June 11, 2025 • 55 mins
Climate policy in the U.S. has taken a wild ride in recent years. In this episode of How to Protect the Ocean, I speak with Chris Moyer, founder of Echo Communication Advisors, about the turbulent shifts in federal policy—especially during the Trump and Biden administrations, and how these shifts have disrupted progress in renewable energy. We examine the implications of these changes for energy development, environmental protection, and the impact of public messaging on political will to act.
Renewable energy isn’t just a technological challenge—it’s also a communication challenge. Chris breaks down how effective storytelling and smart policy design can turn the tide, even in politically divided landscapes. We also look at what the future might hold for climate action in the U.S. and what it all means for protecting the ocean and accelerating a transition away from fossil fuels.
Chris Moyer Website: https://echocomms.com/
Join the Undertow: https://www.speakupforblue.com/jointheundertow
Connect with Speak Up For Blue
Website: https://bit.ly/3fOF3Wf
Instagram: https://bit.ly/3rIaJSG
TikTok: https://www.tiktok.com/@speakupforblue
Twitter: https://bit.ly/3rHZxpc
YouTube: www.speakupforblue.com/youtube
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
(01:00:00):
One of the things
that's hard to
put out is the
entrepreneurial
spirit.
The
entrepreneurial
spirit of people
who are getting
into the
renewable
energy sector,
the industry, who
are trying to
push forward
renewable energy
so we can
depend less on
fossil fuels and
more on
protecting the
environment and
still getting our
energy needs.
And that's what I
was hoping to
hear and I did
(01:00:21):
hear in this
interview with
Chris Boyer
today.
We're talking
about climate
policy in the US,
how it's changed
over even the
last few
months compared
to what it was
over the last
four years and
the ups and downs
of climate
policy in the US
in general and
how that could
affect and slow
down
renewable energy
development
in the US.
We're going to
talk about that
on today's
(01:00:41):
episode of the
How to Protect
the Ocean
podcast.
Let's
start the show.
Hey everybody,
welcome back to
another exciting
episode of the
How to Protect
the Ocean
podcast.
I'm your host,
Andrew Lewin, and
this is the
podcast where you
find out what's
happening
with the ocean,
how you can speak
up for the ocean
and what you can
do to live for
a better ocean by
(01:01:01):
taking action.
And when we talk
about ocean
conservation, we
talk about
climate change
and we talk about
climate policy
and
climate action.
And to get
action, you need
to put forward
good policy and
you need to
communicate that
to a lot of
people to ensure
that that policy
gets in place.
And today's
guest, Chris
Moyer, who is the
founder and CEO
of Echo
Communication
(01:01:22):
Advisors
is on the podcast
today because he
wants to talk to
me about US
climate policy,
which is kind of
a weird thing to
talk about
these days.
But I thought it
was important for
you to listen to
what's happened
over the last
five months in
terms of climate
policy
under the Trump
administration
and how that's
changed since the
Biden
administration
and of course,
(01:01:42):
the first Trump
administration
and how that up
and down is
affecting the way
policies
developed at a
federal level and
how energy
projects are
being put on hold
or just being
canceled
altogether and
how that could
affect climate
policy and just
the push for a
renewable energy
increase over the
next 10 years,
over the next 20
years and just
(01:02:02):
into the future.
So we talk a lot
about what's
happened
recently.
We talk a lot
about the
communications
around that and
how to get people
motivated to talk
to their local
governmental
officials and
say, hey, you
know what?
I like these
projects.
I think this will
be good
for my area.
I want to talk
about it because
that's the one
thing he
highlights is not
a lot of people
come out yet.
The fossil fuel
industry is out
(01:02:23):
there all the
time talking
against these
projects and it
actually works.
So we're going to
talk all about
that on today's
episode.
Just before we do
that, if you want
to take action
for the ocean, if
you want to take
action for
climate, you can
do so by joining
the undertow.
This is a new
project that I've
been working on.
We're building an
online community
of wave makers
(01:02:43):
and people and
connectors who
want to
take action.
We're looking for
10 million
connections would
take $5 million
in action over
the next
five years.
It's an ambitious
goal, but we
can't do it
without you.
Join the undertow
by going to speak
up for blue.com
forward slash
join the undertow
that speak up for
blue.com forward
slash join the
(01:03:04):
undertow.
We are going to
put the links in
the show notes
and in the
description.
If you're
watching this on
YouTube, I want
you to not only
join, but listen
to this interview
to get motivated
to say, hey, you
know what?
I want to help
the ocean. I want
to help
climate change.
Here's Chris
Moyer talking
about US ocean
policy or US
climate policy.
Of course, that's
ocean
policy as well.
Enjoy the
interview and
we'll talk
to you after.
(01:03:24):
Hey, Chris,
welcome to the
how to protect
the ocean
podcast.
Are you ready to
talk about
climate policy?
Yes, I am. Great
to be
here, Andrew.
Wonderful. I'm
excited
about this.
I'm excited in a
way because I
want to know
information about
what's happening
in the US in
terms of
climate policy.
I'm not excited
in the way I may
not like the
answers to some
(01:03:44):
of these
questions or some
of the questions
that I ask, but
I'm so happy to
have you on here.
You have your own
business. We're
going to talk a
little bit
about that.
We're going to
talk about the
work that you do
and where climate
policy is at this
point in time.
Where has
it come?
Where it came
from, you know,
going out the ups
and downs of
really any
country that we
see, but
especially in the
(01:04:05):
US and especially
these days with
the second Trump
administration
coming in,
causing a lot of
chaos with the global climate policy.
With
environmental
policy,
especially
climate change.
So we're going to
talk a lot
about that.
But before we do,
Chris, why don't
you just let the
audience know who
you are and
what you do?
Sir, and I have
to say, be
careful what you
ask for.
You may not like
(01:04:26):
the answers that
unfortunately
that's that's
probably where
it's going
to be today.
But but
yeah, I am.
I am about five
years ago.
I founded Echo
Communications
Advisors and we
are a policy
first strategic
communications
firm.
We work
exclusively with
clean energy
companies with
climate tech
startups that are
doing really cool
things to address
climate change in
(01:04:46):
all various ways.
And we also work
with advocacy
organizations
that are seeking
to shape and make
better climate
policy in the
United States.
Love that. I have
a lot of
questions
about that.
But before I want
to kind of go a
little bit
further back, how
did you get into
communications
and climate?
Where did that
come from?
(01:05:06):
So the first
thing ever did in
politics and
getting into
policy was a
communications
internship with
former Senator
Ted Kennedy back
coming up on 20
years now.
And that really I
was living in
Boston, going to
school there.
And that really
turned me on to
the idea of going
to Washington,
D.C. and trying
to get a job in
(01:05:27):
the Senate.
So I moved down
to D.C. about 15
years or so ago
and ended up
getting a job
with the United
States senator,
who was then the
majority leader
of the United
States Senate guy
named Harry Reid.
The only catch
was the job was
in Las Vegas and
not in
Washington, D.C.
Because the
Senate, the
senator was
running for
reelection.
(01:05:47):
So I was 22. I
flew to Las Vegas
to move there my
first time ever.
And I just
remember getting
that rental car,
leaving the
airport and
driving up the
strip with the
flashing lights.
And I was
thinking, what
did I get
myself into?
And but really,
it was an
education and
climate and clean
energy was a big
part of it.
I remember going
(01:06:08):
to solar arrays
all around the
Las Vegas Valley,
going to
geothermal
companies in
northern Nevada
and just really
getting
understanding of
energy policy and
climate and the
efforts being
done at the
federal level.
This was during
the first Obama
administration.
And from there, I
came back to D.C.
after that
election and
(01:06:28):
worked for the
senator in the
U.S. Capitol and
just really saw
further how
policy can make a
difference to
advance these
industries, these
nascent
industries, these
newer
technologies that
just need a
little bit of
federal
government
support.
Yeah. And then
they kind of take
off and that's
happened
throughout
history with
(01:06:48):
government
support and helps
them become
mature industries
that are now
mainstays of our
economy.
You know, this is
it's really
interesting stuff
because at that
time when you
were talking with
all these
different
companies, these
startups, a lot
of these
startups, the
technology was
new as well.
Right. We were a
lot of it was
testing out.
Hence why there
(01:07:09):
was some
government
government funds
being put in to
test to make sure
that this could
actually work.
It could be
scalable
and so forth.
That is is an
exciting time.
What were your
thoughts?
Like, I guess
maybe what
captured you the
most in terms of
like what
surprised
you the most?
Like, oh, I
didn't know we
could do this.
I didn't even
like think
about this.
Like, what was
the most
interesting tech
(01:07:29):
that you saw at
that time?
Well, I didn't
see too many back
15 years ago.
I didn't see too
many different
technologies per
se, but I think,
you know, someone
who grew up in
the Northeast, I
knew nothing
about geothermal.
Right.
Because we just
really don't
don't have it in
a in a
serious way.
Yeah.
Traditional geothermal is
limited to the
(01:07:51):
Western United
States and, you
know, Iceland and
other parts of
the world, but
not certainly
where I grew up.
And so learning
about that
technology,
frankly, was eye opening.
And now there's
all sorts of
advanced
geothermal
technology and
really cool stuff
where you're not
limited.
It can, you know,
it's on the path
to being able to
you can have
geothermal
anywhere because
if you go deep
(01:08:12):
enough, you will
get heat.
It's just it's
just it can be
really expensive
to to go the
deeper you go.
And so bring down
the cost curve to
make geothermal a
part of the clean
energy transition
and the energy
mix that powers
all the energy
needs
that we have.
So so that was
interesting
to me.
I also think, you
know, 15 years
ago, Tesla was a
(01:08:33):
struggling
company.
Yeah.
And they they got
funding
from the U.S.
government, from
the
Department of Energy.
And that was a
really critical
source of help
for that company
to that.
Who knows where
they'd be if it
wasn't for that
support.
So, you know,
that's relevant
to some of the
discussions we'll
get into in a
moment about
federal policy
and the role of
(01:08:54):
federal
government in
supporting
different sectors
of the energy
industry.
Yeah, absolutely.
So what, like,
you know, during
this time when
you're with the
senator and you
probably moved
into different
positions within
within politics.
But then, you
know, obviously,
communication is
a big part of
your role within
that that time.
At what point did
you say, OK,
(01:09:14):
like, did you get
the idea, you
know, having a
consulting firm
or a
communications
firm where you,
you know,
partnered with
these companies
or work for these
companies as well
as advocacy
groups to
say, hey,
I want to push
this, you know,
they need a
little bit
more help.
They need to. Was
it because they
needed more help?
Was it they
needed to clarify
their message?
(01:09:34):
What pushed you
towards starting
this company a
few years ago?
Yeah, so
you're right.
Like I did other
campaigns.
I worked on
presidential
campaigns and
Senate and
gubernatorial.
And I also have
done some work
with state
attorneys
general, which
they're the top
law enforcement
officer in
each state.
And they play,
(01:09:56):
you know,
especially during
the first Trump
administration.
This is what I
was working with
this group that
was coordinating
a lot of the
efforts that was
really they were
filing lawsuits
left and right.
Not because
they're
frivolous, but
there was so much
to go after from
the federal
government.
So they were
they're trying to
stop rollbacks of
really important
regulations and
policies on the
environment, on
energy, on
climate.
(01:10:18):
And so that was a
great insight
into kind of the,
you know, they
were the last
line of defense
at that point.
And so, you know,
when I started my
firm, I, you
know,
communications
and messaging can
really make the
difference
between
successful policy
or successful
grants funding
from the
government or
another entity.
(01:10:38):
How you frame and
talk about things
can really make
or break success
that you have as
a business.
And, you know, we
need these
businesses to be
successful for
the clean energy
transition.
So the
communications
piece is really
important.
You know, when
people think
about
lobbying as well.
It's not just
like the old
fashioned shoe
leather lobbying
that you go meet
with the senator
and then they're
(01:10:58):
going to
hopefully do what
you want
them to do.
Communications
has become a
greater part of
that overall
strategy.
You have to be
attuned to what
are the outlets,
the news outlets
they're consuming
back in the home
state or their
home district.
How do you find
the right
messengers and
get them to give,
you know, share
the right message
at the right time
so they can have
(01:11:18):
the maximum
influence.
And that takes a
lot of strategy
and
thoughtfulness.
And so that's how
we work with a
lot of our
clients to help
them, you know,
get better policy
so that they can
grow and be
successful and
contribute to the
energy
transition.
For from a policy
perspective and
clean energy.
(01:11:39):
What are the
biggest
challenges over
the last like 10
years for that
for clean energy
to move forward
to scale up in
the face of
policy like what
like was there a
particular policy
that really
allowed them to
happen or was a
particular policy
that has really
challenged them.
Let's say before
this
administration
that came in.
Well, it's it's
(01:11:59):
pretty clear in
2022 the most
significant law
ever passed in
the United States
on climate and
clean energy was
called the
inflation
reduction act.
And that is
really that was
really a law that
set industrial
policy for the
United States in
a way that it
never had before.
