Droz, J

blog free mkt

swamp thing inside the wire: droz boasts of it

===

Fueling the Opposition: How Fossil Fuel Interests Are Fighting to Kill Wind and Solar Farms Before They Are Built

anti-Renewable-Energy Activists and Operatives

John Droz

Realtor John Droz resides in North Carolina and maintains a summer cottage in upstate New York. Based on undergraduate and graduate degrees in physics and some work earlier in his career for General Electric, Droz has presented himself as a scientific expert on a wide range of issues.

He’s emerged as an influential source of conspiracy theories and disinformation about everything from climate science and wind and solar power to Covid-19 and the 2020 elections.²⁰⁸(https://docs.google.com/document/d/1QEZy450AR-6-iTNUOlslT8HzmnFAik8pMFt2QhpSY7k/edit#bookmark=id.ozwnc9q5gxxy)

Droz is a member of the North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality’s Oil and Gas Commission. In 2018, he self-published a paper that was supportive of offshore drilling for oil and methane gas off North Carolina’s coast.

“Offshore wind energy is a much worse choice than is offshore natural gas,” Droz wrote in the paper.

He’s also a member of the CO2 Coalition, formerly known as the George Marshall Institute, a climate denial group that has received money from the Koch network and oil and gas producer EOG Resources.

Droz co-founded the Alliance for Wise Energy Decisions (AWED) with Ohio anti-wind activist Tom Stacy more than a decade ago. AWED and Droz have provided model local laws, strategies, and information utilized by anti-renewables activists all over the country.

A “Potpourri” section of AWED’s website wiseenergy.org lists individuals “who contributed constructive ideas for this website,” including:

Rob Aliasso, an outspoken opponent of wind power in upstate New York who served as co-chairman of the Coalition for the Preservation of the Golden Crescent, and spent more than three decades as an executive at Stebbins Manufacturing and Engineering, which saw its coal scrubber business decline amidst the transition to cleaner forms of energy
Charles Battig, a climate denier associated with the Heartland Institute and CO2 Coalition
Steve Goreham, a paid speaker and climate denier whose clients have included numerous fossil fuel industry groups
Jonathan Lesser, a fellow for the Manhattan Institute and Texas Public Policy Foundation and economic consultant whose clients have included gas utilities, pipeline companies, and Bill Koch’s Alliance to Protect Nantucket Sound
George Taylor, a fellow for the Energy and Environment Legal Institute

Since 2009, AWED has published a monthly newsletter that’s frequently cross-posted on the Institute for Energy Research’s blog MasterResource.org, where Droz is listed as a principal contributor.

In 2011, Droz announced in the newsletter that he’d joined the American Tradition Institute as a fellow. He would later describe the position as unpaid.

“ATI has some great aspirations, and getting rid of unscientific options like wind energy is high on their list,” Droz wrote.

He pointed to ATI’s 2011 lawsuit against Colorado’s renewable energy standard as an example, and asked readers to donate money to support ATI.

ATI named coal producer Alpha Natural Resources as a member in a declaration by executive director Tom Tanton filed in the Colorado lawsuit in March of 2012. Tanton said ATI’s membership also included unnamed “electric power generating and transmission companies that generate energy from coal, natural gas and oil-fired and combustion turbine generation facilities.”

One month earlier, in February of 2012, Droz participated in a coordinating meeting between anti-wind activists and representatives of ATI and other national groups backed by the fossil fuel money. He also helped draft an anti-wind public relations strategy in advance of the meeting.

Droz was back in D.C. that December with Taylor and investor Larry Gerdes meeting with representatives of the American Legislative Exchange Council and Competitive Enterprise Institute and staff for multiple members of the U.S. House and Senate, according to an AWED report-back document EPI later found on one of Droz’s anti-wind websites.

“We gave each legislator a copy of the Rasmussen Renewable Energy report(2.0),” that document said.

Kimball Rasmussen is president and CEO of the Utah-based Deseret Power, a coal burning and mining electric cooperative. In 2010, Rasmussen credited Droz and Taylor with providing “thoughtful input” on the 2.0 edition of his report, “A Rational Look at Renewable Energy,” which disparaged renewables while promoting methane gas as an alternative for reducing CO2 emissions.

AWED’s D.C. trip report-back document from 2012 also illustrates how Droz quickly got to work implementing parts of the national anti-wind PR strategy, which included plans to distribute copies of the Rasmussen report and coordinate with well-funded national groups like ALEC and the Heritage Foundation. Droz later continued to coordinate his anti-wind efforts with Koch-backed groups like Americans for Prosperity and FreedomWorks.

“Everyone involved with AWED (including me) is an unpaid volunteer, who is committed to Science-based energy policies,” Droz told EPI 2017.

Lisa Linowes

Lisa Linowes founded the Industrial Wind Action Group in 2006 and has since emerged as one of the nation’s top anti-renewables activists. Her website, WindAction.org, describes her group as the “#1 Trusted Information Resource on Large-scale Renewables.”

WindAction is incorporated as a “Domestic Profit Corporation” in New Hampshire, where Linowes resides, though the group’s incorporation information states it was “organized exclusively for charitable, educational & scientific purposes.”

WindAction’s website claims the group is “not funded in any way” by the fossil fuel industry or “affiliated with large political activists groups.”

Linowes is the co-founder of the Save Right Whales Coalition that’s fighting offshore wind development along the east coast. In 2021, she joined the Caesar Rodney Institute’s American Coalition for Ocean Protection.

In addition, Linowes serves on the board of directors of Environmental Progress, a California-based group known for criticizing wind and solar power and advocating for nuclear energy and fossil fuels. Michael Shellenberger, the group’s president, is involved in the Save Right Whales Coalition with Linowes.

Linowes is also the co-chairman of the Wildlife, Energy & Community Coalition, which opposes “harmful industrial-scale renewables.”

Linowes has long coordinated her efforts with think tanks funded by the fossil fuel industry. The Institute for Energy Research has promoted Linowes’ writings and efforts on its blog MasterResource.org since 2010, and in 2018 she joined IER’s newly formed advisory council.

In 2017, the name of IER’s former director of communications was listed as the “author” in the document properties of an open letter opposing the federal production tax credit for wind power that Linowes claimed she wrote alone.

She’s also served as a senior policy fellow for the Texas Public Policy Foundation, where she authored a two-part anti-wind report in 2018.

Kevon Martis

Kevon Martis is a longtime anti-renewables activist in Michigan who has organized and led multiple groups opposing renewable energy projects. Martis has served as a leader of Our Home, Our Voice (OHOV) since its inception in 2023, when the self-described 501(c)(4) organization opposed the passage of legislation aimed at streamlining renewable energy siting in Michigan. OHOV reported over $145,000 in revenue on its annual tax report for 2023, but was not required to disclose its donors.

Martis is now the spokesperson for a Citizens for Local Choice ballot initiative that’s fighting to repeal Michigan’s new siting law. Matt Brewer, an attorney for a group that’s opposing the ballot initiative, told Planet Detroit earlier this year that OHOV’s contributions to Citizens for Local Choice may have violated campaign finance laws by hiding the source of some early donations to the ballot committee. Brewer then filed a campaign finance complaint against OHOV.

Citizens for Local Choice did publicly report a $10,000 contribution from longtime Ariel Corporation executive Tom Rastin of Ohio.

Martis joined the Energy and Environment Legal Institute as a Senior Policy Fellow in 2016, about a month after the Wall Street Journal reported that Arch Coal had to disclose its funding of the anti-renewables and anti-climate science group in its bankruptcy filings. In 2012, Martis participated in a coordinating meeting in D.C. between anti-wind activists from multiple states and representatives of the American Tradition Institute and other front groups backed by the fossil fuel industry.

Martis has also led the Interstate Informed Citizens Coalition (IICC) since 2011.

“Martis’s co-founder at the IICC, Joshua Nolan, represented Martin County Coal Corporation in a lawsuit that same year,” as Distilled first reported.

The Institute for Energy Research has promoted Martis’s writings and efforts on its blog MasterResource since 2012.

“I have not and do not receive any support from any energy interest of any kind,” Martis said in a 2020MasterResource blog post by IER’s Robert Bradley. “This includes fossil fuel utilities or the Koch family, etc.”

Martis also described his fellowship position at E&E Legal as unfunded and said “I take no direction from them on any matter.”

Martis’s anti-renewables efforts have extended far beyond his own backyard in Michigan.

“And I have testified on wind energy land use issues across the Midwest, including OH, IL, MI and Kentucky as well as in Nebraska and North Dakota,” Martis said during his 2016 testimony to the Ohio Power Siting Board on wind siting rules.

“I have also been invited to testify before members of Congress in Washington DC,” Martis also said, in reference to a 2013 event hosted by IER.

Martis also appeared at anti-wind meetings in Ohio with Samuel Randazzo, the former attorney and lobbyist who was secretly paid millions of dollars by the coal-burning utility FirstEnergy between 2010 and 2019.

Tom Stacy

Tom Stacy has served as a director for the National Wind Watch (NWW), a 501(c)(3) nonprofit organization based in Massachusetts that serves as a clearinghouse for anti-wind information, since 2009.

NWW is frequently asked if it is “backed by the coal or nuclear industry.”

“NWW is not backed by, affiliated with, or funded in any way by these or any other industry, political organization, or ‘think tank,’” according to a FAQpage found on the group’s website wind-watch.org.

The FAQ page also states that members of the organization’s board of directors “are unpaid volunteers with no affiliations to fossil fuel or nuclear energy industries or any similar outside interests.”

Stacy began to fight wind power as the leader of Save Western Ohio from 2008 to 2010, and he also co-founded the Alliance for Wise Energy Decisions with John Droz.

For many years, Stacy could be found speaking at events and hearings alongside other prominent wind power opponents like Lisa Linowes, Kevon Martis, and Samuel Randazzo.

By 2014, Stacy became a paid consultant for groups like the Institute for Energy Research and the coal industry group America’s Power. He’s co-authored multiple reports that mislead on the costs of renewable energy with George Taylor, a consultant and fellow for the Energy and Environment Legal Institute.

In 2022, Stacy co-authored a report by the Center of the American Experiment, a State Policy Network group in Minnesota, that opposed Wisconsin Governor Tony Evers’s 100% clean energy plan. The Center received $250,000 that year from the Koch group Americans for Prosperity.

Tom Tanton

Tom Tanton has been the president of the consulting firm T2 & Associates since 2003, and during that time he has churned out reports for groups like the American Petroleum Institute and American Legislative Exchange Council.

Tanton was a vice president at the Institute for Energy Research from 2003 to 2007, where he was part of the fight to kill the Cape Wind offshore wind project. He’s been affiliated with the American Tradition Institute and Energy and Environment Legal Institute for over a decade.

