Energy

Joint statement comes more than a month after the E3 countries triggered a mechanism reinstating UN sanctions against Iran.

The United Kingdom, France and Germany have said they wish to restart stalled nuclear talks with Iran and the United States, more than a month after the three European countries triggered a mechanism reinstating the United Nations sanctions on Iran for the first time in a decade.

The E3 countries’ joint statement on Friday came nearly two weeks after UN sanctions were reimposed on Iran, under a “snapback” process that the three nations had initiated on August 28 and that became effective one month later.

In response, Iran recalled its envoys to the three European countries for consultations.

Iran has said that, following those revived sanctions, it would not immediately resume nuclear talks.

The sanctions set up a global ban on cooperation with Iran on nuclear, military, banking and shipping industries.

The sanctions are aimed at imposing new economic pain to pressure Iran, but it remains to be seen if all countries will enforce them. On September 27, the day before the sanctions came into effect, Iran’s national currency, the rial, fell to new all-time lows.

In their joint statement, the UK, France and Germany said: “We are determined to reinitiate negotiations with Iran and the United States towards a comprehensive, durable and verifiable agreement that ensures Iran never acquires a nuclear weapon.”

A spokesman for the Iranian Foreign Ministry, Esmaeil Baghaei, said on Monday that “we have no plans for negotiations at this stage”.

He added that Iran was examining the “consequences and implications” of the restart of sanctions.

“Of course, diplomacy – in the sense of maintaining contacts and consultations – will continue,” Baghaei said. “Whenever we feel that diplomacy can be effective, we will certainly make decisions based on the country’s interests and priorities.”

Nuclear fears

Western countries, spearheaded by the US and joined by Israel, accuse Iran of pursuing nuclear weapons – a charge Tehran has long denied.

During a 12-day June conflict, the US bombed nuclear sites in Iran, joining an Israeli air campaign that targeted Iran’s top generals and nuclear scientists, as well as civilians in residential areas. Iran retaliated with barrages of missiles and drones against Israel and sites linked to the US. According to Amnesty International, Israeli attacks on Iran killed at least 1,100 people.

The E3 said in Friday’s statement that “it was right that the snapback mechanism had been triggered”.

“Iran’s nuclear programme poses a serious threat to global peace and security,” the bloc of nations added.

In 2015, the US, along with the E3, Russia and China, concluded an agreement with Iran providing for the regulation of Iranian nuclear activities in exchange for the lifting of sanctions.

US President Donald Trump decided during his first term in 2018 to withdraw the US from the deal and to reinstate US sanctions.

In retaliation, Iran pulled back from some of its commitments, particularly on uranium enrichment.

According to the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), Iran is the only country without a nuclear weapons programme to enrich uranium to 60 percent. That is close to the threshold of 90 percent required for a bomb, and well above the far lower level needed for civilian nuclear use.

Russian drone and missile strikes have wounded at least 20 people in Kyiv, damaged residential buildings and caused blackouts across swaths of Ukraine, authorities have said.

In the latest mass attack targeting the energy system as winter approaches, electricity was interrupted in nine regions, and more than a million households and businesses were temporarily without power across the country on Friday.

In southeastern Ukraine, a seven-year-old was killed when his home was hit, and at least 20 people were injured. In Kyiv, an apartment block in the city centre was damaged by a projectile, while on the left bank of the Dnipro River that divides the capital, crowds waited at bus stops with the metro out of action, and people filled water bottles at distribution points.

“We didn’t sleep at all,” said Liuba, a pensioner, as she collected water. “From 2:30am, there was so much noise. By 3:30, we had no electricity, no gas, no water. Nothing.”

According to Ukraine’s energy ministry, more than 800,000 customers temporarily lost power in Kyiv.

Moscow’s attack overnight and into Friday fell on the third anniversary of Russia’s first large-scale attack on energy facilities, months after Moscow invaded in February 2022, according to Ukraine’s Foreign Ministry.

Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy called Russia’s latest strikes a “cynical and calculated attack”, and urged allies to respond with concrete measures.

“What’s needed is not window dressing but decisive action – from the United States, Europe, and the G7 – in delivering air defence systems and enforcing sanctions,” he said in a statement on X.

The Kremlin has escalated aerial attacks on Ukrainian energy facilities and rail systems over recent weeks, building on earlier bombing campaigns over the previous three winters that left millions without heating in frigid temperatures. Russia said its forces had hit energy sites supplying power to Ukraine’s defence industry.

The Ukrainian air force said the Russian barrage comprised 465 drones and 32 missiles, adding that 405 drones and 15 missiles were downed.

A source in Ukraine’s energy sector told the AFP news agency that the intensity of attacks was higher compared to last year, and that cloudy weather overnight had allowed drones to evade Ukrainian air defence systems.

Kyiv’s Mayor Vitali Klitschko said Russian forces had targeted “critical infrastructure”.

“This was one of the largest concentrated strikes against energy facilities,” Ukraine’s Prime Minister Yulia Svyrydenko said.

It was the fourth attack in a week against the facilities of Ukraine’s biggest private electricity provider, DTEK, its CEO Maxim Timchenko said.

Late on Friday DTEK said it had restored power to at least 678,000 households and companies in Kyiv after the massive Russian aerial attack.

“DTEK power engineers continue to intensively restore electricity to Kyiv residents,” the company said on Telegram.

Children ‘rejoined’ with families

The Russian attack came as United States First Lady Melania Trump announced that eight children displaced by the war had been reunited with their families following negotiations between her team and Russian President Vladimir Putin’s.

Trump said that Putin had responded to a letter sent via her husband, President Donald Trump, at a summit in Alaska in August.

“My representative has been working directly with President Putin’s team to ensure the safe reunification of children with their families between Russia and Ukraine. In fact, eight children have been rejoined with their families during the past 24 hours,” she said in a short, six-minute speech from the White House on Friday.

US President Trump’s own efforts to broker an end to Russia’s three-year war in Ukraine have stalled, as a series of direct talks between Ukrainian and Russian delegations this year ended.

Trump said on Thursday that Washington and NATO allies were “stepping up the pressure” to end the war in Ukraine.

But the Kremlin said that momentum towards reaching a peace deal had largely vanished.

Nearly three weeks of striking bus drivers and roadblocks by angry farmers have put Ecuador President Daniel Noboa in one of the tensest moments of his presidency.

The outcry comes in response to the government’s increase in diesel fuel costs, after a subsidy was cut last month.

With no signs of dialogue after 18 days, one protester has been killed, numerous protesters and authorities injured, and more than 100 people arrested.

The army announced a large deployment to the capital on Thursday, saying it would prevent vandalism and destruction of property. As many as 5,000 troops were being deployed after dozens of protesters had marched at various sites in the city earlier in the day.

Though the demonstrations called for by Ecuador’s largest Indigenous organisation, CONAIE, are supposed to be nationwide, the most acute impact has been in the northern part of the country, especially Imbabura province, where Noboa won in April’s election with 52 percent of the vote.

On one side is “a president who assumes that after winning the elections he has all of the power at his disposal, who has authoritarian tendencies and no disposition for dialogue”, said Farith Simon, a law professor at the Universidad San Francisco in Quito.

On the other side, he said, is “an Indigenous sector that has shown itself to be uncompromising and is looking to co-govern through force”.

Protesters attacked Noboa’s motorcade with rocks on Tuesday, adding to the tension. The administration denounced it as an assassination attempt.

The Indigenous organisation CONAIE, however, rejected that assertion. It insists its protests are peaceful and that it is the government that is responding with force.

What led to the demonstrations?

The protests were organised by CONAIE, an acronym that translates to the Confederation of Indigenous Nationalities of Ecuador.

The group mobilised its supporters after Noboa decreed the elimination of a subsidy on diesel on September 12.

Diesel is critical to the agricultural, fishing and transport sectors in Ecuador, where many Indigenous people work. The move raised the cost of a gallon (3.8 litres) of diesel to $2.80 from $1.80, which CONAIE said hit the poor the hardest.

The government tried to calm the backlash by offering some handouts, and unions did not join the demonstrations. The confederation rejected the government’s “gifts” and called for a general strike.

What are the protests like?

The Indigenous confederation is a structured movement that played a central role in violent uprisings in 2019 and 2022 that nearly ousted then-Presidents Lenin Moreno and Guillermo Lasso.

Its methods are not always seen as productive, particularly when protests turn violent.

Daniel Crespo, an international relations professor at the Universidad de los Hemisferios in Quito, said the confederation’s demands to return the fuel subsidy, cut a tax and stop mining are efforts to “impose their political agenda”.