And it provided a
number of tax
credits.
It provided
something called
(01:12:20):
transferability
that helps with
smaller companies
that are growing
and bigger.
You know, it's a
great,
helpful system.
It's it brought
manufacturing
back to the
United States.
It's it provided
more secure
supply chains
back in the
United States,
not being reliant
on on other
countries,
especially, you
know, are more
(01:12:41):
adversarial
countries.
And I don't
include Canada in
that, to
be clear.
Thank you.
But this was this
was the policy
set forth back
in, you know, it
was passed in
August of 2022.
So we're coming
up on
three years.
And, you know,
you speak to the
challenge, making
that resonate
(01:13:02):
with voters
across the
country before a
lot of the
benefits
became clear.
You know, there
are jobs that are
being created
right now.
There are
factories
being built.
There are there's
tax revenue being
generated in
rural parts of
this country that
haven't had major
industry in
decades.
And, you know,
because of the
way the election
went in in
(01:13:23):
November, all of
that is at risk
right now.
Which is
interesting
because I think,
you know, the
inflation act
brought in all of
that and allowed
for these supply
chains to come to
the US allowed
for manufacturing
to come
to the US.
Yet this
administration is
talking about how
tariffs are going
to bring all of
that as a scare
tactic to
everybody to
(01:13:44):
doing that, which
is kind of funny
because that all
went on.
That messaging
didn't get out.
I wish I wish
more more
organizations and
political
parties.
Contact you guys
to kind of
highlight that
because, you
know, it feels as
though we would
have been in a
different
position because
obviously
messaging and
communications,
as you know, is
very important.
(01:14:05):
And, you know,
there's a big
difference in the
messaging, you
know, for this
this last
election, which
won't get into
too much because
I don't want to.
I want to focus
on
climate policy.
But, you know,
from your
perspective as as
as a
communications
person,
especially when
it comes to clean
energy,
especially when
it comes to
making sure that
the right policy
get in place and
and working
towards those
policies, it
(01:14:25):
becomes a really
it must become a
real source spot
for you to see
the wrong
information get
out and people
believing it and
not picking it up
when it's right
right there in
front of them.
Like what
what is that?
Like,
where did that?
How come that
always
gets buried?
Climate and
clean energy.
(01:14:46):
Yeah.
Yeah.
Well, it's just
it's very hard to
to break through,
especially in a
campaign against
Donald Trump,
who, you know,
love him or hate
him. He knows how
to get attention.
Yeah.
And attention is
current currency
in this day and
age or such a
fragmented media
environment and
(01:15:06):
other
distractions that
are, you know,
everywhere
for people.
And so, you know,
talking about
jobs that are
coming and a
clean energy
economy that is
happening, but
still coming is
it's harder to
break through and get
attention on that.
And and so, you
know, driving
home the real
(01:15:26):
tangible benefits
of of that
legislation that
I was mentioning,
you know, perhaps
could have been
done a
little bit better.
And, you know,
making sure it
resonates with
people in a way
that they
care about.
And, you know,
too often, I
think bigger
picture here, you
know, climate
change doesn't
feel real.
(01:15:47):
Right.
People, it feels
like it's often
to the even
though there's
still people who
can't get
insurance anymore
because there's
too much risk or
their premiums
are so high.
And we know about
the storms being
more intense and
more frequent.
But, you know,
that that still
doesn't move the
needle in terms
of public opinion
to the extent
that we
need it to.
And so if you're
(01:16:07):
talking about the
treacherous
consequences of
half degree
increase in
global
temperature, that
really doesn't
resonate.
It feels so
esoteric
to people.
And so trying to
put it in terms
of this is not
really
climate change.
This is
economics.
It's an industry
that, you know,
it's a good job.
Doesn't matter
(01:16:28):
what party you
belong to or your
political
beliefs.
And so, you know,
unfortunately, if
we had a few more
years for these
things to mature
and blossom from
the legislation
from the law I
was mentioning,
then it would be
harder to
get rid of it.
But we're at a
point where it's
still not quite
at that moment or
(01:16:49):
instilled enough
in these
communities yet.
It's really
interesting you
bring that up
too, because, you
know, as you were
mentioning, just
the messaging
around the
benefits from the
Affordable Care
Act or the the
the Inflation
Reduction Act.
We had the same
thing in Canada,
you know, as you
probably heard
the carbon tax,
you know, as soon
as you put in the
word tax, nobody
(01:17:10):
likes it. It
sucks. Nobody
wants to pay. We
had a
consumer tax.
So everybody who,
you know, paid
for gas or
whatever that
might be, that
another carbon
tax went on top
of that.
And that was like
the federal
policy wasn't
necessarily
provincial
policy.
The province
didn't have a
carbon tax or a
plan for that.
The federal plan
would kick in the
messaging around.
(01:17:30):
There was a lot
of there were a
lot of benefits
to the
carbon tax for us.
You know, a lot
of people went
over to heat
pumps and a lot
of people moved
over to an
environment like
EVs and so forth.
But it wasn't it
wasn't
communicated
properly by the
federal
government and
they could have
done a
better job.
And maybe they're
waiting for the
provinces to do
it because it's
technically a
problem, a
provincial plan.
But regardless of
what happened, it
got it got
out of hand.
(01:17:51):
And of course,
the opposition is
just like
ax the tax.
The tax is
causing
inflation.
The tax is
causing all your
problems.
You can't afford
groceries because
of the carbon.
The messaging and
negative just
kind of like what
Trump had done in
the US with
climate change
and so forth.
They're getting
more attention.
The negativity is
bringing more
attention.
And the and the
(01:18:12):
policy is not
being
communicated
properly.
And the benefits
of those policies
are not getting
communicated
properly, which
is frustrating
for me because I
was kept telling
my mobile
represented.
I'm like, you
guys got to talk
about the
benefits.
Like,
where is it?
Like, it's so
complicated.
Like, why can't
you talk
about it?
But then on the
other hand, like
it when the when
(01:18:32):
it ended, like we
were in it
for a good.
Almost
nine years.
And there were a
lot of benefits
that still have
come out from it.
But when you when
you mentioned the
word tax or
climate change or
carbon tax,
people are just
like it's
divided, you
know, you either
love it or you
hate it.
It's black
and white.
And that's it.
(01:18:52):
There's no
gray area.
There's no
meeting in
the middle.
I've talked to
politicians
before, local
politicians, and
they say when
they engage with
their, you know,
communities, they
don't necessarily
use the word
climate change.
They'll use the
words like
flooding or fires
that affect your
homes and things
like that.
Is the messaging
changing from
(01:19:13):
getting away from
those politically
triggered words
to more of less
you as you
mentioned, bring
it more local,
bring it more
personal and how
it affects you no
insurance, that
kind of stuff.
It absolutely has
changed in the
last several
months here since
the Trump Trump
Trump second term
started.
The main phrase
(01:19:33):
we're hearing a
lot of from
climate focused
entities is
energy dominance.
And that's that's
a phrase that the
president has
used a lot.
And a lot of
people try to
play into that.
I think things
that you don't
hear anymore are
climate change,
emissions
reduction,
climate justice,
(01:19:55):
you know, things
that were very
much talked about
in the previous
administration.
But those are
great way to get
your project or
your idea, your
bill just
shelved.
And so I think,
you know, it's a
balancing act.
It is wise to
adapt your
messaging, even
if the work
you're actually
doing isn't
changing, because
at the end of the
(01:20:16):
day, what do we
care about?
Do we care about
feeling feeling
good about what
we're doing and
saying what we
want to say?
Or do we want to
get do we want to
get the results
that we're trying
to achieve?
And do we have to
maybe change the
path to
get there?
We're not
compromising our
values or what
we're working on,
but it's just,
okay, how do we
be a little more
strategic and
trying to reach
that same outcome
(01:20:37):
that we're always
been aiming for?
Yeah, I love
that. I think
that's I think
that is a path
forward because
it takes away
from any kind of
like, like I
said, triggering
words or any kind
of strife with
with the audience
and trying to
unite people just
be like, look,
we're all going
through these
problems.
Let's try and
let's try and
figure out a way
around it.
(01:20:57):
And hopefully
that will that
will help in that
kind of way.
We're in the
second term of
Donald Trump as
president.
I know it's hard
thing to say,
hard thing to
hear, but this is
the second one.
What was the
difference? You
worked in the
first one in a
variety of
different
capacities.
But, you know,
(01:21:17):
you've you've
been following
climate for a
long time and
climate policy
for a long time.
What's the
difference
between the first
term and the
second term,
given that there
were four years
in between?
And I'm sure you
didn't mean to
imply this, but
just to be
absolutely clear,
did not work in
the first Trump
administration.
Oh, yes. No, my
apologies.
You worked in the
(01:21:38):
climate industry
like that.
While he was
president. My
apologies.
Was in the
whirlwind. No, I
just I knew
that's not what
you meant, but
I'm sure your
listeners can
discern that that
was not the case.
But I just
appreciate that
crystal crystal
clear some
agree agree.
You know, I think
the first time
felt like nobody
knew what they
were doing in the
Trump
administration.
They had all
these things they
(01:21:58):
were trying to
do, but they were
very
sloppy about it.
They tried to
they didn't
follow the proper
steps to repeal
regulations, for
example.
And they lost a
lot of lawsuits
and couldn't get
what they wanted
because of that
procedural
concern this
time around.
You know, from
day one, they've
been on
top of it.
They learned from
(01:22:18):
some of their
mistakes from the
first time.
And, you know, we
experienced just
a period of it
felt I don't know
how long it was.
I try to not
think too much of
that period, but
it was
just chaos.
They were
throwing
everything
against the wall
and they they
were they're
urging course to
tell them to tell
(01:22:39):
them no.
They were laying
off people. They
were repealing as
much as
they could.
They were doing
as much as they
could with
executive order,
not worrying
about any other
branch of
government.
They they they
had an agenda and
a plan coming in
and they wasted
no time to try to
execute it.
And in some ways,
it's actually
admirable as a as
a use of power
(01:23:00):
and trying to
achieve what you
want to achieve.
But obviously the
substance of all
these things was
very concerning.
Yeah.
And still is
there's been, you
know, it slowed
down a little bit
because the
courts have put
on some
guardrails up.
Not not entirely,
but some.
And and now, as
the focus has
really shifted
from what the
(01:23:21):
president can do
on his own to
what he needs
Congress, even
though his party
controls
Congress, there's
still different
ideas on
what to do.
And so that
process is less clean.
And so that takes
a little bit of
time. And we've
gotten to the
point in the
first term here,
sorry, the first
year of the
second term where
(01:23:41):
they have to hash
out some of these
different ideas
and the details.
You know, the
devil is always
in the details
and they're at
that point.
They're at that
point in
negotiations.
And I don't I
couldn't tell you
that Trump
actually knows
any of the
details.
But he but he
just won. He just wants a bill.
And and so the
you know, his
colleagues, the
(01:24:02):
Republican
leaders in the in
Congress are
working through
that at
the moment.
So it's been
about five months
now, almost five
months. And
there's been a
lot that's been
done. There's
been a lot that's
been reported on.
But it's it has
been a whirlwind,
but it does feel
like it's slowed
down a little
bit. But it was a
(01:24:22):
torrent start.
Right. And during
that time, you
know, I know he
he he pulled the
U.S. out of the
Paris Accord, the
climate
change accord.
What else was
done in terms of
climate change
that had a pretty
significant
effect on other
acts that came
through the
inflation
(01:24:42):
reduction act and
so forth?
Well, the first
one that comes to
mind is he
declared an
energy emergency,
right? Even
though it's not sure what that's based on.
But that gives
him the ability
to do certain
things to prop up
fossil fuels. And
it's it doesn't
really square
(01:25:03):
that he's on the
one hand saying
it's it's an
energy emergency.
And we need all
energy sources or
we know as much
energy as
possible because
it's emergency.
But then then
he's killing
offshore wind and
projects,
including one
that was fully
permitted and
they were they
were they were
building already
or they just
(01:25:23):
started that
that's since been
reversed.
But, you know,
he's saying he's
pretty much
mandating for
coal plants to
stay open, even
if they're not
financially
sustainable.
So it's unclear
how exactly that will work.
You know, there's
there's programs
that were part of
the inflation
reduction act,
the bill that I
(01:25:44):
mentioned from
2022 contracts
that have been
signed with, you
know, there's
this Green Bank
program that a
lot of other
countries have
done
successfully.
It's a way of
lending to allow
some of these
really important
projects to go
forward. And the
last
administration
had put a
significant
amount of federal
dollars to this.
And these
grantees had
(01:26:04):
signed contracts.
But the Trump
administration
came in and said,
actually, we're
going to we're
canceling that.
And so they're
they're in the
midst of
litigation. And
it's really
slowed down some
of these projects
that had been
announced already
all across the
country.
And, you know, we
don't have time
to go through
every executive
order related to
climate and
energy in this
conversation.
But there's a
(01:26:26):
long list and
they're they're
not missing any
opportunity to go
after something
that someone in
the
community values.
