With its passage out of a key committee in the House of Representatives last week, the Clean Electricity Performance Program (CEPP) is a step closer to reality, as part of the powerful budget reconciliation bill (the Build Back Better Act). The bill, and that provision, still have a ways to go to get through Congress, as the House and Senate negotiate a final package. But it’s really important for clean energy to have this and complementary pieces moving — and even more important to get strong versions of them across the finish line.
To understand why, consider how the current design of the CEPP component answers the questions we had recently offered for gauging the robustness of the policy. The good news is that there’s a lot to like in what our elected representatives have laid out so far, and a whole lot to want to defend as its legislative journey continues.
And as for those five questions … the answers are very close, quite possibly, check, TBD, and yes. Here’s how the House language stacks up.
Would the targets be as strong as needed? Very close.
While “as needed” is tricky, since we need much more globally than has been put on the table so far, one useful benchmark might be the current US commitment under the Paris climate accord (50- to 52-percent reductions in heat-trapping emissions below 2005 levels by 2030), and specifically the power sector implications of that (approximately 80-percent clean electricity).
The focus of the CEPP is retail electricity providers — investor-owned utilities, municipal utilities, electric cooperatives, and third-party retail electricity providers in states with competitive power markets. The CEPP that passed out of the House Energy and Commerce Committee (E&C) would reward those providers that increased their clean electricity supply by at least 4 percentage points in a given year (or per year, given some multiyear flexibility written into the plan). And it would collect payments from those that missed that benchmark.
That level of annual growth across the board, coupled with other complementary programs moving through the Build Back Better Act, such as clean energy tax incentives, would get us most of the way to the national target of 80 percent by 2030, according to analysis by the Rhodium Group. And the CEPP as envisioned provides a strong incentive for providers to beat that 4-percent-per-year level of growth to get us the rest of the way, together with all the clean energy pushes from states, utilities, companies, institutions, and households.
Would there be enough funding to power the transition? Quite possibly.
The early stages of the budget reconciliation process had the House and Senate approve the key top line number of $3.5 trillion, plus the allocations to the various committees. That resulted in $150 billion carved out for the CEPP within the portion the E&C is shepherding.
Is that sum enough? The performance grants for providers hitting the 4-point target would be $150 per megawatt-hour (MWh) of increased clean energy above a certain level. And that math — $150/MWh times the number of MWh needed to get to 80-percent clean electricity — works out pretty well, coming in close to the $150 billion.
So the next question is whether the resulting credit (including avoided payments for coming in too low) is enough to motivate providers to make the necessary push — and make the transition as easy and affordable as possible for customers. That level of incentive should make the willingness to invest in new renewables (directly or indirectly) at the pace and scale required all the more powerful.
So grants at that level under the CEPP could be a powerful complement to the extensions of the tax credits also included in the House reconciliation package to drive high levels of clean energy deployment.
Photo credit: John Rogers
Would the funding be used well? Check.
The current House text is explicit about what a provider can do with the performance grants it earns: use it “exclusively for the benefit of the ratepayers.” It then includes examples, such as direct bill assistance, clean energy and efficiency investments, and worker retention.
We agree: The CEPP grants should be used for purposes that directly and solely benefit the public by achieving the transition to clean electricity at a low cost and for maximum gain to consumers. So that’s good, strong language.
And it can be built on. We’ve recommended to lawmakers that they further specify allocation of the resources to ensure that this policy is doing its part to meet the administration’s Justice40 effort aimed at getting at least 40 percent of the benefits from federal investments to flow directly to disadvantaged communities.
Another clause in the E&C bill helpfully addresses the penalty portion for providers that don’t make the threshold in a given period: The legislation would let those payments be recovered only from “shareholders or owners.” That stipulation is particularly important in the case of investor-owned utilities.
Will it drive the cleanest sources? TBD.
As I’ve noted before, there’s low-carbon energy and then there’s really clean energy. Wind and solar would be the overwhelming favorites for providing the bulk of the new electrical capacity fueled by the CEPP. But the House does leave the door open to other options.
