Now that they've won the Virginia and New Jersey governor's races, Democrats Abigail Spanberger and Mikie Sherrill will seek to fulfill their frequent promises on keeping down electricity costs.

Why it matters: In both states, electricity prices emerged as a chief voter concern within the context of household costs — and that's likely to continue in 2026's races elsewhere.

• "We suspect the performances of Sherrill and Spanberger could play into broader [Democratic] party thinking about economic policy," ClearView Energy Partners said in a pre-election note.
• Virginia, in particular, is seen as a bellwether of how hot-button political issues will play out nationally.

Driving the news: Spanberger's "Affordable Virginia" plan detailed how she wants to lower energy costs.

• Her ideas in her race against GOP Lt. Gov. Winsome Earle-Sears included cutting construction red tape and making sure data centers cover their power costs.
• The Old Dominion is the world's data center capital, with hundreds clustered outside Washington, D.C., and — increasingly — around Richmond.
• To bolster the reliability of renewables, Spanberger also called for building rooftop solar and other small solar projects together with battery storage systems.

In New Jersey, Sherrill vowed on her first day in office to declare a "state of emergency on utility costs," freezing utility rates and building out cheaper and cleaner power generation, including solar and battery storage.

• And she promised to "immediately develop plans for new nuclear capacity" in southwest New Jersey's Salem County.
• "I'll sit down with neighboring states to harness economies of scale to build new reactors in our region at a low cost," she said.
• She joined officials in other states who are angry at PJM Interconnection, the country's largest electricity grid operator. She accused PJM of "mismanagement" and giving preference to coal and oil.

The other side: Republicans — including President Trump — argued that relying on renewables would cause prices to spike even higher.

• Trump issued Truth Social posts warning that "you'll be paying $4, $5, and $6 a Gallon, and your Electric and other Energy costs will, likewise, SOAR" and that "if you vote Republican, your Energy Costs are going to go down."

What we're watching: How all this affects next year's races.

Full story

🐢 Vets of Biden-era DOE clean tech programs wrote a detailed post-mortem on why big projects were slow to take flight after the infrastructure and climate laws passed.

• Why it matters: "This meant the political theory animating the administration's approach — that the economic development generated by clean energy projects and industries would create a durable bipartisan coalition — was never truly tested," the report finds.
• The big picture: It lists overlapping reasons — overcaution (a Solyndra complex); lack of clear deployment metrics; diffuse goals (decarbonization, labor, equity, security); bureaucracy and lots more.
• What we're watching: It's advice for a future White House that looks to revive programs that Trump officials scaled back or reoriented.

🎙️ Democrats should focus less on climate and moderate on energy as part of a wider political makeover, per a new analysis.

• Why it matters: The "Deciding to Win" report is circulating ahead of the midterms — and amid early moves in the 2028 White House race (ducks).
• The big picture: The advice from the group Welcome finds voters don't think the party puts enough priority on the economy, the cost of living, health care, border security, and public safety.
• Friction point: Dems should focus "less on issues voters think we place too much emphasis on (climate change, democracy, abortion, identity and cultural issues)," it states.
• What we're watching: Some of this is happening already. The main Dem and green group message against gutting the IRA is about utility bills — not climate. And power prices were a big deal in yesterday's state elections.

Major business groups are urging EPA to reverse plans to end mandatory corporate greenhouse gas reporting, or at least tread very carefully.

Why it matters: While these groups typically want less regulation, EPA moves to rip out climate policies root and branch could bring costly headaches.

• This Goldilocks question is also looming over EPA plans to scuttle the endangerment finding.

Driving the news: The American Petroleum Institute, in new comments, says EPA should "reduce burdens" in the program but keep it intact.

Threat level: Ending the requirements created about 15 years ago carries big risks, API argues:

• It could hinder access to foreign markets that demand climate info.
• It could thwart the use of U.S. carbon sequestration, hydrogen, and clean fuels credits by removing a "reliable pathway" to showing eligibility.
• It would likely raise costs. States and other parties could replicate the mandates, creating a messy patchwork, API said.

Friction point: Other K Street heavyweights are worried, too.

• "[A] sudden change to the current program could result in piecemeal, duplicative, incomplete and more burdensome ... reporting obligations for U.S. companies that also disadvantage them globally," the Business Roundtable told EPA.
• The National Association of Manufacturers' comments reveal similar fears. NAM and BRT signal that a voluntary program might work.

What's next: EPA will "review and respond to comments," it said.

🇪🇺 EU countries agreed to new climate targets and pledges just ahead of the opening of COP30 in Brazil, but only after new concessions and "flexibilities," officials said.

• Why it matters: Showing up in Belém without the plan would have been another blow to climate diplomacy that's already under heavy strains.
• Catch up quick: It sets a binding target to cut emissions by 90% in 2040 compared to 1990. But 5% can come from international carbon credits (basically a form of outsourcing). That number could grow another 5%, per multiple reports.
• State of play: Officials also agreed to their separate, non-binding 2035 goal under the Paris Agreement, pledging a 66.25%–72.5% reduction from those 1990 levels.
• What's next: Action on the 2040 plan now moves to the European parliament, and then negotiations between branches of the EU system, per the nonprofit group E3 that carefully tracks the talks.
• The bottom line: The 11th-hour negotiations show how the EU is struggling to balance green goals, hanging onto industrial strength, and holding down costs. Those tensions won't go away.
• Go deeper: European council press briefing...Bloomberg coverage.

🌳 Via AP, Brazilian President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva outlined plans for a major new forest protection fund.

Three huge oil and gas producing states should do more to "protect the fiscal health of the often rural local governments where extraction takes place," a new report finds.

Why it matters: Fossil fuels are a big revenue source for some states and communities.

• Local governments are vulnerable to boom-and-bust cycles and a longer-term transition from fossil fuels, note the authors with Resources for the Future, a nonpartisan think tank.
• Full study

TotalEnergies' latest outlook sees global oil demand rising slightly through 2040 under current policy and tech trends before just gently declining.

Why it matters: The energy giant pushed back its estimate for when oil thirst will stop growing by over a half-decade.

• Its current trends model in last year's version showed 2035 consumption lower than in 2030, with ongoing declines thereafter.

What we're watching: The International Energy Agency's outlook — which will model current policies for the first time in years — arrives later this month.

"Someday, the AI is going to say to me, 'Hey, stop messing around trying to eradicate malaria. I'm so much smarter than you. You just go play pickleball, and I'll get back to you.' I'm going to be a little disappointed, like, 'Oh geez, I'm not that good at pickleball.'"