SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
renewables
Trump ‘Extrajudicially’ Blocks All New US Wind Projects—Which Could Power 15M Homes Amid Energy Crisis
"Electricity costs are slamming Americans as a result of a not-so-covert Trump plan to stall or block inexpensive clean energy," said Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse.
May 08, 2026
As oil prices soar, driving up gas and electric bills and straining Americans' wallets, the Trump administration is "extrajudicially blocking" all new wind energy projects in the United States through the US Department of Defense, according to recent reports.
The Financial Times reported over the weekend that as part of the president's "crusade against renewable energy," the department had stalled approvals for about 165 onshore wind projects on private lands—including ones awaiting final sign-off, others in the midst of negotiations, and some that would not typically need oversight from the department at all, according to the American Clean Power Association (ACP).
The Associated Press then reported on Thursday that the number of blocked projects was as high as 250 and that they spanned more than 30 states.
In total, the projects could produce about 30 gigawatts of energy, enough to power 15 million American homes, according to FT.
Trump, who has called wind power the "worst form of energy" and said his "goal is to not let any windmill be built” in the US, has tried many methods to kill the industry, all of which have been struck down in court.
"His Day 1 executive order against the wind industry was found unconstitutional. Each of his stop-work orders trying to shut down wind farms was overruled. Numerous moves by his Interior Department were ruled illegal," explained Heatmap senior reporter Jael Holzman.
But she said that even amid these failures, "renewable energy industry insiders have been quietly skittish about a potential secret weapon: the Federal Aviation Administration" (FAA).
Structures over 200 feet must be approved by the FAA before construction, which involves an assessment by the Defense Department.
Holzman wrote that according to industry insiders, including those at the ACP, "the issues started last summer but were limited in scale, primarily impacting projects that may have required some sort of deal to mitigate potential impacts on radar or other military functions."
But over the past few weeks, Holzman said ACP told her that "this once-routine process has fully deteriorated, and companies are operating with the understanding FAA approvals are on pause because the Department of Defense... refuses to sign off on anything."
The group said the refusals have been indiscriminate and that they have affected projects where there are "no obvious impacts to military operations."
Tony Irish, a former career attorney for the Department of the Interior who served during Trump's first term, told Heatmap that amid continued legal failures, the administration is trying to "find ways to avoid courts altogether" and acting upon "a unilateral desire to achieve an end regardless of the legality of it, just using brute force.”
The administration's attempt to strangle the wind industry comes amid ongoing but fragile negotiations between Democrats and Republicans in Congress over permitting reforms that the GOP hopes will speed up approval of fossil fuel projects.
Democrats previously shut down talks in response to the Trump administration halting construction of several wind projects, but said they'd be open to a compromise if the administration agreed to treat renewables fairly.
Last month, Sen. Martin Heinrich (D-NM), a leader of the negotiations on the Democratic side, told Interior Secretary Doug Burgum that if any deal is to be reached, the Trump administration must create confidence that it will not "slow walk" wind and solar permits.
Heinrich told Heatmap on Thursday that the administration's apparent action to halt wind approvals entirely "undercuts their credibility and bipartisan permitting reform.”
Heatmap correspondent Matthew Zeitlin remarked: "At no point did Congress say, 'We want to make new wind power illegal.' If someone presented such a bill, it would lose overwhelmingly. But the president is pulling every possible administrative lever he has to functionally ban it."
The Pentagon acknowledged to Heatmap that it is "actively" reviewing land-based wind projects. However, the FAA declined to comment on whether it was effectively banning new wind projects. White House deputy press secretary Anna Kelly said the Pentagon's statement "does not confirm" that a de facto ban is in place.
Efforts to crush clean energy loom especially large amid the ongoing fuel crisis caused by Trump's war in Iran. In addition to causing gas prices to spike to about $4.50/gallon on average, wholesale electricity prices surged by 8.5% in March after the war was launched, according to The Associated Press.
Countries with large amounts of renewable energy production have proven more capable of avoiding massive spikes in energy costs, while the US has seen some of the worst in the world despite Trump's claims that "energy independence" is saving the day.
Wind energy already accounts for about 10% of America's electricity use and is often cheaper to produce in the long run than fossil fuels, not to mention better for the climate.
As high energy prices and inflation have driven the president's approval rating to its lowest level ever, Jordan Weissmann, the editorial director at the Progressive Policy Project, marveled that "Trump is actively raising voters' electric bills because he hates wind turbines."
"This isn’t energy dominance," agreed Sen. Alex Padilla (D-Calif.). "This is sacrificing American jobs, weakening the American grid, and forcing American families to pay even higher prices."
Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse (D-RI) said that "electricity costs are slamming Americans, as a result of a not-so-covert Trump plan to stall or block inexpensive clean energy. Every blocked kilowatt of clean energy comes instead from fossil fuel. Customers' rates go way up, and all that extra cost families pay goes to (cue drumroll) Trump's corrupt fossil fuel donors. It's on purpose."
The Sunrise Movement argued that Trump's war on wind energy is quite consistent with his method of governing, which has often explicitly involved taking actions meant to maximize the profits of the fossil fuel interests that have backed him and his political movement.
