The energy transition is often described as an infrastructure challenge. Having recently completed my board service at PJM Interconnection, the largest regional grid operator in the United States, and after studying the extensive public record surrounding today’s governance debates, I’m increasingly convinced it’s something else: a decision-speed problem.
Across the country, many of the technologies needed to support electrification, data-center growth, and grid reliability already exist. Capital is available. Forecasting tools are improving. Yet projects still move slowly. And when they do move, commitments are often made faster than the institutions governing them can resolve who bears the associated risks.
That gap has consequences. And they are not distributed evenly.
Having worked across critical infrastructure and grid governance, I’ve seen many energy transition delays stem from institutional misalignment — and what happens when institutions move forward anyway. Those risks are frequently transferred to the stakeholders with the least direct representation in the decision-making process. And in electricity markets, that is often the customer.
The electric power sector was built around institutions that evolved over decades. Utilities, regulators, regional grid operators, developers, investors, municipalities, consumer advocates, and equipment suppliers all perform individual important functions. But they operate under different incentives, authorities, timelines, and accountability structures. And as the energy transition accelerates, this misalignment has become an impediment.
