The World's #1 Renewable Energy Network for News & Information
Sign In or Register
Renewable Energy World Logo
Thursday, May 23, 2013
  • Sections
    • Home
      • News
      • Opinion & Commentary
      • Featured Blogs
      • Research & Reports
      • Video
      • Press Releases
      • All Blogs
      • Events
      • Products
      • Finance
    • Solar
      • News
      • Opinion & Commentary
      • Featured Blogs
      • Research & Reports
      • Video
      • Press Releases
      • All Blogs
      • Events
      • Products
      • Finance
    • Wind
      • News
      • Opinion & Commentary
      • Featured Blogs
      • Research & Reports
      • Video
      • Press Releases
      • All Blogs
      • Events
      • Products
      • Finance
    • Geothermal
      • News
      • Opinion & Commentary
      • Featured Blogs
      • Research & Reports
      • Video
      • Press Releases
      • All Blogs
      • Events
      • Products
      • Finance
    • Bio
      • News
      • Opinion & Commentary
      • Featured Blogs
      • Research & Reports
      • Video
      • Press Releases
      • All Blogs
      • Events
      • Products
      • Finance
    • Hydro
      • News
      • Opinion & Commentary
      • Featured Blogs
      • Research & Reports
      • Video
      • Press Releases
      • All Blogs
      • Events
      • Products
      • Finance
    • Careers
    • Companies
      • Company Directory
      • Press Releases
      • Products
      • Events Calendar
      • White Papers
    • Webcasts
      • Upcoming Webcasts
      • Featured Webcasts
      • Archived Webcasts
      • Events Calendar
    • White Papers
    • Magazines
      • Renewable Energy World
      • Wind Technology
      • Large Scale Solar
      • Hydro Review
      • HRW - Hydro Review Worldwide
      • Renewable Energy World (North America Edition)
      • Photovoltaics World
    • Awards
  • Account
    • Sign In
    • Register
  • Search
Don't Miss The Great Solar Debate: Where Does the Global Solar Industry Stand? Click Here to Register! ×

Can Clean Energy Strike Back Against the Growing Smear Campaign?

Stephen Lacey, Climate Progress
August 06, 2012  |  16 Comments

There has been a noticeable shift within the clean energy industry over the last few months as the election season brings a fresh round of attacks.

From 2005 to 2008, advocates racked up an impressive array of policy support on the local and state levels due to strong bipartisan support. Many people believed that local momentum would carry forward on the national level and provide the catalyst for a comprehensive climate and clean energy bill after President Obama came into office in 2009.

Of course, it wasn’t enough. And the defeat of the climate bill in 2010 marked the beginning of an intensifying campaign against renewable energy. Now, with the Republican party using Solyndra as the center of its messaging strategy, that campaign has become a central theme of the 2012 election.

Renewable energy groups have come to grips with this reality and are adapting their messaging strategies accordingly. Consider this recent email, sent by Adam Browning of the Vote Solar Initiative, on the industry’s need to counter disinformation:

When people ask: What keeps you up at night? I tell them this: There’s an unholy amount of money being spent to attack renewables right now — an unprecedented blitz of solar slander, renewable-mongering and clean energy kvetching that could set policy efforts back decades.

Consider: Of the negative advertising in April of this this election cycle, 81% have targeted renewable energy for attack.  And when you factor that this presidential election is shaping up to be the most expensive in history, with experts estimating spending in the range of $6 billion dollars, well, we got trouble.

Since its founding, The Vote Solar Initiative has been all about helping states and municipalities understand the value of solar. They’ve had to deal with their fair share of misinformation over the years, but they’ve made extraordinarily impressive bipartisan progress on getting better regulatory standards and support mechanisms for solar in place.

But today, with organizations like Americans for Tax Reform, the American Legislative Exchange Council, the Manhattan Institute, and a growing army of Agenda 21 conspiracy theorists (supported by the Republican National Committee) all working to rhetorically smear renewables or take them down on the local level, a lot more people are waking up to the threat.

For sure, groups like Vote Solar want to maintain their non-partisan stance. They’ve worked in the bluest of the blue states and the reddest of the red states, communicating with regulators, policymakers and business owners about the benefits of solar. But they recognize that the political hits are going to pile up against them this election season. That’s a fact.

