PG&E and the federal government had argued that closing would save ratepayers and taxpayers money compared with paying for Ivanpah\u2019s electricity until 2039, when the contract expires. But some experts and stakeholders agreed with the state\u2019s call, noting that the troubled power plant is still providing electricity at a moment when the state has little to spare. <\/p>\n
\u201cWe\u2019re seeing massive electricity demand, especially from the great need for data centers, and we\u2019re seeing grid reliability issues, so all in all, I think this was a wise move,\u201d said Dan Reicher, a senior scholar at Stanford. \u201cHaving said that, I think reasonable people can differ on this one \u2014 it\u2019s a closer call.\u201d <\/p>\n
Ivanpah was the largest plant of its kind in the world when it opened to great fanfare in 2014. The 386-megawatt facility uses a vast array of about 170,000 mirrors to concentrate sunlight onto towers, creating heat that spins turbines to generate electricity. This is known as solar thermal, because it uses the heat of the sun. <\/p>\n
But the plant has been plagued by problems nearly from the start. The mirror-and-tower technology that once seemed so promising was outpaced by flat photovoltaic solar panels, which soon proved cheaper and more efficient and became the industry standard. <\/p>\n
Ivanpah has no on-site battery storage,<\/a> which means it mainly makes power while the sun is shining, and it relies on natural gas to fire up its boilers each morning. <\/p>\n The plant also developed a reputation as a wildlife killer, with a 2016 report from The Times<\/a> finding about 6,000 birds die each year after colliding with Ivanpah\u2019s 40-story towers \u2014 or from instant incineration when they fly into its concentrated beams of sunlight. <\/p>\n Mirrors await the sun on opening day at the Ivanpah Solar Electric Generating System in the Ivanpah Valley near the California\/Nevada border February 13, 2014. <\/p>\n (Mark Boster \/ Los Angeles Times)<\/p>\n Despite these issues, the CPUC determined the facility must stay online to help the state meet \u201ctight electricity conditions\u201d expected in the coming years, including surging demand from data centers and artificial intelligence, building and transportation electrification, and hydrogen production. Ivanpah qualifies as clean energy and California has committed to 100% clean energy by 2045.<\/a> <\/p>\n The state\u2019s most recent Integrated Resources Plan, which looks ahead at how it will meet energy needs, \u201cwould dictate that Ivanpah should remain online in light of the current uncertainty regarding reliability,\u201d the CPUC wrote in its December resolution.<\/a> <\/p>\n The five-member decision came despite PG&E\u2019s assertion<\/a> ratepayers will save money if it closes, a conclusion generally supported by an independent review.<\/a><\/p>\n It also came despite support for Ivanpah\u2019s closure from both the Biden and Trump administrations, which rarely converge on the issue of energy. Construction of the $2.2-billion plant was backed by a $1.6-billion federal loan guarantee that has not yet been fully repaid. <\/p>\n How much remains on that loan has not been made public, but an internal audit reviewed by The Times indicates it may be as much as $780 million. <\/p>\n In the final weeks of his term, Biden\u2019s Department of Energy helped negotiate terminating the contract between PG&E and Ivanpah\u2019s owners. Trump\u2019s Department of Energy \u2014 which has been adversarial<\/a> toward renewables such as wind and solar \u2014 urged California to accept that deal. <\/p>\n \u201cContinued operation of the Ivanpah Projects is not in the interest of California or its customers, nor is it in the interest of the United States and its taxpayers,\u201d Gregory Beard, a senior advisor with the Energy Department\u2019s Office of Energy Dominance Financing, wrote in a Nov. 24 letter to the CPUC.<\/p>\n Yet the California agency pointed to Trump\u2019s policies among its reasons for keeping Ivanpah open. Trump\u2019s tariffs on steel and aluminum will increase prices for new energy technologies and could delay the expansion of the nation\u2019s energy grid, the agency said. Trump also ended tax credits for solar, wind and other renewable energy projects in a move that could reduce up to 300 gigawatts of nationwide build-out by 2035, the CPUC said.<\/p>\n In August, Trump\u2019s Interior Department effectively halted<\/a> wind and solar development on federal land in favor of nuclear, gas and coal. That decision could affect Ivanpah, which sits on nearly 3,500 acres managed by the Bureau of Land Management near the California-Nevada border.<\/p>\n These \u201cshifting federal priorities\u201d are creating uncertainty in the market, the CPUC noted in its resolution. California ratepayers have already paid in excess of $333 million for grid updates to support the Ivanpah project, and terminating its contracts \u201crisks stranding sunk infrastructure costs,\u201d it said.<\/p>\n The Ivanpah Solar Electric Generating System concentrated solar thermal plant in the Mojave Desert in 2023.<\/p>\n (Brian van der Brug\/Los Angeles Times)<\/p>\n Stanford expert Reicher, who also served at the Energy Department under the Clinton administration and as director of climate change and energy initiatives at Google, said from an energy perspective, the decision is sound. <\/p>\n \u201cI lean toward keeping it online, running it well and making improvements, particularly as we face an electricity shortage the likes of which we haven\u2019t seen in decades,\u201d he said. <\/p>\n Reicher noted that while concentrated solar has fallen out of favor in the U.S., it was seen as an attractive investment at the time. Some places are still building concentrated solar facilities, among them China, Mexico and Dubai, and it can have some advantages over photovoltaics, he said. For example, many new concentrated solar facilities have a higher capacity factor, meaning they can generate electricity more hours of the year. <\/p>\n Stakeholders such as Pat Hogan, president of CMB Ivanpah Asset Holdings and an early investor in the plant, also applauded the CPUC decision. While Ivanpah has never operated at its target of 940,000 megawatt-hours of clean energy per year, it is still providing electricity, he said. The plant produced about 726,000 MWh in 2024,<\/a> the most recent year for which there are data, according to the California Energy Commission.<\/p>\n \u201cIt doesn\u2019t operate at the optimum performance that was originally modeled, but it still generates electricity for 120,000 homes in California,\u201d Hogan said.<\/p>\n Hogan said terminating the power purchase agreements would leave investors and taxpayers in the dust, benefiting the utility company and the plant owners. The plan would have converted a \u201cpartially performing federal loan into a near-total loss event,\u201d he wrote in a formal complaint<\/a> filed with the Energy Department\u2019s Office of the Inspector General. <\/p>\n Others said solar photovoltaic and battery storage are the best, most cost-effective way to secure California\u2019s energy future. The state has invested heavily<\/a> in both,<\/a> but Gov. Gavin Newsom\u2019s administration and the CPUC should work to ensure more are brought online quickly, said Sean Gallagher, senior vice president of policy at the Solar Energy Industries Assn., a national trade group. <\/p>\n![\"Some](\"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/us\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/01\/1768140013_328_.jpeg\")
<\/p>\n![\"The](\"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/us\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/01\/1768140014_72_.jpeg\")
<\/p>\n
![\"Thousands](\"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/us\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/01\/1768140014_677_.jpeg\")
<\/p>\n