It's really odd.
I mean, it's it's
it's odd from a
common sense
point of view
when you look at
it from the
outside, if
you're declaring
an emergency, an
energy emergency,
that you're going
to kill off one
form of energy
(01:26:47):
and prop up
another.
So it's you know,
it's very
hypocritical to
say we're going
to prop up the
fossil fuel side,
but we're going
to kill the green
side, you know,
the renewable
energy side, even
though that was
well on its way.
And maybe some of
those projects
had already
started. Maybe
some of them
haven't. But
that's a very
frustrating fact
(01:27:07):
of not growing
energy together
and balancing the
two. And at some
point, I mean,
the hope is for the world.
And I know in
Canada, the hope
is to, you know,
right now, you
know, green
energy may be a
little lower than
fossil fuels. But
as that grows, a
fossil fuel will
go down maybe to
like 20 to 30
percent of
total energy.
(01:27:28):
And I feel like
that's what the
world is trying
to go towards
when we keep
hitting these
balances,
depending on
who's who's in
charge. But it's
really weird when
you know, like
you said, you
declared an
emergent, an emergent, an energy emergency.
And then all of a
sudden, you're
like, well, I'm
going to kill off
one this these
projects that
will help our
energy. And I'm
going to prop up
the other one. It
just goes like it
for to me, it
just looks like,
(01:27:48):
okay, somebody's
in your back,
like you're in
somebody's
back pocket.
And it's the
fossil fuel
industry. And
they just want
the domination of
of energy, right?
That's right. And
they I mean,
let's look at
EVs, for example,
that was another
thing where
they're there.
They halted the
rollout of the EV
charging stations
all across the
country.
(01:28:08):
There is there is
money set aside
for that. That's
really critical
for the adoption
of EVs. They're
trying to kill
the $7500 tax
credit for EVs
that, again,
makes some of
these cars more
affordable as we
get, you know,
from a less
mature market
into a more
mature
market for EVs.
Meanwhile, China
is is dominating
that industry
(01:28:28):
right now with
BYD and and so
there's just a
lot of things
that don't
comport. Let me
give you another
example.
Energy demand is
growing for the
first time in
decades and it's
it's largely due
to
electrification,
including a
vehicle's but
also AI and data
(01:28:49):
centers. You hear
about that a lot.
Yeah, and Bitcoin
crypto mining.
And and so
there's a ton of
energy demands
that can't it
won't be met.
It's not keeping
up at this point.
And so that's why
you need all the
energy sources.
And so, you know,
the president has
made clear he
(01:29:10):
wants to win the
AI race, but
you're
undermining that
goal when you're
cutting off.
You're not, you
know, they used
to say all of the
above. Now
they're saying
fossil fuel only
and maybe
nuclear.
Yeah, yeah, yeah,
exactly. And and
I mean, it's
always I mean,
nuclear is always
controversial for
(01:29:31):
the for the, you
know, a lot of
people. I know
why, you know, we
have nuclear
energy here and
it's
controversial
here. It provides
a lot of energy,
but it's also if
something goes
wrong, we're all
screwed, like for
a long, like
Chernobyl screwed
and and that's a
that's a
big deal.
There's a lot
like even in
(01:29:51):
these what five
months that the
Trump
administration
has been in power
pretty much carte
blanche of being
able to what
being able to do
what we do. And
as you mentioned,
it's just really
difficult to go
through every
single executive
order that
undermines
anything around
around
climate action.
In the next three
and a half years,
at least, I
guess, what's the
(01:30:13):
plan? Like, what
are all of like,
you know, clients
and and that you
have and the
industry, the
clean energy
industry. How are
they going to
react to this?
And how are they
going to push
forward to do the
work that they
want to do
without the help
of the federal government? Can they? And what's the plan?
I think there's
(01:30:34):
you have to look
for what we
advise with our
clients is you
have to find the
small slivers of
opportunity. You
know, there's
just kind of a
reality shock to
the system when
you realize that it's such a change from where we were with the last administration. And so you just have to adjust kind of what the reality and to the new reality. And there are some opportunities. I was talking to a couple of people who are in the
industry. And so, is there a way to make some progress with advanced geothermal make that bigger slice of the energy supply? You know,
you also look to
the states you
want to find
places where you
can make progress
with the new
(01:30:56):
reality. And so,
you know, I think
that's a really good thing.
(01:31:22):
But the one
bigger thing that
I would say is
that even with
the success to to
a large extent
with the
legislation from a few years ago, the thing that still held up further deployment of cleanenergy was permitting challenges. It takes way too long to make progress with the state.
And you have
local
communities, city
(01:31:43):
councils, town,
you know, county
commissions
voting to kill
these projects
because they have
3 people show up
with oil and gas
talking points about why solar array is bad.
And so there
needs to be more
engagement at a
local level from
from people who
just regular
people in these
communities who
(01:32:03):
support these
projects because
they understand
the benefits and
not just falling
prey to the
talking points from the oil and gas industry.
But there's an
effort in the federal
government to do
some sort of
permitting reform
that can make
things a little
bit more
efficient. It's
not, you know, it
still protects
the environment
but understands
(01:32:24):
that there's, you
know, who's going
to invest in a
project that
takes 17 years to actually get it from start to finish.
It's just no one
can see no one
can think that's
a good idea. And
so that's the
last it's kind of
like the last
mile challenge
once you have we
did have good.
It's still in
place. So I won't
say it's gone
yet, but we have
good
(01:32:44):
policy in place.
And the last step
there is to
actually get it
deployed and up and running and we need that we need it to be in service.
Let me ask you
this because you
we talk a lot
about times
regulation gets
in the way and
and you know
fossil fuel
industries will
talk about
regulation
getting in the
way and then
clean energy as
you mentioned
gets in the way
for it seems for
(01:33:04):
different
reasons.
So can you
clarify this for
me? So in Canada
anyway, and
probably us, you
know, when fossil
fuels complain
about policy
getting in the
way. It's usually
environmental
policy, right?
It's usually have
to do with drilling in the ocean.
And the
regulations
around that, you
know, drilling on
land and the
regulations
around that coal
(01:33:25):
burning and so
forth. And the
regulations on
that is the green
energy industry
finding that the
regulations are
the environmental
regulations are also slowing those down.
Well, I think I
think the thing
that slows it
down is if you
have to do four
different
environmental
reviews, it's
like, why can't
these different
layers of
(01:33:45):
government just
get on the same
page? Maybe you
do maybe do one
environmental
review. I don't
know, make that
thorough.
Right, right.
You know, you
don't want to
disrupt sensitive
habitats. You
don't want it.
You know, you
need to be
mindful of these
things. But
again, doing it in a in a common sense way.
And, you know, it
(01:34:07):
just has to be
more efficient.
That's frankly,
yeah, comes down
comes down to you
don't need three
agencies doing
their own study.
And that's an
interesting thing
to guys it is it
three agencies of
the same level of
government or is
it three agencies
of different
levels of
government?
Because I assume
if it's different
levels of
government, maybe
those were put
into place
because like one
level was a
(01:34:27):
different party
and then another
level was a different party and they were worried that
they were going to contradict
each other or
that it was
better to
contradict each
other because one
had more power of
a certain area.
You know how they
play those types
of games? Yeah,
well, sometimes
it's multiple at
the federal level
and sometimes
it's it's it's
multiple the
federal level and
at the state or
yeah, probably
(01:34:47):
the state level
but so it can be
all of those or
any of those.
Yeah, yeah, it's
funny too because
like one example
from Canada that
comes to mind
there was in the
Georgia Strait
there was
supposed to be a
marine protected area that was supposedto be a marine protected area.
And so it was supposedto be
designated but it
got held up for
years because two
departments of
the federal
government could
not agree on who
owns the rights
(01:35:08):
to the the the
sediment of at
the bottom of the
ocean and the
water column. So
they didn't agree
on it and but
they were the
same, you know,
government was
the same party
just two
different
departments
couldn't agree on
the same thing
putting in a
marine protected
area because one
owned that one
was responsible
for the sediment
in the bottom and
the other one was
responsible for
(01:35:28):
the the.
The water column
and I'm sure one
was like, oh, no,
we want to drill
is natural
resource Canada
and it's it. So
this happens a
lot, you know, I
think it's and
you're right. I
think it from a
common sense
point of view
should just be
one environmental
impact
assessment,
whatever they
want to call it,
make it super
thorough, cover
all basis and
that's what it
should be and
never be able to
(01:35:48):
take it out. You
know what I mean?
I never be able
to remove
it, right?
One of the
important things
and the
discussions there
was almost a deal
on permitting
reform at the end
of the last
Congress. So back
in December and
they couldn't
quite get the
final language
right in time.
But one of the
important things
to include that
include in
permitting reform
is transmission.
And, you know, we
(01:36:08):
could have all
these projects
built even I
should say the
last I said the
last mile was
getting the bill
last miles
actually getting
them hooked up to
the grid. Right?
You can't. Okay.
If you're stuck
in the in the
queue for years.
And it's
something like
90% of projects
stuck in the
queue or clean
energy projects.
If you can't do
that, then
they're just
sitting there and
(01:36:29):
they're not
they're not
putting electrons
on the grid and
we need all those
electrons on the
grid and
especially the
clean ones.
Yeah. So if there
is a way to get a
bipartisan
permitting reform
bill that has the
transmission
piece and I think
there could be a
lot of support
for that in
Congress and that
the president
would probably
sign something
with that nature.
(01:36:50):
Yeah. Now, you
know, we talked a
lot about and
we're focusing a
lot about federal
policy right now,
but some of the
some of the
strategies now is
a lot of
environmental and
advocacy
organizations are
looking at state
level, especially
states who are
looking to
improve their environment, who are looking to improve their environment.
Who are looking
to shore up their
protections and
regulations on
environment. Now,
one example that
I've heard that
was recently that
(01:37:10):
was really
interesting is
the green energy
industry is
booming in a
Republican
dominated Texas
and they a lot of
them had moved
from California
because of
regulations into
Texas because
there were less
that regulations
to the chagrin of
some Republicans
apparently
because they're
like, wait, hold
on a second.
The green energy
(01:37:31):
is coming in. We
got to put in
more regulations,
but they kind of
did it to
themselves
because they
wanted energy,
less energy
regulations. And
now there's a
booming industry
in clean energy.
Are there ways
that the clean
energy industry
is looking at
these types of
states that have
less policy to
implement green
energy at the state level?
Well, when you
(01:37:52):
look at, you
know, it's funny
you mentioned
Texas. They were
they were
debating,
considering some
really bad
legislation that
would have I
think one of them
would have
required that I
think it was 50
percent of new
generation had to
be dispatchable.
So basically had
to be natural gas
or they forced
renewable energy
projects to pay
fees to the gas
(01:38:12):
company. So
thankfully that
didn't go
through. But, you
know, Texas kind
of does its own
thing and every
sense of every
sense and
certainly their
other own
grid or right.
And and but wind
is thriving their
solar. It's like
a lot of deals
with landowners
that benefit from
(01:38:32):
from those
projects and they
have some of the
largest some of
the most supply
of energy of
clean energy in
the country.
And so they're
not a surprise
given the
political makeup,
but but yeah,
they're they're
they're
Republican.
There's a lot of
Republican states
(01:38:53):
that actually do
enjoy wind energy
and it's a
critical part of
their their
energy sources.
Energy makeup
like looking at a
state like Iowa,
very Republican
state, North
Dakota, both
Dakotas.
There's some sort
of chasm between
onshore and
offshore wind,
but it's like I
(01:39:19):
lost my train of
thought here. No
worries. No
worries.
Well, it's
interesting,
though, you
mentioned
because, you
know, even within
like ocean and
land when like
like I can drive
along the states
and I've driven
in many of the
states and I see
like on like
onshore wind.
I see on land
that you see the
big windmills. We
see it here in in
(01:39:39):
Ontario because
we have like a
big wind area,
you know,
migratory birds
and so forth.
But offshore wind
seems to get a
lot of flak.
Like, you know,
from some some
environmental
concerns in terms
of of seabirds
and what the what
the environmental
ramifications are
going to be of
(01:39:59):
having an actual
like physical
body in there in
on the seabed.
But not as much,
you know, as as
like oil and gas
and so forth
because of spills
and and and the
damage. But the
Republicans
lately have been
been like, yeah,
offshore wind is
no good.
Like, even before
Trump got in, a
lot of the
Republicans were
like, no, we need
(01:40:19):
to get this.
Like, we're
concerned about
the whales all of
a sudden. They're
concerned about
the whales and so forth.
Yet they're, you
know, obviously
the hypocrisy is
crazy, but
they're they're
obviously
concerned about
the whales all of
a sudden. And
that is crazy to
me to have like
that dichotomy
between land and
and offshore.
Where is that
coming from? Why
(01:40:40):
is it so
worrisome to have
offshore wind for
a lot of people?
You know, I I
hate to simplify
it this much, but
I think it
unfortunately
comes down to the
fact that the
president just
does not like
wind. And I think
the source of
that might have
something to do
with, you know, a
project in and
might even off
(01:41:00):
the coast of
Scotland that he
was building.
