In boosting clean energy in Minnesota, Walz lays foundation for climate influence if Harris wins

When Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz strolled onstage to welcome a conference of clean power advocates to Minneapolis in May, he was quick to note that his state is now getting a little over half of its power from renewables. In the next breath, Walz said Minnesota would never get to 100% — a goal he helped set — without changing what he called “outdated” permitting laws.

“There are things we are doing that are too cumbersome, they don’t fit where we’re at, they add costs, and they make it more prohibitive to get where we need to go,” Walz told the industry group American Clean Power.

A few weeks later, he signed legislation to speed things up. Developers no longer have to demonstrate that a clean energy project — that is, solar and wind, storage and transmission projects — is needed as part of Minnesota’s energy system. And they no longer have to study alternative sites and transmission line routes — a requirement that had effectively doubled the possible opponents for a project.

Walz’s effort to resolve a major obstacle to the clean energy transition nationwide is getting new attention since he was tapped as Kamala Harris’ running mate. His experience enacting such laws in Minnesota could position him as a leader on climate issues if Harris wins in November.

“If Gov. Walz becomes our VP, I hope he could help bring some of this thinking to the federal level,” said Amelia Vohs, climate program director at the Minnesota Center for Environmental Advocacy, a group that was involved in helping produce the permitting reforms. “It would make an incredible difference in the nation’s progress on climate.”

What Minnesota did won’t easily be replicated at the federal level due to a sharply divided Congress. But experts say most renewable projects are developed on private land, making them subject to state or local siting authority or both, and other states could follow Minnesota’s lead. Offshore wind is a notable exception, with regulation from federal agencies for development in federal waters.

New York, California, Illinois and Michigan have already made their own changes to permitting in the last few years to accelerate the adoption of clean energy, with varying approaches depending on whether the state or local government retains control over the siting process.

“The speed of the energy transition matters, it matters a lot,” said Matthew Eisenson, a senior fellow at the Sabin Center for Climate Change Law who tracks legal obstacles to renewable energy facilities and develops strategies for overcoming them.

“The faster we can reduce emissions, the faster we can stabilize the climate and avoid the worst impacts of climate change. So at a macro level, speed matters. At a micro level, speed matters. Projects can die on the vine if it takes too long.”

Most wind and solar projects take four to six years from the time they’re announced to start operating, with roughly two-thirds of that time spent on permitting, according to research from the Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory. About 20% of projects take more than six years.

The Berkeley Lab asked developers of large-scale wind and solar projects nationwide last year about their experiences with permitting. Developers said local ordinances or zoning and community opposition were leading causes of significant delays and cancelations. Research scientist Robi Nilson said the two are often linked — community opposition made the permitting process longer in some cases, and in others, the process was already lengthy because of past opposition to other projects.

The developers said about one-third of their wind and solar siting applications submitted in the last five years were canceled, while about half experienced delays of six months or more. The survey respondents were from companies that combined for about half of the wind and solar developed nationwide from 2016 to 2023.

“Any permitting bill that makes it easier to build clean energy infrastructure and getting connected is really vital to all of our climate goals,” said Ben Pendergrass, vice president of government affairs at Citizens Climate Lobby, a nonpartisan, nonprofit, climate advocacy organization.

Before its new law, Minnesota permits were handled in a half-century-old process that was slow and getting slower. The length of time it took to get a solar project approved grew from about 10 months in 2015 to 18 months from 2019 onward, according to a report by North Star Policy Action, a research group that supports action on climate change, among other issues.

House Majority Leader Jamie Long, a Minneapolis Democrat, had worked with Walz on the 2023 law that set the state’s 100% clean energy goal. As soon as that passed, they turned their attention to permitting. Walz’s appointees to the state Public Utility Commission pulled together broad working groups with the aim of having something set up for this year’s legislative session, Long said.

Changing the law didn’t happen without some opposition.

Lawmakers had to address concerns from environmental groups who worried that speed would hurt environmental review and wanted to be sure there was enough time for public participation in the permitting process. Those groups also wanted to be sure the bill sped up only wind, solar and transmission projects — not nuclear, biomass, fossil-fuel-generated hydrogen or waste burning. Democrats, who control Minnesota’s Legislature, moved the bill forward over objections from Republicans who wanted it to include fossil fuel projects and nuclear.

The eventual bill had support from utilities, renewable developers, labor, environmental advocates and energy policy nonprofits, whose recommendations to speed the process became the heart of the bill. Walz and his team stayed involved throughout to get the eventual bill to the finish line, said Long, the bill’s House author.

Walz signed it at a wind farm in the southern Minnesota district he represented in Congress before becoming governor.

“The legislation achieved a really hard thing in striking a balance between creating efficiency and not having other projects we didn’t intend to make easier get swooped in,” said Vohs, at the Minnesota Center for Environmental Advocacy. “It maintained the integrity of process and didn’t toss out too much in the name of efficiency.”

Virginia-based Apex Clean Energy said it took nearly two years to get permits for each of two large wind and solar projects it developed in southwestern Minnesota’s Cottonwood County. Chris Kunkle, Apex’s senior director of government affairs, said he expected the new law to roughly cut permitting time in half, which he called “fantastic.”

Xcel Energy, the state’s largest utility, said it expected to save several months in permitting a single transmission line or large electric facility. Considering the number of companies pursuing projects to deliver carbon-free electricity to customers, the cumulative time saved will measure in decades.

Doug Loon, president and CEO of the Minnesota Chamber of Commerce, said there was a clear recognition that the system was not working. He said the chamber believes the state should now apply the reforms to all of industry, not just one segment.

Long said he hoped other states would follow Minnesota’s lead.

“I think if a state like ours, which is not particularly deep blue or coastal, can come together and figure out a way to get business, labor and environment to support a package, it’s a strong message it can be done,” he said.