TVA is using NEPA as a stand-in for genuine public and stakeholder processes to inform its latest long-term resource plan. But NEPA was not intended to be used that way, and it falls far short of what is needed for the public to be able to interact with and inform key decisions that will impact all of our daily lives for decades to come. Because it relies on NEPA for public input, TVA’s IRP process lacks transparency and accessibility.
TVA’s IRP: Once Every 5 Years
The Tennessee Valley Authority is currently working on its first long-term Integrated Resource Plan (IRP) in five years. This IRP will drive near-term resource decisions and stand up long-term programs and projects that will determine how electricity needs across the Valley are met next year through 2050. Since TVA will likely not revisit these issues for another five years, this particular plan is of the utmost importance to accelerating clean energy to lower energy costs and improve reliability and resilience. Thus, when the TVA Board denied our request that they hold a public hearing on this IRP, we joined with other advocates to host our own.
The National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) & TVA
NEPA dates back to 1970. It was set up to require all federal agencies to evaluate the potential environmental impacts of their actions and decisions. Since TVA is a federal agency, it is required to go through a NEPA process for many decisions, from changing its rate structure to building a new power plant. A separate statute, the TVA Act, requires TVA to do long-term planning, and includes requirements about resources to consider and how TVA’s utility customers are involved.
NEPA was set up for agencies to conduct Environmental Impact Statements (EIS), not IRPs.
When we joined with other advocates in calling on TVA to have a hearing on its current IRP, TVA responded by listing its NEPA public steps and an invite-only working group. While TVA’s IRP is not exempt from NEPA review, TVA can and should have a separate public, accessible, and transparent process for its IRPs.
One day of the expert hearing on Duke Energy’s IRP by the North Carolina Utilities Commission in September 2022.
Here are just a few ways that NEPA differs from a typical regulatory IRP process.
- NEPA does not allow discovery questions of the utility. In a regulatory IRP, stakeholders can ask questions and request documents.
- Adherence to NEPA is overseen by the EPA and CEQ, neither of which have experience overseeing a utility IRP process. TVA is the only federal utility that does its own IRP. TVA’s closest relative, the Bonneville Power Authority (BPA), has its long-term planning performed by an independent entity.
- When a member of the public or an organization submits comments through the NEPA process they only go to TVA’s staff. In a regulatory IRP process, the independent regulators hear directly from the public and stakeholders through written comments, public hearings, and litigated hearings.
- NEPA focuses on the environmental impacts (and a few select societal impacts) of a specific decision. An IRP typically isn’t prescriptive, and TVA’s IRPs tend to be very general, so the environmental impacts from a draft TVA IRP are usually fairly meaningless. A regulatory IRP process looks at impacts on costs, reliability, the economy, and the environment. The issues a Commission considers when reviewing an IRP are typically set out in a state’s IRP statute.
- Under NEPA, federal agency staff (i.e. TVA staff) determine whether and how to incorporate feedback from the public. In a regulatory IRP process, the independent regulators decide what parts of an IRP to approve, deny, or change.
Regardless of the differences, it remains true that NEPA was not intended to provide the sole public input for a utility IRP. An IRP is a complex process that should consider more than environmental impacts, and requires careful and independent oversight.

SACE has repeatedly called on the TVA Board to make the IRP process more accessible and transparent. When TVA’s Board of Directors refused to hold a public hearing on TVA’s 2024 draft IRP, we joined with allies to hold our own. The outcome of that hearing was clear: TVA’s IRP process is not normal, and not in a good way. The lack of transparency and accountability is likely to lead to further investments in new fossil fuel infrastructure, which will expose people in the Tennessee Valley to the risks associated with higher bills and more power outages in the future. Now we are calling out TVA for using NEPA as its primary public engagement tool for this long-term planning process that will impact the day-to-day lives of residents across the Valley for decades to come.
It is time that TVA put in place a public IRP process, separate and above its requirements under NEPA.
The post TVA: NEPA is not a stand-in for public input in an IRP appeared first on SACE | Southern Alliance for Clean Energy.
Renewable Energy
As Europe Shuns Chinese Turbines and Components, Who Will Fill the Gap?
Weather Guard Lightning Tech

As Europe Shuns Chinese Turbines and Components, Who Will Fill the Gap?
While most of Europe has spent most of this year itemizing reasons it cannot, should not, and will not use Chinese wind turbines or components, accusations and arm-twisting tactics have garnered most of the attention.
But we invite you to consider a future – maybe just five, or ten years from now?- in which those same countries and companies are eagerly awaiting orders from wind turbine manufacturing facilities in… India.
What?!
You know that the country has a lot of installed wind.
You may think – and many in the industry would agree – that India’s blade manufacturers are a few revs behind blade-makers elsewhere in the world. But the country is newly committed to manufacturing and it’s busy installing more – provided that it’s made in India, with Indian technology, by Indian workers.
Of course, similar domestic-focused policy currents are running through European countries – where wind OEMs are almost inarguably a decade ahead of Indian manufacturers. But there’s an important reason why we say, “watch India” in wind turbine manufacturing.