Oh, right. And
there is some
controversy
around maybe some
some wind. One of
his golf courses.
Yeah. Yeah. Yeah.
One of his
resource he was
he was building
or I'm not up to
date on all the
details, but
that's been cited
as maybe the
origin of his his
(01:41:20):
hatred for wind.
And then he goes
on to say things
like it causes
cancer and all
these
absurd claims.
So, you know,
there are some
Republicans in
the, you know, in
Congress that are
supportive of
wind, but it's a
challenging. I
mean, the
toughest place to
be right now is
in the offshore
wind industry in
the
United States.
It's just very
(01:41:41):
difficult to see
a path forward in
the next few
years. So I feel
for folks dealing
with that
challenge at this
point, because
it's not even
based on logic or
sound policy
considerations.
It's just based
on the
president's
personal dislike
for for
(01:42:03):
windbills.
So it's it's it's
I'm not sure how
you can move him
from that
position. Right.
All these things
are happening.
You know, the the
changing of the
guard, so to
speak, in terms
of Republican and
Democrat
presidential
races. And now
that we have a
Republican
dominated house,
you know, and,
(01:42:23):
you know, from
2016 to 2020 as
Republicans and
Democrats, then
the Republicans
again, it slows
down the movement
of clean energy
development.
What are the
consequences of
that for the
future? You know,
like we're
looking at
another four
years of slowing
down, even
halting projects.
Like how how
(01:42:43):
worrisome is
this? Like how
worry should be
like should the
American citizens
be about, you
know, this
slowdown? Like I
feel it's there's
always going to
be a push and
green energy is
going in
renewable energy
is going to build
no matter what.
This is just
going to slow it
down a little
bit. But what are
the consequences
and what should
should Americans
be
concerned about?
(01:43:04):
Well, businesses
and project
funders think not
in terms of a
four year
political cycle,
but in a much
longer business
cycle. And
they're going to
build where they
can have
favorable policy
and more
certainty.
And the swinging
back and forth is
politically is
(01:43:25):
very challenging
to count on
anything. And,
you know, I agree
with you. The
development with
clean energy is
going to
continue. Maybe
not as quickly as
we would like it
to because of
some of the
political
setbacks.
But if it's not
the United
States, they're
going to go to
these these folks
are smart and
they're capable
and they don't
want to sit back.
There's a real
(01:43:45):
urgency with with
them. And so
they're going to
go to other
countries.
They're going to
go to
maybe Canada.
They're going to
go to places in
Europe. They're
going to go to
places in Asia,
other places
around the world.
They're going to
let them build
and give them
give them the
room to grow.
And it would be
really
unfortunate that
innovation that
historically has
(01:44:05):
happened to the
United States,
you know, left
left our shores
and went
elsewhere because
it will put the
United States at
a disadvantage.
Again, it doesn't
it doesn't fit
with what the
president says is
his goal is to be
winning all these.
I mentioned the
AI race, but it's
to be winning all
in all these
(01:44:25):
industries. You
don't want to
seed ground to
China, to other
countries. You
want to be
building that
industry here.
And so it's hard
to square those
those two things.
Yeah, it's
definitely
interesting.
You mentioned
earlier about,
you know,
(01:44:46):
informing and
getting more
people locally to
speak up for
renewable energy
in their areas,
whether that's at
the state level,
whether that's at
the county level
or even at the local level.
From you, like,
you know, a comms
guy, you know,
having a comms
firm is the
messaging now
targeted at the
general public in
(01:45:07):
specific areas
where there's
opportunities to
shift the mindset
of the of local
government or
county
governments or
state governments
to say, hey,
look, you know,
people actually want this.
And so it's more
of renewable
energy literacy,
as we would do in
ocean literacy is
like build up
that ocean
literacy so
people understand
(01:45:27):
what's possible
and how their
communities can
be helped.
I think that's
right, Andrew. I
think there's
there's some
great people out
there doing work
that's very
focused on this
very challenge.
And there's one
group I'll
mention called
Green Light
America, which
has like this
alert system so
they can see
whenever there's
a project on the docket,
(01:45:47):
being considered
by a local
government and
then they can get
into that
community, talk
to and they have
organizers that
can talk to
people who live
there because the
people, the local
elected officials
don't care about
people coming from
Washington, D.C.
They care about
people in their
community and
speaking in favor
of these projects
and it's kind of
starting to
trying to get
over this this
(01:46:08):
nimbyism problem
that people don't
want things
built, even if
they in theory
agree with it
would agree with the idea.
And so, you know,
and getting that
messaging right,
talking about all
the benefits and
not just letting
the oil and gas
talking points
win the day
because if one
one person shows
(01:46:28):
up saying they
don't like the
project and we're
losing by forfeit
because no one
else shows up from our side.
You know, if
you're a local
elected official,
you're going to
listen to the
person who came
and showed up and
there has to be a
counter to that
and hopefully
more than just a
counter but an
overwhelming
sense that we
want this.
And that's the
challenge that we
(01:46:48):
have to solve for
right now. And
one of the
challenge, one of
the challenges,
there's a lot of
challenges.
Well, and how do
you motivate
people to change
that behavior?
Because, you
know, you get
people in your
local communities
who will complain
about whatever,
right? And even
say like, yeah,
I'd love to see
when you know my
energy, but it's
not going
to happen.
You know, there's
too many things
going about it.
How do you
motivate people
to change
(01:47:08):
behavior, which
is so hard, like
from what I
learned is to
change people's
behavior around a
specific topic.
But in this case,
to motivate them
to go to a
meeting or go to
a public meeting
to say, Hey,
look, I want
this. We should
be considering
this and talking
to their local
officials. How do
you motivate that
from a comms
perspective?
Well, I'd say
generally
(01:47:29):
speaking, the
biggest, the most
effective way to
motivate people
is if they feel
like they have
something to
lose. And that's
not always
applicable
here. Right.
But you do have
to put it into
terms that
matter. It's not
big, bigger
picture, helping
climate change.
Some people will
be motivated by
that, which is
great. But a lot
of people need to
know, well, my,
(01:47:49):
you know, my
electric bill
could go down or,
you know, we're
going to have
cleaner air in
our community for
our kids and for
everybody.
Or, you know, if
we're shutting
down a coal
plants, that's,
that's, you know,
you can kind of
tell, yeah,
pretty tangible.
Yeah. So it is
finding those
tangible benefits
(01:48:10):
that if the
project doesn't
go through that
they're going to
miss out on.
Yeah, that's
really, really
interesting. What
are some of the
other you
mentioned just
really quickly
that there are so
many challenges.
Can you talk
about like
another major
challenge that
people are that
that we're seeing
with with trying to push people to a new level?
You know, green
energy and
renewable energy
forward. You mean
(01:48:31):
I have I haven't
given you enough
challenges yet.
You should come
to Washington and
spend a few
days here.
There's lots of
challenges. No,
we've discussed a
lot of is there
anything that the
people should
know about that
they may not,
they may not be
aware of.
You know, there's
there's a lot of
headlines and I
don't I imagine
you all were
(01:48:51):
seeing these two,
but the firing of
federal staffers.
Yeah, you know,
entire
departments and
agencies for
science out
the window.
We're not even
tracking
greenhouse gas
emissions in the
same way. And if
you can't track
or measure
something, how
are you going to
adjust and do
things
differently?
You know, but
also some of the
areas that like
(01:49:13):
maybe a
permitting
reform, for
example, you need
federal
government
workers and some
of these agencies
to actually do
that work.
And, you know, we
talk about
speeding things
up. But if you
can't even get
the people to do
the environmental
review because
there's no staff,
it's going to
take longer. So
it just flies in
the face of the
(01:49:33):
stated goals of
this
administration.
So, yeah, those
are some other
challenges. I
think the biggest
and this is
coming back to
the
communications
world that I
think about quite
a bit. It's just
the
misinformation
and the eco, the
ecosystem for
opponents of what
(01:49:53):
we're of what we
do is a machine.
And it's very,
very hard to
compete and
counter that. And
so that's
something that I
mean, our team is
always trying to
think about how
do we how do we
push back against
that and make
sure to get the
facts out there?
And so, you know,
too much of what
is decided in
Washington these
(01:50:14):
days is not about
facts, but just
about pure
politics and
loyalty to one
person and the
the, you know,
the robust
debates about the
benefits and
shortcomings of
certain policies.
It just doesn't
really have the
same impact. It
doesn't really
happen to the
same extent.
(01:50:36):
For sure. I know
it's a tough time
for climate
policy and
communications.
What is your
hopeful moment
that you have,
you know, in the
next little bit?
Like, what what
do you hope for?
And what is your
sort of light at
the end of the
tunnel in this in
this dark time?
I think I
(01:50:56):
mentioned all
these challenges.
But when I think
of the the
climate tech
entrepreneurs who
they don't let a
challenge stop
them, like they
are they see a
challenge and
they're inspired
and excited,
trying to figure
out how to
overcome it.
And, you know, if
you look at all
these climate
tech companies,
the the ways
they're trying to
address climate
change, the
(01:51:17):
it ranges.
It's all over the
map and there's
thousands of
them. And I think
I'm inspired by,
you know, some of
those are going
to end up being
real significant
players in this
in this ecosystem
over the
years to come.
And I just, you
know, they're
going to continue
doing what
they're going to
do, regardless of
what politics in
D.C. is
dictating. Right.
And that, that to
(01:51:38):
me is where
there's hope and,
you know, they if
they can overcome
this period and
then imagine when
there's actually
favorable
policies in
place, how that
can help
supercharge even
further.
So it's OK. Make
as much progress
as we can in
these next three
and a half years.
Stop as much bad
stuff as we can
in this
time period.
(01:51:58):
Yeah. And then,
you know, try to,
you know, try to
be in a place
come 2029, which
feels so far from
now, being a
place where we
can actually go
on offense and
make the progress
that I'd say most
people
agree with.
Yeah. No, I love
it. I love it. I
(01:52:18):
love to end the
interview on
this. Chris,
thank you so much
for that hopeful
moment and to
inform us all
about what's
happening in the
U.S. with
climate policy.
And we appreciate
the work that you
do and all the
all of your
clients do to
kind of continue
to push the
envelope in
making renewable
energy more
accessible, you
know, pushing
policy to make
(01:52:39):
less regulation
so we can get it
even further down
the road.
Really appreciate
that. Learning a
lot. Love to
invite you back
to talk more.
Hopefully, good,
more good news
later on as we as
we get closer to
2029. But I
definitely
appreciate all
the work you're
doing. Thank you
so much.
Great to be on
with you, Andrew.
Enjoy the
conversation.
Appreciate it.
Thank you, Chris,
for joining us on
today's episode
of the How to
Protect the Ocean
podcast. It was
(01:52:59):
great to be able
to talk about
U.S. policy, even
though it's a
grim time. It's a
dark time in U.S.
climate policy,
but there's a
light at the end
of the tunnel.
And that's that
entrepreneurial
spirit.
People want
renewable energy.
People have this
mission to bring
renewable energy,
not only to the
U.S., but to the
world. And it's
growing and
growing and
growing, even
though the fossil
fuel industry
doesn't want to
(01:53:19):
have that
competition.
They're not going
to be able to get
around it.
People want it.
If you look
around your local
town, you look
around your city,
you look around
your state,
you're seeing
more changes
happen for
renewable energy
projects. You're
seeing more EVs.
You're seeing
more hydro
projects. You're
seeing more solar
projects. You're
seeing more wind
projects and even
(01:53:40):
tidal projects.
If you live along
the coastline,
there's a lot of
projects that are
going on. Not
fast enough.
And a lot of
times the holdup
has nothing to do
with
environmental
problems or
regulations. It
has to do with
other regulations
that are put in
place to slow
down green
energy,
especially even
if you're allowed
to do it and you
have these
Republicans or
you have these
conservatives who
are trying to
halt it for
some reason.
(01:54:00):
For example,
Donald Trump
calling an energy
emergency yet
canceling energy
projects that
renewable
projects that
will actually
increase energy
production in the
U.S. So there's a
lot of hypocrisy
around it, but it
doesn't get
handled unless
you fight for it,
unless you talk
to your local
representatives,
unless you take
the talking
points and
understand the
(01:54:21):
talking points
that are coming
from places like
the ECHO
Communication
Advisors at Chris
owns and the
organizations
that are involved
in advocacy
groups that are
involved in
pushing climate policy.
So that we have a
more balanced and
more renewable
energy progress
in climate
policy. So
hopefully we'll
get to there
sometime soon,
but it comes with
you. You know,
you can listen to
(01:54:42):
these podcasts.
You can talk to
your local
government
officials and you
can join the
undertow at speak
up for blue.com
forward slash
join the
undertow. I'm
going to share
the ways to
connect with
Chris and his
company and to
learn more about
climate policy in the U.S. If you look at the show notes, you'llbe able to find that. But don't forget to join the undertow.
