How They Do It in "Foreign Lands"

Just a little global check-in

Nautical chart of the Mediterranean from 1439

Every once in a while our mad king hits on an accidentally poetic turn of phrase in one of his strangely punctuated missives. In one of this week’s movie-based announcements (not the one about reopening San Francisco’s notorious island prison, which apparently followed a showing of Escape from Alcatraz on the Palm Beach PBS station) (not PBS’s fault, support them here), he declared that he was henceforth “instituting a 100% Tariff on any and all Movies coming into our Country that are produced in Foreign Lands.”

It was the last phrase—’foreign lands’—that attracted me; it conjures up European monarchs of earlier centuries dispatching sailors to see if fountains of youth or dragons or some such might be found off the edges of existing charts. (No, as it turned out, just indigenous people who could be forced to part with their “foreign lands”). It’s a reminder that for Trump, and for many of us, a myopic focus on what’s happening here is a mistake, because we’ve long assumed that we’re at the head of the world. That unconscious supremacy—born in the actual enormous lead we had in living standards in the rubble of World War II—no longer makes much sense. So just a quick survey of what those funny people in other places are up to.

In China, emerging as earth’s first electro-state, the Wall Street Journal had an excellent account this week of just how far our economies are diverging. Autos are a key piece of technology, one that produces both a large suypply and technology chain, and a clue to a country’s identity. In America, Peter Landers, pointed out, the “standard family choice” is a $50,000 gas-fired SUV; in China,

A majority of new vehicles sold in China are either fully electric or plug-in hybrids, and a look around the recent auto show in Shanghai showed that local makers have mostly stopped introducing new gasoline-powered models. In the U.S., by contrast, the traditional combustion engine still powers about eight in 10 new vehicles.

The price difference is overwhelming. Chinese car buyers no longer need to debate whether an EV can be made affordable, not when a decent starter model costs $10,000 and a luxury seven-seater with reclining massage chairs can be had for $50,000. Because of customer demand, even the low-end models come with advanced driver-assistance software.

Ten thousand dollars for a “decent starter model.” We’re not talking junk: “a new Toyota electric-powered sport-utility vehicle for about $15,000, complete with sunroof and cup holders.” Some of this comes because Chinese automakers are paid less (enough, however, to afford a new car); some of it comes from increasingly roboticized factories; and some of it comes from government subsidy. Because the government has decided it wants to own the future: whose cars do you think are going to do better in, um, “foreign lands”? Bloomberg, in March, reported that Chinese automakers were “taking over roads from Brazil to South Africa,”

In South Africa, China-made vehicles account for nearly 10% of sales, or about five times the volume sold in 2019. In Turkey, Chinese brands claimed an 8% share in the first six months of 2024, up from almost none in 2022. In Chile, they have accounted for nearly a third of auto sales for several years running.

China sends more vehicles abroad than any other country, and its passenger car exports surged nearly 20% to 4.9 million in 2024 alone, according to the China Association of Automobile Manufacturers — from less than 1 million in 2020.

In Brazil,

Luiz Palladino, 61, an engineer who has owned GM and Honda vehicles in the past and currently drives a Haval H6 EV, compared the car with much more expensive luxury cars.

“The moment I got into the car I thought: It’s in line with BMWs, Audis, with top-notch car finishing,” he said. “It has everything I want.”

Ok, that’s China (where thanks to huge solar buildout the use of coal for electricity dropped five percent in the first quarter, even as electricity demand surged). Now let’s look at Britain, where humans first learned to burn fossil fuels in quantity in the 18th century. There, the Labor government is apparently set to announce that all new homes will come with solar panels up top.

Housebuilders would be mandated by law to install solar roof panels on new properties by 2027 under new rules, seen by The Times, which ministers have claimed would slash energy bills and reduce emissions.

The change was estimated to add about £3,300 to the cost of building a semi-detached or terraced house and just under £4,000 for a detached property.

However, it was expected that new homeowners would recoup the extra costs within four years, with an average three-bedroom semi-detached saving more than £1,000 a year on energy bills.

This makes eminent sense because

Fitting solar power during construction is much cheaper than adding it to older buildings, which requires costly scaffolding and often new wiring. The payoff will be lower bills for consumers and lower emissions from buildings, which have become the second-biggest carbon polluter after transport.