Tanton’s LinkedIn account lists “friend” of Save Western Ohio as his professional experience for 2009. Save Western Ohio was the anti-wind group led by Tom Stacy before Stacy became a paid consultant who co-authored reports for IER and the coal industry.

A slew of influential anti-renewables activists who emerged during the 2000s have cited Tanton as an early influence on their views on wind power.

A page from the website We Oppose Wind Farms last updated in 2009 includes a picture of Tanton posing with “statewide wind warriors” from New York. More recently, the anti-wind group Save Ontario Shores used public intervenor funds to pay Tanton to be an expert witness against the Lighthouse Wind project in upstate New York, which was never built.

“Much of my tutorial about wind energy and grid operations came from Tom Tanton’s knowledgeable bonhomie,” birder and anti-wind activist Jon Boone wrote in a 2006 paper. “His patient mentoring, enkindled through long phone conversations and voluminous exchanges of emails, made this work possible.”

Boone created the website stopillwind.com and produced and directed “Life Under a Windplant,” a documentary often cited by anti-wind activists. Some of Boone’s writings from more than a decade ago can still be found on IER’s blog MasterResource.org.

Tanton topped a 2008 list where anti-winder John Droz dubbed “the better writers regarding the industrial wind power business.”

That same year, Boone credited Tanton, Droz, Lisa Linowes, and others with reviewing a draft of his article “Why Wind Won’t Work.”

In 2010, anti-winder Ken Hawkins credited Tanton, Boone, Droz, and Stacy, as well as IER’s CEO Robert Bradley, with reviewing a draft of his paper on renewable energy grid integration.

===

https://www.energyandpolicy.org/george-david-banks-trump-wind-power/

sep 2017

George David Banks, a top advisor to President Trump on climate change, once worked as the “D.C. liaison” for the Alliance for Wise Energy Decisions (AWED), a coalition of “individuals, organizations, communities, and businesses” founded by the anti-wind activist and climate skeptic John Droz, Jr.

Droz received national attention in 2012 for his role in drafting a :{“National PR Campaign Proposal”:(style="box-sizing:border-box;border:0px;font-style:inherit;margin:0px;outline:0px;padding:0px;vertical-align:baseline"):}: to “… constructively influence state and national wind energy policies.” The “confidential” draft plan called for “joining forces” with a number of powerful special interest groups backed by the Koch brothers. It was soon followed by :{a February 2012 meeting:(style="box-sizing:border-box;border:0px;font-style:inherit;margin:0px;outline:0px;padding:0px;vertical-align:baseline"):}: between local wind power opponents, including Droz, and representatives of some of these same Koch-backed groups.

Droz is equally well known for :{his role in fooling state lawmakers:(style="box-sizing:border-box;border:0px;font-style:inherit;margin:0px;outline:0px;padding:0px;vertical-align:baseline"):}: in North Carolina into a passing a :{controversial moratorium:(style="box-sizing:border-box;border:0px;font-style:inherit;margin:0px;outline:0px;padding:0px;vertical-align:baseline"):}: on the use of sea level rise protections in coastal planning. Droz often :{describes himself:(style="box-sizing:border-box;border:0px;font-style:inherit;margin:0px;outline:0px;padding:0px;vertical-align:baseline"):}: as an “independent physicist” and he does hold degrees in physics that he earned back in the 1960s and 1970s. However, :{according to Droz’s own resume:(style="box-sizing:border-box;border:0px;font-style:inherit;margin:0px;outline:0px;padding:0px;vertical-align:baseline"):}:, his professional career since 1979 has been in real estate, where he has made enough money to pursue other interests like bashing wind power on the side. Droz is :{not an expert on climate change:(style="box-sizing:border-box;border:0px;font-style:inherit;margin:0px;outline:0px;padding:0px;vertical-align:baseline"):}:, and he has, in fact, embraced unscientific conspiracy theories.

“One insightful observer commented that the whole AGW hypothesis was never about climate anyway — but rather it is ultimately about control (of population, lifestyle, energy use, etc.),” Droz’s :{official position on global warming:(style="box-sizing:border-box;border:0px;font-style:inherit;margin:0px;outline:0px;padding:0px;vertical-align:baseline"):}: concluded (AGW is short for anthropogenic, or human-caused, global warming).

As AWED’s director of D.C. operations in 2012 and 2013, :{Banks worked as part of what the Washington Post dubbed an “unusual coalition”:(style="box-sizing:border-box;border:0px;font-style:inherit;margin:0px;outline:0px;padding:0px;vertical-align:baseline"):}: that pressured Congress to allow a key federal tax credit for wind power to expire. The coalition included the utility Exelon and Koch-backed groups like Americans for Prosperity and Freedomworks, as well as :{a number of local anti-wind groups:(style="box-sizing:border-box;border:0px;font-style:inherit;margin:0px;outline:0px;padding:0px;vertical-align:baseline"):}:.

The Alliance for Wise Energy Decisions and Freedomworks used social media and false narratives to manufacture opposition to the wind production tax credit.

" data-medium-file="https://i0.wp.com/www.energyandpolicy.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/09/Facebook.png?fit=226%2C300&ssl=1" data-large-file="https://i0.wp.com/www.energyandpolicy.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/09/Facebook.png?fit=448%2C594&ssl=1" decoding="async" class="wp-image-5152 size-full jetpack-lazy-image entered lazyloaded jetpack-lazy-image--handled" src="https://i0.wp.com/www.energyandpolicy.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/09/Facebook.png?resize=448%2C594&is-pending-load=1#038;ssl=1" alt="" width="448" height="594" data-recalc-dims="1" srcset="https://i0.wp.com/www.energyandpolicy.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/09/Facebook.png?w=448&ssl=1 448w, https://i0.wp.com/www.energyandpolicy.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/09/Facebook.png?resize=226%2C300&ssl=1 226w, https://i0.wp.com/www.energyandpolicy.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/09/Facebook.png?resize=300%2C398&ssl=1 300w" data-ll-status="loaded" sizes="(max-width: 448px) 100vw, 448px" data-lazy-loaded="1" loading="eager" style="box-sizing: border-box; height: auto; max-width: 100%; display: block; margin: 0px;">

The Alliance for Wise Energy Decisions and Freedomworks used social media and false narratives to manufacture opposition to the wind Production Tax Credit.

Around the same time he was working for AWED, Banks was also a :{policy advisor to Heartland Institute:(style="box-sizing:border-box;border:0px;font-style:inherit;margin:0px;outline:0px;padding:0px;vertical-align:baseline"):}:, which was working with the American Legislative Exchange Council and other Koch-backed groups to use “model legislation” to :{repeal another key driver of wind power growth:(style="box-sizing:border-box;border:0px;font-style:inherit;margin:0px;outline:0px;padding:0px;vertical-align:baseline"):}:: state renewable portfolio standards (RPS). Droz was already working with ALEC and other groups with ties to the Koch brothers to attack :{North Carolina’s RPS:(style="box-sizing:border-box;border:0px;font-style:inherit;margin:0px;outline:0px;padding:0px;vertical-align:baseline"):}:, and in 2013 he :{worked to recruit wind power opponents:(style="box-sizing:border-box;border:0px;font-style:inherit;margin:0px;outline:0px;padding:0px;vertical-align:baseline"):}: in other states to the campaign.

Who paid George David Banks to work for the Alliance for Wise Energy Decisions?

A :{brief bio:(style="box-sizing:border-box;border:0px;font-style:inherit;margin:0px;outline:0px;padding:0px;vertical-align:baseline"):}: of Banks put out by the White House press office when he was appointed by President Trump to serve as a special assistant for international energy and environment made no mention of AWED or the Heartland Institute, nor does his :{LinkedIn profile:(style="box-sizing:border-box;border:0px;font-style:inherit;margin:0px;outline:0px;padding:0px;vertical-align:baseline"):}:.

What Banks does reveal on his LinkedIn profile is that at the same time he was working for AWED in 2012 and 2013, he was also the managing director of Battle Group, LLC, a:

“Strategic consultancy that works to bridge and integrate state and local advocacy efforts with free market lobbying campaigns at the national level, focusing on energy and environment issues.”

A consultancy is, by definition, a company that gets paid to provide professional advice or services, yet AWED and its founder John Droz – a :{self-described:(style="box-sizing:border-box;border:0px;font-style:inherit;margin:0px;outline:0px;padding:0px;vertical-align:baseline"):}: “independent physicist and energy expert” – have long sought to portray their anti-wind efforts as powered by volunteers and free of financial ties to the fossil fuel and utility industries.

“All of our efforts (including this website) are from donated time and effort on the part of committed citizens,” AWED said on its :{PTCFacts.info:(style="box-sizing:border-box;border:0px;font-style:inherit;margin:0px;outline:0px;padding:0px;vertical-align:baseline"):}: website, set up to oppose :{the 2012 extension of the wind production tax credit:(style="box-sizing:border-box;border:0px;font-style:inherit;margin:0px;outline:0px;padding:0px;vertical-align:baseline"):}:. “We have received zero funding from any source for our efforts to promote better energy policies.”

“Everyone involved with AWED (including me) is an unpaid volunteer, who is committed to Science-based energy policies,” John Droz, the founder of AWED, told the Energy and Policy Institute via email in 2017.

“So the short answer is that Dave was paid nothing for any efforts he contributed to promoting Science,” Droz said. (Banks often goes by his middle name, David or Dave)

However, asked if other “individual, organizations, or companies may have been paying Banks for his work on wind energy issues while he was a ‘volunteer’ for AWED,” Droz pleaded ignorance.

“I have no knowledge of any other groups that Dave was connected with during the period of time he volunteered for AWED,” said Droz.

Banks :{started the Battle Group:(style="box-sizing:border-box;border:0px;font-style:inherit;margin:0px;outline:0px;padding:0px;vertical-align:baseline"):}: and worked as :{AWED’s director of D.C. operations:(style="box-sizing:border-box;border:0px;font-style:inherit;margin:0px;outline:0px;padding:0px;vertical-align:baseline"):}: after a 2011-2012 stint on the staff of Republican Senator James Inhofe, where he:{sparked controversy:(style="box-sizing:border-box;border:0px;font-style:inherit;margin:0px;outline:0px;padding:0px;vertical-align:baseline"):}: with :{a leaked memo:(style="box-sizing:border-box;border:0px;font-style:inherit;margin:0px;outline:0px;padding:0px;vertical-align:baseline"):}: that used the words “our partners” to describe the oil industry.

