The Fight

Sign In or Create an Account.

By continuing, you agree to the Terms of Service and acknowledge our Privacy Policy

Q&A

How to Find Consensus to Build More Transmission

A conversation with Cici Vu and Morgan Putnam of DNV Energy Systems

Cici Vu and Morgan Putnam
Heatmap Illustration

Today we’re speaking with Cici Vu and Morgan Putnam from DNV Energy Systems, who helped craft a must-read report out this week on community relations in transmission with Americans for Clean Energy Grid (ACEG). Their report compiles findings of a roundtable with environmentalists, Indigenous rights activists, developers, and individual land owners, and finds transmission can fare better than solar and wind in this current political climate – and that community benefit agreements can be helpful for getting projects across the finish line. But some issues divided the roundtable, including how to structure labor benefits to ensure lots of people get job opportunities from transmission.

The following is a lightly edited and abridged version of our conversation:

Jael: Can you walk me through what you and ACEG found as a part of your research?

Morgan: ACEG identify – like you have – that there is a realness to the community opposition that can arise with these projects. While there are clearly cases of money being spent to augment that, it doesn’t mean the opposition isn’t present. ACEG’s interest was to help make meaningful progress on this issue and figure out how we can do better to accelerate the rate at which we develop transmission. As the report calls out early on, development really proceeds at the pace of trust within a community.

Cici: There are a lot of reports out there on best practices. There are 1,500-page reports on desktop research and lots of interviews and so forth. But I think ACEG hit the nail on the head by bringing in the voices at the same table. With my expertise in mediation, we were able to do that. The recruiting of all the voices helped make the report more inclusive, and more comprehensive and more holistic in viewpoints and perspectives.

The other thing that was really important was bridging the technical aspects of these large infrastructure projects that are so complex that communities don’t understand [them.] Being able to bring the large complexities of these projects – transmission, in this case – and community needs and interest, and being able to translate and interpret and be able to talk to one another, is a core piece of this report.

The tool that gets us there is these community benefits agreements, project work agreements. And they only work well and are effective if they are co-developed with the voices, the developers, the landowners, the host communities alike.

Jael: Did you feel there was a need for a consensus on best practices for community engagement?

Cici: It’s a differentiator. It’s one of the reasons we’re doing this.

We all recognize the needs of load growth demand. But to most effectively advance some of these best practices and make them actionable, these trusted voices have to discuss and agree. Or not agree – because we have a non-consensus segment as well where there were issues that did not meet consensus. When that happened, we made a recommendation to continue the discussion toward consensus.

Jael: What issues were most difficult to find consensus on and why?

Cici: The big piece of tension was how would these projects treat workforce development [and] bring in a local workforce while balancing the needs of labor,because labor has the skills. For instance, one of the issues was that local workforces need to be up-skilled in a way that is much more structured and systematic because there are safety issues in climbing a pole and doing electrification and things like that.

Jael: At a high level, are we seeing a similar broad backlash to transmission like what we’re seeing in specific communities with solar and wind?

Morgan: No, we’re not. It could happen. But those types of things you’re referencing are not yet occurring in transmission. I think it is less likely but not impossible, because–

Jael: What about Grain Belt Express or what’s happened around Piedmont? Do those situations give you any pause?

Morgan: So Grain Belt I think a little bit but it’s in a different category in my mind. Grain Belt is a specific project and, well, just look at the MISO region where that project sits. MISO’s moving forward with a lot of transmission. That project is but one project and it is being developed by an independent transmission developer that has… I think they face additional hurdles at times by virtue of their independence.

Having said that, I think the earlier statement still applies to all transmission. It’s about trust. It’s something where I think if you have the trust and support of the communities, you’re going to be able to move the projects forward.

Cici: We’ve seen a lot of momentum in favor of longer term regional planning of transmission. We haven’t seen as much attention on the triggering words we see with solar, or wind, and the incoming administration for transmission. And we also have a lot of the load demand, which is data centers.

We’re all crossing our fingers with the incoming administration. It’s so unpredictable.

This article is exclusively
for Heatmap Plus subscribers.

Go deeper inside the politics, projects, and personalities
shaping the energy transition.
To continue reading
Create a free account or sign in to unlock more free articles.
or
Please enter an email address
By continuing, you agree to the Terms of Service and acknowledge our Privacy Policy
Q&A

How to Build a Socially Responsible Data Center

Chatting with DER Task Force’s Duncan Campbell.

The Fight Q&A subject.
Heatmap Illustration/Getty Images

This week’s conversation is with Duncan Campbell of DER Task Force and it’s about a big question: What makes a socially responsible data center? Campbell’s expansive background and recent focus on this issue made me take note when he recently asked that question on X. Instead of popping up in his replies, I asked him to join me here in The Fight. So shall we get started?

Oh, as always, the following conversation was lightly edited for clarity.

Keep reading...Show less
Yellow
Hotspots

The Indiana City Saying ‘Tech Yeah!’ to Data Centers

Plus the week’s biggest development fights.

The United States.
Heatmap Illustration/Getty Images

1. LaPorte County, Indiana — If you’re wondering where data centers are still being embraced in the U.S., look no further than the northwest Indiana city of LaPorte.

  • LaPorte’s city council this week unanimously approved the expansion of a data center campus already under construction. Local elected officials were positively giddy at the public hearing on the vote, with city mayor Tim Doherty donning an orange t-shirt exclaiming a pro-AI pun: “TECH YEAH!”
  • Doherty explained his enthusiasm at the hearing in simple dollars and cents. State cuts to education had “put our local schools in an impossible position,” he said, asking: “Will the 15% in revenue sharing give our kids a superior education and the best chance at a future in this tech-driven world?”
  • That revenue sharing Doherty referenced was Microsoft’s deal in March with LaPorte’s school corporation, which stated 15% of the data center’s property tax revenue would go to the corporation for 20 years. So good was that deal some city councilors were vocally defiant against those who were opposed to the project expansion.
  • “Microsoft seems like they’re going to be a good partner for the city. They care. They’re presenting what I think is a good deal and trying to take care of people around them. So I’m all for it and if anybody wants to vote me out, hey, go for it,” councilor Roger Galloway told the hearing room.
  • The lesson? Give lots of money to education and you’re more likely to get a permit. Tale as old as the mining industry.

2. Cumberland County, New Jersey — A broader splashback against AI infrastructure is building in South Jersey.

Keep reading...Show less
Yellow
Spotlight

Data Centers Are Splintering the American Right

Mounting evidence shows that Republican voters are rapidly turning against artificial intelligence.

Tucker Carlson and a data center protest sign.
Heatmap Illustration/Getty Images, Library of Congress

The data center backlash is causing a crisis of faith amongst American conservatives over land use, energy abundance, and corporate regulation. The Republican Party — not to mention the politics of AI infrastructure — may never be the same.

In the last week, I’ve seen a surge of Republican politicians pushing to temporarily ban data centers in conservative states. In South Carolina, Representative Nancy Mace, a leading GOP gubernatorial primary candidate, called for a statewide moratorium on new data centers. In Texas, the sitting agriculture commissioner Sid Miller proposed the same for the Lone Star State. Ditto in North Dakota where the idea got backing from a GOP primary candidate for a Public Service Commission seat.

Keep reading...Show less
Yellow