US Senate Moves to Cut Energy Permitting Red Tape: Which Breaks Out First, Clean Energy or Natural Gas?

The US Senate will vote on a 417-page bill on November 9, with the core goal of speeding up the approval process for energy projects. The more critical question is: will it push down greenhouse gas emissions from the US energy sector, or keep driving them higher?

The full name of the act is the Bipartisan American Affordability and Jobs Act, abbreviated as BAAJA. It targets the most frustrating part of the US federal permitting system: a large-scale power project, transmission line or natural gas pipeline usually has to go through years of environmental reviews and public procedures.

The current rules cannot bypass the National Environmental Policy Act and the Clean Water Act. It is a widely agreed consensus that the process is slow and overly complicated. BAAJA narrows the scope of projects that require federal permitting, sets clear deadlines for reviews, and includes additional clauses on transmission planning, mining and other areas. It is largely technology-neutral, keeping the door open for both fossil fuels and renewables.

That is why the coalition of supporters is surprisingly diverse. Four senators sponsored the bill, two Republicans and two Democrats. The White House backs the act, with the Council of Economic Advisers arguing it will cut review time and boost GDP. An analysis from the American Clean Power Association states that the bill could unlock 350 gigawatts of new clean energy for the power grid. The climate community has long called for permitting reform, with the logic that solar and wind are already cost-competitive, and once construction bottlenecks are removed, they will come out on top economically.

Some environmental groups are not convinced. An assessment from NRDC (Natural Resources Defense Council) notes that while the transmission provisions could bring major benefits to the grid, the narrowed environmental review scope could harm public and private lands.

Emissions models return divided results. An analysis from Rhodium Group lays out the best-case scenario: overall economy-wide emissions fall by 4%, average household energy bills drop by $78 a year, and 200 gigawatts of new clean energy is added by 2040, while in the worst-case scenario, emissions stay roughly flat. A report from Resources for the Future finds that power sector emissions will fall by 6% by 2041, with total system costs saving more than $350 billion by mid-century.

The main concern lies with natural gas. Data centers have driven up power demand, and a batch of new natural gas power plants have already been announced. Kevin Kircher, assistant professor of mechanical engineering at Purdue University and energy modeling researcher, points out there is a trade-off here: you expand the clean power industry on one hand, and as a compromise, expand the fossil fuel industry on the other. His modeling finds that if BAAJA had taken effect in 2025, energy sector emissions would be higher than the actual baseline, and health and mortality risks linked to air pollution would also rise.

This technology-neutral permitting reform is like speeding up the toll gate lifting process: the bill does not pick for you whether the speeding fleet is made up of wind turbines or gas-powered trucks. Faster construction means more clean energy, but also more natural gas. Electricity prices may fall, but demand could also be driven up, and the emissions ledger may not look positive.

The political timeline is also unstable. Midterm elections have just wrapped up, and with Democrats securing a clear victory, they may choose to wait until next year when they control both chambers of Congress to renegotiate the policy. But any final agreement will still need Donald Trump's signature, which limits what revisions the future bill can make.

Simplifying approval procedures and cutting red tape is a worthwhile move. But the final emissions outcome still depends on an old question: what exactly do you want to build?

Source: MIT Technology Review, Casey Crownhart, Original Article Link.