How are we going to build all that clean energy infrastructure? Considering private enterprise, public initiative, and hybrid approaches to the challenge of electricity transmission

Abstract

Any pathway to a net-zero-carbon energy system in the United States will require a staggering build-out of infrastructure for electricity generation and transmission, zero-carbon fuels, and carbon sequestration. To date, however, there has been hardly any conversation among policy analysts, let alone high-level policymakers, about how such a massive infrastructure initiative should be undertaken. We have abundant evidence that our existing system for electricity infrastructure expansion is slow, inefficient, and expensive. In a spring 2021 workshop, the Niskanen Center and the Clean Air Task Force convened a group of practitioners, advocates, and academics to consider how the nation can achieve such an unprecedented infrastructure build-out, using electricity transmission as a case study. This paper summarizes some key themes and policy ideas from that workshop. A central framing concept is that policy for transmission infrastructure is traditionally structured around the three “Ps”: planning, permitting, and paying. One important step forward would be to incorporate two additional Ps in policy design: participation (to include the perspectives and needs of the full range of stakeholders, especially local communities) and process (to provide a standard framework to spur project development and investment with clear expectations and accountability mechanisms). There was also broad support for the idea that a national transmission plan is needed to establish a clear set of goals and metrics across the many entities involved in moving electricity. From this foundation (3+2 “Ps” and a national plan) we describe a range of policy elements, then present two sample policy models for consideration, one emphasizing private enterprise and the other public initiative. While the objectives of the two sample initiatives are consistent, such as addressing conflicts in siting and permitting, they differ in the extent of federal authority that would be invoked. The problem of marshaling political support was beyond the scope of our discussion but must inform future development of the policy framework.