Much of the conversation around clean energy growth in the U.S. focuses on technology costs and market incentives. Solar module prices continue to decline, battery storage is scaling rapidly, and federal policy (IRA tax credits, state-level clean energy mandates) is pushing record levels of project development. Yet, for many developers and engineers, the real barrier to deployment is not technology or financing,it’s interconnection.
A recent interconnection feasibility study in California illustrates the problem. For a proposed 1.8 MW EV fast charging hub, PG&E’s Integrated Capacity Analysis showed 0 kW of available load hosting capacity on the local feeder. Upstream transmission capacity existed (over 2 MW available), but unlocking it required utility reconfiguration, infrastructure upgrades, and a lengthy engineering review process. Even with proactive planning, the projected timeline was 14–24 months, driven largely by utility study queues and potential substation upgrades.
This is not an isolated case. Across California and other high-renewables states, developers report similar challenges:
Discussion Points for the Community:
A recent interconnection feasibility study in California illustrates the problem. For a proposed 1.8 MW EV fast charging hub, PG&E’s Integrated Capacity Analysis showed 0 kW of available load hosting capacity on the local feeder. Upstream transmission capacity existed (over 2 MW available), but unlocking it required utility reconfiguration, infrastructure upgrades, and a lengthy engineering review process. Even with proactive planning, the projected timeline was 14–24 months, driven largely by utility study queues and potential substation upgrades.
This is not an isolated case. Across California and other high-renewables states, developers report similar challenges:
- Timelines: Initial “pre-checks” may take weeks, but full engineering studies can stretch for 12–18 months. If substation upgrades are needed, the delay can be even longer.
- Cost Allocation: Disputes frequently arise over who pays for system upgrades. While Rule 15 in California specifies that shared upgrades (e.g., substation transformer replacement) should be utility-funded, unclear project narratives can result in developers being assigned costs that arguably serve broader system reliability.
- Permitting and Coordination: Even when grid capacity exists, aligning utility, permitting authorities, and construction schedules creates uncertainty that investors and customers struggle to navigate.
Discussion Points for the Community:
- Are interconnection queues now the single biggest constraint on U.S. clean energy growth?
- What reforms, streamlined permitting, standardized cost-sharing, proactive utility upgrades, would make the biggest impact?
- Can states and utilities realistically scale interconnection processes fast enough to match the pace of federal and state renewable energy targets?
