The Quiet Part Is Very Loud

We’re Back: In recent months, we paused Trends in Energy as we have been working tirelessly to launch our Trends in Energy Premium service, which leverages our new AI-First public affairs intelligence platform that blends the power of AI and the acumen of our analysts to empower teams to shape the debate as the 2024 campaign unfolds. We’re thrilled to be back in your inbox with the same valuable analysis you’ve come to rely on. Keep an eye out for the latest updates and analysis in upcoming Trends in Energy newsletters, and learn more here about Trends and Energy Premium.

This Week's Trend In Brief:

• Climate change got barely a mention at last month’s Democratic National Convention, even as Kamala Harris and her campaign distanced herself from policies she previously supported, such as a ban on fracking and an EV mandate.

• Yet climate activist groups that should be alarmed by these walk-backs do not seem overly concerned. In fact, the same groups that spent years pressuring Joe Biden over perceived weakness on the climate are now mobilizing significant resources in a “do no harm” effort to ensure Harris becomes president.

• Indeed, even as Harris seems to be moderating her previous energy positions, these climate activist groups are investing $55 million in swing state advertising, committing $120 million to elect climate-friendly politicians, and launching a massive youth voter engagement program, suggesting they “feel pretty confident they’re going to get her there” on their preferred policies once she wins.  

• While Harris isn’t making climate change a central issue in her campaign, the millions flowing from climate activists show they know climate very much remains on the ballot. Public affairs professionals across the energy industry must ensure they are looking beyond campaign pronouncements to understand what a Harris Administration is likely to mean for their interests.

Digging Deeper:

 
Despite reports that “climate change” was going “to get its moment” at the Democratic National Convention (DNC) last month, Kamala Harris and Tim Walz mostly avoided the subject. During her headline speech at the DNC, “Kamala Harris briefly touched on climate change,” only claiming that “Many ‘fundamental freedoms are at stake’ in this election,” including “the ‘freedom to breathe clean air and drink clean water and live free from the pollution that fuels the climate crisis.’” The Washington Post called the omission of climate change from the DNC and other recent Democratic campaign events a strategic move that “suggests that Democrats see talking about the environment as a lose-lose proposition.” While some environmental groups criticized Harris for avoiding the subject, many climate groups have decided Harris’s avoiding the climate question will not impact their agenda.

When it comes to climate issues so far this election, Harris has attempted to walk back her positions to avoid losing moderate voters in key states like Pennsylvania. In her recent sit-down interview with CNN, “Harris said she wouldn’t ban fracking if elected president, a reversal of her position during her first presidential run,” because a ban on fracking is no longer needed thanks to “action taken under Democrats' climate law to strengthen the transition to cleaner forms of energy.” Similarly, Harris’s campaign will not say “whether she supports requiring automakers to build only electric or hydrogen vehicles by 2035 — a position she took during her 2020 campaign for president.” Harris instead contends her “values have not changed” even if some of her specific policy ideas have. While these flip-flops would usually concern environmental activists who ramped up immense pressure against Biden for perceived weakness on the climate, the vast majority of climate groups are supporting Harris without public policy commitments.

Yet the environmental activist groups “that spent more than a year staging protests against President Joe Biden’s energy policies are pursuing a new strategy with his would-be successor: Get Kamala Harris elected now, ask questions later.” These climate activists “are taking a do-no-harm approach to Harris’ candidacy,” allowing her to reverse on issues such as fracking and EVs without meeting the meaningful outcry other politicians have experienced. Instead, activists like the Center for Biological Diversity Action Fund’s Brett Hartl argue, “We have to defeat Donald Trump” and “don’t want to sabotage her campaign for no valid reason.” Climate Hawks Vote PAC President R.L. Miller similarly contended, “All the activists need to know is Kamala has pledged to take on Big Oil, details TBD.” These attitudes don’t surprise former FERC chair Neil Chatterjee, who suggested Harris, once she is elected, will be in alignment with environmental activists’ agenda despite taking the opposite stance during the campaign. According to Chatterjee, “She may say today that she’s no longer for a ban on fracking. I think [climate activists] feel pretty confident they’re going to get her there.”

Climate activists are betting millions Harris will be an ally once elected while ignoring her reversals on various green energy policy commitments. Last month, a group of environmental organizations, including the League of Conservation Voters (LCV) and Environmental Defense Fund, launched a $55 million advertising campaign in swing states to support Harris’s presidential bid, focusing on clean energy jobs and curbing oil company profits without directly mentioning climate change. The campaign aims to resonate with independents and young voters who were less motivated in previous elections and builds on LCV’s $120 million campaign to elect pro-climate candidates. The Sunrise Movement is also organizing for Harris, launching a massive “youth voter engagement program” that aims “to connect with over 1.5 million young voters about the stakes of this election for climate change.” Even though the Sunrise Movement is withholding its endorsement of Harris, its campaign “will use a combination of face-to-face, phone, and digital methods to urge young voters to vote for Harris and stop a 2nd Trump Presidency.”

The policy feints from Harris are belied by the millions in support from climate activist groups, and energy industry public affairs professionals must ensure their assessment of a potential Harris Administration goes deeper than her campaign talking points. Climate groups have made clear they recognize that pushing Harris too hard on specific policies now could risk her electability, especially with moderate voters, and instead are focusing their efforts on ensuring she wins the presidency because they believe she will indeed be a reliable ally once elected. The millions of dollars from the environmental movement invested in voter outreach and advertising campaigns reinforce this belief and are an important reminder for firms across the energy industry that despite media reports on Harris moderating her positions, environmental groups are convinced of her eventual loyalty. Energy industry public affairs professionals must ensure they dig deeper than campaign talking points to assess a potential Harris Administration, including examining the potential appointees who will staff her agencies and shape her policies, as well as the activists and other stakeholders who already have her ear on energy and climate issues. For those who will be negatively impacted by a further leftward turn in this policy arenas, ensuring voters understand the true agenda before they vote is also crucial.

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.

MTrans?