Advertisement 2Advertisement Article contentAkshat Rathi 2:19 Article contentWell, let’s start with the headline, because President Trump’s One Big Beautiful Bill has now become an act, and according to the Office of Budget Responsibility, it means $488 billion worth of clean energy spending that’s gone. Much of it was linked to President Biden’s Inflation Reduction Act. And of course, you served under the Biden administration. So let’s look at the big picture first, and we’ll come to the nitty gritty later. Biden set out a goal that the US will cut its emissions in half by the end of the decade, relative to 2005 levels. Do you think the O triple-B has killed any hope that the US will meet those goals?Article contentJigar Shah 2:59 Article contentI think that the people who voted for the O triple-B believe that they intended to kill those goals. I think that we’ve seen this before, right? I’m not going to sugarcoat it. This is obviously a huge setback for our industry. And I would say that this is the first time that a sitting president has gone to war with clean energy. But I think at the same time, when you think about where our industry was in 2017, when Trump first came into office, it was quite nascent. Solar panels were not necessarily fully bankable, battery storage was a gleam in people’s eye.Article content Advertisement 3 Story continues below This advertisement has not loaded yet, but your article continues below. Article contentToday, I would suggest that we are now in a place where Pakistan is deploying 12 gigawatts of solar a year. And you see many other countries doing the same thing around the world. I think you’ve got folks who are installing balcony solar at record levels in Germany. Battery storage has clearly saved the Texas grid every single day, and as a result, the O triple-B has not touched battery storage. And so I would suggest to you that the industry has to recognize it has now gotten targeted, and so it needs to invest the money required to actually defend itself, right?Article contentSo today, the clean energy industry in the United States invests double the amount of CapEx that the oil and gas industry does each year. And that’s a big number, because remember, the US is the largest producer of oil and gas in the world, so I’m not referring to a small industry. But we’re double the amount of CapEx every year that the oil and gas industry does, and we spend 1/20 of the amount of money on influence and political power. And so as a result, we have very little of it. And so I think for a long time, people thought, ‘we’re cute and furry and beautiful to hold, no one hates clean energy.’ Well, there are people who actually hate clean energy. And so I think we all need to acknowledge the humbling nature of what’s happened here, and recognize that this is all solvable, right, that we can build political power. We provide a huge amount of local benefits. And I would say this is the first time in my lifetime that so many elected officials deliberately tried to sabotage their own constituents in service to a party leader. So we’ll see how durable this war against clean energy really is. Article content Advertisement 4 Story continues below This advertisement has not loaded yet, but your article continues below. Article contentAkshat Rathi 5:29 Article contentSo I spoke to one analyst, and he basically put it in the simplest way. He said the clean energy part of this bill is more about cultural issues than economic ones. At a time, as you noted, the rest of the world is doubling down on clean energy, this bill will pull the US back from investing in it. His read was that the US is actually acting like a petrostate, not a country that wants to dominate on energy. Is that a fair read?Article contentJigar Shah 5:56 Article contentI find that people have a lot of these hot takes, and I think it’s important to start with just saying what I did before, which is that we were targeted as an industry, and we were unprepared for that targeting, and so we lost. That being said, we have an affordability crisis in the United States. What this bill has done is stripped 17 million people of Medicaid. If you look at the way the President has operated our economy, we started his administration with a 2% average tariff on all incoming goods. In the United States today, our average tariff is 15% and with all the announcements happening as we speak, that number might be 25%. That is generally on the back of poor people. And so that means a bunch of people are going to spend an extra $1,800- $5,000 per year on stuff, depending on what they’re buying. Advertisement 2 This advertisement has not loaded yet. Advertisement 3 Story continues below This advertisement has not loaded yet, but your article continues below. Article contentAnd so you could imagine how quickly this will change in a year. If a year from now people’s electricity bills are up 9% because of all these bad decisions, you could imagine them reversing them very quickly after the midterm elections. And so I want to make sure that people recognize this for what it is, which is a stunning defeat of the clean energy industry and a wake up call to the fact that, yes, we have extraordinary solutions, and they are by far the easiest way to reach energy dominance and to reach affordability for consumers. But we did not do the work to make sure that everyone understood that.Article contentAkshat Rathi 7:29 Article contentSo let’s get into the details, and I’ll just list a few things, because they’re worthy of noting. We know that