Just after Banks left Inhofe’s staff, :{Politico Pro:(style="box-sizing:border-box;border:0px;font-style:inherit;margin:0px;outline:0px;padding:0px;vertical-align:baseline"):}: ($) asked Banks about his ties with the lobbyist C. Boyden Gray, FreedomWorks and Americans for Prosperity. Here is how Banks responded:

“I was kind of on the circuit with some of these guys, but there’s obviously a limit of what you can do in the Senate,” he said, noting a desire to do media appearances and speeches. “I’d like to do more of that if possible.”

In 2009-2011, Banks had worked as a partner for Boyden Gray & Associates, where according to his :{LinkedIn profile:(style="box-sizing:border-box;border:0px;font-style:inherit;margin:0px;outline:0px;padding:0px;vertical-align:baseline"):}: he was a registered lobbyist for Constellation Energy, which:{**merged with Exelon**:{in 2012:(style="font-weight:inherit"):}::(style="box-sizing:border-box;border:0px;font-style:inherit;margin:0px;outline:0px;padding:0px;vertical-align:baseline"):}:. While Banks was working with AWED in 2012, C. Boyden Gray was :{lobbying against the wind PTC:(style="box-sizing:border-box;border:0px;font-style:inherit;margin:0px;outline:0px;padding:0px;vertical-align:baseline"):}: for Exelon, which :{along with Gray:(style="box-sizing:border-box;border:0px;font-style:inherit;margin:0px;outline:0px;padding:0px;vertical-align:baseline"):}: publicly :{campaigned for the PTC’s immediate expiration:(style="box-sizing:border-box;border:0px;font-style:inherit;margin:0px;outline:0px;padding:0px;vertical-align:baseline"):}:. Gray also served at the time on :{the board of directors for Freedomworks:(style="box-sizing:border-box;border:0px;font-style:inherit;margin:0px;outline:0px;padding:0px;vertical-align:baseline"):}:, which partnered with Banks and AWED to manufacture public opposition to the wind PTC.

[twt]

George David Banks tweeted links to Freedomworks’ attacks on the wind production tax credit.

Exelon also for several years :{funded the Koch-backed American Energy Alliance’s:(style="box-sizing:border-box;border:0px;font-style:inherit;margin:0px;outline:0px;padding:0px;vertical-align:baseline"):}: attacks on the wind PTC. This group was another member of the “unusual coalition” that Banks and AWED :{campaigned alongside:(style="box-sizing:border-box;border:0px;font-style:inherit;margin:0px;outline:0px;padding:0px;vertical-align:baseline"):}: in 2012 and 2013.

Exelon did not respond to a request for comment on whether it made any payments to Banks or the Battle Group during the time period in question.

Droz’s 2012 proposal for a national PR campaign by local anti-wind activists had called for “joining forces” with a number of national Koch-backed groups. Sure enough, it was Christine Harbin of the Koch-backed Americans for Prosperity that organized :{a 2012 letter:(style="box-sizing:border-box;border:0px;font-style:inherit;margin:0px;outline:0px;padding:0px;vertical-align:baseline"):}: signed by a number of local anti-wind groups and national organizations backed by the Koch brothers, according to :{a document:(style="box-sizing:border-box;border:0px;font-style:inherit;margin:0px;outline:0px;padding:0px;vertical-align:baseline"):}: found on the website of one of the signers, Auglaize Neighbors United.Among the signers were AWED, Freedomworks, and the American Energy Alliance.

“We are working with several other national organizations who are also against the PTC,” according to an update found in that same document from the Auglaize Neighbors United website. “Our DC liaison, Dave Banks, has been actively working with these groups, who have been meeting once a week to discuss strategy, etc.”

AWED’s relationships with Banks and other D.C. insiders opened some powerful doors in Washington. Banks joined Droz and other AWED supporters for a meeting with staff for then House Speaker John Boehner, according to a “:{AWED December 2012 DC PTC Trip Report:(style="box-sizing:border-box;border:0px;font-style:inherit;margin:0px;outline:0px;padding:0px;vertical-align:baseline"):}:” that Droz posted online.

Asked about these relationships in 2017, Droz again feigned ignorance.

“Of course I am familiar with Americans for Prosperity, Freedomworks, and Exelon,” Droz told the Energy and Policy Institute. “None of those people (to my knowledge) paid anyone to assist in this issue.”

Bank’s public work as AWED’s director of D.C. operations appears to have ended sometime in 2013, around the same time he :{joined the Center for Strategic & International Studies:(style="box-sizing:border-box;border:0px;font-style:inherit;margin:0px;outline:0px;padding:0px;vertical-align:baseline"):}: (CSIS). At CSIS, Banks :{again fought against the wind PTC:(style="box-sizing:border-box;border:0px;font-style:inherit;margin:0px;outline:0px;padding:0px;vertical-align:baseline"):}: alongside :{C. Boyden Gray and Exelon:(style="box-sizing:border-box;border:0px;font-style:inherit;margin:0px;outline:0px;padding:0px;vertical-align:baseline"):}:. Banks continued to :{target the wind PTC:(style="box-sizing:border-box;border:0px;font-style:inherit;margin:0px;outline:0px;padding:0px;vertical-align:baseline"):}: in 2015, while executive vice president for the American Council for Capital Formation, where he later :{defended Donald Trump’s tweet:(style="box-sizing:border-box;border:0px;font-style:inherit;margin:0px;outline:0px;padding:0px;vertical-align:baseline"):}: that claimed climate change was a hoax manufactured by the Chinese.

George David Banks faces questions about his past lobbying in 2017

Banks has faced scrutiny as :{one of many former lobbyists:(style="box-sizing:border-box;border:0px;font-style:inherit;margin:0px;outline:0px;padding:0px;vertical-align:baseline"):}: appointed by Trump to work on the same issues they lobbied on within the past two years, despite a campaign pledge to “drain the swamp.” Banks was registered as having lobbied for the American Council on Capital Formation (ACCF) on “Tax, Environment, and Regulatory Issues” in :{2015:(style="box-sizing:border-box;border:0px;font-style:inherit;margin:0px;outline:0px;padding:0px;vertical-align:baseline"):}: and :{2016:(style="box-sizing:border-box;border:0px;font-style:inherit;margin:0px;outline:0px;padding:0px;vertical-align:baseline"):}:. Banks and ACCF now :{claim:(style="box-sizing:border-box;border:0px;font-style:inherit;margin:0px;outline:0px;padding:0px;vertical-align:baseline"):}: he was “mistakenly” registered as a lobbyist, and that the work Banks did for ACCF did not actually qualify as lobbying.

As mentioned earlier, in 2009-2011, Banks was also a partner in Boyden, Gray & Associates, where his :{LinkedIn profile:(style="box-sizing:border-box;border:0px;font-style:inherit;margin:0px;outline:0px;padding:0px;vertical-align:baseline"):}: discloses he was a “Registered lobbyist for Constellation, FirstEnergy and Nuclear Energy Institute.” Lobbying reports for Banks from this time can be in the U.S. House and Senate lobbying disclosure databases.

Banks worked on “lobbying campaigns” for :{AWED:(style="box-sizing:border-box;border:0px;font-style:inherit;margin:0px;outline:0px;padding:0px;vertical-align:baseline"):}: and :{the Battle Group:(style="box-sizing:border-box;border:0px;font-style:inherit;margin:0px;outline:0px;padding:0px;vertical-align:baseline"):}:, according to statements about his work found online. However, searches of the House and Senate lobbying disclosure databases found no reports for lobbying done by “George David Banks” between 2012 and 2014, which covers the time period he worked for AWED and ran the Battle Group.

What Banks’ anti-wind allies want from Trump

“FYI I have some connections to the Trump transition team, and (as you can tell from news stories), things are moving along quite quickly,” Droz :{wrote to supporters:(style="box-sizing:border-box;border:0px;font-style:inherit;margin:0px;outline:0px;padding:0px;vertical-align:baseline"):}: shortly after the 2016 election.

Droz’s post-election message also included a revealing “:{list:(style="box-sizing:border-box;border:0px;font-style:inherit;margin:0px;outline:0px;padding:0px;vertical-align:baseline"):}: of some major issues that need addressing” by the Trump administration. The list included a call to “Terminate special renewable subsidies (e.g. PTC and ITC).” Droz and AWED also :{joined a letter:(style="box-sizing:border-box;border:0px;font-style:inherit;margin:0px;outline:0px;padding:0px;vertical-align:baseline"):}: that called on Trump to withdraw the U.S. from the Paris climate agreement, which was signed by many of the special interest groups they worked with on previous attacks on the wind PTC.

The American Energy Alliance, with which Banks worked closely during his time at AWED, backed Trump’s presidential campaign and has played an :{outsized role:(style="box-sizing:border-box;border:0px;font-style:inherit;margin:0px;outline:0px;padding:0px;vertical-align:baseline"):}: in defining the new Trump administration. The Institute for Energy Research, the American Energy Alliance’s research arm, continues to :{promote Droz’s anti-wind work:(style="box-sizing:border-box;border:0px;font-style:inherit;margin:0px;outline:0px;padding:0px;vertical-align:baseline"):}: on its blog, MasterResources.org

Still, ending the wind PTC before it’s current expiration date of 2020 :{appears to be a non-priority:(style="box-sizing:border-box;border:0px;font-style:inherit;margin:0px;outline:0px;padding:0px;vertical-align:baseline"):}: for most Republican lawmakers in Washington, and it’s worth a reminder that :{Trump actually backed the PTC:(style="box-sizing:border-box;border:0px;font-style:inherit;margin:0px;outline:0px;padding:0px;vertical-align:baseline"):}: while on the campaign trail.

But Droz and AWED have found some success working with Republicans and Koch-backed groups at the state level since 2012. In 2017, Droz :{provided support:(style="box-sizing:border-box;border:0px;font-style:inherit;margin:0px;outline:0px;padding:0px;vertical-align:baseline"):}: to Republican state lawmakers in North Carolina who tried to halt an Amazon wind farm :{based on the pretense:(style="box-sizing:border-box;border:0px;font-style:inherit;margin:0px;outline:0px;padding:0px;vertical-align:baseline"):}: that it posed a risk to a Navy radar installation –:{ a claim the Navy denied:(style="box-sizing:border-box;border:0px;font-style:inherit;margin:0px;outline:0px;padding:0px;vertical-align:baseline"):}:. One of those same lawmakers, Senate Majority Leader Harry Brown, later :{tacked a moratorium on new wind farms:(style="box-sizing:border-box;border:0px;font-style:inherit;margin:0px;outline:0px;padding:0px;vertical-align:baseline"):}: onto a major solar bill that was signed into law – :{a move that pleased Droz:(style="box-sizing:border-box;border:0px;font-style:inherit;margin:0px;outline:0px;padding:0px;vertical-align:baseline"):}:. During a recent podcast interview with H. Sterling Burnett of the Heartland Institute, Droz said he also supported a successful effort by state lawmakers in Texas to pass legislation that makes new wind farms located near military bases ineligible for property tax exemptions.

