As policymakers on both sides of the aisle reconcile with what an “all of the above” energy policy strategy can look like, prioritizing energy developments on environmentally contaminated sites could garner bipartisan support. This “repurposed” use of brownfields, Superfund sites, and other legacy industrial lands could help address growing energy demand and lead to direct local benefits for constituents. But concerns about liability, funding, and potential environmental harm emerge in the face of overdue permitting reform.
Federal energy permitting, for both renewable and fossil fuel projects, faces significant criticism for delays and uncertainty. While both the Biden and Trump administrations have advocated for reform, their primary goals differ: clean energy for Democrats, and broader industrial development for Republicans. Lengthy environmental reviews and bureaucratic hurdles affect all projects, yet partisan divisions frequently stall comprehensive reform efforts.
Despite record energy production in 2025, concerns persist across the political spectrum regarding power deficits and rising generation costs. This shared urgency highlights an opportunity: brownfield energy development. By repurposing contaminated sites, this approach addresses rising demand, remediates environmental damage, and revitalizes neglected areas. While federal progress is slow, states can lead by identifying suitable sites, engaging communities, and offering bundled incentives.
Solar and wind farms are particularly well-suited for brownfield sites, limiting the use of agricultural or protected lands. Redeveloping these sites also typically faces less public opposition than greenfield projects, mitigating investor concerns about delays. However, ongoing attention to public participation is crucial, as some reforms seek to shield energy projects from legal challenges, potentially risking environmental safeguards and public trust without strong oversight.
States can accelerate brownfield energy development through procurement preferences and direct financial incentives, advancing renewable goals even amidst federal deregulation. Administrative changes, such as utilizing external professionals, can also streamline permitting. Emerging policy tools include the ADVANCE Act, which promotes nuclear projects on brownfields, and New York’s “Build Ready” program by NYSERDA, which pre-permits brownfield parcels for renewable deployment. Proactive identification of suitable land by state and local governments can further streamline permitting and funding.
Brownfield redevelopment offers tangible benefits, transforming polluted land into community assets and fostering local support. This approach represents a common-sense, bipartisan policy reform to address the energy crisis. While states are pioneering innovative tools and incentives, federal action remains crucial. Reauthorizing the Brownfields Program and implementing smart permitting reform with robust environmental and community safeguards are essential for scaling these efforts. Expanding state-level initiatives can ensure repurposed lands continue to drive bipartisan energy progress despite federal gridlock.