Consider these trends:

  • American Energy Alliance, Americans for Prosperity, American Future Fund, and Crossroads GPS – the top outside interest group spenders – have spent a total $24.9 million on deceptive ads, many of them energy-related, the Annenberg Public Policy Center found.
  • The Koch-backed Americans for Prosperity has devoted more than 90 percent of its ad spending to energy ads. Two of these ads pushed the patently false claim, roundly rejected by fact-checkers, regarding clean energy jobs. Politico just reported the Koch-backed organizations plan to spend $400 million ahead of the 2012 election, with a large amount of that money likely going toward energy issues.
  • 85 percent of the dollars spent on presidential ads by four top-spending third-party groups were for ads with at least one claim ruled deceptive by fact-checkers.
  • One in four of the dollars spent on TV ads has funded mostly false advertising mentioning energy. This equals the amount of spending on health care ads, according to Kantar Media.

In other words, hundreds of millions of dollars are being spent — virtually overnight — on straight-up lies designed to unravel the last decade of progress in renewable energy.

And just yesterday, the Sierra club issued a report detailing the flow of money from fossil fuel interests to organizations and individuals engaging in the campaign to take down renewable energy. The report outlines most of what we’ve been reporting on this website for the last year, but it’s a solid comprehensive overview of the players involved.

The report outlines political donations, industry dollars funding anti-renewable think tanks, and the relationship between local and national groups.

It’s still unclear how finely coordinated many of the current attacks are, particularly between local and national groups. However, it’s perfectly clear that organizations opposed to renewable energy — either for short-term political gain or long-term business reasons — are funneling hundreds of millions of dollars into the current smear campaign against the industry. There’s no refuting that it’s underway and it’s intensifying.

The Sierra Club summed up the attacks this way:

It is a testament to the success and rapid growth of clean-energy resources that they are now regarded as enough of a threat to draw fire from some of the largest, most powerful corporations on the planet. But with this rising status, there comes a heightened degree of difficulty that the renewable and efficiency companies — as well as advocates for their products as an environmental solution — must both recognize and contend with. The Koch brothers, Exxon Mobil, Peabody Energy, and others are playing for keeps. They have unlimited resources and we have documented that they are committing them to undermining clean energy. We clearly face a dog-eat-dog environment and must respond with as much vigor and aggressiveness as those who would see wind, solar, geothermal, and other technologies fade into the sunset — a product of a brief period in American economic history when the competitive environment was a friendly place for clean energy.

Ambitious efforts to change the political landscape to fit a certain set of interests are very unlikely to happen on a shoestring. Most of the activities described in this report have not taken place overnight, nor have they happened by accident. Hours of work and dedicated individuals have collaborated to build a meaningful opposition to renewable energy, whether through the previously discussed “think tanks,” “citizens groups,” or political contributions. These efforts have also required a significant amount of funding.

In order to combat this disinformation, many of the clean energy industry groups have banded together to create an Energy Fact Check website. It’s a great resource for keeping up with the growing list of deceptive or completely nonfactual claims. Unfortunately, it can’t match the Kochs, who can easily raise and spend $400 million in a few months.

But what’s potentially more valuable than money? Local businesses, entrepreneurs, and advocates sticking up for their industry. Look at what happened in New Jersey where Republican Governor Chris Christie — a man loved by the Kochs — expanded the state’s solar industrybecause it has been such an economic boost for small businesses. That happened because the New Jersey solar industry, along with the local utilities, were able to communicate the benefits of the technology. Local pragmatism beat out national politics.

In the medium and long-term, we know renewables, efficiency, and conservation will win the day — the need for distributed, low-carbon resources is far too environmentally and economically important. But that win isn’t going to be easy. It’s going to take some equally powerful push back from folks on the local level to counter the national smear campaign.

This article was originally published on Climate Progress and was republished with permission.

16 Comments

Register To Comment
Peter Bradshaw
Peter Bradshaw
August 15, 2012
Many nuclear power plants, which can take hours to turn on or off, have been combined with pumped storage facilities, so that the diurnal usage variations can be covered, pumping water up at night, and regaining (most of) that energy during the day running it back down. The same basic technology can be used, on an opposite timetable, to even out the diurnal variation of solar PV power. As nuclear power stations are retired (or suffer catastrophic problems), these pumped storage facilities can be used to deal with the variations of many of the renewable power sources.