The local communities and states that Droz and AWED target next will do well to remember whose interests these wind power opponents have aligned with, and it’s not the interests of the majority Americans who want to see more, not less, support for wind power.

Posted in: Alliance for Wise Energy Decisions, Exelon, Koch Brothers, Wind
Tagged in: alliance for wise energy decisions, American Legislative Exchange Council, Americans for Prosperity, anti-wind groups, AWED, C. Boyden Gray, Donald Trump, Exelon, FreedomWorks, george david banks, John Droz, Koch Brothers, Production Tax Credit, Wind, wind power opponents

gmail 11 22

over the past month or so, thanks in large part to the work of reporter Michael Thomas, the Internet has rediscovered an effort that's been underfoot for more than a decade: the coal-funded attack on clean energy. In a few viral Twitter threads, Thomas has focused on the work of two longtime anti-renewables campaigners, John Drozand Kevon Martis, who have spent the past 15 years or so fighting renewable energy projects at the local level (and convincing and training others to do the same).

I first heard about Martis and Droz through Scott Peterson at Checks and Balances Project,back in 2018 when he was digging into the sudden, successful backlash against wind energy in Ohio and Michigan. They're still going strong (Droz is now a member of the CO2 Coalition as well) and, according to Thomas, gaining steam. I suspect we'll see a resurgence of anti-renewable activity as the fossil fuel industry looks to leverage the Inflation Reduction Act incentives for gas and dampen the benefit of the Act for renewables. So it's a good time to look at where that work fits in the broader climate countermovement.

When I look at both Droz's and Martis's presentations, what I see are the fingerprints of a guy who predates both of them in the anti-climate battle: Steve Milloy. Which is interesting because Milloy also happens to be the highest-paid staffer at the same organization where Martis is a senior fellow: Energy & Environment Legal Institute (E&E Legal), previously known as the American Tradition Institute—the organization that went after climate scientists like James Hansen, Michael Mann, and Katharine Hayhoe in the early aughts, trying to discredit them, and climate science in general. E&E Legal is also affiliated or sharing counsel with the Energy & Environment Action Team, the Free Market Environmental Law Clinic, and the Competitive Enterprise Institute. Droz, Martis, E&E, and CEI turn up on all sorts of documents and letterstogether, too, and Milloy and Droz are both frequent speakers at Heartland Institute events.

According to the most recent 990 on file for E&E Legal,Milloy is pulling in close to half a million dollars a year from his role as a board member and senior policy fellow there. Their "Videos" sectionis dominated by Milloy's regular appearances "debunking" climate science on Fox News, Newsmax, and OAN. E&E Legal has received funding from A rch Coal, Peabody Coal, and the Koch brothers-funded Donors Trust.

Lately I've been thinking a lot about two things the media and much of the climate movement tends to dismiss as long past—old-school climate denial and the coal lobby. Both are not only still around, but seem to be having a bit of a renaissance. This ad that the Heartland Institute started running earlier this month, for example, looks like something you might have seen in the early 2000s:

[htlnd twt 97%]

And for at least a couple of decades, Heartland's longtime warrior Milloy has been at the intersection of the coal lobby and climate denial. Although he's often laughed off as something of a clown (he likes to call environmentalists "watermelons," green on the outside but red in the middle, and go on social media tirades against the "climate bedwetters"), Milloy is also lurking in the background of the climate denial resurgence.

Among Milloy's many claims to infamy is the fact that he is the architect of the proposed EPA "secret science" rule, something he's been pushing since the late 1990s. As Naomi Oreskes, who covered Milloy in her book Merchants of Doubt, pointed out in 2018, the proposal seemed reasonable on its face but was actually intended to do something Milloy has wanted to do for decades: erode the credibility of epidemiological studies, in order to erode the credibility of science, period. For Milloy, as with everything he does, it was also in service of his longtime goal: rolling back air pollution regulations. He came very close to getting his way under Trump, and I suspect we haven't seen the last of it.

A core Milloy belief is that EPA scientists are basically biased in favor of more regulation, and therefore can't be trusted. It's an idea that comes up over and over in Martis's and Droz's presentations, too. Check out the cover of one of Droz's presentations, taking aim at a state-level environmental policy, for example:

[pix]

and compare it with the way Milloy talks about federal environmental policy in one of his many Wall Street Journal op-eds:

[pix l]

I interviewed Milloy a couple years back, when he was basking in the glory of multiple wins under President Trump, posting pictures with his pals inside the Environmental Protection Agency and bragging about "eating the greens' lunch."A perfect example of the bizarre place Milloy holds on the right: he says he was a member of Trump's EPA transition team, and the leader of that team, Myron Ebell, the Director of Global Warming and International Environmental Policy at the Competitive Enterprise Institute, confirmed that claim to me, but Trump's EPA would never confirm nor deny his presence on the team. According to Milloy, though, he "was the only person on the team with a background in EPA science, so I was brought on to write the science part of the transition plan."

When reporter Paul Thacker covered controversial toxicologist (and Milloy pal) Ed Calabrese's studies being embraced by the Trump EPA, he told me he was surprised to see how much respect the rightwing climate denier universe showed Milloy. "He's like one of their warriors, that's one of the things that really struck me when I was writing about these Calabrese emails," Thacker told me at the time. "He's sort of their prince."

During the Trump administration, the prince of the climate deniers made a lot of his long-held dreams come true. There was EPA declining to tighten their air pollution standards, the rollback of mercury regulations, and then the 2018 disbanding of the EPA's Particulate Matter Review Panel, or as Milloy put it to me: "Blowing out that particulate matter sub-panel, another huge win."

"I’ve got huge wins under my belt, it's been tremendously satisfying for me,” he said.

When I asked him if he thought Republicans would take up the secret science proposal again, if and when they regained power of the government, Milloy replied, "That is on my agenda."

Also on the agenda? De-funding the EPA and handing environmental regulation over to the states. Milloy says the environment in which the EPA was created 50 years ago is not the one we're living in today. "The environment is clean," he says. "We know what's dangerous and what is not, or how to quickly determine that issue when it arises. Every state has a strong environment agency. The U.S. EPA should be dramatically reduced in size and authority, with most of its responsibilities delegated to states."

Advocates who work on environmental issues at the state level disagree. Take methane regulations: "Nobody has the staff resources to regulate methane emissions or VOCs [volatile organic compounds] from oil and gas drilling," says Sharon Wilson, who tracks methane emissions for the nonprofit Earthworks. She points to New Mexico as a recent example. "New Mexico just passed methane rules that look really good on paper. But they have five employees—five—to go out and inspect and regulate the entire state's oil and gas industry, which is expansive."

More than anything, of course, Milloy wants to win his lifelong battle against air pollution regulations. One of his earliest jobs was running The Advancement of Sound Science Center (TASSC), which was created by Philip Morris and their PR firm APCO in the 1990s to deal with the mounting evidence that linked secondhand smoke and, more broadly, indoor air pollution, to cancer. The secondhand smoke issue brought the tobacco industry together with lots of other industries that were worried about air pollution regulation—automotive, manufacturing, and, of course, fossil fuels. Which is how Milloy, working for the tobacco industry, became one of the first leaders of the climate countermovement.

And fairly early on, Milloy connected the dots on air pollution and climate change, especially around the subject of particulate matter, microscopic particles in the atmosphere that are tiny enough to be inhaled. Particulate matter and greenhouse gas emissions are mostly generated by the same activity—the combustion of fossil fuels—which is why Milloy has said “PM2.5 is more important than CO2 on climate regulations.” His fear was that while climate policy had proven easy to beat back, industry was unlikely to be so lucky with air pollution; confusing people about atmospheric carbon is one thing, convincing them to embrace dirty air is something else altogether.

That sub-panel that Milloy "blew out" went ahead and published their work in the New England Journal of Medicine shortly after Trump left office. “We unequivocally and unanimously concluded that the current PM2.5 standards do not adequately protect public health," they wrote. Under Biden, the Clean Air Scientific Advisory Committee (CASAC) agreed, and the EPA is in the process of strengthening the standards. According to Milloy, who backed a suit against the EPA trying to force the EPA to reinstate Trump appointees to the CASAC, it's all predicated on fraudulent science. And if he were just one dude shouting on Twitter, it would be easy to dismiss,but this is a guy the Republican Party is likely to tap to restructure—or dismantle—the EPA if and when they regain power.

“What I think the right wing has done is try to saw the legs off the infrastructure that holds up environmental decision-making,” said Eric Schaeffer, a longtime EPA employee-turned-whistle blower and executive director of the nonprofit Environmental Integrity Project. “It’s hard to attack clean air and clean water, they don’t want to do that, so they suggest the science is flawed, make it about ‘secret science.’ It’s decades of that, and then you wind up in the middle of a pandemic and it’s like … we’re seeing right now the impacts of a decades-long campaign to undermine science.”

Although it was a front group for Philip Morris,TASSCalso included oil, chemical, and automotive companies, like Exxon, Dow, and GM, all working together to counteract efforts to regulate air pollution. In 1996, RJ Reynolds Tobacco Company was a funder of Milloy's website, JunkScience.com, which he still runs today. Memos outlining the creation of TASCC could pass as mission statements for Milloy's enterprise today, too. "It must be part of a larger mosaic that concentrates all of the EPA's enemies against it at one time."

TASCC operated under the principle that if an economic argument can't keep regulation at bay, your next best move is to undermine the science that regulation is based on. And almost as soon as he started working on air pollution, Milloy had new science to contend with: a 1993 epidemiological study that looked at 8,000 people across six American cities and found that exposure to fine particulate matter—PM2.5, or soot—was correlated to reduced life expectancy. Not what you want to hear when the companies you work for sell the products that produce PM2.5: cigarettes, cars, coal, and oil.

Milloy started by picking apart the methodology: the subject group was too small, researchers hadn't controlled for other factors, and epidemiology's reliance on observational data makes it suspect in general. He manufactured controversy around the researchers keeping their data private. And he targeted the scientists themselves, particularly lead researcher Steven Dockery and one of the statisticians involved, C. Arden Pope, calling them fraudsters.

