United States: Energy and Natural Resources

President Trump's Executive Order 14420 invokes emergency powers to restrict foreign-produced bulk-power system equipment that poses national security risks, while directing the Department of Energy to review existing grid infrastructure for vulnerabilities. The order establishes a framework for pre-qualifying equipment and vendors, but leaves critical implementation details—including the complete list of covered foreign entities and specific risk assessment criteria—to forthcoming DOE

President Trump's Executive Order 14420 prohibits the acquisition and installation of foreign-produced bulk-power system electric equipment from countries like China, Russia, Iran, and North Korea, citing national security risks from potential digital backdoors and remote sabotage capabilities. The Order grants the Secretary of Energy broad authority to restrict equipment transactions and may require removal or replacement of previously installed foreign equipment, with implementing regulations expected by

The commercial nuclear maritime industry is experiencing a renaissance as governments, classification societies, and private companies align to address technical, regulatory...

The Pentagon's Office of Strategic Capital has launched a groundbreaking fund-level financing program targeting critical minerals supply chains essential to U.S. national security. Unlike traditional government loans to individual companies, this initiative provides capital directly to qualified investment fund managers who can leverage federal loans alongside private capital to address strategic mineral shortages and vulnerabilities in the defense industrial base.

The Department of War's Office of Strategic Capital has launched a groundbreaking $500 million to $1 billion fund finance program targeting critical minerals vital to U.S. national security. How will this federal-private capital partnership reshape financing for companies addressing supply chain vulnerabilities in strategic materials?

The U.S. Department of Commerce's Bureau of Industry and Security (BIS) recently published a temporary final rule and request for public comments that effectively prohibits the export of black mass and tungsten waste and scrap without prior BIS authorization. The rule takes effect August 27, 2026, and expires one year later, although BIS may extend the effective time period beyond this date.

President Trump's Executive Order 14420 invokes emergency powers to restrict foreign-produced bulk-power system equipment that poses national security risks, while directing the Department of Energy to review existing grid infrastructure for vulnerabilities. The order establishes a framework for pre-qualifying equipment and vendors, but leaves critical implementation details—including the complete list of covered foreign entities and specific risk assessment criteria—to forthcoming DOE

The convergence of power generation and digital infrastructure is reshaping how investors value data center platforms. As AI-driven demand intensifies competition for scarce resources like transmission access and interconnection rights, the largest transactions reveal a fundamental shift: investors are no longer simply buying operating assets—they're acquiring the upstream capabilities that control future capacity creation.

US export control laws govern civil nuclear power projects at every stage, from feasibility studies to operations. Understanding the complex requirements under DOE Part 810, NRC Part 110, and BIS EAR is essential for EPC contractors to avoid significant penalties and ensure compliance throughout the project lifecycle.

A decade after the Frank R. Lautenberg Chemical Safety for the 21st Century Act transformed TSCA, how have four administrations shaped EPA's approach to chemical risk evaluation? This panel discussion examines the evolution of risk evaluation methodologies, the controversial formaldehyde assessment, and the proposed Risk Evaluation Framework Rule's implications for protecting public health.

Two environmental organizations have filed suit challenging EPA's approval of semiconductor manufacturing chemicals under TSCA, raising concerns about potential health risks including cancer and neurological harm. The case questions whether EPA adequately documented its decision-making process for chemicals containing PFAS properties used in photolithography applications. This litigation could significantly impact the semiconductor industry's ability to onshore chip production and set precedents for future

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit has upheld EPA's designation of PFOA and PFOS as hazardous substances under CERCLA, rejecting industry challenges to the rule. The decision addresses critical questions about EPA's regulatory authority, cost-benefit analysis requirements, and the scope of potential liability for PFAS contamination. What does this ruling mean for companies facing potential cleanup obligations and future CERCLA litigation?