The “litigation doom loop” is a huge problem for clean energy deployment.
Solar projects that receive the strictest level of NEPA environmental review have the highest litigation rate:
64%
By contrast, fossil fuel projects only have a 32% litigation rate.
.@ArnabDatta321 and @EnergyLawProf have an important piece in @mattyglesias’s Slow Boring today looking at how clean energy projects can get stuck in an indefinite cycle of environmental review, judicial injunction, and then remand for more review.
@ArnabDatta321 @EnergyLawProf @mattyglesias It's so perverse that the strictest level of environmental review disproportionately slows down clean energy projects.
From 2012-2018:
60% of all environmental impact statements for energy projects were for transmission/solar/wind/hydro/etc
New report from the Center for American Progress claims that "NEPA functions as a critical climate action & environmental justice tool requiring agencies to consider the environmental & public health impacts of projects."
But NEPA is actually delaying pro-climate projects...
1/ The most stringent level of environmental review under NEPA is used way more often for clean energy projects than for fossil fuel projects.
Many fossil fuel projects are “categorically excluded” from NEPA even though similar scale clean energy projects aren't.
2/ Offshore wind is especially vulnerable to permitting delays:
Hard to believe that these two countries are on the same island...
"As recently as 1960, the two countries had similar standards of living. Today, the D.R., by some measures, is eight times as rich as Haiti, while Haiti’s standard of living hasn’t advanced at all since 1950." @Noahpinion
This is probably just a negotiating position from Republican leadership, but seems like a great way to kill a bipartisan deal.
Democrats in both the House and Senate have been consistently clear that permitting reform must include transmission.
The NYT editorial board had a very good article last week explaining why transmission is critical to accelerating clean energy deployment: nytimes.com/2023/05/04/opi…