But it's hard to discredit scientists who are, themselves, incredulous of their findings. “In all honesty, we were not even willing to lick the stamp on the manuscript [of the Harvard Six Cities study] because the result seemed so… It wasn't that it was absurd. It's just that it was a bit bigger than we expected, and we were a bit concerned about it,” Pope told me. That led the researchers to ask the American Cancer Society to re-run the analsysis with their own, independently collected cohort of subjects.They got similar results, and so did the Health Effects Institute, an organization half-funded by the EPA, and half-funded by the automotive industry. Milloy kept fighting it, but nothing worked. In 1997 the EPA passed its first regulation on particulate matter. It has tightened those regulations every eight years or so, right up until Scott Pruitt decided not to in 2018 (one of the Trump EPA moves that Milloy counts as a personal win).

Also during the 1990s, Milloy produced the paper that would become the basis for the "secret science" proposal at Trump's EPA. He was contracted by the Department of Energy to write it, but says when he submitted it to an EPA full of Clinton appointees, they wouldn't publish it, "because I said regulations were based on politics and not science. So, I decided to cut my contract and publish it on my own," he said. "It got picked up in the Wall Street Journal and that’s what sort of launched me into whatever I am today.”

25 years later, he "put it in the transition plan and talked with Pruitt about it,"Milloy said.

It wasn't new science or a new strategy that handed Milloy a win after 25 years. It wasn't new evidence that finally vindicated him, it was just…access. Being on the Trump EPA transition team enabled him to smuggle in all sorts of ideasfrom his pals, including James Enstrom, a tobacco-industry funded scientist who published one of the few studies contradicting the Six Cities data. While Milloy points to Enstrom’s study as proof that Pope et al are peddlers of “junk science,” Pope points to the 25 years worth of additional studies that have consistently replicated the Six Cities result, and says Enstrom "has a six year follow-up that he published in this sort of obscure journal a year or so ago. And he just barely doesn't get statistical significance. And so reports that [PM 2.5] has no effect.”

That obscure journal that put out Enstrom's paper is published by another friend of Milloy's, that toxicologist I mentioned before, Ed Calabrese, whose (mostly industry-funded) research focuses on the idea that a little bit of pollution and radiation are actually**good**for you. Calabrese's journal, Dose-Response, where he publishes his own research, published Enstrom's PM 2.5 study in 2017. When Trump EPA administrator Scott Pruitt announced in 2018 that the agency would not strengthen the regulations on particulate matter, he cited Enstrom's study as justification for the science on PM2.5 being "too uncertain" to act upon.

Almost as soon as the U.S. government began to mandate quarantine in response to the Covid-19 pandemic, Milloy took to Twitter to warnthat Covid lockdown would lead to climate lockdown,and to take aim at one of his favorite scientific targets: epidemiology.

Aside frompolitical ideology— Milloy says that while he started out apolitical he’s now a “full blown conservative, libertarian, free market guy,”—there’s also a PM 2.5 connection with Covid. Early in the pandemic, Harvard released a study correlating PM 2.5 exposure with increased risk of death from the virus.

Milloy's wins on PM2.5 under President Trump illustrate just how much of the U.S. regulatory apparatus the administration was able to dismantle in a short amount of time, but they're an indicator of something else too: a willingness to go further than conservatives ever have in the battle against environmental regulation, to actually go ahead and attack clean air and water. Why? In a word, climate.If the Supreme Court does, as many expect it to, eventually, overturn the precedent set by Massachusetts v EPA, which granted the EPA the right to regulate greenhouse gas emissions, one of the remaining ways for the EPA to get at CO2 is to regulate particulate matter. Both are emitted via the combustion of fossil fuels. Which is a big part of the reason Milloy, a longtime lobbyist for coal, has focused on blocking PM 2.5 regulations since 1990. As he put it to me recently: "PM2.5 is the most important backdoor science scheme for regulating fossil fuel emissions."

I don't recall seeing a lot of anti-renewables rhetoric from Milloy over the years, but since his arrival at E&E in 2016, it's become a mainstay of his public presence. Just this week, in fact, he described proposed onshore wind farms in the UK with a list of Kevon Martis's greatest hits, warning that it would "junk up beautiful countryside with ugly, expensive, climatically pointless and bird-killing wind turbines."

Another sign of what's next: Milloy, Droz, E&E Legal and the Competitive Enterprise Instiute have joined the fight against Environmental, Sustainability, and Governance (ESG) guidelines in the finance industry as well. Milloy says it's a "leftist scam."And E&E Legal, Droz, Heartland and CEI teamed up on a letter to the SECrecently, arguing that: "The Commission’s current proposal [to standardize climate disclosures in finance] is similar to much previous ESG activism in that it uses the language of business and financial management in order to suggest that it seeks practical, prosperity-enhancing goals, but is actually animated by environmental theory that is hostile to hydrocarbon energy and industrial development per se for moral and ideological reasons."

Groups like CEI, E&E Legal, Heartland Institute, and various others in the free-market, libertarian universe sprung into action against ESG in 2020 after mostly ignoring it for years. It was the SEC's move to standardize climate risk disclosure and ESG guidance, to make it auditable and enforceable, to, in effect, finally make ESG real that was the problem. Prior to the Commission's finding in 2020 that inconsistencies and fragmentation in climate-related disclosures had led to just the sort of confusion amongst investors that the SEC was created to address,ESG was just a handy greenwashing tool for polluting companies and industries. It rarely, if ever, caught the attention of these groups.

No surprise to see Milloy and E&E Legal hopping onboard now though: like all of their other efforts, the anti-ESG push has been led and largely funded by coal.Earlier this year, Documented publishedits investigationinto how state treasurers in coal states became the frontline warriors in this fight. Attorneys general in those states have gotten involved now, too.

There's a small group of lone wolf climate denier dudes whose work I follow because it's a pretty decent bellwether of where the climate countermovement is headed next. Milloy is one of them,and his talking points in recent years have cycled through the following themes: climate change is a hoax, Covid (and related mitigation measures) is a hoax, ESG and renewables are a scam, and Americans should be concerned about election integrity. By connecting all of these to conservative identity, operatives like Milloy, and the various groups they work with and for, have managed to breathe new life into ideas thought to be buried in the past, from the notion that CO2 is actually goodfor the planet to the idea that wind turbines are dangerous for birds to plain old garden variety climate denial.

===...

refto x

http://www.energyandpolicy.org/george-david-banks-trump-wind-power/

Droz received national attention in 2012 for his role in drafting a :{“National PR Campaign Proposal”:(style="box-sizing:border-box;border:0px;font-style:inherit;margin:0px;outline:0px;padding:0px;vertical-align:baseline"):}: to “… constructively influence state and national wind energy policies.” The “confidential” draft plan called for “joining forces” with a number of powerful special interest groups backed by the Koch brothers. It was soon followed by :{a February 2012 meeting:(style="box-sizing:border-box;border:0px;font-style:inherit;margin:0px;outline:0px;padding:0px;vertical-align:baseline"):}:between local wind power opponents, including Droz, and representatives of some of these same Koch-backed groups.

[img]

The Alliance for Wise Energy Decisions and Freedomworks used social media and false narratives to manufacture opposition to the wind Production Tax Credit.

Who paid George David Banks to work for the Alliance for Wise Energy Decisions?

What Banks does reveal on his LinkedIn profile is that at the same time he was working for AWED in 2012 and 2013, he was also the managing director of Battle Group, LLC, a:

“Strategic consultancy that works to bridge and integrate state and local advocacy efforts with free market lobbying campaigns at the national level, focusing on energy and environment issues.”

“So the short answer is that Dave was paid nothing for any efforts he contributed to promoting Science,” Droz said. (Banks often goes by his middle name, David or Dave)

However, asked if other “individual, organizations, or companies may have been paying Banks for his work on wind energy issues while he was a ‘volunteer’ for AWED,” Droz pleaded ignorance.

“I have no knowledge of any other groups that Dave was connected with during the period of time he volunteered for AWED,” said Droz.

Banks :{started the Battle Group:(style="box-sizing:border-box;border:0px;font-style:inherit;margin:0px;outline:0px;padding:0px;vertical-align:baseline"):}: and worked as :{AWED’s director of D.C. operations:(style="box-sizing:border-box;border:0px;font-style:inherit;margin:0px;outline:0px;padding:0px;vertical-align:baseline"):}: after a 2011-2012 stint on the staff of Republican Senator James Inhofe, where he :{sparked controversy:(style="box-sizing:border-box;border:0px;font-style:inherit;margin:0px;outline:0px;padding:0px;vertical-align:baseline"):}: with :{a leaked memo:(style="box-sizing:border-box;border:0px;font-style:inherit;margin:0px;outline:0px;padding:0px;vertical-align:baseline"):}: that used the words “our partners” to describe the oil industry.

“I was kind of on the circuit with some of these guys, but there’s obviously a limit of what you can do in the Senate,” he said, noting a desire to do media appearances and speeches. “I’d like to do more of that if possible.”

In 2009-2011, Banks had worked as a partner for Boyden Gray & Associates, where according to his :{LinkedIn profile:(style="box-sizing:border-box;border:0px;font-style:inherit;margin:0px;outline:0px;padding:0px;vertical-align:baseline"):}: he was a registered lobbyist for Constellation Energy, which :{merged with Exelon in 2012:(style="box-sizing:border-box;border:0px;font-style:inherit;margin:0px;outline:0px;padding:0px;vertical-align:baseline"):}:. While Banks was working with AWED in 2012, C. Boyden Gray was :{lobbying against the wind PTC:(style="box-sizing:border-box;border:0px;font-style:inherit;margin:0px;outline:0px;padding:0px;vertical-align:baseline"):}: for Exelon, which :{along with Gray:(style="box-sizing:border-box;border:0px;font-style:inherit;margin:0px;outline:0px;padding:0px;vertical-align:baseline"):}: publicly :{campaigned for the PTC’s immediate expiration:(style="box-sizing:border-box;border:0px;font-style:inherit;margin:0px;outline:0px;padding:0px;vertical-align:baseline"):}:. Gray also served at the time on :{the board of directors for Freedomworks:(style="box-sizing:border-box;border:0px;font-style:inherit;margin:0px;outline:0px;padding:0px;vertical-align:baseline"):}:, which partnered with Banks and AWED to manufacture public opposition to the wind PTC.

[img]

George David Banks tweeted links to Freedomworks’ attacks on the wind production tax credit.

Exelonalso for several years :{funded the Koch-backed American Energy Alliance’s:(style="box-sizing:border-box;border:0px;font-style:inherit;margin:0px;outline:0px;padding:0px;vertical-align:baseline"):}: attacks on the wind PTC. This group was another member of the “unusual coalition” that Banks and AWED :{campaigned alongside:(style="box-sizing:border-box;border:0px;font-style:inherit;margin:0px;outline:0px;padding:0px;vertical-align:baseline"):}: in 2012 and 2013.

Exelon did not respond to a request for comment on whether it made any payments to Banks or the Battle Group during the time period in question.

