on all computers.

    A quiet success story in energy and climate

    Energy Star does not grab headlines. It does not rely on regulation or mandates. Yet it has quietly become one of the most effective tools the U.S. has for improving energy efficiency across homes, offices and public buildings.

    That said, the program is not without its limitations. Some critics have pointed out that not all certified products consistently perform at the highest efficiency levels. Other critics note that the benefits of Energy Star are more accessible to wealthier consumers who can afford up-front investments, even with available rebates. And the EPA itself has, at times, struggled to manage the certification process and update standards in line with the latest technological advances.

    At a time when energy costs and climate concerns are rising, Energy Star stands out as a rare example of a practical, nonpartisan program that delivers real benefits. It helps individuals, businesses and communities save money, lower emissions and take part in a more sustainable future – one smart decision at a time.

    Magali Delmas received funding from the US EPA in 2002 for research on Environmental Management Strategies and Corporate Performance.

    – ref. Energy Star, on the Trump administration’s target list, has a long history of helping consumers’ wallets and the planet – https://theconversation.com/energy-star-on-the-trump-administrations-target-list-has-a-long-history-of-helping-consumers-wallets-and-the-planet-258152

    MIL OSI –

  • MIL-OSI Submissions: Energy Star, on the Trump administration’s target list, has a long history of helping consumers’ wallets and the planet

    Source: The Conversation – USA (2) – By Magali A. Delmas, Professor of Management, Institute of the Environment and Sustainability, Anderson School of Management, University of California, Los Angeles

    The blue Energy Star label is widely recognized across the U.S. Alex Tai/SOPA Images/LightRocket via Getty Images

    Since the early 1990s, the small blue Energy Star label has appeared on millions of household appliances, electronics and even buildings across the United States. But as the Trump administration considers terminating some or all of the program, it is worth a look at what exactly this government-backed label means, and why it has become one of the most recognizable environmental certifications in the country.

    Energy Star was launched by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency in 1992 and later expanded in partnership with the Department of Energy with a simple goal: making it easier for consumers and businesses to choose energy-efficient products, helping them reduce energy use and save money, without sacrificing quality or performance.

    As a scholar of energy conservation, I have studied the Energy Star program’s development and public impact, including how it has shaped consumer behavior and environmental outcomes.

    According to the EPA, it has saved consumers an average of US$15 billion a year on energy costs since its inception, a massive return on a program that costs taxpayers an estimated $32 million a year.

    How Energy Star works

    When you see an Energy Star label on a product, it means that product has met strict energy efficiency standards set by the EPA in collaboration with the U.S. Department of Energy, which tests how much energy appliances use. The federal agencies also consult with product manufacturers, utilities and others to figure out how best to improve products and determine how cost-effective changes might be.

    Products that earn the Energy Star certification typically use significantly less energy than standard models, often between 10% and 50% less. The energy – and financial – savings can add up quickly, especially when homes or buildings have multiple Energy Star appliances and systems.

    Energy Star itself does not manufacture or sell products. Instead, it acts as a trusted third-party certifier, providing consumers and businesses with reliable information and clear labeling. It also offers information to help people estimate energy savings and compare long-term costs, making it easier to identify high-performing, cost-effective options. Manufacturers participating in Energy Star seek to improve their environmental reputation and increase their market share, giving them a strong incentive to meet the program’s efficiency criteria.

    Today, the label appears on refrigerators, dishwashers, laptops, commercial buildings and even newly built homes. The government says people in more than 90% of American households recognize the label.

    Energy Star-certified appliances include upright freezers, clothes washers and many other types of home equipment, which use between 10% and 50% less energy than uncertified items.
    AP Photo/Joshua A. Bickel

    People don’t always choose efficient products

    Energy Star seeks to tackle a wide range of problems that can result in people deciding not to buy energy-efficient products.

    One problem is that efficient models often come with higher up-front costs. While efficient models save money over time, that higher purchase price can discourage buyers. Energy Star helps counter this problem by clearly showing how much money can be saved on energy costs over the lifetime of the product – as compared with noncertified products – and by offering rebates that reduce the initial expense.

    Another problem involves what economists call “split incentives.” A landlord might not want to pay a higher price up front for energy-efficient appliances if the tenants are the ones who will save money on the utility bills. And renters may not want to spend a lot of money on appliances or equipment in a place they do not own. Energy Star tries to bridge this divide by promoting whole-building certifications, which encourage landlords to invest in their buildings’ energy efficiency with the goal of making their properties more attractive to tenants.

    The countless varieties of refrigerators, dishwashers, air conditioners and other items on the market can also create confusion. Consumers who just look at manufacturers’ promotional material may find it very hard to determine which appliances truly deliver better energy efficiency. The Energy Star label makes this comparison easier: If the label is there, it is among the most efficient choices available.

    And consumers are often skeptical of manufacturers’ claims – especially when it comes to new technologies or environmental promises. Energy Star’s status as a program backed by the government, rather than a private company, gives it a level of independence and credibility that many other labels lack. People know the certification is based on science, not sales tactics.

    Lastly, Energy Star helps overcome the problem that many people are not aware of how much energy their appliances consume, or how those choices contribute to climate change. By connecting everyday products to larger environmental outcomes, Energy Star helps consumers understand the effects of their decisions, without needing to become energy experts.

    The program delivers real results

    Since its inception, more than 800,000 appliance models have earned Energy Star certification based on the criteria for their type of product.

    The same principles that make the label valuable for consumer appliances – independent certification, clear metrics and a focus on results – have proved equally effective in real estate. Nearly 45,000 commercial buildings and industrial plants have earned certification. And there have been more than 2.5 million Energy Star-certified homes and apartments built in the U.S.

    In 2023 alone, over 190,000 new homes and apartments were certified, representing more than 12% of all new residential construction nationwide.

    Energy Star-certified homes are designed to be at least 10% more energy efficient than those built to standard building codes, with more insulation and windows and lights that are energy-efficient, as well as appliances. These enhancements can translate to better quality, comfort and long-term cost savings for homeowners.

    Commercial buildings, which account for about 18% of total U.S. energy use, have also benefited substantially. Research I was involved in found that certified commercial buildings use an average of 19% less energy than their noncertified counterparts.

    Computers can sleep, too – not just cats. Both types conserve energy.
    Markus Scholz/picture alliance via Getty Images

    Why government leadership matters

    Energy Star’s status as a government-led label contributes to its credibility as a more neutral and science-based source of information than commercial labels.

    Energy Star’s government connections also bring scale: By requiring federal purchases to have Energy Star certifications, the federal government can influence manufacturers. For example, a federal executive order in 1993 required government agencies to purchase only computers that had been Energy Star-certified, which required them to have energy-saving sleep functions.

    In response, manufacturers began including the feature so they could sell their products to the government. Consumers soon came to expect the sleep feature on all computers.

    A quiet success story in energy and climate

    Energy Star does not grab headlines. It does not rely on regulation or mandates. Yet it has quietly become one of the most effective tools the U.S. has for improving energy efficiency across homes, offices and public buildings.

    That said, the program is not without its limitations. Some critics have pointed out that not all certified products consistently perform at the highest efficiency levels. Other critics note that the benefits of Energy Star are more accessible to wealthier consumers who can afford up-front investments, even with available rebates. And the EPA itself has, at times, struggled to manage the certification process and update standards in line with the latest technological advances.

    At a time when energy costs and climate concerns are rising, Energy Star stands out as a rare example of a practical, nonpartisan program that delivers real benefits. It helps individuals, businesses and communities save money, lower emissions and take part in a more sustainable future – one smart decision at a time.

    Magali Delmas received funding from the US EPA in 2002 for research on Environmental Management Strategies and Corporate Performance.

    – ref. Energy Star, on the Trump administration’s target list, has a long history of helping consumers’ wallets and the planet – https://theconversation.com/energy-star-on-the-trump-administrations-target-list-has-a-long-history-of-helping-consumers-wallets-and-the-planet-258152

    MIL OSI –

  • MIL-OSI Submissions: Development finance in a post-aid world: the case for country platforms

    Source: The Conversation – Africa – By Richard Calland, Emeritus Associate Professor in Public Law, UCT. Visiting Adjunct Professor, WITS School of Governance; Director, Africa Programme, University of Cambridge Institute for Sustainability Leadership, University of Cambridge

    With the Trump administration slashing US Agency for International Development budgets and European nations shifting overseas development aid budgets to bolster defence spending, the world has entered a “post-aid era”.

    But there is an opportunity to recast development finance as strategic investment: “country platforms”.

    Country platforms are government-led, nationally owned mechanisms that bring together a country’s climate priorities, investment needs and reform agenda, and align them with the interests of development partners, private investors and implementing agencies. They function as a strategic hub: convening actors, coordinating funding, and curating pipelines of projects for investment.

    Think of them as the opposite of donor-driven fragmentation. Instead of dozens of disconnected projects driven by external priorities, a country platform enables governments to set the agenda and direct finance to where it is needed most. That could be renewable energy, climate-smart agriculture, resilient infrastructure, or nature-based solutions.

    Country platforms are a current fad. They were the talk of the town at the 2025 Spring meetings of multilateral development banks in Washington DC. Will they quickly fade as the next big new idea comes into view? Or can they escape the limitations and failings of the finance and development aid ecosystem?

    The Independent High Level Expert Group on Climate Finance, on which I serve, is striving to find new ways to ramp up finance – both public and private – in quality and quantity. I agree with those who argue that country platforms could be the innovation that unlocks the capital urgently needed to tackle climate overshoot and buttress economic development.

    The model is already being tested. More than ten countries have launched their platforms, and more are in the pipeline.

    For African countries, the opportunity could not be more timely. African governments are racing to deliver their Nationally Determined Contributions. These are the commitments they’ve made to reduce their greenhouse gas emissions as part of climate change mitigation targets set out in the Paris Agreement. Implementing these plans is often being done under severe fiscal constraints.

    At the same time global capital is looking for investment opportunities. But it needs to be convinced that the rewards will outweigh the risks.

    Where it’s being tested

    In Africa, South Africa’s Just Energy Transition Partnership has demonstrated both the potential and the complexity of a country platform. Egypt and Senegal also have country platforms at different stages of implementation. Kenya and Nigeria are exploring similar mechanisms. The African Union’s Climate Change and Resilient Development Strategy calls for country platforms across the continent.

    New entrants can learn from countries that started first.

    But country platforms come in different shapes and sizes according to the context.

    Another promising example is emerging through Mission 300, an initiative of the World Bank and African Development Bank, working with partners like The Rockefeller Foundation, Global Energy Alliance for People and Planet, and Sustainable Energy for All. It aims to connect 300 million people to clean electricity by 2030.

    Central to this initiative are Compact Delivery and Monitoring Units. These are essentially country platforms anchored in electrification. They reflect how a well-structured country platform can make an impact. Twelve African countries are already moving in this direction. All announced their Mission 300 compacts at the Africa Heads of State Summit in Tanzania.

    This growing cohort reflects a continental commitment to putting energy-driven country platforms at the heart of Africa’s development architecture.

    Why now – and why Africa?

    A well-functioning country platform can help in a number of ways.

    Firstly, it can give the political and economic leadership a clear goal. The platform can survive elections and show stability, certainty and transparency to the investment world.

    Secondly, national ownership and strategic alignment can reduce risk and build confidence. That would encourage investment.

    Thirdly, it builds trust among development partners and investors through clear priorities, transparency, and national ownership.

    Fourthly, it moves beyond isolated pilot projects to system-level transformation – meaning structural change. The transition in one sector, energy for example, creates new value chains that create more, better and safer jobs. Country platforms put African governments in charge of their own economic development, not as passive recipients of climate finance.

    The country sets its investment priorities and then the match-making with international climate finance can begin.

    Making it work: what’s needed

    Developing the data on which a country bases its investment and development plans, and blending those with the fiscal, climate and nature data, is complex. For this reason country platforms require investment in institutional capacity, cross-ministerial collaboration, and strong coordination between finance ministries, environment agencies and economic planners. And especially, in leadership capability.

    African countries must take charge of this capacity and capability acceleration.

    Second, development partners can respond by providing money as well as supporting African leadership, aligning with national strategies, and being willing to co-design mechanisms that meet both investor expectations and local realities.

    Capacity is especially crucial given the scale of Africa’s needs. According to the African Development Bank, Africa will require over US$200 billion annually by 2030 to meet its climate goals. Donor aid will provide only a fraction of this. It will require smart, coordinated investment and careful debt management. Country platforms provide the structure to govern the process.

    Seizing the opportunity

    Country platforms represent one of the most promising innovations in climate and development finance architecture. Properly designed and led, they offer African countries the opportunity to take ownership of their climate and development futures – on their own terms.

    Country platforms could be the “buckle” that finally enables the supply and demand sides of climate finance to come together. It will require commitment, strategic and technical capability, and, above all, smart leadership.

