How DOE is trying to stop US renewables projects from getting derailed

A recent survey of U.S. developers from the Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory found that roughly one-third of wind and solar projects are canceled by local opposition, restrictive ordinances, and grid constraints.

The Department of Energy is trying to ease tensions with local communities that are restricting or prohibiting clean energy development by setting standards on community consultation and local economic benefits for projects that receive federal funding. DOE hopes this approach will secure more local buy-in. 

• The current take: The Department of Energy’s Community Benefits Plans framework “requires that every single applicant for DOE funding has to put together a plan for community benefits,” said Shalanda Baker, director of the department’s office of economic impact and diversity, in an interview with Jason Bordoff on the Columbia Energy Exchange podcast.
• The market grounding: Between the bipartisan infrastructure law and the Inflation Reduction Act, the Biden Administration has dedicated billions of dollars for clean energy projects. But local opposition to these projects is on the rise, according to the LBNL report, and another report by Columbia University’s Sabin Center for Climate Change Law. Local governments in nearly every state have established laws or regulations that block or restrict clean energy projects. 
• The outlook: DOE hopes upfront consultation and community benefit plans will reduce local opposition. With this approach “the development risk arguably goes down,” said Baker.

Even if projects are approved for development, communities can cause delays through organized opposition. The Sabin Center’s research found the number of projects contested by organized opposition rose 39% in 2023. 

According to investigative reporting, this opposition is fueled by social media misinformation, utility PR campaigns, and conservative financial backers.

Late last year, a judge in Oklahoma ordered a wind farm in Osage County to be removed after opposition from the Osage Nation, Bordoff pointed out. The project has been a point of contention for almost a decade.

“I argued that if we did not infuse equity and justice and indigenous rights at the outset, we were doomed or destined to replicate injustice in our march to avert catastrophic climate change,” said Baker about her early work on the energy transition. “That was very unpopular because back in the 2010s we were more concerned with having climate change be a part of the lexicon,” she added. 

Now, the CBPs framework, which Baker helped create, is embedded with energy justice initiatives, like requiring developers to create educational opportunities with minority-serving institutions. 

“In many of these distressed communities, because often their tax base has been eroded, their school systems are in disrepair. They don’t have a ready workforce to participate in these job opportunities that are going to be created,” Baker explained. 

But the long-term pay off of the projects makes it more difficult to secure community buy-in. “A lot of the benefits of these projects won’t be felt for another five to 10 years,” said Baker. “Getting folks to understand that these benefits are coming, we need you to be patient, we need you to work with us, is really one of the challenges.”

Even with the long timeline for showing benefits, Baker believes the approach will get more communities to support clean energy deployment. “In my view, this framework that we have created does ultimately reduce the development risk.”

Listen to the full interview covering Shalanda Baker’s background working on energy justice, updates on the Biden Administration’s Justice40 Initiative, and efforts to combat local opposition to clean energy projects: