How the 2026 Washington Legislature Can Right-Size the Power Grid

Описание: One month after unprecedented floods surged across Washington, forcing tens of thousands of people to flee their homes, lawmakers will convene in Olympia to discuss climate policy. This latest climate change-fueled disaster, in an ever-extending string of them, is yet another reminder of what is at stake.

Washington's climate ambitions hang on poles and wires. Electric transmission lines make it possible to carry cheap, efficient, reliable power from solar fields in California or wind farms in Montana to the people in Washington who rely on it every day. Without more grid capacity, the state risks relying for longer on polluting and increasingly expensive natural gas for electricity.

Yet, Washington is only reviewing one (controversial) large transmission project. Meanwhile, the US federal administration is cutting support for the grid despite its claims to the contrary.

Washington lawmakers can step up, including in the 2026 legislative session. They can empower the state to partner with experienced developers to build lines no one else will, saving ratepayers money. They can eliminate duplicative steps in project review processes, while preserving Tribal consultation rights and opportunities for public feedback. And they can ensure that local jurisdictions do not arbitrarily block or slow crucial projects. The alternative is sticking Washingtonians with an aging grid, which they will pay for in higher bills and forgone opportunities for clean, reliable power.

Washington has few tools to build the transmission it needs. At present, the state is wholly at the mercy of individual utilities and the Bonneville Power Administration (BPA), an independent agency of the US Department of Energy. The last major expansion of the transmission grid in Washington occurred a decade ago, when BPA energized three new 500 kilovolt lines. (One reason for the slow build-out, as Sightline has explained, is these entities do not want to pay for these large projects.)

A state transmission authority would transform Washington from a hopeful observer to a proactive leader of its decarbonization journey.

The authority would identify grid projects that Washington needs that neither utilities nor BPA want or plan to develop. It could then partner with experienced private transmission builders to erect the lines. And, if the legislature granted it revenue bonding power, it could build these lines more cheaply than private utilities, which in part rely on expensive equity to finance capital projects. Plus, unlike private utilities, the authority would not profit from grid projects. A recent study found that, in California, transmission projects financed with low-cost public debt could cost 57 percent less than projects financed by investor-owned utilities. Cheaper power lines mean lower monthly utility bills for customers.

Lawmakers can look to New Mexico, Colorado, and California for guidance.

New Mexico's transmission authority, which the legislature established in 2007, is developing 1,500 miles of transmission lines, with at least two lines under construction. It partners with private developers, such as NextEra Energy and Pattern Energy, to build them, and then leases or sells them to utilities or transmission companies. Revenues from projects New Mexico's authority develops cover its operating expenses.

Colorado's transmission authority, which the legislature created in 2021, determined in its 2024 study that utilities' plans to expand the grid fell short of what the state needs; to decarbonize, the state requires more than 500 additional miles of high-voltage wires. The authority is now in discussions with potential partners to develop six priority projects to fill this gap.

And in 2025, California enacted a major transmission policy, which, among other provisions, facilitates public debt financing and public ownership of grid projects with the goal of saving ratepayers money. While the bill doesn't create a transmission authority per se, it let...