CCL’s Transmission Reform and Key Messages

America's old and outdated power grid has become a critical bottleneck preventing the country from adding the needed new clean energy sources that will reduce climate pollution while improving energy affordability and security. Join CCL's VP of Government Affairs Jenn Tyler and Research Manager Dana Nuccitelli to learn about why transmission reforms are a crucial climate solution, the details of potential transmission permitting reform provisions, and key messages for congressional offices.

Why Transmission is Critical

America's energy grid is the invisible backbone of the clean energy transition — and right now, it's the single biggest bottleneck standing between us and meaningful climate progress.

Large new power-generating facilities like  wind farms, solar arrays, and geothermal plants tend to be located far from the households and businesses that need their electricity. Transmission lines are the highway system for electrons: without them, cheap clean energy can't get where it's needed. That’s why most of the climate pollution reductions achievable through permitting reform come specifically from expanding transmission. Insufficient transmission capacity is a key bottleneck slowing down additions of new cheap clean energy to the grid. And a stronger grid isn't just good for the climate — it also makes electricity more stable, secure, and affordable for everyone.

Key Insight

The National Academies of Science put it plainly: "Perhaps the single greatest risk to a successful energy transition during the 2020s is the risk that the nation fails to site, modernize, and build out the electrical grid." They go further: the need for new transmission during this decade is unprecedented, and without it we risk falling back on more fossil fuel generation. Similarly, financial analysts at Barclays have concluded that slow grid expansion — not clean technology cost — is now the binding constraint on electrification.

Transmission's Political Climate

How We Got Here

For decades, transmission was a fairly quiet, nonpartisan issue. Decisions were driven by utilities and grid operators, focused mainly on reliability, and mostly concerned with moving electricity from fossil fuel power plants from place to place. It wasn't the kind of thing that generated political heat.

That changed when electricity demand began rising fast for the first time in decades. Three forces drove that shift: the data center boom, electrification of homes and vehicles, and manufacturing reshoring. At the same time, wind and solar became the cheapest sources of new electricity. Suddenly, expanding the grid became both urgently necessary and politically charged.

What Has Changed in Congress

Federal backstop permitting authority and cost-sharing policies — both key to building long-distance transmission expediently — became central flashpoints. Republicans grew wary of expanded federal siting power, which they viewed through the lens of states’ rights, and the potential that some Americans could be forced to pay for transmission lines that they don’t benefit from. But that resistance has softened considerably as members of Congress from both parties have confronted the reality of rising power demand from data centers and domestic manufacturing in their own districts.

Where Things Stand Today

Democrats consider transmission a top priority in permitting reform negotiations. They see it as the backbone of climate progress and a way to keep the clean energy transition on track after rollbacks to the IRA, as well as a boon to energy affordability and security.

Republicans have become increasingly open to transmission reform, driven primarily by concerns about grid reliability, consumer energy costs, and the energy demands of data centers and manufacturing reshoring — not climate.

The Tension Points

Progress on transmission faces several real friction points:

Federal backstop authority — Should the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission have the authority to take over the permitting process for important interstate transmission line projects (in coordination with states) when states take too long to act?

Cost allocation — Who pays for how much of new transmission lines?

Local land use opposition — Communities and landowners often resist new lines crossing their property.

 Incumbent power plant revenue — Existing fossil fuel generators stand to lose revenue when cheap distant power can compete in their markets.

"Green Energy Subsidy" narrative — Some frame transmission investments as a backdoor clean energy subsidy, which creates resistance even when the grid benefits are broad.

Potential Policy Solutions

Interstate transmission line federal backstop permitting authority — Allows federal agencies to site lines when states cannot agree, ensuring that  important projects aren't permanently blocked.

Interregional Transmission Planning — Requires grid operators to coordinate planning across regional boundaries, identifying where new lines are most needed.

Standard cost allocation approach — Establishes clear rules for who pays for new transmission and how those costs are shared, reducing uncertainty for investors and ratepayers alike.

Make FERC the lead agency — Streamlines the federal permitting process by designating the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission as the primary coordinating authority.

Grid Enhancing Technologies (GETs) — Incentivizes deployment of technologies that increase the capacity of existing lines without new construction.

Categorical Exclusions for certain transmission projects — Allows lower-impact projects like the installation of GETs to move forward with a less-detailed environmental review.

Transmission tax credits — Financial incentives to accelerate private investment in grid infrastructure.

The BIG WIRES Act

In this area, CCL formerly advocated for the Building Integrated Grids With Inter-Regional Energy Supply (BIG WIRES) Act. It would have directed FERC to require each transmission planning region (except Texas) to increase interregional transfer capacity to the lesser of its current capacity plus 15% of peak load, or 30% of the region's peak load. However, some congressional offices were concerned about setting a specific quantitative requirement, and so subsequent legislation has tended to exclude this aspect of BIG WIRES.

Would Transmission Policy Actually Save Money?