The E&C bill doesn’t spell out particular sources for inclusion or exclusion, instead setting a carbon intensity target — the maximum carbon pollution (carbon-dioxide equivalent on a 20-year global warming potential basis) per unit of electricity allowed for a source to qualify.
The good news is the House’s carbon intensity target is potentially quite strong, if it includes the emissions from the fuel supply (“upstream” emissions), although that isn’t clear from the current bill language. If upstream emissions are in there (again TBD), any fossil fuel generation would need a pretty high level of carbon capture and storage to count for the CEPP. A colleague has estimated that, with those upstream emissions included, coal or gas plants would need to capture and store at least 80 to 90 percent of their carbon dioxide emissions.
But the legislation needs to be clearer about those upstream emissions indeed being in the calculations. And the Union of Concerned Scientists (UCS) also has recommended other changes to make sure this section is as strong as it needs to be:
explicitly excluding particular sources, such as municipal solid waste incineration and conventional natural gas generation;
prorating performance grants for resources that meet the carbon intensity standard but are still above zero; and
putting in place strong guardrails for bioenergy, hydroelectric, carbon capture and storage, and nuclear projects to address other environmental and fuel-cycle impacts.
Would all electric utilities be covered? Yes!
This one is maybe the most straightforward. The E&C language seems quite clear that all retail electricity providers, regardless of type or size, would be covered. That’s good news, because it means that all electricity customers would benefit from the transition to clean energy.
Stronger is better
So a strong performance by the House Energy and Commerce Committee, with a few things to strengthen and a lot worth defending as this piece continues through Congress.
Be assured that UCS will continue to push for the reconciliation package as a whole — and you can, too, by contacting your members of Congress. And we also will continue to weigh in to make sure that the Clean Electricity Performance Program lives up to its full promise and becomes a powerful tool for our clean energy transition.
Paris’ bike-share system, Vélib has long been considered one of the shining success stories of urban micromobility. With a massive fleet of over 20,000 pedal and electric-assist bicycles around Paris, the service has helped millions of residents and tourists get around the City of Light without needing a car or scooter. But lately, a growing problem is threatening to knock the wheels off this urban mobility marvel: theft and joyriding.
According to city officials and the service operator, more than 600 Vélib bikes are now going missing every single week. That’s over 30 bikes a day simply vanishing from the system – some stolen outright, others taken on “joy rides” and never returned.
“At the moment we’re missing 3,000 bikes,” explained Sylvain Raifaud, head of the Agemob company that currently operates the Velib system. That’s nearly 15% of over 20,000 Vélib bikes across Paris.
The sticky-fingered culprits aren’t necessarily professional thieves or organized crime rings. Instead, they’re often regular users who treat the shared bikes like disposable toys.
Advertisement – scroll for more content
The city estimates that many people have figured out how to pry the bikes out of the system’s parking docks, unlocking one for a casual cruise and then ditching it somewhere far from a docking station.
Once pried free, the bikes are technically usable for the next 24 hours until their automatic locking feature kicks in. At that point, the bikes are often simply abandoned. Some end up in alleyways. Others get tossed in rivers. A few just disappear completely.
And since the bikes are intended to be parked at their many docking stations around the city, they don’t have GPS chips, further complicating recovery of “liberated” bikes.
The issue started small but has grown into more than an inconvenience – it’s beginning to undermine the entire purpose of the service. With bikes going missing at such a high rate, many Vélib docking stations are left empty, especially during rush hours.
Riders looking for a quick commute or a convenient hop across town are increasingly finding themselves without available bikes, or having to walk long distances to find a functioning one.
That kind of unreliability chips away at user confidence and threatens to drive potential riders back into cars, cabs, or other less sustainable forms of transport at a time when Paris has already made great strides to dramatically reduce car usage in the city.
The losses are financially painful, too. Replacing stolen or vandalized bikes isn’t cheap, and the resources spent on tracking down missing equipment or reinforcing anti-theft measures are stretching thin. Vélib has faced theft and vandalism issues before, especially during its early years, but this latest surge has officials sounding the alarm with renewed urgency.
