Eastern Interconnection Study Puts $15.3 Billion Net Value on Thirteen Transmission Projects
A September 2026 study sharpens the financial case for grid expansion as federal loan programs pour billions into transmission while targeted grants are cancelled.
Thirteen inter- and intraregional transmission projects in the Eastern Interconnection could produce up to $15.3 billion in net system value through 2050, according to a study released on Tuesday, September 1, 2026. The findings land as the federal approach to transmission financing has split sharply, with large loans flowing to some states and grants being cancelled in others.5
PJM captures the biggest portion. In the base demand unconstrained scenario, PJM receives $6.7 billion in benefits over 40 years, more than triple the combined $1.9 billion projected for SPP and MISO South, per the study. The Southeast gets $851 million, the Northeast $393 million. Across the full Eastern Interconnection footprint, the unconstrained base case produces $12.4 billion in net present value at a 1.77 benefit-to-cost ratio.5
On Wednesday, July 8, 2026, the DOE closed a loan of up to $3.26 billion to an AEP Texas subsidiary through the Trump administration's Energy Dominance Financing program, covering roughly 100 transmission projects and upgrades across the state. DOE and AEP project the loan will save more than one million homes and businesses approximately $685 million over 30 years. A related EDF commitment is financing upgrades to roughly 5,000 miles of transmission lines across Indiana, Michigan, Ohio, Oklahoma and West Virginia, with $275 million in estimated financing cost savings projected over the loan's life.3,2
The numbers are larger still elsewhere. Earlier in 2026, Southern Company's Alabama Power and Georgia Power secured EDF loans totaling $26.54 billion, split roughly $22.42 billion for Georgia Power and $4.09 billion for Alabama Power. Southern projects $7 billion in savings for 4.3 million customers across both states.2
But grants ran the other way. In August 2026, the DOE terminated funding for projects tied to states that voted for Kamala Harris in the 2024 election, following White House OMB director Russ Vought's social media post declaring the administration would cancel "nearly $8 billion in Green New Scam funding." Among the terminated awards was a $630.6 million grant from 2024 targeting upgrades to more than 100 miles of high-voltage lines using advanced cables capable of carrying more electricity within existing corridors.4
The split matters for project economics. EDF loans require debt service. Grants do not. A project that loses a grant and must substitute EDF debt carries a higher long-run cost for ratepayers than the original financing structure assumed, compressing the net savings estimates that state commissions and FERC will scrutinize in approval proceedings.4,2
The generation build underway makes the transmission shortfall more pressing. The September 2026 study counted 67 gigawatts of capacity currently under construction in the United States: 27 GW of solar, 17 GW of battery storage, 15 GW of wind and 9 GW of gas-fired generation. New generation without transmission access is stranded generation.5
The DOE in prior rounds made approximately $1.9 billion available specifically for advanced transmission investments aimed at meeting demand growth and resource adequacy requirements. That was a fraction of what EDF is now committing to individual utilities, but it served a different purpose — catalyzing grid upgrades through grant funding rather than debt, and targeting infrastructure in areas that might not qualify for, or seek, large federal loans.1
The September 2026 study's high-demand scenario pushes net system value to $15.3 billion, about $2.9 billion above the base case. That difference reflects how much projected AI data center load, EV adoption and industrial electrification actually materializes. If load growth runs below current models, the financial case for the least economically attractive projects in the set becomes harder to sustain.5
For project sponsors in states that lost grant funding, the immediate pressure is what replaces it. EDF loans require matching private capital and carry debt service that grants did not. The September 1 study's benefit-to-cost ratios may be persuasive to investors, but they do not close a capital gap left by cancelled federal awards — and no new funding mechanism to fill that gap has been announced.5,4