Many, if not all, hydroelectric power stations can be converted to pumped storage facilities. There are many regions of the country (and the world) where hydroelectric sources provide a significant proportion of the power load. And in most such places, the size of the facility accommodates the annual rainfall pattern; thus in California, the storage lakes must last for several summer months. Accommodating the "two days" storage mentioned, or the more rational 5-7 days, would be no problem. And the river flow would be returned to a more natural pattern.

Looking at 5-day and 7-day running averages of one set of PV panels on one house roof (mine), the diurnal variation is almost entirely smoothed out. Adding in power generation from other such systems over a few tens of miles in all directions would surely smooth it out further.
Tim Dolan
Tim Dolan
August 15, 2012
I forgot to mention. Stop trying to do large arrays and concentrate on small distributed roof-top arrays. To get permission to add solar to a home takes at most 6 months (and then only because I was in a historic district and had to get review board approval).

You don't need an environmental impact statement, because the impact is already there from the house or other building in the first place. So distributed solar is really only limited by production and demand. It reduces the impact on the grid, minimizes the environmental impact (or may even lessen it), employs more folks, requires less investment by the energy companies (or the government). The only negative is it takes some control away from the large power companies.
Tim Dolan
Tim Dolan
August 15, 2012
Not as sure about wind, but I do know if you have a large number of small solar arrays distributed around a regional area, the power prediction should be fairly accurate at least 72 hours out. I know that cloud cover percentage and temperature (2 of the largest factors in solar power production) are fairly easy to predict these days.

While a single individual array may fluctuate a lot relative to its size, a large number of small distributed arrays scattered around a regional area (say the size of Rhode Island) should be predictable days in advance within the tolerance of even our current grid infrastructure.

I am a retired Imagery analyst and had the opportunity to plan reconnaissance collections in the past and so I know how accurate cloud cover prediction can be to a specific location at least 72 hours in advance (the air tasking cycle of the time).

I also from doing some research know the power companies in the PJM region take into account at least temperature in their daily predictions of power useage, although some of them don't seem to do a very good job at their predictions. Some do however, which tells me some of them don't care.

As far a Texas wind, I am suspecting a few large wind farms instead of lots of wind generators scattered around on farms. I noticed when I have traveled in Germany, they have a few here, a few there, but not the large wind farms I see in the US (or at least I didn't observe any truly large wind farms in Germany).
Rematog - The Original
Rematog - The Original
August 14, 2012
Longwatcher

On item 1, you are correct, but in some regions it's greater, esp wind energy, there have already be grid upsets in Texas when the wind failed to blow as predicted and there was a scramble to start up fossil units to take up the slack. Remember, 15 minutes is a fast start unit, 1-2 hours is reasonably fast, and big base load units can take >6 hours to reach full load (24-48 hours from cold start to full load).

Item 2. This country has allowed the grid to fall behind demand. You just can't get large loads from east to west, esp across the Rockies. It would take many billions of invenstment to make that possible (and yes, we should be doing it.)

10 years is not that long. It takes 3-5 years to permit, design, fabricate and erect a major generating asset. And to get a loan of > a billion dollars, you need a design with commerical guarantees from a vendor with pockets that deep..... or a federal loan guarantee. Thats how the real world works...
Tim Dolan
Tim Dolan
August 14, 2012
The best way to fight the smear campaigns tends to be with actual facts. If you can hit the people with the occasional fact and get that to sink in, they will generally ignore the BS of a smear campaign for what it is. Meanwhile, about the storage issue. there are two factors at work. 1. Until we hit the 10% maybe as high as 30% renewable energy mark with solar and wind, then storage is not an immediate problem. Given we are at less then 2-3% we have quite a ways to go still. We are likely at least 10 years away from needing anything more then power leveling type storage, which is not a high-tech requirement. 2. If the Grid is set up correctly your windless/cloudy night needs to be over 1/3 of the USA simultaneously. Just the PJM region (which I am in) goes from Illinois to NY, Maine to the Carolinas. It is not likely you would have those conditions over that large of an area. granted there could be a large area affected at one time, but until you get to that between 10-30% integration, not a serious problem. This translates into: we need to work on energy storage, because we will need it; however that should not stop us from deploying solar and wind in the meantime. the more solar/wind deployed the more investment there will be for energy storage. As we get closer to 10% and beyond, there will be demand for energy storage technologies to be developed naturally. But there is no need for solar/wind until we actually run out of fossil fuels (although even then we can always trade food for fuel - which I don't personally recommend).
Sandy Caruso
Sandy Caruso
August 14, 2012
"Can Clean Energy Strike Back Against the Growing Smear Campaign?" To answer the author's question, YES! Just allow the free market to work. When 'clean' energy such as solar can stand on it's own without taxpayer subsidies then we'll have solar on every house, business and factory in the county. The problem arises when capitalism is thwarted by progressive liberals like Obama, John Podesta,(Chair for Center for American Progress; Co-chair for Pres Obama's transition team; Chief of Staff for Pres Clinton, and author of: "How America's Progressives Can Save Our Economy"), George Soros (who FUNDS Center for American Progress), and the list goes on.