EV tax credits that take $7,500 off the sticker price of a car are going away later this year, a whole bunch of incentives that would have made it cheaper for people to electrify their home. Rooftop solar, that’s going away. But there are some tax credits for clean energy that have been protected. So when you look at the bill, is there any good news for climate tech in there?Article content Advertisement 5 Story continues below This advertisement has not loaded yet, but your article continues below. Article contentJigar Shah 8:14 Article contentYeah, so let’s be very specific about what’s in the bill, because I think that people get very confused. We are going to have a boom in residential solar this year, as people try to install solar before the 25d tax credit expires at the end of the year. So everybody I know of that I’ve talked to is fully sold out through the end of the year. They’re working as hard as they can for the large scale projects, or this is commercial and utility scale projects. All of the companies who’ve already started construction of projects will be given the ability to finish them within 2027 without any additional foreign entities of concern language; any of the other poison pills don’t apply if the project’s already under construction. And so that takes us all the way through 2027.Article contentSo I just want to make sure that we’re crystal clear that solar and wind are going to have bumper years this year, next year, probably in 2027 as well. Then there’s a drop off. And so this is what you call a cold water approach to phasing out subsidies. Now you’ve got a lot of less mature sectors that have been given much more runway, and batteries are included in that. So I think that’s a good news story, and the vast majority of the battery developers are all solar and wind developers. Those divisions of their companies will grow, while the other divisions of their companies might go slightly flat.Article content Advertisement 6 Story continues below This advertisement has not loaded yet, but your article continues below. Article contentThen you’ve got a huge push around nuclear, which I think was largely started by the Biden administration. And I think that currently, the Trump administration is just using the work that we did. I don’t think they’ve actually done their own work yet, but I’m hopeful that they will, right. They’ve promised to streamline regulations and make it easier to do stuff, but when I talk to investors, their spreadsheets haven’t resulted in any reductions in costs in the spreadsheet. So we’ll see whether that comes through. I think enhanced geothermal is on its way. I think that was already on its way with the geothermal liftoff report that we wrote and all the other things that we’ve done. I think the oil and gas industry is very interested in investing in that space. I would suggest that they’re actually not being ambitious enough in the enhanced geothermal space on the private sector side. I think that this administration desperately wants to help them more, and they’re not being more vocal about how they might be able to receive or utilize that help. So I think there’s some communication challenges there. Advertisement 3 This advertisement has not loaded yet. Advertisement 4 Story continues below This advertisement has not loaded yet, but your article continues below. Article contentThere was a huge amount of additional resources provided to hydro power. We have 37,000 megawatts of old hydro that is going to be retired over the next five to eight years, right? So relicensing all that hydro, putting in next generation technology, could get 50% more power output out of all of those existing sites, right? So that’s a huge source of clean firm power that could come forward. There was an extension of the fuel cell tax credits, which I’m not quite sure is amazing, but it’s great. There’s some good stuff in there, right and around the commercialization of technology. But I do think that the intention of this, which I think will remain to be clear, is a phase out of tax credits for mature technologies and more of a focus on immature and commercializing technologies.Article contentAkshat Rathi 11:18 Article contentThere’s also some tax credits being given to bring in biofuels into sustainable aviation fuels. What do you make of those?Article contentJigar Shah 11:27 Article contentYou know, we wrote a lift off report at my insistence that we published right before we left office. And to summarize, it basically says the EU refuses to allow any crops to be used in their SAF production, right? So to the extent that you’re making SAF, you’re making it for the EU, they will not allow corn ethanol to be used in any of that SAF. So I don’t really understand why you would do it. I think the Japanese program does allow for these sorts of feedstocks, but I think you could dwarf the Japanese market pretty quickly by the existing plants that we’ve already funded right out of the Loan Programs Office. And so I’m a big fan of biomethanol for shipping. I do think that clean hydrogen is largely going to go into ammonia, which is what we always predicted at the Loan Programs Office.Article content Advertisement 7 Story continues below This advertisement has not loaded yet, but your article continues below. Article contentSo I think a lot of these clean fuels fights that people were having the last four years are starting to resolve themselves as to which feedstocks go into SAF, which feedstocks go into shipping, you know, which feedstocks go other places. And