    Richard Calland works for the University of Cambridge Institute for Sustainability Leadership. He is also an Emeritus Associate Professor at the University of Cape Town and an Adjunct Visiting Professor at the University of Witwatersrand School of Governance. He serves on the Advisory Council of the Council for the Advancement of the South African Constitution, Chairs of the Board of Sustainability Education and is a member of the Board of Chapter Zero Southern Africa.

    – ref. Development finance in a post-aid world: the case for country platforms – https://theconversation.com/development-finance-in-a-post-aid-world-the-case-for-country-platforms-257994

    MIL OSI –

  • MIL-OSI Submissions: Sustainable economic growth in South Africa will come from renewables, not coal: what our model shows

    Source: The Conversation – Africa – By Andrew Phiri, Associate Professor of Economics, Nelson Mandela University

    Coal fired power stations produce 85% of South Africa’s electricity, making the country the biggest producer of harmful greenhouse-gas emissions in Africa. To move away from coal and meet its commitment to reaching net zero emissions by 2050, South Africa needs to dramatically increase production of renewable energy. New research by economics associate professor Andrew Phiri looked at the relationship between renewable and non-renewable energy consumption and GDP growth in South Africa to find out which energy source is most compatible with economic development.

    Non-renewables, renewables and economic growth: what’s there to know?

    We set out to discover whether renewable energy in South Africa, such as wind or solar power, supports sustainable economic growth. We also wanted to find out if renewables can replace non-renewable energy as a source and enabler of economic growth.

    Together with student Tsepiso Sesoai, I did research comparing the impact of renewable and non-renewable energy on economic growth in South Africa.

    South Africa currently faces a dual challenge when it comes to energy. It is heavily dependent on non-renewable energy (coal), which also worsens global warming and speeds up climate change. But it desperately needs to grow the economy at a faster rate, given very high unemployment, poverty and inequality.

    It’s therefore important to find out whether South Africa would be able to make a smooth transition from non-renewable energy to cleaner energy, and grow the economy at the same time.

    Past studies have looked into the role of energy in South Africa’s economic growth, but their methods have provided only limited information about whether South Africa can make a smooth transition from dirty to clean energy.



    Read more:
    African economic expansion need not threaten global carbon targets: study points out the path to green growth

    To get a deeper understanding, we conducted a modelling exercise. We used an analytical tool called “continuous complex wavelets” to see how renewable and non-renewable energy influences growth over time.

    Our model shows that an increased supply and higher consumption of non-renewable energy causes long-term economic growth over 10-15 year cycles. Renewables, at best, have short-term growth effects over six months to one year.

    After 2000, there was a very sharp increase of almost 25% in the use of renewable energy throughout the decade. According to our model, this sharp increase was enough to have an impact on economic growth over the short term but not over the long term.

    This is because South African energy regulators have not adopted strong enough measures for renewable energy to enable long-term growth. They have not funded the mass rollout of renewable energy, or connected renewables to the national grid. We found that renewables can only sustain growth over six to 12 month cycles whereas policymakers work towards longer cycles such as the 2030 and 2050 sustainable development goals.

    Economic growth and coal consumption: what did you find?

    In 2003, the government started taking climate change seriously with the release of the White Paper on Renewable Energy. The government started intentionally trying to increase the use of renewable energy while decreasing the use of dirty energy, such as coal. Before this, South Africa’s economic growth was heavily driven by coal consumption.

    Renewable energy saw its biggest surge after the 2010 launch of the Renewable Energy Independent Power Producer Procurement Programme. This opened competitive bidding for renewable energy providers to supply electricity to the grid.

    The transition to renewable energy had begun. But coal-fired power, while declining, remained the main source of electricity.

    In 2019 carbon taxes were formally introduced. This resulted in a further slowdown in consumption of non-renewable energy. The COVID-19 pandemic in 2020 and 2021 coincided with severe power cuts. These two events combined caused a general slowdown in non-renewable and renewable energy use, and in economic growth.

    At this point, the drop in coal consumption was actively dragging down the economy. This in turn reduced society’s income, as measured by the gross national product. And because incomes were constrained, fewer private households purchased renewable energy systems. People didn’t spend on solar panels.

    What do your findings mean?

    Our research suggests that relying on non-renewable energy, like coal, won’t lead to long-term growth for South Africa. This is because non-renewables are not a reliable source of energy, as shown by loadshedding.

    Our research further suggests that renewable energy policies, subsidies and programmes made some positive short-term impacts on economic growth, measured as gross domestic product.

    Overall, our findings highlight that policymakers have treated renewables as a “nice-to-have” gesture for humanity, instead of a key driver of long-term economic growth.

    This has led to weak policies, poor regulation, and under-investment in renewable energy. These have held the sector back from making a bigger contribution to economic growth.



    Read more:
    Africa doesn’t have a choice between economic growth and protecting the environment: how they can go hand in hand

    For example, the government has not taken renewables seriously enough to include them in the power grid. This has largely limited the use of renewable energy to private homes and businesses. Coal-fired electricity from the country’s power utility, Eskom, is still cheaper for households than leaving the grid and purchasing their own renewable energy infrastructure (solar energy systems). The government has not funded the infrastructure needed to unlock South Africa’s vast renewable energy potential.

    The planet is at a critical state with global warming. The government should urgently set up policies and actions to overcome the barriers to using renewable energy. Only then will renewable energy have a permanent, positive influence on economic growth.

    South Africa has huge potential in renewables like solar, wind and biomass, thanks to its diverse geography. Yet, when people think about moving away from coal, they worry about job losses in the coal industry. But historically, energy transitions have never been instant. African countries that embraced the change early on reaped the benefits. They became more industrialised and prosperous.

    The South African government must act now if it wants to use renewable energy to drive future economic growth and stay ahead in the global shift to clean energy. Climate change affects us deeply. But it also presents a chance for Africa to leap ahead technologically.

    Andrew Phiri does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

    – ref. Sustainable economic growth in South Africa will come from renewables, not coal: what our model shows – https://theconversation.com/sustainable-economic-growth-in-south-africa-will-come-from-renewables-not-coal-what-our-model-shows-239339

    MIL OSI –

  • MIL-OSI Submissions: Has finance for green industry had an impact in Africa? What’s happened in 41 countries over 20 years

    Source: The Conversation – Africa – By Nara Monkam, Associate Professor of Public Economics, Chair in Municipal Finance within the Department of Economics, and Head of the Public Policy Hub at the University of Pretoria, University of Pretoria

    The African continent finds itself in a predicament. Advanced economies in the rest of the world developed through industrialisation: their economies transformed from mainly agricultural to industrial. This involved burning fossil fuels like coal, generating greenhouse gas emissions that caused global warming.

    African economies have trailed behind industrially. They’re now industrialising at a time when the world is moving away from fossil fuels and towards solar power, wind energy and hydropower.

    Africa has 60% of the world’s best solar resources but only 1% of the world’s installed solar power systems. Despite renewable energy capacity nearly doubling in the last decade, only 2% of global investments in renewable energy went to Africa.

    Green industrialisation could be the answer: achieving long-term economic growth and industrial development that does not harm the environment. But in most African countries, renewable energy is more expensive than fossil fuels, which are readily available in many parts of the continent. Africa is also one of the world’s poorest regions and cannot easily afford green technologies.

    So a key issue in economic development is how to stimulate green industrial productivity. Green finance (funding from banks and investors specifically for environmentally friendly projects) can fund green innovations. These include renewable energy technologies, energy-efficient building designs, or electric vehicles.



    Read more:
    Africa doesn’t have a choice between economic growth and protecting the environment: how they can go hand in hand

    I am an economist who worked with a team of researchers to study the impact of green finance on industrialisation in Africa. We also wanted to find out if green innovation influenced the effect that green finance has on industrialisation. (This was measured in this study as the total industrial value added as a percentage of gross domestic product.)

    For example, switching to renewable energy like solar power reduces greenhouse gas emissions, and helps mitigate climate change. But the high costs of renewable energy equipment could harm industrial growth.

    The research analysed macroeconomic and energy, green finance and industrialisation statistics from 41 African countries between 2000 and 2020.

    Our research found that green finance offers funding opportunities for clean and innovative technologies and creating new jobs in green sectors. However, the potential of green financing to drive industrialisation through green innovation (such as renewable energy projects) is not being realised.



    Read more:
    How green innovation could be the key to growth for the UK’s rural businesses

    This is because renewable energy comes with high costs. There also are not enough skilled people available to run green projects. There’s a lack of proper roads, connectivity or transmission lines to connect renewable energy to the main grid. The basic conditions for industrial growth through renewable energy are not in place.

    Governments in Africa should find ways to make green innovation work. This will mean that society can enjoy the benefit of new environmentally friendly projects.

    How to make green innovation work

    African governments should focus on increasing people’s access to renewable energy projects. For this to happen, they need to put more funding and effort into developing renewable energy infrastructure. Renewable energy technologies must be available and affordable.

    Education and capacity building is needed, particularly in rural communities. For example, community-owned solar microgrid projects provide people with the skills needed to manage and look after renewable energy systems.

    Governments will need to subsidise local manufacturing of renewable energy components. When these are produced locally, this can help harness the potential of green innovation for industrialisation and also create jobs.

    Countries must co-operate regionally on green innovation. This means sharing best practices, pooling resources, and making coordinated efforts towards green industrialisation.

    Our research found that it would be useful to set up regional centres of excellence for renewable energy research and development. Regional alliances are also needed, so that countries can work together to negotiate better terms for green finance. This could enhance Africa’s journey towards the kind of green industrialisation that is cost effective and sustainable over time.

    What needs to happen next

    These steps would boost the impact of green finance on industrialisation in Africa:

    • more climate finance, including finance from the private sector

    • environmental taxation – a policy tool to limit activities, goods or services that have negative environmental impacts

    • reform of multilateral development agencies to make it easier for African countries to access to climate funds

    • development bank funding tailored to the needs of African countries. Nations that invest in renewable energy manufacturing should get tax breaks and other incentives. Green bonds that only fund renewable energy projects should be issued to attract private investors

    • vocational training and higher education programmes that focus on training people in green technologies must get government funding.

    Africa has a huge problem with trying to build some resilience to the effects of climate change, such as floods and drought. Economic development is also a challenge on the continent. Both could be addressed by green industrialisation. With the right investments in green finance, innovation and infrastructure, the continent can unlock sustainable growth, reduce poverty and help curb climate change.

    Nara Monkam receives funding from the University of Pretoria.

    – ref. Has finance for green industry had an impact in Africa? What’s happened in 41 countries over 20 years – https://theconversation.com/has-finance-for-green-industry-had-an-impact-in-africa-whats-happened-in-41-countries-over-20-years-244567

    MIL OSI –

  • MIL-OSI Submissions: South Africa has failed to deliver access to enough water for millions – a new approach is needed

    Source: The Conversation – Africa – By Tracy Ledger, Head: Energy and Society Programme, University of Johannesburg

    South Africa is one of only 52 countries that guarantee access to water as a human right. “Access” from a human rights perspective means that water is physically accessible, clean and safe for consumption, and affordable. Section 27 of the country’s constitution stipulates that everyone has the right to access sufficient water.

    But South Africa is not doing well on meeting the standards of a full human rights approach to water access. In a recent paper, I and my colleagues at the Public Affairs Research Institute’s Just Transition Programme set out the extent of this failure, and mapped out what needs to be done to rectify the situation.

    The Just Transition Programme aims to contribute to a successful climate transition that prioritises social justice, equity and poverty reduction.

    Part of our research method is ethnography – spending time in communities struggling to access water. We do this to learn what concrete changes are required to improve people’s lives, from their own perspective.

    Physical access to water for households has increased significantly since the country’s first democratic elections in 1994. Nevertheless, water quality and safety has declined over the past ten years. Almost half the country’s drinking water is considered unsafe
    for human consumption. Water service interruptions – sometimes lasting days – are becoming more common.



    Read more:
    Basic water services in South Africa are in decay after years of progress

    South Africa’s household poverty rate (the number of households who live below the upper bound poverty line) is now at 55%. We found that water is becoming more and more unaffordable for impoverished households. The result is that these families have to limit the amount of water they use. This worsens poverty and inequality.

    To solve this problem, the South African government needs to embrace a human rights approach to access to water, where people are given enough water to live a full life.

    What went wrong?

    The first problem is affordability. People cannot access water if they don’t have the money to pay for it, but most clean and safe water in South Africa must be paid for. Poverty is a key barrier to access.

    The United Nations special rapporteur on the human rights to water and sanitation has emphasised that it is the responsibility of the state to assess whether households can afford to pay for water, without sacrificing other basic essential items such as food. It is up to governments to take steps to make water affordable.

    The country’s Free Basic Water policy was originally intended to address this issue. It guaranteed impoverished households access to a free 6,000 litres of water per month. This is roughly 200 litres per household of eight people per day. However, in practice this policy is not a meaningful solution, for two reasons:

    • the amount provided is an average of 25 litres of water per person per day. This is way below the World Health Organization recommendation of a minimum water allowance of between 50 and 100 litres of water per person per day.

