New 'Co-Location Energy Act' Aims to Speed Up Solar Projects, But Gives Existing Leaseholders Veto Power

The newly introduced Co-Location Energy Act is trying to tackle one of the biggest headaches in renewable energy: finding land to build on. This bill is straightforward: it allows solar and wind projects to be built on federal land that is already leased for other energy production, like oil, gas, or geothermal. The goal is to maximize the use of existing federal footprints, which could be a smart move for efficiency.

Sharing the Sandbox: The Co-Location Plan

This Act gives the Secretary of the Interior the power to issue permits for building and operating solar and wind systems on existing federal energy lease sites. Think of it as allowing a solar farm to share space with an existing oil field, leveraging the same land for two different energy sources. This could potentially speed up the deployment of clean energy by skipping the long process of securing entirely new federal land leases. For a renewable energy developer, this is huge—it’s a shortcut to available space.

The Catch: Consent is King

Here’s where it gets complicated, and where the bill hands out some serious leverage. The Secretary cannot let anyone evaluate the site for solar or wind, or issue a permit to build it, without the explicit permission of the current leaseholder. If a company already holds the lease for oil drilling on that federal land, they get absolute veto power over any new solar or wind project proposed for the same spot. This is a critical detail. While the bill enables co-location, it also effectively gives incumbent energy companies—often fossil fuel interests—the final say on whether clean energy can move onto their leased turf. If you’re a solar developer trying to expand, your success now depends entirely on whether a competitor agrees to let you in.

The Environmental Review Shortcut

The bill also requires the Secretary of the Interior to quickly determine if certain renewable energy activities qualify as “routine stuff that usually doesn’t mess up the environment much.” If they do, these activities could be excluded from the full, time-consuming environmental review process required under the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). This is designed to accelerate project timelines, which is great for getting more clean energy online faster. However, it also means that some projects will bypass the detailed scrutiny and public input that a full NEPA review provides. For environmental advocates and the public, this raises a concern: cutting corners on environmental review, even for routine activities, means less oversight and potentially missed impacts that could affect local ecosystems and communities.

What This Means for the Real World

If this bill passes, we could see faster renewable energy development, but potentially only where existing energy companies are willing to share. If an incumbent leaseholder decides they don’t want a competing solar project next door—maybe they see it as competition, or maybe they just don't want the hassle—they can simply say no, and the project dies right there. This provision, requiring leaseholder consent, is the bill’s biggest risk, as it could unintentionally slow down the energy transition by empowering the very companies that might prefer to maintain the status quo. It’s a classic tradeoff: efficiency and speed versus checks, balances, and fair competition.