Some Republican lawmakers, including Rep. Nick Begich, R-Alaska, are considering repealing the Inflation Reduction Act's clean energy incentives. Supporters of the measure say cuts would threaten jobs in Alaska. The efforts come as Alaska's liquid natural gas supplies will not be enough to meet demand in the state. That means the state may have to begin importing gas causing prices to rise.

Jennifer Hyde, federal infrastructure coordinator at the Alaska Center, hoped clean energy projects could begin benefitting the state before the crisis takes hold.

"We're hoping that communities can seize on IRA funds in order to actualize on solar projects, on wind projects, on hydro projects, on a number of other alternatives before this crisis happens," she explained.

Begich and other Republicans signed a letter arguing that the clean energy subsidies in the IRA will undermine America's energy dominance - and inflate energy costs. But Sen. Lisa Murkowski, R-Alaska, has supported the clean energy incentives.

Anchorage business owner Ben Kellie is concerned about the impacts of the possible repeal of clean energy incentives on Alaska's economy, and said the incentives can mean major savings for Alaska families.

"This isn't just saving a few cents off of a bill. A lot of these projects are in communities where people are paying over a thousand dollars to heat and light small homes off the road system," Kellie said. "This is real money that not only stays in the community and circulates, but helps families make ends meet through cold winters."

In 2023, about a quarter of all Alaska energy came from renewable sources.

The Republican backed tax-package being considered in Congress includes provisions that would repeal clean energy tax credits that some say have been transformational for a state like Arizona. It's all part of the huge budget bill that looks to advance President Donald Trump's agenda on several issues and includes provisions that would phase out a number of clean energy tax investments passed because of the Biden era Inflation Reduction Act.

Christian Stumpf, director of external affairs of The Nature Conservancy, said billions of dollars and thousands of jobs in Arizona are in jeopardy.

"The IRA has truly been a catalyst for infrastructure investments across Arizona. We've really increased our state's leadership position in the clean energy economy and we are providing good paying jobs that are putting Arizonans to work. We just can't afford to let that go away," he explained.

Since the passage of clean energy investments in 2022, companies have announced dozens of clean energy projects and created over 13,000 jobs in rural and urban Arizona communities - many of which are 'red' districts. But some provisions in Trump's "big, beautiful" bill have sparked concerns among Republicans who feel the repealing of credits would negatively impact energy production and the economy. If changes are made in the Senate, the legislation will need to be passed by the U.S. House again.

While some Republicans in Congress have questioned the impacts of the IRA and have opposed it because they claim it would raise taxes without helping curb inflation, Stumpf said it has been "nothing but a success so far," and encourages local elected officials to advocate for the clean energy investments that have been made possible.

"We're having really positive conversations on both sides of the aisle and we're hopeful that both sides can come to meaningful compromise. We are trying not to see this through a Republican or Democrat lens," he explained. "We really think that there is a strong case to be made for economic vibrancy and supporting sustainable communities."

Republican leaders are hoping to pass the huge budget bill and have it signed by Trump before the Fourth of July.

Loss of the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health Mining Program will reverse decades of progress in preventing disease, injury and death among miners, experts said.

Around 150 researchers are expected to be laid off next month, effectively shuttering the program.

Steve Schafrik, associate professor of mine engineering at the University of Kentucky, said the agency's research labs are conducting studies not easily be replicated, noting the labs contain specialized equipment aimed at reducing hazards to which miners are exposed.

"Facilities for trying to reduce the noise of equipment so that workers aren't exposed to that level of noise all day, every day," Schafrik noted. "That's a pretty difficult task, and you need to have very specific research equipment to do that."

The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services said layoffs are part of an effort to combine numerous agencies under the umbrella of the new "Administration for a Healthy America." According to federal data, around one of five of the nation's operating coal mines are located in Kentucky.

Schafrik pointed out the program's worker safety materials are used by mining industries around the world. He stressed the shutdown also leaves an uncertain future for grants and contracts needed to recruit new researchers.

"NIOSH has put a big emphasis on generating capacity within the academic institutions for replenishment of the researchers who can go out and work in academia, industry, regulatory bodies and government research," Schafrik outlined.

He added the program's closure will affect other industries, such as mineral production.

"While we are looking to get more critical mineral production inside of the United States, to be coupling that with the reduction of the Health and Safety Research Program, I don't understand the reasoning behind that," Schafrik observed.

According to the Mine Safety and Health Administration, 10 miner fatalities occurred between Jan. 3 and March 5, 2025, more than triple the number from the same period last year.


get more stories like this via email

The budget bill passed by the U.S. House and now under consideration in the Senate would reform environmental permitting in Illinois and nationwide, potentially streamlining the process and reducing litigation exposure.

Under the National Environmental Policy Act, large projects with the potential to affect the environment must complete environmental assessments or impact statements, including all federal agencies and affects private development projects needing federal permits. The new provision would create an expedited review process for a fee of 25% on top of the usual cost of a review.

Thomas Hochman, director of infrastructure policy at the Foundation for American Innovation, said the new rule would also shield projects from litigation related to permitting.

"There are quotes from folks like an outgoing EPA General Counsel, who say 90% of the details in a NEPA review are purely there for litigation-proofing the document," Hochman pointed out. "You can imagine if you only need 10% of the details in that environmental impact statement, because you know that you are not at risk of litigation, that is almost certainly a radically faster timeline."

National Environmental Policy Act reform has been attempted by both parties in Congress in recent years but could not pass the Senate. This year's bill marks the first time it has been attempted in the budget reconciliation process. If approved, the permitting reforms may accelerate some of the later phases of the multiyear Rebuild Illinois capital program.

In court, federal agencies have an 80% success rate on appeal and their environmental reviews are not often changed through litigation. One study of reviews showed solar energy projects face the highest litigation rate. Frequent litigation was also seen with pipelines, transmission lines and wind energy projects.

Despite streamlining the process, Hochman pointed out the reforms may also make projects subject to changing political priorities.

"If you let each administration determine what the cost is and also spend time determining what the cost should be, you can potentially see differences in treatment," Hochman observed. "Maybe a Republican administration drags their feet and puts out a really high cost for a wind project that's going through an environmental impact statement. Maybe a Democratic administration does the same for a pipeline that's going through an environmental impact statement."

Projects may still face litigation under other environmental laws such as the Clean Air and Clean Water Acts.


get more stories like this via email