so we’re trying to figure all that stuff out. The US is clearly blessed with an extraordinary agriculture industry. But I think, as you also know, agriculture is not devoid of climate impacts. And so I do think that from a climate perspective, we’re going to all have to be a lot more thoughtful about whether this is really serving us well on the climate side, or whether this is really just a push.Article contentAkshat Rathi 12:51 Article contentAnd speaking of the Loan Programs Office, last time you were here on Zero, almost exactly two years ago, you were talking about the $9.2 billion loan to Ford to build batteries for electric cars. How much of the progress you made at the LPO will be undone by this bill, or what has been done by the Trump administration so far? Article contentJigar Shah 13:12 Article contentI think it depends on what you mean by undone. I would say that to date, they have not undone anything, right? So all of the loans that we issued have been honored to date. None of them have been unfairly rescinded or whatever you would suggest. I do think they’ve been slow to close the loans that I had laid for them to close, and so I’m shocked at how long it’s taken for them to take the wins that we gave them. If you look at the O triple-B, it has more resources for the Loan Programs Office that’s very specific. Relabeling the 1706 program, which was energy infrastructure reinvestment program, into the energy dominance financing, and they’ve relabeled some other stuff. So they have a lot of resources, and the resources that they have remaining could match our production, so they could do another $108 billion worth of loans over these next four years, presumably in their preferred sectors, like nuclear or geothermal or some of these other areas. But to date, they have not shown that they have a clear mandate around where to put that money.Article content Advertisement 8 Story continues below This advertisement has not loaded yet, but your article continues below. Article contentAkshat Rathi 14:22 Article contentYou had about $400 billion when initially we talked about it. And there has been a certain amount of rescinding happening, right? $3.6 billion for the title 17 loan guarantee program. $3 billion for the advanced technology vehicles manufacturing, $5 billion for the energy infrastructure reinvestment program. So current loans that you have given out, those haven’t been rescinded, but there are future loans that could have been given out under those programs that are gone now.Article contentJigar Shah 14:49 Article contentYeah, but I don’t think it really matters all that much. I mean, this is all money that was set aside to do certain things, right? It was very clear that elections have consequences, and they were not going to do those certain things. And so having the money sit there and them not putting it out the door doesn’t make any sense. And so they’ve rescinded it, fine, and they’ve provided an additional billion dollars of new money for things that they do want to do. So they took some away, they put some more back in, and they can give us the Loan Programs Office more money in the funding bills that will be passing later this year, right? So that part I’m not concerned about. I do think that they have the resources to do the same amount of loans that we did, but in their preferred sectors. Advertisement 4 This advertisement has not loaded yet. Advertisement 5 Story continues below This advertisement has not loaded yet, but your article continues below. Article contentAkshat Rathi 15:32 Article contentWe’ll be back with more of my conversation with Jigar Shah after this break. And hey, if you’re finding this episode insightful, please take a moment to rate and review the show on Apple Podcasts and Spotify your feedback really matters and helps new listeners discover the show. Thank you.Article contentAkshat Rathi 15:57 Article contentComing back to the politics of it, and I think you put it well, which is that the clean energy industry in the US doesn’t spend much, a very small fraction, 1/20th, of what the oil and gas industry spends on lobbying. But in the thinking of the Inflation Reduction Act and of the Biden administration, there was always this goal that if you bring both red states — Republican-led states — and Democrat-led states together, and you provide these tax credits going to all states… And especially in the IRA, much of it was going more than the majority was going to the Republican side. That is what will hold these politicians to account, and they won’t cause self harm by rescinding these things. So where did that fail? And what lessons do you take from it for the clean energy industry?Article content Advertisement 9 Story continues below This advertisement has not loaded yet, but your article continues below. Article contentJigar Shah 16:50 Article contentI think there are two different questions. So I think we need to be very careful about what we’re concluding in these data points. I mean, President Trump is a very unique individual, like when you think about his poll numbers and his actual voting numbers, he really won the working class in a very big way. But more than that — since 2017 he has remade the Republican Party so that he is the only dominant force and that everyone should fear him. When you have that much power over individuals, then they do things that are blatantly in disregard for their constituents.Article contentAnd so whether it’s out of fear, fear for their family, fear for re-election, fear for whatever it is, that