    • many millions of poor households are excluded from the benefit because of poor implementation of the policy by municipalities.

    This situation reflects the failure to create, implement and oversee a regulatory environment that is necessary to realise affordable access to sufficient, clean water for all South Africans.

    The policy failures

    Firstly, water policy – at both national and municipal levels – has failed to take a human rights approach. A human rights approach requires that access to sufficient, quality and affordable water is the starting point for all policy making and resource allocation decisions. This has not been the case.

    Secondly, access to water has been narrowly defined as making water physically available without considering affordability. Most water access policy in South Africa includes statements declaring that water must be affordable for everyone. Unfortunately, all of these policy promises have remained exactly that – just promises.

    Meeting the goal of affordability requires more from the government than stating that water should be affordable. The state must develop affordability standards – in other words, calculate a water tariff that everyone can afford – and monitor it. At the moment, there is no national government oversight of water tariffs and so the affordability policy is effectively meaningless.



    Read more:
    The lack of water in South Africa is the result of a long history of injustice — and legislation should start there

    The actual state practices of tariff setting and approval, particularly in local municipalities, have not translated any of these promises into reality.

    Thirdly, many households are denied access to even the 25 litres of free water per person per day, because municipalities don’t always implement the free basic water policy as intended.



    Read more:
    Why ordinary people must have a say in water governance

    Fourthly, the state has failed to acknowledge the contradiction between providing universal access to services, and requiring municipalities to generate enough money to cover 90% of their running costs. Tariffs for water have increased at rates well above inflation over the past 20 years. But in a very impoverished environment where many people cannot afford to pay for water, up to two thirds of South Africa’s municipalities have been classified as being in financial distress.

    There is a fundamental – and currently insoluble – conflict between the tariffs that municipalities must charge in order to maintain fully funded budgets, and the tariffs that could be defined as affordable.

    What needs to be done?

    These actions should be taken in the short term:

    • the free basic water allowance must be increased

    • the household indigent policy, which determines how households can access free municipal services like water, must be restructured.

    • affordability standards must be developed in close consultation with affected communities. This is the only way to set water tariffs that are based on what households are actually able to pay.

    • there must be oversight of the provision of sufficient, affordable water for everyone.

    In the longer term, these two additional problems must be solved:

    • municipalities are losing revenue from water, particularly from leaking pipes and other infrastructure

    • the local government fiscal framework requires that municipalities earn a surplus on trading services such as water. This must be changed so that municipal finances prioritise affordability of water instead.

    The ethnographic research team for this work was led by Mahlatse Rampedi, who holds a master’s degree and has ten years of experience, together with Ntokozo Ndhlovu, who holds an honours degree.

    Tracy Ledger does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

    – ref. South Africa has failed to deliver access to enough water for millions – a new approach is needed – https://theconversation.com/south-africa-has-failed-to-deliver-access-to-enough-water-for-millions-a-new-approach-is-needed-247831

    MIL OSI –

  • MIL-OSI United Kingdom: Robot dogs showcased at the Lincolnshire Show

    Source: United Kingdom – Executive Government & Departments

    News story

    Robot dogs showcased at the Lincolnshire Show

    The team’s new canine ambassadors sparked chats on clean energy, local jobs and a future powered by fusion.

    The STEP team pose with a robot dog. Image credit: UK Industrial Fusion Solutions Ltd.

    The UK’s first of a kind Spherical Tokamak for Energy Production (STEP) fusion energy team wowed the crowds at the Lincolnshire Show last week with a pair of robo-dogs. The STEP Programme is located at West Burton, a previous coal-fired power station with plans to build a fusion energy power plant at the site which uses robotics to help movement inside the plant. The dog duo proved a hit at the Showground and generated many conversations around fusion energy, the boost the programme will bring to local businesses, thousands of extra jobs that STEP will bring to the area and opportunities around new skills for future generations of workers. 

    Thousands of people gathered at the show which centres on agriculture, trade and local produce, a true celebration of rural life in Lincolnshire. This year the show returned for its 140th year with around 60,000 visitors and a constant flow of people around the STEP robot dogs who were providing entertainment to people of all ages, and they also caught the attention of a few (real) dogs too who were not quite sure what to make of the lively little robots.    

    STEP was hosted by West Lindsey District Council at the annual show, who are proud to be neighbours of this upcoming national significant infrastructure project beginning with construction that will take the commercialisation of fusion energy a step closer to getting clean and green power on to the Grid. The local MP for Gainsborough, Sir Edward Leigh was on hand to speak to people visiting the Show. He commented:

    This is the most exciting thing that has happened to Gainsborough in a hundred years. We’re going to be at the cutting edge of technology, just as Gainsborough was in the middle of the 19th century when it became an industrial town. It’s really exciting. Fusion is unlimited green energy, it’s completely safe, it will transform humankind. Gainsborough is really coming up in the world, and this will just be the icing on the cake.

    You can join in with some of the fusion fun and help the STEP team who are running a competition to name the two newest members of their team – the robot dogs!

    You can submit your robot dog name suggestions here

    Notes to Editors

    The first of its kind, STEP is the UK’s major technology and infrastructure programme to build a prototype fusion power plant that will demonstrate net energy, fuel self-sufficiency and a viable route to plant maintenance.  This will pave the way for the potential development of a fleet of future fusion power plants around the world and the commercialisation of fusion energy.

    We’ll achieve this by producing a prototype tokamak power plant – in an innovative spherical shape – that will demonstrate net energy. That’s why the programme is called STEP: it stands for ‘Spherical Tokamak for Energy Production’.  But STEP is about more than tokamak technology – it’s a huge endeavour encompassing design, site development and construction, alongside supply chain logistics and industry. Fusion research and development has the potential to catalyse new ideas and technologies that will benefit multiple industries and help secure our future on this planet.

    By fusing government and business, inspiration and pragmatism, theory and practice, UK-expertise and international impact, we’re going to realise the step-change that will secure humanity’s bright future. A recent report by AMION, commissioned by local authorities, set out the economic potential of the STEP programme.

    Read the AMIOM report (PDF)

    To sign-up for updates about STEP, visit: step.ukaea.uk or follow our social channels @STEPtoFusion.

    Updates to this page

    Published 30 June 2025

    MIL OSI United Kingdom –

  • MIL-OSI Russia: Rosneft employees celebrated Youth Day

    Translation. Region: Russian Federal

    Source: Rosneft – Rosneft – An important disclaimer is at the bottom of this article.

    Rosneft enterprises took part in Youth Day – a holiday for young people, which is celebrated annually in our country on the last Saturday of June. The Company’s employees held a series of events aimed at developing sports, creativity and professional growth.

    Samotlorneftegaz supported a large-scale city festival in Nizhnevartovsk. The company’s specialists organized a thematic platform with a diverse program. Festival guests were able to take a virtual tour of the Samotlor field using modern VR technologies, get acquainted with exclusive samples of innovative equipment and materials used in the oil and gas production process.

    A special entertainment program was prepared for young visitors: educational coloring books with images of animals that Rosneft studies and cares for, as well as master classes and exciting thematic quizzes for different age groups.

    A special atmosphere was created by the company’s employees and volunteers who took part in the “Candle of Memory” and “Victory Waltz” events, dedicated to the 80th anniversary of the Great Victory and the 60th anniversary of the discovery of the Samotlor field.

    The Saratov Oil Refinery organized a sports bike ride for the plant’s employees and their families. The participants covered several dozen kilometers through the picturesque Kumysnaya Polyana nature park along routes of varying difficulty. Young specialists of the plant also held a team-building training aimed at developing teamwork skills and achieving common goals.

    Novokuibyshevsky Oil Refinery presented its interactive platform at the city festival. In the format of an exciting quest, festival guests got acquainted with the main areas of the enterprise’s activities, its social projects and production achievements.

    The guests’ attention was drawn to the ecological site with the Ecosphere master class, where participants took a virtual tour of the Samarskaya Luka National Park using the Ecotropa63 mobile application.

    Rosneft enterprises implement various events and programs aimed at supporting the younger generation, including a mentoring and internship system, participation of young specialists in innovative projects and scientific research, and development of professional competencies. The company is actively involved in the development of young specialists: it organizes training in modern advanced training programs, including new educational tracks aimed at developing management competencies. The company supports youth scientific and practical conferences and professional skills competitions: this year, large-scale hackathons were organized, where young specialists developed innovative solutions for the oil and gas industry.

    Rosneft creates opportunities for professional and personal growth of young specialists. By investing in young talents, the Company creates a solid foundation for the development of the younger generation.

    Department of Information and Advertising of PJSC NK Rosneft June 30, 2025

    Please note: This information is raw content directly from the source of the information. It is exactly what the source states and does not reflect the position of MIL-OSI or its clients.

    MIL OSI Russia News –

  • MIL-OSI Economics: W&T Announces Positive Court Finding Regarding Remaining Surety Provider Claims

    Source: W & T Offshore Inc

    Headline: W&T Announces Positive Court Finding Regarding Remaining Surety Provider Claims

    HOUSTON, June 30, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — W&T Offshore, Inc. (NYSE: WTI) (“W&T” or the “Company”) today announced that U.S. Magistrate Judge Dena Palermo recommended denying two surety companies motions for preliminary injunction, through which they collectively asked for full monetization of over $100 million dollars. The Court found, in relevant part, the sureties failed to demonstrate they would suffer irreparable harm if their cash collateral demands were not granted.

    Key highlights relating to the ruling include:

    • Sureties’ motion for preliminary injunction, which would have required W&T to immediately post collateral, was categorically recommended to be denied;
    • Sureties failed to carry a clear burden of proof to establish irreparable harm necessary to obtain a preliminary injunction;
    • Ruling results in all current collateral requests by sureties being effectively nullified;
    • The Company will not be required to post collateral (if at all) until a determination on the merits of the pending lawsuit with the remaining surety providers;
    • The previously-announced settlement agreement, together with this favorable Court ruling, represent significant positive outcomes for W&T.

    Tracy W. Krohn, W&T’s Chairman and Chief Executive Officer stated, “We are very pleased with the Magistrate Judge’s recommendation that the Sureties’ preliminary injunction motions be denied. This vindicates W&T’s decision to aggressively defend against unlawful predatory business practices. W&T looks forward to a day when independent operators can once again operate in the Gulf of America unhampered by collusion and unlawful pressures exerted by sureties’ unfettered market power. We could not be more pleased with the Court’s decision preventing unnecessary and unjustified collateral demands by abusive surety providers.”  

    Mr. Krohn added, “surety providers have, for far too long, abused the ability to demand collateral. The Magistrate Judge’s recommendation, assuming it is upheld by the District Court, helps put an end to these blackmail business practices. Never again should any oil and gas producer have to cave to unjustified collateral demands. It admittedly takes courage and calculated risk to resist collective ultimatums from surety providers, but we hope the Court’s decision inspires others to follow suit in standing up to bullying tactics. The sureties’ collusive behavior has caused W&T’s (and other independent operators’) stockholders incalculable harm and it is about time that sureties are held accountable.”

    W&T Offshore’s legal team is led by its General Counsel, George J. Hittner, as well as Deputy General Counsels, Steven Lackey and Ted Imperato. W&T’s trial team is led by Yasser A. Madriz, the Managing Partner of the Houston Office of McGuireWoods, LLP along with members of the firm’s Commercial Litigation Section, Jason Huebinger, Megan Lewis, and Miles Indest.

    About W&T Offshore

    W&T Offshore, Inc. is an independent oil and natural gas producer with operations offshore in the Gulf of America and has grown through acquisitions, exploration and development. As of March 31, 2025, the Company had working interests in 52 fields in federal and state waters (which include 45 fields in federal waters and seven in state waters). The Company has under lease approximately 634,700 gross acres (496,900 net acres) spanning across the outer continental shelf off the coasts of Louisiana, Texas, Mississippi and Alabama, with approximately 487,200 gross acres on the conventional shelf, approximately 141,900 gross acres in the deepwater and 5,600 gross acres in Alabama state waters. A majority of the Company’s daily production is derived from wells it operates. For more information on W&T, please visit the Company’s website at www.wtoffshore.com.

    Forward-Looking and Cautionary Statements

    This press release contains forward-looking statements within the meaning of Section 27A of the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, and Section 21E of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended. All statements other than statements of historical facts included in this release, including those regarding the potential outcome of the litigation, the impact of the litigation on the Company or the industry more broadly, and the Company’s future operations are forward-looking statements. When used in this release, forward-looking statements are generally accompanied by terms or phrases such as “estimate,” “project,” “predict,” “believe,” “expect,” “continue,” “anticipate,” “target,” “could,” “plan,” “intend,” “seek,” “goal,” “will,” “should,” “may” or other words and similar expressions that convey the uncertainty of future events or outcomes, although not all forward-looking statements contain such identifying words. Items contemplating or making assumptions about actual or potential future production and sales, prices, market size, and trends or operating results also constitute such forward-looking statements.