"Trump's energy policy has one priority: help his Big Oil donors make a final cash grab before their industry goes extinct," the group said. "If energy prices spike and the climate crisis worsens... well, that's working people's price to pay."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Amid Energy Crisis of His Own Making, Trump Slammed for Using Taxpayer Money to Cancel Wind Projects
"We the taxpayers are going to pay companies $900 million... to NOT build wind power at a time when electricity prices are spiking and we need more clean power?" said one expert.
Apr 28, 2026
President Donald Trump's administration this week shelled out even more US taxpayer money to get energy firms to cancel planned renewable energy projects.
As The New York Times reported, the US Department of the Interior on Monday announced plans to reimburse energy companies a combined $885 million in exchange for forfeiting their leases to build wind farms in federal waters off the coasts of New York, New Jersey, and California.
The companies involved in the projects have promised promised to invest in fossil fuel energy projects, "including liquefied natural gas facilities along the Gulf Coast," the Times reported.
The agreements with the energy companies are similar to a deal the administration struck earlier this year with French firm TotalEnergies, which agreed to forfeit its leases for projects off the coasts of New York and North Carolina in exchange for $928 million that would be plugged into fossil fuels.
Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY) blasted the administration for killing the projects planned off the coast of his state, decrying "a reckless decision that hurts working families and the economy."
"Once again, Donald Trump is attacking New York offshore wind at the behest of his fossil fuel donors with no justification," Schumer said.
Costa Samaras, director of the Carnegie Mellon University Scott Institute for Energy Innovation, expressed disbelief that the administration was killing clean energy projects at a time when Americans are suffering from surging gas prices, which on Tuesday hit their highest level in four years.
"Hold on," he wrote in a social media post. "We the taxpayers are going to pay companies $900 million, which is more than six times what we spend on wind power research and development, to NOT build wind power at a time when electricity prices are spiking and we need more clean power?"
New polling suggests that Trump's blanket opposition to wind power projects is becoming politically costly.
As Gizmodo reported on Tuesday, a recent survey conducted by GOP public opinion research firm the Tarrance Group found that "nearly three-quarters (74%) of voters favor the construction of offshore wind projects off the coast of their own state, with majorities favoring in every state surveyed."
The poll found that even Republican voters have grown more supportive of wind power projects, with support for offshore wind rising by 30 percentage points over the last year.
In its analysis of the poll, the Tarrance Group said that more voters have come around to supporting offshore wind due in part to "ongoing concerns about energy prices," which have spiked since Trump launched an illegal war with Iran in February.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Thanks to Trump's Iran War, Big Oil Raking in $30 Million Per Hour in Windfall Profits
“Moments of global crisis continue to translate into bumper profits for oil majors while ordinary people pay the price."
Apr 15, 2026
US President Donald Trump's unprovoked war of choice in Iran has been a goldmine for the fossil fuels industry, which is earning massive windfall profits thanks to the rise in the price of petroleum.
An analysis published by The Guardian on Wednesday estimated that the 100 biggest oil and gas companies have collectively raked in an extra $30 million per hour since Trump launched his war with Iran without any congressional authorization in late February.
In just the first month of the conflict, The Guardian reported, Big Oil made $23 billion in windfall profits, and the industry is projected to haul in an additional $234 billion in windfall profits by the end of the year if the price of oil stays in the $100 range.
The top beneficiaries of the Iran conflict are Saudi Aramco, which is projected to earn $25.5 billion in windfall profits by the end of the year; Kuwait Petroleum Corp., which is projected to earn $12.1 billion; and ExxonMobil, which is projected to earn $11 billion.
"The excess profits come from the pockets of ordinary people as they pay high prices to fill up their vehicles and power their homes, as well as from businesses incurring higher energy bills," The Guardian noted. "Dozens of countries have cut fuel taxes to help struggling consumers, meaning those nations, including Australia, South Africa, Italy, Brazil and Zambia, are raising less money for public services."
The Guardian's analysis was conducted by climate watchdog Global Witness, using data from intelligence provider Rystad Energy.
Patrick Galey, head of news investigations at Global Witness, told The Guardian that Big Oil's windfall profits should be a wakeup call to the world about the dangers of relying on fossil fuels.
"Moments of global crisis continue to translate into bumper profits for oil majors while ordinary people pay the price," Galey said. "Until governments kick their fossil fuel addiction, all of our spending power will be held hostage to the whims of strongmen."
Climate advocates have for months been calling for a windfall profits tax on Big Oil during the Iran War as a way to retrieve some of the money consumers have lost during the conflict.
Earlier this month, the climate advocacy organization 350.org renewed its previous call to slap fossil fuel companies with a windfall profits tax, and then invest the revenue into renewable energy sources to provide real long-term relief to global consumers.
Beth Walker, an energy policy expert at climate change think tank E3G, also recommended a windfall profits tax with the aim of ending reliance on dirty energy sources.
"Governments should use taxes on windfall profits to accelerate the transition to green energy," said Walker, "rather than deepen dependence on fossil fuels.”
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular