DOE has left siting and permitting research in limbo – Latitude Media

Report on Potential Cancellation of U.S. Department of Energy Grants and Implications for Sustainable Development Goals

1.0 Executive Summary

This report details the potential cancellation of key research grants by the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE), creating significant uncertainty for projects designed to accelerate clean energy infrastructure. The termination of this funding directly threatens progress on several United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), particularly SDG 7 (Affordable and Clean Energy), SDG 9 (Industry, Innovation, and Infrastructure), SDG 11 (Sustainable Cities and Communities), SDG 13 (Climate Action), and SDG 17 (Partnerships for the Goals). Two specific grants awarded to the Solar and Storage Industries Institute (SI2) are at risk, jeopardizing research into overcoming primary barriers to renewable energy deployment.

2.0 At-Risk Projects and Alignment with SDG 7 & SDG 9

The funding uncertainty surrounds two grants managed by the DOE’s Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy (EERE). These initiatives are critical for developing the innovative processes and resilient infrastructure necessary to advance SDG 7 and SDG 9.

2.1 Grant Details

• Community Engagement Strategies: A $2.3 million grant to fund research on effective community engagement methods to build public support for large-scale solar projects. This directly addresses social barriers to renewable energy, a key component of achieving Target 7.2 of SDG 7 (increase the share of renewable energy).
• “Uncommon Dialogue” Initiative: A $3 million grant to support a multi-stakeholder working group focused on designing best practices for clean energy development. This fosters innovation in infrastructure planning, aligning with Target 9.1 of SDG 9 (develop sustainable and resilient infrastructure).

The research aims to streamline siting and permitting, which would accelerate the timeline for bringing clean power online, a foundational requirement for meeting climate targets under SDG 13 and supporting sustainable industrialization under SDG 9.

3.0 Impact on Community-Centric Goals: SDG 11 & SDG 16

The imperiled research is uniquely focused on the socio-political dimensions of the energy transition, which are central to achieving inclusive and just outcomes as outlined in SDG 11 and SDG 16.

3.1 Fostering Inclusive Development

Community opposition is currently the leading cause of clean energy project cancellations in the United States. The SI2 research is designed to create standardized, effective strategies for developer-community collaboration.

1. Promoting Participatory Planning: The research on community engagement directly supports Target 11.3 of SDG 11 by enhancing capacity for participatory and sustainable human settlement planning.
2. Building Strong Institutions and Consensus: The “Uncommon Dialogue” initiative convenes diverse stakeholders, including Tribal nations, conservation groups, and community advocates, to avoid litigation and build consensus. This embodies the principles of Target 16.7 of SDG 16 (ensure responsive, inclusive, participatory and representative decision-making).

4.0 Consequences of Funding Withdrawal for SDG Attainment

The cancellation of these grants would create significant setbacks for national and global sustainability objectives. The immediate and long-term consequences would undermine progress across multiple SDGs.

4.1 Projected Negative Outcomes

• Research Gaps: The termination of funding would leave a “gaping hole” in the understanding of effective community engagement, stalling progress on overcoming a critical barrier to deploying clean energy (SDG 7).
• Project Delays and Curtailment: The community engagement study would likely be scaled back significantly, while the “Uncommon Dialogue” initiative would lose momentum and the ability to retain under-resourced stakeholders, weakening the partnership (SDG 17).
• Erosion of Institutional Trust: The arbitrary cancellation of federal funding sends a “chilling signal” to the research community, discouraging future public-private partnerships and undermining the stability required for long-term innovation in support of SDG 9.
• Hindrance to Climate Action: By failing to address the procedural and social barriers that slow clean energy deployment, the cancellation directly impedes the infrastructure build-out necessary for climate mitigation under SDG 13.

Ultimately, the withdrawal of federal support for this foundational research jeopardizes the speed and equity of the clean energy transition, demonstrating a clear conflict with the nation’s stated commitments to the Sustainable Development Goals.