The confederation says it’s just trying to fight for a “decent life” for all Ecuadorians, even if that means opposing Noboa’s economic and social policies.

What are Noboa’s policies?

Noboa is a 37-year-old, politically conservative millionaire heir to a banana fortune. He started his second term in May amid high levels of violence.

One of the steps he has taken is raising the value-added tax rate to 15 percent from 12 percent, arguing that the additional funds are needed to fight crime. He has also fired thousands of government workers and restructured the executive branch.

The president has opted for a heavy-handed approach to making these changes and rejected calls for dialogue. He said, “The law awaits those who choose violence. Those who act like criminals will be treated like criminals.”

What has been the fallout?

A protester died last week, and soldiers were caught on video attacking a man who tried to help him.

The images, along with generally aggressive actions by security forces confronting protesters, have fuelled anger and drawn criticism about excessive use of force from organisations within Ecuador and abroad.

The Attorney General’s Office said it was investigating the protester’s death.

Experts warn that the situation could grow more violent if the protests that have largely been in rural areas arrive in the cities, especially the capital, where frustrated civilians could take to the streets to confront protesters.

Some party needs to intervene and lead the different sides to dialogue, perhaps the Catholic Church or civil society organisations, Crespo and Simon agreed.

Oct. 9 (UPI) — The offshore wind farm company Orsted announced Thursday it plans to cut its workforce by roughly one-quarter by the end of 2027 as it redirects its business toward Europe and Asia.

Orsted said Thursday that as a number of offshore wind farms are finalized and come online in the next few years it needs to right size its workforce to match a decline in construction activities it expects to see.

“This is a necessary consequence of our decision to focus our business and the fact that we’ll be finalizing our large construction portfolio in the coming years — which is why we’ll need fewer employees,” Rasmus Errboe, CEO of Orsted, said in a press release.

“At the same time, we want to create a more efficient and flexible organization and a more competitive Orsted, ready to bid on new value-accretive offshore wind projects,” Errboe said.

Right now, the company employs roughly 8,000 people globally but as it wraps up current construction work and some employees become redundant, on top of natural attrition and other moves, Orsted plans to reduce its head count to roughly 6,000.

The company has spent the year updating its portfolio, it said, as its roughly 8.1 gigawatt construction portfolio starts to come online, with most of its geographic and technical focus to be aimed at Europe, as well as some markets in the Asia-Pacific region.

In the United States, Orsted was ordered by the Trump administration in August to stop construction its nearly completed Revolution Wind project off the coast of New England.

The stop work order was part of a Trump move to cut nearly $700 million in funding from 12 wind farms because it considered the projects to be “wasteful.”

Revolution Wind, at the time, was roughly 80 percent complete and expected to provide enough power for more than 350,000 homes in Rhode Island and Connecticut.

“We’re building a more financially robust and competitive company with solid earnings, which will increase as we complete our projects,” Errboe said in the release. “Once we’ve achieved this, Orsted will be a significantly stronger, more focused and competitive company.”

On the news, shares for the company were trading 0.7 percent higher on Thursday, according to CNBC.

WARNINGS of potential blackouts this winter have been issued, with “tight days” for energy supply expected in early December and mid-January.

The National Energy System Operator (NESO) has warned that there may still be tight periods this winter where electricity supply struggles to meet demand.

1

In these cases, system notices could be issued to increase production, with imported electricity from Europe helping to prevent blackouts.

Despite the concerns, NESO says spare supply, known as electricity margins, is at its strongest level since 2020.

It added that new battery storage along with European imports will play a key role in avoiding disruptions.

The electricity grid operator and National Gas released their winter outlook reports as energy prices rose earlier this month following an increase in the price cap.

NESO’S report said: “We expect a sufficient operational surplus throughout winter, although there may still be tight days that require us to use our standard operating tools, including system notices.”

System notices are how the grid operator informs the wider energy industry that electricity supply has not matched demand, allowing for production to increase if needed.

Early data from electricity firms and forecasters has suggested that “tight days” are most likely to take place in early December or mid-January.

Neso added that imports will be available when needed to help cover demand, supported by “adequate electricity supply across Europe”.

Deborah Petterson, director of resilience and emergency management at NESO, said: “A resilient and reliable energy supply is fundamental to our way of life.

“At NESO we are looking at the upcoming winter and can report this year’s winter outlook sets out the strongest electricity margins in six years.

“It is critical that we continue our work with the wider energy industry to prepare for the coming months to build on this foundation and maintain our world-leading track record of reliability.”

What about gas supplies?

The latest analysis from National Gas indicated that Great Britain has enough gas supply capability to meet peak demand.

It indicated supply can meet demand, even “even accounting for unforeseen network outage scenarios”.

The gas network operator said gas demand is expected to be 3% lower than last winter, easing pressure on supply.

It said high-demand days are still expected but it stressed that it is “confident” the market will operate as needed.

Glenn Bryn-Jacobsen, director of energy systems and resilience at National Gas, said: “As we head into winter, we remain confident in the resilience of our gas system and our ability to meet Britain’s energy needs during periods of peak demand.

“The energy landscape is evolving, with a growing reliance on imports and the continued decline of UK continental shelf supplies.

“Meeting these challenges requires a co-ordinated, forward-looking approach, and we’re working closely with Government, industry, and regulators to develop the right solutions that safeguard security of supply for the future.”

But the report from National Gas shows a fall in Britain’s gas storage capabilities, thanks to the Rough storage site off the coast of Yorkshire no longer storing gas, which means there is an increased reliability on importing liquified natural gas (LNG) to plug the gap in times of high demand.

The facility in the North Sea is the largest of its kind in the UK, but owner Centrica has stopped filling it with natural gas amid concerns over its financial viability.

The Rough site comprises about half of Britain’s storage capacity, and acts as a buffer when the weather is especially cold and demand for gas spikes.

Centrica has long warned it will be decommissioned without government support to allow investment in the site.

Last winter, Britain narrowly avoided blackout warnings as freezing weather caused wind power to plunge, leaving the grid struggling to meet demand.

NESO paid £21million – ten times the usual rate – to keep gas power plants running to balance the shortfall in January.

Experts criticised the system operator for failing to predict peak energy demand and relying too heavily on renewable energy during winter.

Wind power dropped to 17.6%, while gas provided half of the country’s electricity.

Critics argued this reliance on weather-dependent energy left Britain vulnerable and called for more investment in gas and nuclear power for reliable supply.

PAYING close attention to your boiler can help you cut down on your energy bills.

In fact, one small change can save UK households up to £200 this winter.

1

Experts have advised UK residents to take a closer look at their boiler dials before the winter weather sets in.

According to the pros, a simple adjustment could cut annual energy bills by as much as £200.

Boiler specialists at Your NRG, the UK’s leading independent fuel distributor, shared their expertise.

They explained that many families are paying more than necessary because their central heating flow temperature is set too high.

Around 80% of UK homes use a combi boiler, which heats water directly from the mains without a storage tank.

However, most homeowners do not realise that the flow temperature, which is the temperature of water circulating through radiators, is often set unnecessarily high.

Hidden dial

Locating the dial that controls this and reducing the setting from 75-80 degrees celcius, down to around 60 degrees can improve efficiency.

This will help to lower your bills by up to 8%, which could represent savings of around £200 a year for the average household.

But make sure you’re turning the correct dial and not confusing the flow temperature dial with the hot water temperature dial, which controls water used in taps and showers.

It is vital not to lower this dial as hot water must be stored at a minimum of 60 degrees to prevent the growth of legionella bacteria.

Adjustments should only be made to the dial marked with a radiator or thermometer symbol.

And for homes with heat-only or regular boilers that heat a separate hot water tank as well as the central heating, the advice differs.

Caution message

These boilers often have only one dial, which should never be set below 60 degrees for safety reasons.

Adjusting the central heating flow temperature on most combi boilers only takes a few minutes. 

Most models have a flap at the bottom to reveal the controls, and for boilers with a pointer rather than a digital display, setting it to the 12 o’clock position usually lowers the flow temperatures to 60 degrees. 

Homeowners who are unsure are advised to ask a heating engineer to make the adjustment during the next service.

More on home heating

Plus, an £18 buy from The Range that will keep your whole family warm.

An energy expert broke down the top ways to keep your home warm this winter.

And a completely free way you can keep your house warm, and it only takes minutes.

A luxury gadget will cocoon you on winter nights, and only costs 4p to run.

We’ve rounded up the best heated throws to keep you cosy without racking up your energy bills.

Tyneham village in Dorset was abandoned in 1943 when the British military requisitioned the village for training purposes during World War Two – and the villagers were never able to return

A deserted Dorset village stands as a unique relic in Britain, abandoned yet not erased from memory.