does not invalidate the thesis behind the Inflation Reduction Act. When you think about 20 plus people on the Republican side in the house that signed the letter, plus you had four or five Republican senators that were genuinely looking to try to save all the incentives. So when you think about where this whole thing landed, right, it is terrible for the clean energy industry, and it was so much better than it could have been. And so I don’t think that we should take from this that this is not a durable solution. In a million years, no one would have suggested that elected officials would actively sabotage manufacturing facilities in their community. No one would have guessed that. This is the single largest assault on working class people that we’ve had in I don’t know, since Ronald Reagan was promising to do that in the 1980s.Article content Advertisement 10 Story continues below This advertisement has not loaded yet, but your article continues below. Article contentAkshat Rathi 18:31 Article contentWe are also in this period where the US and Europe and the Western world in general, is seeing electricity consumption rise at a level that it hasn’t seen in decades. Much of what would have happened under the IRA would have enabled the rollout of clean energy. But crucially, it would have rolled out cheap electricity to these data centers that are consuming huge amounts of it. How do you think O triple-B affects the scaling up of data centers in the US?Article contentJigar Shah 19:02 Article contentI think that the economic development story in the United States is something that’s very strong, and it’s one that the utilities want to support. The governors want to support their utilities in getting those things done. And at least in rhetoric, the President of the United States also wants to make sure we win the AI race and all that stuff, right? So I think that we’re going to win that race. I think what’s going to likely occur is we’re going to move much faster than even I imagined, into the, you know, distributed capacity procurement that Sparkfund is doing in Minnesota, the virtual power plant programs that are being done across the country. I think what you will see in this moment is an enormous deployment of demand flexibility enabled by the batteries that got full subsidization within the O triple-B. Advertisement 5 This advertisement has not loaded yet. Advertisement 6 Story continues below This advertisement has not loaded yet, but your article continues below. Article contentAkshat Rathi 19:53 Article contentWell, the battery manufacturing supply chain, though, does not have the same credits left.Article contentJigar Shah 20:00 Article contentNo, they do. They still get the 45x credit. Article contentAkshat Rathi 20:07 Article contentLocal content— Article contentJigar Shah 20:08 Article contentNo, local content, they don’t. So they no longer have to buy lithium or graphite or battery separators or whatever from local companies. But there’s a production credit. So for every megawatt hour of batteries that they made, they got a payment. They still get those. And most of the existing battery manufacturing facilities in the US are EV battery manufacturing facilities. So they will continue to be put into EVs. And then I think some of the battery manufacturing facilities that were built a little more slowly are converting themselves into utility scale battery manufacturing facilities. So making LFP batteries, making batteries that are for utility scale applications, and so that conversion is happening now.Article contentAkshat Rathi 20:47 Article contentSo BloombergNEF’s modeling shows that the manufacturing capacity increase in battery making in the US is going to be much lower, because a lot of the electric vehicle battery manufacturing is not coming online. But overall, trying to actually build out a supply chain in the US for batteries is going to be a harder challenge than it was before the O triple-B. Is that not right?Article content Advertisement 11 Story continues below This advertisement has not loaded yet, but your article continues below. Article contentJigar Shah 21:10 Article contentYeah, that’s right. So battery manufacturing was on track to reaching 400 gigawatt hours worth of production in the US. I still think we’re going to reach that target, to be clear. But I think what’s happening is, for the plants that were being built more slowly, they have an opportunity today to convert them to serve the utility scale battery market and not the electric vehicle market, and all of those conversions are being made. So I think we’ll still get to 400 gigawatt hours, but it’ll be a bigger mix between utility scale versus electric vehicle batteries. But the electric vehicle batteries will still be, I don’t know, 270 gigawatt hours or so. So that’s why I’m saying like, I don’t think we know how this is going to play out. I feel like the O triple-B was so randomly constructed that I think people are still trying to figure out exactly how they’re going to implement all these provisions.Article contentAkshat Rathi 22:03 Article contentSo on EVs, the projections before O triple-B was that the US would have reached half of new sales being EVs by 2030. That’s now dropping, according to BloombergNEF estimates, to 37%. Fast forward 15 years, let’s not worry about what is going to happen tomorrow. But given the rest of the world is speeding up on EV transition, it’s not just China, it’s also India, it’s also Europe, even Africa, you’re seeing two wheeler electric vehicles take off. Do