Trump’s plan to accelerate energy projects threatened by legal challenges

Trump's potential return to the "Schedule F" measure could ease energy project approvals but risks legal delays due to the replacement of technical experts with political appointees.

Share:

Gain full professional access to energynews.pro from 4.90$/month.
Designed for decision-makers, with no long-term commitment.

Over 30,000 articles published since 2021.
150 new market analyses every week to decode global energy trends.

Monthly Digital PRO PASS

Immediate Access
4.90$/month*

No commitment – cancel anytime, activation in 2 minutes.

*Special launch offer: 1st month at the indicated price, then 14.90 $/month, no long-term commitment.

Annual Digital PRO Pass

Full Annual Access
99$/year*

To access all of energynews.pro without any limits

*Introductory annual price for year one, automatically renewed at 149.00 $/year from the second year.

Former President Donald Trump’s ambition to streamline energy project approvals is centered on a controversial plan to overhaul the federal civil service. At the heart of this plan is the reinstatement of “Schedule F,” a measure introduced during his first term, which would allow the dismissal of thousands of federal employees and replace technical experts with political appointees, potentially impacting the permit review process, particularly under the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA).

Schedule F, a federal employment category introduced by a Trump executive order in October 2020, would strip traditional protections from career civil servants. The goal is to expedite decisions on major infrastructure projects, especially in the energy sector. However, federal permitting experts warn that this acceleration could lead to further delays, primarily due to potential legal challenges.

Technical expertise replaced by political appointees

Nikki Chiappa, director of the permitting program at the Breakthrough Institute, points out that replacing NEPA review specialists with politically appointed individuals who lack technical expertise could make environmental assessments more vulnerable to lawsuits. According to Chiappa, the quality of reviews could decline, making these projects more susceptible to prolonged legal delays.

The Schedule F program could also result in a loss of talent among federal experts, further increasing the workload for the few remaining specialists. This situation risks undermining the speed of approvals, a key objective of Trump’s strategy.

Impacts on renewable energy projects

While Trump has shown support for mining and fossil fuel projects, his frequent criticisms of renewable energy, particularly wind power, are well documented. Should Schedule F be reinstated, the appointment of politically aligned individuals could slow down green energy projects, including those backed by the Biden administration, such as offshore wind and solar initiatives.

The “Project 2025” report, authored by the Heritage Foundation, supports this approach by recommending that the role of executive director of the Permitting Council — the federal agency responsible for coordinating environmental reviews for high-priority projects — be given to a presidential appointee with expanded powers to influence the approval process.

Increased risk of legal delays

The legal vulnerability of approvals issued without solid technical expertise could paralyze numerous energy projects. A study by the Breakthrough Institute reveals that NEPA-related lawsuits delayed projects by an average of 3.9 years between 2013 and 2022, whether they were fossil fuel or renewable energy projects. Without a strong framework to address legal challenges, these delays could worsen under a Trump administration implementing Schedule F.

Christine Tezak, director at ClearView Energy Partners, suggests that projects already under construction are likely safe from political interference, but new projects could be more vulnerable. If environmental reviews are seen as less rigorous, opponents of these projects will have more grounds to challenge them in court.

A risky bet for the future of energy projects

Ultimately, Trump’s desire to streamline energy project approvals may face unforeseen obstacles. By reducing the role of technical experts within the administration, many projects could become entangled in legal disputes. Without legislative reforms to limit legal challenges, particularly those related to NEPA, the risk is that this strategy, intended to speed up projects, could end up slowing them down even further.

According to the International Energy Agency (IEA), global renewable power capacity could more than double by 2030, driven by the rise of solar photovoltaics despite supply chain pressures and evolving policy frameworks.
Algeria plans to allocate $60 billion to energy projects by 2029, primarily targeting upstream oil and gas, while developing petrochemicals, renewables and unconventional resources.
China set a record for clean technology exports in August, driven by surging sales of electric vehicles and batteries, with more than half of the growth coming from non-OECD markets.
A night-time attack on Belgorod’s power grid left thousands without electricity, according to Russian local authorities, despite partial service restoration the following morning.
The French Academy of Sciences calls for a global ban on solar radiation modification, citing major risks to climate stability and the world economy.
The halt of US federal services disrupts the entire decision-making chain for energy and mining projects, with growing risks of administrative delays and missing critical data.
Facing a potential federal government shutdown, multiple US energy agencies are preparing to suspend services and furlough thousands of employees.
A report reveals the economic impact of renewable energy losses in Chile, indicating that a 1% drop in curtailments could generate $15mn in annual savings.
Faced with growing threats to its infrastructure, Denmark raises its energy alert level in response to a series of unidentified drone flyovers and ongoing geopolitical tensions.
The Prime Minister dismissed rumours of a moratorium on renewables, as the upcoming energy roadmap triggers tensions within the sector.
Kuwait plans to develop 14.05 GW of new power capacity by 2031 to meet growing demand and reduce scheduled outages, driven by extreme temperatures and maintenance delays.
The partnership with the World Bank-funded Pro Energia+ programme aims to expand electricity access in Mozambique by targeting rural communities through a results-based financing mechanism.
The European Commission strengthens ACER’s funding through a new fee structure applied to reporting entities, aimed at supporting increased surveillance of wholesale energy market transactions.
France’s Court of Auditors is urging clarity on EDF’s financing structure, as the public utility confronts a €460bn investment programme through 2040 to support its new nuclear reactor rollout.
The U.S. Department of Energy will return more than $13bn in unspent funds originally allocated to climate initiatives, in line with the Trump administration’s new budget policy.
Under pressure from Washington, the International Energy Agency reintroduces a pro-fossil scenario in its report, marking a shift in its direction amid rising tensions with the Trump administration.
Southeast Asia, facing rapid electricity consumption growth, could tap up to 20 terawatts of solar and wind potential to strengthen energy security.
The President of the Energy Regulatory Commission was elected to the presidency of the Board of Regulators of the Agency for the Cooperation of Energy Regulators for a two-and-a-half-year term.
The Australian government has announced a new climate target backed by a funding plan, while maintaining its position as a major coal exporter, raising questions about its long-term energy strategy.
New 15-year agreement for the exploration of polymetallic sulphides in the Indian Ocean, making India the first country with two licences and the largest allocated perimeter for these deposits.