Tragic events forced residents to flee their cherished homes decades ago.

Located along Dorset’s breathtaking Jurassic Coast, a visit to Tyneham village feels like travelling through time.

Visitors can peer into the lives of locals who were compelled to desert the settlement during World War Two.

The year 1943 marked the moment when this thriving community of Tyneham would witness their existence transformed permanently.

During the height of the Second World War, British forces commandeered the village for military exercises.

This resulted in heartbroken residents receiving just one month’s warning to vacate properties where countless families had resided across generations.

The wartime administration seized Tyneham village and its surrounding territory to serve as a training facility for Allied troops, positioned adjacent to the Lulworth firing range.

Locals trusted they were sacrificing their dwellings for their nation’s benefit and expected to return following the war’s conclusion.

A message was attached to the church entrance, stating: “Please treat the church and houses with care. We have given up our homes where many of us have lived for generations, to help win the war to keep men free. We will return one day and thank you for treating the village kindly.”

Sadly, the residents of Tyneham were never able to return home even after World War Two ended, as the village and surrounding land became a military training ground.

Now, nearly 80 years later, the village remains frozen in time and serves as a ‘thought-provoking and interesting’ tourist attraction. It opens at certain times of the year, offering visitors ‘fascinating insights into the lives of its former residents’.

When not open to the public, the gates blocking access are locked every evening.

One TripAdvisor review reads: “This deserted village has such an interesting history. The boards within the church detailing the villagers fight to be allowed to return to the village and the current position are very moving.”

Another review on TripAdvisor describes it as ‘a wonderful place – very atmospheric and sad but in a way that keeps drawing you back to visit’.

The last resident of Tyneham, Peter Wellman, passed away at the age of 100 in April this year. The centenarian made his final visit to the village in 2024, to see the place where he was born and raised.

During his last visit to Tyneham in 2024, Peter reminisced about his childhood days. He told the Dorset Echo: “We had no electricity, no mains gas and no running water – we had to pump that from near the church.

“I remember going to the beach and fishing and we often had mackerel. We were happy until we got moved out.”

Tyneham village, nestled in the Isle of Purbeck, is not actually an island but a peninsula, bordered by the English Channel in the picturesque county of Dorset.

Here are the key events from day 1,322 of Russia’s war on Ukraine.

Here is how things stand on Wednesday, October 8, 2025:

Fighting

• Russian President Vladimir Putin said his forces have captured almost 5,000 square kilometres (1,930sq miles) of Ukrainian territory so far this year, and Moscow retains the strategic initiative on the battlefield.
• Russian troops have captured the Ukrainian villages of Novovasylivka in the southeastern Zaporizhia region and Fedorivka in the eastern Donetsk region, Russia’s defence ministry said.
• Russian air defence units destroyed 184 Ukrainian drones in recent attacks, the RIA Novosti state-owned news agency reports.
• Russia’s air defence units also intercepted and destroyed a drone flying towards Moscow city, said Sergei Sobyanin, mayor of the Russian capital.

• Ukraine’s Energy Minister Svitlana Hrynchuk said Russian air strikes have caused “significant” damage to Ukrainian gas production capacity due to the targeting of regional gas infrastructure and power transmission facilities in front-line regions.
• Hrynchuk said Ukraine wants to increase imports of natural gas by 30 percent after Russian attacks on its gas infrastructure, telling reporters she had discussed additional gas imports with Group of Seven (G7) member states.
• Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy accused Russia of using oil tankers for intelligence gathering and sabotage operations, and he added that Ukraine was cooperating with its allies on the matter.
• Russia’s state nuclear energy company has claimed that a Ukrainian drone attempted to strike a nuclear plant in Russia’s Voronezh region bordering Ukraine, but the unmanned aerial vehicle crashed into a cooling tower and caused no damage at the site.

Military aid

• Kremlin spokesperson Dmitry Peskov said Russia was waiting for clarity from the United States about the possible supply of Tomahawk missiles to Ukraine, saying such weapons could theoretically carry nuclear warheads and reiterated that Moscow would see the provision of such weapons as a serious escalation.
• The Kremlin also said it assumed for now that US President Donald Trump still sought a peace settlement in Ukraine.

Peace talks

• Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan spoke by phone with President Putin and said diplomatic initiatives need to gain momentum to achieve a just and lasting peace in the Russia-Ukraine war, Erdogan’s office said.
• The statement cited Erdogan as saying Turkiye will continue to work for peace and said bilateral relations and regional and global issues were also discussed with Putin.
• Italian Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni said she believed Trump had come to the conclusion that Russia was not interested in a peace deal with Ukraine, and that the only way forward was to apply pressure, continue to support Ukraine, and impose sanctions on Russia.

Politics and diplomacy

• Polish Prime Minister Donald Tusk said it is not in Poland’s interest to hand over a Ukrainian man wanted by Germany for suspected involvement in explosions which damaged the Nord Stream gas pipelines three years ago.
• Tusk said the problem with Nord Stream 2 was not that it was blown up but that it was built. He added that Russia built the pipelines “against the vital interests not only of our countries, but of all of Europe”.
• A Polish court ruled on Monday that the Ukrainian diver wanted by Germany over his alleged involvement in the explosions, which damaged the Nord Stream gas pipeline, must remain in custody for another 40 days, his lawyer said.
• European Union governments have agreed to impose limits on the travel of Russian diplomats within the bloc, the Financial Times reported.

Economy

• Ukraine’s foreign currency reserves totalled $46.5bn as of October 1, the National Bank of Ukraine reported on its website.

Shares of Energy Fuels (UUUU 0.59%), a miner of uranium for use as atomic fuel in nuclear power plants, bounced back from their Friday slump on Monday, gaining 2.3% — then soared 7.8% more through 10:30 a.m. ET Tuesday.

It seems investors have gotten over their shock at Energy Fuels’ Friday money grab.

Image source: Getty Images.

Energy Fuels raises cash

Energy Fuels announced Friday it placed with private investors $700 million worth of convertible notes (that’s debt that can be converted into shares, diluting existing shareholders).

Energy Fuels got a great rate on the debt — just 0.75% interest — and a decent duration as well. The debt doesn’t come due until November 2031. Despite the favorable (to Energy Fuels) terms, demand for the debt was strong, and underwriters elected to expand the offering from its original size, ultimately placing all $700 million with bond investors.

If Energy Fuels decides to convert its debt into shares rather than repay it, the investors will be allowed to trade each $20.34 worth of debt they hold for one share of Energy Fuels stock. However, Energy Fuels noted it bought capped calls for $53.55 million, which effectively raise the conversion rate to $30.70.

Is this good news for Energy Fuels, or bad?

Investors Friday may have been spooked by the possibility of share dilution, but those fears seem to have since subsided. In their place is the understanding that Energy Fuels now has more than $645 million in cash at its disposal, with which to grow its twin businesses of mining uranium and rare earth metals.

Even burning nearly $115 million annually, that gives Energy Fuels almost six years to find its footing now. If the U.S. nuclear industry grows as fast as it’s expected to, that might be just long enough.

The Trump administration this week escalated its efforts against renewable energy when it announced the cancellation of $7.56 billion in funding for projects in 16 states, including California.

The U.S. Department of Energy said the 223 canceled projects — all of which are in states that favored Kamala Harris in the 2024 presidential election — were terminated because they “did not adequately advance the nation’s energy needs, were not economically viable, and would not provide a positive return on investment of taxpayer dollars.”

But while the cuts took aim at blue states, they will affect Trump’s base as well: The terminated projects span districts represented by 108 Democratic members of Congress and 28 Republicans. In California, that includes large swaths of the Central Valley and Inland Empire, which largely leaned toward Trump in 2024.

Russell Vought, director of the White House’s Office of Management and Budget and a top Trump administration official, said in a post on X that the canceled projects were using “Green New Scam funding to fuel the Left’s climate agenda.”

The biggest cut was $1.2 billion for California’s ambitious project to develop clean hydrogen known as the Alliance for Renewable Clean Hydrogen Energy Systems, or ARCHES. It was awarded by the Biden administration as part of a competitive nationwide effort to develop hydrogen projects. The idea is that the hydrogen, which burns at a very high temperature, will be able to replace planet-warming fossil fuels in some industry and transportation uses.

The ARCHES project is a public-private partnership that would create at least 10 hydrogen production sites around the state, primarily in the Central Valley. It would also help transition two large gas-fired power plants — Scattergood in Los Angeles and the Lodi Energy Center in San Joaquin County — to 100% renewable hydrogen, and develop more than 60 hydrogen fueling stations in areas including Fresno, Riverside, Orange and San Joaquin counties.