we end up in this situation where the US still remains the place where the gas guzzler is king and everybody else is zipping around in EVs, breathing clean air?Article content Advertisement 12 Story continues below This advertisement has not loaded yet, but your article continues below. Article contentJigar Shah 22:47 Article contentWe don’t, no. This is what I’m saying, I feel like all of these prognostications are done on models that were built by human beings who had assumptions. The way that the US market has been moving, and will move, is to plug-in hybrid vehicles. We were never going to be all electric vehicles.Article contentBoth my in-laws and my parents just bought a plug-in hybrid vehicle. They’re both the same exact one, actually, and it was 33 or 34 miles electric. Almost all new models are heading towards 40-45 miles electric for these plug-in hybrid vehicles. And I think the vast majority of people are gonna move to these 30-40, mile plug-in hybrid vehicle batteries. And my parents get that light that shines, that says your gas is getting stale because you haven’t used it in two months. So it meets 100% of their needs. And I put in a level two charger for them, but they won’t use it, so they’ll just plug it into the wall using level one, because it’s only a 34 mile range. And they’re like, it works fine, like, we don’t need that. So I think you will see that America, because of the long distances that we drive, what you will find is that the vast majority of people will find comfort with a plug-in hybrid, and then they will solve their range anxiety by just using gasoline when they go beyond that period. And that will still result in 90% of that family’s vehicle miles traveled going to zero emission. Advertisement 6 This advertisement has not loaded yet. Advertisement 7 Story continues below This advertisement has not loaded yet, but your article continues below. Article contentAkshat Rathi 24:18 Article contentSo if we split the energy transition into these mature technologies and these maturing immature technologies, we looked at how much of the tax rates for the mature technologies are being taken away. On the maturing side, we talked through nuclear, geothermal, maybe some biofuel for SAF, but those, as you said, are not being done thoughtfully. There’s no real proactive nature to try and build those out. Sitting here outside the US, it does feel like the US, at least under Trump, will have given up on competing with China on the mature technologies, right? You’re going to have some solar and some batteries, and they’ll grow, but really that supply chain is not going to get built in the US in the next four years, you’re going to have to depend on foreign entities. Article contentJigar Shah 25:08 Article contentYou’re welcome. Akshat. You’re welcome. For a long time, everybody was yelling at me for the IRA being too lucrative, and you’re stealing all of our companies and all of our opportunities. I have now given it back to you. You must now continue the mission.Article contentAkshat Rathi 25:23 Article contentDo you think, I mean, from the US perspective, do you think four years down the line, say another president comes in, and say it’s a climate friendly one, that we’ll look at what happened and say, ‘Yes, the US can still compete with China?’Article content Advertisement 13 Story continues below This advertisement has not loaded yet, but your article continues below. Article contentJigar Shah 25:36 Article contentYeah, of course. Look, I think that the thing that people got wrong before, and I think what they’re getting wrong now is that while I loved serving the last four years within the Biden administration, we were always private-sector led, government enabled. I think people thought that that was a throwaway line, but it really wasn’t. Everything in the United States is driven by the private sector. And if you look at this next week, there’s a big conference in Detroit, of all the major venture capital funds and others who voted for Trump, and they are all talking about putting up 10s of billions of dollars into re-industrializing our country. And so they’re looking to pick up all these projects and to continue to build them? And so we’ll see which ones succeed and which ones don’t succeed, and what they decide to do and what they don’t decide to do.Article contentBut that’s the private sector leading. Trump is not going to stop them from leading. If they want to build something here in the United States, because we did 90% of the work under the last administration, and they want to take it the last 10% of the way, they’re going to do that right? And so I just think that people thought that there was this imperial presidency within the Biden administration, and now an imperial presidency within the Trump administration. And for these issues, neither is true. Now, you know, we could talk about immigration or we could talk about other issues, but for these issues, neither was true, right? This was always private-sector led, and those people continue to do it.Article content Advertisement 14 Story continues below This advertisement has not loaded yet, but your article continues below. Article contentNow, have we taken a gut punch, like a huge gut punch, yes, right after we thought that we had aligned the interest of everyone in the political spectrum around figuring out how to diversify supply chains from China. People are saying, well, we’re going to say all the right things, but we’re not going to do all the right things in the O triple-B. That sucks, but