KUER0%

Last year was big for solar in Utah, but the Trump admin is slowing that roll 69%

By David Condos0%

5/4/2026, 8:00:00 AM

BS Summary: This article contains 20 faulty reasoning types, including Pessimism Bias, Negativity Bias, and Indoctrination, with Optimism Bias as the most egregious example at 21.4% saturation with 201 hits. Analysis detected 923 faulty-reasoning hits from 938 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 62.6% and a BS Rank of 69% (6,418 of 20,473 articles). This article is worse (more manipulative) than 68.70% of the article peer group.

2025 was a banner year for solar power in Utah. 
More than 1.2 gigawatts were installed in the Beehive State last year  the most of any year in the past decade. 
With the state’s abundant sunshine, high elevation and ample open space, Jennifer Eden with advocacy group Utah Clean Energy said the state may just be scratching the surface of how much power it could harness from the sun. 
“Solar is an incredible resource in the state of Utah,” said the organization’s senior climate and clean energy associate. 
“There's a lot of potential.” 
It’s been a growing part of the state’s power picture. 
Utah ranked 8th nationally for new solar capacity added in 2025  rising from 36th in 2023. 
But federal policy changes targeting renewable energy could thwart that momentum, said Sean Gallagher, senior vice president of policy at the Solar Energy Industries Association. 
A 2025 Trump administration order directed Interior Secretary Doug Burgum to personally approve every solar and wind project on federal lands. 
The directive also gums up the works for projects on private land, Gallagher said, because developers often need to consult with federal agencies about environmental impacts. 
“It’s amounted to essentially a ban on permits of solar projects across the country, not just on public land,” he said. 
“And it’s created a real threat to affordability and to America’s ability to meet our rising energy demands.” 
The Trump administration’s actions could derail 40% of the new solar capacity planned in Utah for the next five years, according to Gallagher’s organization. 
Around 1,400 megawatts of solar are slated to come online next year, including large projects near Cedar City and Delta, but most of that is now at risk. 
It’s a strange contradiction, Gallagher said, because conservative politicians typically favor free markets and spurn red tape. 
In his view, the administration’s actions go directly against that, and Utahns could face the consequences. 
“Residents are going to suffer,” he said. 
“They’re either going to have trouble actually meeting demand when air conditioners turn on in the hot summer afternoons, or they’re going to see the prices go up  or both.” 
Utah electric rates already increased by around 6% in the past year, Gallagher said, largely due to rising demand. 
“You’ve got data centers that are planned in Utah. 
You’ve got population growth. 
You’ve got business growth,” he said. 
“And as that demand rises, supply has got to keep up, or prices are just going to have to go up.” 
Despite solar’s growth in Utah, roughly three-quarters of the state’s power still comes from coal and natural gas. 
Natural gas prices can vary widely, impacted by wars and storms. 
Further diversifying Utah’s energy mix could shield electricity bills from spiking now that it’s cheaper to generate power from the sun and wind than from burning fossil fuels. 
“Utah prides itself on its inexpensive electricity,” Eden said, “but if we’re saddled with fuel costs that are variable and potentially high, that’s not going to be good for affordability in the state.” 
While solar requires an up-front investment to install, Eden noted, the sunlight that keeps it going is free. 
As battery storage has become cheaper and widespread, concerns about intermittent reliability have faded. 
Plus, there are environmental benefits from transitioning to renewable energy, she said. 
Scientists agree that fossil fuel emissions are driving climate change, which has made extreme heat and droughts more frequent and intense. 
Lowering carbon emissions could also reduce air pollution, which plagues Utah valleys. 
Unfortunately, Eden said, politics sometimes get in the way of the economics, despite the state’s all-of-the-above energy goals. 
And when federal or state leaders make solar a partisan issue, that can trickle down to influence how Utahns view it. 
“What we don’t want to see from the Legislature or anybody else is more politicization of electricity resources,” she said. 
“If we need resources, we need to talk about what’s affordable, what’s available, what’s clean and healthy for our population and our environment, and not what political winds say is better or worse.” 
Other Trump actions, such as ending tax credits for rooftop panels or terminating the Solar for All program, could also make it harder for Utahns to get on board with solar. 
Some small businesses that help homeowners install panels have already gone out of business in the wake of federal policy changes, Gallagher said, and companies that have survived are trying to adapt to a new reality. 
