(The Texas Tribune) If Texas wants to continue to be a leader in oil, the Permian Basin needs more energy.
That’s the warning influential trade groups representing oil companies have been telling state lawmakers and regulators for years.
A dearth of power plants and transmission lines connecting the region to the rest of the state’s grid means there isn’t enough electricity to power field operations, such as compressors and oil pumps.
In 2023, lawmakers offered a solution that spelled out a dramatic expansion of electricity transmission infrastructure in the Permian Basin, the state’s biggest oil field.
“Texas’ thriving production is driving the state’s success,” the Texas Oil and Gas Association, a statewide trade group whose membership makes up roughly 90% of the state’s crude oil and natural gas market, wrote to regulators charged with designing that plan. “And a reliable electricity supply is crucial to sustaining this industry.”
The industry’s advocacy has been successful. Costing upward of $13 billion, the Permian Basin Reliability Plan is now at the final stages of administrative review and public input before construction can begin, which could be as soon as next year, some observers say.
But the most recent blueprints of the plan — which include building the state’s biggest transmission line through the Texas Hill Country — have spurred opposition from a coalition of landowner and conservative groups and a handful of lawmakers who are asking regulators to pump the brakes.
Groups opposing the state’s plan worry that construction along beloved landscapes and rivers will damage the environment and usher in higher costs for ratepayers. A solution, they said, would be for regulators to revisit their plans. Industry leaders said oil companies can’t afford to wait. Oil and gas production has skyrocketed in Texas, a milestone that industry leaders said has also become a bottleneck.
The West Texas oil fields lack adequate infrastructure to import large volumes of electricity to maintain momentum.
“To be very blunt, in order for Texas to continue to be the beacon for economic growth it must develop these projects in a timely fashion,” said Ben Shepperd, president of the Permian Basin Petroleum Association. “And the greatest risk of failure for the Permian Basin Reliability Plan is for these necessary projects to falter under any sort of delay.”
Fulfilling the wishes of the oil and gas industry and the industrial sector, the utility commission partially approved ERCOT’s proposal to build or improve 260 transmission lines across Texas by 2038. That plan includes three major transmission lines, otherwise called import paths, one of which would transport electricity from east to west. These lines, called 765 kV lines, can carry more electricity than any other line that currently exists in Texas. It will cost nearly $14 billion, a cost that ratepayers are expected to cover.
Regulators at the utility commission have greenlit most of the 260 proposed projects. But the utility commission has yet to fully approve 33 of the biggest, most controversial proposals of the expansion package. The six companies that proposed the projects still require the final stamp of approval, which includes public input.
Multiple groups conservative policy analysts and grassroots movements have already begun urging the utility commission to reconsider a proposed path through the Devil’s River in the Texas Hill Country. And now they’re getting a boost from state lawmakers. The groups argue that the project is moving too fast and costs too much, and hope their advocacy will result in proposals for other routes and additional studies.
Residents have already begun organizing to try to stop the project in the Hill Country, where a network of rivers cuts through rolling hills and grassland in Central Texas. The region has a storied camping culture spanning generations. Now it’s the site of gatherings in protests and town halls. The project, residents of the area argue, could devastate the landscape.
Some lawmakers including those who previously supported the legislation agree. At least five of them, whose districts are in areas where the transmission line would pass through, wrote a letter to the utility commission in January, asking regulators to reevaluate their plans. Two of them state Reps. West Virdell, R-Kerrville, and Don McLaughlin, R-Laredo had not been elected when the bill was passed. State Rep. Eddie Morales, D-Eagle Pass, and Sens. Roland Gutierrez, DSan Antonio, and Pete Flores, R-Llano, voted for the bill.
“We have each heard from hundreds of constituents, along with business organizations, local officials, and conservation groups, expressing significant concerns about the potential impacts of this project,” the letter said. “Given the magnitude of this project, we believe additional time is necessary to fully evaluate the most responsible path and consider new transmission route links that will avoid pristine river basins, minimize land fragmentation, reduce ecological harm, protect sensitive water resources, and ensure meaningful public engagement.”
The utility commission told the Tribune it is currently reviewing seven proposed routes. Residents have until April 1 to challenge them. If the challenge is successful, the utility commission has 180 days from the date the proposal was filed to approve, modify, or deny it. The process could lead to legal proceedings before the State Office of Administrative Hearings.