One of the MOST ridiculous legislation to come about in recent years requiring bio-fuels to be mixed with fossil fuels. I'm sure there are many on this website who have heard me harp about this issue before. Using FOOD as a FUEL source and especially at the behest of the government is assinine, stupid, wasteful, and fraught with unintended consequences.

I would for once like to see the government do their job not tell everyone else in the private sector how to do theirs! It's not 'clean energy' that is getting the smear campaign, it's those who are shoving it down our throats after taking our taxes to pay for it then funneling those dollars back to campaign funds for the same idiots to run again. It's time for REAL change not 'transformation' to a socialist network of elitists governing hard working taxpayers being taxed into oblivion by those who are unable to manage their own affairs.
Philip Haddad
Philip Haddad
August 14, 2012
If renewables are not the answer, what is? It is not nuclear and not fossil.
Paul Arrondelle
Paul Arrondelle
August 14, 2012
@ Robin

Yes, you've hit the nail on the head there, although I don't quite understand why we need to have 2 days worth of power stored. At the moment renewables can only be part of the energy mix, but their proportion can grow over time. We are making steps in the direction we need to all the time, for example this widely distributed story:

http://www.power-eng.com/news/2012/08/10/new-zealand-welcomes-tokelau-as-world-s-first-solar-powered-nation.html

Summary, solar power with storage batteries and bio-fuel filled generators provides power for entire island nation. Yes, I'm sure that their usage is modest, but the innovation and progress being made is staggering. To continue we simply need a reasonable working environment, and that means it to be free from attacks by entrenched vested interest groups who put their short term gain ahead of the long term good. At the very least, critisism should be fact based, as indeed your point is.
Rematog - The Original
Rematog - The Original
August 14, 2012
I've yet to see any suggested solution for solar or wind power on to what to do on windless (or too windy) nights.....

Until there is storage, or a truly dispatchable renewable, renewables CAN NOT be the base load source for the electrical grid.

So, for today, renewables can only be used to displace a portion of conventional generation capacity, and must have conventional generation back-up.

And, by storage, I'm talking utility grid scale. For a storage unit to equal one conventional coal unit's capacity for two days, you would need 23 Billion watt-hours of storage. ( 600 MW x 48 hrs x 1000 kw/Mw x 1000 watt/kw x .8 capacity factor ) And what would that cost?

And that's the size of storage capacity the country would need many hundreds of if we tried to rely on solar for say 1/2 our electrical power needs. (which from the above, is a 500 fold increase from today, i.e. double the scale 9 times...)
Philip Haddad
Philip Haddad
August 14, 2012
Keep in mind that it is heat, not CO2 that we should focus on. (Nuclear is not even an option because it emits twice the amount of total heat as its electrical output). The 16 terrawatts of energy consumption is more than enough to raise the atmospheric temperature. Renewables are the only answer.
William Fitch
William Fitch
August 9, 2012
Hi: There are only two long run possibilities here. Either RE wins or nature fixes. I vote for RE since it comes with survival...