(01:55:03):
I want to thank
you so much for
joining us on
today's episode
of the how to
protect the
podcast. I'm your
host, Andrew
Lewin from the
true North strong
and free. Have a
great day. We'll
talk to you next
time. And happy
conservation.
One of the things
that's hard to
put out is the
entrepreneurial
spirit.
The
entrepreneurial
spirit of people
who are getting
into the
renewable
energy sector,
the industry, who
are trying to
push forward
renewable energy
so we can
depend less on
fossil fuels and
more on
protecting the
environment and
still getting our
energy needs.
And that's what I
was hoping to
hear and I did
(01:00:21):
hear in this
interview with
Chris Boyer
today.
We're talking
about climate
policy in the US,
how it's changed
over even the
last few
months compared
to what it was
over the last
four years and
the ups and downs
of climate
policy in the US
in general and
how that could
affect and slow
down
renewable energy
development
in the US.
We're going to
talk about that
on today's
(01:00:41):
episode of the
How to Protect
the Ocean
podcast.
Let's
start the show.
Hey everybody,
welcome back to
another exciting
episode of the
How to Protect
the Ocean
podcast.
I'm your host,
Andrew Lewin, and
this is the
podcast where you
find out what's
happening
with the ocean,
how you can speak
up for the ocean
and what you can
do to live for
a better ocean by
(01:01:01):
taking action.
And when we talk
about ocean
conservation, we
talk about
climate change
and we talk about
climate policy
and
climate action.
And to get
action, you need
to put forward
good policy and
you need to
communicate that
to a lot of
people to ensure
that that policy
gets in place.
And today's
guest, Chris
Moyer, who is the
founder and CEO
of Echo
Communication
(01:01:22):
Advisors
is on the podcast
today because he
wants to talk to
me about US
climate policy,
which is kind of
a weird thing to
talk about
these days.
But I thought it
was important for
you to listen to
what's happened
over the last
five months in
terms of climate
policy
under the Trump
administration
and how that's
changed since the
Biden
administration
and of course,
(01:01:42):
the first Trump
administration
and how that up
and down is
affecting the way
policies
developed at a
federal level and
how energy
projects are
being put on hold
or just being
canceled
altogether and
how that could
affect climate
policy and just
the push for a
renewable energy
increase over the
next 10 years,
over the next 20
years and just
(01:02:02):
into the future.
So we talk a lot
about what's
happened
recently.
We talk a lot
about the
communications
around that and
how to get people
motivated to talk
to their local
governmental
officials and
say, hey, you
know what?
I like these
projects.
I think this will
be good
for my area.
I want to talk
about it because
that's the one
thing he
highlights is not
a lot of people
come out yet.
The fossil fuel
industry is out
(01:02:23):
there all the
time talking
against these
projects and it
actually works.
So we're going to
talk all about
that on today's
episode.
Just before we do
that, if you want
to take action
for the ocean, if
you want to take
action for
climate, you can
do so by joining
the undertow.
This is a new
project that I've
been working on.
We're building an
online community
of wave makers
(01:02:43):
and people and
connectors who
want to
take action.
We're looking for
10 million
connections would
take $5 million
in action over
the next
five years.
It's an ambitious
goal, but we
can't do it
without you.
Join the undertow
by going to speak
up for blue.com
forward slash
join the undertow
that speak up for
blue.com forward
slash join the
(01:03:04):
undertow.
We are going to
put the links in
the show notes
and in the
description.
If you're
watching this on
YouTube, I want
you to not only
join, but listen
to this interview
to get motivated
to say, hey, you
know what?
I want to help
the ocean. I want
to help
climate change.
Here's Chris
Moyer talking
about US ocean
policy or US
climate policy.
Of course, that's
ocean
policy as well.
Enjoy the
interview and
we'll talk
to you after.
(01:03:24):
Hey, Chris,
welcome to the
how to protect
the ocean
podcast.
Are you ready to
talk about
climate policy?
Yes, I am. Great
to be
here, Andrew.
Wonderful. I'm
excited
about this.
I'm excited in a
way because I
want to know
information about
what's happening
in the US in
terms of
climate policy.
I'm not excited
in the way I may
not like the
answers to some
(01:03:44):
of these
questions or some
of the questions
that I ask, but
I'm so happy to
have you on here.
You have your own
business. We're
going to talk a
little bit
about that.
We're going to
talk about the
work that you do
and where climate
policy is at this
point in time.
Where has
it come?
Where it came
from, you know,
going out the ups
and downs of
really any
country that we
see, but
especially in the
(01:04:05):
US and especially
these days with
the second Trump
administration
coming in,
causing a lot of
chaos with the global climate policy.
With
environmental
policy,
especially
climate change.
So we're going to
talk a lot
about that.
But before we do,
Chris, why don't
you just let the
audience know who
you are and
what you do?
Sir, and I have
to say, be
careful what you
ask for.
You may not like
(01:04:26):
the answers that
unfortunately
that's that's
probably where
it's going
to be today.
But but
yeah, I am.
I am about five
years ago.
I founded Echo
Communications
Advisors and we
are a policy
first strategic
communications
firm.
We work
exclusively with
clean energy
companies with
climate tech
startups that are
doing really cool
things to address
climate change in
(01:04:46):
all various ways.
And we also work
with advocacy
organizations
that are seeking
to shape and make
better climate
policy in the
United States.
Love that. I have
a lot of
questions
about that.
But before I want
to kind of go a
little bit
further back, how
did you get into
communications
and climate?
Where did that
come from?
(01:05:06):
So the first
thing ever did in
politics and
getting into
policy was a
communications
internship with
former Senator
Ted Kennedy back
coming up on 20
years now.
And that really I
was living in
Boston, going to
school there.
And that really
turned me on to
the idea of going
to Washington,
D.C. and trying
to get a job in
(01:05:27):
the Senate.
So I moved down
to D.C. about 15
years or so ago
and ended up
getting a job
with the United
States senator,
who was then the
majority leader
of the United
States Senate guy
named Harry Reid.
The only catch
was the job was
in Las Vegas and
not in
Washington, D.C.
Because the
Senate, the
senator was
running for
reelection.
(01:05:47):
So I was 22. I
flew to Las Vegas
to move there my
first time ever.
And I just
remember getting
that rental car,
leaving the
airport and
driving up the
strip with the
flashing lights.
And I was
thinking, what
did I get
myself into?
And but really,
it was an
education and
climate and clean
energy was a big
part of it.
I remember going
(01:06:08):
to solar arrays
all around the
Las Vegas Valley,
going to
geothermal
companies in
northern Nevada
and just really
getting
understanding of
energy policy and
climate and the
efforts being
done at the
federal level.
This was during
the first Obama
administration.
And from there, I
came back to D.C.
after that
election and
(01:06:28):
worked for the
senator in the
U.S. Capitol and
just really saw
further how
policy can make a
difference to
advance these
industries, these
nascent
industries, these
newer
technologies that
just need a
little bit of
federal
government
support.
Yeah. And then
they kind of take
off and that's
happened
throughout
history with
(01:06:48):
government
support and helps
them become
mature industries
that are now
mainstays of our
economy.
You know, this is
it's really
interesting stuff
because at that
time when you
were talking with
all these
different
companies, these
startups, a lot
of these
startups, the
technology was
new as well.
Right. We were a
lot of it was
testing out.
Hence why there
(01:07:09):
was some
government
government funds
being put in to
test to make sure
that this could
actually work.
It could be
scalable
and so forth.
That is is an
exciting time.
What were your
thoughts?
Like, I guess
maybe what
captured you the
most in terms of
like what
surprised
you the most?
Like, oh, I
didn't know we
could do this.
I didn't even
like think
about this.
Like, what was
the most
interesting tech
(01:07:29):
that you saw at
that time?
Well, I didn't
see too many back
15 years ago.
I didn't see too
many different
technologies per
se, but I think,
you know, someone
who grew up in
the Northeast, I
knew nothing
about geothermal.
Right.
Because we just
really don't
don't have it in
a in a
serious way.
Yeah.
Traditional geothermal is
limited to the
(01:07:51):
Western United
States and, you
know, Iceland and
other parts of
the world, but
not certainly
where I grew up.
And so learning
about that
technology,
frankly, was eye opening.
And now there's
all sorts of
advanced
geothermal
technology and
really cool stuff
where you're not
limited.
It can, you know,
it's on the path
to being able to
you can have
geothermal
anywhere because
if you go deep
(01:08:12):
enough, you will
get heat.
It's just it's
just it can be
really expensive
to to go the
deeper you go.
And so bring down
the cost curve to
make geothermal a
part of the clean
energy transition
and the energy
mix that powers
all the energy
needs
that we have.
So so that was
interesting
to me.
I also think, you
know, 15 years
ago, Tesla was a
(01:08:33):
struggling
company.
Yeah.
And they they got
funding
from the U.S.
government, from
the
Department of Energy.
And that was a
really critical
source of help
for that company
to that.
Who knows where
they'd be if it
wasn't for that
support.
So, you know,
that's relevant
to some of the
discussions we'll
get into in a
moment about
federal policy
and the role of
(01:08:54):
federal
government in
supporting
different sectors
of the energy
industry.
Yeah, absolutely.
So what, like,
you know, during
this time when
you're with the
senator and you
probably moved
into different
positions within
within politics.
But then, you
know, obviously,
communication is
a big part of
your role within
that that time.
At what point did
you say, OK,
(01:09:14):
like, did you get
the idea, you
know, having a
consulting firm
or a
communications
firm where you,
you know,
partnered with
these companies
or work for these
companies as well
as advocacy
groups to
say, hey,
I want to push
this, you know,
they need a
little bit
more help.
They need to. Was
it because they
needed more help?
Was it they
needed to clarify
their message?
(01:09:34):
What pushed you
towards starting
this company a
few years ago?
Yeah, so
you're right.
Like I did other
campaigns.
I worked on
presidential
campaigns and
Senate and
gubernatorial.
And I also have
done some work
with state
attorneys
general, which
they're the top
law enforcement
officer in
each state.
And they play,
(01:09:56):
you know,
especially during
the first Trump
administration.
This is what I
was working with
this group that
was coordinating
a lot of the
efforts that was
really they were
filing lawsuits
left and right.
Not because
they're
frivolous, but
there was so much
to go after from
the federal
government.
So they were
they're trying to
stop rollbacks of
really important
regulations and
policies on the
environment, on
energy, on
climate.
(01:10:18):
And so that was a
great insight
into kind of the,
you know, they
were the last
line of defense
at that point.
And so, you know,
when I started my
firm, I, you
know,
communications
and messaging can
really make the
difference
between
successful policy
or successful
grants funding
from the
government or
another entity.
(01:10:38):
How you frame and
talk about things
can really make
or break success
that you have as
a business.
And, you know, we
need these
businesses to be
successful for
the clean energy
transition.
So the
communications
piece is really
important.
You know, when
people think
about
lobbying as well.
It's not just
like the old
fashioned shoe
leather lobbying
that you go meet
with the senator
and then they're
(01:10:58):
going to
hopefully do what
you want
them to do.
Communications
has become a
greater part of
that overall
strategy.
You have to be
attuned to what
are the outlets,
the news outlets
they're consuming
back in the home
state or their
home district.
How do you find
the right
messengers and
get them to give,
you know, share
the right message
at the right time
so they can have
(01:11:18):
the maximum
influence.
And that takes a
lot of strategy
and
thoughtfulness.
And so that's how
we work with a
lot of our
clients to help
them, you know,
get better policy
so that they can
grow and be
successful and
contribute to the
energy
transition.
For from a policy
perspective and
clean energy.
(01:11:39):
What are the
biggest
challenges over
the last like 10
years for that
for clean energy
to move forward
to scale up in
the face of
policy like what
like was there a
particular policy
that really
allowed them to
happen or was a
particular policy
that has really
challenged them.
Let's say before
this
administration
that came in.
Well, it's it's
(01:11:59):
pretty clear in
2022 the most
significant law
ever passed in
the United States
on climate and
clean energy was
called the
inflation
reduction act.
And that is
really that was
really a law that
set industrial
policy for the
United States in
a way that it
never had before.
And it provided a
number of tax
credits.
It provided
something called
(01:12:20):
transferability
that helps with
smaller companies
that are growing
and bigger.
You know, it's a
great,
helpful system.
It's it brought
manufacturing
back to the
United States.
It's it provided
more secure
supply chains
back in the
United States,
not being reliant
on on other
countries,
especially, you
know, are more
(01:12:41):
adversarial
countries.
And I don't
include Canada in
that, to
be clear.
Thank you.
But this was this
was the policy
set forth back
in, you know, it
was passed in
August of 2022.
So we're coming
up on
three years.
And, you know,
you speak to the
challenge, making
that resonate
(01:13:02):
with voters
across the
country before a
lot of the
benefits
became clear.
You know, there
are jobs that are
being created
right now.
There are
factories
being built.
There are there's
tax revenue being
generated in
rural parts of
this country that
haven't had major
industry in
decades.