Analysis of Sustainable Development Goals in the Article

1. Which SDGs are addressed or connected to the issues highlighted in the article?

1. SDG 7: Affordable and Clean Energy
   • The article’s central theme is the funding of research projects designed to facilitate the construction of clean energy infrastructure, specifically large-scale solar projects. This directly supports the goal of increasing access to and the share of clean energy.
2. SDG 9: Industry, Innovation, and Infrastructure
   • The research grants are aimed at innovation (“research that has never been undertaken before”) to improve processes for building sustainable infrastructure. The projects focus on overcoming barriers to siting and permitting, which is critical for upgrading and expanding energy infrastructure.
3. SDG 11: Sustainable Cities and Communities
   • The research explicitly focuses on improving how developers work with local communities and governments. The goal is to build public support and navigate community opposition, which aligns with making development planning more inclusive, participatory, and sustainable.
4. SDG 13: Climate Action
   • By aiming to speed up the development of clean energy projects, the research contributes directly to climate change mitigation efforts. The article notes that improving these processes helps “bring more generation online,” which is essential for transitioning away from fossil fuels.
5. SDG 16: Peace, Justice, and Strong Institutions
   • The “Uncommon Dialogue” initiative is a prime example of this SDG. It brings together diverse stakeholders, including Tribal nations and community advocates, to design best practices and “avoid litigation that can tie up electricity projects for years.” This promotes inclusive and participatory decision-making.
6. SDG 17: Partnerships for the Goals
   • The article describes multi-stakeholder partnerships involving government (Department of Energy), research institutions (Solar and Storage Industries Institute, Stanford’s Woods Institute), industry (solar developers), and civil society (land conservation groups, community advocates). The “Uncommon Dialogue” initiative, with its “more than 50 organizations now involved,” is a clear example of such a partnership.

2. What specific targets under those SDGs can be identified based on the article’s content?

1. Target 7.2: By 2030, increase substantially the share of renewable energy in the global energy mix.
   • The research projects are designed to make it “easier and faster to build clean energy infrastructure,” specifically large-scale solar projects, which directly contributes to increasing the share of renewable energy.
2. Target 7.a: By 2030, enhance international cooperation to facilitate access to clean energy research and technology… and promote investment in energy infrastructure and clean energy technology.
   • The Department of Energy grants, totaling $5.3 million, represent a direct investment in clean energy research and technology aimed at improving infrastructure development.
3. Target 9.5: Enhance scientific research, upgrade the technological capabilities of industrial sectors… encouraging innovation.
   • The grants fund research that “has never been undertaken before” to create a better “understanding of what works in community engagement” and design best practices for development, thereby enhancing scientific research and encouraging innovation in the clean energy sector.
4. Target 11.3: By 2030, enhance inclusive and sustainable urbanization and capacity for participatory, integrated and sustainable human settlement planning and management.
   • The research aims to “test and compare different community engagement strategies” and improve how developers “work with local communities and governments,” which directly addresses the need for more participatory and sustainable planning for infrastructure projects.
5. Target 16.7: Ensure responsive, inclusive, participatory and representative decision-making at all levels.
   • The “Uncommon Dialogue” initiative, which brings together “energy developers, land conservation and environmental groups, Tribal nation representatives, agricultural interests, community advocates, and investors,” is a mechanism to ensure decision-making on energy projects is inclusive and participatory.
6. Target 17.17: Encourage and promote effective public, public-private and civil society partnerships.
   • The collaboration between the Department of Energy (public), solar developers (private), and various research and community organizations (civil society) exemplifies the type of multi-stakeholder partnership this target aims to promote.

3. Are there any indicators mentioned or implied in the article that can be used to measure progress towards the identified targets?

1. Financial Investment in Research:
   • The article explicitly mentions the value of the grants: “$2.3 million” for one project and “$3 million” for the other. The amount of funding allocated to clean energy research serves as a direct indicator of investment in innovation (relevant to Targets 7.a and 9.5).
2. Rate of Project Cancellation due to Community Opposition:
   • The article states that community opposition is the “leading cause of cancelled clean energy projects.” A reduction in this rate would be a key indicator of the success of the research on community engagement strategies (relevant to Targets 11.3 and 16.7).
3. Timeline for Project Development:
   • The research aims to speed “up the timelines that help bring more generation online.” Therefore, the average time required for siting, permitting, and building clean energy projects would be a relevant indicator of progress (relevant to Target 7.2).
4. Number and Diversity of Stakeholders in Partnerships:
   • The “Uncommon Dialogue” initiative is described as having “more than 50 organizations now involved,” including a wide range of interests from industry to Tribal nations. This number serves as an indicator of the scale and inclusiveness of multi-stakeholder partnerships (relevant to Targets 16.7 and 17.17).
5. Expenditure on Community Engagement:
   • The article notes that developers often spend “less than 0.1% of a project’s capital expenditures” on community engagement. An increase in this percentage could serve as an indicator of improved industry practices resulting from the research (relevant to Target 11.3).

4. Summary Table of SDGs, Targets, and Indicators

Source: latitudemedia.com