hopefully it’s a wake up call to our industry that, look, these technologies continue to be the way of the future. If you can’t do it in the United States, you can go to the UK, you can go to the EU, you can go to Canada, go to Australia. They still have all their programs in place. They want you to go there to do that work. And some folks are just stubborn, so they’re going to keep trying to do it here in the United States. And I’m here for it. Article contentAkshat Rathi 27:48 Article contentWhat should the clean energy industry do? You said increased political spending for lobbying, which, given how much spending happens in US politics already, especially during the presidential elections, you’re calling for more — great — but strategically?Article contentJigar Shah 28:04 Advertisement 7 This advertisement has not loaded yet. Advertisement 8 Story continues below This advertisement has not loaded yet, but your article continues below. Article contentAlthough it’s not spending that way, right? It’s more about the fact that we have projects in communities around the country, and most of those communities don’t even know that we’re there, right? We need to fund the T-ball team, we need to fund the local high school. We need to do all of the things that you have to do. But remember, the moment that we’re in is the exact same moment that the fracking industry was in in 2014 when the Saudi Arabians decided to declare war against the fracking industry in the United States. And the fracking industry didn’t cry in their beer. They woke up and said: all right, let’s figure out how to right size our supply chains. Let’s figure out how to get all of our suppliers to cut their costs. Let’s figure out how to do all these things to continue to stay alive. And they came out of that stronger than they went into that battle. But I think at the time, all of the stock analysts and all of the big newspapers were saying the fracking industry was dead.Article contentAnd so I think that when you think about all the times that I have been left for dead on the side of the road, whether it was in 2008 after the global financial crisis, whether it was after the Spanish program collapsed upon itself in 2009 and 2010 and people said, people are never going to invest in Spain ever again. Whether it’s in Germany and the manufacturing collapse of the solar panel industry there. There’s lots of times that our industry has been left for dead and we have risen and become stronger for it.Article content Advertisement 15 Story continues below This advertisement has not loaded yet, but your article continues below. Article contentI think it’s important to acknowledge, yes, the clean energy industry is at war with this administration, and yes, the clean energy industry has what it needs to thrive in this moment. But you know, along the way, 50% of our companies may go bankrupt. The ones that weren’t well capitalized, the ones who weren’t run well et cetera, may go bankrupt, and then the other 50% are going to probably thrive out of this, and take the rest of the market share and continue to succeed. It is still the case that our technology is the best in the world, and it is the only way we’re going to achieve energy dominance. It’s the only way we’re going to unlock all these economic opportunities. But you know, I think you can hold both of those ideas in your head at the same time.Article contentAkshat Rathi 30:11 Article contentWell, I assume the clean energy industry wants to listen to this, because right now, things do seem quite dire, and you are still bullish. Bullish within the framework of what is going to be a tough challenge. Thank you, Jigar.Article contentJigar Shah 30:25 Article contentOf course, thanks for having me.Article contentAkshat Rathi 30:34 Article contentAnd thank you for listening to Zero. Now for the sound of the week.Article content Advertisement 16 Story continues below This advertisement has not loaded yet, but your article continues below. Article contentAkshat Rathi 30:47 Article contentThat’s the sound of rockfall on the main climbing route up Mont Blanc. For the first time in recorded history, during this European heat wave in June, the summit of Mont Blanc, at a height of 4800 meters, remained above freezing for a full 24 hour period. Warmer temperatures are leading to more rockfall across the Alps as permafrost melts. If you liked this episode, please take a moment to rate and review the show on Apple podcasts and Spotify. Share this episode with a friend or with a lobbyist. This episode was produced by Oscar Boyd. Our theme music is composed by Wonderly. Special thanks to Jessica Beck, Sommer Saadi, Mohsis Andam, and Siobhan Wagner. I’m Akshat Rathi, back soon.Article content Advertisement 8 This advertisement has not loaded yet. Webinar: So legen Sie Ihr Geld an wie die Reichen cn-vermoegensberatung.de | SponsoredSponsoredUndoEnpal zahlt jedem Hausbesitzer bis zu 2.000€ jährlich, wenn...Enpal | Solaranlage fürs Dach | SponsoredSponsoredUndoNie mehr Fußschmerzen im Frühjahr– Entdecke diese Komfort-SandalenBergXperten | SponsoredSponsoredUndoThe Latest: NATO leaders agree on spending hike, vow to defend each otherFinancial PostUndoTrouble is brewing in RV country | Finan cial PostUndoMOST POPULARSenate Republicans Seek to Ease Solar and Wind Tax Credit CutoffFinancial PostUndoMOST POPULARNumber of Americans travelling to Canada continues to declineFinancial PostUndoIdeal für Altbau: Aira Wärmepumpe ab 8.900€Wärmepumpen-Förderung 2025 | SponsoredSponsoredUndoFeatured Local Savings