In all, it would deliver an estimated 220,000 jobs, including 130,000 construction jobs and 90,000 permanent jobs, according to the state. California is pursuing hydrogen in addition to renewables such as offshore wind, solar power and geothermal energy to help diversify its supply, meet growing demand driven by artificial intelligence data centers, and reach its target of 100% carbon neutrality by 2045.

The Trump administration said terminating the clean energy projects will save taxpayers money.

One district with a project that’s been cut is the northern San Joaquin Valley, represented by Tom McClintock (R-Elk Grove). McClintock said he strongly supports the Energy Department’s decision.

“$7.5 billion comes out to about $60 taken from the average earnings of every family in America,” McClintock said. “Call me old fashioned, but I think that companies should make their money by pleasing their customers and not by using government to take money that families have earned.”

The Times also reached out to Reps. Vince Fong (R-Bakersfield), Doug LaMalfa (R-Richvale), Keven Kiley (R-Rocklin), Ken Calvert (R-Corona), Young Kim (R-Anaheim Hills) and Jay Obernolte (R-Big Bear Lake), whose districts are touched by the ARCHES hub and other terminated projects.

A representative for Fong said his office was dealing with issues related to the U.S. government shutdown and so was unable to comment. None of the others responded.

Jesse Lee, senior advisor with the nonprofit group Climate Power, said the cancellations may not save taxpayers money, but cost them. The administration this year has canceled a $7 billion program to help low-income households install solar panels on their homes and halted the development of off-shore wind projects, among other efforts.

“Having these projects come to fruition is really the only chance we have at insulating people from skyrocketing utility bills year after year,” Lee said — particularly in the face of energy-thirsty AI. “The only way to have a prayer of meeting that demand is through these kinds of clean energy projects.”

Lee believes the actions could come back to haunt the party in the midterm elections. Since Trump took office in January, at least 142 clean energy projects have been canceled affecting what his group estimates is at least 80,500 jobs — not including the latest round of cuts announced this week. About 47% of those jobs were in congressional districts represented by Republicans, according to Clean Power’s energy project tracker.

Democratic officials in California said the Energy Department’s latest cuts amount to political retaliation. They were announced on the first day of the shutdown, which the administration blames on Democrats.

“The cancellation of ARCHES is vindictive, shortsighted, and proof that this Administration is not serious about American energy dominance,” California Sens. Adam Schiff and Alex Padilla wrote in a joint letter to Energy Secretary Chris Wright dated Thursday, in which they urged him to restore its funding.

“The cancellation of this award threatens the future promise of hydrogen energy, leaving us behind the rest of the world,” the senators said. “The ARCHES hub is a key strategic investment into American energy dominance, energy technology prominence, manufacturing job growth, and lowering energy costs for American families.”

The cuts come as the Trump administrations eases the path for production of fossil fuels such as oil, gas and coal, including this week’s announcement that it will open 13 million acres of federal lands for coal mining and provide $625 million to recommission or modernize coal-fired power plants. Coal has become increasingly uncompetitive with either natural gas or solar power.

Large-scale renewable energy and carbon capture projects in red states such as Wyoming, Ohio, Texas, Louisiana and North Dakota that received funding from the Energy Department were not subject to the cuts.

Other canceled awards in California include $630 million to the California Energy Commission for grid resilience upgrades; $500 million to the National Cement Company of California for a carbon-neutral cement production facility; $87 million to Redwood Coast Energy Authority for grid updates benefiting tribal communities; $50 million to Southern California Edison for a battery energy storage project; and $18 million to the Imperial Irrigation District to modernize its electrical grid, bolster resiliency against power outages and catalyze renewable energy usage.

“We are disappointed as we did a great deal of work to win the $18.3 million matching grant from the DOE to help modernize our electrical grid and enhance reliability for our customers,” said Robert Schettler, a spokesman for the Imperial Irrigation District located in southeastern California. “Despite this setback, we will reevaluate the scope as the project is a necessity.”

Officials with ARCHES called the administration’s decision a “short-sighted move that abandons America’s opportunity to lead the global clean energy transition.” They said they hope to keep the project moving forward even without the federal grant; ARCHES has also secured more than $10 billion in private funding agreements.

“Despite the loss of federal funding, we will press forward with our state, private, and international partners to build the infrastructure, train the workforce, and establish the supply chains that will power a modern, resilient energy economy,” ARCHES board chair Theresa Maldonado said in a statement.

Last week the European Commission said it was preparing to introduce tariffs on Russian oil imports entering the EU through Hungary and Slovakia.

It comes as US President Donald Trump has piled pressure on NATO members to stop buying Russian energy, in a bid to end the Russia-Ukraine war. At the UN last week he said, “They’re funding the war against themselves. Who the hell ever heard of that one?” Trump was referring to the more-than one billion euros ($1.35bn) EU countries are still paying to Russia each month for fossil fuels.

In this explainer, Al Jazeera outlines the latest figures on Europe’s oil and gas imports from Russia, why some countries remain dependent on Russian energy and which other nations are now purchasing Russian fuel.

Which European states are still buying Russian energy?

According to the Centre for Research on Energy and Clean Air (CREA), which tracks physical flows of fossil fuels, the EU spent 1.15bn euros ($1.35bn) on Russian fossil fuels in August.

The five largest importers accounted for 85 percent of that total, buying 979 million euros ($1.15 billion) worth of Russian oil and gas. The remaining 15 percent came from countries including Spain, Bulgaria, Romania, Italy, Greece, Croatia, Slovenia, Austria and Poland.

The top buyers of Russian energy include:

• Hungary: 416 million euros ($488m)
• Slovakia: 275 million euros ($323m)
• France: 157 million euros ($184m)
• Netherlands: 65 million euros ($76m)
• Belgium: 64 million euros ($75m)

Hungary and Slovakia both purchased Russian crude oil and pipeline gas, while France, the Netherlands and Belgium imported liquefied natural gas (LNG), which is natural gas cooled into a liquid so it can be transported by ship instead of through pipelines.

Europe’s heavy reliance on oil and gas

Together, oil (33 percent) and natural gas (24 percent) account for more than half of Europe’s energy supply. Coal contributes 11.7 percent, followed by nuclear at 11.2 percent, biofuels at 10.9 percent, solar and wind at 6.1 percent, and hydropower at 3.1 percent.

To transport these large volumes of oil and gas, Europe relies on an extensive network of 202,685 km of active pipelines as of 2023, according to GlobalData.

A key part of this network is the 4,000 km (2,500 miles) Druzhba pipeline, one of the world’s longest oil pipelines, with a capacity of 1.2 to 1.4 million barrels per day, carrying oil from eastern Russia through Belarus and Ukraine to Hungary and Slovakia.

Hungary and Slovakia continue to receive oil through the pipeline under a temporary EU exemption, granted to prevent severe energy shortages, as these landlocked countries rely heavily on the Druzhba pipeline and have few alternative import routes or ports.

How has Europe’s reliance on Russian gas changed?

Before Russia’s invasion of Ukraine in February 2022, the EU sourced more than 45 percent of its total gas imports and 27 percent of its oil from Russia. By 2024, these shares had fallen to 19 percent for gas and three percent for oil.

Many European leaders have faced pressure to impose heavier sanctions on Russia as the EU seeks to reduce its dependence on Russian energy. However, this remains challenging for countries heavily reliant on a single energy source, for example, in Hungary, more than 60 percent of energy comes from oil and gas.

Imports of Russian gas fell from over 150 billion cubic meters (bcm) in 2021 to less than 52 bcm in 2024. This shortfall was largely offset by increased imports from other partners: US imports rose from 18.9 bcm in 2021 to 45.1 bcm in 2024, Norway from 79.5 bcm to 91.1 bcm, and other partners from 41.6 bcm to 45 bcm.

What other commodities is Europe buying from Russia?

In addition to lower energy imports, the EU is now importing less nickel, iron and steel from Russia.

However, fertiliser essential for farming, for which Russia is a major producer and exporter, has increased by almost 20 percent from 2021 to 2025.

Earlier this year, the European Commission’s proposal to introduce a 6.5 percent tariff on fertiliser imports from Russia and Belarus was endorsed by the European Commission with the aim to phase out reliance on inorganic fertiliser from Moscow.

Outside the EU, who is buying Russian energy?

In August, China was the largest buyer of Russian fossil fuels, accounting for 5.7 bn euros ($6.7 bn) worth of Russian energy export revenues, with 58 percent (3.1 bn euros) of these imports being crude oil.

