This week I chatted with Courtney Brady, Midwest region deputy director for climate advocacy group Evergreen Action. Brady recently helped put together a report on rural support for renewables development, for which Evergreen Action partnered with the Private Property Rights Institute, a right-leaning advocacy group. Together, these two organizations conducted a series of interviews with self-identifying conservatives in Pennsylvania and Michigan focused on how and why GOP-leaning communities may be hesitant, reluctant, or outright hostile to solar or wind power.
What they found, Brady told me, was that politics mattered a lot less than an individual’s information diet. The conversation was incredibly informative, so I felt like it was worth sharing with all of you.
The following chat was edited lightly for clarity. Let’s dive in:
Okay, so tell me first why you did this report.
Clean energy deployment is getting increasingly challenging for a variety of reasons. What’s happening on the federal level is one thing, but something we don’t talk about much in the climate movement is what’s happening locally, what actually determines the odds of a project being successful and incorporated into the grid.
The side of the story we often hear that’s the loudest is from people at the local level who are opposed to these projects, and it limits our ability to understand the nuances. It’s not always that everyone opposes these projects in their community — that’s often not the case. We talked to several farmers in this report who are using these projects as a lifeline to keep farms in their families’ hands, generate income, preserve their farms. These projects can provide an income lifeline for these farms.
Something we tried to accomplish with this report was to understand the different perspectives, what was driving them. The only way we could do that was by going out and talking to these people in their own communities, on their own land.
The group we worked with has a very conservative background. They work on Republican campaigns. They’re very involved in local government relations. And they were the ones who were able to go out and interview these folks about what this means for their communities.
A few weeks ago, I interviewed the head of the League of Conservation Voters about the way that renewables are perceived as culturally left wing. Are there any takeaways in your research about how to deal with that?
You know, I expected to hear a little bit more of that political ideological leanings than what we actually got in these interviews. Our partners went out and interviewed seven folks; four of the case studies were in Pennsylvania, and three of them were in Michigan. It was a mix of local government officials and landowners themselves, most of whom were farmers. And they asked them, What are you hearing in your community? Where’s the opposition coming from?
I’d assumed this would be a left-versus-right, red-versus-blue issue, but this is not what we heard. We heard a lot about a lack of information or misinformation in these communities and the crucial incomes these projects can provide to landowners themselves. Again, everyone in this report that was interviewed identified as a conservative or said they were Trump supporters. It’s interesting to hear that hasn’t impacted their views of clean energy at large. They were either really happy with the projects they’d sited or still trying to get projects sited years and years later.
When you talked about misinformation, what came up?
The sizing of these leases. We heard about fears in communities that land was going to be completely overtaken over by solar or wind.
Some of these farmers said one of the biggest things they heard from their neighbors was that we’re giving away hundreds and thousands of acres to solar projects and wind projects and taking away land that should go towards crops and food. We’re hearing from these farmers that a lot of this land is no longer fertile, so providing a temporary solar lease allows that farmer to continue generating revenue while letting that land breathe.
People really had this fear of farmland being completely converted to energy production. I don’t know where a lot of that came from. We asked if that was something spread on the internet and we heard, Neighbors talk and there are Facebook groups. So there’s this overblown fear about the size of projects.
When it comes to these interviews, it does seem like you spoke to a lot of people who believe what you say. But did you speak to people who don’t believe this stuff? Because right now we’re seeing cases where opposition is either winning over county commissioners or voting out of office local officials who believe exactly what you heard from some folks.
We’ve heard so much of the opposition. It’s trending, really growing across the country. And understanding the root of why opposition is there is important. But so often we don’t hear the other side of it, these really nuanced perspectives.
There are these folks in the middle who are really thematic in these interviews — this is not about energy but a core American property rights issue. That resonates with people regardless of party.
The other piece is, there’s fear in communities of being the person to speak out against groups that are loud, the ones who want to kick people out of office over energy things. So it was really important to elevate these voices and in the interviews just made a lot of common sense. This was about elevating voices that don’t always get a seat at the table in discussions around these issues.