Droz’s 2012 proposal for a national PR campaign by local anti-wind activists had called for “joining forces” with a number of national Koch-backed groups. Sure enough, it was Christine Harbin of the Koch-backed Americans for Prosperity that organized :{a 2012 letter:(style="box-sizing:border-box;border:0px;font-style:inherit;margin:0px;outline:0px;padding:0px;vertical-align:baseline"):}: signed by a number of local anti-wind groups and national organizations backed by the Koch brothers, according to :{a document:(style="box-sizing:border-box;border:0px;font-style:inherit;margin:0px;outline:0px;padding:0px;vertical-align:baseline"):}: found on the website of one of the signers, Auglaize Neighbors United. Among the signers were AWED, Freedomworks, and the American Energy Alliance.

Asked about these relationships in 2017, Droz again feigned ignorance.

George David Banks faces questions about his past lobbying in 2017

What Banks’ anti-wind allies want from Trump

The American Energy Alliance, with which Banks worked closely during his time at AWED, backed Trump’s presidential campaign and has played an :{outsized role:(style="box-sizing:border-box;border:0px;font-style:inherit;margin:0px;outline:0px;padding:0px;vertical-align:baseline"):}: in defining the new Trump administration. The Institute for Energy Research, the American Energy Alliance’s research arm, continues to :{promote Droz’s anti-wind work:(style="box-sizing:border-box;border:0px;font-style:inherit;margin:0px;outline:0px;padding:0px;vertical-align:baseline"):}: on its blog, MasterResources.org

But Droz and AWED have found some success working with Republicans and Koch-backed groups at the state level since 2012. In 2017, Droz :{provided support:(style="box-sizing:border-box;border:0px;font-style:inherit;margin:0px;outline:0px;padding:0px;vertical-align:baseline"):}: to Republican state lawmakers in North Carolina who tried to halt an Amazon wind farm :{based on the pretense:(style="box-sizing:border-box;border:0px;font-style:inherit;margin:0px;outline:0px;padding:0px;vertical-align:baseline"):}: that it posed a risk to a Navy radar installation –:{ a claim the Navy denied:(style="box-sizing:border-box;border:0px;font-style:inherit;margin:0px;outline:0px;padding:0px;vertical-align:baseline"):}:. One of those same lawmakers, Senate Majority Leader Harry Brown, later :{tacked a moratorium on new wind farms:(style="box-sizing:border-box;border:0px;font-style:inherit;margin:0px;outline:0px;padding:0px;vertical-align:baseline"):}:onto a major solar bill that was signed into law – :{a move that pleased Droz:(style="box-sizing:border-box;border:0px;font-style:inherit;margin:0px;outline:0px;padding:0px;vertical-align:baseline"):}:. During a recent podcast interview with H. Sterling Burnett of the Heartland Institute, Droz said he also supported a successful effort by state lawmakers in Texas to pass legislation that makes new wind farms located near military bases ineligible for property tax exemptions.

fac so ss

no link

(ALEC), a controversial and powerful group that brings together state legislators and corporate representatives to promote conservative policies, has been pushing to repeal state renewable energy standards -- and now lawmakers affiliated with the group have filed legislation to do just that in North Carolina.

This week, the Affordable and Reliable Energy Act (H298) was introduced to repeal the state's renewable energy portfolio standard (REPS), which currently requires 3 percent of all electricity sold in the state to come from renewable sources, with that portion rising to 12.5 percent by 2025. North Carolina was the first state in the Southeast to adopt a REPS law, with the General Assembly passing it with broad bipartisan support in 2007.

The move to scrap the REPS comes despite research showing that the law has been responsible for significant job creation in North Carolina, which was recently found to be among the top states for clean-energy project announcements.

The North Carolina REPS repeal bill has four primary sponsors -- and three of the four have known affiliations with ALEC. The primary sponsors, all Republicans, are:

* State Rep. Mike Hager (R-Rutherford, Burke). First elected to the state House in 2010, Hager is an engineer who worked for 17 years for Duke Energy, which under H298 would be allowed to recoup from its customers the costs of contracts it has entered for renewable power. Though Hager says he is now retired from the utility, his economic disclosure form does not report any income from the utility giant. However, it does report that he received $1,000 from ALEC to attend a conference in 2011.

The head of the Public Utilities and Energy Committee, Hager has also been a key leader in the push to allow fracking for natural gas in North Carolina, even attempting to have a key vote taken on the matter when a Democrat momentarily left the floor during debate.

The top industry contributor to Hager's campaign is electric utilities, according to the National Institute on Money in State Politics' FollowTheMoney.org database. In the most recent election cycle, he received $8,000 from Duke Energy, $5,500 from the N.C. Association of Electric Cooperatives, $4,000 from Progress Energy, and $2,000 from Dominion.

* Rep. Marilyn Avila (R-Wake). A chemist who once worked for the North Carolina-based textile giant HanesBrands, Avila was elected to the General Assembly in 2006. Before that, she spent 15 years working as the administrative director and event coordinator with the John Locke Foundation (JLF), a Raleigh think tank that was founded and is funded primarily by leading conservative financier Art Pope, who is now the state budget director.

JLF has been a leading voice of climate science denial in North Carolina, and it has been working to repeal the REPS with representatives of ALEC and the American Tradition Institute, another climate science denial group with fossil-fuel industry connections. Avila is among the North Carolina lawmakers who attended ALEC's 2011 annual meeting.

In the most recent election cycle, energy interests were among her top 10 biggest donors, according to FollowTheMoney.org.

* Rep. George Cleveland (R-Onslow). A former Marine and assistant security officer for the State Department, Cleveland was elected to the state House in 2004. He filed legislation to repeal REPS during the last legislative session, but it didn't go anywhere.

Earlier this year, Cleveland sponsored a talk at the legislature by John Droz, a fellow with the American Tradition Institute, that attacked renewable energy and purported to show that global warming is a scientific hoax. In 2010, Cleveland was among the state lawmakers who signed an ALEC letter to U.S. Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid opposing plans to regulate greenhouse gases under the Clean Air Act.

Electric utilities were fourth among Cleveland's biggest industry contributors in the latest election cycle, according to FollowTheMoney.org.

* Rep. Jeff Collins (R-Nash, Franklin). A financial consultant and the founder of Rocky Mount Bible Church, Collins is the only one of the four primary sponsors of the REPS repeal bill who does not have documented ties to ALEC. He is a member of the Public Utilities and Energy Committee chaired by Hager.

Electric utilities were sixth among Collins' biggest industry contributors in the latest election cycle, according to FollowTheMoney.org.

Of the 21 co-sponsors of the bill, five also have known ties to ALEC: Reps. Hugh Blackwell (R-Burke), Rayne Brown (R-Davidson), Justin Burr (R-Stanly), Sarah Stevens (R-Surry), and Mike Stone (R-Lee). In addition, House Speaker Thom Tillis (R-Mecklenburg), who will play a key role in advancing the legislation, recentlyjoined ALEC's board of directors.

ALEC claims that renewable energy standards increase energy costs, but research has shown just the opposite: A recent study conducted by RTI International and La Capra Associates for the N.C. Sustainable Energy Association showed that the state's REPS law was not only a key driver of clean energy development and job creation but that the law will also lead to lower electricity rates over time by avoiding the construction of costly new fossil fuel and nuclear power plants. By 2026, the state's clean energy program will have resulted in a total of $173 million in cost savings for electricity customers, the study found.

ALEC's modus operandi has drawn widespread criticism, with the watchdog group Common Cause filing an IRS complaint last year accusing the group of violating its tax-exempt status by lobbying state lawmakers.

Almost 98 percent of ALEC's budget is raised from sources other than legislative dues, including corporations, trade associations, and corporate foundations, according to the Center for Media and Democracy's ALEC Exposed project. ALEC has also gotten significant funding from foundations controlled by the billionaire brothers behind the Koch Industries oil and chemical conglomerate, who have also been major funders of attacks on climate science and renewable energy.

Duke Energy is on the record as supporting North Carolina's REPS law, but at the same time it's a paying member of ALEC (despite calls to resign) and helped finance the group's conference held last spring in the company's hometown of Charlotte, N.C. That's where the Electricity Freedom Act -- ALEC's model bill to repeal REPS -- was drafted by the Heartland Institute, a prominent climate science denial group that's received significant funding from fossil fuel interests including the Kochs and Exxon Mobil, another major funder of climate disinformation.

While the language of the North Carolina bill differs from that in the model legislation, the measures would have the same effect of ending renewable energy purchase requirements for the state's investor-owned utilities.

It's uncertain how North Carolina Gov. Pat McCrory (R), a longtime Duke Energy employee who holds substantial investments in the company, would respond to the bill should it pass the legislature and end up on his desk. McCrory has been particularly supportive of offshore wind, embracing it as part of his all-of-the-above energy strategy.

The News & Observer of Raleigh, N.C. reports that McCrory is currently discussing the future of North Carolina's renewable energy program with his advisers and cabinet and said it was important to be clear with investors about the state's long-term plan.

6/14

Below, Washpost notes the creeping realization that, for life in low lying areas, the climate clock is ticking.

Backstory: media still unable to distinguish actual authorities from self-described “experts”.

Washington Post:

NAGS HEAD, N.C. — The dangers of climate change were revealed to Willo Kelly in a government conference room in the summer of 2011. By the end of the century, state officials said, the ocean would be 39 inches higher and her home on the Outer Banks would be swamped.

The state had detailed maps to illustrate this claim and was developing aWeb sitewhere people could check by street address to see if their property was doomed. There was no talk of salvation, no plan to hold back the tide. The 39-inch forecast was “a death sentence,” Kelly said, “for ever trying to sell your house.”

So Kelly, a lobbyist for Realtors and home builders on the Outer Banks, resolved to prove the forecast wrong. And thus began one of the nation’s most notorious battles over climate change.

Coastal residents joined forces with climate skeptics to attack the science of global warming and persuade North Carolina’s Republican-controlled legislature to deep-six the 39-inch projection, which had been advanced under the outgoing Democratic governor. Now, the state is working on a new forecast that will look only 30 years out and therefore show the seas rising by no more than eight inches.

Environmentalists are appalled, and North Carolina has been lampooned as a hotbed of greedy developers trying to “outlaw” the rising tide. Some climate-change experts are sympathetic, however, calling the rebellion an understandable reaction to sea-level forecasts that are rapidly becoming both widely available and alarmingly preciss.

The main problem they have is fear,” said Michael Orbach, a marine policy professor at Duke University who has met with coastal leaders. “They realize this is going to have a huge impact on the coastal economy and coastal development interests. And, at this point, we don’t actually know what we’re going to do about it.”

