{"id":4104,"date":"2020-01-27T17:33:03","date_gmt":"2020-01-27T17:33:03","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/ciresblogs.colorado.edu\/prometheus\/?p=4104"},"modified":"2020-01-27T17:56:30","modified_gmt":"2020-01-27T17:56:30","slug":"is-there-an-energy-partisan-divide","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/ciresblogs.colorado.edu\/prometheus\/2020\/01\/27\/is-there-an-energy-partisan-divide\/","title":{"rendered":"Is There an Energy Partisan Divide?"},"content":{"rendered":"\n
\"\"<\/figure>\n\n\n\n

Look to the States to Understand Renewable Energy in the U.S.<\/em><\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

by Kathleen Hancock<\/a>
CSTPR Faculty Affiliate, Associate Professor, Colorado School of Mines<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Photos by Kathleen Hancock<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

The United States seems to be regressing when it comes to\nrenewable energy with Republicans leading the way.  But this picture is incomplete.  There is strong evidence that the current White\nHouse antipathy toward renewables, and support for coal, is off-set by\nstate-led initiatives, even in solidly Republican states. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

At the presidential level, there has often but not always been a partisan divide.  In the 1970\u2019s, following the OPEC crisis, the U.S. shared with Germany world leadership in investing in renewable energy (Laird and Stefes, 2009). The issue was not politicized.  However, while Germany continued on an upward path of embracing renewables, the U.S. leadership on renewables collapsed when Democratic President Jimmy Carter was replaced by Republican Ronald Reagan. Most recently, Barack Obama introduced the Clean Power Plan<\/a> linking Democrats with renewable energy.  Announced in 2015, the Plan called for three building blocks: improve coal-fired power plants to reduce carbon, replace coal plants with ones fueled by natural gas, and increase zero-emission sources like wind and solar.  Obama also signed the Paris Accords calling for reduced emissions to mitigate climate change.  There was even a brief period in which the U.S. seemed poised to resume a global leadership position: Obama and Chinese President Xi Jinping agreed their states<\/a>, the two biggest greenhouse gas emitters, would work together to reduce emissions.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Obama\u2019s advocacy for renewables was quickly abandoned when Republican Donald Trump \u2013 whose primary pre-election comment on climate change was a 2010 tweet suggesting it is a Chinese hoax<\/a> \u00ad\u2013 assumed the presidency.  More recently, Trump dismissed his own administration\u2019s warnings about catastrophes related to climate change, stating simply \u201cI don\u2019t believe it.\u201d<\/a>  When it comes to energy sources, Trump is most strongly associated with a pro-coal stance, a position consistent with a lack of concern about climate change and that goes against support for renewable energy. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Adding to the evidence that Republicans are anti-renewable energy, Trump\u2019s views are supported by a slight majority of his party\u2019s rank and file.  A 2017 Pew opinion poll<\/a> found that 81% of Democrats say alternative sources (generally assumed to be solar and wind) should be the most important priority for addressing America\u2019s energy supply, whereas only 45% of Republicans supported that view. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Considering Carter vs. Reagan and Obama vs. Trump, is it\nfair to say that Republicans oppose renewables while Democrats embrace\nthem?  Recent research shows that is not\nthe full story.   <\/p>\n\n\n\n

The key to answering the partisan question is to look at individual U.S. states (Emmons Allison and Parinandi, Forthcoming). There we find that the U.S. is collectively making strides toward including more renewables.  Some states are doing it quietly; others boastfully.  In addition, unusual coalitions sometimes form to push through policies favoring renewables.  <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Before assessing state differences, it is critical to distinguish\namong the uses for energy.  The U.S Energy\nInformation Administration reports five categories of energy consumption:  electric power (38%), transportation (29%),\nindustrial (22%), residential (6%), and commercial (5%).  Electric power produces most of our\nelectricity while the other four use most of that electricity.  Source uses vary widely by category. For\nexample, oil accounts for about 92% of transportation but only 1% of\nelectricity.   <\/p>\n\n\n\n

To focus the discussion, let\u2019s look only at electricity.  In this sector, renewables are playing a larger role than many might have expected, although fossil fuels combined still dominate the sector, as shown in Figure 1.  Renewables include hydropower, solar, wind, hydro, biofuels, and geothermal. These figures are for utility-scale only.  Rooftop solar, one of the most important forms of distributed energy, has also been steadily rising as shown in Figure 2. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

\"\"<\/figure>\n\n\n\n

Figure 1: Fuel sources for electricity in the United States, 2018. Source:  U.S. Energy Information Agency<\/a>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\"\"<\/figure>\n\n\n\n

To check for a partisan divide, we can break down electricity\ngeneration and politics state-by-state. Specifically, do Democratic states have\nthe highest production of renewables?  The answer is no.   As\nshown in Figure 3, a good mix of Republican and Democratic states make up the\ntop renewable energy producers. The dominant political party shown here is\nbased on which party has the majority in the state legislature and the party of\nthe governor as well as the majority party according to a 2018 Gallop opinion\npoll.  If the same party had two of three\nof these indicators, it is scored for that party.  Only North Carolina shows as purple due to a\nmixed response on the Gallup poll, a Republican state legislature, and a\nDemocratic governor.  This is only a\nsnapshot meant to give an indication of party dominance which does change over\ntime.  Still, many of these states have\nlong been dominated by the same party.  <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Renewable energy is commonly broken into two categories: traditional large hydroelectric power and other renewables, primarily wind and solar.  Hydroelectric has been around for decades whereas wind and solar are relatively new at the utility-scale. The largest hydro producer is the Democratic state of Washington while Republican Texas overwhelms the others with its high wind-sourced production.  <\/p>\n\n\n\n