    These forward-looking statements are based on the Company’s current expectations and assumptions about future events and speak only as of the date of this release. While management considers these expectations and assumptions to be reasonable, they are inherently subject to significant business, economic, competitive, regulatory and other risks, contingencies and uncertainties, most of which are difficult to predict and many of which are beyond the Company’s control. Accordingly, you are cautioned not to place undue reliance on these forward-looking statements, as results actually achieved may differ materially from expected results described in these statements. The Company does not undertake, and specifically disclaims, any obligation to update any forward-looking statements to reflect events or circumstances occurring after the date of such statements, unless required by law.

    Forward-looking statements are subject to risks and uncertainties that could cause actual results to differ including, among other things, the regulatory environment, including availability or timing of, and conditions imposed on, obtaining and/or maintaining permits and approvals, including those necessary for drilling and/or development projects; the impact of current, pending and/or future laws and regulations, and of legislative and regulatory changes and other government activities, including those related to permitting, drilling, completion, well stimulation, operation, maintenance or abandonment of wells or facilities, managing energy, water, land, greenhouse gases or other emissions, protection of health, safety and the environment, or transportation, marketing and sale of the Company’s products; inflation levels; global economic trends, geopolitical risks and general economic and industry conditions, such as the global supply chain disruptions and the government interventions into the financial markets and economy in response to inflation levels and world health events; volatility of oil, NGL and natural gas prices; the global energy future, including the factors and trends that are expected to shape it, such as concerns about climate change and other air quality issues, the transition to a low-emission economy and the expected role of different energy sources; supply of and demand for oil, NGLs and natural gas, including due to the actions of foreign producers, importantly including OPEC and other major oil producing companies (“OPEC+”) and change in OPEC+’s production levels; disruptions to, capacity constraints in, or other limitations on the pipeline systems that deliver the Company’s oil and natural gas and other processing and transportation considerations; inability to generate sufficient cash flow from operations or to obtain adequate financing to fund capital expenditures, meet the Company’s working capital requirements or fund planned investments; price fluctuations and availability of natural gas and electricity; the Company’s ability to use derivative instruments to manage commodity price risk; the Company’s ability to meet the Company’s planned drilling schedule, including due to the Company’s ability to obtain permits on a timely basis or at all, and to successfully drill wells that produce oil and natural gas in commercially viable quantities; uncertainties associated with estimating proved reserves and related future cash flows; the Company’s ability to replace the Company’s reserves through exploration and development activities; drilling and production results, lower–than–expected production, reserves or resources from development projects or higher–than–expected decline rates; the Company’s ability to obtain timely and available drilling and completion equipment and crew availability and access to necessary resources for drilling, completing and operating wells; changes in tax laws; effects of competition; uncertainties and liabilities associated with acquired and divested assets; the Company’s ability to make acquisitions and successfully integrate any acquired businesses; asset impairments from commodity price declines; large or multiple customer defaults on contractual obligations, including defaults resulting from actual or potential insolvencies; geographical concentration of the Company’s operations; the creditworthiness and performance of the Company’s counterparties with respect to its hedges; impact of derivatives legislation affecting the Company’s ability to hedge; failure of risk management and ineffectiveness of internal controls; catastrophic events, including tropical storms, hurricanes, earthquakes, pandemics and other world health events; environmental risks and liabilities under U.S. federal, state, tribal and local laws and regulations (including remedial actions); potential liability resulting from pending or future litigation; the Company’s ability to recruit and/or retain key members of the Company’s senior management and key technical employees; information technology failures or cyberattacks; and governmental actions and political conditions, as well as the actions by other third parties that are beyond the Company’s control, and other factors discussed in W&T Offshore’s most recent Annual Report on Form 10-K and subsequent Quarterly Reports on Form 10-Q found at www.sec.gov or at the Company’s website at www.wtoffshore.com under the Investor Relations section.

         
    CONTACT: Al Petrie Sameer Parasnis
      Investor Relations Coordinator Executive VP and CFO
      investorrelations@wtoffshore.com sparasnis@wtoffshore.com
      713-297-8024 713-513-8654

    Source: W&T Offshore, Inc.

    Released June 30, 2025

    MIL OSI Economics –

  • MIL-OSI Economics: W&T Announces Positive Court Finding Regarding Remaining Surety Provider Claims

    Source: W & T Offshore Inc

    Headline: W&T Announces Positive Court Finding Regarding Remaining Surety Provider Claims

    HOUSTON, June 30, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — W&T Offshore, Inc. (NYSE: WTI) (“W&T” or the “Company”) today announced that U.S. Magistrate Judge Dena Palermo recommended denying two surety companies motions for preliminary injunction, through which they collectively asked for full monetization of over $100 million dollars. The Court found, in relevant part, the sureties failed to demonstrate they would suffer irreparable harm if their cash collateral demands were not granted.

    Key highlights relating to the ruling include:

    • Sureties’ motion for preliminary injunction, which would have required W&T to immediately post collateral, was categorically recommended to be denied;
    • Sureties failed to carry a clear burden of proof to establish irreparable harm necessary to obtain a preliminary injunction;
    • Ruling results in all current collateral requests by sureties being effectively nullified;
    • The Company will not be required to post collateral (if at all) until a determination on the merits of the pending lawsuit with the remaining surety providers;
    • The previously-announced settlement agreement, together with this favorable Court ruling, represent significant positive outcomes for W&T.

    Tracy W. Krohn, W&T’s Chairman and Chief Executive Officer stated, “We are very pleased with the Magistrate Judge’s recommendation that the Sureties’ preliminary injunction motions be denied. This vindicates W&T’s decision to aggressively defend against unlawful predatory business practices. W&T looks forward to a day when independent operators can once again operate in the Gulf of America unhampered by collusion and unlawful pressures exerted by sureties’ unfettered market power. We could not be more pleased with the Court’s decision preventing unnecessary and unjustified collateral demands by abusive surety providers.”  

    Mr. Krohn added, “surety providers have, for far too long, abused the ability to demand collateral. The Magistrate Judge’s recommendation, assuming it is upheld by the District Court, helps put an end to these blackmail business practices. Never again should any oil and gas producer have to cave to unjustified collateral demands. It admittedly takes courage and calculated risk to resist collective ultimatums from surety providers, but we hope the Court’s decision inspires others to follow suit in standing up to bullying tactics. The sureties’ collusive behavior has caused W&T’s (and other independent operators’) stockholders incalculable harm and it is about time that sureties are held accountable.”

    W&T Offshore’s legal team is led by its General Counsel, George J. Hittner, as well as Deputy General Counsels, Steven Lackey and Ted Imperato. W&T’s trial team is led by Yasser A. Madriz, the Managing Partner of the Houston Office of McGuireWoods, LLP along with members of the firm’s Commercial Litigation Section, Jason Huebinger, Megan Lewis, and Miles Indest.

    About W&T Offshore

    W&T Offshore, Inc. is an independent oil and natural gas producer with operations offshore in the Gulf of America and has grown through acquisitions, exploration and development. As of March 31, 2025, the Company had working interests in 52 fields in federal and state waters (which include 45 fields in federal waters and seven in state waters). The Company has under lease approximately 634,700 gross acres (496,900 net acres) spanning across the outer continental shelf off the coasts of Louisiana, Texas, Mississippi and Alabama, with approximately 487,200 gross acres on the conventional shelf, approximately 141,900 gross acres in the deepwater and 5,600 gross acres in Alabama state waters. A majority of the Company’s daily production is derived from wells it operates. For more information on W&T, please visit the Company’s website at www.wtoffshore.com.

    Forward-Looking and Cautionary Statements

    This press release contains forward-looking statements within the meaning of Section 27A of the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, and Section 21E of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended. All statements other than statements of historical facts included in this release, including those regarding the potential outcome of the litigation, the impact of the litigation on the Company or the industry more broadly, and the Company’s future operations are forward-looking statements. When used in this release, forward-looking statements are generally accompanied by terms or phrases such as “estimate,” “project,” “predict,” “believe,” “expect,” “continue,” “anticipate,” “target,” “could,” “plan,” “intend,” “seek,” “goal,” “will,” “should,” “may” or other words and similar expressions that convey the uncertainty of future events or outcomes, although not all forward-looking statements contain such identifying words. Items contemplating or making assumptions about actual or potential future production and sales, prices, market size, and trends or operating results also constitute such forward-looking statements.

    These forward-looking statements are based on the Company’s current expectations and assumptions about future events and speak only as of the date of this release. While management considers these expectations and assumptions to be reasonable, they are inherently subject to significant business, economic, competitive, regulatory and other risks, contingencies and uncertainties, most of which are difficult to predict and many of which are beyond the Company’s control. Accordingly, you are cautioned not to place undue reliance on these forward-looking statements, as results actually achieved may differ materially from expected results described in these statements. The Company does not undertake, and specifically disclaims, any obligation to update any forward-looking statements to reflect events or circumstances occurring after the date of such statements, unless required by law.

    Forward-looking statements are subject to risks and uncertainties that could cause actual results to differ including, among other things, the regulatory environment, including availability or timing of, and conditions imposed on, obtaining and/or maintaining permits and approvals, including those necessary for drilling and/or development projects; the impact of current, pending and/or future laws and regulations, and of legislative and regulatory changes and other government activities, including those related to permitting, drilling, completion, well stimulation, operation, maintenance or abandonment of wells or facilities, managing energy, water, land, greenhouse gases or other emissions, protection of health, safety and the environment, or transportation, marketing and sale of the Company’s products; inflation levels; global economic trends, geopolitical risks and general economic and industry conditions, such as the global supply chain disruptions and the government interventions into the financial markets and economy in response to inflation levels and world health events; volatility of oil, NGL and natural gas prices; the global energy future, including the factors and trends that are expected to shape it, such as concerns about climate change and other air quality issues, the transition to a low-emission economy and the expected role of different energy sources; supply of and demand for oil, NGLs and natural gas, including due to the actions of foreign producers, importantly including OPEC and other major oil producing companies (“OPEC+”) and change in OPEC+’s production levels; disruptions to, capacity constraints in, or other limitations on the pipeline systems that deliver the Company’s oil and natural gas and other processing and transportation considerations; inability to generate sufficient cash flow from operations or to obtain adequate financing to fund capital expenditures, meet the Company’s working capital requirements or fund planned investments; price fluctuations and availability of natural gas and electricity; the Company’s ability to use derivative instruments to manage commodity price risk; the Company’s ability to meet the Company’s planned drilling schedule, including due to the Company’s ability to obtain permits on a timely basis or at all, and to successfully drill wells that produce oil and natural gas in commercially viable quantities; uncertainties associated with estimating proved reserves and related future cash flows; the Company’s ability to replace the Company’s reserves through exploration and development activities; drilling and production results, lower–than–expected production, reserves or resources from development projects or higher–than–expected decline rates; the Company’s ability to obtain timely and available drilling and completion equipment and crew availability and access to necessary resources for drilling, completing and operating wells; changes in tax laws; effects of competition; uncertainties and liabilities associated with acquired and divested assets; the Company’s ability to make acquisitions and successfully integrate any acquired businesses; asset impairments from commodity price declines; large or multiple customer defaults on contractual obligations, including defaults resulting from actual or potential insolvencies; geographical concentration of the Company’s operations; the creditworthiness and performance of the Company’s counterparties with respect to its hedges; impact of derivatives legislation affecting the Company’s ability to hedge; failure of risk management and ineffectiveness of internal controls; catastrophic events, including tropical storms, hurricanes, earthquakes, pandemics and other world health events; environmental risks and liabilities under U.S. federal, state, tribal and local laws and regulations (including remedial actions); potential liability resulting from pending or future litigation; the Company’s ability to recruit and/or retain key members of the Company’s senior management and key technical employees; information technology failures or cyberattacks; and governmental actions and political conditions, as well as the actions by other third parties that are beyond the Company’s control, and other factors discussed in W&T Offshore’s most recent Annual Report on Form 10-K and subsequent Quarterly Reports on Form 10-Q found at www.sec.gov or at the Company’s website at www.wtoffshore.com under the Investor Relations section.

         
    CONTACT: Al Petrie Sameer Parasnis
      Investor Relations Coordinator Executive VP and CFO
      investorrelations@wtoffshore.com sparasnis@wtoffshore.com
      713-297-8024 713-513-8654

    Source: W&T Offshore, Inc.

    Released June 30, 2025

    MIL OSI Economics –

  • MIL-OSI United Kingdom: Homeowners could save hundreds on energy bills from solar drive

    Source: United Kingdom – Executive Government & Departments 2

    Press release

    Homeowners could save hundreds on energy bills from solar drive

    Homeowners could save around £500 from the government’s drive for solar power on rooftops.

    • Homeowners could save around £500 from the government’s rooftop revolution 
    • rooftop solar could help bring bills down for British families through the Plan for Change 
    • government launches ‘roadmap’ to maximise the potential of solar on warehouses, homes and car parks 

    Families and businesses could benefit from cheaper bills and greater energy security through plans to drastically increase the deployment of rooftop solar across the country.  

