A new nonpartisan analysis from Resources for the Future (RFF) finds that the Senate permitting bill would reduce carbon emissions from power plants in the near term and deliver estimated savings of over $350 billion in present-value terms through 2050, while also helping to keep electricity prices down. The study comes as the bill faces a test vote on Nov. 9.
The analysis models the bill's effects on the power sector compared with current law and policy. Under its central scenario, the bill would drive “robust” transmission expansion, enabling “use of additional clean energy and existing resources of all types.” Overall electricity system costs are estimated to be 3.5% to 7% lower each year through 2041. Co-author Kevin Rennert told Axios that should translate into lower electricity bills, though the study does not directly model retail prices.
By 2028, the study's central outlook shows roughly 60 gigawatts more clean energy capacity on the grid under the bill than under a baseline of current law and policy. The build-out of renewables, partly enabled by transmission expansion, would displace fossil fuels, initially pushing power plant CO2 emissions down as coal is edged aside. Over time, emissions would climb but remain below levels projected without the bill.
The RFF study uses a “high-electrification demand scenario” to represent rapid growth in demand from data centers and other sources. It does not analyze every aspect of the wide-ranging bill, such as how changes in environmental laws would affect mining and pipelines.
Other analyses are also circulating. A White House study found the bill would eventually boost GDP by $82 billion to $164 billion annually. The Solar Energy Industries Association is circulating analysis showing solar and wind would together provide over 37% of power generation in 2035 under the bill, compared with around 20% under “obstructed permitting.”
The bill also faces opposition. The NAACP issued a document strongly criticizing the bill, and other contested issues include its effects on consultation with Native American tribes and historic preservation.
Analysis
Why This Matters
- The permitting bill is one of the most consequential energy and climate policies in Congress, affecting transmission, renewables, and fossil fuel development.
- If passed, it could significantly alter the trajectory of US power sector emissions and electricity costs for consumers.
- The upcoming test vote on Nov. 9 will be a key indicator of the bill's prospects.
Background
The Senate permitting bill aims to streamline approval processes for energy projects, including transmission lines, pipelines, and renewable energy facilities. Proponents argue it will accelerate clean energy deployment and modernize the grid; critics say it undermines environmental protections and tribal consultation. The RFF analysis is one of the first detailed independent models of its effects.
Key Perspectives
- Resources for the Future: The bill's central scenario would reduce power-sector CO2 initially, expand transmission, and lower electricity system costs by 3.5-7% annually through 2041.
- White House: The bill would boost GDP by $82 billion to $164 billion annually and provide substantial power bill savings.
- Solar Energy Industries Association: Under the bill, solar and wind would provide over 37% of power generation in 2035, versus about 20% under "obstructed permitting."
- NAACP: Has issued a document strongly criticizing the bill.
What to Watch
- The test vote on Nov. 9, which will show how much support the bill has in the Senate.
- Further analyses from environmental groups and tribal organizations that could shift the debate.
- Amendments to the bill that may be proposed to address tribal consultation and environmental concerns.
Checked
12 claims in this story checked against 1 source: 11 supported.
Show each claim
- SupportedThe Senate permitting bill could cut power-sector emissions in the near term and lower electricity costs, according to an analysis.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.”
- SupportedThe study projects more than $350 billion in present-value savings through 2050.Axios: “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.”
- SupportedThe bill faces a test vote on Nov. 9.Axios: “It will help inform lobbying and advocacy around the bill ahead of a test vote looming on Nov. 9.”
- SupportedUnder its central scenario, the bill would drive “robust” transmission expansion, enabling “use of additional clean energy and existing resources of all types.”Axios: “It would drive "robust" transmission expansion ( see above ), enabling "use of additional clean energy and existing resources of all types."”
- SupportedElectricity system costs are estimated to be 3.5% to 7% lower each year through 2041.Axios: “Overall electricity system costs are an estimated 3.5% to 7% lower each year through 2041 compared to a no-bill baseline”
- SupportedCo-author Kevin Rennert said the projected savings should translate into lower electricity bills.Axios: “That should translate into lower electricity bills for people, co-author Kevin Rennert tells Axios”
- SupportedThe study does not directly model retail prices.Axios: “though the study does not directly model retail prices.”
- SupportedBy 2028, the central outlook shows roughly 60 gigawatts more clean energy capacity under the bill than under current law and policy.Axios: “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.”
- SupportedPower-sector CO2 emissions would initially drop, then rise over time while remaining below levels projected without the bill.Axios: “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.”
- SupportedThe RFF study uses a “high-electrification demand scenario” to represent rapid demand growth from data centers and other sources.Axios: “For instance, it uses a "high-electrification demand scenario to represent the rapid increase in demand from data centers and other sources."”
- SupportedA White House study found the bill would eventually boost GDP by $82 billion to $164 billion annually.Axios: “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.”
- Partly supportedThe Solar Energy Industries Association is circulating analysis showing solar and wind would provide over 37% of power generation in 2035 under the bill, versus around 20% under “obstructed permitting.”Axios: “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."”