Officials acknowledge that there’s no easy fix. Paris, like many cities with bike-share systems, walks a fine line between accessibility and accountability. Part of what makes Vélib so successful is its ease of use and widespread availability. But those same features make it vulnerable to misuse – especially when enforcement is limited and the consequences for abuse are minimal.
The timing of the problem is especially unfortunate. In recent years, Paris has seen impressive results in reducing car traffic, expanding bike lanes, and promoting cycling as a key part of its sustainable transport strategy. Vélib is a cornerstone of that plan. But if the system becomes too unreliable, it risks losing the very people it was designed to serve.
Meanwhile, as Parisians increasingly find themselves staring at empty docks, the challenge for the city and Vélib will be to restore confidence in the system without making it harder to use. That means striking the right balance between freedom and responsibility, between open access and protection against abuse.
In a city where cycling is supposed to be the future of mobility, losing thousands of bikes to joyriders and sticky fingers isn’t just frustrating; it’s unsustainable.
FTC: We use income earning auto affiliate links.More.
U.S. President Donald Trump and Elon Musk attend a press event in the Oval Office of the White House in Washington, D.C., U.S., May 30, 2025.
Nathan Howard | Reuters
When they lose a significant other, most men do indeed become a “TRAIN WRECK.” Then they pick up the pieces of their lives and start living again — paying attention to their personal grooming, hitting the gym and discovering new hobbies.
What does the world’s richest man do? He starts a political party.
Last weekend, as the United States celebrated its independence from the British in 1776, Elon Musk enshrined his sovereignty from U.S. President Donald Trump by establishing the creatively named “American Party.”
Few details have been revealed, but Musk said the party will focus on “just 2 or 3 Senate seats and 8 to 10 House districts,” and will have legislative discussions “with both parties” — referring to the U.S. Democratic and Republican Parties.
It might be easier to realize Musk’s dream of colonizing Mars than to bridge the political aisle in the U.S. government today.
To be fair, some thought appeared to be behind the move. Musk decided to form the party after holding a poll on X in which 65.4% of respondents voted in favor.
Folks, here’s direct democracy — and the powerful post-separation motivation — in action.
— CNBC’s Erin Doherty contributed to this report.
What you need to know today
And finally…
An investor sits in front of a board showing stock information at a brokerage office in Beijing, China.
US President Donald Trump, right, and Elon Musk, chief executive officer of Tesla Inc., during a news conference in the Oval Office of the White House in Washington, DC, US, on Friday, May 30, 2025.
Francis Chung | Bloomberg | Getty Images
When they find themselves without a significant other, most men finally start living: They pay attention to their personal grooming, hit the gym and discover new hobbies.
What does the world’s richest man do? He starts a political party.
Last weekend, as the United States celebrated its independence from the British in 1776, Elon Musk enshrined his sovereignty from U.S. President Donald Trump by establishing the creatively named “American Party.”
Few details have been revealed, but Musk said the party will focus on “just 2 or 3 Senate seats and 8 to 10 House districts,” and will have legislative discussions “with both parties” — referring to the U.S. Democratic and Republican Parties.
It might be easier to realize Musk’s dream of colonizing Mars than to bridge the political aisle in the U.S. government today.
To be fair, some thought appeared to be behind the move. Musk decided to form the party after holding a poll on X in which 65.4% of respondents voted in favor.
Folks, here’s direct democracy — and the powerful post-separation motivation — in action.
[PRO] Wall Street is growing cautious on European equities. As investors seek shelter from tumult in U.S., the Stoxx 600 index has risen 6.6% year to date. Analysts, however, think the foundations of that growth could be shaky.
And finally…
Ayrton Senna driving the Marlboro McLaren during the Belgian Grand Prix in 1992.
Pascal Rondeau | Hulton Archive | Getty Images
The CEO mindset is shifting. It’s no longer all about winning
CEOs today aren’t just steering companies — they’re navigating a minefield. From geopolitical shocks and economic volatility to rapid shifts in tech and consumer behavior, the playbook for leadership is being rewritten in real time.
In an exclusive interview with CNBC earlier this week, McLaren Racing CEO Zak Brown outlined a leadership approach centered on urgency, momentum and learning from failure.