0:01

The passage of the Inflation Reduction Act

0:03

in the U.S. has spurred a huge

0:06

amount of investment and progress in

0:09

the renewable energy space. And

0:12

at the same time, a big

0:14

uptick in anti-renewables activism, especially

0:16

when it comes to offshore

0:18

wind projects. In a

0:21

lot of cases, the people showing up to

0:23

fight wind farms, both on land and offshore,

0:26

are the same people who were fighting them

0:28

over a decade ago. But

0:30

there are some new groups, too, and

0:32

they're deploying some new tactics, especially

0:35

around conservation and the

0:37

idea that wind turbines are bad for

0:39

birds and whales. There's

0:42

no science backing up these claims, but

0:44

that hasn't stopped them from taking hold.

0:47

Still, it's a tricky situation. We're

0:50

not just talking about fossil fuel-backed

0:52

resistance here. The groups opposing these

0:55

projects are not just astroturf groups.

0:58

Some of them are real grassroots groups,

1:00

comprised of citizens who are

1:02

genuinely concerned about, for

1:04

example, the fate of the endangered

1:06

right whale and how offshore wind

1:08

farms might impact it. Many

1:11

of those groups are being co-opted

1:13

and weaponized, though, by organizations that

1:15

have spent the past 20 years

1:18

working to block climate policy. And

1:21

then the whole issue is complicated even

1:23

further by the fact that some of

1:26

the companies building these wind farms either

1:29

are today or used to be

1:31

fossil fuel companies. It's

1:35

complicated, which is why a report

1:37

out of Brown University late last

1:39

year, mapping the groups that are

1:41

active on the east coast of

1:43

the U.S. was especially

1:45

helpful. That report

1:48

is called Against the Wind, and it

1:50

digs into the people and organizations who

1:52

are actively fighting wind energy. It looks

1:55

at how they connect to each other,

1:57

who's funding what, and which talking points

2:00

seem to be spreading. To unpack

2:02

it all, I've got Isaac Slevin, the

2:04

lead author on the report, with me

2:06

today. I'm Amy Westervelt

2:09

and this is Drilled. After

2:11

the break, a deep dive on the fight

2:13

over wind. Stay with us.

2:22

What were you hoping to find when you

2:24

set out for this research? Over

2:26

the last couple years, we've witnessed

2:28

a huge rise in opposition to

2:31

offshore wind across the East Coast.

2:33

This isn't the first time that's

2:35

happened. There was a wave of

2:37

opposition to offshore wind a decade

2:39

ago. There's always been the skeptics

2:41

about it. What was

2:44

really interesting about this recent

2:46

wave is their focus on

2:49

conservation. This isn't your run-of-the-mill

2:51

climate denial movement or climate

2:53

denial disinformation tactics

2:56

being employed. These

2:58

are self-proclaimed conservationists

3:00

who are fighting

3:03

against offshore wind because they

3:05

say that it endangers bird

3:07

populations and especially that offshore

3:09

wind endangers the

3:12

right whale, which is this rare

3:14

species of whale. Scientific literature says

3:16

that it does not endanger the

3:18

right whale. When we started

3:21

on this project, we wanted to know where

3:24

all of this is coming from.

3:26

How are these disparate

3:30

local anti-offshore wind groups

3:33

developing such sophisticated

3:35

political attacks, pushing out so

3:38

much rhetoric and information

3:40

at a time? This project

3:42

started looking at specifically one

3:44

group in Little Compton, Rhode

3:46

Island called Green Oceans. It

3:49

was a rhetorical analysis of

3:51

their information and misinformation About

3:54

everything from right whales to the

3:56

fishing industry to the reliability of

3:59

the turbines. The to impact

4:01

the National Defense and what we

4:03

found when we were analyzing these

4:05

rhetorical tactics was that they were

4:07

shared across the movements and not

4:10

just shared by other anti offshore

4:12

wind groups in Massachusetts and New

4:14

Jersey, but also shared by climate

4:17

denial groups like the Heartland Institute

4:19

like The Committee for a Constructive

4:21

Tomorrow or See Sacked And that

4:23

was pretty interesting and and pretty

4:26

put soulier. So. As. An

4:28

aside to that project, I began looking

4:30

at different connections between these grassroots groups

4:32

in those national think tanks. and of

4:35

course, the fossil fuel companies must also

4:37

fuel interests that fund has think tanks.

4:39

And what we ended up with was

4:42

an expansive web. As. Anti

4:44

awesome when groups on the ground.

4:47

Working with backing

4:49

from. Climate. Denial

4:51

and Right wing think tanks, many of

4:53

which were bankrolled by. Classic

4:55

fossil fuel industry. Donors like the

4:58

Charles Koch Foundation like the State

5:00

Policy Networks like the American. Few.

5:03

And Petrochemical Manufacturers Association.

5:05

So. We didn't

5:08

know what we were gonna, signs

5:10

we were just looking into were

5:12

all this opposition came from and

5:14

what we found was a reasonably

5:16

well organized and extraordinarily well connected

5:18

group of. People. And think

5:21

tanks opposing offshore wind. We've.