And, you know,
because of the
way the election
went in in
(01:13:23):
November, all of
that is at risk
right now.
Which is
interesting
because I think,
you know, the
inflation act
brought in all of
that and allowed
for these supply
chains to come to
the US allowed
for manufacturing
to come
to the US.
Yet this
administration is
talking about how
tariffs are going
to bring all of
that as a scare
tactic to
everybody to
(01:13:44):
doing that, which
is kind of funny
because that all
went on.
That messaging
didn't get out.
I wish I wish
more more
organizations and
political
parties.
Contact you guys
to kind of
highlight that
because, you
know, it feels as
though we would
have been in a
different
position because
obviously
messaging and
communications,
as you know, is
very important.
(01:14:05):
And, you know,
there's a big
difference in the
messaging, you
know, for this
this last
election, which
won't get into
too much because
I don't want to.
I want to focus
on
climate policy.
But, you know,
from your
perspective as as
as a
communications
person,
especially when
it comes to clean
energy,
especially when
it comes to
making sure that
the right policy
get in place and
and working
towards those
policies, it
(01:14:25):
becomes a really
it must become a
real source spot
for you to see
the wrong
information get
out and people
believing it and
not picking it up
when it's right
right there in
front of them.
Like what
what is that?
Like,
where did that?
How come that
always
gets buried?
Climate and
clean energy.
(01:14:46):
Yeah.
Yeah.
Well, it's just
it's very hard to
to break through,
especially in a
campaign against
Donald Trump,
who, you know,
love him or hate
him. He knows how
to get attention.
Yeah.
And attention is
current currency
in this day and
age or such a
fragmented media
environment and
(01:15:06):
other
distractions that
are, you know,
everywhere
for people.
And so, you know,
talking about
jobs that are
coming and a
clean energy
economy that is
happening, but
still coming is
it's harder to
break through and get
attention on that.
And and so, you
know, driving
home the real
(01:15:26):
tangible benefits
of of that
legislation that
I was mentioning,
you know, perhaps
could have been
done a
little bit better.
And, you know,
making sure it
resonates with
people in a way
that they
care about.
And, you know,
too often, I
think bigger
picture here, you
know, climate
change doesn't
feel real.
(01:15:47):
Right.
People, it feels
like it's often
to the even
though there's
still people who
can't get
insurance anymore
because there's
too much risk or
their premiums
are so high.
And we know about
the storms being
more intense and
more frequent.
But, you know,
that that still
doesn't move the
needle in terms
of public opinion
to the extent
that we
need it to.
And so if you're
(01:16:07):
talking about the
treacherous
consequences of
half degree
increase in
global
temperature, that
really doesn't
resonate.
It feels so
esoteric
to people.
And so trying to
put it in terms
of this is not
really
climate change.
This is
economics.
It's an industry
that, you know,
it's a good job.
Doesn't matter
(01:16:28):
what party you
belong to or your
political
beliefs.
And so, you know,
unfortunately, if
we had a few more
years for these
things to mature
and blossom from
the legislation
from the law I
was mentioning,
then it would be
harder to
get rid of it.
But we're at a
point where it's
still not quite
at that moment or
(01:16:49):
instilled enough
in these
communities yet.
It's really
interesting you
bring that up
too, because, you
know, as you were
mentioning, just
the messaging
around the
benefits from the
Affordable Care
Act or the the
the Inflation
Reduction Act.
We had the same
thing in Canada,
you know, as you
probably heard
the carbon tax,
you know, as soon
as you put in the
word tax, nobody
(01:17:10):
likes it. It
sucks. Nobody
wants to pay. We
had a
consumer tax.
So everybody who,
you know, paid
for gas or
whatever that
might be, that
another carbon
tax went on top
of that.
And that was like
the federal
policy wasn't
necessarily
provincial
policy.
The province
didn't have a
carbon tax or a
plan for that.
The federal plan
would kick in the
messaging around.
(01:17:30):
There was a lot
of there were a
lot of benefits
to the
carbon tax for us.
You know, a lot
of people went
over to heat
pumps and a lot
of people moved
over to an
environment like
EVs and so forth.
But it wasn't it
wasn't
communicated
properly by the
federal
government and
they could have
done a
better job.
And maybe they're
waiting for the
provinces to do
it because it's
technically a
problem, a
provincial plan.
But regardless of
what happened, it
got it got
out of hand.
(01:17:51):
And of course,
the opposition is
just like
ax the tax.
The tax is
causing
inflation.
The tax is
causing all your
problems.
You can't afford
groceries because
of the carbon.
The messaging and
negative just
kind of like what
Trump had done in
the US with
climate change
and so forth.
They're getting
more attention.
The negativity is
bringing more
attention.
And the and the
(01:18:12):
policy is not
being
communicated
properly.
And the benefits
of those policies
are not getting
communicated
properly, which
is frustrating
for me because I
was kept telling
my mobile
represented.
I'm like, you
guys got to talk
about the
benefits.
Like,
where is it?
Like, it's so
complicated.
Like, why can't
you talk
about it?
But then on the
other hand, like
it when the when
(01:18:32):
it ended, like we
were in it
for a good.
Almost
nine years.
And there were a
lot of benefits
that still have
come out from it.
But when you when
you mentioned the
word tax or
climate change or
carbon tax,
people are just
like it's
divided, you
know, you either
love it or you
hate it.
It's black
and white.
And that's it.
(01:18:52):
There's no
gray area.
There's no
meeting in
the middle.
I've talked to
politicians
before, local
politicians, and
they say when
they engage with
their, you know,
communities, they
don't necessarily
use the word
climate change.
They'll use the
words like
flooding or fires
that affect your
homes and things
like that.
Is the messaging
changing from
(01:19:13):
getting away from
those politically
triggered words
to more of less
you as you
mentioned, bring
it more local,
bring it more
personal and how
it affects you no
insurance, that
kind of stuff.
It absolutely has
changed in the
last several
months here since
the Trump Trump
Trump second term
started.
The main phrase
(01:19:33):
we're hearing a
lot of from
climate focused
entities is
energy dominance.
And that's that's
a phrase that the
president has
used a lot.
And a lot of
people try to
play into that.
I think things
that you don't
hear anymore are
climate change,
emissions
reduction,
climate justice,
(01:19:55):
you know, things
that were very
much talked about
in the previous
administration.
But those are
great way to get
your project or
your idea, your
bill just
shelved.
And so I think,
you know, it's a
balancing act.
It is wise to
adapt your
messaging, even
if the work
you're actually
doing isn't
changing, because
at the end of the
(01:20:16):
day, what do we
care about?
Do we care about
feeling feeling
good about what
we're doing and
saying what we
want to say?
Or do we want to
get do we want to
get the results
that we're trying
to achieve?
And do we have to
maybe change the
path to
get there?
We're not
compromising our
values or what
we're working on,
but it's just,
okay, how do we
be a little more
strategic and
trying to reach
that same outcome
(01:20:37):
that we're always
been aiming for?
Yeah, I love
that. I think
that's I think
that is a path
forward because
it takes away
from any kind of
like, like I
said, triggering
words or any kind
of strife with
with the audience
and trying to
unite people just
be like, look,
we're all going
through these
problems.
Let's try and
let's try and
figure out a way
around it.
(01:20:57):
And hopefully
that will that
will help in that
kind of way.
We're in the
second term of
Donald Trump as
president.
I know it's hard
thing to say,
hard thing to
hear, but this is
the second one.
What was the
difference? You
worked in the
first one in a
variety of
different
capacities.
But, you know,
(01:21:17):
you've you've
been following
climate for a
long time and
climate policy
for a long time.
What's the
difference
between the first
term and the
second term,
given that there
were four years
in between?
And I'm sure you
didn't mean to
imply this, but
just to be
absolutely clear,
did not work in
the first Trump
administration.
Oh, yes. No, my
apologies.
You worked in the
(01:21:38):
climate industry
like that.
While he was
president. My
apologies.
Was in the
whirlwind. No, I
just I knew
that's not what
you meant, but
I'm sure your
listeners can
discern that that
was not the case.
But I just
appreciate that
crystal crystal
clear some
agree agree.
You know, I think
the first time
felt like nobody
knew what they
were doing in the
Trump
administration.
They had all
these things they
(01:21:58):
were trying to
do, but they were
very
sloppy about it.
They tried to
they didn't
follow the proper
steps to repeal
regulations, for
example.
And they lost a
lot of lawsuits
and couldn't get
what they wanted
because of that
procedural
concern this
time around.
You know, from
day one, they've
been on
top of it.
They learned from
(01:22:18):
some of their
mistakes from the
first time.
And, you know, we
experienced just
a period of it
felt I don't know
how long it was.
I try to not
think too much of
that period, but
it was
just chaos.
They were
throwing
everything
against the wall
and they they
were they're
urging course to
tell them to tell
(01:22:39):
them no.
They were laying
off people. They
were repealing as
much as
they could.
They were doing
as much as they
could with
executive order,
not worrying
about any other
branch of
government.
They they they
had an agenda and
a plan coming in
and they wasted
no time to try to
execute it.
And in some ways,
it's actually
admirable as a as
a use of power
(01:23:00):
and trying to
achieve what you
want to achieve.
But obviously the
substance of all
these things was
very concerning.
Yeah.
And still is
there's been, you
know, it slowed
down a little bit
because the
courts have put
on some
guardrails up.
Not not entirely,
but some.
And and now, as
the focus has
really shifted
from what the
(01:23:21):
president can do
on his own to
what he needs
Congress, even
though his party
controls
Congress, there's
still different
ideas on
what to do.
And so that
process is less clean.
And so that takes
a little bit of
time. And we've
gotten to the
point in the
first term here,
sorry, the first
year of the
second term where
(01:23:41):
they have to hash
out some of these
different ideas
and the details.
You know, the
devil is always
in the details
and they're at
that point.
They're at that
point in
negotiations.
And I don't I
couldn't tell you
that Trump
actually knows
any of the
details.
But he but he
just won. He just wants a bill.
And and so the
you know, his
colleagues, the
(01:24:02):
Republican
leaders in the in
Congress are
working through
that at
the moment.
So it's been
about five months
now, almost five
months. And
there's been a
lot that's been
done. There's
been a lot that's
been reported on.
But it's it has
been a whirlwind,
but it does feel
like it's slowed
down a little
bit. But it was a
(01:24:22):
torrent start.
Right. And during
that time, you
know, I know he
he he pulled the
U.S. out of the
Paris Accord, the
climate
change accord.
What else was
done in terms of
climate change
that had a pretty
significant
effect on other
acts that came
through the
inflation
(01:24:42):
reduction act and
so forth?
Well, the first
one that comes to
mind is he
declared an
energy emergency,
right? Even
though it's not sure what that's based on.
But that gives
him the ability
to do certain
things to prop up
fossil fuels. And
it's it doesn't
really square
(01:25:03):
that he's on the
one hand saying
it's it's an
energy emergency.
And we need all
energy sources or
we know as much
energy as
possible because
it's emergency.
But then then
he's killing
offshore wind and
projects,
including one
that was fully
permitted and
they were they
were they were
building already
or they just
(01:25:23):
started that
that's since been
reversed.
But, you know,
he's saying he's
pretty much
mandating for
coal plants to
stay open, even
if they're not
financially
sustainable.
So it's unclear
how exactly that will work.
You know, there's
there's programs
that were part of
the inflation
reduction act,
the bill that I
(01:25:44):
mentioned from
2022 contracts
that have been
signed with, you
know, there's
this Green Bank
program that a
lot of other
countries have
done
successfully.
It's a way of
lending to allow
some of these
really important
projects to go
forward. And the
last
administration
had put a
significant
amount of federal
dollars to this.
And these
grantees had
(01:26:04):
signed contracts.
But the Trump
administration
came in and said,
actually, we're
going to we're
canceling that.
And so they're
they're in the
midst of
litigation. And
it's really
slowed down some
of these projects
that had been
announced already
all across the
country.
And, you know, we
don't have time
to go through
every executive
order related to
climate and
energy in this
conversation.
But there's a
(01:26:26):
long list and
they're they're
not missing any
opportunity to go
after something
that someone in
the
community values.
It's really odd.
I mean, it's it's
it's odd from a
common sense
point of view
when you look at
it from the
outside, if
you're declaring
an emergency, an
energy emergency,
that you're going
to kill off one
form of energy
(01:26:47):
and prop up
another.
So it's you know,
it's very
hypocritical to
say we're going
to prop up the
fossil fuel side,
but we're going
to kill the green
side, you know,
the renewable
energy side, even
though that was
well on its way.
And maybe some of
those projects
had already
started. Maybe
some of them
haven't. But
that's a very
frustrating fact
(01:27:07):
of not growing
energy together
and balancing the
two. And at some
point, I mean,
the hope is for the world.
And I know in
Canada, the hope
is to, you know,
right now, you
know, green
energy may be a
little lower than
fossil fuels. But
as that grows, a
fossil fuel will
go down maybe to
like 20 to 30
percent of
total energy.
