Manchin’s permit reform imploded — now what?

To solve climate change, America needs an enormous buildout of clean energy infrastructure, manufacturing and supply chains.

The recent failed attempt to enact Sen. Joe Manchin’s (D-W.Va.) permitting plan provides friends and foes alike breathing room to step back and take a deeper look at what is needed on federal permitting reform, and to find the best path to get there.

The demise of the Manchin plan was the surest display yet of the rising political clout of the environmental justice movement. Frontline communities led a coalition of national environmental groups and other allies to successfully derail the Manchin plan, which was drafted without any input from communities already overburdened with toxic pollution.

More than 80 Democrats in the House and Senate stood up to Majority Leader Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) and President Biden, who had both agreed to support this side deal with Manchin to secure his crucial vote for the Inflation Reduction Act.  

It shouldn’t be lost, however, that the fight on the Manchin permitting plan also caused a rare split among Democratic climate hawks, and that some of the clean energy business lobby supported Manchin’s approach.

This dangerous rift needs to be quickly mended. A divided clean energy coalition will be easy prey for the fossil fuel lobby, jeopardizing the recent congressional breakthroughs on renewable energy.  

Those divisions will only get worse if Schumer and the White House try to resurrect the Manchin plan like a zombie. And to what end?

The political math for Manchin’s grand bargain doesn’t add up. Many Democrats balked at the fossil fuel goodies in the Manchin plan, while most Republicans demanded additional fossil fuel concessions.

Chasing Republican votes for a resurrected Manchin plan would require a devil’s bargain. The GOP counter-proposal includes major rewrites to weaken the Clean Water Act, the Clean Air Act and the Endangered Species Act, as well as a prohibition against considering the costs of climate change in issuing permits. Concessions in this direction will surely strengthen resistance among Democrats.

Resurrecting the Manchin plan to negotiate with Republicans will only deepen divisions and cloud America’s clean energy future.

There is a better path.

Democrats should focus first on what they can control: unifying their own caucus and bringing back together the winning coalition of outside interests that helped deliver the best parts of the Inflation Reduction Act.

Rep. Raul Grijalva (D-Ariz.), chairman of the House committee that is responsible for permitting reform, and 80 other members of the House Sustainable Energy and Environment Coalition have already shined a light on a more inclusive process to “bring about a clean energy future as rapidly and equitably as possible.”

They can start with the one part of the Manchin plan that has widespread interest: accelerating the buildout of grid infrastructure to support rapid decarbonization and move electric power reliably and affordably from regions with strong wind and solar potential to population centers.

The Manchin plan addresses two critical transmission topics: cost allocation for new infrastructure and the balance of power between states and the federal government for issuing permits.

However, that transmission discussion can’t unfold properly until it is freed from the hostage situation constructed by the Manchin plan, which mashes together two irreconcilable goals: building renewable energy and long-lasting natural gas infrastructure.

Natural gas and renewable power are the main competitors for the future of American energy. Natural gas causes as much climate pollution as coal because methane is an especially potent climate-altering pollutant. Legislation that simultaneously accelerates the long-term infrastructure of both natural gas and renewable energy is a rudderless mess.

The Biden administration recently acknowledged the importance of shifting infrastructure away from fossil fuels. In comments on the proposed Willow oil project in Alaska, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) cited analysis by the International Energy Agency and wrote, “the science is clear that no new oil, gas, or coal development is permissible if the world is to reach net zero carbon emissions by 2050.”

Congress will have its hands full as it looks to ways to equitably expedite permitting for clean energy projects. They need to find a better approach than the Manchin plan, which favored permitting shortcuts, time limits for issuing permits and limiting community access to the courts.

Instead, clean energy supporters should take a clear-eyed look at the real issue at the heart of this fight: conflicts between energy developers and local communities.

Permitting is the refereed playing field to sort out those tensions. Tilting that playing field toward developers may embolden developers to wait out the clock on local communities, but it will not stop those communities from blocking unwanted projects.

The Manchin plan’s efforts to marginalize community rights and environmental justice concerns would have exactly the opposite effect as what is needed, leading to more conflict that undermines investor confidence.

The best way to speed up projects is for energy developers to engage communities early in the process with transparent information and a plan to take local concerns and equity into consideration and share economic benefits with affected communities.

The Inflation Reduction Act took a major step in this direction by giving federal agencies an infusion of money to boost their thinly staffed permitting offices.

One promising bill is the Environmental Justice for All Act, which require federal agencies to provide early and meaningful community involvement opportunities. The bill was developed transparently with extensive and inclusive input from communities across the nation. The bill already has the support of 14 Senate Democrats, 106 House Democrats and 175 environmental, environmental justice, civil rights and allied organizations.

The midterm elections will shape whether congress can get a worthwhile bill to the president’s desk. In the meantime, a unified Democratic permitting agenda will help inform President Biden and energy regulators as they pursue reforms with executive action. 

Jeremy Symons is principal of Symons Public Affairs. He was the project manager of Climate 21, a blueprint for “whole-of-government” presidential climate leadership. He previously worked at Environmental Defense Fund and for Democrats in the United States Senate.