5:23

Been tracking these groups a little bit too. And

5:25

one thing that really jumps out as

5:27

just how much the is when I

5:29

to call. Lone Wolves climate denier

5:32

did so said Marc Morano. At

5:34

Sea Sad Or Steve Malloy who

5:36

works not just for Heartland, but

5:38

also the Competitive Enterprise Institute in

5:40

Quito. And it's really a whole

5:43

host of organizations working against climate

5:45

policy over the last couple of

5:47

decades. How much guys like that

5:49

has really jumped in to this

5:51

fight? Here's a clip

5:53

from a little boat ride seemed

5:56

we'll conservation as Marc Morano took

5:58

with an anti winter. in

6:00

Rhode Island just to give you a

6:02

little taste. Tell

6:31

me who slash

6:38

what is the Caesar Rodney

6:40

Institute and then what

6:42

is their relationship

7:00

with the Texas Public

7:02

Policy Foundation? So the

7:04

Caesar Rodney Institute is a

7:06

state policy network affiliate

7:09

based in Delaware. The

7:11

state policy network is this sprawling

7:15

collection of libertarian

7:18

right-wing think tanks. There's

7:20

at least one in all 50 states. And

7:24

the state policy network serves to

7:26

back these think tanks, lobbying

7:29

efforts and political efforts on the state

7:31

level. That

7:33

has to do with climate and also has to

7:35

do with just about everything else relating to

7:38

education. For example, a lot of these

7:40

state policy network groups have been active

7:42

in the critical race theory panic recently

7:45

and working in trans

7:48

rights and trans healthcare. And

7:52

in Delaware, the Caesar Rodney Institute

7:54

has become particularly interested in blocking

7:57

offshore wind. And

7:59

our research firm, that they're extraordinarily well

8:01

connected there. So the Caesar

8:04

Rodney Institute and one of

8:06

their directors of policy, a

8:08

man named David Stevenson, created

8:10

an astroturf, a fake grassroots

8:12

appearing anti-offshore wind group

8:14

called Save Our Beach Views. And

8:18

this group blasted

8:20

out tens of thousands

8:22

of mailers containing misinformation about

8:25

a proposed local offshore

8:27

wind project and raised a substantial amount

8:29

of money off of it. Now,

8:32

the Caesar Rodney Institute has graduated

8:34

a bit from Save Our Beach

8:36

Views and put that group in

8:39

a coalition with itself and

8:42

four other state policy network affiliates

8:44

in four other states, as

8:46

well as four other

8:48

anti-offshore wind groups across the East Coast.

8:51

So the Caesar Rodney Institute

8:53

has emerged as a major player in

8:55

this movement. And

8:57

you'll see David Stevenson pop up

8:59

in congressional hearings

9:02

talking about offshore wind and

9:04

fundraisers for some of

9:06

these local anti-offshore wind groups. The

9:09

Texas Public Policy Foundation is a

9:12

climate villain in all regards, way

9:14

beyond the context of offshore

9:16

wind. They have been working

9:19

to advance particularly natural gas

9:21

nationwide. This is particularly odd

9:24

considering how reliant Texas is

9:26

comparatively on wind power, but

9:29

still the Texas Public Policy Foundation

9:31

is heavily opportunistic and jumps

9:33

at every chance it can get

9:36

to disparage renewable energy of all

9:38

kinds. A great example was

9:40

during the freeze in Texas a couple years

9:42

ago when they ran with the false narrative

9:45

that wind power was

9:47

collapsing and causing unreliability in

9:49

the grid and causing people to freeze when in

9:51

fact it was due to natural gas and the

9:53

fossil fuel industry not being able to cope

9:56

with the low temperatures. And

9:58

so the Texas Public Policy Foundation found

10:00

a way to oppose an

10:03

offshore wind project called Vineyard

10:05

Wind by funding

10:07

a lawsuit to

10:10

attack it. But the Texas

10:12

Public Policy Foundation didn't sue themselves.

10:15

They sued on behalf of six plaintiffs,

10:17

all of which are fishing industry groups on

10:19

the East Coast. All six

10:21

of these groups are also members of

10:23

the Responsible Offshore Development Association,

10:26

or RODA, which does a

10:28

lot of research and coalition building

10:30

in opposition to offshore wind.

10:33

So from thousands of miles away, the

10:35

Texas Public Policy Foundation, also a state

10:37

policy network affiliate, has found itself embedded,

10:40

I should say has embedded

10:42

itself in this fight

10:44

that frankly only concerns it because

10:46

of its ties to the fossil

10:49

fuel industry. Okay, I'm curious about

10:51

sort of the relationship between Texas

10:53

Public Policy Foundation and Cesar Rodney

10:56

and what you found there. Our

10:59

map did not connect them other

11:01

than having people in

11:03

common. So they're both

11:06

state policy network affiliates.

11:08

But that's about it. I

11:11

mean, they have similar supporters. Well,

11:14

I mean, the fact that they're both the

11:17

premier state policy network affiliates

11:20

in their states is really substantial.