(01:27:28):
And I feel like
that's what the
world is trying
to go towards
when we keep
hitting these
balances,
depending on
who's who's in
charge. But it's
really weird when
you know, like
you said, you
declared an
emergent, an emergent, an energy emergency.
And then all of a
sudden, you're
like, well, I'm
going to kill off
one this these
projects that
will help our
energy. And I'm
going to prop up
the other one. It
just goes like it
for to me, it
just looks like,
(01:27:48):
okay, somebody's
in your back,
like you're in
somebody's
back pocket.
And it's the
fossil fuel
industry. And
they just want
the domination of
of energy, right?
That's right. And
they I mean,
let's look at
EVs, for example,
that was another
thing where
they're there.
They halted the
rollout of the EV
charging stations
all across the
country.
(01:28:08):
There is there is
money set aside
for that. That's
really critical
for the adoption
of EVs. They're
trying to kill
the $7500 tax
credit for EVs
that, again,
makes some of
these cars more
affordable as we
get, you know,
from a less
mature market
into a more
mature
market for EVs.
Meanwhile, China
is is dominating
that industry
(01:28:28):
right now with
BYD and and so
there's just a
lot of things
that don't
comport. Let me
give you another
example.
Energy demand is
growing for the
first time in
decades and it's
it's largely due
to
electrification,
including a
vehicle's but
also AI and data
(01:28:49):
centers. You hear
about that a lot.
Yeah, and Bitcoin
crypto mining.
And and so
there's a ton of
energy demands
that can't it
won't be met.
It's not keeping
up at this point.
And so that's why
you need all the
energy sources.
And so, you know,
the president has
made clear he
(01:29:10):
wants to win the
AI race, but
you're
undermining that
goal when you're
cutting off.
You're not, you
know, they used
to say all of the
above. Now
they're saying
fossil fuel only
and maybe
nuclear.
Yeah, yeah, yeah,
exactly. And and
I mean, it's
always I mean,
nuclear is always
controversial for
(01:29:31):
the for the, you
know, a lot of
people. I know
why, you know, we
have nuclear
energy here and
it's
controversial
here. It provides
a lot of energy,
but it's also if
something goes
wrong, we're all
screwed, like for
a long, like
Chernobyl screwed
and and that's a
that's a
big deal.
There's a lot
like even in
(01:29:51):
these what five
months that the
Trump
administration
has been in power
pretty much carte
blanche of being
able to what
being able to do
what we do. And
as you mentioned,
it's just really
difficult to go
through every
single executive
order that
undermines
anything around
around
climate action.
In the next three
and a half years,
at least, I
guess, what's the
(01:30:13):
plan? Like, what
are all of like,
you know, clients
and and that you
have and the
industry, the
clean energy
industry. How are
they going to
react to this?
And how are they
going to push
forward to do the
work that they
want to do
without the help
of the federal government? Can they? And what's the plan?
I think there's
(01:30:34):
you have to look
for what we
advise with our
clients is you
have to find the
small slivers of
opportunity. You
know, there's
just kind of a
reality shock to
the system when
you realize that it's such a change from where we were with the last administration. And so you just have to adjust kind of what the reality and to the new reality. And there are some opportunities. I was talking to a couple of people who are in the
industry. And so, is there a way to make some progress with advanced geothermal make that bigger slice of the energy supply? You know,
you also look to
the states you
want to find
places where you
can make progress
with the new
(01:30:56):
reality. And so,
you know, I think
that's a really good thing.
(01:31:22):
But the one
bigger thing that
I would say is
that even with
the success to to
a large extent
with the
legislation from a few years ago, the thing that still held up further deployment of cleanenergy was permitting challenges. It takes way too long to make progress with the state.
And you have
local
communities, city
(01:31:43):
councils, town,
you know, county
commissions
voting to kill
these projects
because they have
3 people show up
with oil and gas
talking points about why solar array is bad.
And so there
needs to be more
engagement at a
local level from
from people who
just regular
people in these
communities who
(01:32:03):
support these
projects because
they understand
the benefits and
not just falling
prey to the
talking points from the oil and gas industry.
But there's an
effort in the federal
government to do
some sort of
permitting reform
that can make
things a little
bit more
efficient. It's
not, you know, it
still protects
the environment
but understands
(01:32:24):
that there's, you
know, who's going
to invest in a
project that
takes 17 years to actually get it from start to finish.
It's just no one
can see no one
can think that's
a good idea. And
so that's the
last it's kind of
like the last
mile challenge
once you have we
did have good.
It's still in
place. So I won't
say it's gone
yet, but we have
good
(01:32:44):
policy in place.
And the last step
there is to
actually get it
deployed and up and running and we need that we need it to be in service.
Let me ask you
this because you
we talk a lot
about times
regulation gets
in the way and
and you know
fossil fuel
industries will
talk about
regulation
getting in the
way and then
clean energy as
you mentioned
gets in the way
for it seems for
(01:33:04):
different
reasons.
So can you
clarify this for
me? So in Canada
anyway, and
probably us, you
know, when fossil
fuels complain
about policy
getting in the
way. It's usually
environmental
policy, right?
It's usually have
to do with drilling in the ocean.
And the
regulations
around that, you
know, drilling on
land and the
regulations
around that coal
(01:33:25):
burning and so
forth. And the
regulations on
that is the green
energy industry
finding that the
regulations are
the environmental
regulations are also slowing those down.
Well, I think I
think the thing
that slows it
down is if you
have to do four
different
environmental
reviews, it's
like, why can't
these different
layers of
(01:33:45):
government just
get on the same
page? Maybe you
do maybe do one
environmental
review. I don't
know, make that
thorough.
Right, right.
You know, you
don't want to
disrupt sensitive
habitats. You
don't want it.
You know, you
need to be
mindful of these
things. But
again, doing it in a in a common sense way.
And, you know, it
(01:34:07):
just has to be
more efficient.
That's frankly,
yeah, comes down
comes down to you
don't need three
agencies doing
their own study.
And that's an
interesting thing
to guys it is it
three agencies of
the same level of
government or is
it three agencies
of different
levels of
government?
Because I assume
if it's different
levels of
government, maybe
those were put
into place
because like one
level was a
(01:34:27):
different party
and then another
level was a different party and they were worried that
they were going to contradict
each other or
that it was
better to
contradict each
other because one
had more power of
a certain area.
You know how they
play those types
of games? Yeah,
well, sometimes
it's multiple at
the federal level
and sometimes
it's it's it's
multiple the
federal level and
at the state or
yeah, probably
(01:34:47):
the state level
but so it can be
all of those or
any of those.
Yeah, yeah, it's
funny too because
like one example
from Canada that
comes to mind
there was in the
Georgia Strait
there was
supposed to be a
marine protected area that was supposedto be a marine protected area.
And so it was supposedto be
designated but it
got held up for
years because two
departments of
the federal
government could
not agree on who
owns the rights
(01:35:08):
to the the the
sediment of at
the bottom of the
ocean and the
water column. So
they didn't agree
on it and but
they were the
same, you know,
government was
the same party
just two
different
departments
couldn't agree on
the same thing
putting in a
marine protected
area because one
owned that one
was responsible
for the sediment
in the bottom and
the other one was
responsible for
(01:35:28):
the the.
The water column
and I'm sure one
was like, oh, no,
we want to drill
is natural
resource Canada
and it's it. So
this happens a
lot, you know, I
think it's and
you're right. I
think it from a
common sense
point of view
should just be
one environmental
impact
assessment,
whatever they
want to call it,
make it super
thorough, cover
all basis and
that's what it
should be and
never be able to
(01:35:48):
take it out. You
know what I mean?
I never be able
to remove
it, right?
One of the
important things
and the
discussions there
was almost a deal
on permitting
reform at the end
of the last
Congress. So back
in December and
they couldn't
quite get the
final language
right in time.
But one of the
important things
to include that
include in
permitting reform
is transmission.
And, you know, we
(01:36:08):
could have all
these projects
built even I
should say the
last I said the
last mile was
getting the bill
last miles
actually getting
them hooked up to
the grid. Right?
You can't. Okay.
If you're stuck
in the in the
queue for years.
And it's
something like
90% of projects
stuck in the
queue or clean
energy projects.
If you can't do
that, then
they're just
sitting there and
(01:36:29):
they're not
they're not
putting electrons
on the grid and
we need all those
electrons on the
grid and
especially the
clean ones.
Yeah. So if there
is a way to get a
bipartisan
permitting reform
bill that has the
transmission
piece and I think
there could be a
lot of support
for that in
Congress and that
the president
would probably
sign something
with that nature.
(01:36:50):
Yeah. Now, you
know, we talked a
lot about and
we're focusing a
lot about federal
policy right now,
but some of the
some of the
strategies now is
a lot of
environmental and
advocacy
organizations are
looking at state
level, especially
states who are
looking to
improve their environment, who are looking to improve their environment.
Who are looking
to shore up their
protections and
regulations on
environment. Now,
one example that
I've heard that
was recently that
(01:37:10):
was really
interesting is
the green energy
industry is
booming in a
Republican
dominated Texas
and they a lot of
them had moved
from California
because of
regulations into
Texas because
there were less
that regulations
to the chagrin of
some Republicans
apparently
because they're
like, wait, hold
on a second.
The green energy
(01:37:31):
is coming in. We
got to put in
more regulations,
but they kind of
did it to
themselves
because they
wanted energy,
less energy
regulations. And
now there's a
booming industry
in clean energy.
Are there ways
that the clean
energy industry
is looking at
these types of
states that have
less policy to
implement green
energy at the state level?
Well, when you
(01:37:52):
look at, you
know, it's funny
you mentioned
Texas. They were
they were
debating,
considering some
really bad
legislation that
would have I
think one of them
would have
required that I
think it was 50
percent of new
generation had to
be dispatchable.
So basically had
to be natural gas
or they forced
renewable energy
projects to pay
fees to the gas
(01:38:12):
company. So
thankfully that
didn't go
through. But, you
know, Texas kind
of does its own
thing and every
sense of every
sense and
certainly their
other own
grid or right.
And and but wind
is thriving their
solar. It's like
a lot of deals
with landowners
that benefit from
(01:38:32):
from those
projects and they
have some of the
largest some of
the most supply
of energy of
clean energy in
the country.
And so they're
not a surprise
given the
political makeup,
but but yeah,
they're they're
they're
Republican.
There's a lot of
Republican states
(01:38:53):
that actually do
enjoy wind energy
and it's a
critical part of
their their
energy sources.
Energy makeup
like looking at a
state like Iowa,
very Republican
state, North
Dakota, both
Dakotas.
There's some sort
of chasm between
onshore and
offshore wind,
but it's like I
(01:39:19):
lost my train of
thought here. No
worries. No
worries.
Well, it's
interesting,
though, you
mentioned
because, you
know, even within
like ocean and
land when like
like I can drive
along the states
and I've driven
in many of the
states and I see
like on like
onshore wind.
I see on land
that you see the
big windmills. We
see it here in in
(01:39:39):
Ontario because
we have like a
big wind area,
you know,
migratory birds
and so forth.
But offshore wind
seems to get a
lot of flak.
Like, you know,
from some some
environmental
concerns in terms
of of seabirds
and what the what
the environmental
ramifications are
going to be of
(01:39:59):
having an actual
like physical
body in there in
on the seabed.
But not as much,
you know, as as
like oil and gas
and so forth
because of spills
and and and the
damage. But the
Republicans
lately have been
been like, yeah,
offshore wind is
no good.
Like, even before
Trump got in, a
lot of the
Republicans were
like, no, we need
(01:40:19):
to get this.
Like, we're
concerned about
the whales all of
a sudden. They're
concerned about
the whales and so forth.
Yet they're, you
know, obviously
the hypocrisy is
crazy, but
they're they're
obviously
concerned about
the whales all of
a sudden. And
that is crazy to
me to have like
that dichotomy
between land and
and offshore.
Where is that
coming from? Why
(01:40:40):
is it so
worrisome to have
offshore wind for
a lot of people?
You know, I I
hate to simplify
it this much, but
I think it
unfortunately
comes down to the
fact that the
president just
does not like
wind. And I think
the source of
that might have
something to do
with, you know, a
project in and
might even off
(01:41:00):
the coast of
Scotland that he
was building.
Oh, right. And
there is some
controversy
around maybe some
some wind. One of
his golf courses.
Yeah. Yeah. Yeah.
One of his
resource he was
he was building
or I'm not up to
date on all the
details, but
that's been cited
as maybe the
origin of his his
(01:41:20):
hatred for wind.
And then he goes
on to say things
like it causes
cancer and all
these
absurd claims.
So, you know,
there are some
Republicans in
the, you know, in
Congress that are
supportive of
wind, but it's a
challenging. I
mean, the
toughest place to
be right now is
in the offshore
wind industry in
the
United States.
It's just very
(01:41:41):
difficult to see
a path forward in
the next few
years. So I feel
for folks dealing
with that
challenge at this
point, because
it's not even
based on logic or
sound policy
considerations.
It's just based
on the
president's
personal dislike
for for
(01:42:03):
windbills.
