On October 1, 2025, the Trump administration announced the cancellation of roughly $8 billion in grants earmarked for energy projects, with the majority of cuts falling on states led by Democrats or those that voted for Vice President Kamala Harris in the 2024 election, according to reporting from NOTUS and The Hill. The decision has sent shockwaves through the energy sector, state governments, and communities counting on the funding to modernize power grids, advance clean energy technologies, and create jobs.
The Department of Energy (DOE) confirmed that 321 awards supporting 223 projects were being axed, totaling approximately $7.56 billion in spending. The affected states read like a who’s who of blue America: California, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Hawaii, Illinois, Maryland, Minnesota, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, Oregon, Vermont, and Washington. All of these states backed Harris in the last election and are largely governed by Democrats. However, the cuts have also hit projects in Tennessee, South Carolina, North Dakota, Iowa, and Florida—states not typically associated with left-leaning energy policies.
What’s left standing? According to NOTUS, similar energy projects in Republican-led or Trump-voting states have been spared. For instance, while Minnesota lost $460 million for desperately needed interregional transmission lines, Montana—a state that voted for Trump—retained a $700 million grant for a comparable grid connection project. Likewise, Hawaii’s funding for grid resilience and a $40 million backup microgrid for Joint Base Pearl Harbor-Hickam was axed, but Georgia Power still holds on to $160 million for grid improvements.
Battery innovation projects were not immune either. Of the 17 grants for battery recycling and reprocessing, three—located in Colorado and California—were cut. The rest, in places like Utah, Virginia, Pennsylvania, and North Carolina, remain funded. Hydrogen hub funding also took a hit: California and the Pacific Northwest lost billions, while projects in Texas, Louisiana, West Virginia, Ohio, South Dakota, Pennsylvania, and Indiana remain intact.
The rationale behind these cuts has been hotly debated. Russell Vought, director of the White House Office of Management and Budget, called the targeted grants “Green New Scam funding to fuel the Left’s climate agenda.” The administration’s critics, however, see a political motive. According to The Hill, the cuts are widely interpreted as an attempt to pressure Democrats into passing a government funding bill amid a tense shutdown standoff.
White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt appeared to confirm this leverage tactic in a Fox News interview, stating, “Pass the clean, continuing resolution and all of this goes away.” Yet, Energy Secretary Chris Wright offered a different explanation. In a CNN interview, he denied any partisan targeting, insisting, “This is a partial list of an ongoing process. More project announcements will come.” Wright later told Congress that the cancellations were part of an effort to “protect taxpayer dollars” and followed a “thorough, individualized financial review.”
For many in the affected states, the news came as a shock. States and companies often received little or no prior notice. Some, like the Sacramento Municipal Utility District, were still waiting for official word from the DOE days after the announcement. Senator Martin Heinrich of New Mexico, a top Democrat on the Senate’s Energy and Natural Resources Committee, said he had lunch with Secretary Wright just minutes before the cancellations were made public—without a hint of what was coming. “He had neither the courtesy nor the care to mention that this was coming, and that it included 10 projects in my state, projects that affect real jobs and real families,” Heinrich told NOTUS. He later called the moves “nakedly political, unhinged, and unlawful” in a written statement to The Hill, adding, “Instead of working to help our families and communities, the Trump Administration is tearing these projects down, driving up energy bills for families, and putting hardworking people in New Mexico and across the country out of work.”
California has perhaps the most at stake. A $1.2 billion award for advancing hydrogen energy—intended to create hundreds of thousands of jobs and reduce health costs—was among the most high-profile cuts. Governor Gavin Newsom, widely seen as a potential 2028 presidential candidate, didn’t mince words in his response: “In Trump’s America, energy policy is set by the highest bidder, economics and common sense be damned. Clean hydrogen deserves to be part of California’s energy future—creating hundreds of thousands of new jobs and saving billions in health costs.” Newsom’s office estimates the cuts threaten 200,000 jobs in the state.
The Pacific Northwest also lost $1 billion for hydrogen power, while other regional hubs in West Virginia and Pennsylvania remain funded. The Pacific Northwest Hydrogen Hub expressed disappointment but retained hope, stating, “While we are disappointed in the Department of Energy’s decision to cut funding for the Pacific Northwest Hydrogen Hub, there is still immense opportunity for our region to finish what we started.”
The list of companies losing out is long and varied, including major utilities like Commonwealth Edison, Xcel Energy, Exelon, General Electric, and Pacific Gas and Electric. Clean energy producers, battery innovators, and organizations focused on reducing methane emissions, such as the Gas Technology Institute, are also affected. Some companies, like Smartville of Carlsbad, California, and Sublime Systems, have already received official cancellation notices. Others are left in limbo, unsure whether their projects will be halted or if previously distributed funds will be wasted.
Confusion reigns even in the appeals process. The DOE says affected entities have 30 days to appeal, but some groups report being told they have only 10 days. Further muddying the waters, some grants categorized as benefiting blue states are physically located in red states. For example, a $19.7 million federal award to IBM for methane emissions research is listed under New York but will actually be carried out in Utah, Montana, and Alaska.
Notably, some of the canceled projects appear to contradict the Trump administration’s own priorities. Executive orders have emphasized domestic mineral development, yet battery recycling grants—crucial for increasing supplies of lithium and other metals—are among those cut.
So what happens to the reclaimed billions? The Energy Department has not clarified what will be done with the clawed-back funds, despite repeated inquiries from outlets like The Hill. The only thing that seems certain is more cancellations may be on the horizon, with Secretary Wright indicating the process is ongoing and could soon affect projects in Republican-led states as well.
For now, the fate of hundreds of projects, thousands of jobs, and America’s energy future hangs in the balance. The partisan divide over climate and energy policy has rarely felt so stark—nor the stakes so high for workers, communities, and the country’s aging power infrastructure.
