The U.S. Chamber Is Fighting a Losing War Against Solar Energy

By Zach Roberts, July 19th, 2022

The U.S. Chamber of Commerce’s positions on solar energy remain divorced from reality and falsely claim that we do not have the capability to meet the 2030 science-based targets for a green transition.

The U.S. Chamber of Commerce is continuing its war on solar energy. Bankrolled in part by the oil and gas industry, they falsely claim that fossil fuels are pivotal for the United States’ energy future and twist the narrative to discredit renewable energy, despite the fact that a clean energy transition is not only entirely possible to achieve, but also deeply necessary to combat the climate crisis. Even though they nominally dropped their status as a climate denier in 2019 and claim to want more renewable energy implementation, the Chamber has changed nothing about how they operate on the matter, even fighting efforts to extend and expand renewable energy tax credits while simultaneously pushing for more domestic fossil fuel drilling. They feign concern about technological limitations and infrastructure because the truth, that we have the technology and means to transition away from fossil fuels and meet the science-based 2030 targets with cost effective technologies, threatens their profit margins and influence in Congress. Taking each of their concerns in turn reveals the flimsiness of their arguments when compared to the reality of the situation.

The Supposed Role of Oil and Gas

The Chamber expects you to believe that oil and natural gas are necessary investments to keep up with energy needs that solar and wind cannot cover. However, the Chamber counts many major players in the oil and gas industry among their members and/or donors, including, but not limited to, the American Petroleum Institute, Chevron, Hess, and Marathon Oil. In addition, the leadership of the Chamber’s Global Energy Institute includes individuals, like their president Marty Durbin, who have established careers as coal, oil, and gas advocates for a wide array of groups. There is a clear financial interest that the Chamber is protecting here, and their efforts aim to increase the money lining their pockets rather than the well-being of any consumer or the economy as a whole.

The main point of transitioning away from fossil fuels is to reduce emissions and pollution, which oil and natural gas use directly contradicts. Not only does natural gas inherently create harmful CO2 emissions, but production and processing of it also releases methane, which is more than 80 times as powerful a greenhouse gas than CO2 in the first 20 years after release, giving natural gas a substantial role in advancing the climate crisis. Meanwhile, research shows that solar and wind infrastructure easily offset their minimal emission contributions over their life cycles and create significant reductions in emissions overall.

Natural gas’ emissions problems make them bad enough to support on their own, but the Chamber doubles down by refusing to properly address methane issues and are on record as supporting a resolution by the House that would have undone a key Bureau of Land Management rule aimed to reduce venting and flaring of gas like methane. This alone undermines any claim they make about natural gas’ role in sustainability and further shows their sole commitment to profit over a healthy environment.

Technology and Grid Reliability

According to the Chamber, current technology and lack of grid reliability limits the adoption of renewable energy and attempts to expand its reach will cause consumer electricity rates to rise. However, this is just plainly not true. Research done by the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) of the Department of Energy demonstrates that we already have the grid capacity to reach 80% renewable sourcing by 2050 with our current technology combined with more electric system flexibility. Therefore, we should have the capability to continue advancing in technology without sacrificing growth of clean energy, getting more of the grid on renewables now while making it even easier to meet and surpass that 80% estimate. As NREL states, this goal will require more grid reliability, but the Chamber’s accusations that better grid infrastructure will cost consumers more money are unfounded in the long term.

Currently, grid maintenance costs are factored into the energy bill consumers pay every month. These costs are substantial, but that is only because the electric grid is outdated, and electric companies would prefer to keep holding a decrepit system together than invest in grid modernization and renewables. 

This is also the Chamber’s key argument against net metering, which provides rooftop solar owners with a credit on their bill for unused electricity they generate that is given back to the grid. They believe this credit allows solar owners to avoid paying for that grid maintenance, even though their contributions to the grid make up for it. 

Besides, nobody should be paying for maintenance caused by negligence, especially when further research from NREL shows modernization would be less costly to the company and consumers in the long term. NREL finds that grid modernization would be “conservatively saving consumers $2.50 to $3.30 per dollar spent.” 