So it's it's it's
I'm not sure how
you can move him
from that
position. Right.
All these things
are happening.
You know, the the
changing of the
guard, so to
speak, in terms
of Republican and
Democrat
presidential
races. And now
that we have a
Republican
dominated house,
you know, and,
(01:42:23):
you know, from
2016 to 2020 as
Republicans and
Democrats, then
the Republicans
again, it slows
down the movement
of clean energy
development.
What are the
consequences of
that for the
future? You know,
like we're
looking at
another four
years of slowing
down, even
halting projects.
Like how how
(01:42:43):
worrisome is
this? Like how
worry should be
like should the
American citizens
be about, you
know, this
slowdown? Like I
feel it's there's
always going to
be a push and
green energy is
going in
renewable energy
is going to build
no matter what.
This is just
going to slow it
down a little
bit. But what are
the consequences
and what should
should Americans
be
concerned about?
(01:43:04):
Well, businesses
and project
funders think not
in terms of a
four year
political cycle,
but in a much
longer business
cycle. And
they're going to
build where they
can have
favorable policy
and more
certainty.
And the swinging
back and forth is
politically is
(01:43:25):
very challenging
to count on
anything. And,
you know, I agree
with you. The
development with
clean energy is
going to
continue. Maybe
not as quickly as
we would like it
to because of
some of the
political
setbacks.
But if it's not
the United
States, they're
going to go to
these these folks
are smart and
they're capable
and they don't
want to sit back.
There's a real
(01:43:45):
urgency with with
them. And so
they're going to
go to other
countries.
They're going to
go to
maybe Canada.
They're going to
go to places in
Europe. They're
going to go to
places in Asia,
other places
around the world.
They're going to
let them build
and give them
give them the
room to grow.
And it would be
really
unfortunate that
innovation that
historically has
(01:44:05):
happened to the
United States,
you know, left
left our shores
and went
elsewhere because
it will put the
United States at
a disadvantage.
Again, it doesn't
it doesn't fit
with what the
president says is
his goal is to be
winning all these.
I mentioned the
AI race, but it's
to be winning all
in all these
(01:44:25):
industries. You
don't want to
seed ground to
China, to other
countries. You
want to be
building that
industry here.
And so it's hard
to square those
those two things.
Yeah, it's
definitely
interesting.
You mentioned
earlier about,
you know,
(01:44:46):
informing and
getting more
people locally to
speak up for
renewable energy
in their areas,
whether that's at
the state level,
whether that's at
the county level
or even at the local level.
From you, like,
you know, a comms
guy, you know,
having a comms
firm is the
messaging now
targeted at the
general public in
(01:45:07):
specific areas
where there's
opportunities to
shift the mindset
of the of local
government or
county
governments or
state governments
to say, hey,
look, you know,
people actually want this.
And so it's more
of renewable
energy literacy,
as we would do in
ocean literacy is
like build up
that ocean
literacy so
people understand
(01:45:27):
what's possible
and how their
communities can
be helped.
I think that's
right, Andrew. I
think there's
there's some
great people out
there doing work
that's very
focused on this
very challenge.
And there's one
group I'll
mention called
Green Light
America, which
has like this
alert system so
they can see
whenever there's
a project on the docket,
(01:45:47):
being considered
by a local
government and
then they can get
into that
community, talk
to and they have
organizers that
can talk to
people who live
there because the
people, the local
elected officials
don't care about
people coming from
Washington, D.C.
They care about
people in their
community and
speaking in favor
of these projects
and it's kind of
starting to
trying to get
over this this
(01:46:08):
nimbyism problem
that people don't
want things
built, even if
they in theory
agree with it
would agree with the idea.
And so, you know,
and getting that
messaging right,
talking about all
the benefits and
not just letting
the oil and gas
talking points
win the day
because if one
one person shows
(01:46:28):
up saying they
don't like the
project and we're
losing by forfeit
because no one
else shows up from our side.
You know, if
you're a local
elected official,
you're going to
listen to the
person who came
and showed up and
there has to be a
counter to that
and hopefully
more than just a
counter but an
overwhelming
sense that we
want this.
And that's the
challenge that we
(01:46:48):
have to solve for
right now. And
one of the
challenge, one of
the challenges,
there's a lot of
challenges.
Well, and how do
you motivate
people to change
that behavior?
Because, you
know, you get
people in your
local communities
who will complain
about whatever,
right? And even
say like, yeah,
I'd love to see
when you know my
energy, but it's
not going
to happen.
You know, there's
too many things
going about it.
How do you
motivate people
to change
(01:47:08):
behavior, which
is so hard, like
from what I
learned is to
change people's
behavior around a
specific topic.
But in this case,
to motivate them
to go to a
meeting or go to
a public meeting
to say, Hey,
look, I want
this. We should
be considering
this and talking
to their local
officials. How do
you motivate that
from a comms
perspective?
Well, I'd say
generally
(01:47:29):
speaking, the
biggest, the most
effective way to
motivate people
is if they feel
like they have
something to
lose. And that's
not always
applicable
here. Right.
But you do have
to put it into
terms that
matter. It's not
big, bigger
picture, helping
climate change.
Some people will
be motivated by
that, which is
great. But a lot
of people need to
know, well, my,
(01:47:49):
you know, my
electric bill
could go down or,
you know, we're
going to have
cleaner air in
our community for
our kids and for
everybody.
Or, you know, if
we're shutting
down a coal
plants, that's,
that's, you know,
you can kind of
tell, yeah,
pretty tangible.
Yeah. So it is
finding those
tangible benefits
(01:48:10):
that if the
project doesn't
go through that
they're going to
miss out on.
Yeah, that's
really, really
interesting. What
are some of the
other you
mentioned just
really quickly
that there are so
many challenges.
Can you talk
about like
another major
challenge that
people are that
that we're seeing
with with trying to push people to a new level?
You know, green
energy and
renewable energy
forward. You mean
(01:48:31):
I have I haven't
given you enough
challenges yet.
You should come
to Washington and
spend a few
days here.
There's lots of
challenges. No,
we've discussed a
lot of is there
anything that the
people should
know about that
they may not,
they may not be
aware of.
You know, there's
there's a lot of
headlines and I
don't I imagine
you all were
(01:48:51):
seeing these two,
but the firing of
federal staffers.
Yeah, you know,
entire
departments and
agencies for
science out
the window.
We're not even
tracking
greenhouse gas
emissions in the
same way. And if
you can't track
or measure
something, how
are you going to
adjust and do
things
differently?
You know, but
also some of the
areas that like
(01:49:13):
maybe a
permitting
reform, for
example, you need
federal
government
workers and some
of these agencies
to actually do
that work.
And, you know, we
talk about
speeding things
up. But if you
can't even get
the people to do
the environmental
review because
there's no staff,
it's going to
take longer. So
it just flies in
the face of the
(01:49:33):
stated goals of
this
administration.
So, yeah, those
are some other
challenges. I
think the biggest
and this is
coming back to
the
communications
world that I
think about quite
a bit. It's just
the
misinformation
and the eco, the
ecosystem for
opponents of what
(01:49:53):
we're of what we
do is a machine.
And it's very,
very hard to
compete and
counter that. And
so that's
something that I
mean, our team is
always trying to
think about how
do we how do we
push back against
that and make
sure to get the
facts out there?
And so, you know,
too much of what
is decided in
Washington these
(01:50:14):
days is not about
facts, but just
about pure
politics and
loyalty to one
person and the
the, you know,
the robust
debates about the
benefits and
shortcomings of
certain policies.
It just doesn't
really have the
same impact. It
doesn't really
happen to the
same extent.
(01:50:36):
For sure. I know
it's a tough time
for climate
policy and
communications.
What is your
hopeful moment
that you have,
you know, in the
next little bit?
Like, what what
do you hope for?
And what is your
sort of light at
the end of the
tunnel in this in
this dark time?
I think I
(01:50:56):
mentioned all
these challenges.
But when I think
of the the
climate tech
entrepreneurs who
they don't let a
challenge stop
them, like they
are they see a
challenge and
they're inspired
and excited,
trying to figure
out how to
overcome it.
And, you know, if
you look at all
these climate
tech companies,
the the ways
they're trying to
address climate
change, the
(01:51:17):
it ranges.
It's all over the
map and there's
thousands of
them. And I think
I'm inspired by,
you know, some of
those are going
to end up being
real significant
players in this
in this ecosystem
over the
years to come.
And I just, you
know, they're
going to continue
doing what
they're going to
do, regardless of
what politics in
D.C. is
dictating. Right.
And that, that to
(01:51:38):
me is where
there's hope and,
you know, they if
they can overcome
this period and
then imagine when
there's actually
favorable
policies in
place, how that
can help
supercharge even
further.
So it's OK. Make
as much progress
as we can in
these next three
and a half years.
Stop as much bad
stuff as we can
in this
time period.
(01:51:58):
Yeah. And then,
you know, try to,
you know, try to
be in a place
come 2029, which
feels so far from
now, being a
place where we
can actually go
on offense and
make the progress
that I'd say most
people
agree with.
Yeah. No, I love
it. I love it. I
(01:52:18):
love to end the
interview on
this. Chris,
thank you so much
for that hopeful
moment and to
inform us all
about what's
happening in the
U.S. with
climate policy.
And we appreciate
the work that you
do and all the
all of your
clients do to
kind of continue
to push the
envelope in
making renewable
energy more
accessible, you
know, pushing
policy to make
(01:52:39):
less regulation
so we can get it
even further down
the road.
Really appreciate
that. Learning a
lot. Love to
invite you back
to talk more.
Hopefully, good,
more good news
later on as we as
we get closer to
2029. But I
definitely
appreciate all
the work you're
doing. Thank you
so much.
Great to be on
with you, Andrew.
Enjoy the
conversation.
Appreciate it.
Thank you, Chris,
for joining us on
today's episode
of the How to
Protect the Ocean
podcast. It was
(01:52:59):
great to be able
to talk about
U.S. policy, even
though it's a
grim time. It's a
dark time in U.S.
climate policy,
but there's a
light at the end
of the tunnel.
And that's that
entrepreneurial
spirit.
People want
renewable energy.
People have this
mission to bring
renewable energy,
not only to the
U.S., but to the
world. And it's
growing and
growing and
growing, even
though the fossil
fuel industry
doesn't want to
(01:53:19):
have that
competition.
They're not going
to be able to get
around it.
People want it.
If you look
around your local
town, you look
around your city,
you look around
your state,
you're seeing
more changes
happen for
renewable energy
projects. You're
seeing more EVs.
You're seeing
more hydro
projects. You're
seeing more solar
projects. You're
seeing more wind
projects and even
(01:53:40):
tidal projects.
If you live along
the coastline,
there's a lot of
projects that are
going on. Not
fast enough.
And a lot of
times the holdup
has nothing to do
with
environmental
problems or
regulations. It
has to do with
other regulations
that are put in
place to slow
down green
energy,
especially even
if you're allowed
to do it and you
have these
Republicans or
you have these
conservatives who
are trying to
halt it for
some reason.
(01:54:00):
For example,
Donald Trump
calling an energy
emergency yet
canceling energy
projects that
renewable
projects that
will actually
increase energy
production in the
U.S. So there's a
lot of hypocrisy
around it, but it
doesn't get
handled unless
you fight for it,
unless you talk
to your local
representatives,
unless you take
the talking
points and
understand the
(01:54:21):
talking points
that are coming
from places like
the ECHO
Communication
Advisors at Chris
owns and the
organizations
that are involved
in advocacy
groups that are
involved in
pushing climate policy.
So that we have a
more balanced and
more renewable
energy progress
in climate
policy. So
hopefully we'll
get to there
sometime soon,
but it comes with
you. You know,
you can listen to
(01:54:42):
these podcasts.
You can talk to
your local
government
officials and you
can join the
undertow at speak
up for blue.com
forward slash
join the
undertow. I'm
going to share
the ways to
connect with
Chris and his
company and to
learn more about
climate policy in the U.S. If you look at the show notes, you'llbe able to find that. But don't forget to join the undertow.
(01:55:03):
I want to thank
you so much for
joining us on
today's episode
of the how to
protect the
podcast. I'm your
host, Andrew
Lewin from the
true North strong
and free. Have a
great day. We'll
talk to you next
time. And happy
conservation.
Popular Podcasts
United States of Kennedy
United States of Kennedy is a podcast about our cultural fascination with the Kennedy dynasty. Every week, hosts Lyra Smith and George Civeris go into one aspect of the Kennedy story.
Stuff You Should Know
If you've ever wanted to know about champagne, satanism, the Stonewall Uprising, chaos theory, LSD, El Nino, true crime and Rosa Parks, then look no further. Josh and Chuck have you covered.
Dateline NBC
Current and classic episodes, featuring compelling true-crime mysteries, powerful documentaries and in-depth investigations. Follow now to get the latest episodes of Dateline NBC completely free, or subscribe to Dateline Premium for ad-free listening and exclusive bonus content: DatelinePremium.com