What next for the licensing law?

Legislation to strengthen the nation’s electricity grid and speed up energy permitting cleared a major hurdle in the Senate on Wednesday, drawing applause from clean and conventional energy lobbyists in a hearing room in the Dirksen Building.

But the joy may be short-lived as major obstacles to passing new legislation continue to loom in an election year of complete unpredictability.

Even if the bill comes up for a Senate vote in the coming months, House Republicans appear lukewarm about the idea of ​​a permitting and transmission package. The White House, while supportive of previous permitting efforts, has been quiet this time.

Despite these obstacles, the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee passed a compromise bill, S. 4753, authored by Chairman Joe Manchin (IW.Va.) and member John Barrasso (R-Wyo.), by a vote of 15-4. Manchin and Barrasso called the result “tremendous,” “unprecedented” and “encouraging” to reporters after the amendment was introduced.

“We just did this for a year and a half in the most bipartisan way possible,” Manchin said. “And we did it in the most toxic atmosphere. I think it’s pretty surprising to a lot of people that we’ve gotten this far.”

Barrasso, a staunch supporter who is running unopposed for the Republican Party leadership, summed up the victory this way: “We have a really good step here toward American energy independence,” he said, adding that it would be a step toward “ending our dependence on China.”

The strong committee vote raised hopes that the tough policy issue could succeed later in the year. The package includes a mix of technical and permitting measures for transmission lines, renewable energy — including geothermal — and oil, gas and coal.

After Manchin effectively defeated all but one proposed amendment — one from Sen. Steve Daines (R-Mont.) that would have sped up the review of forestry projects — he was optimistic, even if he had few specific answers for reporters about what would come next.

“We hope to get this done before the end of the year,” said Manchin, who is retiring and wants to make permitting a legacy issue.

He could not say whether Majority Leader Chuck Schumer would hold a vote on the Senate floor — it takes 60 votes in the upper chamber to overcome a filibuster — and was similarly vague about the opinion of the White House, which did not respond to multiple requests for comment on the bill.

“I’ve had brief conversations with them,” Manchin said. “But not intensely, because we had to go through the process first. We’re the legislative branch. We’ll see what happens, but they’re going to engage now.”

White House climate adviser John Podesta backed Manchin’s 2023 permitting bill, a repeat of the failed 2022 attempt, while saying President Joe Biden “quite frankly doesn’t love everything about the bill. But that’s the spirit of compromise.”

Environmental groups fight back

While both Schumer and Biden insist they want to pass reform to cut greenhouse gas emissions and unlock the climate benefits included in the inflation-reduction bill, strong opposition from hundreds of environmental groups could give them pause.

Green opposition was noted by Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), who read a letter led by Earthjustice, said the bill would “destroy essential environmental protections,” open “tens of millions of acres of public lands and hundreds of millions of acres of coastal waters to further oil and gas leasing” and “will in fact “blocking gas export projects that harm frontline communities and perpetuate the climate crisis.”

But renewable energy advocates have largely split with mainstream environmental groups. In essence, renewable energy advocates have pointed to regulations that give renewable projects parity with oil and gas projects, excluding some projects from full environmental reviews.

“That was the groundbreaking advance today,” said JC Sandberg of the American Clean Power Association. “We’re committed to a full sale.”

But the question remains whether clean energy interests will be enough to sway presumptive Democratic presidential nominee Kamala Harris, especially at a time when her past as California attorney general and U.S. senator is under intense scrutiny.

The youth-led Sunrise Movement recently called on the vice president to differentiate herself from Biden on approving oil and gas projects, as well as other issues.

Even if the bill passes the Senate, it will face a big question mark in the Republican-majority House of Representatives, which just gave up a week of work in Washington to get into full reelection mode.

In addition, many House Republicans are skeptical of the transmission legislation out of concerns about states’ rights and energy costs for their constituents. Manchin said he and Barrasso would approach it as a bipartisan duo.

“They can do the same thing there,” he said.

While nothing is certain, if Republicans lose the House elections in November, there is a possibility they would be willing to accept whatever they can get under the Manchin-Barrasso package.

But if they manage to retain control of the House of Representatives, they may want to make even bigger changes to environmental laws, including easing water permitting requirements for pipelines.

Democrats could also have an incentive to act if they fear big losses in November. If Republicans control the White House or either chamber of Congress, the GOP may not be eager to expand the grid as quickly as Democrats say it needs to stave off the worst effects of climate change.

Manchin and Barrasso may try to combine the legislation with another bill that needs to be passed, with the primary target being the national defense authorization act for fiscal year 2025.

Rejecting Amendments

Manchin has repeatedly tried and failed to promote enabling legislation. This could be his last attempt to shape his legacy and speed up energy projects, address extreme weather events and ensure that new power lines are affordable and reliable.

And while most of the committee supported the bill, they have plenty of ideas on how to change it. Manchin has promised to incorporate some of those ideas before the bill passes.

Several amendments were rejected:

• Sanders proposed striking a provision in the bill that would have overturned the Biden administration’s freeze on natural gas export approvals. Failed 6-13.

• Daines wanted to require the sale of oil and gas leases in Montana and other energy-producing states, as well as offshore in the Gulf of Mexico and off the coast of Alaska. He blasted the Biden administration for doing “everything in its power” to restrict the sale of oil leases. It failed 9-10.

• Sen. Angus King (I-Maine) joined with Sens. Ron Wyden (D-Ore.), Alex Padilla (D-Calif.) and Maria Cantwell (D-Wash.) on two amendments that would ban oil and gas leasing on the outer continental shelf off New England and the West Coast. Both were defeated by a 9-10 vote. Sanders, Wyden and Hawaii Sen. Mazie Hirono opposed the full bill, fearing it would play too heavily into the hands of fossil fuel interests. Wyden was particularly miffed by a provision that would allow industry, rather than the Interior Department, to decide where companies can drill for oil. Overall, he called his opposition “grudging,” while acknowledging that “I certainly agree with a lot of the elements of this bill.”

• Sen. Josh Hawley (R-Mo.), the only Republican to vote against the bill, wanted to change the process for building or modifying transmission facilities, a problem he has been vocal about, arguing that farmers have their land trampled by corporations trying to build power lines. The bill failed 8-11.

Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska), a former ENR chairwoman, offered several amendments aimed at strengthening hydropower, but agreed to withdraw some of them after Manchin promised to try to include the provisions in the base text, assuming it was within his committee’s purview.

When she agreed, Manchin breathed a sigh of relief. “Thank you very much,” he said, drawing chuckles from the room.