Cities such as Norfolk and Miami have embraced the data, identifying inundation zones as a first step toward planning — and seeking federal funds for — sea walls, floodgates and other forms of protection. On lonelier stretches of the U.S. shoreline, however, government aid seems less likely than interference and abandonment, and the forecasts are sparking deep anxiety about the future.

-

Even with an eight-inch forecast, 414 Dare County properties worth $70 million would be marked for inundation. If the state ever activates the Web site that lets potential investors search by address, Kelly said, “all of a sudden, those properties would be worthless.”

Nationwide, $700 billion of coastal property could be below mean sea level by the end of the century — and an additional $730 billion could be at risk at high tide — without new policies to forestall climate change, according to a new report by the Risky Business Project, a high-powered group of financial and political figures who are set to meet Wednesday with senior Obama administration officials.

The Post piece also contained this:

“They said there were numerous things the county had to start doing: Raise roads, elevate bridges, rezone land. Any property affected by 39 inches, they wanted to be rezoned as uninhabitable,” said John Droz, a local physicist who was quickly recruited by Carteret County officials to undertake an independent review of the 39-inch forecast.

Which prompted this from MediaMatters:

Journalists should not be duped into portraying anti-wind energy activist John Droz Jr. as simply a “physicist” and an expert on issues related to climate change. Droz has cast doubt on man-made climate change and undermined scientifically accurate sea-level rise predictions in North Carolina, despite admitting he has no expertise in either area.

Wash. Post: Droz Is A “Physicist” That Undertook An “Independent Review” Of Sea Level Rise. An article published on the front page of The Washington Post on June 25 described how, under political pressure, North Carolina’s state government ditched a report by a science panel stating that the state should plan on about 39 inches in sea level rise by 2100. The state has instead decided that forecasts should only go out 30 years for public infrastructure projects and zoning of land, during which the sea level is expected to rise eight inches. However, the Post inadequately described John Droz, who undertook an “independent review” of the sea level rise report, as a “local physicist”

Droz Is AnAdviser To Pro-Developer Group NC-20. The Institute for Southern Studies reported that Droz is an adviser to NC-20, a group formed by local development interests that fears “the financial impact of any limits on coastal development” if accurate sea level rise predictions are acted on:

A bill that would block North Carolina agencies from considering the latest science of sea level rise in making planning decisions has gotten a lot of attention nationally — from a Scientific American blog post that said the state was “making sea level rise illegal” to a segment on the satiric Colbert Report that accused the state of addressing the crisis predicted by climate models “by outlawing the climate models.”

[...]

The push for the legislation came from a group called NC-20, which is comprised of development interests in the state’s 20 coastal counties. The group’s chair is Tom G. “Tommy” Thompson, director of the Beaufort Economic Development Commission, and its president is Willo Kelly, a former lobbyist for the Outer Banks Home Builders Association. The board also includes a number of realtors and home builders, who worry about the financial impact of any limits on coastal development. (For more on NC-20, click here.)

The group’s scientific advisor is John Droz, a climate science contrarian and real estate investor who owns properties along the North Carolina coast. Droz, who has degrees in physics and mathematics, has never published a peer-reviewed article in a scientific journal and has given presentations against wind energy to state lawmakers and the public that were marred by errors of fact. He is a senior fellow at the American Tradition Institute, a conservative think tank with ties to fossil fuel interests that promotes skepticism about global warming and renewable energy and has targeted a leading climate scientist with a controversial lawsuit.

NC-20 argues that the cost of accepting the CRC’s estimates of sea level rise “would be incalculable.” The group claims that the projected 1 meter rise in sea level by 2100 is a “myth promoted by manmade global warming advocates” rather than a serious prediction based on science. Institute for Southern Studies, [7/11/12]

Droz’s “IndependentReview” Cites Unnamed Experts, Makes References To “Karma.”Droz’s “Commentary” on the state’s sea level rise report published at NC-20′s website, which The Washington Postportrayed as an “independent review,” quotes anonymous “experts” promoting cherry-picked data:

On the same day that the NC Coastal Resources Commission’s (CRC) Sea Level Rise (SLR) Report Addendum was received, “The Ideology of Catastrophe” appeared in the Wall Street Journal. Some might consider that Karma, but maybe it’s just the system working towards an inevitable equilibrium.

In that insightful WSJ article there are many memorable quotes, like: “My point is … to understand why apocalyptic fear has gripped so many of our leaders, scientists and intellectuals, who insist on reasoning and arguing as though they were following the scripts of mediocre Hollywood disaster movies.”

It’s not apparent that the author read the initial CRC “science panel” report, or it’s newly minted Addendum, but his observations are uncannily prescient.

–

Droz Was A Speaker At Heartland Institute Climate Denial Conference.Droz spoke against wind power at the 2012 “International Conference on Climate Change” by the Heartland Institute, which touts a description of itself as the “most prominent think tank promoting skepticism about man-made climate change.” Heartland Institute's YouTube Channel,[; Heartland, accessed 6/25/14]

Droz Has Not Published A Single Peer-Reviewed Paper In A Credible Journal.WRAL reported that Droz does not hold a Ph.D, and has not published a “single peer-reviewed paper in any credible journal”:

sourcewatch

John Droz Jr. is "a physicist who has also been an environmental activist for some 25 years." He runs a website called Wind Power Facts that argues "we do have serious energy (and environmental) problems, and we should insist on Sound Scientific Solutions for such matters." The website does not mention that he is also a fellow of the American Tradition Institute.

Droz is a longtime opponent of wind farms, arguing that the technology has not yet been scientifically proven and that wind technology should not be on the public grid until it has. He claims 10,000 subscribers to his pro-science email newsletter.^[1]

Facing South notes that Droz "spent most of his career in real estate as an investor and a broker, according to his resume. He owns two properties in coastal Carteret County, N.C. together valued at over $900,000, according to county tax records." He serves as a member of the board of directors and a scientific advisor to NC-20, a 501(c)(4) nonprofit that brings together twenty NC coastal county governments, as well as businesses and individuals to represent the interests of coastal North Carolina citizens.^[2]

[hide]

Subverting wind power memo

On May 8, 2012, the Guardian posted a confidential memo edited (but not written) by senior fellow John Droz of the American Tradition Institute (ATI) that suggests how to build a national movement of wind development protesters. Among its main recommendations, the proposal calls for a national PR campaign aimed at causing "subversion in message of [wind] industry so that it effectively becomes so bad that no one wants to admit in public they are for it." It suggests setting up "dummy billboard businesses", and creating a "counter-intelligence branch" to track the wind energy industry. It also calls for spending $750,000 to create an organisation with paid staff and tax-exempt status dedicated to building public opposition to state and federal government policies encouraging the wind energy industry.

Although originally planned, the proposal was not discussed at a meeting of self-styled 'wind warriors' from across the country in Washington DC in February 2012. Participants included members of conservative groups such as Committee for a Constructive Tomorrow and Tea Party Patriots, as well as the Sierra Club and Audubon.

The proposal was reviewed by Droz for discussion at the Washington meeting, which he also organized. ATI's executive director, Tom Tanton, told the Guardian that Droz had acted alone on the memo, although he remains a fellow at ATI. Droz said the Washington strategy session was his own initiative, and that neither he nor any of the participants had been paid for attending the session.^[3]

In a phone interview with The Guardian, Droz confirmed that he occasionally enlisted support for his pro-science effort from a variety of organizations like FreedomWorks, Americans for Prosperity (AFP), Sierra Club, etc.^[2]

Wind power presentations

In December 2011, Facing South reported that representatives of the American Tradition Institute and the John Locke Foundation were holding forums in the North Carolina coastal communities of Wilmington and Morehead City titled,"The Truth About Wind Power on the Coasts of North Carolina". One of the presenters was John Droz. N. C. Senate Bill 3, a law that passed in 2007, made the state the first in the Southeast to adopt a minimum requirement for the use of renewable energy sources by investor-owned electric utilities: 12.5 percent by 2025. The groups dismissed the law as an energy tax on the poor. The John Locke Foundation is calling for repealing it entirely.^[4]

Articles and resources

References

:{Jump up:(style="top:-99999px;clip:rect(1px 1px 1px 1px);overflow:hidden;position:absolute !important;padding:0px !important;border:0px !important;height:1px !important;width:1px !important"):}:↑ Suzanne Goldberg, "Conservative thinktanks step up attacks against Obama's clean energy strategy: Confidential memo seen by Guardian calls for climate change sceptics to turn American public against solar and wind power," The Guardian, May 8, 2012.
↑ ^Jump ^up ^to:2.0 ^2.1 Sue Sturgis, "NC anti-wind power crusader behind plot to subvert renewable energy industry" Facing South, May 11, 2012.
:{Jump up:(style="top:-99999px;clip:rect(1px 1px 1px 1px);overflow:hidden;position:absolute !important;padding:0px !important;border:0px !important;height:1px !important;width:1px !important"):}:↑ Suzanne Goldberg, "Conservative thinktanks step up attacks against Obama's clean energy strategy: Confidential memo seen by Guardian calls for climate change sceptics to turn American public against solar and wind power," The Guardian, May 8, 2012.
:{Jump up:(style="top:-99999px;clip:rect(1px 1px 1px 1px);overflow:hidden;position:absolute !important;padding:0px !important;border:0px !important;height:1px !important;width:1px !important"):}:↑ Sue Sturgis, "Climate-science deniers join forces against NC renewable-energy program" Facing South, December 9, 2011.

External resources

American Tradition Institute website (http://www.atinstitute.org/ - not to be confused with the American Tradition Partnership website at http://www.americantradition.org/ )

External articles

Sue Sturgis, "SPECIAL INVESTIGATION: Who's behind the 'information attacks' on climate scientists?" Facing South, Oct. 31, 2011

Categories:

desmog: John Droz

John Droz Jr.

Credentials

John received undergraduate degrees in Physics and Mathematics from Boston College, and a graduate degree in Physics from Syracuse University.[1]

Background

John Droz, Jr. is aSenior Fellow [1] at American Tradition Institute [2] and is an anti-wind-power activist.

He retired at age 34 after a successful career in real estate investing, but has also worked for GE: Aerospace Electronics (Utica, NY), Mohawk Data Sciences (Herkimer, NY), and Monolithic Memories (Cupertino, CA).

In 2011 he became a member of the Board of Directors and scientific advisor [3] to NC-20 [4], an advocacy group that has been outspoken against restrictions on coastal development.

Droz also runs the website “Wind Power Facts [5]” which asserts that mainstream information about wind power is distributed primarily by industry lobbyists while the “real science” indicates that we should abandon wind power as a source of energy.

