How Renewable Projects Can Be a Political Win-Win

For this week’s conversation I chatted with Pete Maysmith, CEO of the League of Conservation Voters. There’s no one I’d rather talk to at a moment when any conflict over a solar farm can turn into the equivalent of a heated political campaign. I wanted to know how LCV is approaching the way renewables are becoming more partisan and the insurgent rise of local opposition to project development. Thankfully, Maysmith was willing to take some time right before the Labor Day weekend to sit in my hot seat.

The following conversation has been lightly edited for clarity.

How is your organization attempting to counter the way support for renewable energy projects on the local level is becoming increasingly partisan?

I’m actually not as convinced that’s the case. There’s certainly some markers around it being partisan at times, but I also know there’s lots of polling that shows by far the most popular form of energy is solar. Wind is No. 2. Below that you start to get the fossil fuel forms of energy. I actually think there’s broad support.

That doesn’t mean it is always uncontroversial, but I think there’s a couple things that are really interesting about that. One, a lot of the anti-renewables sentiment falls into a follow-the-money category, in that there is funded opposition intentionally designed to foment opposition to things like offshore wind or sometimes solar facilities. It’s funded by fossil fuel interests — so yes, there’s opposition, but understanding where that springs from. And I think the second thing is that there is, I think, a real lack of full understanding among the public about the fact that renewable energy is the fastest and the cheapest form of energy to bring onto the grid right now. There’s probably a belief or an association that fossil fuels are cheaper. That’s simply not true.

I think that’s a reason to do effective public education — that as we deal with spiking electricity bills across the country, the most effective thing we can do to address it is to bring the fastest and the cheapest form of energy online.

But that doesn’t account for the fights I follow across the country. Those projects are tagged as being “Green New Deal” projects or satisfying some sort of “woke left” agenda. That sentiment very much exists. What do you do about that?

I think you just have to make the case that it’s the cheapest and the fastest form of energy. 93% of all energy brought onto the grid was wind, solar, and battery capacity because it’s the cheapest and the fastest to bring on. You can’t get gas turbines. Meanwhile, energy bills are spiking. Data centers are going in. Extreme storms … all of these things and more are causing demand to spike. What this means is you need more supply.

How we address this is to not say renewables are better than fossil fuels. We obviously think that from a climate perspective, but let’s not have that conversation first. Let’s start with a conversation about what is the cheapest and the fastest form of energy. We need people to understand that if you want to address rising energy prices, let’s use the cheapest and the fastest form of energy in terms of what to bring onto the grid.

For me, the next place I go is to these other concerns around renewable energy. What are you working on to address rising concerns around renewables and farmland, for instance?

I think that there’s lots of opportunity for renewable energy projects to be win-win in all sorts of ways. Look at the projects started under the Inflation Reduction Act. 80% of those were in Republican congressional districts. We had a running list for a while of Republican House members who voted against the IRA – a partisan bill, right? – who then went to ground-breakings and ribbon-cuttings and dirt-shovel events to celebrate battery plants opening and wind or solar facilities.

That doesn’t mean they’re all free of conflict. I’m not saying that. But there are a lot of places where Republicans were celebrating those very projects.

In terms of project by project, take offshore wind. A lot of our affiliates have done a lot of work in New England in localities to talk about the benefits of an offshore wind project. Does that mean 100% of the people always support it? No, of course not. But in lots of instances, we’ve developed a good broad base of support for offshore wind projects because of the jobs, because it creates revenue, and because solar and wind are the cheapest and fastest forms of energy to bring onto the grid.

I often hear about the need for more organizing at the grassroots and local level to get more support into county hearings and planning commission meetings. What are you doing about that?

One of the things I love the most about LCV is the work we do about our 33 affiliates. It’s the affiliates in many of the states with these projects happening that are deeply engaged. Sometimes that’s at the state legislative level to oppose bills that would stop renewables. Sometimes it’s at that level to help speed approval of renewables projects, which we fought for in Illinois. And sometimes it’s at the local level, including to stop efforts to block renewables siting. Our folks in New England have been organizing regionally for offshore wind, for example.