It’s well known that the pace of adding new wind and solar projects to the grid needs to double to meaningfully reduce emissions by mid-century. But what’s less well recognized is that many people hoping to welcome clean energy into their communities are being increasingly and systematically denied the opportunity. Local bans on clean energy are sweeping the nation: roughly 15% of counties have effectively banned new wind or solar projects, and half of the counties that banned solar did so in 2023 alone.

The typical remedy prescribed for what many see as merely a community opposition problem is to seek to win over opponents through more community engagement and more financial benefits. It’s certainly the case that more of both are typically warranted and that some projects are poorly designed or ill-suited to a community and ought not to proceed. But this well-meaning diagnosis misses an unfortunate reality: in many cases, a handful of project opponents have weaponized the clean energy permitting process to block projects and deny their neighbors the benefits these projects could provide. 

State legislatures can sit passively by as their constituents are denied economic opportunities, or act – as several states have – to create policies that allow responsibly designed projects to advance. Projects that capitalize on the reliability, affordability, and environmental benefits of clean energy and incorporate fulsome community input, meaningful economic benefits, and protection of the environment.

Ineffective siting policies–the rules under which large-scale wind, solar, and sometimes batteries receive state and local approvals–are now among the top barriers to affordable, reliable, and clean energy in the United States. Developers canceled one-third of wind and solar projects in the past five years, often due to local permitting restrictions and community opposition. These canceled projects represent 36 gigawatts and billions of dollars of unrealized clean energy development and are why clean energy developers often say that local siting challenges are what keep them up at night. If this siting barrier remains unaddressed, local restrictions will cause us to fall far short of state and national clean energy ambitions. The more these policies proliferate, the harder they are to stop.

America’s patchwork of state and county jurisdiction complicates the problem. States differ widely on how clean energy projects are permitted: in some states an agency is in charge; in others each county or town must decide which projects are allowed to move forward and on what terms. Some states have more than a thousand such jurisdictions, each with their own permitting process. Many of these local jurisdictions have embraced the climate, health, and economic benefits clean energy projects provide. Unfortunately, some have chosen to ban all new clean energy projects. For those that don’t outright block projects, the predictability, quality, and rapidity of project reviews varies widely–often left to permitting officials with too few resources or expertise to give projects a reasonable review.

Adding fuel to the fire, clean energy has become imbued with politics as never seen before. In some parts of the country, blocking wind and solar projects has become a cultural cudgel. Elsewhere, bipartisanship reigns–local governments of diverse political persuasions work to stop clean energy projects. More often than not, fossil industry-funded misinformation campaigns intensify hostility. And yet, research consistently finds that a strong majority of Americans want more clean energy, and a strong majority of neighbors of wind and solar projects seem to like them. 

Recognizing the incongruity of enthusiasm for clean energy with the inability to build projects, state legislatures are developing a diverse set of laws that help move well-designed clean energy projects forward. The most complete are those passed in the past four years in California, New York, Illinois, and Michigan. Each state took a distinctive approach to both better balance the interests of clean energy supporters with the concerns of the people who oppose them and to reconcile the need to move fast with the need to proceed carefully.

Other state legislatures have caught on; by our count, legislatures in six states are likely to introduce major siting policy reforms in 2025. Yet these states are flying blind. Despite a growing understanding of the importance of clean energy siting, little is known about which type of policy is likely to deliver on the legislatures’ goals. And well-intentioned policy, poorly designed, can cause more problems than it solves.

We founded Clean Tomorrow to catalyze rapid emissions reductions through policies that lead to lasting community and economic benefits. That’s why we are focusing so much of our attention on supporting state legislatures, clean energy advocates, communities, and others navigating siting policy reforms. We are conducting rigorous analysis and stakeholder engagement to identify the most promising policies to maximize the benefits clean energy provides–for communities, the environment, and the electric grid. And that focus will continue apace, no matter the outcome of the 2024 elections.

The weaponization of local siting processes may be a serious obstacle to clean energy, but it’s not an insurmountable one. States have the legislative tools to overcome this challenge, and they have the support from organizations like ours in crafting policy that works. But every month that clean energy opponents are able to take advantage of local siting to block new development will mean more canceled projects, more unrealized clean energy potential, and more communities denied the economic and environmental benefits these projects can bring. It’s time to get to work.