It’s because you might learn something.
If you follow The Uptime Wind Energy Podcast, you probably heard this discussion a few weeks ago. It wasn’t the headline story – we try to highlight as many major news items and trends that we can, and follow up as credible information becomes available. India’s quiet moves to strengthen its own renewable energy industries didn’t grab the headlines. But it comprised a good bit of our panelists’ discussion.
With India’s expanding manufacturing capacity, and Suzlon’s strategic offerings for the European market (Blue Sky), there are reasons for European developers to take a closer look at Indian manufacturers.
If Europe continues to squelch deals with Chinese manufacturers due to data security issues, India is a relatively obvious candidate to fill the void, for several reasons:
- The country has depth and breadth in R&D: India (Suzlon, specifically) has a track record of involvement and relationships across the continent, as it operates research and development centers in Germany, the Netherlands, and Denmark.
- Indian service providers have reach: Inox and Adoni Wind operate multiple wind turbine manufacturing plants and wind farms throughout several Indian states, and Apraava Energy has been commissioning wind projects, working with multiple OEMs, for more than 16 years.
- The country’s energy sector has size: Tata Power is estimated to be worth about US$16 billion and employs 22,000 people.
And major manufacturers from other countries have had a strong presence in the country for years:
- GE Vernova has turbine blade and nacelle manufacturing operations and multiple tech/R&D centers in India;
- Vestas has a R&D technology center in Chennai; and
- China’s SANY Wind has had assembly facilities in India since 2017, and in 2024, it signed a licensing agreement with JSW allowing SANY to manufacture blades and generators for JSW – enabling JSW Neo Energy to produce wind turbine generators and major components in-country.
So while there is hard data suggesting that India is already a global hub for wind turbines, sometimes the real strength comes from soft skills. Like sharing information.
We’ve noticed that Indian manufactures aren’t stingy with information. They share what they learn in the field and on the shop floor, so that the whole industry can move faster to solve problems. That bodes well for the industry overall, and particularly well for companies who figure out how to solve problems that some manufacturers aren’t even ready to admit to having.
We’ll be watching India with a great deal of interest in the coming months. Subscribe to The Uptime Wind Energy Podcast and follow along with us.
We’re not financial analysts. We’re engineers who watch the wind industry very closely. This is what we’ve noticed, and we thought it was worth sharing.
Where do you think you’ll be looking for solutions, components, and service providers in the next few years or the next decade? Tell us what you think. We’d love to hear from you.
As Europe Shuns Chinese Turbines and Components, Who Will Fill the Gap?
Renewable Energy
When You Write for Idiots, You Can Get Away with Anything
To the author of the meme here:
“Either” refers to two choices; “any” refers to three or more.
More importantly, it’s amazing how shamelessly the ultra-right wing exaggerates. The left side of the Democratic party would like to see the United States look like social democracies in places like Scandinavia. Having government programs that benefit the common person, e.g., Social Security, public schools, emergency relief, libraries, environmental responsibility, etc., does not equate to Stalinism.
Renewable Energy
Are Muslims “Dangerous?”
Some of my old prep school chums from the Class of 1973 convene via Zoom approximately every six weeks for a 90-minute discussion of current events, science, and anything else that sounds interesting.
Our professions range from medicine, law, finance, and business management. All from highly ranked colleges. Over 50% hold doctorate degrees.
Here’s something I find fascinating about the group: it includes one right-wing conservative. I don’t mean a Reaganite; I mean a Trump supporter. This guy is incapable of any thought that doesn’t come directly from Nexsmax.
It’s almost eerie how closely he toes the line of the far-right. Yesterday he echoed the Newsmax talking point and told the group that all Muslims holding public office are “very dangerous” and should be removed.
Now, the rest of us are sitting there, dumbfounded at this idea, unwilling waste our breath on this racist and utterly preposterous concept.
All this raises the question: How are our political viewpoints formed? How much of this is genetics? Epigenetics? Early childhood experiences? How do take a boy from among the best environments and turn him into someone who struggles to understand the most basic principles on which our country was founded?
https://www.2greenenergy.com/2026/11/09/principles-country-was-founded/
-
Climate Change1 year ago
Guest post: Why China is still building new coal – and when it might stop
-
Greenhouse Gases1 year ago
Guest post: Why China is still building new coal – and when it might stop
-
Greenhouse Gases2 years ago嘉宾来稿:满足中国增长的用电需求 光伏加储能“比新建煤电更实惠”
-
Climate Change2 years ago嘉宾来稿:满足中国增长的用电需求 光伏加储能“比新建煤电更实惠”
-
Renewable Energy1 year agoSending Progressive Philanthropist George Soros to Prison?
-
Greenhouse Gases1 year ago
嘉宾来稿:探究火山喷发如何影响气候预测
-
Climate Change2 years agoAnalysis: China’s CO2 falls 1% in Q2 2024 in first quarterly drop since Covid-19
-
Climate Change1 year ago嘉宾来稿:探究火山喷发如何影响气候预测

