Lobbyists are grossly misleading public, media, and government officials

In summary, and as detailed below, the ACORE report:

  • Is highly biased, totally lacking in objectivity, based on unrealistic and often undisclosed assumptions, and certainly is not useful as a basis for public policy decisions.
  • Is highly misleading, particularly in its exaggerated claims of economic and job benefits.
  • Ignores the high cost that its recommendations would imposed on the people of Kansas.
  • Fails to identify and consider arguments
  • Raises questions about the discernment skills of political leaders if they have taken the ACORE report seriously.
  • Demonstrates the arrogance of the highly subsidized special interest groups that use misleading reports to influence the public, media, and government officials, and force high cost wind and other renewable generation into the nation’s energy mix and citizens’ tax and electric bills.

Download: Highly Misleading ACORE Report on Potential for Wind Energy critiqued by Glenn R. Schleede

8 thoughts on “Lobbyists are grossly misleading public, media, and government officials

  1. ACORE is a nonprofit association, not a lobbying or trade organization. Get your facts straight.

  2. Oh, puleeaase! Amanda, look at their website and see what they DO. All the big energy companies belong to this organization and direct its actions. They are no different than CanWEA or AWEA in any way, shape or form. Are people still this niave?

  3. I’m referring to a legal classification.

    lobbying organization (like CanWEA or AWEA)=501(c)(4)
    nonprofit like ACORE=501(c)(3)

    501(c)(3) organizations can appeal directly to legislative bodies and representatives and may support issue-based legislation. Lobbying capacity is typically limited to spending less than 5 to 20% of the organizational budget on lobbying activities, depending on the size of your organization.

    501(c)(4) organizations can engage in unlimited lobbying so long as it pertains to the organization’s mission. 501(c)(3) organizations are not permitted to engage in political activity, endorse or oppose political candidates, or donate money or time to political campaigns, but 501(c)(4) organizations can do all of the above.

    http://www.nj.com/helpinghands/nonprofitknowhow/index.ssf/2008/07/the_difference_between_501c3_a.html

  4. sorry, mistyped. didn’t mean to include canwea as a 501c4, as they are canadian.

  5. Amanda, you can get technical with legal classification but when something walks like a duck and quacks like a duck…believe me, it’s a duck. It is even worse when they try to pass themselves off as “non-profit” organization. These are not wonderful environmentalists with halos, they are cut throat executives that work for big energy.

    The only reason ACORE exists is to lobby for big energy companies! Give your head a shake.

  6. MA, you do realize ACORE and ACORN are two different organizations?! Neither is a lobbying association.

    However, your main argument, that ACORE is lobbying for big energy company, is absolutely ridiculous. Renewable energy is almost always decentralized energy production, like PV panels on a residential building, a wind mills run by a rural cooperative or biomass boiler system in a school or university. Unlike oil, gas and coal, which are massively centralized and considered big energy, renewable energy, and for that matter ACORE, is small energy, and any cut throat executive would be stupid to work for renewable energy companies, especially in the U.S. due to the absolute lack of government incentives.

    Amanda is correct with her assessment of 501(c)3s. They are by law not allowed to conduct significant lobbying. Whatever “big energy” you see in ACORE, that is not where those companies conduct their lobbying efforts. Look at the Chamber of Commerce for that, and they are absolutely against renewable energy. Highly biased special interest groups – you’re dead wrong criticizing ACORE!

    Also, Amanda, trade organizations like AWEA, SEIA or SEPA are 501(c)6 organizations.

    Last item:
    Why is renewable energy more expensive than fossil fuels? Fossil fuels are subsidized by the government and it’s effects on nature (BP oil disaster, Exxon Valdez), human health and the environment (pollution, climate change) are not included in the price of their product.

  7. Why the comparison between renewable and oil or coal? It is a though one is better than another. The comparison seems to be generated by the thought that renewables will replace the need for coal or oil when in fact we will have all of the above. An industrial wind turbine will take up to a tone of heavy-duty lightweight magnets of which 700 lbs is neodymium. The rare earth metals needed are mainly mined from China which produces about 98% of the world’s rare earth metals. China’s mining is taking a heavy toll on the environment. To get at the rare earth, powerful acid is pumped down bore holes, where it dissolves some of the earth. The slurry is then pumped into leaky artificial ponds with earthen dams. Much of this occurs at small, under-regulated or unlicensed mines. Farmland near Baotou, Mangolia is being wasted as are the livelihood of the farmers, whose livestock and families who being poisoned. Industrial wind turbines are nothing more than an additional industry trying to sell a bit of junk electricity at a higher cost from dirty generators that will produce less and less within a short time to nothing. The green title is an illusion allowing a dirty industry which produces next to nothing to appear to be clean and charge a lot for it. What should we do? Try conservation, something our government hates because it means they have less control on where we spend our money.

  8. Why is nuclear so inexpensive? Because billions of taxpayer dollars have been spent on developing and building these plants, and taxpayers will be held accountable for safely storing the radioactive waste for the next thousand years.

    If you’re worried about taxpayer money, look here:
    http://www.eli.org/pdf/Energy_Subsidies_Black_Not_Green.pdf
    Your money is not going to fund Ventas or Siemens, it’s going to fund Exxon and BP.

    Secondly, there are 600+ companies and organizations members of ACORE. It’s not a big boys club, as you have seen when pick and choosing your few examples of large companies. Additionally, it’s the Board of Directors that sets the policy of the organization. Shell, GE and Merryl Lynch there? Nope: http://www.acore.org/about/governance/board

    It’s all about lobbying! Is it? Let’s see: ACORE spent $50.000 on lobbying in 2009, the American Petroleum Institute about $7.3 million. http://www.opensecrets.org/lobby/clientsum.php?lname=American+Council+on+Renewable+Energy&year=2009 and http://www.opensecrets.org/lobby/clientsum.php?lname=American+Petroleum+Institute&year=2009

    So what’s wrong with incentivizing renewable energy? It’s more expensive? Well, cleaning up the Gulf of Mexico isn’t cheap. Fighting a war over oil isn’t cheap. Destroying rivers and hilltops isn’t cheap. Combating global warming and paying for adaption isn’t cheap. However, that’s not included in the price tag of the electricity you consume and gives a false sense of cheap energy. Renewable energy is more expensive because we’re subsidizing fossil fuels and are disregarding the externalized costs associated with drilling, mining, processing, burning the resources.

    European countries show ways to solve the problem: Put a price on carbon, and stimulate innovation. They’re exporting their technology, because their governments have learned that the solution is not looking for the cheapest option, but the most sustainable one. Ontario has caught on, and that’s a good thing.

    If you guys keep clinging to the past, that’s what you’ll be.

Comments are closed.