Exclusive: How the permitting bill could change the energy landscape
· axios.com · popularity 34/100 · 0 similar stories today · Science & Research Methods (Discovery & Research)
Read the original at axios.com →
Summary
Data: Resources for the Future; Note: Central RFF scenario ; Chart: Ben Geman/Axios The Senate permitting plan would cut emissions from power plants in the near term and help keep electricity prices down, a new analysis finds. Why it matters: The study from scholars at Resources for the Future, a nonpartisan think tank, offers some of the most detailed independent modeling yet of the bill 's effects. It will help inform lobbying and advocacy around the bill ahead of a test vote looming on Nov. 9. Driving the news: The analysis models how the bill would affect the power sector compared with current law and policies. Among the findings from its central scenario: It would drive "robust" transmission expansion ( see above ), enabling "use of additional clean energy and existing resources of all types." Overall electricity system costs are an estimated 3.5% to 7% lower each year through 2041 compared to a no-bill baseline, saving over $350 billion total through 2050 in present-value terms. That should translate into lower electricity bills for people, co-author Kevin Rennert tells Axios, though the study does not directly model retail prices. The bill would boost the build-out of renewables, partly enabled by expansion of transmission, with added clean energy displacing fossil fuels even though additions of gas-fired capacity still occur. CO2 from the power sector would initially drop as more coal is edged aside, and then climb over time — but remain below levels projected without the bill. By the numbers: In 2028, there's roughly 60 gigawatts more clean energy capacity on the grid in the study's central outlook compared to a baseline of current law and policy. Data: Resources for the Future; Chart: Ben Geman/Axios The intrigue: The RFF analysis shows how it sees the bill initially pushing power plant emissions downward. Even that eventual upward trend is hardly guaranteed. This kind of study is by definition packed with assumptions and variables that the authors acknowledge — the future being the future and all. For instance, it uses a "high-electrification demand scenario to represent the rapid increase in demand from data centers and other sources." Yes, but: The study — which uses a model developed by the Energy Department's National Laboratory of the Rockies — doesn't attempt to analyze every aspect of the wide-ranging bill. For example, it does not capture how changes in environmental laws would affect mining, pipelines, and various activities outside the power sector. Catch up quick: There's a lot of other analysis flying around in the intense public and closed-door lobbying over the bill. A new White House study finds the bill would eventually boost GDP by $82 billion to $164 billion annually and provide substantial savings on power bills. And Punchbowl News reports that the Solar Energy Industries Association is circulating an analysis on Capitol Hill showing that under the bill, solar and wind would together provide over 37% of power generation in 2035 vs. around 20% under "obstructed permitting." What we're watching: Emissions, renewables deployment, and costs are several factors in the permitting bill battle, but hardly the only ones as some environmentalists and other critics take aim at the bill. Other contested terrain includes the effect on consultation with Native American tribes, historic preservation, and more. The NAACP, for instance, is out with a new document strongly criticizing the bill. Sign up here for Axios' Future of Energy newsletter.
Found in: Axios. Rating basis: single outlet; outlet tier 4; 1 feeds; feed position 1.