Frenemies In Force

This Week's Trend In Brief:

• A single activist in Oregon is using a decades-old policy – originally designed for activists to block nuclear power in the 1970s – to file more than a dozen challenges against renewable energy projects in the state.

   

• While this activist is conservative, she is using lawsuits to impose costly delays, echoing the very playbook climate activists have refined for decades to obstruct oil and gas projects – a strategy now turned against renewables by activists across the partisan spectrum.

   

• Even when energy projects align with environmental goals, climate activists are deploying the very infrastructure they’ve built, from legal networks to grassroots campaigns, to target and delay projects that don’t meet their impossible standards for climate action and environmental responsibility.

   

• Although renewable projects seem to advance the climate movement’s declared priorities, the movement itself – now a multi-billion-dollar enterprise – is fueled by perpetual conflict, ensuring that even the most green investments face opposition from both sides of the debate.

   

• For renewable energy companies, success depends on understanding that opposition will come from both anti-renewables conservatives and supposed climate allies and deploying a disciplined playbook to assess how these increasingly organized and professionalized forces can delay or derail your investments.

Digging Deeper:

In Oregon, a single retired conservative activist has filed more lawsuits against renewable energy projects than any other entity in the state, using a decades-old policy originally designed to stop nuclear power. During the outcry against nuclear power in the 1970s, liberal Oregon lawmakers crafted a burdensome process “that gave the public increased say over where power plants could be built,” allowing the activists of the day to use “appeal after appeal to delay proposed nuclear plants to death.” Now, a former gun store owner and elk hunter, Irene Gilbert, “is on a mission to keep turbines and transmission towers from blighting the rural landscape.” So far, she has filed challenges to 15 energy projects, more than anyone else in the state. For energy companies, her campaign underscores that a permit is no guarantee of progress, as a single determined opponent can tie up projects for years, and a reminder that the same tools are being used at scale to block even climate-friendly infrastructure nationwide.

While almost certain to lose in court, her strategy is nonetheless effective, using the very litigation and delay tactics pioneered by climate activists to tie projects up for years, drain resources, and discourage investment. Gilbert openly concedes she has little chance of ever stopping projects outright, but insists the real impact comes from forcing years of costly delays. She argues, “I figure I can lose a thousand cases… Even if it doesn’t look like it, I have made a difference.” The office of Oregon Governor Tina Kotek has acknowledged the “existing significant impediments” to renewable energy growth in Oregon and is weighing options to streamline the process while still ensuring public input. What’s happening in Oregon is not unique. Gilbert is drawing from a national playbook long used by climate activists, exploiting permitting rules and procedural hurdles to stall traditional energy infrastructure. Companies across the energy industry must recognize that securing permits is only the beginning, and prepare for opposition that can extend timelines, inflate costs, and reshape investment decisions.

Now, activists on both the left and the right are increasingly repurposing the litigation, appeals, and regulatory tactics climate activists once aimed at oil and gas to target renewable energy projects. Opponents of renewable projects have employed a diverse range of tactics, including litigation, petitions, administrative appeals, and interventions at public hearings, utilizing the expertise and assistance developed by climate activists. The Vineyard Wind project off Martha’s Vineyard, for example, has been mired in lawsuits even after securing permits, with conservation groups warning about its potential environmental impacts. Nevada’s $1.2 billion Gemini Solar Project spent years facing opposition from environmental groups and local residents over its potential impacts, despite being a $1.2 billion investment in clean energy. From the right, clean energy developers face skeptical conservatives who view renewable energy as an unnecessary and wasteful “boondoggle,” as well as a growing activist base that opposes new projects linked to green energy solutions. At the local level, districts are also “banning green energy faster than they’re building it” by enacting outright bans, moratoriums, and other restrictions, often with support activists on both the left and the right. . To move projects from permits to construction without being derailed by years of delay, companies must be aware of where opposition is likely to rise and stay ahead of its challenges to avoid prolonging the already long approval process.

Although renewable projects appear to advance the climate movement’s declared priorities, progress is often met with new battles, driven by a billion-dollar movement and the pursuit of unattainable standards for climate action and environmental responsibility. As we have noted before, climate activists have become uncompromising in their demands and command significant resources, which they will wield against any project they believe falls short. These activists “have little incentive to proclaim victory and depart the field when their fundraising and grassroots energy relies on never being satisfied.” As a result, renewable projects will continue to face increasing pressure from climate activists, concerned residents, and others, meaning it is more important than ever for energy companies to stay ahead of the debate on the ground. As Oregon illustrates, and as opposition to projects nationwide confirms, activists have tools and are not afraid to use them – even against clean energy infrastructure that ostensibly aligns with their stated goals. Coupled with a growing conservative activist movement that mirrors tactics from the climate side, the result is a widening gap between an energy industry building solutions for a lower-carbon future and activist movements that sustain themselves by driving the next fight.

To avoid being caught flat-footed, energy developers need a clear plan to anticipate and counter both anti-renewables conservatives and supposed climate allies who continue to wage increasingly aggressive campaigns.  On both the left and the right, today’s activist networks operate with professional structures, national reach, and digital sophistication, ensuring that even as the energy industry works to advance climate solutions, organized opposition stands ready to challenge them. From conservative skeptics to climate advocates with ever-rising demands, companies must be aware of the competing narratives and pressures that can stall projects in an already years-long approval process. For those in the energy industry, success will depend on recognizing how activist opposition from both sides operates and how these increasingly organized and professionalized forces can derail your investments. Public affairs professionals and the companies they represent need a proven playbook to identify those risks and anticipate their challenges – whether from local communities or external activist groups – and use that insight to track developments and stay ahead of opposition.

Trends in Energy is your weekly look at key trends affecting the energy industry, brought to you by the competitive intelligence experts at Delve. As the political and regulatory landscape continues to shift, reach out to learn how our insights can help you navigate these challenges.