11:22

There's this phenomenal Jane

11:24

Mayer article from I believe

11:26

2013 about how the state

11:28

policy network works like IKEA,

11:31

straight from the mouth of the state

11:34

policy network CEO or president at

11:36

the time, who's still the state

11:38

policy network CEO or president, that

11:40

FPN works to equip

11:42

all of these local think

11:44

tanks with the information and

11:47

strategies that they need to

11:49

fight prescribed battles in their

11:51

state legislatures. And

11:54

TPPS and CRI are

11:57

both doing that in their

11:59

respective states. So it's always going to

12:01

look a little bit different whether you're

12:03

talking about direct lobbying of

12:05

legislators or filing lawsuits or

12:08

setting up Astroturf groups. That's

12:11

where the IKEA assemblages look a

12:13

little bit different from state to state,

12:15

but it's all coming from the same

12:17

catalog. And

12:20

I think that remembering that is incredibly

12:22

important when you're looking at how this

12:25

seemingly disparate network of offshore

12:27

wind opponents, but also disparate

12:29

network of public education

12:32

opponents, of public healthcare opponents

12:36

actually share a lot of tactics and share

12:39

a lot of strategies because it's no accident

12:41

that they were coming from the same playbook

12:43

sponsored by the state policy network. That's super

12:45

interesting. I want to talk about

12:47

all these little local operatives in these

12:49

sites, right? And all of

12:51

these people who get

12:54

involved in this for one reason or another.

12:56

And I feel like it starts to get complicated

12:59

when we talk about these people because some

13:01

of them are

13:03

themselves just

13:06

don't like the idea of offshore wind for

13:08

some reason or another. Some of them

13:10

have their own legitimate

13:12

to them at least reasons for not

13:14

wanting these projects, but then they get

13:17

sort of like co-opted into this whole

13:19

effort. And I'd love to have you

13:21

talk about that because it's complicated and

13:23

that complexity gets flattened out when we

13:25

talk about this stuff a lot. For sure. Yeah.

13:29

Thank you for asking that question because I do agree that

13:31

it's something that gets lost. A

13:34

good place to start would be Mary Chalk. She's

13:37

a co-founder of the Save Right

13:39

Whales Coalition and co-director of Nantucket

13:42

Residence for Whales, which was formerly

13:44

known as Nantucket Residence Against Turbines.

13:49

And she was particularly interesting

13:51

in our early research because of

13:53

her conservation

13:56

based rhetoric talking

13:59

about... about whales and pollution,

14:01

about pristine views in

14:04

Nantucket. She's appeared

14:06

at events hosted by Green Oceans,

14:09

which is the offshore wind group,

14:11

anti-offshore wind group in Little Compton,

14:13

Rhode Island. She was wearing a

14:15

whale costume at a public hearing

14:18

that Green Oceans disrupted. And

14:21

Green Oceans also has used

14:23

a lot of that same rhetoric.

14:27

In terms of legitimate claims, it's important

14:29

to remember, I think it's important

14:31

to remember first that there are

14:33

valid reasons to be worried about

14:36

industrialization of natural resources, of

14:38

these massive imported

14:41

steel turbines popping

14:44

up in protected waters or

14:46

waters that are

14:48

essential to certain endangered species.

14:52

The conservationists have gotten really

14:54

good at blocking projects,

14:57

in general fossil fuel projects,

15:00

on those grounds. And

15:02

I think you see an extension of that

15:04

here. I don't believe that people like Mary

15:06

Chalk are lying about their love for whales

15:09

or lying about their love for environmental conservation.

15:11

And you can see that firsthand in a lot of their

15:13

Facebook groups. There was a ton

15:16

of information and misinformation that's

15:18

communicated through anti-offshore wind Facebook

15:20

groups. And it's sometimes dozens

15:22

of articles and photos

15:24

every single day of whales

15:27

that have washed up on

15:29

coastlines across New England. So

15:33

I think that's the more legitimate side of,

15:35

at least legitimate worry. It's always important to

15:37

note here that there actually isn't a connection,

15:39

a proven scientific connection

15:42

between offshore wind construction and

15:44

environmental conservation. That is

15:46

something that I think is important to

15:48

note because this isn't an astroturf movement.

15:52

People like Mary Chalk haven't been placed

15:55

by the fossil fuel industry To

15:57

stir up something big. Another.

16:00

Aspect of I think is

16:03

important is property values. I'm

16:05

a lot of the people

16:08

in Green Oceans leadership as

16:10

extremely expensive oceanfront properties and

16:12

would. Be seeing

16:14

the turbines often dozens of miles

16:17

out. To the renderings in a

16:19

recent lawsuits in the Newport Preservation

16:21

Society about offshore wind you can

16:24

see actually how stunningly far out

16:26

there would be and how they're

16:29

be really difficult to see so.

16:32

Even though that doesn't translate it,

16:34

friendlies pretty rare, really into rhetoric

16:36

about actual. Property. Values I think

16:38

that's where a lot of that which intimate concerned from

16:41

some of like. Hair retired

16:43

to the coasts or I wanted

16:45

to live in a space and

16:47

see certain things that are important

16:50

to me spiritually and for hims

16:52

me culturally and masses offshore wind

16:54

turbines are not as those. On

16:58

the asset that for I can target the

17:00

fishing industry if you want to rethink their

17:02

super interesting analysis by. Yeah, I would

17:04

love to hear that. I mean a.