\"\"<\/figure>\n\n\n\n

Figure 3: Top U.S. states for renewable energy. Notes: a. Generation for utility-scale electricity, 2018. b. Includes top 10 for non-hydro, mostly solar and wind and top 10 for traditional hydroelectric (with asterisks).  California scores in the top 10 for both categories.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

While the numbers show renewables are not strictly a partisan issue, to understand how we get these numbers, one must understand the political processes behind getting more renewables. Political science frameworks suggest we should find key advocacy coalitions pushing for policies that open the door to more renewables. (For an example from Africa, see Hancock. 2015).<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Looking for such coalitions, political scientists Micha\u00ebl Aklin and Johannes Urpelainen compare the politics of renewable energy in the U.S., Denmark, Finland, France, Germany, and the U.K. (Aklin and Urpelainen, 2018). \u00a0While Aklin and Urpelainen focus on the national level (with the exception of California) their approach can be adapted to politics within the U.S. states.\u00a0 Using their framework, we would expect to see pro-environmental groups, renewable energy industry representatives, and agricultural groups (who can earn money leasing land to wind farm developers) pushing for more renewable energy. \u00a0Indeed, wind farms are popping up around the country, with a vast number of them in Texas, sometimes right along side crops and oil wells. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

\"\"<\/figure>\n\n\n\n

Two vignettes demonstrate how this type of advocacy coalition can form regardless of the larger political landscape. First, South Carolina, a solidly Republican state, was once considered one of the least friendly states for solar energy.  In May 2019, South Carolina went from the state \u201cwhere solar power rarely shines\u201d<\/a> to eliminating artificial barriers to solar installations and extending solar credits until at least 2021.  What accounts for this change?  Several factors were at work. A critical catalyst was the financial collapse of a nuclear power plant.  In 2006, South Carolina was one among several states that passed legislation to encourage nuclear power. With Congress talking about possible carbon taxes, nuclear energy seemed like a good idea.  But $9 billion later and construction far from finished, the state decided to pull the plug on nuclear. This opened the previously closed door to renewable energy.  <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Second,\nin Nevada, a well-known wealthy Republican, who was also a key advocate and\n\u201cpatron-in-chief\u201d of then-candidate Donald Trump, Sheldon Adelson, became a\nstrong advocate for solar energy, playing a key role in taking on NV Energy, by\nfar the largest electric utility in Nevada. \nIn this case, the high energy consumption costs associated with running\na casino trumped any skepticism of climate change.  Able to produce their own solar energy,\ncasinos can significantly cut costs. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

While the national government\u2019s actions \u2013 especially with the Trump administration\u2019s rollback of key environmental laws and regulations \u2013 can give the impression that the U.S. is stuck in the fossil fuel world, the reality is that states are making significant strides toward embracing renewable energy, often for economic and health reasons, rather than climate change.  As they do so, the coalition backing renewable energy grows stronger, further cementing the transition that other leading countries, like Germany, have been building from the top down.  There will be a day, it seems, when renewable energy will no longer be politically contested, even in the United States.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\n\n\n\n

Laird, F.N. and C. Stefes, 2009. “The diverging paths of German and United States policies for renewable energy: Sources of difference.” Energy Policy<\/em> 37:2619-2629.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Emmons Allison, J. and S. Parinandi, Forthcoming 2020. \u201cEnergy Politics of the United States\u201d in Oxford Handbook of Energy Politics<\/em>. Ed. Kathleen J. Hancock and Juliann Emmons Allison.    <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Hancock, K.J., 2015. “Energy Regionalism and Diffusion in Africa:  How political actors created the ECOWAS Center for Renewable Energy & Energy Efficiency.”  Energy Research & Social Science<\/em> 5:105-115.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Aklin, M. and J. Urpelainen, 2018.  Renewables: The Politics of a Global Energy Transition.<\/em> MIT Press.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Look to the States to Understand Renewable Energy in the U.S. by Kathleen HancockCSTPR Faculty Affiliate, Associate Professor, Colorado School of Mines Photos by Kathleen Hancock The United States seems to be regressing when it comes to renewable energy with … Continue reading →<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":32,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[6],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-4104","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-commentaries"],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","publishpress_future_action":{"enabled":false,"date":"2026-04-22 23:55:11","action":"change-status","newStatus":"draft","terms":[],"taxonomy":"category"},"publishpress_future_workflow_manual_trigger":{"enabledWorkflows":[]},"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/ciresblogs.colorado.edu\/prometheus\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/4104","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/ciresblogs.colorado.edu\/prometheus\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/ciresblogs.colorado.edu\/prometheus\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/ciresblogs.colorado.edu\/prometheus\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/32"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/ciresblogs.colorado.edu\/prometheus\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=4104"}],"version-history":[{"count":6,"href":"https:\/\/ciresblogs.colorado.edu\/prometheus\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/4104\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":4117,"href":"https:\/\/ciresblogs.colorado.edu\/prometheus\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/4104\/revisions\/4117"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/ciresblogs.colorado.edu\/prometheus\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=4104"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/ciresblogs.colorado.edu\/prometheus\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=4104"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/ciresblogs.colorado.edu\/prometheus\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=4104"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}