NEWS HEARD AROUND THE HILL: Text for the long-awaited border deal dropped in the Senate on Sunday, outlining the terms for a $118 billion agreement that would create stricter border and immigration policies, while providing billions to Ukraine, Israel, and Taiwan along with the border.
But, of course, there are some energy-related provisions that were able to slip their way into the agreement. Here’s the rundown, in case you missed it:
- $98 million to invest in the development and production of isotopes
- $149 million for the National Nuclear Security Administration to respond to the conflict in Ukraine
- $2.72 billion to support domestic uranium enrichment to help beef up production of civil and advanced nuclear fuel.
The bill also allocates $1.58 billion in direct budget support for Ukraine, to help build out the “future of a self-reliant Ukrainian economy” within the areas of private sector growth, transportation, and energy.
For context: Russia is one of the largest exporters of “other isotopes” – forms of chemical elements that can be used to enrich uranium and create nuclear reactors – according to the Observatory of Economic Complexity. But even before the Russian invasion of Ukraine, there has been pressure for the U.S. to reduce its dependence on foreign isotope suppliers, in case geopolitical conflicts disrupt supply chains. And that proved to be the case following the Russia-Ukraine conflict – which led to new mitigation efforts by the Department of Energy’s Isotope Program, which deals with the isotopes supply chain.
Russia is also the sixth largest producer of uranium – the other ingredient to fuel nuclear energy – following Uzbekistan and Australia, according to the World Nuclear Association.
Furthermore, Russia has routinely targeted Ukraine’s energy system in attacks, and took over the Zaporizhzhia nuclear plant in March of last year – the first operating civil nuclear power plant to come under attack.
Why it’s important: The funds aim to build up U.S. domestic production of the materials needed for nuclear power – and to help expand Ukraine’s capabilities to combat Russian forces.
But will it pass? It’s unclear if the package has the 60 votes to clear the upper chamber – and it faces an even higher hill to climb in the House. Stay tuned for updates on that.
Welcome to Daily on Energy, written by Washington Examiner Energy and Environment writers Breanne Deppisch (@breanne_dep) and Nancy Vu (@NancyVu99). Email bdeppisch@washingtonexaminer dot com or nancy.vu@washingtonexaminer dot com for tips, suggestions, calendar items, and anything else. If a friend sent this to you and you’d like to sign up, click here. If signing up doesn’t work, shoot us an email, and we’ll add you to our list.
ON OUR RADARS: Lawmakers in the House and Senate will each hold hearings this week to examine President Joe Biden’s decision to pause approvals for new LNG export terminals, which has generated backlash from industry groups, Republicans, and some centrist Democrats.
On Tuesday, a House Energy and Commerce subcommittee will examine threats to energy security and to fossil fuel producers as a result of the pause. Witnesses include the head of EQT, the largest U.S. natural gas producer, as well as officials from the Hudson Institute’s Initiative on American Energy Security, and the Natural Resources Defense Council.
On Thursday, DOE Deputy Secretary David Turk will testify before the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee over the agency’s process for assessing new LNG export applications, and the impact the pause could have on U.S. allies.
Other witnesses include Charlie Riedl, the head of the Center for LNG, and James Watson, the secretary general for EuroGas.
Meanwhile, lawmakers are pressing the administration to reverse course. Members of the Energy Export Caucus, led by Reps. Carol Miller, a West Virginia Republican, and Henry Cuellar, a Texas Democrat, said in a letter to Biden today that the pause could threaten national security, hurt the economy, and force production into the hands of dirtier producers such as Russia. (U.S. LNG exports are 41% cleaner than Russian natural gas, according to the DOE data.)
PUTIN TRAVELING TO TURKEY ‘SOON’ TO DISCUSS ENERGY: Russian President Vladimir Putin is expected to visit Turkey “soon” to discuss energy issues, Ankara said yesterday, in what will mark the Russian strongman’s first visit to a NATO country since the start of Russia’s war in Ukraine—and one that will likely spark fierce political backlash from leaders in Europe.
Russia and Turkey are working to foster a closer relationship on issues of energy, natural gas infrastructure, and a planned nuclear power plant, ties that would allow Russia to find a new home for its energy exports and Turkey to secure cheap and readily available supplies, despite deep opposition from its European neighbors.
The two countries are expected to discuss a planned gas hub in Turkey’s Thrace region; a planned $20 billion nuclear power plant in Akkuyu, and an undersea gas pipeline Russia is lobbying for, Bloomberg reports.
Meanwhile, Turkish officials characterized the visit as crucial to reviving the U.N.-brokered grain deal with Ukraine after Russia abruptly pulled out last year. Read more on the visit here.
FARMING PROTESTS SPREAD TO GREECE AND BEYOND: Greek farmers massed on tractors outside a trade fair yesterday in Thessaloniki to protest high costs and European Union environmental regulations, the latest in a wave of unrest over high costs and regulations from bloc leaders.
Greek farmers plan to continue large-scale protests throughout the week, and have announced plans for highway blockades.
Meanwhile, similar protests continued throughout the EU: In Romania, farmers have used trucks and tractors to impede traffic for three straight weeks, while Dutch and Belgian farmers gathered this weekend to block off border crossing stations. Polish farmers announced plans to do the same with their border in Ukraine as early as this week.
Why it matters: The protests have worried EU leaders just months ahead of the European Parliament elections in June. Attempts to appease the farming groups have largely failed, and recent polling from the European Council on Foreign Relations suggests that more seats in the parliament are vulnerable to being overtaken by populist, far-right candidates, and could result in an “anti-climate policy action” coalition.
“There is a clear backlash on the agriculture part of the Green Deal,” one EU Parliament member from France, Pascal Canfin, told Reuters. “But there is no backlash for the rest,” he added.
EUROPE WEIGHS NEW PROTECTIONS FROM STATE-BACKED CHINESE SOLAR: The European Commission is weighing emergency steps to help European Union solar manufacturers stay afloat and compete with subsidized Chinese companies, whose low prices and high production rate threaten industry groups.
Leaders will give a statement today in Strasbourg before members of the European Parliament as they prepare to debate the best path forward. Options include direct government assistance, such as a bailout for EU companies, and more protective trade barriers levied against China, whose state-subsidized solar modules currently sell for just half the price of the EU-made modules.
The EU discussions come after months of pressure from the European Solar Manufacturing Council, a trade group that has pushed primarily for government buyouts.
Others have pushed for more defensive actions, such as import tariffs on Chinese solar panels. But these efforts have failed previously, and risk a trade war that would “be a disaster for the EU solar market,” BloombergNEF analyst Jenny Chase told Politico EU—and could threaten its goal of reaching 30 GW solar capacity by 2030.
RUNDOWN
Financial Times Burst pipes and freezing flats plague Putin’s Russia
E&E News ‘Gold’ hydrogen: The next clean fuel?
Bloomberg Big oil’s optimism faces reality check in tech-obsessed market
