Sign up for our daily briefing

Make your busy days simpler with Axios AM/PM. Catch up on what's new and why it matters in just 5 minutes.

Please enter a valid email.

Please enter a valid email.

Subscription failed
Thank you for subscribing!

Catch up on coronavirus stories and special reports, curated by Mike Allen everyday

Catch up on coronavirus stories and special reports, curated by Mike Allen everyday

Please enter a valid email.

Please enter a valid email.

Subscription failed
Thank you for subscribing!

Denver news in your inbox

Catch up on the most important stories affecting your hometown with Axios Denver

Please enter a valid email.

Please enter a valid email.

Subscription failed
Thank you for subscribing!

Des Moines news in your inbox

Catch up on the most important stories affecting your hometown with Axios Des Moines

Please enter a valid email.

Please enter a valid email.

Subscription failed
Thank you for subscribing!

Minneapolis-St. Paul news in your inbox

Catch up on the most important stories affecting your hometown with Axios Twin Cities

Please enter a valid email.

Please enter a valid email.

Subscription failed
Thank you for subscribing!

Tampa Bay news in your inbox

Catch up on the most important stories affecting your hometown with Axios Tampa Bay

Please enter a valid email.

Please enter a valid email.

Subscription failed
Thank you for subscribing!

Charlotte news in your inbox

Catch up on the most important stories affecting your hometown with Axios Charlotte

Please enter a valid email.

Please enter a valid email.

Subscription failed
Thank you for subscribing!

Please enter a valid email.

Please enter a valid email.

Subscription failed
Thank you for subscribing!

Photo: Jeffrey Greenberg/UIG via Getty Images

The emerging White House plan to throw an economic lifeline to struggling coal-fired and nuclear power plants would likely thwart progress on cutting greenhouse gas emissions, even though nuclear generation is the largest U.S. source of zero-carbon power, some analysts tell Axios.

Why it matters: This underscores how climate advocates increasingly fearful of a wave of nuclear plant closures — a topic we recently explored here and here — are still without policy allies in the White House despite the Trump administration's support for the fuel.

The basic reason: More coal-fired plants face shutdowns in the coming years than nuclear plants absent strong federal intervention.

"I think more coal is likely to be at risk of shutdown from poor economics than nuclear, so the impact of subsidizing uneconomic plants would be even worse from a climate standpoint."
— Jason Bordoff, head of Columbia University's Center on Global Energy Policy, in an email

To be sure: Uncertainties abound, such as what White House policy will ultimately look like and the lost mix of natural gas, renewables and other resources that would have replaced coal and nuclear plants set to be kept afloat.

One possible future: Council on Foreign Relations energy expert Varun Sivaram was kind enough to do some back-of-the-envelope modeling.

  • He looked at the effect of freezing coal and nuclear generation at their 2017 levels, rather than allowing both to drop in accordance with the most recent Energy Information Administration long-term forecast.
  • "This results in more production from coal and nuclear; the additional coal electricity generated in 2025 is about 24% more than the additional nuclear electricity generated in 2025," Sivaram said in an email.
  • That would be enough to hinder the power sector's ongoing emissions reductions — he finds that the Trump administration's actions would result in between 0% to 5% higher emissions in 2025 relative to 2017, depending on how much gas versus renewables are displaced.
  • The big picture: "That's bad because we actually need to substantially decrease power sector emissions by 2025 in order to meet our Paris commitment," Sivaram said.

One level deeper: Two analysts with Resources For the Future (RFF), a nonpartisan think tank, say their modeling shows that preventing a "typical, unprofitable" one-gigawatt coal plant from closing causes 2.9 million tons of CO2 emissions per year.

  • Their short note over the weekend also says that preventing a money-losing one-gigawatt nuclear plant from closing reduces CO2 emissions by 3.5 million tons annually.

But, but, but: The RFF note points out that over the last four years, coal plants have been retiring at a rate of roughly eight gigawatts annually, while nuclear capacity retirements have been about one gigawatt annually for the last five years.

Going forward: The amount of power from a given source slated to go offline in the years ahead is a moving target — and a number of states are acting on their own to preserve their nuclear plants, most recently New Jersey.

  • That said, EIA's Electric Power Monthly includes a database of planned power station retirements.
  • And the consultancy ClearView Energy Partners, in a recent note which did not explore the carbon topic, projects that roughly 23 gigawatts of coal-fired capacity might be retired between now and mid-2027. That's substantially more than the amount of at-risk nuclear capacity.

Go deeper

The dark new reality in Congress

National Guard troops keep watch at security fencing. Photo: Kent Nishimura/Los Angeles Times via Getty Images

This is how bad things are for elected officials and others working in a post-insurrection Congress:

  • Rep. Norma Torres (D-Calif.) said she had a panic attack while grocery shopping back home.
  • Rep. Jim McGovern (D-Mass.) said police may also have to be at his constituent meetings.
  • Rep. Adam Kinzinger (R-Ill.) told a podcaster he brought a gun to his office on Capitol Hill on Jan. 6 because he anticipated trouble with the proceedings that day.
Off the Rails

Episode 3: Descent into madness

Photo illustration: Sarah Grillo/Axios. Photos: Tom Williams/CQ-Roll Call, Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images

Beginning on election night 2020 and continuing through his final days in office, Donald Trump unraveled and dragged America with him, to the point that his followers sacked the U.S. Capitol with two weeks left in his term. This Axios series takes you inside the collapse of a president.

Episode 3: The conspiracy goes too far. Trump's outside lawyers plot to seize voting machines and spin theories about communists, spies and computer software.

President Trump was sitting in the Oval Office one day in late November when a call came in from lawyer Sidney Powell. "Ugh, Sidney," he told the staff in the room before he picked up. "She's getting a little crazy, isn't she? She's really gotta tone it down. No one believes this stuff. It's just too much."

Convicts turn to D.C. fixers for Trump pardons

Trump confidante Matt Schlapp interviews Jared Kushner last February. Schlapp is seeking a pardon for a biotech executive. Photo: Samuel Corum/Getty Images

A flood of convicted criminals has retained lobbyists since November’s presidential election to press President Trump for pardons or commutations before he leaves office.

What we're hearing: Among them is Nickie Lum Davis, a Hawaii woman who pleaded guilty last year to abetting an illicit foreign lobbying campaign on behalf of fugitive Malaysian businessman Jho Low. Trump confidante Matt Schlapp also is seeking a pardon for a former biopharmaceutical executive convicted of fraud less than two months ago.

You’ve caught up. Now what?

Sign up for Mike Allen’s daily Axios AM and PM newsletters to get smarter, faster on the news that matters.

Please enter a valid email.

Please enter a valid email.

Subscription failed
Thank you for subscribing!