The energy transformation is at a critical inflection point:

Rapid advancement of artificial intelligence (AI) is driving nationwide data center growth
Industrial policy is leading to a resurgence of the U.S. manufacturing sector in critical areas, such as semiconductors
Public- and private-sector emissions-reduction goals remain high, but we are struggling to meet them — not just domestically but globally
Geopolitical instability is renewing concern for energy security

All these factors and more are driving an unprecedented surge for affordable, reliable, and sustainable energy. Yet America is not on track to meet that demand because of the increasingly fervent opposition to the new energy development we need because of the increasingly fervent opposition to the new energy development we need.

Whether you are building O&G, renewables, storage, distribution, or energy-intensive facilities like data centers, vehement opposition at the community level — compounded by permitting and regulatory blockages — is extending timelines by years and cancelling projects outright. Political deadlock has slowed progress on the reforms necessary to remove those blockages, and industry and government can’t seem to reach a consensus on what’s going wrong and how to fix it.

DDC Public Affairs, in collaboration with C3 Solutions, convened an invitation-only Chatham House Rule policy roundtable discussion to address the engagement challenges obstructing the energy transformation.

“Community and Stakeholder Engagement for Successful Energy Development” brought together energy industry experts, communicators, and policy researchers to discuss potential legislative solutions to engagement challenges and messaging strategies that could better earn public trust. While there was much disagreement on policy solutions and the role of government in engagement, one thing was clear: the industry needs consistent permitting and engagement guidelines nationwide, as well as an industry-wide consensus on what adequate engagement looks like.

All attendees agreed that the energy industry has undergone a massive paradigm shift when it comes to development. Public opposition and distrust of new development extend far beyond the traditional climate politics of renewables versus fossil fuels. No longer is there a typical archetype of a community opposed to new development: from wealthy liberal communities in New England, to tribal communities in the Southwest, to farming communities in the Midwest, Americans of all stripes are becoming increasingly skeptical of new energy development in their backyards.

A common complaint among attendees was the complete lack of consistency in public engagement standards and permitting guidelines, both from the public and private sectors. The lack of clear-cut standards and guidance makes effective outreach substantially more difficult — further degrading public trust and extending project timelines. Earning community and stakeholder approval for the scale of energy development we need requires cross-industry collaboration and public-private partnership at an unprecedented scale.

Rampant misinformation on social media was also cited as a growing problem, with many attendees sharing examples of organized online campaigns stemming from activists opposing projects that shared false or misleading information regarding their energy projects — painting them as harmful and dangerous in ways that have no connection to reality. This concern further underscored the need for early education and engagement.

While permitting reform is a political hot topic, and was a commonly shared concern among attendees, there was an understanding that even if federal permitting reform is accomplished in the new Congress, it won’t change the patchwork of state and local permitting regulations that hamper new development and supercharge opposition to projects.

Lastly, attendees, who came from all sectors within the energy industry, understood that all our fates are tied together due to the “contagion effect”: when one project is obstructed, other projects in the same geographic region — regardless of technology type — are more likely to be opposed. So, if one project engages poorly and incites resistance, the other entirely unrelated projects nearby will also suffer. One attendee noted that a possible reason for this is that once the opposition organizes, it’s easier to turn it toward another project. Another noted that once trust degrades for one project, skepticism can spread via social media to other communities nearby, “salting the earth” for future development.

The energy transformation is arguably the most complex societal shift in our history — rivaling the industrial and agricultural revolutions. But it can’t succeed from the top down, only from the bottom up, driven forward by community support, not despite it. The ideas and perspectives shared during our roundtable have renewed our confidence that the transformation can be successful, and we look forward to convening more in the near future.

Policy Roundtable Recap: Lessons Learned on Community Engagement