    The government has today (Monday 30 June) launched a pathway for the UK to rapidly accelerate the roll out of solar, helping drive down bills, supporting tens of thousands of jobs and powering economic growth with clean energy. 

    Families could save around £500 a year on their energy bills by installing rooftop solar panels as part of the government’s rooftop revolution – making working people better off through the Plan for Change.  

    The Solar Roadmap sets out the steps needed for the government and industry to deliver 45-47 GW of solar by 2030 – which will support up to 35,000 jobs and use less than half a percent of total UK land.  

    This includes:  

    • increasing solar deployment on new build homes through the Future Homes Standard to save households money on bills
    • launching a call for evidence to understand how to harness the untapped potential of solar in car parks across England, Wales and Northern Ireland  
    • plans to launch a safety review to unlock portable plug-in solar panels, making it easier and cheaper for people living in rented accommodation and apartments to install solar on their balconies and rooftops
    • stronger engagement with industry and trade bodies to identify skills gaps in the solar sector to support more people into well-paid clean energy jobs

    Research suggests 88% of the British public are in favour of solar energy. Since July, the government has taken action to deploy the technology at scale, approving nearly 3 GW of nationally significant solar – more than the last 14 years combined. This is the equivalent of powering more than 500,000 homes with clean, homegrown power. 

    Energy Minister Michael Shanks said: 

    Families have been paying the price for the fossil fuel rollercoaster for years. 

    Our Plan for Change means delivering more homegrown energy that we control to boost the UK’s energy security and save money on your bills. 

    Through solar, we are rolling out the quickest to build and one of the cheapest forms of energy for families to start saving hundreds on their energy bills, all whilst helping tackle the climate crisis.

    The roadmap outlines practical actions for industry and government to overcome the challenges to delivering this ambition within the next five years and boost the UK’s energy security. This includes providing a new blueprint for industry to overcome barriers in planning, electricity networks, supply chain and innovation and workforce and skills challenges. 

    There are already over 1.5 million homes in the UK with rooftop solar panels installed. According to MCS, the body responsible for certifying renewable energy installers, 15,496 solar installations took place in January 2025 on existing homes, a 16.5% increase on the previous year.

    To help households with the finances of installing rooftop solar, the government is working with the Green Finance Institute, the finance sector, consumer bodies and the solar sector itself to provide financial solutions for households and businesses.  

    The government has also made rooftop solar more accessible, having recently announced all new build homes will have solar panels by default to help bring down bills for families, through the Future Homes Standard. This will also see new homes benefit from low-carbon heating, such as heat pumps and high levels for energy efficiency.    
     
    This means recipients of new build homes will save money on their energy bills through government support, tackling the cost of living crisis for aspirational young families and new house buyers. 

    Rooftop solar not only adds value through lowering bills but it can also increase the financial value of the property. The government wants homeowners to cash in on this and is working with the Royal Institution of Chartered Surveyors to ensure that the value of solar homes is assessed properly. 

    Renters and those living in apartments could also be set to experience the benefits of solar as the government sets out the steps required to make ‘plug-in’ solar available in the UK. Plug-in solar works in the same way as rooftop solar panels, except it is portable and is connected directly into plug sockets – ideal for apartments with balconies. 

    Plug-in solar is currently unavailable in the UK due to longstanding regulations. But in Germany, around 435,000 balconies had plug-in solar installed in 2024 alone, saving residents in apartments money on their electricity bills.  

    Last month, Great British Energy announced an initial £200 million investment in rooftop solar for hundreds of schools and hospitals, with savings around £200,000 a month for some hospitals. 

    Solar Energy UK Chief Executive and Co-Chair of the Solar Taskforce, Chris Hewett said:  

    Today marks the dawn of a transformative era for how the UK powers itself.  

    The Solar Roadmap highlights dozens of practical measures needed to expand solar generation, boost the supply of cheaper and more secure power, foster new industries, create skilled jobs, boost biodiversity and slash our greenhouse gas emissions.  

    The sector is already growing fast, with around 700 small-scale rooftop installations being completed each day, but needs to grow faster. 

    Garry Felgate, Chief Executive of The MCS Foundation said: 

    The UK is experiencing a solar boom, with record numbers of subsidy-free solar panels being installed on rooftops across the country.    

    We welcome the Solar Roadmap which sets out the many ways in which we can maximise British potential for clean, cheap electricity.   

    Following on from the announcement that the vast majority of new homes will be required to have solar panels under the Future Homes Standard, the Solar Roadmap clearly demonstrates this government’s commitment to home-grown renewable power.

    Matthew Boulton, Director of Solar, Storage and Private Wire at EDF Renewables UK, and member of the Solar Taskforce said:  

    EDF Renewables UK is proud to have contributed to the UK government’s Solar Taskforce and welcomes the publication of the Roadmap.   

    We are at a pivotal moment for the solar sector, and we fully support the clear, coordinated action set out in the Roadmap that will help unlock the UK’s full solar potential.  

    We look forward to continuing our collaboration with government and industry to turn this vision into reality.

    Alexandra Desouza, EMEA General Counsel, Lightsource bp and member of the Solar Taskforce said: 

    The publication of the solar roadmap comes at a big moment for the UK energy sector — and especially for solar. Solar is key to the UK’s future energy mix and has a critical role to play in delivering secure, low-cost power.  

    The deployment of more solar and battery storage helps keep energy costs competitive for UK businesses, boosting economic growth and making companies more resilient. 

    As per the solar roadmap’s aims and ambitions, the focus is to shift to delivery for Clean Power 2030. This is a real opportunity for the UK to align behind a shared goal — bringing communities together, supporting farmers, and accelerating the transition to renewable and domestic generation.

    Kamal Rajput, Tata Steel UK’s Strategic Business Development Lead, and Co-Chair of the Solar Energy UK, UK Supply Chain Steering Group said:  

    We very much welcome the publication of the Solar Roadmap, highlighting the vital role that UK manufacturers such as Tata Steel will play in helping government achieve its clean energy targets.  

    With our product innovations such as the recently launched Catnic SolarSeam roofing system, and our MagiZinc products used extensively in utility scale racking systems, Tata Steel is well-placed to play a significant role in the growing solar energy sector.

    Case studies

    Case study 1

    Phil lives in North Leeds with his wife and son. They installed 14 solar panels and battery storage on their detached 3 bed property in November 2022.   

    The installation cost approximately £20,000 in total – £8,000 for solar panels, £8,000 for the battery and the rest contributed towards and Electric Vehicle Charging port. 

    Phil says:

    I wanted solar because we had an electric car and the prospect of charging it from the sun was quite attractive. Over the last 90 days, our electric bill was minus £18.60 – in other words, we’ve cooked, cleaned, tumble-dried, showered, watched copious amounts of TV, ran the car for 2,000 miles and we are owed £18.60!

    With retirement looming, we wanted to invest in the house to make it as cheap to run as possible. Our monthly direct debit is less than half what it was before the install.

    Case study 2

    Tim is a retired teacher living south of King’s Lynn. He had 12 solar panels and a battery storage unit installed on his 3-bed property in March 2024. 

    His home is a new-build property with an EPC rating B+ that also includes an air source heat pump that is powered entirely through clean power supplied by the solar panels. He’s also installed an Electric Vehicle Charging point on his drive. 

    Since installing the rooftop solar panels, Tim’s electricity bill has gone from £1,200 a year to £150 a year – saving of over £1,000 a year. 

    Tim says:

    I’ve been delighted with the results so far. Before I put the panels up, I used 3 MWh of electricity. Over the past 12 months the solar panels alone have generated over double that amount – meaning I am technically my own electricity supplier selling back to the grid!

    The panels will pay for themselves in 12 years but will last for more like 25 years whilst adding value to my house, should I decide to sell it.  

    I used the lump sum from my pension to pay for the panels. I see it as an investment for the future – an investment in the planet, but also my own financial security as my bills are now so low.

    It is great to be part of the green energy revolution! In a world of global warming and climate change, at least the house is now self-sufficient in power. The advantages of solar are so great that my father, aged 90, has also had them installed recently on his house near Nottingham.

    Case study 3

    Stourton Park and Ride in Leeds is the UK’s first fully solar-powered park and ride, featuring a 1.2 MW system of solar panels, battery storage, and 26 Electric Vehicle charging points.   

    The Solar PV system is estimated to generate 852,000 kWh a year and offset 471 tonnes of carbon in its first year – the equivalent of removing over 200 cars from the road.  

    Notes to editors  

    The Bundesnetzagentur (Germany’s Federal Network Agency) registered about 435,000 new plug-in balcony solar panel installations in its core energy market data register in 2024. 

    View the full Solar Roadmap.

    Read the data on public support for solar: DESNZ Public Attitudes Tracker: Spring 2024.

    Contact details to the case studies can be made available on request.

    Updates to this page

    Published 30 June 2025

    MIL OSI United Kingdom –

  • MIL-OSI USA: HAWAI‘I GREEN BUSINESS AWARDS PROGRAM HONORS LOCAL BUSINESSES AND EVENTS FOR SUSTAINABILITY PRACTICES

    Source: US State of Hawaii

    HAWAI‘I GREEN BUSINESS AWARDS PROGRAM HONORS LOCAL BUSINESSES AND EVENTS FOR SUSTAINABILITY PRACTICES

    Posted on Jun 27, 2025 in Latest Department News, Newsroom

    STATE OF HAWAIʻI
     KA MOKU ʻĀINA O HAWAIʻI

    JOSH GREEN, M.D.
     GOVERNOR
    KE KIAʻĀINA

     

    DEPARTMENT OF BUSINESS, ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AND TOURISM

    KA ʻOIHANA HOʻOMOHALA PĀʻOIHANA, ʻIMI WAIWAI A HOʻOMĀKAʻIKAʻI

     

    JAMES KUNANE TOKIOKA

    DIRECTOR

    KA LUNA HOʻOKELE

     

    HAWAIʻI STATE ENERGY OFFICE

    KE‘ENA HANA UILA MOKU‘ĀINA

    MARK B. GLICK

    CHIEF ENERGY OFFICER

    LUNA IKEHU

     

    2024/2025 HAWAI‘I GREEN BUSINESS AWARDS PROGRAM HONORS LOCAL BUSINESSES AND EVENTS FOR SUSTAINABILITY PRACTICES  

     

    FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

    June 27, 2025

     

    HONOLULU —The Hawai‘i Green Business Program (HGBP) recognized 45 Hawai‘i businesses and events today for their commitment to energy and water efficiency, waste reduction, pollution prevention and community involvement, as well as cultural and natural resource preservation.

    The 45 awardees representing six islands were recognized during the annual HGBP awards ceremony at historical Washington Place. Hosted by the Hawai‘i State Energy Office, the Honolulu Board of Water Supply and Hawaiʻi Energy, the awards program

    showcases the businesses advancing Hawaiʻi’s clean energy and sustainability goals, emphasizing energy efficiency as a key solution in accelerating Hawaiʻi’s move to renewable energy.

    Governor Josh Green, M.D., praised awardees for their commitment to sustain the ecological, cultural and economic health of Hawaiʻi, heralding lawmakers for the 2025 passage of the nation’s first climate impact fee to fund environmental stewardship and address the impacts of climate change.

    Governor Green said, “At a time when environmental protections are being repealed at the federal level, Hawaiʻi will not forfeit its commitment to a more resilient, clean economy. The businesses and organizations we recognize today honor a statewide commitment to malama ʻāina — to steward our precious natural resources for future generations.”

    “Simply put,” said Hawai’i Chief Energy Officer Mark Glick, “using less energy means we need to generate less. These 45 businesses are among the best applying efficiency to our commercial building stock and energy efficient business practices make a profound difference.”

    Newly appointed state director of energy efficiency and renewable energy Monique Zanfes concluded, “Many of the businesses in this room rely on Hawai‘i’s natural resources not just for operations, but as the foundation of what draws people here. Protecting these resources isn’t just the right thing to do — it’s essential to the long-term viability and health of Hawai‘i. I thank them for leading by example.”