The solar industry supports 7,905 jobs and 132 solar companies in Utah, according to Solar Energy Industries Association data. 
“It’s still a sort of worthy thing for customers to look at,” Gallagher said of rooftop solar installation. 
“But those companies are having challenges this year, and we’re doing a lot of work trying to help them manage through that transition.” 
One way is to help them take advantage of a remaining tax credit that works when customers lease solar panels through the installation company, rather than own them outright. 
There are some bright spots, though, such as the 2025 law Utah passed that made it the first state in the nation to support plug-in solar that residents can install themselves. 
Also, an April ruling from a federal judge blocked the Trump administration from slowing wind and solar development. 
That offers some hope, Gallagher said, but it’s unlikely to be the end of the story. 
“It remains to be seen exactly how this is going to shake out,” Gallagher said. 
“We’ll be watching the administration closely to see how they comply with it.” 
Article reasoning-pattern comparisonThis article: 0.0%David Condos: 3.1%KUER: 2.8%Confirmation Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%David Condos: 1.8%KUER: 1.3%Anchoring Bias0.0%This article: 1.2%David Condos: 3.0%KUER: 3.4%Availability Heuristic1.2%This article: 0.0%David Condos: 0.7%KUER: 1.2%Representativeness Heuristic0.0%This article: 0.0%David Condos: 0.6%KUER: 0.5%Hindsight Bias0.0%This article: 2.2%David Condos: 2.5%KUER: 1.9%Overconfidence Bias2.2%This article: 1.7%David Condos: 7.5%KUER: 7.4%Framing Effect1.7%This article: 3.5%David Condos: 2.2%KUER: 1.3%Loss Aversion3.5%This article: 0.0%David Condos: 1.0%KUER: 1.2%Status Quo Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%David Condos: 0.4%KUER: 0.3%Sunk Cost Effect0.0%This article: 21.4%David Condos: 5.8%KUER: 4.4%Optimism Bias21.4%This article: 17.9%David Condos: 5.7%KUER: 2.4%Pessimism Bias17.9%This article: 13.2%David Condos: 6.8%KUER: 6.3%Negativity Bias13.2%This article: 2.5%David Condos: 1.4%KUER: 2.2%Self-Serving Bias2.5%This article: 0.0%David Condos: 0.8%KUER: 0.9%Fundamental Attribution Error0.0%This article: 0.0%David Condos: 0.4%KUER: 0.2%Actor-Observer Bias0.0%This article: 1.8%David Condos: 1.2%KUER: 1.9%In-Group Bias1.8%This article: 0.0%David Condos: 0.4%KUER: 0.6%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%David Condos: 1.0%KUER: 2.3%Halo Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%David Condos: 0.1%KUER: 0.1%Horn Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%David Condos: 0.0%KUER: 0.0%Dunning-Kruger Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%David Condos: 1.8%KUER: 1.2%Recency Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%David Condos: 0.2%KUER: 0.3%Primacy Effect0.0%This article: 1.4%David Condos: 0.2%KUER: 0.1%Blind-Spot Bias1.4%This article: 0.0%David Condos: 0.4%KUER: 0.6%Ad Hominem0.0%This article: 1.8%David Condos: 0.3%KUER: 0.4%Straw Man1.8%This article: 2.2%David Condos: 5.6%KUER: 4.7%Appeal to Authority2.2%This article: 3.3%David Condos: 1.5%KUER: 1.7%False Dilemma3.3%This article: 0.0%David Condos: 2.3%KUER: 1.1%Slippery Slope0.0%This article: 0.0%David Condos: 0.1%KUER: 0.2%Circular Reasoning0.0%This article: 2.2%David Condos: 2.6%KUER: 4.1%Hasty Generalization2.2%This article: 0.0%David Condos: 0.1%KUER: 0.2%Red Herring0.0%This article: 0.0%David Condos: 0.5%KUER: 0.7%Bandwagon0.0%This article: 0.7%David Condos: 5.3%KUER: 5.6%Appeal to Emotion0.7%This article: 0.0%David Condos: 0.6%KUER: 0.7%Begging the Question0.0%This article: 3.8%David Condos: 2.9%KUER: 2.4%Post Hoc (False Cause)3.8%This article: 0.0%David Condos: 0.0%KUER: 0.1%Tu Quoque0.0%This article: 0.0%David Condos: 0.4%KUER: 0.4%Burden of Proof0.0%This article: 0.0%David Condos: 0.5%KUER: 0.2%Appeal to Nature0.0%This article: 0.0%David Condos: 0.3%KUER: 0.3%Composition/Division0.0%This article: 0.0%David Condos: 2.1%KUER: 3.1%Anecdotal0.0%This article: 0.0%David Condos: 0.0%KUER: 0.1%No True Scotsman0.0%This article: 0.0%David Condos: 1.0%KUER: 1.5%Ambiguity (Equivocation)0.0%This article: 0.0%David Condos: 0.0%KUER: 0.0%Gambler’s Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%David Condos: 0.1%KUER: 0.2%Middle Ground0.0%This article: 0.0%David Condos: 0.1%KUER: 0.1%Personal Incredulity0.0%This article: 0.0%David Condos: 0.0%KUER: 0.1%Special Pleading0.0%This article: 0.0%David Condos: 0.2%KUER: 0.2%Genetic Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%David Condos: 0.4%KUER: 0.8%Unattributed Quote0.0%This article: 0.0%David Condos: 0.4%KUER: 0.7%Quote-first Misdirection0.0%This article: 1.7%David Condos: 1.8%KUER: 2.2%Biased Writer Voice1.7%This article: 5.7%David Condos: 2.5%KUER: 1.6%Indoctrination5.7%This article: 5.0%David Condos: 2.1%KUER: 0.8%Politically Left Leaning Bias5.0%This article: 0.0%David Condos: 0.4%KUER: 0.3%Politically Right Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 5.0%David Condos: 0.5%KUER: 1.0%Attempt to Sell a Product or S…5.0%