And it comes despite the efforts of former British prime minister (and current Saudi lobbyist) Tony Blair to scupper such advances. Keir Starmer has four more years on his electoral mandate; Canada’s Mark Carney five, and after last week’s smashing election win Australia’s Anthony Albanese has three; the rest of the English-speaking world seems set to keep moving forward into a working energy future. And the rest of Europe too.

In Germany, for instance, as many as three million apartments may now have “balcony solar” arrays, solar panels that can be bought for a few hundred euros at the equivalent of Home Depot, hung from the railing of your veranda, and plugged straight into the wall, where they provide a reasonable amount of power. As France 24 reported recently,

City authorities in Frankfurt gave Christoph Stadelmann, a 60-year-old teacher, half of the 650 euros ($676) he paid for his kit at the beginning of last year.

Stadelmann expects to make his money back within three years.

Mirjam Sax said she would recommend balcony solar panels in spite of Germany's sometimes grey weather.

"If you've got a balcony, if you've got a bit of sun, you can put up a panel or two to see if it's worth it," she said.

"It's easy and there's a price for every budget."

You can’t do that in America, because our country has fallen behind these foreign lands. As Grist reported last week, Underwriters Laboratory, which certifies appliances, hasn’t bothered to do the work to approve the systems, which means they can’t legally be installed in most places.

These challenges will take time and effort to overcome, but they’re not insurmountable, advocates of the technology said. Even now, a team of entrepreneurs and research scientists, backed by federal funding, are creating these standards. Their work mirrors what happened in Germany nearly a decade ago, when clean energy advocates and companies began lobbying the country’s electrical certification body to amend safety regulations to legalize balcony solar.

In 2017, Verband der Elektrotechnik, or VDE, a German certification body that issues product and safety standards for electrical products, released the first guideline that allowed for balcony solar systems. While such systems existed before VDE took this step, the benchmark it established allowed manufacturers to sell them widely, creating a booming industry.

“Relentless individuals” were key to making that happen, said Christian Ofenheusle, the founder of EmpowerSource, a Berlin-based company that promotes balcony solar. Members of a German solar industry association spent years advocating for the technology and worked with VDE to carve a path toward standardizing balcony solar systems.

Happily, we have some “relentless individuals” here as well. Cora Stryker, for instance, who this year started Bright Saver, to bring the balcony technology to America. I talked with her at some length last week: I’ve stuck our exchange into question-and-answer format below

1. Is America finally getting balcony solar!? Tell me about how you heard about this new development and got involved

Yes! We’re already doing installations in the SF Bay Area and we are looking for early adopters to help us start a “balcony” plug-in solar movement in this country like the one we are seeing in Germany. As you know, plug-in solar isn’t just for balconies. It can go almost anywhere - in the backyard, the side of a house, in front of a garage, etc. My cofounders and I started Bright Saver because we believe that the benefits of producing clean energy at home should be available to everyone, not just homeowners with good roofs who can commit to spending $20-30k, although our system is also great for folks like me who have maxed out our rooftop solar capacity and want more power. Rooftop solar is all or nothing - what we are offering is a more modular, lower-commitment, more affordable and versatile solar option as an alternative.

I first heard about balcony solar when you started writing about it, actually! Then I met my cofounders Kevin Chou and Rupert Mayer - tech entrepreneurs who got the climate call - and I joined as the long-time climate advocate among us.

2) What's your hope for this project--how big can this get?

We can get big. Really big.

70% of Americans can’t get rooftop solar but millions in that group want it. How can we produce more clean energy nationwide? We believe the solution is to address accessibility first, giving everyone an option to produce solar at home. This will give millions of Americans an option to become primary producers of their own energy, saving on electricity bills, and, we believe, bringing millions into the climate movement, giving us all hope that the power to address climate rests in our hands.

If we do this right, we follow in Germany’s footsteps, and produce several gigawatts of clean energy annually. However, unlike Germany, we can’t take the risk of letting it take ten years to ramp up because we don’t have ten years when it comes to climate. That’s why we started Bright Saver - to make this happen more quickly than it would on its own.

3) The U.S. has different wiring than Europe--explain if this is a problem and how it's overcome?