    The honorees of this year’s Hawai‘i Green Business Program Awards are:

      Green Hotels, Resorts, Venue and Office Awardees:

    • Ala Moana Hotel by Mantra
    • Halekulani
    • Halepuna Waikiki
    • Hokulani, a Hilton Grand Vacations Club
    • The Kahala Hotel & Resort
    • Marriott’s Ko Olina Beach Club
    • Prince Waikiki
    • Kings’ Land, a Hilton Grand Vacations Club
    • Maui Bay Villas, a Hilton Grand Vacations Club
    • The Cliffs at Princeville
    • Four Seasons Resort O‘ahu at Ko Olina
    • Four Seasons Resort Maui at Wailea
    • Four Seasons Resort Lānaʻi
    • Sensei Lānaʻi, A Four Seasons Resort
    • Hawai‘i Convention Center
    • Waialae Country Club
    • Honeywell International/Smart Energy
    • Coradorables Sustainable Corporation

    Green Event Awardees:

    • 2024 Hawai‘i Library Association/HASL HLA Conference
    • 2025 Sony Open
    • Artist Waltz
    • Green Business Engagement National Network 7th National GBENN Summit
    • Sentry 2024 Golf Tournament

    Entry Level Program Awardees:

    • Coconut Ave
    • Drip Studio
    • The Fresh Shave
    • Hoku Foods Natural Market
    • Kilauea Bakery
    • Lady Elaine
    • Leong’s Road House
    • Little Plum
    • Uncle Paul’s Corner Store
    • Maui Juice Co.
    • Morning Glass Coffee
    • Pele’s Kitchen
    • Pu‘u O Hōkū Ranch
    • Sweet Cane Café
    • The Locavore Store
    • Oko‘a Farms Produce
    • Hanalei Spirits Distillery
    • Kaua‘i Island Brewing Co.
    • Kona Brewing Company
    • Lanikai Brewing Co.
    • Maui Brewing Company
    • Waikulu Distillery

    In one year, the energy efficiency measures of the above businesses resulted in 38.8 million gallons of water saved, 6.5 million kWh of electricity saved, 22.7 tons of green waste diverted, 12,372 tons of waste recycled,119,110 therms (1 therm = 100,000 BTUs) of gas saved, 6,725 metric tons of CO2 equivalent for electricity kWh reduced and 945 metric tons of CO2 equivalent for gas reduced.

     

     

     # # #  

      

    Media Contacts:   

     

    Yvonne Hunter

    Strategy and Marketing Officer

    Hawaiʻi State Energy Office

    Cell: 808-497-0080

    Laci Goshi

    Communications Officer

    Department of Business, Economic Development and Tourism

    Cell: 808-518-5480

    Erika Engle

    Press Secretary

    Office of the Governor, State of Hawai‘i

    Phone: 808-586-0120

    Makana McClellan

    Director of Communications

    Office of the Governor, State of Hawaiʻi

    Cell: 808-265-0083

     

                    

    MIL OSI USA News –

  • Govt drafts emission targets for over 460 industries under carbon market plan

    Source: Government of India

    Source: Government of India (4)

    The Ministry of Environment has issued a draft notification proposing legally binding greenhouse gas (GHG) emission targets for over 460 industrial units as part of India’s first compliance-based carbon market.

    The move, aimed at curbing industrial emissions and accelerating decarbonisation, will apply to sectors such as aluminium, iron and steel, petroleum refining, petrochemicals, and textiles.

    Titled the Greenhouse Gas Emission Intensity Target Rules, 2025, the draft, dated June 23, forms part of the Carbon Credit Trading Scheme (CCTS), 2023.

    The scheme requires designated industries – referred to as “obligated entities” – to reduce their GHG emissions per unit of output over time, or compensate by purchasing carbon credit certificates from the Indian Carbon Market.

    According to the draft, “The obligated entity shall achieve the Greenhouse Gases Emissions Intensity (GEI) targets in the respective compliance year… or meet its GEI target by purchasing carbon credit certificates from the Indian carbon market.”

    If implemented, the targets will become legally enforceable from the date of final notification.

    As per the draft, failure to comply will attract financial penalties and legal consequences under the Environment (Protection) Act, 1986.

    The targets will be assigned for two compliance years – 2025-26 and 2026-27 – based on baseline emission intensity data from 2023-24.

    The draft includes a list of 264 industrial units along with their baseline emission levels and reduction targets for the compliance years 2025-26 and 2026-27.

    The Bureau of Energy Efficiency (BEE) will determine these targets using sectoral benchmarks and past performance. Greenhouse gas emission intensity (GEI) is defined as tonnes of CO2 equivalent emitted per unit of output or product.

    For example, Hindalco Industries’ Taloja aluminium plant in Maharashtra, which had a baseline GEI of 1.3386 tCO2 per tonne in 2023-24, must reduce that figure to 1.2563 by 2026-27. In the steel sector, Arcelor Mittal Nippon Steel India’s Hazira facility – India’s largest obligated entity by production volume – must cut its emission intensity from 2.2701 to 2.1696 tCO2 per tonne during the same period.

    The rules also cover the petroleum refining sector. BPCL’s Bina Refinery in Madhya Pradesh, with a crude throughput of over 51 million barrels, has been assigned a GEI reduction trajectory from 5.2312 tCO2/MBBLS in 2023-24 to 4.8553 by 2026-27. BPCL’s Kochi
    Refinery, one of the largest in the country, must bring down its GEI from 4.5745 to 4.4230 tCO2/MBBLS in the same time frame.

    Entities that emit less than their targets will receive carbon credit certificates, calculated as the difference between the GEI target and actual GEI, multiplied by the total production volume.

    Conversely, those exceeding their targets must buy the difference in credits from the Indian Carbon Market. “The number of carbon credit certificates to be issued… shall be determined as per the following formula: (GEI Target – GEI Achieved) x Unit of equivalent product produced,” the draft states.

    Unused credits can be banked for future use, allowing companies some flexibility across compliance years.

    However, if an entity fails to meet its target and does not purchase the required credits, the Central Pollution Control Board (CPCB) will impose an Environmental Compensation.

    This amount will be “equal to twice the average price at which a carbon credit certificate is traded during the trading cycle,” as per the notification. The penalty must be paid within 90 days.

    Funds collected will be used to support carbon market operations, upon recommendation of the National Steering Committee and approval of the Centre.

    The ministry has invited comments, objections, or suggestions from the public and industry stakeholders. Submissions must be made within 60 days of the draft’s publication and can be emailed to ccts.hsm-moefcc@gov.in.

    (ANI)

  • Govt drafts emission targets for over 460 industries under carbon market plan

    Source: Government of India

    Source: Government of India (4)

    The Ministry of Environment has issued a draft notification proposing legally binding greenhouse gas (GHG) emission targets for over 460 industrial units as part of India’s first compliance-based carbon market.

    The move, aimed at curbing industrial emissions and accelerating decarbonisation, will apply to sectors such as aluminium, iron and steel, petroleum refining, petrochemicals, and textiles.

    Titled the Greenhouse Gas Emission Intensity Target Rules, 2025, the draft, dated June 23, forms part of the Carbon Credit Trading Scheme (CCTS), 2023.

    The scheme requires designated industries – referred to as “obligated entities” – to reduce their GHG emissions per unit of output over time, or compensate by purchasing carbon credit certificates from the Indian Carbon Market.

    According to the draft, “The obligated entity shall achieve the Greenhouse Gases Emissions Intensity (GEI) targets in the respective compliance year… or meet its GEI target by purchasing carbon credit certificates from the Indian carbon market.”

    If implemented, the targets will become legally enforceable from the date of final notification.

    As per the draft, failure to comply will attract financial penalties and legal consequences under the Environment (Protection) Act, 1986.

    The targets will be assigned for two compliance years – 2025-26 and 2026-27 – based on baseline emission intensity data from 2023-24.

    The draft includes a list of 264 industrial units along with their baseline emission levels and reduction targets for the compliance years 2025-26 and 2026-27.

    The Bureau of Energy Efficiency (BEE) will determine these targets using sectoral benchmarks and past performance. Greenhouse gas emission intensity (GEI) is defined as tonnes of CO2 equivalent emitted per unit of output or product.

    For example, Hindalco Industries’ Taloja aluminium plant in Maharashtra, which had a baseline GEI of 1.3386 tCO2 per tonne in 2023-24, must reduce that figure to 1.2563 by 2026-27. In the steel sector, Arcelor Mittal Nippon Steel India’s Hazira facility – India’s largest obligated entity by production volume – must cut its emission intensity from 2.2701 to 2.1696 tCO2 per tonne during the same period.

    The rules also cover the petroleum refining sector. BPCL’s Bina Refinery in Madhya Pradesh, with a crude throughput of over 51 million barrels, has been assigned a GEI reduction trajectory from 5.2312 tCO2/MBBLS in 2023-24 to 4.8553 by 2026-27. BPCL’s Kochi
    Refinery, one of the largest in the country, must bring down its GEI from 4.5745 to 4.4230 tCO2/MBBLS in the same time frame.

    Entities that emit less than their targets will receive carbon credit certificates, calculated as the difference between the GEI target and actual GEI, multiplied by the total production volume.

    Conversely, those exceeding their targets must buy the difference in credits from the Indian Carbon Market. “The number of carbon credit certificates to be issued… shall be determined as per the following formula: (GEI Target – GEI Achieved) x Unit of equivalent product produced,” the draft states.

    Unused credits can be banked for future use, allowing companies some flexibility across compliance years.

    However, if an entity fails to meet its target and does not purchase the required credits, the Central Pollution Control Board (CPCB) will impose an Environmental Compensation.

    This amount will be “equal to twice the average price at which a carbon credit certificate is traded during the trading cycle,” as per the notification. The penalty must be paid within 90 days.

    Funds collected will be used to support carbon market operations, upon recommendation of the National Steering Committee and approval of the Centre.

    The ministry has invited comments, objections, or suggestions from the public and industry stakeholders. Submissions must be made within 60 days of the draft’s publication and can be emailed to ccts.hsm-moefcc@gov.in.

    (ANI)

  • Govt drafts emission targets for over 460 industries under carbon market plan

    Source: Government of India

    Source: Government of India (4)

    The Ministry of Environment has issued a draft notification proposing legally binding greenhouse gas (GHG) emission targets for over 460 industrial units as part of India’s first compliance-based carbon market.

    The move, aimed at curbing industrial emissions and accelerating decarbonisation, will apply to sectors such as aluminium, iron and steel, petroleum refining, petrochemicals, and textiles.

    Titled the Greenhouse Gas Emission Intensity Target Rules, 2025, the draft, dated June 23, forms part of the Carbon Credit Trading Scheme (CCTS), 2023.

    The scheme requires designated industries – referred to as “obligated entities” – to reduce their GHG emissions per unit of output over time, or compensate by purchasing carbon credit certificates from the Indian Carbon Market.

    According to the draft, “The obligated entity shall achieve the Greenhouse Gases Emissions Intensity (GEI) targets in the respective compliance year… or meet its GEI target by purchasing carbon credit certificates from the Indian carbon market.”

    If implemented, the targets will become legally enforceable from the date of final notification.

    As per the draft, failure to comply will attract financial penalties and legal consequences under the Environment (Protection) Act, 1986.

    The targets will be assigned for two compliance years – 2025-26 and 2026-27 – based on baseline emission intensity data from 2023-24.

    The draft includes a list of 264 industrial units along with their baseline emission levels and reduction targets for the compliance years 2025-26 and 2026-27.

    The Bureau of Energy Efficiency (BEE) will determine these targets using sectoral benchmarks and past performance. Greenhouse gas emission intensity (GEI) is defined as tonnes of CO2 equivalent emitted per unit of output or product.

    For example, Hindalco Industries’ Taloja aluminium plant in Maharashtra, which had a baseline GEI of 1.3386 tCO2 per tonne in 2023-24, must reduce that figure to 1.2563 by 2026-27. In the steel sector, Arcelor Mittal Nippon Steel India’s Hazira facility – India’s largest obligated entity by production volume – must cut its emission intensity from 2.2701 to 2.1696 tCO2 per tonne during the same period.

    The rules also cover the petroleum refining sector. BPCL’s Bina Refinery in Madhya Pradesh, with a crude throughput of over 51 million barrels, has been assigned a GEI reduction trajectory from 5.2312 tCO2/MBBLS in 2023-24 to 4.8553 by 2026-27. BPCL’s Kochi
    Refinery, one of the largest in the country, must bring down its GEI from 4.5745 to 4.4230 tCO2/MBBLS in the same time frame.

    Entities that emit less than their targets will receive carbon credit certificates, calculated as the difference between the GEI target and actual GEI, multiplied by the total production volume.

    Conversely, those exceeding their targets must buy the difference in credits from the Indian Carbon Market. “The number of carbon credit certificates to be issued… shall be determined as per the following formula: (GEI Target – GEI Achieved) x Unit of equivalent product produced,” the draft states.

    Unused credits can be banked for future use, allowing companies some flexibility across compliance years.

    However, if an entity fails to meet its target and does not purchase the required credits, the Central Pollution Control Board (CPCB) will impose an Environmental Compensation.

    This amount will be “equal to twice the average price at which a carbon credit certificate is traded during the trading cycle,” as per the notification. The penalty must be paid within 90 days.

    Funds collected will be used to support carbon market operations, upon recommendation of the National Steering Committee and approval of the Centre.

    The ministry has invited comments, objections, or suggestions from the public and industry stakeholders. Submissions must be made within 60 days of the draft’s publication and can be emailed to ccts.hsm-moefcc@gov.in.

    (ANI)

  • MIL-OSI Africa: Kosmos Energy and Partners Achieve Commercial Operations at Greater Tortue Ahmeyim (GTA) Liquefied Natural Gas (LNG) Project

    The project partners on the Greater Tortue Ahmeyim (GTA) LNG development – situated on the maritime border of Senegal and Mauritania – have started commercial operations. The Gimi FLNG vessel – owned by maritime infrastructure company Golar LNG and situated at the project site – reached its Commercial Operating Date (COD) in June 2025, signaling the start of a 20-year Lease and Operating Agreement.