17:07

One thing to be that the

17:09

fishing stuff. Is like. They've.

17:12

Also been getting impacted

17:14

by. Climate Change Scrap. Books

17:18

so like ah yeah, so yeah. I

17:20

would love nothing about that. Totally.

17:23

So these self proclaimed conservationists

17:25

of ends up in an

17:27

alliance with a lot of

17:29

players and the fishing industry

17:32

both opposing offshore wind, the

17:34

conservationists for claims about whale

17:36

conservation, and the fishing industry

17:38

for. Worries that.

17:41

Ah, Sir wind construction will disrupt

17:43

were fish are and what kinds

17:45

of fish are in which places.

17:48

As was this migratory patterns Those

17:50

concerns are a lot more sounded

17:52

than those about Wales. It's still

17:54

really weird alliance because. According.

17:57

to noaa fishing gear entanglement

17:59

has was 65% of

18:01

documented right whale deaths, injuries, and

18:04

morbidities since 2017. In

18:06

other words, the biggest enemy

18:09

to those who proclaim

18:11

to love right whales is

18:14

the fishing industry who they've struck an

18:16

alliance with in opposition to offshore wind.

18:20

But there are legitimate reasons

18:22

for fishing communities to be concerned.

18:24

I mean, there's a first just

18:27

strictly financial reason of needing a livelihood

18:30

and relying on fisheries and fish or

18:32

relying on fishing grounds to produce certain

18:34

kinds of fish at certain times of

18:37

year. And also the cultural aspect of

18:39

things. I mean, some of these fishing

18:41

communities and fishing leaders are third, fourth

18:43

generation, potentially even going

18:45

back even farther. And also the idea

18:47

of simply switching

18:50

industries because a

18:53

Danish energy company wants to put

18:55

up wind turbines is unfathomable and

18:57

fundamentally disrespectful. But

19:00

we've seen some of these grassroots conservation

19:03

style groups pick up that fishing

19:06

rhetoric and forge those

19:08

fishing alliances. After making

19:11

a lot of less maybe

19:15

politically relevant arguments or certainly true

19:17

arguments. So the fishing industry has

19:19

become a very helpful tool. You

19:21

can even call them a front

19:24

for people who want to block

19:26

offshore wind for other reasons.

19:28

And that's everyone from those conservationists to the

19:31

fossil fuel interests. I have

19:34

no reason to think that the Texas

19:36

Public Policy Foundation particularly cares about New

19:38

England fishing communities. Even if the

19:40

fishing communities are going to get up in arms

19:42

about offshore wind, then the Texas Public Policy Foundation

19:44

can swoop in and

19:46

fund a lawsuit about it. I actually

19:48

saw something recently

19:52

from Steve Molloy. His

19:54

articles have popped up everywhere.

19:57

Cleaver of the Whales, Steve

19:59

Molloy. You are.

20:01

You know enough. That's why it's

20:03

so preposterous Legs people? It you

20:05

know, see Sox in the Heartland

20:08

Institute who have been blocking climate

20:10

policy and conservation policy for decades.

20:12

With me, a whole career out

20:14

of it, are now being. Used

20:17

as defenders of the whales

20:19

in the states of industrialization

20:21

and it's kind of preposterous

20:23

when you, yes, But.

20:26

Also, you know I know I

20:29

want as much as I want

20:31

to be cynical about it. I

20:33

think it's also worth remembering that

20:36

this is how dire these anti

20:38

offshore wind advocates feel that their

20:40

situation is. that the strangest of

20:43

bedfellows can be made can come

20:45

together. So. That

20:47

these projects can be shot down

20:49

even as people who are responsible

20:52

for hurting and killing whales. whatever

20:54

it takes to get his turbines

20:56

out of their. Lives.

20:58

Or anyone. Working on

21:00

conservation solutions it's and rule out

21:03

offshore wind is I mean it's

21:05

hard to know what to do.

21:08

We. Are trying a few

21:10

different things so there is

21:12

a. Hearing in

21:15

Little Compton in March

21:17

or April that included.

21:20

Professor. Timmons Roberts talking

21:22

about. The role of

21:24

the fossil fuel industry and that included

21:26

a marine biologist from the University of

21:28

Rhode Island who talked about Wales. It

21:30

was put on by. A

21:33

local. State.

21:35

Representatives to give it a sense

21:37

of mean, illegitimacy and and place

21:40

for dialogue on and green oceans

21:42

wasn't having it in a they.

21:44

Protested. They've. Got.

21:47

Up and handed out leaflets at the

21:49

door to make sure if I knew

21:51

the truth about offshore wind. To.

21:55

Become just really and an

21:57

alley. Where people just are are like.

