If you have "no place to go," come here!

Congrats to "Rent-seeking"!

okanogen's picture

Go little meme! Go!

You know a meme has achieved success when its targets adopt it:

Critics of tax credits for wind energy projects are intensifying their push to kill the incentive with a study that calls it “rent seeking” by an established industry that doesn’t need the subsidy.

The conservative American Energy Alliance (AEA) unveiled the study Thursday as wind power companies — joined by allies including President Obama — are pushing Congress to renew credits that are scheduled to lapse at year’s end.

AEA, which receives some of its funding from fossil fuel companies, is circulating the study on Capitol Hill ahead of a lame-duck battle over the fate of the multibillion-dollar incentive.

When Romney went down, the main obstacle to passage of the production tax credit for wind energy was removed. Although there is a lot of bipartisan support (which is actually growing), the Koch conglomerate primarily has put a lot of money into fighting it and the vocal minority (mainly teabag) have ramped up their vocals.

This really is one of those "call your congressman" moments. Right now, during the lame duck. It is one of the thousands of things that we need to do to address climate change.

No votes yet


okanogen's picture
Submitted by okanogen on

I'm involved in the wind industry. So what? We also work on pipelines for pipeline safety, and the Keystone XL pipeline would be a potential massive project for us, but I would never advocate or work on it. Our competitors make very good money in the tar sands business, I'm not advocating that either. I'm agains the sulfide mining that is proposed near the boundary waters, though we would potentially work on that. Being a geologist, I could have been involved in oil or mineral exploration, instead I pointedly went into environmental work.

So organic farmers can't discuss organic farming? I don't see anybody finding some "vested interest" in the many political and academic people here pushing their views or interests or campaigns.

Do you have a problem with one of the few existing solutions to global climate change? Or do you have some other ax to grind?

Blizzard's picture
Submitted by Blizzard on

Ok, you got me, I do have kind of an ax to grind against wind energy (and am well aware that I am likely at odds with most of the readers/commenters here ...)

But as for my comment, I was mostly just curious where you're coming from, since I've been reading your stuff -- and thanks for the response. For the record, I most certainly do not think that having a business interest in something makes a person's arguments on the subject less valid. Those arguments should stand on their own regardless.

Submitted by lambert on

Sometimes tough to balance (see under legacy parties, official Washington) but if the demand is for pure ideals, na ga happen and I am not sure it should. I know the difference between advertising and editorial, which is where vested interests show up....

okanogen's picture
Submitted by okanogen on

All would have been forgiven if I just had voted for Stein. Damn. Didn't I understand it was in my vested interest here at Corrente to do that? Or at least say I did? Or be silent and assumed I did?

FWIW, I would applaud having organic farmers posting here about the value of GMO labelling and their information on the industry. They know it better than we do. I would applaud local foodies discussing their local foods. Same issue. This place used to have a lot more DIY, and I never would have had an issue with them discussing things they make. I think we know the difference between that and hawking shit.

In this case, the only problem I could see with someone having an issue with someone who is partly involved in the wind industry, discussing those issues, is when there is another problem and it is a personal credibility attack.

Submitted by lambert on

... but if people put their voting decisions out there, they're going to be expected to defend them, no matter what they are. Corrente is not a conflict free zone, in case you haven't noticed. Echo chambers are bad...

Submitted by hipparchia on

voting decisions? what's that got to do with okanogen's post?

okanogen works in the wind power industry [and has said so, many times] and in this particular post is urging us to call our congresscritters in support of keeping the tax credits for wind energy.

blizzard appears to be slyly hinting that okanogen has written this post to benefit okanogen's own pecuniary interests, rather than environmental concerns.

looks to me like blizzard is being a troll here.

okanogen's picture
Submitted by okanogen on

I appreciate the rare support. Very brave of you and I appreciate it.

Maybe we are keeping our heads while all around us are losing theirs?

Like most people, I don't like having my integrity questioned, especially via dogwhistles, but fuck it. I think I have proven over the years I'm not delicate. I also have nothing to defend integrity-wise. Fuck anybody who even obliquely suggests I do.

But isn't it surprising/interesting that not a single comment on the actual topic?

Or not?

Submitted by hipparchia on

four generations of my family have been have been involved in the petro-fuel industry in one way or another, including me. several of us are also confirmed treehuggers and fans of alternative energy and die-hard believers that we all need to just plain consume less energy, no matter what the source. quite the headbreaker, huh? ;)

there are some sociological and environmental problems with wind power, but this is true for solar, hydro, tidal, nuclear, biofuel, geothermal [have i missed any?] power too, but we clearly need to do something besides just continuing to burn fossil fuels. i applaud anybody who believes in this strongly enough that they choose to make one or more of these alternatives their career.

meanwhile, thank you for alerting me to this particular opportunity to harass my congresscritters and possibly even help save the environment at the same time.

okanogen's picture
Submitted by okanogen on


I mean, that was comedy, right?

What about this post put my "vote decision" "out there" as something I needed to "defend" in this context? Is advocating proven alternative energy solutions against global climate change now a position that must be "defended"?

Submitted by lambert on

When you write:

All would have been forgiven[1] if I just had voted for Stein[2]. Damn. Didn't I understand it was in my vested interest[3] here at Corrente to do that? Or at least say I did?[4] Or be silent and assumed I did?

[1] By whom?

[2] Which presumably you did for a reason (Iran) and not randomly?

[3] Everybody was vested interests. Single payer is certainly in my interest, even if it is the right policy.

[4] Who's saying you should? Not the moderation ruiles and not me.

[5] Dittoes.

okanogen's picture
Submitted by okanogen on

I for one am really ready to move on, but for completeness:

[1] By the tribe that is seemingly working to find every stick to beat this dog. Somehow I have been transformed into a vested interest Obot operator, which would be news to Mrs. Okanogen and all my friends and family who have listened to me hate on him from 2007.

[2] Yes, reluctantly, Iran.

[3] Agreed, couldn't say it better.

[4] If I was pursuing my vested interest of being part of the pure anti-Obama tribe, I should. Obviously that is fairly clear in the sarcasm.

[5] Huh? Referring to being silent about my vote? Probably that would be the more politic choice. Yes. I'm no longer interested in that anymore really, it's for suckers as they say and we should really move on to productive action rather than rehashing electoral politics that give outcomes pretty much out of our control and against the interests of the 99% regardless of choice.

okanogen's picture
Submitted by okanogen on

To get back to the original topic, I think this is the first time we have seen a Koch family operative have the cognitive dissonance to decry "rent-seeking".