Stance on Climate Change

“Is Global Warming a scientifically resolved matter? No. There is some very convincing evidence (and scientists) that indicate that there is such a thing as Global Warming. But

there are some very qualified scientists (with good evidence) that suggest just the opposite.

More importantly, statements often appearing in the media like 'the majority of scientists' believe in Global Warming, are meaningless. First of all, no legitimate survey has ever been

done, and secondly, science is not about the number of people who advocate a position.” [2]

Key Quotes

“When I first heard about wind energy I was a supporter. Quite frankly, I never linked the looks of turbines but felt that we would have to live with the unsightliness as a trade-off for the good I initially assumed they were doing. Then I did some research and Critical Thinking. My conclusion now (as a scientist, economist, and environmentalist) is that industrial Wind Energy is not based on sound science.” [3]

“A critical fact to understand is that just because a power source is an alternative, or a renewable, does NOT automatically mean that it is better than any conventional or fossil fuel source!” [4]

“90% of my time is spent on science. My focus is to try to educate citizens. Citizens could care less whether I have a peer-reviewed article.”[11]

Key Deeds

February 3, 2013

John Droz delivered a presentation titled “Science Under Assault” [6] which suggests that modern climate science is being threatened by environmentalists, educators and the media. He highlights articles that claim environmentalism is a “new religion” with a primary goal to “undermine the authority of science,” and that mainstream climate science is based on “fiction.”

*Facing South* notes [7] that Droz cites a number of less-than-credible sources:

“sources like WorldNetDaily [8], a website that promotes conspiracy theories about topics such as President Obama's citizenship; Quadrant, a conservative Australian magazine that was involved in a scandal over publishing fraudulent science; and the Institute for Creation Research, a Texas outfit that rejects evolution and promotes Biblical creationism and the notion that “All things in the universe were created and made by God in the six literal days of the Creation Week.” [10]

Sam Pearsall, a UNC environment and ecology professor and retired program manager for the Environmental Defense Fund described the presentation as “the most remarkable example of propaganda delivered as anti-propaganda” he had ever witnessed.

June, 2012

NC-20 brought forward a bill that would restrict how state agencies and planners predict sea-level change. An early version [9] set out to ban the state from using current data models to predict sea-level change caused by climate change. A later version [9] bans predictions of sea level rise “unless such rates are from statistically significant, peer-reviewed data and are consistent with historic trends.”

According to WRAL [10], that would essentially ban projections based on cliamate change as these results would be inconsistent with historic trends. The following is an excerpt from the NC-20 memo that was obtained byWRAL.com (emphasis added): [11]

“Bottom Line: we got everything we asked for. I'll send the technical details later, but we got a commitment tototally abandon any reference to accelerated SLR. Instead, the State will use historic, linear sea level measurements to create future projections (about 8 inches by 2100 instead of the 56 inches once being considered) and the provision of standard deviations which are basically fluctuations around the average projection at any given year. This is a huge win for NC 20 counties which always seem to lose in regulatory negotiations. It proves once again that unity is the key to advancing the cause of equity for NC 20 in matters such as regulation and economic development.”

John Droz demanded a retraction by WRAL, claiming that NC-20 had not been involved in the regulation despite the above memo.

May 21 - 23, 2012

John Droz was a speaker [11] at the Heartland Institute's Seventh International Conference on Climate Change (ICCC7).

DeSmogBlogresearched the co-sponsors behind Heartland's ICCC7 [12] and found that they had collectively received over $67 million from ExxonMobil, the Koch Brothers[13]and the conservative Scaife family foundations [14].

February, 2012

Droz was a member of a group who critiqued [15] the 2010 “NC Sea-Level Rise Assessment Report” by the Coastal Resource Commission's Science Panel that had stated sea levels in Carolina would rise one meter by 2100.[5]

January, 2012

Contributed apresentation [16] opposing a proposed wind project in Beaufort County (NC). [6]

An article in the local paper, Beaufort County Now, reported that “Self-proclaimed physicist, economist and environmentalist John Droz. Jr. witnessed to the Beaufort County Commissioners that not only should the the Pantego Wind Farm project not be constructed, but no wind turbine generating power should be erected anywhere.”

Droz summarized his belief that “Wind energy is not a technically sound solution to provide us power, or to meaningfully reduce global warming,” “wind energy is not an economically viable source of power on its own,” and “wind energy is not environmentally responsible.” [3]

Droz is involved in setting up an activist network opposed to wind power [17] and has developed a strategy to combat wind industry advocates by “communicate[ing] the Science message in the proper way to the public.”

His objectives include to “come up with an effective National PR Plan.”

Droz's list of “Our Typical Opponents” includes the wind industry, utilities supporting wind power, labour unions, most environmental organizations, pro-wind media, and many academic institutions. [7]

December 5, 2011

Was a presenter at a John Locke Foundation workshop titled “The Truth About Wind Power on the Coasts of North Carolina [18].” [8]

According to the event description, “This workshop will present an alternative view of wind power and what it would mean to North Carolina’s coastal communities. Participants will learn about wind power in general, including its intermittency problems, high costs, limited value and its environmental and economic impact. Myths will be countered, including why wind power would not play any meaningful role in energy security.”

The other presenters included David W. Schnare [19] and Daren Bakst.

Affiliations

**American Tradition Institute**[2]—Fellow [1] and Director of the Environmental Law Center. [1]
**NC-20** [4] — “Science Advisor” and Member,Board of Directors [3]. [9]
**Wind Power Facts** [5] [4]

Publications

According to a search of Google Scholar, John Droz does not appear to have published any articles in peer-reviewed journals on the subject of climate or any other topic.

Resources

“Fellows & Advisors [1],” American Tradition Institute. Accessed May 4, 2012.
John Droz. “The Power of Energy [20],” October 2, 2008. Available at SSRN.
“Does the Pantego Wind Project Make Sense? [16]”, Power Point Presentation by John Droz, Jr., January 2012.
“Wind Power Facts [5]” homepage. Accessed March 4, 2012.
“ATI Fellow, John Droz, Convinces State to Rethink Climate-Related Policy [15],” American Tradition Institute, March 1, 2012.
“Beaufort County Commissioners hear from citizens on separate issues [21],” Beaufort County Now, January 10, 2012.
“Why I Think Science is Our Best Strategy [17],” Power point presentation by John Droz, Jr. February, 2012.
“Workshop - “The Truth About Wind Power on the Coasts of North Carolina [18],”Crystal Coast Tea Party, November 17, 2011.
“Board of Directors [3],” NC-20. Accessed May 4, 2012.
Sue Sturgis. “Climate conspiracy theorist returns to NC legislature, warns of threat from science 'elite' [7],” Facing South, February 7, 2013.
Laura Leslie. “Sea-level bill: Who is John Droz? [10]”, WRAL.com, June 6, 2012.

Tags:

global warming [22]

climate change [23]

desmogblog [24]

global warming blog [25]

denial industry [26]

climate change denier [27]

global warming research [28]

climate misinformation [29]

smogger [30]

climate change skeptic [31]

climate denialism [32]

denial database [33]

ICCC7 [34]

Heartland Institute Seventh International Conference on Climate Change [35]

John Droz [36]

The Guardian Exposes Fossil Funded Groups Coordinating Renewable Energy Attacks

Ever wonder why a blooming green energy industry has faced such harsh opposition? Now, as the old adage goes, "the cat's out of the bag."

The Guardian today revealed the network of fossil-funded groups coordinating the ongoing onslaught of attacks on renewable energy, particularly wind power. A memorandum passed to The Guardian from the Checks and Balances Project details the organizations and personnel acting as ringleaders to build an astroturf echo chamber of clean energy critics.

Guardian reporter Suzanne Goldenberg writes in "Conservative thinktanks step up attacks against Obama's clean energy strategy,"

"A number of rightwing organisations, including Americans for Prosperity, which is funded by the billionaire Koch brothers, are attacking Obama for his support for solar and wind power. The American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC), which also has financial links to the Kochs, has drafted bills to overturn state laws promoting wind energy."

A confidential memo seen by The Guardian and obtained by DeSmogBlog "advises using 'subversion' to build a national movement of wind farm protesters," explained Goldenberg.

That memo was crafted by John Droz, a Senior Fellow at the American Tradition Institute (ATI).*(see update below)* ATI was the right-wing think-tank behind the lawsuit to obtain University of Virginia climatologist Michael Mann's "ClimateGate" emails.

Conservative America's fight against the advancement of a new energy economy continues to evolve. The latest development is a concerted campaign to discredit the wind industry and shift public opinion against the technology.

A confidential memo published by The Guardian highlights a proposal crafted by John Droz, a fellow at the right-wing think tank the American Tradition Institute, which calls for the creation of a national organization and focused public relations campaign to use "subversion" to build a nation-wide anti-wind movement.

The nine-page memo was presented to a room full of self-titled "wind warriors" in Washington, DC in February. One of the chief goals of the national PR campaign is to "cause subversion in message of industry so that it effectively becomes so bad no one wants to admit in public they are for it."

In order to make this happen, the proposal calls for joining forces with established organizations that have "substantial commonality and commitment [to the cause]." Unsurprisingly, the authors call for partnerships with some of the most well-funded and notorious challengers of climate science and clean energy. These groups include the Heartland Institute, Cato Institute, Manhattan Institute, Americans for Prosperity, FreedomWorks, American Legislative Exchange Council, and the American Tradition Institute.

Each of these organizations has received significant funding from major fossil fuel companies such as ExxonMobil and Koch Industries. Americans for Prosperity, FreedomWorks, and the Cato Institute have all been established by Charles and David Koch, the owners of Koch Industries, America's largest privately-held oil company.

This close-knit group of organizations has continuously used subversive tactics to discredit the evidence around climate change, influence public opinion, and inhibit government action to shift toward a low carbon economy. ....

http://www.masterresource.org/about/#droz

Droz, J

John Droz

Lisa Linowes

Kevon Martis

Tom Stacy

Tom Tanton

Who paid George David Banks to work for the Alliance for Wise Energy Decisions?

George David Banks faces questions about his past lobbying in 2017

What Banks’ anti-wind allies want from Trump

Who paid George David Banks to work for the Alliance for Wise Energy Decisions?

George David Banks faces questions about his past lobbying in 2017

What Banks’ anti-wind allies want from Trump

Contents

Subverting wind power memo

Wind power presentations

Articles and resources

References

Related SourceWatch articles

External resources

External articles

desmog: John Droz

John Droz Jr.

Credentials

Background

Stance on Climate Change

Key Quotes

Key Deeds

Affiliations

Publications

Resources

The Guardian Exposes Fossil Funded Groups Coordinating Renewable Energy Attacks

Attachments