.....Bill
Donald Wagner
Donald Wagner
August 7, 2012
This is just history repeating itself. As Mahatma Gandhi said 'First they ignore you, then they ridicule you, then they fight you, then you win.' According to the US Energy Information Administartion ( http://www.eia.gov/electricity/data.cfm#generation), solar energy production grew from 611.793 Million Kilowatt hours in 2007 to 1813.994 Million Kilowatt hours in 2011 which is a 195% increase!! Total electrical energy production went from 4156744.724 Million Kilowatt hours in 2007 to 4105734.47 Million Kilowatt hours in 2011 which is a -0.012% decrease. For fossil fuel companies, solar is basically an minor annoyance (in April 2012 providing 0.104% of electrical energy), but a fast growing annoyance. It is in their best interest (although not for the people in general or the environment) to skew the laws in their favor and to push the FUD factor (fear uncertainty and doubt). It seems that the party of anti-science should be labeled that way and let people know it is science that gave them their IPhone, big screen TV, internet etc.
Karl-Friedrich Lenz
Karl-Friedrich Lenz
August 7, 2012
The smear campaign I am striking back against is the one coming from pro-nuclear blogs. Rod Adams with his "Unreliables" idea and Barry Brook with his "Brave New Climate" anti-renewable propaganda blog come to mind.

While they don't have big dollars or much merit for their claims, they are dangerous since they can, on first sight, give the impression of caring about climate change.

The only way to deal with the fossil fuel industry lobbying is to turn it around. Make them understand that it is in their profit interest to sell less and charge more per unit.
Paul Arrondelle
Paul Arrondelle
August 7, 2012
Actually the author doesn't refer to "skepticism" at all. They refer to the cold, hard facts that lies are being told because the truth doesn't suit the message they want to send.

Do try to keep up Anonymous, it really isn't that hard to grasp.
Dimitar Mirchev
Dimitar Mirchev
August 7, 2012
No need to strike back - only need to beat them on the market!

@ #1 Anonymous

Are you talking about Renewables or about nucelar, coal, etc. It is hard to figure out.
ANONYMOUS
August 6, 2012
It is interesting that the author would never think to attribute the growing skepticism to crazy outsourcing from the green initiative, bankrupt companies, thousands laid off, failed policies and bullying tactics?

Add Your Comments

To add your comments you must sign-in or create a free account.

  • Create a Free Account!
  • Sign-In
Stephen Lacey

Stephen Lacey

I am a reporter with ClimateProgress.org, a blog published by the Center for American Progress. I am former editor and producer for RenewableEnergyWorld.com, where I contributed stories and hosted the Inside Renewable Energy Podcast. Keep...
  • About
  • Articles
  • Blog
  • Contact
  • FOLLOW
  • CONTACT
Stay Connected
         
To register for our free e-Newsletters, create your free account here:

Editors' Picks

  • America's Real Problem with Solar Energy
  • US, Australian Companies Taking Giant Steps for Global EGS Geothermal
  • EU Debate Over Climate Change Policy Could Dampen Renewable Energy Growth

Most Commented

  • 12
    Breakdown: Penetration of Renewable Energy in Selected Markets
  • 6
    Renewable Energy Research Initiative Launched in UK
  • 3
    French and German Ministers Call for 2030 Renewable Energy Targets
  • 1
    Moniz Unanimously Confirmed As New DOE Chief

Total Access Partners

Growing Your Business? Learn More about Total Access
  • RenewableEnergyWorld.com
  • CleanEdison
  • Geothermal Resources Council
  • Ambient Technologies, Inc.
  • Admirals Bank
  • Enerquip
  • Maritime Geothermal
  • Geothermal Energy Association
News
  • Renewable Energy
  • Solar Energy
  • Wind Energy
  • Bioenergy
  • Geothermal Energy
  • Hyrdo Power
  • Blogs
  • Video
  • Finance
Resources
  • Companies
  • Products
  • Careers
  • Events
  • Webcasts
  • White Papers
  • Magazines
  • Press Releases
  • e-Newsletters
Company
  • About Us
  • Our Team
  • Contact Us
  • Advertising & Services
  • Privacy Policy
  • Terms & Conditions
  • Site Map
Network Partners - Magazines
  • Hydro Review Magazine
  • Hydro Review Worldwide Magazine
  • Renewable Energy World Magazine
Network Partners - Events
  • Power-Gen International
  • Renewable Energy World Conference & Expo North America
  • Renewable Energy World Conference & Expo Europe
  • Renewable Energy World Conference & Expo Asia
  • Renewable Energy World Conference & Expo Africa
  • Renewable Energy World Conference & Expo India
  • HydroVision International
  • HydroVision Brazil
  • HydroVision India
  • HydroVision Russia
© Copyright 1999-2013 RenewableEnergyWorld.com - All rights reserved.
RenewableEnergyWorld.com - World's #1 Renewable Energy Network for news & Information