The dominant framing of the interconnection queue problem centres on process dysfunction: serial study sequences, first-come-first-served rules that reward speculative submissions over prepared ones, inadequate staffing at ISO and RTO study teams, and regulatory lag in implementing FERC-mandated reforms. These are real problems. FERC Order 2023's shift to cluster-based processing, financial readiness requirements, and mandatory study deadlines addresses them meaningfully.
What the process-improvement framing understates is the structural dimension. The interconnection queue was designed for a grid where new generation connected incrementally — one plant at a time, over years, in a system whose generation mix was relatively stable. As of the end of 2025, over 2,060 GW of total generation and storage capacity were actively seeking grid connection in the United States. The entire installed US generation fleet is approximately 1,280 GW. The queue is not merely long. It reflects a fundamental mismatch between the speed of renewable deployment and the rate at which transmission infrastructure — physical and institutional — can absorb it. Africa-newsroom
The cascading restudy problem illustrates this clearly. Under serial study logic, a single project withdrawal forces restudies of every project whose impact assessment was calculated relative to the withdrawn capacity. In a cluster of 40 projects, one major withdrawal can invalidate months of engineering work across 15 or 20 queue positions. FERC Order 2023's cluster methodology reduces but does not eliminate this exposure. The instability is inherent to any study process that depends on a stable queue composition.
The cost-allocation structure compounds the architectural problem. Proposed renewable energy and energy storage projects face significantly greater interconnection costs than natural gas generators — a consequence of their geographic distribution in areas with limited existing transmission capacity. When a project triggers a network upgrade, that cost is typically assigned to the triggering project under most tariff frameworks, regardless of the shared value that upgrade creates for subsequent developers in the same corridor. This creates a first-mover penalty that systematically discourages development in exactly the high-resource areas where the generation economics are strongest.
FERC Order 1920's proactive transmission planning requirements represent the correct response to this dimension — shifting from reactive, application-triggered infrastructure planning toward forward-looking regional transmission investment that anticipates generation needs. The question is whether capital commitment, rate-case approval, and construction timelines will follow the planning mandate on a schedule consistent with near-term renewable deployment targets.
REM Episode 15 maps the queue's mechanics, the reform landscape, and the critical distinction between process improvement and structural remedy. It also examines the African corollary: where the US problem is a formal process overwhelmed by volume, the predominant challenge in Sub-Saharan Africa outside South Africa is the absence of a codified interconnection framework at all — a different failure mode producing a similar outcome for project bankability.
The full analysis is published at donfackfortune.medium.com.
Donfack Fortune is a mechanical engineer and energy systems analyst publishing Renewable Energy Mall & Engineering Review (REM), a series grounded in engineering first principles and African infrastructure realities in global energy contexts.