India was the second-largest buyer, with 3.6 bn euros ($4.2bn) in imports, of which 78 percent (2.9 bn euros) was crude oil.

Turkiye ranked third, importing 3 bn euros ($3.5bn) worth of energy, including a mix of pipeline gas, oil products, crude oil and coal.

The EU was the fourth-largest purchaser, accounting for 1.2 bn euros ($1.4bn)  in imports. Two-thirds of these were Russian LNG and pipeline gas, valued at 773 million euros ($907m).

South Korea was the fifth-largest buyer at 564 million euros ($662m), with three-quarters of its imports consisting of coal.

Reports indicate that the United States has agreed to provide Ukraine with targeting intelligence for its long-range strikes against Russian energy infrastructure. For many months now, Ukraine has been waging a campaign to degrade Russia’s oil and natural gas infrastructure, depriving it of critical resources for its offensive in Ukraine as well as revenue from energy exports.

According to an article in the Wall Street Journal, which cites unnamed U.S. administration officials, and another report from Reuters, the new policy is being adopted ahead of a possible transfer of longer-range and harder-hitting weapons that can be used against the same kinds of targets, and potentially others deep in Russia.

The officials who spoke to the WSJ reportedly said that President Donald Trump had recently signed off on the sharing of intelligence for the Ukrainian strikes, although the caveat that only attacks on energy infrastructure are covered is significant. Targeting data will be provided to Kyiv by U.S. intelligence agencies as well as the Pentagon. Meanwhile, U.S. officials are said to be pushing NATO allies to do the same.

This would be the first time, officially at least, that the Trump administration provides Ukraine with this kind of intelligence for its long-range strikes.

In the meantime, Ukraine has been repeatedly using long-range one-way attack drones, and to a lesser degree, cruise missiles of its own design, to hit Russian refineries, pipelines, power stations, and related infrastructure far beyond the front lines.

Videos showing purported Ukrainian strikes on Russian oil refineries in March 2024, involving long-range one-way attack drones:

The hope is that the new U.S.-supplied intelligence will make these raids more destructive.

At the same time, a Ukrainian delegation has arrived in Washington this week to work on a new agreement with the Trump administration that would see Kyiv sharing its drone technology with the United States, in exchange for a so-far undecided compensation, perhaps in the form of additional arms.

As to what might come next in terms of longer-range and more powerful weapons, should the United States agree to provide them, there is already much speculation that the Tomahawk land-attack cruise missile might be included. The prospect of Ukraine getting its hands on the Tomahawk, which can strike targets at a range of almost 1,000 miles, carrying a 1,000-pound unitary warhead, has already caused some alarm among pro-Kremlin military bloggers, as seen in the video below.

Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky has confirmed that he had requested Tomahawks from Trump, after which U.S. Vice President JD Vance said that the United States was considering Ukraine’s request.

However, there is no guarantee that the Tomahawk transfer to Ukraine will be approved. As it stands, these highly accurate — and expensive — cruise missiles have only ever been exported to a handful of countries, and only in ship- and submarine-launched form.

The same officials explained that the Tomahawk was just one option being discussed, with others including the Barracuda, from Anduril. This is described by the company as an “expendable autonomous air vehicle,” but is essentially a low-cost, highly modular, air-breathing precision standoff munition. The Barracuda-500, for example, has a maximum range of 500 miles and carries a payload of up to 100 pounds. Currently, it is exclusively for air-launched applications, but it is built to be adapted to ground launch as well.

“Other American-made ground- and air-launched missiles that have ranges of around 500 miles” are also being considered, the officials said.

Washington has already approved the transfer to Ukraine of thousands of Extended Range Attack Munitions (ERAM). These are another new and relatively low-cost standoff missile, although it’s unclear whether Kyiv will be able to use the new weapon to strike targets deep within Russia. Previously, unnamed U.S. officials suggested that such targets are off-limits for American-made weapons, at least for the U.S.-donated Army Tactical Missile System (ATACMS).

The ERAMs, which have a range between 150-280 miles and are stated to be air-launched, at least initially, may well have already begun to arrive in Ukraine. The first lot of 840 ERAMs is split between two designs, produced by CoAspire and Zone 5 Technologies, respectively. These are to be delivered by the end of October 2026.

As for the aforementioned ATACMS, Trump halted new deliveries of this ballistic missile, first provided to Ukraine under the Biden administration. There are also now tight controls on Ukrainian ATACMS use, with each strike requiring approval from Washington. At least some requests to use them against targets in Russia have been turned down, although the weapon has seen notable use in the Kursk region, adjacent to the Ukrainian border.

Even without the delivery of additional types of U.S.-made long-range missiles and the approval to use them against targets deep in Russia, the additional intelligence will be very useful to Ukraine. Pinpointing the weakest links in Russia’s energy infrastructure is especially critical if Ukraine continues to rely on lower yield, less capable weapons, like one-way attack drones, instead of advanced cruise missiles that pack heavy warheads.

There remains the possibility that long-range weapons might be provided by Ukraine’s non-U.S. allies.

Germany, for example, has been consistently linked with a transfer of Taurus air-launched cruise missiles to Ukraine, although this has, so far, been turned down by the government in Berlin. Nevertheless, German military officials have supported the idea of sending Kyiv weapons of this kind.

“Ukraine needs assistance in three key areas of confronting Russian aggression: air defenses, the ability to hold the front line, and the ability to strike deep into Russia,” explained Brig. Gen. Joachim Kaschke, responsible for German military aid to Ukraine. “When the Ukrainian defenders are facing a numerically superior adversary, they have to take the fight beyond the front lines,” he added.

Previously, the United Kingdom, France, and Italy have provided Ukraine with Storm Shadow and the similair SCALP-EG air-launched cruise missiles, which have seen extensive use.

Kyiv has used a wide variety of homegrown long-range one-way attack drones to attack Russian energy infrastructure.

It also has available the Long Neptune, an extended-range version of the land-attack version of the Neptune anti-ship missile. Ukraine famously used Neptune missiles to sink the Russian Navy’s Slava class cruiser Moskva in 2022 and reportedly began developing a new land-attack version in 2023. The numbers of these weapons is said to be very limited though.

A first official look at Ukraine’s other operational land attack cruise missile; the Long Neptune.

The Neptune LACM reportedly has a range of roughly 1000km, and has already seen combat this year. pic.twitter.com/cPHJ5sjZlu

— OSINTtechnical (@Osinttechnical) August 25, 2025

Zelensky has said the range of the Long Neptune is in the region of 620 miles and that it has already been tested in combat.

More relevant for these kinds of strikes is the locally produced Flamingo ground-launched long-range cruise missile, unveiled in August. This weapon has a reported range of 1,864 miles and a powerful 2,535-pound warhead, making it a much farther-reaching and more destructive weapon than any missile or one-way-attack drone available to Ukraine now. Just as significantly, Ukraine is hoping to ramp up manufacturing capacity to build seven Flamingos every day by October of this year, though there are questions about how realistic any expanded production goals might be.

While there have been questions about the survivability of one-way attack drones and the very large and relatively crude Flamingo cruise missile, at the very least, they provide an additional headache for Russia’s hard-pressed air defenses, and it’s clear that a significant proportion of these attacks result in damage to energy infrastructure.

Remarkably clear footage of a Ukrainian attack drone flying untouched through Russian ground fire over Krasnodar Krai this morning, eventually slamming directly into Rosneft’s Tuapse refinery and detonating. pic.twitter.com/7p2U7l53Nr

— OSINTtechnical (@Osinttechnical) July 22, 2024

Interestingly, it appears that Russia has been stepping up its own attacks on Ukrainian energy infrastructure in recent weeks. This may well signal the start of a new winter offensive, repeating Russian tactics of previous years.

Russia is intensifying its strike campaign against Ukrainian energy infrastructure.

Footage below shows strikes on 330kV & 110kV electrical substations in the town of Slavutych, Kyiv Oblast, northern Ukraine.

In recent time, the Russians carried out similar attacks on energy… pic.twitter.com/ZEhl8hyoQg

— Status-6 (Military & Conflict News) (@Archer83Able) October 2, 2025

The new intelligence-sharing policy and the possibility of new long-range missiles being cleared for transfer to Kyiv appear to indicate a changing approach from the Trump administration.

After he took office in January, Trump made efforts to broker a ceasefire. However, despite offering Russian President Vladimir Putin economic and commercial incentives, this hasn’t gained traction, and a series of meetings between Russian and U.S. leaders have not had any success.

Now, Trump is taking a new and harder line with Putin.