938 words analyzed.

Speakers

3speakers62%attributed speech358writer words
Voice mapSelect a segment to jump to its words
Writer's voice • 16 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 10 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 22 words • 0.0% coverageJennifer Eden • 38 words • 0.0% coverageJennifer Eden • 19 words • 0.0% coverageJennifer Eden • 5 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 10 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 17 words • 0.0% coverageSean Gallagher • 25 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 21 words • 0.0% coverageSean Gallagher • 26 words • 0.0% coverageSean Gallagher • 21 words • 0.0% coverageSean Gallagher • 18 words • 0.0% coverageSolar Energy Industries Association • 24 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 28 words • 0.0% coverageSean Gallagher • 17 words • 0.0% coverageSean Gallagher • 16 words • 0.0% coverageSean Gallagher • 7 words • 0.0% coverageSean Gallagher • 31 words • 0.0% coverageSean Gallagher • 19 words • 0.0% coverageSean Gallagher • 9 words • 0.0% coverageSean Gallagher • 4 words • 0.0% coverageSean Gallagher • 6 words • 0.0% coverageSean Gallagher • 21 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 18 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 11 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 28 words • 0.0% coverageJennifer Eden • 33 words • 0.0% coverageJennifer Eden • 18 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 14 words • 0.0% coverageJennifer Eden • 12 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 21 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 12 words • 0.0% coverageJennifer Eden • 18 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 21 words • 0.0% coverageJennifer Eden • 20 words • 100.0% coverageJennifer Eden • 33 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 31 words • 100.0% coverageSean Gallagher • 36 words • 0.0% coverageSolar Energy Industries Association • 19 words • 0.0% coverageSean Gallagher • 18 words • 100.0% coverageSean Gallagher • 23 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 29 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 31 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 18 words • 0.0% coverageSean Gallagher • 16 words • 0.0% coverageSean Gallagher • 15 words • 0.0% coverageSean Gallagher • 13 words • 0.0% coverage
Selected voice

Sean Gallagher

78%flagged-word coverage
341 attributed words59% of attributed speech67% writer coverage
0%7.5%15.0%Politically Left Leaning B-13.1 ptsWriter: 13.1%Sean Gallagher: 0.0%0.0%Attempt to Sell a Product -2.8 ptsWriter: 8.1%Sean Gallagher: 5.3%5.3%Biased Writer Voice-4.5 ptsWriter: 4.5%Sean Gallagher: 0.0%0.0%

Attribution is sentence-level. Pattern percentages are calculated only from words assigned to that voice.

Loading…
Loading…
Loading…
Loading…
Loading…
Loading…

Analysis

Hover over highlighted words in the article to view the associated bias or fallacy analysis.