The Fight

Sign In or Create an Account.

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

Spotlight

‘Enhanced’ Reviews Await Power Lines Tied to Solar and Wind, BLM Says

Uh oh.

•
Power lines.
Heatmap Illustration/Getty Images

The Bureau of Land Management says it will be heavily scrutinizing transmission lines if they are expressly necessary to bring solar or wind energy to the power grid.

Since the beginning of July, I’ve been reporting out how the Trump administration has all but halted progress for solar and wind projects on federal lands through a series of orders issued by the Interior Department. But last week, I explained it was unclear whether transmission lines that connect to renewable energy projects would be subject to the permitting freeze. I also identified a major transmission line in Nevada – the north branch of NV Energy’s Greenlink project – as a crucial test case for the future of transmission siting in federal rights-of-way under Trump. Greenlink would cross a litany of federal solar leases and has been promoted as “essential to helping Nevada achieve its de-carbonization goals and increased renewable portfolio standard.”

Well, BLM has now told me Greenlink North will still proceed despite a delay made public shortly after permitting was frozen for renewables, and that the agency still expects to publish the record of decision for the line in September.

This is possible because, as BLM told me, transmission projects that bring solar and wind power to the grid will be subject to heightened scrutiny. In an exclusive statement, BLM press secretary Brian Hires told me via e-mail that a secretarial order choking out solar and wind permitting on federal lands will require “enhanced environmental review for transmission lines only when they are a part of, and necessary for, a wind or solar energy project.”

However, if a transmission project is not expressly tied to wind or solar or is not required for those projects to be constructed… apparently, then it can still get a federal green light. For instance in the case of Greenlink, the project itself is not explicitly tied to any single project, but is kind of like a transmission highway alongside many potential future solar projects. So a power line can get approved if it could one day connect to wind or solar, but the line’s purpose cannot solely be for a wind or solar project.

This is different than, say, lines tied explicitly to connecting a wind or solar project to an existing transmission network. Known as gen-tie lines, these will definitely face hardships with this federal government. This explains why, for example, BLM has yet to approve a gen-tie line for a wind project in Wyoming that would connect the Lucky Star wind project to the grid.

At the same time, it appears projects may be given a wider berth if a line has other reasons for existing, like improving resilience on the existing grid, or can be flexibly used by not just renewables but also fossil energy.

So, the lesson to me is that if you’re trying to build transmission infrastructure across federal property under this administration, you might want to be a little more … vague.

Yellow

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
Plus

The Promise and Peril of the Blue Wave for Renewables

Talking with Arnab Pal, the executive director of Deploy Action.

•
The Q&A subject.
Heatmap Illustration

This week’s conversation is with Arnab Pal, executive director of Deploy Action, president of Clean Infrastructure Advisors, and former principal advisor at the Energy Department’s Loan Programs Office under the Biden administration alongside Jigar Shah.

I reached out to Pal for guidance on where he saw state-level policy going around renewables development after the 2026 blue wave election. Simply put, few could’ve provided better guidance. We have no idea what could happen next after an unprecedented election result, but he couldn’t have been more clear-eyed and, as he put it to me, focused on the future. I appreciated our conversation and decided it was worthwhile to provide it to you in full.

Keep reading...Show less
Yellow
Spotlight

Was This Really the Data Center Election?

Evidence suggests data center concerns probably didn’t actually flip many votes.

•
Voting signs and a data center.
Heatmap Illustration/Getty Images, Library of Congress

This week’s midterm elections were undeniably horrible for the data center industry. But a closer look indicates dominant media narratives about the impact of AI infrastructure on voting behavior also deserve more scrutiny.

On election night, candidates who railed against data center sprawl during their campaigns won across the country, including statewide races in red areas. The most striking example was Gina Hinojosa, now governor-elect for the data center-centric state of Texas, who ran on instituting a complete pause on projects across the Lone Star State. So striking was her win, it sent AI and data center stocks into freefall. Cleanview, a clean energy news and data site, said Hinojosa’s pause, if put into effect, could affect up to 88.4 gigawatts of “planned” data center development, depending on how it's implemented.

Keep reading...Show less
Yellow
Hotspots

The Place Where a Candidate Promising to Do Less on Data Centers Actually Won

And more of the week’s top fights around development.

•
The United States.
Heatmap Illustration/Getty Images

1. McCracken County, Kentucky – A rare bright spot for the data center sector quietly occurred in deep red Kentucky in a race defined by what’ll likely be the first project built on federal land.

  • As I previously reported, a large data center project became the primary point of conflict in the race for McCracken County’s judge-executive. The incumbent Republican Craig Clymer had welcomed the project, and faced a challenge from independent George Bray, mayor of the county’s largest city of Paducah. Bray also supported the data center but said his city, which is adjacent to the project, should’ve received more demarcated benefits. Bray called for a community benefit agreement.
  • Turns out voters in McCracken County didn’t care enough about this issue to make a change and wanted to keep Clymer in office. He won handily, netting more than 12,000 votes to Bray’s roughly 7,600. It’s one of the few races across the country that went in favor of the candidate promising to do less when it came to data centers.

2. Pulaski County, Arkansas – After a blue wave election in Little Rock, this county government is on a collision course with data center development.

Keep reading...Show less
Yellow