Last week, Trump took to social media to declare, for the first time, that he considers it possible that Ukraine retakes all of its territory that was lost to Russia. He also called upon NATO allies in Europe to shoot down Russian aircraft if they enter alliance airspace.

It seems that, with an eye on the battlefield situation, where Russia continues to make only slow progress, Trump is now turning up the heat on Putin, something that we have discussed in detail in the past.

Of course, approving the delivery of additional long-range weapons would be an even bolder action.

Already, Kremlin officials are talking about the possibility of Tomahawks arriving in Ukraine.

“The question remains: Who can launch these missiles, even if they end up on Kyiv regime territory?” Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov said earlier this week. “Can only Ukrainians launch them, or will the American military do so? Who is assigning the targeting to these missiles? This requires a very thorough analysis.”

Whatever decision Washington makes on the long-range weapons, the expanded intelligence-sharing with Kyiv underscores the fact that the United States is willing to provide more support for Ukraine, including its direct strikes deep inside Russia aimed at Moscow’s prized energy production capabilities. It may well also suggest that Trump sees this as the next step in pressuring Russia to sit at the negotiation table.

Contact the author: [email protected]

A top Trump administration official on Wednesday said the U.S. Department of Energy will cut billions of dollars in funding for energy projects in Democratic states.

“Nearly $8 billion in Green New Scam funding to fuel the Left’s climate agenda is being canceled,” said Russell Vought, director of the White House’s Office of Management and Budget, in a post on X.

“The projects are in the following states: CA, CO, CT, DE, HI, IL, MD, MA, MN, NH, NJ, NM, NY, OR, VT, WA,” Vought said.

All 16 states listed did not vote for Trump in the 2024 election.

Vought said more information about the cuts would come from the U.S. Department of Energy, which also announced this week that it will open 13 million acres of federal lands for coal mining and provide $625 million to recommission or modernize coal-fired power plants.

In a news release, the department confirmed that it had terminated more than 300 financial awards associated with 223 projects, amounting to $7.56 billion. The department did not specify the project names or locations, but said the awards had been issued by multiple offices, including the Office of Clean Energy Demonstrations and the Office Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy.

According to the DOE, the projects were canceled following a review that found they did not “adequately advance the nation’s energy needs, were not economically viable, and would not provide a positive return on investment of taxpayer dollars.” About a quarter of the awards had been issued by the Biden administration between election day in November and Trump’s inauguration in January, the agency said.

California Senator Adam Schiff said Vought’s post amounts to political retaliation.

“Our democracy is badly broken when a president can illegally suspend projects for Blue states in order to punish his political enemies,” Schiff wrote on X. “They continue to break the law, and expect us to go along. Hell no.”

Connecticut Rep. Rosa DeLauro described the move as “purely vindictive” and said it will result in higher energy prices across the country.

“Terminating critical energy projects in Democratic states weaponizes policy for political revenge and will only drive energy bills higher, increase unemployment, and eliminate jobs,” DeLauro said in a statement. “It is reckless and betrays both common sense and public trust.”

California and other states on Vought’s list have been working to advance clean energy projects such as solar power and offshore wind. Republican states working on similar efforts — such as Texas, the largest producer of wind energy in the U.S. — were not among Vought’s list of cuts, despite also receiving funding from the Department of Energy.

Vought, one of the authors of the conservative platform document Project 2025, has been actively involved in reshaping the federal government during the second Trump administration. Vought on Wednesday also announced that the U.S. Department of Transportation was freezing $18 million for two infrastructure projects in New York City “to ensure funding is not flowing based on unconstitutional [Diversity, Equity and Inclusion] principles.” The projects include a train tunnel connecting New York and New Jersey and a subway line running along Second Avenue in New York City.

His posts came on the first day of the U.S. government shutdown.

The recipients of the canceled awards will have 30 days to appeal the termination decisions, according to the DOE, which said some of the projects included in the announcement have already begun that process.

The stock of NextEra Energy (NEE 2.77%) is on the move today on two news reports. Shares of the parent company of the largest electric utility as well as the biggest energy infrastructure developer in the U.S. jumped nearly 4% Wednesday morning.

After pulling back slightly, NextEra stock was still trading 2.3% higher as of 1:18 p.m. ET. The company delivered an investor presentation today, but the market might be more focused on a reported takeover bid for competitor AES Corporation.

Image source: Getty Images.

Renewables will help power artificial intelligence

NextEra gave a presentation for investors today at the Wolfe Research Utilities, Midstream, and Clean Energy Conference, just one day after AES presented at the same forum. NextEra told attendees how it planned to help power America’s growing energy needs through various sources, including its wind, solar, and nuclear energy projects. The company also said it will use its leading battery storage capacity.

But today’s stock jump more likely came after the Financial Times reported that AES is the target of a takeover bid by BlackRock subsidiary General Infrastructure Partners (GIP). The reported $38 billion bid would give GIP a power-generation and utility company that could help support the increasing need to power data centers being built for artificial intelligence (AI) applications.

As a leader in the sector, NextEra doesn’t need a takeover bid to give investors a good return. The company told investors it continues to expect 6% to 8% annual earnings-per-share growth through 2027. With demand continuing to accelerate, investors could expect the company to meet or even beat that guidance. It’s a stock in the right sector at the right time.

FAMILIES can now receive a cut of £56million in energy bill support from a ‘Big Six’ supplier.

From today, OVO Energy is handing out free electric blankets as one of its ways to help customers with rising energy bills.

1

The supplier runs the extra support service for users all year round, but is now increasing the amount of aid it’s giving out ahead of the winter months.

Since 2022, OVO has given £190million in aid, including heated blankets, smart sockets, and efficiency kits, helping 42,000 customers last year.

The latest £56million package includes free energy-saving products and direct financial support.

And it’s not just electric blankets that you could bag for free.

OVO is also giving away mattress toppers and home efficiency kits to struggling households as part of the scheme.

Customers could also receive a wide range of energy-saving measures installed through ECO4 – from loft insulation to a new boiler, or even high-end tech like heat pumps.

Eligible customers could get a whole package installed, all for free.

Financial support including Direct Debit reductions, emergency credit top-ups, and extended repayment plans are also being offered.

To check your entitlement, visit ovoenergy.com/extra-support.

Ovo is separately campaigning for the introduction of a social tariff to protect vulnerable customers from high energy prices and combat fuel poverty across the UK.

David Buttress, chief executive of OVO, said: “We’re providing support to those who need it most by working together with our charity partners and committing our largest ever customer support package.”

“But this isn’t a long term solution.

“We need to make the energy system work better for everyone.

“That starts with targeted support in the form of a social tariff – no one can be, or no one needs to be left behind.”

What other grants are available?

There are several other ways households can boost their home’s energy efficiency and save money through a variety of grants.

From insulation and boiler upgrades to modifications for disabled residents, financial assistance can cover a substantial portion of your home improvement costs.

Some grants may even cover up to £50,000 worth of home improvements.

Great British insulation scheme – £1,000s

You can get help insulating your home through the Government’s Great British Insulation Scheme (GBIS) if you’re not eligible under the ECO scheme.

GBIS is open to an extra 400,000 households in council tax bands A to E across England, Wales and Scotland who might not be claiming benefits.

To qualify, you must have an energy performance certificate rating of D or lower.

You could be in line for essential upgrades to your home, including roof, loft or cavity wall insulation – which could cut your annual energy bill by £100s.

Check whether you meet the eligibility criteria by visiting gov.uk/apply-great-british-insulation-scheme.

Boiler upgrade scheme – £7,500

Through the boiler upgrade scheme, you could get a grant to cover part of the cost of replacing fossil fuel heating systems with a heat pump or biomass boiler.

You can get one grant per property, towards help with the following:

• £7,500 towards an air source heat pump
• £7,500 towards a ground source heat pump (including water source heat pumps and those on shared ground loops)
• £5,000 towards a biomass boiler

To qualify for this scheme you must own the property you are looking to upgrade.

You must find an MCS-certified installer to claim the grant on your behalf.

MCS is the certification scheme for energy-efficiency product installers.

You can find the nearest ones to you by visiting www.mcscertified.com/find-an-installer, but it is worth shopping for a few quotes.

Home upgrade grant – £1,000s

The home upgrade grant provides funding for various energy efficiency measures for homes that are not connected to the gas grid, often in rural or semi-rural areas.

To be eligible, you must own and live in the property you’re applying for and not use a mains gas boiler as your home’s main heating system.

You’ll also need an performance certificate (EPC) rating of D, E, F or G – if you do not know your home’s EPC you can find it out when you apply.

