California’s governor is cutting climate deals overseas while Washington pulls back—raising hard questions about who gets to steer America’s energy future.
Story Snapshot
- Gov. Gavin Newsom and U.K. Energy Secretary Ed Miliband signed a new climate and clean-energy Memorandum of Understanding on Feb. 16, 2026, in London.
- British firm Octopus Energy announced a nearly $1 billion commitment aimed at California clean-tech companies and projects tied to the partnership.
- The deal emphasizes technology scale-up, research links, and transatlantic investment, alongside goals like cutting bills and boosting grid flexibility.
- President Trump called the arrangement “inappropriate” and questioned California’s governance track record, citing outmigration and high-speed rail delays.
A State-Level Foreign Policy Play Meets a Federal Reset
Gov. Gavin Newsom announced an expanded U.K.–California climate partnership after signing a Memorandum of Understanding with U.K. Energy Secretary Ed Miliband on February 16, 2026. The timing matters because the Trump administration withdrew the United States from the U.N. Framework Convention on Climate Change earlier in 2026, while California and the U.K. continue pursuing net-zero goals under that framework. The result is a new spotlight on state-level “climate diplomacy.”
The agreement’s stated purpose is to build a “refreshed framework” to drive innovation, scale clean-energy technologies, and connect businesses and researchers across both economies. The U.K. government described the effort as a way to strengthen transatlantic investment, support jobs and industrial growth, and accelerate the race for clean power, while also addressing climate and nature concerns. Those aims are broad, and the sources do not provide specific enforcement mechanisms or timelines.
What the MOU Actually Targets: Grid Tech, Investment Links, and Biodiversity
The most concrete dollar figure tied to the announcement came from Octopus Energy, which committed nearly $1 billion toward California companies and projects focused on clean technologies and nature-based solutions. Octopus CEO Nick Chaset said the MOU opens opportunities to bring the firm’s “smart technology” to California, highlighting work with Southern California Edison involving the Octopus Shift app to support electric vehicles and home battery participation in the grid.
The partnership also includes an environmental conservation component: a commitment to conserve 30% of lands and coastal waters by 2030 through nature-based solutions and biodiversity protection. Supporters frame that as pairing emissions reductions with ecosystem goals. The research provided does not specify how California would measure progress toward the 30% benchmark, what budget lines would fund it, or how potential conflicts with land use, water policy, and property rights would be handled.
Newsom’s Case: Investment and “Delivery” Claims Versus Household Reality
Newsom’s office pitched the partnership as proof that “international collaboration delivers real results for Californians,” arguing the state has clear climate goals and the ability to deliver on them. The administration also pointed to California’s grid buildout: battery storage has risen to nearly 17,000 megawatts since the beginning of the Newsom administration, a 2,100%+ increase, with over 30,000 megawatts of new resources added to the grid overall.
Those capacity numbers show rapid buildout, but they do not, by themselves, settle the question many voters care about most: whether energy becomes more reliable and affordable. Octopus claims its technology can help cut energy bills and improve the customer experience, yet the sources provided do not include independent estimates of rate impacts, cost-benefit analyses, or safeguards against cost shifts onto working families. Limited detail means results will hinge on implementation.
Trump’s “Inappropriate” Critique Focuses on Governance, Not the Climate Science
President Trump criticized the deal as “inappropriate” and framed it as a warning about California’s governance record. According to Politico, Trump argued that if the same approach used in California were applied to the U.K., the venture would not succeed, pointing to population outmigration and delays tied to the state’s high-speed rail project. His critique, as reported, targets effectiveness and competence more than the partnership’s technical aims.
That distinction matters for conservative readers who prioritize accountable government. The partnership links a U.S. state with a foreign national government to shape markets, research priorities, and investment flows. Even when the goals sound positive, the lack of granular public benchmarks in the announcement invites skepticism—especially given California’s history of major projects running over budget or behind schedule. The provided sources do not document additional critics or specific “insanity” quotes.
What to Watch Next: Proof Points, Guardrails, and Who Pays
The next test is whether Octopus Energy’s nearly $1 billion commitment becomes verifiable projects with measurable outcomes—jobs created, technologies deployed, and any claimed bill reductions for consumers. The sources do not list project names, spending tranches, or deadlines, so watchdog scrutiny will matter. Conservatives will also look for transparency: procurement rules, conflict-of-interest safeguards, and whether policy choices prioritize reliability and affordability over political branding.
Newsom’s UK clean energy pact ripped for ‘insanity,’ as critics question effectiveness https://t.co/RIBQF8Oj10
— NA404ERROR (@Too_Much_Rum) February 17, 2026
Another open question is how this partnership interacts with federal energy policy under President Trump. The research indicates California is pursuing a path independent of federal climate frameworks, which could widen political and regulatory gaps between Sacramento and Washington. That tension is likely to grow if state actions affect interstate commerce, grid planning, or permitting priorities. For now, the facts are clear on the signing and the headline investment—but the real verdict depends on execution.
Sources:
https://www.gov.uk/government/news/uk-and-california-deepen-ties-on-clean-energy-to-boost-investment