21:59

Know. super open to

22:02

conversations. So

22:04

do I feel like people are combative? Yeah,

22:06

or just like people are just dug

22:09

into like their sides and not really

22:11

even that interested in solving the issue

22:13

anymore? Yeah, I

22:15

do. I mean, the

22:18

Climate and Development Lab published a report

22:20

about the misinformation

22:22

tactics that Green Oceans has used

22:25

in its literature and

22:27

they attacked

22:29

the CDL on Twitter. We

22:31

put out this report and we're getting attacked

22:35

on Twitter for us being the ones

22:37

sponsored by the fossil fuel industry. Wow.

22:39

A funny note on that is like

22:41

they cited, this is Save LBI, Save

22:44

Long Beach Island, they cited a Brown

22:46

Daily Herald article saying that Brown takes

22:48

20 million from the fossil fuel industry.

22:51

Myself and Will Ketra, my co-author

22:53

in this, co-wrote that report too.

22:55

And like, we know this

22:58

is the whole issue that fossil fuel

23:00

money is everywhere and we need to

23:03

combat it everywhere. And just saying, no,

23:05

no, you is actually really counterproductive

23:07

and not about actually creating the

23:10

systems we need to be

23:12

sustainable and as an

23:14

academic institution to spread truth and

23:17

facilitate free inquiry, but it's

23:19

just about scoring points. But

23:23

to go back to your, I think this also

23:25

relates to your earlier point about Steve Malloy and

23:28

people just wanting to win. They're

23:32

in their entire, there's such

23:35

a media ecosystem,

23:37

a standalone media ecosystem

23:40

around anti offshore wind.

23:43

They have at least a

23:45

dozen Facebook groups with thousands

23:48

of members each where you

23:51

can just scroll through and read about

23:53

whales dying, about turbines

23:55

leaking. There'll

23:57

be the occasional win, you know, a lawsuit in France.

24:01

That mandates that. To

24:03

Rise has to be taken down to protect

24:06

whales or or said giving up on a

24:08

couple of It's projects in New Jersey and

24:10

so you can celebrate alongside people. And

24:12

I don't know if you need to know what

24:14

you're celebrating for. Then. There's

24:17

of course Fox News and of Murdoch

24:19

media empire. And so people like. Make.

24:22

Dean who appears in our map, go

24:24

on Fox News and are put on

24:27

national television talking about the impact on

24:29

Wales. This is also been happening with

24:31

Sky News and Australia. There's a soul

24:34

international element was Australia that we haven't

24:36

even begun to analyze. Yeah, where we're

24:38

seeing a lot of the same tactics

24:41

and a lot of the same media

24:43

ecosystem happen. And.

24:45

Once you're in this mindset that you

24:47

can only trust a small subset of

24:50

people who are speaking truth to power,

24:52

it's really hard to get in and

24:54

and russell that idea away. And

24:57

that's so not unique to

24:59

offshore wind. Combating the right

25:01

wing media ecosystem is officer

25:03

very personal issue and we

25:06

just read is heartbreaking articles

25:08

about people's parents and grandparents

25:10

completely fallen victim to it's

25:12

it's so persuasive because it's

25:14

teaches you that you can't

25:17

trust anybody else. So even

25:19

when you how's. Your

25:22

elected officials, Your

25:24

university scientists, your

25:27

scholars, your journalists,

25:30

Coming. Out and saying that right whales

25:32

are gonna be okay. And.

25:34

That we need wind turbines for a

25:36

just transition snow Seem to trust them.

25:38

or at the very least they don't

25:41

seem to find their articles. There's.

25:43

Waste of an ass to sort

25:45

of lay down their arms. and

25:47

we have a website called like

25:49

Real Offshore wind.com or something that

25:52

like that it's like looks like

25:54

kind of weren't being. yet

25:57

is also like it's it's a design like one

25:59

of the is sort of scammy.

26:01

Yes, yes. Yeah.

26:05

So we're going to see. But it's like, I

26:07

feel like the solution other than, you know, winning

26:09

political battles, you know, in terms of like changing

26:11

hearts and minds, it might just

26:13

be the same tactics that

26:15

we need to bring a

26:18

lot of our people back. That's super interesting. The

26:20

Australia connection makes me wonder if

26:23

because, you know, state policy network

26:25

and Heartland and whatever are part of

26:27

the Atlas network, too. Oh, yeah. So,

26:30

yeah, have you seen any ideas

26:34

just sort of floating through that

26:36

whole kind of conservative think tank

26:38

ecosystem more broadly? Yes.

26:41

The research on offshore wind

26:43

opposition and Atlas is really,

26:46

really new, like in the last few months.

26:49

And so there's a lot we don't know

26:51

yet. What we do know

26:53

is that members of Atlas, just like members

26:55

of S.P.N. are using, I

26:58

mean, almost identical rhetoric. I

27:00

can't confirm that there

27:03

are talking points being passed around,

27:06

but you can clearly see in,

27:10

for example, the white paper put out

27:12

by Greenoceans that they are citing Steve

27:16

Malloy and they are citing Sea Fact.