You’ll usually need to have a household income of £36,000 a year or less.

If you’re eligible, your local council will arrange a home survey to see how your home could be made more energy efficient.

They might suggest improvements like installing wall, loft and underfloor insulation, air source heat pumps, electric radiators

Find out more by visiting gov.uk/apply-home-upgrade-grant.

What energy bill help is available?

There’s a number of different ways to get help paying your energy bills if you’re struggling to get by.

If you fall into debt, you can always approach your supplier to see if they can put you on a repayment plan before putting you on a prepayment meter.

This involves paying off what you owe in instalments over a set period.

If your supplier offers you a repayment plan you don’t think you can afford, speak to them again to see if you can negotiate a better deal.

Several energy firms have schemes available to customers struggling to cover their bills.

But eligibility criteria vary depending on the supplier and the amount you can get depends on your financial circumstances.

For example, British Gas or Scottish Gas customers struggling to pay their energy bills can get grants worth up to £2,000.

British Gas also offers help via its British Gas Energy Trust and Individuals Family Fund.

You don’t need to be a British Gas customer to apply for the second fund.

EDF, E.ON, Octopus Energy and Scottish Power all offer grants to struggling customers too.

Thousands of vulnerable households are missing out on extra help and protections by not signing up to the Priority Services Register (PSR).

The service helps support vulnerable households, such as those who are elderly or ill.

Some of the perks include being given advance warning of blackouts, free gas safety checks and extra support if you’re struggling.

Get in touch with your energy firm to see if you can apply.

WASHINGTON — The Trump administration said Monday that it will open 13 million acres of federal lands for coal mining and provide $625 million to recommission or modernize coal-fired power plants as President Trump continues his efforts to reverse the yearlong decline in the U.S. coal industry.

Actions by the Energy and Interior departments and the Environmental Protection Agency follow executive orders Trump issued in April to revive coal, a reliable but polluting energy source that’s long been shrinking amid environmental regulations and competition from cheaper natural gas.

Environmental groups denounced the announcement, which comes as the Trump administration has clamped down on renewable energy, including freezing permits for offshore wind projects, ending clean energy tax credits and blocking wind and solar projects on federal lands.

Under Trump’s orders, the Energy Department has required fossil-fueled power plants in Michigan and Pennsylvania to keep operating past their retirement dates to meet rising U.S. power demand amid growth in data centers, artificial intelligence and electric cars. The latest announcement would allow those efforts to expand as a precaution against possible electricity shortfalls.

Trump also has directed federal agencies to identify coal resources on federal lands, lift barriers to coal mining and prioritize coal leasing on U.S. lands. A sweeping tax bill approved by Republicans and signed by Trump reduces royalty rates for coal mining from 12.5% to 7%, a significant decrease that officials said will help ensure U.S. coal producers can compete in global markets.

‘Mine baby, mine’

The new law also mandates increased availability for coal mining on federal lands and streamlines federal reviews of coal leases.

“Everybody likes to say, ‘drill baby, drill.’ I know that President Trump has another initiative for us, which is ‘mine baby, mine,’” Interior Secretary Doug Burgum said at a news conference Monday at Interior headquarters. Environmental Protection Agency Administrator Lee Zeldin and Energy Undersecretary Wells Griffith also spoke at the event. All three agencies signed orders boosting coal.

“By reducing the royalty rate for coal, increasing coal acres available for leasing and unlocking critical minerals from mine waste, we are strengthening our economy, protecting national security and ensuring that communities from Montana to Alabama benefit from good-paying jobs,” Burgum said.

Zeldin called coal a reliable energy source that has supported American communities and economic growth for generations.

“Americans are suffering because the past administration attempted to apply heavy-handed regulations to coal and other forms of energy it deemed unfavorable,” he said.

Trump has clamped down on renewable energy

Environmental groups said Trump was wasting federal tax dollars by handing them to owners of the oldest, most expensive and dirtiest source of electricity.

“Subsidizing coal means propping up dirty, uncompetitive plants from last century — and saddling families with their high costs and pollution,” said Ted Kelly, clean energy director for the Environmental Defense Fund. “We need modern, affordable clean energy solutions to power a modern economy, but the Trump administration wants to drag us back to a 1950s electric grid.’’

Solar, wind and battery storage are the cheapest and fastest ways to bring new power to the grid, Kelly and other advocates said. “It makes no sense to cut off your best, most affordable options while doubling down on the most expensive ones,” Kelly said.

The EPA said Monday that it will open a 60-day public comment period on potential changes to a regional haze rule that has helped reduce pollution-fueled haze hanging over national parks, wilderness areas and tribal reservations. Zeldin announced in March that the haze rule would be among dozens of landmark environmental regulations that he plans to roll back or eliminate, including a 2009 finding that climate change harms human health and the environment.

Coal production has dropped steeply

Burgum, who also chairs Trump’s National Energy Dominance Council, said the actions announced Monday, along with the tax law and previous presidential and secretarial orders, will ensure “abundant, affordable energy while reducing reliance on foreign sources of coal and minerals.’’

The Republican president has long promised to boost what he calls “beautiful” coal to fire power plants and for other uses, but the industry has been in decline for decades.

Coal once provided more than half of U.S. electricity production, but its share dropped to about 15% in 2024, down from about 45% as recently as 2010. Natural gas provides about 43% of U.S. electricity, with the remainder from nuclear energy and renewables such as wind, solar and hydropower.

Energy experts say any bump for coal under Trump is likely to be temporary because natural gas is cheaper, and there’s a durable market for wind and solar power no matter who holds the White House.

Daly writes for the Associated Press. AP writer Todd Richmond in Madison, Wis., contributed to this report.

Last year on the campaign trail, President Trump repeatedly promised to “slash energy and electricity prices by half within 12 months.” But actions speak louder than words. Since returning to office in January, the Trump administration has instead done everything it possibly can to drive up the cost of electricity. What is going on?

The damage starts with Trump’s attempts to prevent any new clean energy generation at a time when electricity demand is growing rapidly, caused by an explosion of new data centers and new housing, the expanding fleet of electric vehicles and a resurgence in American manufacturing. The U.S. needs more energy than ever, and 96% of electricity capacity added to the U.S. grid in 2024 came from clean energy. Why? Because clean energy is both the cheapest source of electricity and the fastest to produce. If we don’t rethink our energy future quickly enough to keep up with a growth in demand, then electricity prices will only continue to rise.

Then again, maybe the recent price spikes are part of Trump’s goals, because he’s done everything he can do to block new clean energy, including:

• Raising taxes on clean energy projects by at least 30% when Trump had all the renewable energy tax credits removed from his “One Big Beautiful Bill.”
• Blocking clean energy projects on federal lands, effectively creating a bureaucratic veto by requiring Secretary of the Interior Doug Burgum to personally sign off on permitting for every proposed clean energy project.
• Issuing “stop work” orders (with no significant justification) for two offshore wind projects that were fully approved and permitted — and, in one case, where construction was already 80% complete. This not only drives up the cost of constructing new electricity resources; it also creates a business climate in which no sane company would risk investing in new projects that may be torpedoed by an arbitrary and capricious federal government simply because the President thinks wind turbines mar his view.
• Canceling a Department of Energy loan commitment for the Grain Belt Express, a major transmission project designed to carry low-cost wind and solar energy from the Great Plains to Illinois and other eastern U.S. states where electricity prices have risen rapidly. This deprives those states of new energy and undermines the ability of Great Plains states to harness natural resources and grow their economies as energy exporters.
• Gutting federal agencies, such as the Department of Energy’s Loan Programs Office, which helps finance big energy projects, especially for innovative new technologies such as geothermal and new nuclear. Without government support for first-of-their-kind projects, these initiatives simply won’t happen and promising new energy technology will be delayed for years.

It’s not just the cost of building clean energy development that Trump has sabotaged. His high and ever-changing tariffs have also scrambled supply chains and raised prices for all types of energy. New tariffs, for example, have raised the cost of steel by up to 50%, which affects the cost of pipes needed for natural gas plants as well as towers for wind turbines and racks for solar panels. Every single kind of new electricity generation is now more expensive, and those higher material costs create higher prices for electricity on our utility bills.

Trump has also raised costs of existing energy resources, including supporting the oil industry’s efforts to dramatically increase U.S. exports of natural gas. This will reduce the supply available for heating homes and running power plants in America, raising prices on electricity bills and gas bills at once. Trump has also used emergency powers to force less-than-profitable coal plants to stay open, saddling customers with the extra costs to subsidize these old plants. In one instance, it cost locals $29 million to keep the J.H. Campbell plant in West Olive, Mich., open for just five weeks of extended operations. Analysts now estimate that Trump’s push to keep coal plants open could add between $3 billion and $6 billion per year to our electricity bills.