That’s been a structural - pun intended - concern for some time. In Europe, you can buy plug-in solar units at the grocery store for a few hundred Euros, plug them into the wall, and you’re done. Unfortunately, we can’t use those European systems because, as you point out, we have a 120-volt electrical system and most of Europe is on a 230-volt system.

Here, we are limited in the number of systems that are compatible with our electrical system and they are expensive and not easy to install. We exist to eliminate these barriers to adoption. For instance, as a nonprofit, we keep our prices low and we install the system, a complicated process that requires a licensed electrician.

My job is to put myself out of a job - if we jumpstart this movement now, we get more manufacturers into the game, competition drives down prices and increases ease of use, which stimulates more widespread adoption, and the virtuous cycle continues on market forces without us. In this political climate, I think we are all looking for solutions that give the power to us, literally, rather than relying on government to solve climate.

4) What do you need from local authorities to really make this happen?

We are primarily installing units in the backyard or front yard, where we believe permits are rarely a concern. I have young kids and I can’t think of any parents who got a permit to put a trampoline or a slide in the backyard. Similarly, the 800 Watt units we are installing are impermanent structures which you plug into an outdoor outlet like an appliance. They are half the electricity load of a hair dryer and we include a smart power meter to make sure they never backfeed into the grid.

What we need is local and state legislation like what just passed unanimously in Utah. As you know, that legislation eliminates the ambiguity when it comes to mounted plug-in systems so folks can put them anywhere that is convenient for them. In fact, part of our nonprofit’s mission is to build a national coalition of advocacy groups to help pass such legislation in all fifty states - so please get in touch if you know groups that might want to join our coalition!

5) Why do you need donations to get this started?

Without donations, we stay small and grow slowly. I’ve been approached by several venture capitalists who say to me, you have huge market potential - let’s talk! But we want to keep lowering and lowering prices as we get bigger, not feeling the pressure of investors wanting us to raise prices and increase profits. We are a nonprofit because, well, w're not here to profit - we are here to bring solar to everyone who wants it.

We have a big vision to give all Americans the option to become energy independent. We plan to include home battery storage in the future, but we are only four months old, we have limited funding, and we need to start somewhere.Donating or becoming an early adopterwill make it possible for us to stay true to our mission of serving everyone with solar energy and growing the climate movement so that every household of every means can start producing their own energy from the sun

Many thanks to Stryker and her friends for getting this off the ground (and if you think it tickles me that she first read about the concept in this newsletter, then you’re right; that’s why I do this).

And here’s the thing. Though Americans aren’t used to it, there’s sometimes something useful in being behind all those other foreign lands. They’ve figured out what needs to happen, and all we have to do is copy. That’s what China did for decades—maybe it’s our turn. And now I’m going to go watch a bunch of foreign movies before the tariffs kick in.

But first

In other energy and climate news:

+Important update from Ralph Keeling, keeper of the planet’s atmospheric carbon data, on the threat posed by Trump’s dismantling of NOAA

NOAA and Scripps play another key role in the atmospheric measurement community. How does the world know that the value of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere today is really 427.6 and not 427.7 parts per million? Such differences may seem small, but they are consequential in the realm climate research, and they can be calculated only because a lot of work has gone into calibration. Hundreds of groups can measure carbon dioxide using various off-the-shelf analyzers, but these analyzers first need to be calibrated using compressed air that has a known amount of carbon dioxide in it. Scripps assumed the lead role for preparing tanks filled with known amounts of carbon dioxide and dispensing them to the community until 1995, at which point NOAA took over.

Our colleagues at NOAA are living day to day, not sure if tomorrow will be their last on the job. We pray that common sense will prevail and that NOAA will be spared the worse. Whatever its fate, we will remain in the fight to preserve the world’s ability to measure carbon dioxide levels with whatever support we can muster, a small bulwark against climate science’s new dark age.

+Meanwhile, Trump is doing his best to fast-track the disastrous Line 5 oil line under the Great Lakes. As Carrie Klein reports

The Army Corps of Engineers, citing a recent national energy emergency order by President Trump, has expedited a permit review for a new miles-long section of an oil and gas pipeline that would bore deep into protected wetlands bordering Canada and the United States.