27:19

And so whether or not somebody

27:21

is hand delivering that misinformation and

27:23

those polished talking points to

27:25

them, we're still getting there. So

27:27

when our report came out and I saw in

27:29

the Greenoceans Facebook group something, you know, comment like,

27:31

oh, it looks like we're in this network of

27:34

fossil fuel industry interests and climate

27:36

deniers. Who knew? I

27:39

was thinking, well, yeah, I mean, I'm sure you

27:41

don't think of yourself as being in that industry,

27:43

but you are plainly borrowing from their talking points

27:45

because you find them persuasive and they've made their

27:47

way to you. So

27:51

absolutely, there's tons of shared

27:53

rhetoric and shared talking points. It

27:56

just remains to be seen how explicit

27:58

this network is. How much

28:01

people in it know that they're in it? Yeah,

28:03

that's so interesting. But some

28:06

of these conservationists totally see themselves fighting the

28:09

fossil fuel industry. The difference, of course, being

28:11

that the fossil fuel industry is spending single

28:14

digit percentages of its

28:16

annual expenditures on

28:20

renewable energy. And then,

28:22

even then, lying about it.

28:24

Right. Shell spending,

28:26

what, 1.5% annually

28:28

on renewables after they got

28:31

caught for calling natural gas

28:33

expenditures renewables. So

28:36

I think that's the difference. And maybe that's a

28:38

way to break through the media ecosystem. Yeah,

28:40

yeah. But that's interesting that

28:43

there's this idea that, oh, we're

28:45

also fighting oil majors.

28:47

Because not only are they not

28:49

spending that much, but they're

28:51

present in the renewable energy

28:53

space is creating opposition to.

28:59

That's a problem. I hadn't thought

29:01

about that. I don't know. I

29:04

mean, because there's all

29:06

the discourse about to what degree do we

29:09

allow the fossil fuel industry to

29:11

pivot? Right. We can't trust them as

29:13

actors, or as reliable, honest actors,

29:15

but also they have all of

29:17

this capital. Yeah.

29:20

And technical expertise. That always gets lumped

29:22

into it. Maybe we should just

29:25

go completely invest

29:27

in these startups, or in particular,

29:29

transitioned oil majors like Orset. Because

29:34

I don't know. But I don't

29:36

know. I think I don't buy that because you'd

29:38

still have all of the arguments

29:41

about fishing and about whales, regardless of

29:43

which company is setting up the turbines.

29:46

Right. Like the fishermen, they

29:48

don't really care that it's BP. I just

29:50

pulled up one of the tweets

29:52

I've gotten in response. Mike

29:55

Dean, who was on Fox News, on

29:57

that after wind said, wow. Give

30:00

them a few more semesters and they

30:02

might find out the fossil fuel industry

30:04

BP Shell Equinor Orsted EDF are the

30:07

ones actually building the offshore wind project

30:09

these grassroots groups are opposing. Genius. Wow.

30:11

It's just so interesting. But

30:13

it also just makes this problem

30:15

really hard to solve. Okay, last

30:18

question. I just I would love to

30:20

hear from you. What, what were some of

30:22

the things that you found

30:24

in the course of doing this research that

30:26

were surprising to you? What kind of

30:29

jumped out to you as being like, Whoa, was not

30:31

expecting that? Or that you're like,

30:34

I really want people to pay attention to this. Sure.

30:38

I think it's really important. I mean, what we've

30:40

just been talking about, how earnest a

30:44

lot of these groups are

30:46

seeing themselves as conservationists seeing

30:48

themselves as defending their fishing

30:51

communities and fighting against

30:53

these fossil fuel majors. This

30:56

isn't like the

30:58

Astroturf climate denial movements

31:01

of the past. A

31:04

lot of this actually is organic and

31:07

finding allies not because they love

31:09

right wing climate denial think tanks,

31:11

but because nobody else is coming

31:13

to their aid. Megan

31:16

lap who's big in fishing

31:18

policy on the East Coast, she's a

31:21

fisheries liaison for a company called sea

31:23

freeze in Rhode Island, even said this

31:25

when she was asked about how she

31:27

feels about the Texas Public Policy Foundation

31:29

backing her lawsuit. And she said

31:31

something along the lines of we need all the help

31:33

that we can get. So

31:36

it's not exactly

31:38

a plea for plea to be

31:40

gentle. But to

31:43

give people credit for backing

31:45

their communities again, for a

31:48

lot of reasons that actually aren't based in science

31:51

for you know, there's a lot going

31:53

on there that isn't particularly savory. But

31:56

we shouldn't just write this off and treat

31:58

it like a bunch of of

32:00

misinformed old people with way

32:02

too much time on their hands. They

32:05

are responding to grievances that

32:07

are real and imagined, but ultimately

32:09

are powerful motivators for political action.

32:13

I spend a lot of time in

32:15

climate activist circles and I think constantly

32:17

about how dire climate change is and

32:19

how evil the fossil fuel industry

32:21

is and about how nobody

32:24

is going to protect us but us.