    Spearheaded by energy majors Kosmos Energy and bp (operator), alongside Petrosen and Société Mauritanienne Des Hydrocarbures – the respective national oil companies of Senegal and Mauritania – the GTA project represents one of the lowest-cost greenfield projects in the world. The project achieved first LNG production in February 2025, with the maiden LNG cargo lifted in April 2025. According to Kosmos Energy, COD comes as the partners currently load a fourth cargo, with plans to export a fifth at the start of Q3. Kosmos Energy is a Diamond Sponsor of African Energy Week (AEW): Invest in African Energies, taking place September 29 to October 3, 2025, in Cape Town.

    AEW: Invest in African Energies is the platform of choice for project operators, financiers, technology providers and government, and has emerged as the official place to sign deals in African energy. Visit http://www.AECWeek.com for more information about this exciting event.

    The first major offshore LNG project in the broader MSGBC region, GTA is expected to unlock more than 15 trillion cubic feet of recoverable natural gas resources. The project reached a final investment decision (FID) in 2018, with the respective governments of Senegal and Mauritania declaring that the project is of “strategic national importance” in 2021. To date, the project partners have ramped up production volumes to a level equivalent to the annual contracted volumes of approximately 2.4 million tons per annum (mtpa). This represents 90% of the nameplate capacity of 2.7 mtpa. A second phase is also planned, which seeks to double production capacity to over 5 mtpa. Focus has now shifted to phase two FID, which will largely depend on continued cross-border cooperation, regulatory alignment and additional investment.

    Beyond GTA, Kosmos Energy holds a strong presence across Africa. The company is engaged in upstream oil exploration, production and development, with a focus on unlocking the continent’s deepwater assets. In Equatorial Guinea, the company is working towards increasing oil production through well work and drilling. Alongside its project partners, Kosmos Energy recently completed an infill drilling program on the Ceiba and Okume fields and is now working to reprocess existing seismic data with modern technology to high-grade future infill drilling potential. In Ghana, the company has pledged $2 billion in upstream operations. The funding is expected to be allocated to expanding exploration, improving infrastructure and driving technology development to boost efficiency in the upstream sector. Kosmos Energy currently holds stakes in the country’s Jubilee and TEN fields.

    Looking ahead, these developments are expected to unlock significant benefits for the countries in which Kosmos Energy operates. By unlocking greater value from Africa’s deepwater oil and gas basins, the company is enhancing revenue generation, job creation and broader economic growth in Africa. Kosmos Energy’s AEW: Invest in African Energies 2025 sponsorship reflects its commitment to monetizing Africa’s deepwater resources. As the largest event of its kind on the continent, AEW: Invest in African Energies 2025 takes place under a mandate to make energy poverty history. The event convenes stakeholders – from global investors and project developers to technologies providers and service firms – to engage in dialogue and sign deals.

    Distributed by APO Group on behalf of African Energy Chamber.

    MIL OSI Africa –

  • MIL-OSI Africa: South Africa’s Platinum Group Metals (PGMs) Sector in Focus as Isondo Precious Metals Chief Executive Officer (CEO) Joins African Mining Week (AMW)


    Download logo

    Vinay Somera, CEO of South African fuel cell component manufacturer Isondo Precious Metals has joined the upcoming African Mining Week (AMW) 2025 – Africa’s premier gathering for mining stakeholders – as a speaker.

    Somera will join a high-level panel, South Africa’s Strategic Influence in the Global Platinum Group Metals (PGMs) Market, where he is expected to highlight efforts to maximize PGM production in South Africa. With the country supplying roughly 80% of the world’s PGMs –essential for electric vehicle and clean energy development – AMW 2025 will unpack the country’s strategic position in the global market, especially as the world enters its third consecutive year of supply deficits – expected to reach 848,000 ounces in 2025.

    African Mining Week serves as a premier platform for exploring the full spectrum of mining opportunities across Africa. The event is held alongside the African Energy Week: Invest in African Energies 2025 conference from October 1-3 in Cape Town. Sponsors, exhibitors and delegates can learn more by contacting sales@energycapitalpower.com.

    At AMW 2025, Somera is set to showcase how Isondo Precious Metals is producing membranes for green hydrogen fuel cells and electrolyzers using South African-sourced PGMs. Under his leadership, the company is scaling its fuel cell manufacturing capabilities and working with international partners on infrastructure development and workforce training. Isondo Precious Metals recently acquired hydrogen reduction equipment from U.S.-based Camco Furnaces and two test stations from Greenlight Innovations, where it is also conducting workforce development initiatives.

    As such, AMW 2025 represents an ideal platform for Somera to provide an update on Isondo Precious Metals’ strategy to deploy hydrogen refueling stations for hydrogen-powered buses and vehicles in South Africa. As Isondo Precious Metals advances its proof of concept for a new ammonia cracking generator, AMW 2025 offers a strategic platform for Somera to present the company’s investment and expansion plans to a targeted audience of South African, regional and global investors and partners.

    Distributed by APO Group on behalf of Energy Capital & Power.

    MIL OSI Africa –

  • MIL-OSI: 2025 Incentive Awards

    Source: GlobeNewswire (MIL-OSI)

    TORONTO, June 30, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — Sintana Energy Inc. (TSX-V: SEI, OTCQX: SEUSF) (“Sintana” or the “Company”) reports that its Board of Directors has approved grants of a total of 4.3 million equity incentive awards comprised of 100,000 common stock options and 4.2 million restricted share units to several directors and officers of the Company. The options have an exercise price of CA $0.73, vest in three equal tranches over the next 24 months and will expire on June 27, 2035.

    ABOUT SINTANA ENERGY:

    The Company is engaged in petroleum and natural gas exploration and development activities on six large, highly prospective, onshore and offshore petroleum exploration licenses in Namibia, an onshore joint venture in Angola and a project in Colombia’s Magdalena Basin.

    On behalf of Sintana Energy Inc.,
    “Robert Bose”
    Chief Executive Officer

    For additional information or to sign-up to receive periodic updates about Sintana’s projects, and corporate activities, please visit the Company’s website at www.sintanaenergy.com

    Corporate Contacts:   Investor Relations Advisor:
    Robert Bose Sean Austin  Jonathan Paterson
    Chief Executive Officer Vice-President Founder & Managing Partner
    212-201-4125 713-825-9591 Harbor Access
        475-477-9401
         

    Forward-Looking Statements

    Certain information in this release are forward-looking statements. Forward-looking statements consist of statements that are not purely historical, including statements regarding beliefs, plans, expectations or intensions for the future, and include, but not limited to, statements with respect to potential future farmout agreements on PEL 83 and/or PEL 87, and proposed future exploration and development activities on PEL 83 and/or PEL 90 and neighbouring properties, as well as the prospective nature of the Company’s property interests. Such statements are subject to risks and uncertainties that may cause actual results, performance or developments to differ materially from those contained in the statements, including, but not limited to risks relating to the receipt of all applicable regulatory approvals, results of exploration and development activities, the ability to source joint venture partners and fund exploration, permitting and government approvals, and other risks identified in the Company’s public disclosure documents from time to time. Readers are cautioned that the assumptions used in the preparation of such information, although considered reasonable at the time of preparation, may prove to be imprecise and, as such, undue reliance should not be placed on forward-looking statements. The Company assumes no obligation to update such information, except as may be required by law.

    NEITHER THE TSX VENTURE EXCHANGE NOR ITS REGULATION SERVICES PROVIDER (AS THAT TERM IS DEFINED IN THE POLICIES OF THE TSX VENTURE EXCHANGE) ACCEPTS RESPONSIBILITY FOR THE ADEQUACY OR ACCURACY OF THIS RELEASE.

    The MIL Network –

  • MIL-OSI: As New Energy Tax Policy Takes Shape, T1 Energy Confident It is Well Positioned

    Source: GlobeNewswire (MIL-OSI)

    AUSTIN, Texas and NEW YORK, June 30, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — T1 Energy Inc. (NYSE: TE) (“T1,” “T1 Energy,” or the “Company”) values the ongoing support in the current draft of the budget bill under consideration in the U.S. Senate for the 45X Production Tax Credit, which encourages domestic production of solar modules and component pieces. This tax policy, backed by both houses of Congress and provisionally extended through 2032, provides a foundation for the growth of a domestic solar supply chain. T1 Energy expects to participate in and benefit from that growth.

    In addition, the proposed language in the budget bill maintains transferability and stackability of 45X credits. T1 views both as important incentives for the domestic solar manufacturing industry in general, and specifically for T1 by providing financing options and flexibility. The ability to potentially stack the 45X credits from integrated U.S. cell and module production is expected to contribute meaningfully to T1’s EBITDA generation.

    These elements of the budget bill are important for T1 as the Company continues to advance several capital formation initiatives to fund development of G2_Austin, its planned 5 GW U.S. Solar Cell Facility in Milam County, Texas. Finalization of the budget bill and a policy framework that supports T1’s domestic content strategy are key steps to advance T1’s project financing, customer offtake discussions and other related funding initiatives. The Company expects to complete the capital formation process to reach the start of construction at G2_Austin in Q3 2025.

    T1 Energy is evaluating the recently added proposal to implement an excise tax on certain solar projects that include a substantial percentage of components from a Foreign Entity of Concern (“FEOC”) nation. As a young and nimble company, T1 Energy believes it will be able to align its manufacturing operations with the final version of the bill. If the FEOC tax is in the final draft, T1 expects to be able to provide American solar modules exempt from the tax. If the provision is removed, T1 will continue with existing plans to provide high efficiency, cost-competitive modules from G1_Dallas, its operational 5 GW Solar Module Facility, while the Company evaluates its most attractive value creation opportunities.

    “Solar energy strengthens our electric grids and lowers electricity prices for Americans and American businesses. We see this every day on the Texas grid as solar supports the state’s dynamic population and economic growth through abundance and affordability. Solar is not a problem. It’s an answer. And it needs to be made in America,” said T1 Chairman of the Board and Chief Executive Officer Daniel Barcelo.

    About T1 Energy

    T1 Energy Inc. (NYSE: TE) is an energy solutions provider building an integrated U.S. supply chain for solar and batteries. In December 2024, T1 completed a transformative transaction, positioning the Company as one of the leading solar manufacturing companies in the United States, with a complementary solar and battery storage strategy. Based in the United States with plans to expand its operations in America, the Company is also exploring value optimization opportunities across its portfolio of assets in Europe.

    To learn more about T1, please visit www.T1energy.com and follow us on social media.

    Investor contact:

    Jeffrey Spittel
    EVP, Investor Relations and Corporate Development
    jeffrey.spittel@T1energy.com
    Tel: +1 409 599 5706

    Media contact:

    Russell Gold
    EVP, Strategic Communications
    russell.gold@T1energy.com
    Tel: +1 214 616 9715

    Cautionary Statement Concerning Forward-Looking Statements:

    This press release contains forward-looking statements within the meaning of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. All statements contained in this press release that do not relate to matters of historical fact should be considered forward-looking statements, including without limitation with respect to: the Company’s ability to deliver solar modules exempt from proposed tax and any associated advantage in the solar marketplace; the duration of the 45X Production Tax Credit policy; the proposed tax policy providing a foundation for the growth of a domestic solar supply chain and the Company’s expected participation and benefit from such growth; the final form of the budget bill, including the transferability and stackability of 45X credits, and any benefits to the Company on its financing options and flexibility; the extent to which potential stackability of 45X credits may contribute meaningfully to T1’s EBITDA generation; T1’s ability to align its manufacturing operations with the final version of the budget bill and comply with the bill; the Company’s commitment to shareholders and customers; the Company’s capital formation initiatives to fund G2_Austin and the timeline for its construction; the Company’s ongoing customer offtake discussions; and the Company’s commitment to provide modules that are exempt from the proposed FEOC tax. These forward-looking statements are based on management’s current expectations. These statements are neither promises nor guarantees, but involve known and unknown risks, uncertainties and other important factors that may cause actual future events, results, or achievements to be materially different from the Company’s expectations and projections expressed or implied by the forward-looking statements. Important factors include, but are not limited to, those discussed under the caption “Risk Factors” in (i) T1’s annual report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2024 filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the “SEC”) on March 31, 2025, as amended and supplemented by Amendment No. 1 on Form 10-K/A filed with the SEC on April 30, 2025, and T1’s quarterly report on Form 10-Q for the quarterly period ended March 31, 2025 filed with the SEC on May 15, 2025, (ii) T1’s post-effective Amendment No. 1 to the Registration Statement on Form S-3 filed with the SEC on January 4, 2024, and (iii) T1’s Registration Statement on Form S-4 filed with the SEC on September 8, 2023 and subsequent amendments thereto filed on October 13, 2023, October 19, 2023 and October 31, 2023. All of the above referenced filings are available on the SEC’s website at www.sec.gov. Forward-looking statements speak only as of the date of this press release and are based on information available to the Company as of the date of this press release, and the Company assumes no obligation to update such forward-looking statements, all of which are expressly qualified by the statements in this section, whether as a result of new information, future events or otherwise, except as required by law.

