In recent months, more than 100 wind farms in 21 states were stalled as part of a sweeping effort by the U.S. government to halt renewable energy development. Since 2025, total cancellations of clean energy projects have grown to more than 21 gigawatts (GW) of capacity — enough to power 2 million homes.These efforts, along with other federal policies, are not only restricting the supply of clean energy, but could cost Americans billions of dollars at a time when one in three Americans is foregoing necessities like food and medical care to pay their rising utility bills.That affordability crisis is also being driven by delayed grid investments, infrastructure-damaging extreme weather events and the surge in data center demand. Since 2019, electricity rates nationally have increased 33%. With utilities requesting record rate increases, relief won’t likely come anytime soon.A new study by the consulting firm National Economic Research Associates, commissioned by the Corporate Energy Buyers Association, finds that continuing to constrain deployment of new solar and wind projects could add $11.6 billion annually to household energy bills from 2027 through 2033. Commercial and industrial customers would pay an additional $5.7 billion annually in electricity and natural gas costs, bringing the total added cost over the seven-year period for all consumers to $121 billion.If current U.S. federal government actions continue to needlessly take clean energy sources off the table, Americans will face even higher energy bills. Wind turbines stand at the mouth of Spanish Fork Canyon in Utah. As electricity bills soar, the federal government is restricting a more cost-effective option. Photo by M Outdoors/Shutterstock. Restricting Clean Energy Increases Energy CostsSome of the federal actions that are stalling wind and solar energy development include restrictive federal permitting practices that specifically target clean energy, attempts to stop work and revoke already-issued permits for nearly completed clean energy projects, halting military reviews of proposed wind farms for radar and flight paths, and requiring U.S. Interior secretary approval of wind and solar projects on federal lands and waters. Together, these actions kill or delay projects, increase financing and project development costs, and create uncertainty that discourages investment.Meanwhile, the administration is pushing for mandates to operate expensive coal generation, fast tracking permitting of fossil fuel projects, and taking steps to prioritize fossil fuel resources for grid connection.Even when federal courts overturned some of the administration’s efforts to squash renewable energy projects — as they did after a stop-work order halted the nearly-complete 700-megawatt Revolution Wind project off the coast of Rhode Island and four other offshore wind projects — there are still consequences. The imposed barriers send a chilling message to investors, businesses and industry, leading to increased project costs that are ultimately passed on to consumers. While the U.S. Department of Justice is no longer pursuing efforts to defend these offshore wind project stop-work orders in court, other efforts to derail wind and solar projects continue.The Business Case for Clean EnergyThere’s a strong business case for advancing clean energy: Solar, wind and battery storage are among the fastest to deploy, most widely available, reliable and cost-effective sources of new electricity when allowed to compete in the market on a level playing field — particularly with respect to federal permitting processes and approvals. The U.S. needs a diverse set of resources, including clean energy, to meet rapidly surging demand. In many regions, renewables are the most economically sound and sustainable choices, which is why as of earlier this year, adoption has reached 370 GW or enough to power 80 million homes.For one, clean energy can be fast.Wind, solar and battery storage can rapidly come online so long as they can connect to the grid and don’t face permitting restrictions. Onshore solar and wind plants can be planned and fully operational in as little as two years; storage can take even less.Wind, solar and battery storage projects experience substantially fewer and less significant project delays than natural gas or nuclear plants. This is not a recent phenomenon — historical data show renewable projects are brought online faster than fossil fuel projects. And nuclear projects can take even longer.The most recent U.S. example, Georgia’s Vogtle nuclear plant expansion, took 15 years to build after construction began in 2009. It was completed in 2024 following billions of dollars in cost overruns, becoming the most expensive power project in U.S. history. Expansions planned at other existing nuclear plants, however, are expected to come online more quickly — some within the next few years.For renewables, faster deployment and cost effectiveness have helped drive their growth, with more than 90% of new electricity capacity in 2024 coming from wind, solar and battery storage sources.In contrast, gas-fired power plants are facing long delays for parts and approvals. Current wait times for large natural gas turbines are now between five and seven years. These delays aren’t just due to the turbine technology — they’re a sign of pervasive under-capacity of the turbine manufacturing system.As a result, some large new data centers are turning to reciprocating gas engines, modified jet engines and other sources to power facilities to come online more quickly. Plans for these often off-grid projects have skyrocketed and now total about 90 GW nationally, according to Cleanview, which tracks U.S. power and data center development. While these may be the fastest fossil fuel resources to deploy, they are not energy-efficient or designed for steady, long-term power generation for large loads, making this a suboptimal long-term strategy. The increased reliance on