Yes — substantially. Building long-distance transmission lines costs billions of dollars upfront, but it unlocks access to cheaper clean power sources and allows that power to be shared more efficiently. A new study found approximately $5 billion in potential annual savings from more interregional transmission — and that figure doesn't even include the economic value of reduced power outages. Independent analyses consistently find that the economic benefits of expanded transmission exceed costs by roughly 1.5 to 3 times.

What About Climate Pollution?

RMI analyzed the climate pollution impact of the Energy Permitting Reform Act’s transmission provisions, alongside FERC Order 1920 and estimated that together, these policies would accelerate transmission expansion by 2–4 times today's rate. New transmission would allow the U.S. grid to deploy large amounts of clean energy, meet rising electricity demand, and displace fossil fuel generation. In their central scenario, RMI estimates the EPRA would help reduce emissions by approximately 6.5 billion tons of CO₂ equivalent cumulatively through 2050.

To put that in context:

Transmission permitting reform is, in effect, equivalent to restoring the IRA in climate impact. This makes it the big climate policy opportunity of this moment — and one where CCL can play a meaningful role.

Key Messages on Transmission

Effective advocacy on transmission looks different depending on who you're talking to. Meeting your member of Congress where they are — using the frames that resonate with their district and priorities — is the key to effective lobbying.

For Republican Offices

Republicans are generally open to transmission reform for reliability and economic reasons. Lead with:

• Grid reliability — More transmission connections mean fewer blackouts and more resilience when extreme weather hits.
• Energy dominance — A stronger grid positions America to lead on energy production and export.
• Economic competitiveness — Manufacturers and data centers need reliable, affordable power to locate and grow in the U.S.
• Affordability — More transmission means more competition and lower consumer electricity costs.
• Domestic energy supply — The manufacturing reshoring and data center boom require more power. Transmission unlocks it.

Avoid leading with the climate angle with Republican offices. The economic and reliability case is stronger and more resonant.

For Democratic Offices

Democratic Members of Congress are generally already supportive of transmission expansion. The job here is not persuasion — it's conveying urgency and connecting the stakes to what's at risk.

• Transmission as the backbone of climate progress — Without grid expansion, clean energy can't reach the people who need it.
• Restoring what was lost — Transmission reform can restore the emissions reductions lost in the IRA rollback. This is a direct path to climate impact right now.
• Reliability and affordability — These are cross-cutting benefits that strengthen the public case.
• Keeping the transition on track — Every year of delay is a year of continued fossil fuel generation that didn't have to happen.

Ready to Test Your Understanding?

Complete the knowledge check to reinforce these concepts and earn credit for this training.

Start Knowledge Check

Why is transmission considered the most important permitting reform for climate?

• It creates the most new jobs in clean energy
• It unlocks the largest climate pollution reductions of any permitting reform
• It is the easiest reform to pass in Congress
• It primarily benefits coastal states

Most of the climate pollution reductions achievable through permitting reform come from expanding transmission. RMI estimates the Energy Permitting Reform Act alone could reduce grid emissions by 6.5 billion tons cumulatively through 2050 — equivalent to restoring the full IRA.

What has made Republicans more open to transmission reform in recent years?

• Concern about climate change
• Pressure from environmental groups
• Rising power demand from data centers and manufacturing reshoring
• Opposition to fossil fuels

Republican resistance to transmission reform has softened primarily because of rising power demand from data centers and domestic manufacturing — both of which require reliable, affordable electricity that a stronger grid can provide.

Which of the following is NOT one of the main tension points in transmission reform negotiations?

• Cost allocation (who pays for new lines?)
• Federal backstop permitting authority
• Opposition from solar and wind developers
• Local land use concerns

The main tension points in transmission reform are cost allocation, federal backstop authority, local land use opposition, incumbent power plant revenue impacts, and the "green energy subsidy" narrative. Solar and wind developers generally support more transmission.

What does the BIG WIRES Act do?

• Bans new fossil fuel transmission projects
• Requires each transmission planning region to increase interregional transfer capacity
• Creates a new federal agency for grid oversight
• Provides tax credits for transmission construction

The BIG WIRES Act directs FERC to require each transmission planning region to increase interregional transfer capacity to the lesser of its current capacity plus 15% of peak load, or 30% of the region's peak load.

When talking to a Republican Member of Congress about transmission, what should you lead with?

• The climate benefits of a cleaner grid
• Grid reliability, energy dominance, and economic competitiveness
• The need to phase out fossil fuels
• Federal authority over state energy decisions

With Republican offices, lead with grid reliability, energy dominance, economic competitiveness, and affordability. Avoid leading with the climate angle — the economic and reliability case is far more resonant.

Skip ahead to the following section(s):

• (0:00) Intro & Agenda
• (1:36) Why Transmission is Important
• (4:00) Transmission’s Political Climate
• (13:10) Challenges and Policy Solutions
• (24:46) What about Climate Pollution?
• (31:08) Does the Analysis Still Hold?
• (33:29) Key Messages on Transmission
• Q&A Discussion (https://vimeo.com/1171119377/5007bd42b2?share=copy&fl=sv&fe=ci)

• Jenn Tyler
• Dana Nuccitelli

Presentation Slides: https://cclusa.org/transmission-reform-slides 

Log your training

Instructions for printing this page on Community.