Blood on Their Hands

Texas’ energy grid, operated by the Electric Reliability Council of Texas (ERCOT) is a sobering example of how imperative and beneficial long-term grid modernization is in the face of neglect. The deregulated nature of the grid means that decisions to upgrade are often left to the power companies, who tend to opt against those upgrades even when implored to do so by federal agencies like the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) and organizations like the North American Electric Reliability Commission (NERC). This neglect leads to massive costs and tragedies like the winter storms that paralyzed the Texas power grid both in 2011 and ten years later with lessons unlearned in 2021. Their unwillingness to care led to millions freezing in the dark and the deaths of 246 people. To this day, Texas’ energy grid is the only one in the country that does not have the infrastructure to meet peak summertime demand.

This, of course, does not matter to utilities or oil and gas companies, in Texas or anywhere else in the country. The brutal reality is that many of these firms profited from people’s hardships and made billions off the Texas energy crisis through price gouging, and profit margins are the driving factor almost everywhere in the private utilities sector, regardless of the suffering caused.

Dark Money Keeps Your Rates High, Not Solar

It is rich to hear the Chamber fearmonger about higher rates from grid modernization when they are allied to the Edison Electric Institute, a lobbying organization that uses ratepayer money given to them by utilities to lobby Congress for permission to charge higher rates. The Chamber supports a disgraceful funding cycle that takes money from the pockets of consumers and recycles it to then take more and more money from us. If the Chamber is so committed to their crusade against higher electricity rates, they should start by divesting themselves from their dark money lobbying and urging their oil, gas, and utility allies to do the same. Without this step, their protests about rates should be viewed for what they are: empty and driven by greed.

Backing Climate Deniers

The U.S. Chamber also endorses political candidates, announcing their endorsements in press releases. Historically, endorsees do not support environmental and climate change legislation. Based on the environmental scores calculated by the League of Conservation Voters (LCV), the politicians endorsed by the U.S. Chamber have an average environmental score of 38%. Scores are calculated from 0 to 100% and represent the percentage of votes casted in favor of environmental policies out of the total votes for environmental policies they casted in their lifetime. A score of 38% means the Chamber continually endorses politicians that on average vote no to necessary environmental legislation 62% of the time. Recently, the Chamber endorsed Idaho republican Mike Simpson, Ohio republican Theresa Gavarone, and Nebraska republicans Don Bacon and Mike Flood.

There are still 139 members of Congress that “deny the scientific consensus of human-caused climate change.” Climate deniers still hold power in the United States Congress in part because of continued monetary support and endorsements from companies and the U.S. Chamber of Commerce. In 2022, the U.S. Chamber continues to fund the election campaigns of climate deniers and obstructors.

Perovskites and Toxic Lead

The only statement by the Chamber that could possibly be construed as even remotely pro-solar would be their endorsement of a company using a material called perovskite in solar panels to increase efficiency and cost-effectiveness. Unfortunately, this is a diversion, and a dangerous one at that. The Chamber uses this statement to act as if they are supporting solar development, but in the post itself they continue the same tired talking points about the high costs associated with solar investment, misleadingly representing solar as a precarious and “challenging” industry.

Furthermore, the Chamber is promoting a technology that may appear unproblematic and beneficial on the surface, but they conveniently forget to mention that perovskites contain toxic lead that can seep out into the environment, causing decidedly more harm than good. While there is research being done to address these issues, they are not solved: the most tangible solution only involves creating a fail-safe in case of lead leaching into the soil, without actually taking the toxic lead out of the equation. Promotion of a technology like this as some kind of green solution before it is even made environmentally sound is incredibly negligent and once again shows the Chamber’s fixation on profit over people.

Fighting the Chamber’s Propaganda

The Chamber’s past and present positions on renewable energy, as well as their continued support for expansion of oil and gas demonstrate that they have no commitment to a greener future. They profit off environmental degradation and twisting the narrative on renewables. They make backhanded claims about the infeasibility of renewable energy and so-called “benefits” of oil and natural gas despite research and reality firmly contradicting them at every turn. They remain a massive roadblock to a safe and effective green transition, and we must continue to break their hold on information and spread the truth about renewable energy’s necessity and viability wherever we are able.

Change The Chamber is a bipartisan coalition of over 100 student groups, including undergraduates, graduate students and recent graduates. Contact Change The Chamber at changeuschamber@gmail.com.