The pipeline request from Enbridge Energy, a Canadian company, would cut beneath the Straits of Mackinac—the connecting waterway between Lakes Michigan and Huron—to install a tunnel 12 times as wide as above-ground existing pipelines. Tribal groups that had been cooperating with the Corps’ environmental impact statement for the project pulled out when they learned of the emergency review. The Corps announced April 15 that the project, known as Line 5, fits under Trump’s January order.

New emergency procedures from both departments in response to Trump’s executive order are “really ploughing new ground,” said Dave Scott, a senior attorney at the Environment Law & Policy Center, a legal advocacy group.

“There is a massive and real risk that the public won’t be able to engage meaningfully with decisions that government agencies like the Corps are making that have significant impacts on the environment,” Scott said.

+Reporters usually tend to err on the side of controversy, so it was nice to see the BBC report that most people living near solar panels…barely notice they’re there

For more of the Ashby residents I spoke to, where the panels were mostly put in about a decade ago, there are drawbacks, despite most people having much less incendiary views on the solar farms next door.

But the overall consensus was - they do not really bother them.

John Gillespie, 41, said the solar panels a stone's throw from his house were not flagged when he bought his home recently, and having them nearby had not affected him.

He said: "As the population grows, we need more energy. There's a lot of empty fields, I don't think it's harming anyone."

Shellbrook resident Liz Bark, 54, said: "When they built it we were concerned what it could look like, but it's fine.

"When you walk around the wooded area you can hear it but it doesn't bother us at home.

"It's quite nice to see that the ground is still being used. The grass is still growing, the sheep are being fed."

+How well has environmental regulation worked in the past? New research shows that the Clean Air Act has essentially ended acid rain in the mountains of the northeast

The first author of the study, Skylar Hooler, stated that after studying several sediment samples, they found that there was over a 90% reduction in metal contamination across four ponds in the Adirondacks in the last 50 years.

The study found that most metal deposition occurred between 1970 and 1990, during which time amendments and additional implementations were made with the Clean Air Act, with each lake responding differently based on its environment.

+Warren Buffett’s retirement from the top of Berkshire Hathaway leaves behind a “complicated” environmental legacy—one that the Sierra Club highlighted at his last annual meeting last week in Omaha

While other energy companies are working towards a rapid clean energy transition, Berkshire Hathaway operates the dirtiest set of coal-fired power plants in the country, contributing to millions of dollars in healthcare expenses, thousands of lost school and work days, and dozens of premature deaths. Yet, Berkshire’s three major utilities, MidAmerican Energy, PacifiCorp, and NV Energy—which collectively provide electricity to over 4 million customers across 10 states—are doubling down on fossil fuels. MidAmerican Energy has advertised a 100% renewable energy vision, but the company continues to operate five coal-fired power plants across Iowa with emissions that make it the single largest polluter in the state. PacifiCorp recently disclosed a plan to operate many of its coal plants indefinitely, while NV Energy similarly delays retirement of its coal plants and proposes massive investments in methane gas.

+Despite strenuous efforts to blame renewables for Spain’s big blackout last week, it turns out that wasn’t the problem.

+New genetic research confirms longstanding lore linking an existing New Mexican tribe to the ancient ruins at Chaco Canyon—and that may give them standing to help block oil and gas development

Craig Quanchello, the Picuris Pueblo lieutenant governor and one of the lead authors of the paper, hopes the study’s conclusions will convince people — including the US government — that his tribe deserves a say in Chaco Canyon’s future. “We’ve always said we have this deep connection to Chaco Canyon,” he said at a press briefing.

A 2023 US government restriction on new oil and gas drilling in the area surrounding Chaco Canyon is facing a legal challenge from the Navajo Nation. A review by the administration of US President Donald Trump is also threatening to repeal the restriction. This month, a federal judge gave two other New Mexico tribes permission to oppose the Navajo lawsuit.

+Great coverage in, of all places, the Daily Mail—of the pillaging of southeast forests by Drax so they can burn the trees in British power plants to produce electricity, the single most absurd energy plan on this planet. As fund manager Louis Bacon writes

The vast Drax power plant in Yorkshire is at the heart of the most egregious environmental scandal, the Big Lie of British energy policy.