32:27

And I'm seeing a lot of these

32:29

sentiments shared in this network

32:31

against offshore wind. And

32:34

disentangling that is going to be

32:37

really difficult. Leah Stokes put out

32:39

a phenomenal article this fall about

32:41

the term energy privilege, which

32:43

showed how the communities that

32:46

are blocking offshore wind are disproportionately

32:48

white and wealthy. And

32:51

they have energy privilege in

32:53

that their perceived harms,

32:56

which are potentially

32:59

decreased property values, which

33:01

are polluted quote view

33:03

sheds. In other

33:05

words, visibly seeing offshore wind

33:07

turbines from their homes. Those

33:11

harms are such small potatoes,

33:13

honestly almost embarrassingly small potatoes

33:16

compared to the day to day experience of

33:19

the predominantly black, Latina and indigenous

33:21

communities that affect the bill of

33:24

the fossil fuel industry. Those

33:26

communities that experience oil

33:31

refineries that lower life expectancies and give

33:36

children debilitating asthma that results

33:38

in extraordinary hospital bills. And

33:41

that are giving communities

33:43

rare cancers through polluted air and water.

33:47

So it's also important

33:49

to not lose sight of what we're

33:51

fighting this for. And

33:54

there's balance there. We don't want to be

33:56

sacrificing fishing communities. Like that's not fair to

33:58

anybody. And that's what a job. just transition

34:00

means. It means protecting

34:03

and making safe and

34:05

communities that are gonna

34:08

have to foot the bill of a renewable

34:10

transition. But it also

34:12

doesn't mean entirely caving to them

34:14

so that we preserve a

34:17

fundamentally racist and lethal status

34:19

quo. So that's

34:22

one thing that, you know, when I was wrapping up

34:24

this project and trying to make sense

34:26

of this all and, you know, balance certain

34:28

sympathy that I feel with

34:31

also an unshakable belief in

34:33

the power of renewable energy and

34:35

the urgency of renewable energy. Yeah.

34:39

You remember what's happening. Yeah.

34:42

What has to happen so

34:44

that these predominantly white

34:47

and wealthy communities can avoid

34:49

offshore wind and it's

34:51

debilitating. Yeah, I mean, that's

34:53

the thing is getting that message

34:55

to land with people in a way

34:58

that this doesn't put

35:00

them on the defensive. It's just

35:02

tough. The entire history of America

35:04

is not one in which we

35:06

have incentivized or rewarded people for

35:09

doing anything for the common good.

35:12

And we kind of need people to

35:14

get there for the renewable transition to happen.

35:17

But we haven't done that culture work. We

35:19

haven't actually fixed the social

35:23

contract in a way that would lay the groundwork

35:25

for people to do that. And now we've got

35:27

to do all that work really fast. What

35:30

I want to do is lead by example. Like

35:33

it's clear that we need a politics of

35:35

pluralism that we don't have. I

35:38

mean, all of this movement is, you know,

35:40

fishing, like the fishing

35:43

industry versus the offshore wind projects,

35:45

the community groups versus

35:47

the university professors. No, we

35:49

also see them as enemies

35:51

of progress sometimes. Right?

35:54

And that's not entirely fair either

35:57

because we're all looking out for

35:59

our self-interest ways and we just make

36:02

different decisions to decide what that

36:04

self-interest is. And

36:07

steamrolling them is not

36:10

good for our democracy

36:12

or good for our discourse. I

36:15

mean, a

36:17

great way to unleash

36:20

a national or international

36:23

lion of anti offshore

36:25

wind opposition would be

36:27

to call them climate deniers over

36:29

and over again or say that

36:31

they don't have free will or

36:33

say that this is all some

36:35

astroturf project of Charles Koch and

36:37

friends. Right. Or accuse

36:40

them of being like white

36:42

elitists, you know, especially

36:45

when you have this

36:48

weird coalition there, right, of like working

36:50

class fishermen and then people who

36:52

have ocean front estates. I

36:57

know. And yeah, but

37:00

also leaves difficult decisions, right? Like we

37:02

do need to build these things really

37:04

quickly. We do have scientists on one

37:06

side of the debate. Like there are

37:08

going to be some trade off. That's the thing. I

37:10

feel like we're really allergic to

37:12

being like, yeah, there are some

37:15

trade off. Let's talk

37:17

about it and figure out what

37:20

are the impacts that we can live with and

37:23

how do we equitably distribute them as

37:25

opposed to what we've been doing, which

37:27

is just ignoring the impacts and letting

37:29

them fall on the most marginalized people

37:31

in our society. You know,

37:33

it's not like energy hasn't

37:35

had impacts before. Yeah. It's

37:38

just hard, I guess, having spent

37:40

so much time in their Facebook

37:43

groups and media ecosystem. Yeah.

37:45

It's hard for them to

37:49

not feel like they are being

37:52

targeted and policy is being imposed

37:55

on them. Social harms are being

37:57

imposed on them without their consent.

38:00

And that's something that a lot, you know, I mean,

38:02

that's, that's an MBIism at its core, for sure. Yeah.

38:07

Have you listened to any comparisons between this and

38:10

what happened with fracking? Cause I feel like

38:12

the thing they have in common is it's

38:14

like the first time energy externalities

38:17

were foisted upon

38:19

white communities, basically. I mean,

38:21

with fracking, it was mostly not

38:24

wealthy communities, but, um, but

38:27

it certainly communities that were like

38:29

not totally used to having the

38:32

refinery down the street kind of problem.