gas is also likely to raise consumer energy bills.Second, clean energy is cost-competitive.Solar and wind are the lowest-cost options for new electricity generation in many regions, using a measurement known as the Levelized Cost of Electricity (LCOE). The LCOE analysis published annually by Lazard indicates that prices of all types of generation are rising, but that solar and wind are less expensive than conventional generation options, even without subsidies. Renewable projects that can come online quickly enough to still be eligible for federal tax credits are even more affordable. According to Lazard, costs for battery energy storage, which help address the variable output of renewables, are rising due to tariffs and foreign sourcing restrictions, but wind and solar combined with storage are still cost-competitive.Historically, market-driven renewables have been a bargain for most consumers. A recent analysis by Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory found that states with large amounts of market-based renewables tended to have lower electricity prices.Electricity generation prices from wind and solar are also more stable and consistent over time compared to fossil fuels, as renewables don’t depend on fuel purchases that can be affected by regional or global markets. While domestic shale gas can be ramped up to meet demand, fossil fuel prices can change dramatically based on geopolitical events. While the Iran War has had minimal impacts on U.S. natural gas and electricity prices so far, it has significantly raised domestic gasoline prices and disrupted global oil and natural gas markets. In 2022, Russia’s invasion of Ukraine disrupted natural gas supplies to Europe so severely that it also led to increased electricity and natural gas costs for many U.S. homeowners, while costs for renewables remained mostly unaffected.Moreover, supply chains for natural gas infrastructure have been unable to keep up with demand for gas-fired capacity, leading to rising prices. Between the fourth quarter of 2025 and the first quarter of 2026, average natural gas turbine prices increased from roughly $2,000 per kilowatt to roughly $3,000 per kilowatt. Some gas-fired generator projects are reporting costs at two-and-a-half times what they would have cost just a few years ago. And gas turbine costs are only expected to increase in the near future, according to research from GridLab. While prices for wind and solar are also rising, this is due to high demand as well as labor shortages, tariffs, permitting challenges and rising insurance costs. LevelTen Energy released data showing that power purchase agreement prices for solar and wind rose by 13% and 24%, respectively, in the first quarter of 2026, compared to a year earlier. Prices for wind energy were substantially higher because of the scarcity of available projects — a result of permitting restrictions imposed by federal agencies and other actions to discourage project completion. Competition for resources is also playing a role. For example, earlier this year, Amazon outbid utility Puget Sound Energy by $1 million in an auction for what will become one of the largest U.S. solar projects.Third, clean energy helps with reliability.A diverse mix of energy resources can make the grid more reliable. While wind and solar projects do not operate around the clock, they have proven to help with reliability during severe weather while fossil fuel plants became inoperable. During 2021’s Winter Storm Uri, an ice storm that left 4.5 million people without power and caused 246 deaths, 55% of the generating capacity that experienced unplanned outages and reduced output came from natural gas generators. Conversely, wind and solar only made up 23% of that capacity.A similar story holds true for Winter Storm Elliott, a blizzard in 2022 that impacted 2.1 million people and caused blackouts in several parts of the southeastern U.S. During the storm, wind and solar accounted for just 5% of the generating capacity that experienced unplanned outages and reduced output. Conversely, natural gas generators accounted for 63% of unavailable capacity, while coal generators made up 23%.Moreover, solar and wind resources have been increasingly deployed with battery storage to extend their operating hours and further reduce the costs of serving load. Other new technologies, like grid forming inverters, are also helping solar and wind resources provide more grid services that support grid reliability. A wind and solar farm in the California desert. U.S. policies that restrict clean energy risk taking a fast, reliable and cost-effective energy source off the table. Photo by Jason Finn/Shutterstock. Restricting Clean Energy Raises Costs and Puts Our Economic Competitiveness at RiskThe global market for clean energy is valued at over $1 trillion today and expected to quintuple in the next decade. If the U.S. abandons clean energy development at home, it will risk our ability to meet energy demand while handing this huge, growing market to global competitors.Key competitors around the world, including China, are already dominating the global supply of renewable capacity, ramping up their investments and reaping the benefits.The U.S. needs a comprehensive electricity strategy that uses the best possible options — especially low-cost clean energy — to relieve price burdens and risks, remain competitive in the global market and decrease economic dependence on other countries. Comprehensive transmission and permitting reform at the federal level should also be included.At a time when affordability concerns are widespread across the country, perpetuating current practices and restrictions could pose significant additional costs to all energy users. Rather than interfering with clean energy investments, the federal government should be empowering the industry to work toward expanding clean energy to affordably, reliably and quickly meet our growing electricity needs.