Why? Drax used to be a coal power station. But it switched from burning coal to burning wood pellets – the most dirty and primitive source of energy.

Supposedly, this produces renewable electricity and eliminates carbon emissions even though the carbon footprint here is up to twice that of coal, according to scientists, when transportation and production of pellets is taken into account.

A grotesque sham because, incredibly, none of Drax’s increased carbon emissions are included in Britain’s accounts. They are deemed to be emitted in North America – even though the wood is burnt in Yorkshire.

On top of that accounting sleight of hand, there is the pretence that trees chopped down instantly regrow and are therefore renewable. In truth, this takes decades – decades our climate cannot wait. It is hideously expensive, and one reason why, as Tony Blair put it on Tuesday, current UK energy policy is ‘doomed to fail’.

Since the changeover from coal, Drax has burned the equivalent of 300million trees at its Yorkshire power station. We are all furious about the destruction of the Sycamore Gap tree. So what should you feel about 300million trees, many of them from primeval forests? And, remember, you have been forced to pay Drax £6billion in ‘green’ subsidies for this travesty.

+Denali Nalamalapu, who played a key role in the effort to stop the MVP pipeline,has a new graphic memoir out recounting the epic fight.

+And finally, some good news from California, where the folks at SunRun have linked together 75,000 solar home batteries into a vast virtual power plant ahead of this summer’s hot weather

CalReady, originally launched to help ease the stress on California’s power grid, experienced impressive growth this year, expanding from about 16,000 households in 2024 to more than 56,000 homes today. With these additional installations, the virtual power plant now has the capability to deliver up to 375 megawatts of instantaneous peak power, which is enough electricity to supply around 280,000 households, nearly matching the number of homes in Ventura County.

Unlike traditional centralized battery or fossil fuel plants, CalReady leverages thousands of individual residential solar batteries. According to Sunrun CEO Mary Powell, this approach is fundamentally changing California’s energy landscape: “Sunrun has created one of the largest batteries in the country, rivaling large-scale utility projects but without taking up additional land or requiring costly new infrastructure. CalReady’s decentralized nature eliminates any potential single point of failure while offering greater resilience and flexibility for the state’s evolving energy needs.”

One of CalReady’s biggest advantages is its decentralized structure. Traditional centralized power facilities, whether fossil-fueled or renewable, are vulnerable to single points of failure. A wildfire, severe storm, or infrastructure malfunction can quickly take these plants offline. By contrast, Sunrun’s distributed network, made up of thousands of independently operating batteries, significantly reduces these risks.

CalReady is actively managed and dispatched by Sunrun, providing reliable daily grid support during peak energy usage hours from 4 to 9 p.m. from May through October. The California Energy Commission recognizes CalReady as the largest aggregation participating in its Demand Side Grid Support program, underscoring the importance and scale of this residential-powered resource.

Meanwhile, in rural North Carolina, here’s a mayor “betting big” on solar to uplift his small town of Enfield.

When history buffs reenacted a Revolutionary War general’s visit to this tiny, rural North Carolina town in February, its top elected official was notably absent.

General Marquis de Lafayette may have helped liberate America from England, but over 240 years later his story has little relevance to Mayor Mondale Robinson.

“I find it extremely hard to be celebrating the Revolutionary War when people in Enfield — households of four people — are living on $24,000 a year,” said Robinson, sitting in his windowless office, sparsely decorated with small, framed photos of Black leaders. ​“I don’t know what freedom looks like, because you can’t tell me people in Enfield are free to live the way they want to.”

Robinson, who was elected in 2022, envisions a day when Black people in his community are able to live a life of pride, freedom, and economic stability. He believes clean energy will play a central role.

Alongside other community leaders and clean energy advocates, Robinson is planning a new solar farm that could meet most of Enfield’s electricity needs. He wants a modern substation to replace the town’s dilapidated one. And he aims to create a ​“storefront” for energy efficiency that could help residents reduce energy waste and their electric bills.

“We’re trying to be energy independent,” Robinson said. ​“Besides green energy being good for the environment, it’s also going to help our people … live a life with dignity. That includes the housing, the grid, figuring out how to do renewable energy in a way that is not just sustainable but also job-creating.”