38:35

There's all these really interesting use cases

38:38

where like, like

38:40

in Pennsylvania, for example, a bunch of

38:42

pretty conservative communities ended up coming around

38:44

to the idea of, of

38:47

race of nature and like

38:50

embedding that in their town charters,

38:52

because all of a sudden they

38:54

were like, wait a minute. Like,

38:57

so if my neighbor decides

39:00

to go for a lease, but I

39:02

don't, and my water gets

39:04

fouled, like I can't do anything about

39:06

it and I don't benefit from the

39:08

lease. That's not fair. You know, what

39:10

can I read about that?

39:13

That sounds super interesting. I'm going to send

39:15

it to you. Cause yeah, to me, I'm like,

39:17

I see so many parallels between that and this

39:20

stuff where it's like, we're basically, I mean, let's

39:22

face it, people don't really think about this stuff

39:24

until it shows up in their backyard. Right.

39:26

And then all of a sudden they think very

39:28

differently about it than they did before. Like I'm

39:30

sure none of these people were

39:33

like protesting against refineries

39:35

being built in Cancer Alley. Or

39:37

the role of the fishing industry

39:39

in, you know, right whales,

39:41

right? Like it's only once they

39:44

are materially impacted or proclaim

39:46

to be materially impacted by

39:49

seeing offshore wind

39:51

turbines do all of these arguments about things

39:54

that have actually been happening the whole time

39:56

come out. That's right. Yeah.

39:58

Yeah, exactly. seeing how it's

40:00

going to turn out because I mean, on one

40:02

hand, like the offshore wind industry is going

40:05

through significant hardship

40:07

right now. I know. There

40:10

was like a chart recently that showed this

40:12

massive drop off in offshore

40:14

wind installations on the

40:17

US like no. Of

40:20

course, the anti offshore wind groups are

40:22

claiming victory. It doesn't seem like it's

40:24

at all related to them. Like this

40:26

is about supply chain issues and inflation.

40:29

I sort of brought, I guess, all that up

40:31

as like a caveat to remembering that they are

40:34

losing like they've especially in

40:36

New Jersey, they found right

40:39

wing politicians to be champions of

40:42

the fight against offshore wind. No

40:44

surprise there. And they

40:46

are not winning. There was a special election a

40:48

couple months ago. There's a good E&E news article

40:51

about it, but that is not playing well overall.

40:54

And so it also is going to be interesting to

40:56

see what happens when

40:58

they lose. I mean, you know, they can keep suing

41:00

to death. Right. Right. But are

41:02

they going to move on? Like, is this going to

41:04

be a new anti

41:07

wind conspiracy group? Like

41:09

is this going to be like a sustained movement? Are they going

41:11

to kind of go home? A

41:14

lot of them are really old and retired. Are

41:16

you familiar with Gordon G? He's the

41:18

president of West Virginia University, the one gutting

41:21

them right now. Yeah. So

41:24

his ex wife is one of the major

41:26

players in Green Oceans in Rhode Island. Oh,

41:29

in. Constance G. She's in our map. And

41:32

that's kind of, you know, apropos of

41:34

nothing. But it's like, OK, people who

41:36

are substantially wealthy and have been their

41:39

whole lives, it seems. And

41:41

now living in these beautiful places,

41:45

what's their real long

41:47

term political game here? Yeah,

41:50

that is interesting. Yeah.

41:54

So far, they haven't shown to have

41:56

influence where it matters. There

41:58

was a. congressional

42:01

hearing where David Stevenson was there,

42:03

Bob Stern was there, Megan Lappe

42:05

was there. They

42:07

have successfully convinced certain

42:09

municipalities to pass resolutions

42:11

opposing offshore wind like

42:14

Little Compton, Rhode Island. But

42:17

when it comes to Boem,

42:19

for example, they're

42:21

not winning because

42:25

while agencies

42:27

like Boem take into

42:30

account community input, there's

42:33

a whole host of other factors

42:35

that the anti-offshore wind movement can't

42:37

address and hasn't been able

42:40

to address. So they're

42:43

not inconsequential

42:45

in numbers. You can there these

42:48

photos of these

42:51

protests of the hold hands along

42:53

beaches in New Jersey. And

42:56

there's not not a lot of them, but I don't

42:59

think they have their hands on the right level levers

43:01

of power. I mean, there was one

43:04

kind of random congressman, Jeff Andrew in

43:06

New Jersey, they've gotten through a little

43:08

bit to Jared Golden, who's a Democrat

43:11

from Maine. But in

43:13

terms of actual decision making capability, it's

43:16

pretty weak. I mean, it's pretty

43:19

weak. So right

43:21

now, I'm not super worried. But

43:26

with offshore wind industry on

43:28

the back foot, and with all of these

43:30

lawsuits in the works, I wonder if

43:32

the industry and advocates will get beaten

43:34

down. I just don't entirely

43:37

see that happening.