    T1 intends to use its website as a channel of distribution to disclose information which may be of interest or material to investors and to communicate with investors and the public. Such disclosures will be included on T1’s website in the ‘Investor Relations’ section. T1, and its CEO and Chairman of the Board, Daniel Barcelo, also intend to use certain social media channels, including, but not limited to, X, LinkedIn and Instagram, as means of communicating with the public and investors about T1, its progress, products, and other matters. While not all the information that T1 or Daniel Barcelo post to their respective digital platforms may be deemed to be of a material nature, some information may be. As a result, T1 encourages investors and others interested to review the information that it and Daniel Barcelo posts and to monitor such portions of T1’s website and social media channels on a regular basis, in addition to following T1’s press releases, SEC filings, and public conference calls and webcasts. The contents of T1’s website and its and Daniel Barcelo’s social media channels shall not be deemed incorporated by reference in any filing under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended.

    The MIL Network –

  • MIL-OSI United Kingdom: Prax Lindsey Oil Refinery Limited, Prax Storage Lindsey Limited and Prax Terminals Killingholme Limited in Liquidation: information for customers, suppliers, creditors and sub-contractors

    Source: United Kingdom – Executive Government & Departments

    News story

    Prax Lindsey Oil Refinery Limited, Prax Storage Lindsey Limited and Prax Terminals Killingholme Limited in Liquidation: information for customers, suppliers, creditors and sub-contractors

    On 30 June 2025, a winding-up order was made against Prax Lindsey Oil Refinery Limited, Prax Storage Lindsey Limited, and Prax Terminals Killingholme Limited. The court appointed the Official Receiver, Gareth Jonathan Allen, as Liquidator.

    Following an application made by the Official Receiver, the court has also appointed Matthew Callaghan, Andrew Johnson, Joanne Hewitt-Schembri and Samuel Ballinger of FTI Consulting LLP as Special Managers of the companies. The Special Managers have been appointed to assist the Official Receiver with the liquidations. 

    The Official Receiver will wind-up the companies in accordance with his statutory duties. He also has a duty to investigate the cause of the companies’ failure and conduct of current and former directors.  

    Information for customers and suppliers 

    If you are a customer of Prax Lindsey Oil Refinery Limited, Prax Storage Lindsey Limited, and Prax Terminals Killingholme Limited please contact the Special Managers via email:  PLOR.customers@fticonsulting.com.  

    If you are a supplier of Prax Lindsey Oil Refinery Limited, Prax Storage Lindsey Limited, or Prax Terminals Killingholme Limited, please contact the Special Managers via email:  PLOR.suppliers@fticonsulting.com 

    Information for creditors  

    You will need to register as a creditor in the liquidation Prax Lindsey Oil Refinery Limited, Prax Storage Lindsey Limited, and Prax Terminals Killingholme Limited if: 

    • you have not been paid for goods or services you’ve supplied 
    • you have paid the company for goods or services that you have not received.  

    To register as a creditor, you will need to complete a Proof of Debt, clearly identifying which company owes you money. A Proof of Debt form can be downloaded at GOV.UK 

    Please return the form, together with all supporting documentation, to the Liquidator at PLOR.Creditor@Insolvency.gov.uk 

    Once you have registered and the Official Receiver receives your Proof of Debt he will add you to the list of creditors and include you on future correspondence about the liquidation. 

    Information for sub-contractors 

    If you are a sub-contractor of Prax Lindsey Oil Refinery Limited, Prax Storage Lindsey Limited, or Prax Terminals Killingholme Limited and are owed money, then you should register as a creditor and will need to complete a Proof of Debt. This can be downloaded at GOV.UK

    Please return the form, together with all supporting documentation, to the Liquidator at PLOR.Creditor@Insolvency.gov.uk.   

    If you were a sub-contractor of any other company in the State Oil group, you should contact that company if you have any concerns.

    Updates to this page

    Published 30 June 2025

    MIL OSI United Kingdom –

  • MIL-OSI Europe: Swiss Federal Office of Energy awards the 2025 Watt d’Or energy prize

    Source: Switzerland – Department of Foreign Affairs in English

    This evening, 9 January 2025, the Swiss Federal Office of Energy will award Switzerland’s prestigious energy prize, the Watt d’Or, for the eighteenth time. The winners of gold for 2025 are: Matica AG from Kaltenbach (TG) together with Lucerne University of Applied Sciences and Arts HSLU (Energy Technologies category), ewb together with Lubera AG from Buchs, Saint Gallen (Renewable Energies category), Galliker Transport AG from Altishofen (LU) (Energy Efficient Mobility category), and IWB from Basel (Buildings and Space category). The jury’s special prize will be awarded to Genossenschaft Elektra, Jegenstorf (BE) together with Groupe E (FR), Azienda Elettrica di Massagno AEM (TI) and EKZ with ETH Zurich (ZH). The Watt d’Or trophy – a snow globe – will be presented to the winners by the distinguished jury, headed by Susanne Vincenz-Stauffacher, at the Kongresszentrum Kursaal in Bern. The event will be attended by hundreds of representatives from the Swiss energy scene, including politicians, business people and researchers.

    MIL OSI Europe News –

  • MIL-OSI Africa: South Sudan’s Minister of Mines to Showcase E&P Prospects at African Mining Week (AMW) 2025

    Source: Africa Press Organisation – English (2) – Report:

    Download logo

    Martin Gama Abucha, Minister of Mines of South Sudan, has joined the upcoming African Mining Week (AMW) conference as a speaker. Minister Abucha will take part in the Ministerial Forum, where he will share insight into South Sudan’s policy frameworks, investment incentives and infrastructure plans aimed at unlocking the full potential of the country’s mining sector. 

    As South Sudan seeks to increase mining investments and drive projects forward, AMW provides an ideal platform for Minister Abucha to outline the country’s commitment to enhancing cooperation with global public and private stakeholders to build a robust and competitive mining value chain. As the premier gathering for mining stakeholders in Africa, the event connects global financiers and project developers with African mining opportunities, facilitating collaboration and deal-signing. Insights shared by Minister Abucha will support future deals. 

    African Mining Week serves as a premier platform for exploring the full spectrum of mining opportunities across Africa. The event is held alongside the African Energy Week: Invest in African Energies 2025 conference from October 1-3 in Cape Town. Sponsors, exhibitors and delegates can learn more by contacting sales@energycapitalpower.com.

    Under Minister Abucha’s leadership, South Sudan’s Ministry of Mines has been accelerating geological mapping to identify exploration hotspots and reduce investment risk. In April 2025, the Ministry hosted a delegation from Qatar, including government officials and mining investors, to discuss opportunities in seismic studies, gold refining and the extraction of lead and critical minerals. The meeting follows Qatari firms such as United Gold investing across South Sudan to establish gold marketing stations. The stations aim to formalize artisanal mining by integrating informal production into the formal economy. 

    Collaborations are also underway with South Africa to leverage the country’s mining expertise, investment portfolio and technology to better understand South Sudan’s mineral landscape. Other partnerships include with Russia’s ROSGEO, the U.S.-based REE-Magnesium and Canada’s CVMR to map the country’s mineral resources and better understand the geology. In November 2024, South Sudan’s national oil company Nilepet announced the discovery of critical minerals following a geological survey conducted in the first half of 2024 and revealed plans to establish a national mining company to support sector growth. 

    Amid these developments, AMW 2025 offers a timely opportunity for Minister Abucha to engage with global geoscience firms, mining investors and African stakeholders to forge new partnerships and strengthen existing collaborations. AMW 2025 panel discussions and project showcases will position South Sudan as an emerging mining destination on the continent. 

    – on behalf of Energy Capital & Power.

    MIL OSI Africa –

  • MIL-OSI Europe: Written question – Israel’s nuclear weapons programme – E-002503/2025

    Source: European Parliament

    Question for written answer  E-002503/2025
    to the Commission
    Rule 144
    Lynn Boylan (The Left), Kathleen Funchion (The Left)

    In recent public statements, the President of the Commission has repeatedly invoked Israel’s ‘right to self-defence’ and the need for Iran to not acquire a nuclear weapon. No mention has been made of the fact that Israel is itself a nuclear power and is one of only five countries in the world not to have ratified the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty. Israel has also not accepted International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) safeguards on its nuclear activity.

    In her discussions with the Israeli Government, did the President of the Commission:

    • 1.call on Israel to ratify the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty?
    • 2.call on the Israeli Government to accept IAEA safeguards on its nuclear activities?
    • 3.demand a halt to nuclear weapons production and stockpiling by Israel?

    Submitted: 23.6.2025

    Last updated: 30 June 2025

    MIL OSI Europe News –

  • Britain, France and Germany condemn ‘threats’ against head of IAEA watchdog

    Source: Government of India

    Source: Government of India (4)

    Britain, France and Germany condemned on Monday what they described as threats against the head of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) watchdog, and called on Iran to guarantee the safety of IAEA staff on its territory.

    “France, Germany and the United Kingdom condemn threats against the Director General of the IAEA Rafael Grossi and reiterate our full support to the Agency and the DG in carrying out their mandate,” said a joint statement issued by the foreign affairs ministries of those three countries.

    “We call on Iranian authorities to refrain from any steps to cease cooperation with the IAEA. We urge Iran to immediately resume full cooperation in line with its legally binding obligations, and to take all necessary steps to ensure the safety and security of IAEA personnel,” they added.

    Their joint statement did not specify what threats had been made against Grossi.

    On Monday, Iran said it could not be expected to guarantee the safety of IAEA inspectors, so swiftly after its nuclear sites were hit by Israeli and U.S. strikes in the 12-day war that ended with a ceasefire last week.

    “How can they expect us to ensure the safety and security of the agency’s inspectors when Iran’s peaceful nuclear facilities were attacked a few days ago?” Foreign Ministry spokesperson Esmaeil Baghaei told a news conference.

    The IAEA’s board voted earlier this month to declare that Iran was in violation of its obligations under the global nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty. Iranian officials have suggested that vote helped pave the way for Israel’s attacks.

    Baghaei said a parliamentary bill approved by the Guardian Council makes it mandatory for the government to suspend cooperation with the UN nuclear watchdog.

    “Iran shouldn’t be expected to accept its obligations under the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) when the UN nuclear watchdog has stopped short of condemning the attacks on Iran’s nuclear sites,” Baghaei said.

    (Reuters)

  • MIL-OSI Asia-Pac: 43rd batch of applications approved for trials of green transport technologies under New Energy Transport Fund

    Source: Hong Kong Government special administrative region

    43rd batch of applications approved for trials of green transport technologies under New Energy Transport Fund 
    The Steering Committee of the Fund has adopted a merit-based approach to assess applications for funding with a view to making the best use of the Fund and taking into account factors including the latest technology developments. One application has been approved in this batch (Note) for the trial of an electric heavy goods vehicle as an aircraft tractor, involving a total subsidy of $1.5 million.
     
    The latest approval brings the total number of trials approved under the Fund to 296, with a total subsidy of about $242 million. As at end-May 2025, a total of 239 approved trials under the Fund have been completed. Trial reports have been uploaded to the Fund’s website (www.eeb.gov.hk/en/new-energy-transport-fund/AT.html#Trial_Reports 
         As the technology of electric vehicles and batteries is becoming more mature, to allow the Fund to focus on subsidising new energy technologies with a more pressing need for trials in the local context in future, the Fund has only accepted applications for trials of new energy transport commercial tools other than electric commercial vehicles from April 1, 2025, with a view to expediting the green transformation of the transport trade.

         The Government put in place the Fund in March 2011 to subsidise the testing and encourage wider use of green transport technologies for a variety of commercial transport tools, such as goods vehicles (including special-purpose vehicles), taxis, light buses, buses, vessels, motorcycles, non-road vehicles (applicable to vehicle models approved by the Transport Department or the Airport Authority Hong Kong), or the aforesaid transport tools of charitable/non-profit making organisations providing services to their clients. The technologies to be subsidised include new energy vehicles or vessels, conversion of in-use conventional vehicles or vessels to new energy vehicles or vessels, and after-treatment emission reduction devices or fuel-saving devices applicable to vehicles and vessels. Transport operators and charitable/non-profit making organisations may apply for trying out different green technology products subject to a maximum subsidy of $10 million for each application and a total of $12 million for each applicant.
     
    For more information on the Fund and the approved applications, please visit the website of the Fund (

    www.eeb.gov.hk/en/new-energy-transport-fund/new-energy-transport-fund.html 
    Note: An electric heavy goods vehicle as an aircraft tractor by China Aircraft Services Limited.
    Issued at HKT 10:00

    NNNN

    MIL OSI Asia Pacific News –