A project proposal to build about 800 miles of transmission lines from Kansas through Missouri, Illinois and Indiana to deliver wind-generated power to consumers has been on the table for over a decade, but an Illinois court halted planned construction of the lines in that state on August 8.

Known as the Grain Belt Express, this project will need to be repeated about 110 more times across the United States – creating a total of up to 91,000 miles of new transmission lines – if the Biden-Harris administration is to meet its goal of generating 100% clean electricity from “renewable” energy sources by 2035.

While natural gas, coal and nuclear power plants can be located close to population centers, solar and wind farms are often located in remote areas, requiring extensive transmission infrastructure to supply electricity to populated areas.

To put this expansion of power lines in context, America has built an average of 645 miles per year since the second half of the 2010s to date. At that rate, it would take nearly 141 years to expand the grid to meet Biden and Harris’s policy goal.

To maintain a reliable power grid, upgrading and building transmission lines is critical. However, 91,000 miles of transmission lines primarily carry heavily subsidized solar and wind energy, driving up the price of electricity. Renewable energy sources drive up the cost of electricity for a variety of reasons, including the additional costs of backup power generation and building the expensive, extensive transmission infrastructure.

For example, California’s aggressive use of wind and solar power has caused residential electricity prices to rise by nearly 170 percent between 2004 and 2024, from about 12 cents to 33 cents per kilowatt hour. In Florida, however, which expanded the use of natural gas instead of renewables, prices rose only 65 percent over the same period.

Building such a massive renewable energy transmission infrastructure will cost over $220 billion – an expense that will be borne by individuals as companies recoup those costs by passing them on to electricity consumers. That means electricity will become even more expensive, disproportionately affecting low-income families, farmers and small businesses already struggling in an economy with high food and energy prices.

Power lines also reduce property values. A study published in the Journal of Real Estate Research found that vacant lots next to these lines sell for 45 percent less than lots without power lines nearby, and lots within 1,000 feet sell for an 18 percent discount than comparable lots farther away. Underground power lines, on the other hand, don’t spoil the view, but they are at least eight times more expensive than above-ground ones – a cost that gets passed on to Americans’ electric bills.

The main reason for the high projections for transmission lines is that they are needed to connect wind and solar farms, which are mostly located in remote areas, to population centers. For example, the Midwest and Southwest are ideal for wind and solar power, but are far from populated areas, requiring long-distance transmission lines.

However, such transmission infrastructure would not be necessary if the grid were fed by a reliable mix of baseload energy sources – natural gas, nuclear power and coal power – which would ensure a steady and reliable supply of electricity to meet the grid’s minimum needs.

Natural gas power plants are located near urban centers and industrial areas, so extensive transmission lines are not required. For example, the Ravenswood power plant is located about two miles from the Empire State Building in New York City, the most populous city in the United States.

More than a third of the U.S. population lives or works within 50 miles of nuclear power plants. For example, the Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant in Maryland is about 45 miles from the White House.

Even if the Biden-Harris administration wanted to build new transmission lines, such projects take an average of a decade to complete due to the slow government permitting process and local opposition. Therefore, the administration has tried to speed up the permitting process for transmission lines, such as the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission’s recent order to improve long-term regional transmission planning and the Department of Energy’s order to cut federal permitting process timelines in half. To address this problem, the bipartisan Energy Permitting Reform Act of 2024 was also recently introduced in Congress.

While a faster permitting process would be beneficial for infrastructure development in any modern economy, the sole purpose of the government’s fast-track measures was to build the planned tens of thousands of miles of transmission lines that would allow “green” investors to earn a return on their costly investments – investments that increase the cost of electricity rather than lower it. Citizens end up paying twice – once through higher electricity bills and a second time by having to look at those ugly transmission lines.

Instead, the United States should rely primarily on fossil fuels and nuclear power, supplemented by a variety of other energy sources. This mix of reliable energy sources will provide a stable, reliable, and affordable electricity supply—while reducing the need for another 91,000 miles of unsightly, expensive power lines.