Is this sheer economic incompetence — not difficult to fathom given the rate at which Trump has driven businesses into bankruptcy — or part of his strategy to deliberately make electricity more expensive so people won’t switch to EVs and the oil industry won’t lose its customers?

Either way, electricity prices are already rising and Trump’s actions are clearly making it worse. Doubtless, Republicans will try to point the finger at renewable energy when electricity prices spike over coming years, but the real causes should be clear: Trump’s reckless decisions to block new clean energy production, raise tariffs on the energy supply chain, export our natural gas and force customers to subsidize struggling coal plants.

Americans need abundant, affordable energy to power our homes and grow our economy, and we need leaders who know how to support the clean energy revolution, not try to stand in its way.

Josh Becker is a Democratic state senator from Menlo Park and chair of the California Senate Committee on Energy, Utilities and Communications.

According to data compiled by S&P Global Market Intelligence, Nano Nuclear Energy‘s (NNE -2.79%) share price had eroded by almost 11% week to date as of Thursday night. This, despite the fact that the company was included on several stock indexes managed by a well-known indexer.

Come and join

Before market open that day, Nano announced that its stock is now a component of not one, not two, but three equity indexes managed by S&P Dow Jones Indices. The trio is the S&P Global Broad Market index (BMI), the S&P Total Market index (TMI), and the SPX Completion index.

Image source: Getty Images.

These, however, are not as closely tracked and have less prominence than other equity gauges in the S&P family (most notably the S&P 500 index).

At least Nano has plenty of company. In terms of composition, the BMI is certainly sprawling. As of the end of August, it has 14,782 component stocks, which are collectively headquartered in 48 countries around the globe.

The other indexes are notably smaller, at 3,360 for S&P Completion and 3,865 for TMI. The two are related — S&P Completion has the same composition as TMI, except with the stocks also on the S&P 500 index stripped out.

The good old index effect

Nano’s ascensions definitely represent an advancement for the next-generation nuclear company. However, many investors might be thinking they aren’t enough of an advancement, since in prestige and visibility terms, the trio is under the level of closely monitored mainstays, again like the S&P 500 index.

Nevertheless, if it hasn’t already been discovered and researched simply by its presence in the currently hot nuclear sector, Nano will soon go under the microscope by a host of index funds. After all, such vehicles are constantly on the hunt for good investments among a relatively limited pool of stocks.

Jodie Marlow, who moved to Murcia in Spain four years ago along with her partner and their two children, has shared how much she pays for her household bills every month

As autumn arrives and the weather becomes colder, more Brits will start fretting about the colder weather and how it will affect their energy bills.

It’s typical for energy bills to rise as we consume more gas and electricity to heat our homes. This has led some people to consider relocating to escape the high costs. Currently, there are already 403,925 UK nationals registered as residents in Spain, according to Statista. While many of them relocated there to chase the sun, others may have moved to enjoy lower living costs. This was the case for one mum, Jodie Marlow, who relocated to Murcia in Spain four years ago with her partner and their two children.

While the sunshine and new lifestyle have been a lovely for them all, Jodie also revealed that they no longer stress over their energy bills. In a revealing TikTok video, Jodie shared how much she pays for her household bills each month, as she said it’s cheaper than the UK.

Firstly, the family doesn’t have to worry about rent or mortgage payments as they own their property outright. Even better, houses on their street have doubled in value since they bought their home a few years ago.

Moving on to electricity, Jodie said switching to a cheaper provider has been transformative. The previous month, they’d paid just €37 (£32).

But since they’d recently begun running their air conditioning through the night, the bill had climbed to €55 (£48), which she insisted was ‘nothing’ given her two lads had kept their air con running every single night whilst they slept.

Regarding water, the household spends roughly €99 (£86.41) in three month instalments. This works out at €33 (£28.80) per month.

“Our house actually runs off of a gas bottle,” Jodie explained. “I thought it was really weird at first, but actually it’s pretty normal in Spain. And a gas bottle costs around €16 (£13.97).”

These bottles last ages, particularly during warmer weather as they’re not having as many hot showers. Then, rather than using the gas hob, Jodie said she often cooks on the barbecue that has a hob. She also uses an air fryer, which saves her gas too.

Jodie added: “So that gas bottle honestly could last us three months.”

For the equivalent of council tax, Jodie puts aside €250 (218.24) per year, which is around €21 (£18.33) a month. She continued: “So again, not a lot. I know some people who pay that literally a month what I pay a year.”

Wi-Fi costs €24.99 (£21.81) per month, whilst sim cards are €12.99 (£11.34). Then for home insurance, they are covered for €250 (£218.24) per year. This works out as approximately €22 (£19.21) per month.

People were stunned to discover how much cheaper things were in Spain and took to the comments section to share their thoughts.

One viewer was gobsmacked by the electricity bill, commenting: “60 Euros a month! We spent £40 per week for a 4 bed house in England.”

However, other Brits living in Spain chimed in to reveal their bills were even steeper than what Jodie had shared.

Another viewer shared : “I live in Malaga, my electric is around €180 a month, water for the last three months was €1260 and we use gas bottles €200 for three, so not cheaper than the UK.”

In response, Jodie said: “I guess depends where in the uk the same as where in Spain as Malaga is more than where I live. It’s all relative.”

Gov. Gavin Newsom answering the Republican redistricting power-grab in Texas with a plan of his own is a powerful example of how Golden State Democrats are standing up to President Trump and firing up their base. But while the partisan fireworks draw attention, California Democrats are also quietly offering a different kind of model for the national party that may prove more meaningful in the long run. They’re not just resisting Trump; they’re actually governing.

Forget what you think you know about California and its lefty Democrats. They’re inching to the center, meeting voters where they are, and it’s improving people’s lives.

Just look at San Francisco, long seen as a dysfunctional emblem of failed progressive governance.

The city’s new mayor, Daniel Lurie, a nonprofit leader and philanthropist, has shaken off left-wing taboos and focused on delivering results. Instead of defunding the police, he’s hiring more officers and cracking down on shoplifting and drug crimes. Instead of demonizing the business community, he’s partnering with them. He’s also reforming zoning laws to make it easier to build more housing, which should ease the city’s affordability crunch and the homelessness crisis. Lurie has been in office less than a year, but already crime is plummeting and his approval rate has reached 73%.

National Democrats can find a lesson here: Voters care about results, not just empathy and ideology.

In Sacramento, Newsom and legislative Democrats are taking a similar tack, with a stubborn focus on affordability and the courage to stare down opposition, even in their own coalition. For example, the Legislature recently reformed the California Environmental Quality Act, a well-intentioned 50-year-old law that had been twisted to obstruct construction projects, clean energy development and public transportation. This angered some powerful environmental activists, but it will ultimately help bring down costs for housing and energy.

CEQA reform is emblematic of California’s new, more balanced approach on some thorny issues, like energy and climate. The state recently announced that two-thirds of its power now comes from clean energy sources — a major achievement. At the same time, Newsom and the Legislature agreed to a package of bills that will increase oil drilling while extending the state’s cap-and-trade program. Together, the package can reduce energy costs for Californians and strengthen our state’s chances of reaching carbon neutrality by 2045. Some environmental justice advocates and climate purists oppose the deal, but it’s an example of how to make progress in the long term while addressing affordability in the short term.

Immigration is another example: Newsom and other leading California Democrats continue to stand up to the Trump administration’s inhumane immigration policies, including suing to stop the deployment of troops to Los Angeles. But they also recently passed a budget that pulls back on costly plans to provide health insurance to all low-income undocumented immigrants.

This reflects the new California model: principled resistance and pragmatic governance. The results speak for themselves. The Golden State recently surpassed Japan to become the fourth-largest economy in the world.

Democratic leaders are making these moves because they are listening to voters who consistently say that the high cost of living is their top concern.

In 2024, these concerns contributed to a surprising number of Californians abandoning Democrats, even with Kamala Harris, the state’s former U.S. senator and attorney general, on the ticket. Trump flipped 10 counties and boosted his support in 45. Since 2016, 72% of California counties have gotten redder, including many with heavy Latino populations.

Democrats are paying attention and are wisely changing course. Being responsive to voter concerns doesn’t have to mean sacrificing core values, but it does require new approaches when the old ways aren’t working.

Karen Skelton (whose father is a political columnist for the Los Angeles Times) is a political strategist, having worked in the White House under Presidents Clinton and Biden and at the United States Departments of Energy, Transportation and Justice.