Another CNBC article says, "Interior Secretary Doug Burgum will now make the final decision over wind and solar permitting on federal lands that his department owns. ... About 5% of solar projects and 1% of wind projects are located on federal land, according to ACP."
So, seems like limited effect.
What the wind and solar developers seem to be screaming about is how the federal government will no longer be issuing subsidies and tax breaks for the construction of wind and solar facilities, claiming that without these, it will cost thousands of jobs and cripple the industry. Yet, at the same time, we're hearing the green-energy people continuing to push the "wind and solar production is cheaper than fossil fuel generation" -- well, if it's truly cheaper than fossil-fuel generation, then it doesn't need federal subsidies and tax breaks, and wind and solar facilities will be built, selling power at the same cost as fossil-fuel generation, providing a higher return on investment than building fossil-fuel generation, and so will replace fossil-fuel plants.
And then a particularly dense cloud will move over a solar facility, its output will drop almost to nothing, and because wind and solar are incapable of stabilizing the power grid on their own, we'll see another incident like the one in Spain, where voltage and frequency disruption at a solar power facility caused a distribution node to trip and go offline, and because at the time some 2/3 of Spain's power was being generated by wind and solar, there was insufficient stabilizing capacity to keep this from causing a cascading series of distribution centers to trip and go offline as well, shutting down the electrical grid over the entire Iberian peninsula and parts of France.