Solar Industry Poll Favors (Surprise) Solar Industry

by Steve Haner

You will never find a better example of blatant question bias in a poll:

“Do you agree or disagree that solar farms are better than other types of development because they do not pollute the environment and help lower the cost of electricity for homes and businesses?”

They “do not pollute” and “help lower the cost for electricity.”  With a tilt like that in the question, the amazing thing is that only 56% of a sample of Virginia voters said sure, I agree, and a full 20% still disagreed, the rest unsure.

There are other examples of biased question design in the poll, released a couple of days ago by a solar industry front group with the convenient and laughable name of “Conservatives for Clean Energy.” Sure, a bunch of conservatives looked up from the latest Tucker Carlson rant, passed on another discussion of the stolen election, and decided instead to pool their money on a poll focused on:

  • The Virginia Clean Economy Act
  • Attitudes about Virginia woods and farmlands being converted to miles and miles of solar panels
  • Virginia’s continued participation in the PJM Interconnection grid

No, this is an industry backed operation, definitely tied to solar developers but the fine hand of a utility might be discerned, as well. Only somebody totally in bed with the solar industry or less than honest would accept this at face value as coming from disinterested “conservatives.”

Which of course would explain why Virginia Mercury bought this hook, line and obvious agenda with a story published earlier today. No questions in that story about who is really paying and certainly no eyebrows raised by biased questions. So we raise those here.

There is no reason to doubt that the poll of 762 likely voters was done properly, and the results obtained are fairly reported. You simply must pay attention to the questions as asked and not asked or to the “helpful” added information included and “unhelpful” facts excluded.

The Virginia Clean Economy Act called the “VCEA” passed last year requires utilities to transition to 100 percent clean energy by 2050, cut emissions from polluting power plants, and retire those plants over time. It also requires utilities to offer more energy efficiency programs, to help customers reduce their energy bills. After hearing this, do you support or oppose the VCEA?

Anything missing from that? Do you see any reference to the detailed customer cost projections already produced by the State Corporation Commission? To the new electricity tax being imposed on all customers to selectively lower the bills of a favored few? To the other new electricity tax to pay for carbon allowances, showing up on Dominion bills next month?

Again, with the added push of “reduce their energy bills” being the last phrase of the question, still only 62% of respondents said they supported it. Use instead: “…which will add 50 percent to the cost of your electricity over ten years” in the question and the results would flip, and most respondents would have been opposed.

Here is another way it’s done: The poll includes a series of three “questions” about how solar developments “pose no danger to people, livestock and agriculture crops or adjacent homes,” and “allow farmers to receive supplementary income to keep farms alive,” followed by “generate millions of dollars in tax revenue for schools.”

If was only after the build-up of those (you have to admit) one-sided arguments that the real questions about attitudes toward solar are asked, such as the one at the opening of this post. The three positive claims as precursors put a huge thumb on the scale. Cooking The Poll 101.

The poll also asked people about personal experiences with solar in their county or neighborhood, and 225 indicated they had been affected, most (14%) positively but many (8%) negatively. That is probably a more accurate test of public attitudes and shows them far more closely balanced.

Finally, the poll tested the gubernatorial election, reporting a soft 45% to 40% edge for Democrat Terry McAuliffe over Republican Glenn Youngkin. While the samples sizes shrink on some of the subgroups, it showed McAuliffe’s lead is mainly based on the opinions of women and suburban voters, perhaps one and the same. In those categories the Democrat has double-digit leads, but there is time for those to change.

So what do we really learn from this poll?

The solar industry and others who are going to get rich off the VCEA renewable energy boom are very worried about this becoming an election issue before November 2. The real purpose of this poll is to discourage anybody from going there, to create an impression opinions are set, that real conservatives are all in.

Opinions are not set. Voters still know very little about this. A simple early question about VCEA revealed only 27% of respondents knew about it. That must include some percentage who know and dislike it.

They cannot sell this with honesty and open debate.

The poll also tested, but just as importantly shows off, various messages that proponents of the VCEA, especially the massive solar component, will want to use to either sell it, or defend their votes for it. The slideshow includes detailed crosstabs on the pro and con arguments, the kind of crosstabs political professionals use in message targeting (again, with small samples on those).

It is a political tool masquerading as a test of voter opinion. Read and use it as a political tool.


Share this article



ADVERTISEMENT

(comments below)



ADVERTISEMENT

(comments below)


Comments

67 responses to “Solar Industry Poll Favors (Surprise) Solar Industry”

  1. William O'Keefe Avatar
    William O’Keefe

    If this poll was an example of the sophistication of the solar industry, see short. The blatant bias shows at a minimum that the polling firm is worse than a bunch of amateurs. At least they could have read Darrell Huff’s How to Lie With Statistics before developing the polling questions.
    The VCEA is based on the promotion of fear at the expense of science, technology, and objective decision making. Unless someone can find a way to get China, India, and poor developing countries from burning coal and dung, these expensive feel good initiatives are no more than pxxxxxx in the wind.

    1. LarrytheG Avatar
      LarrytheG

      I agree, it’s a lame poll. But with China and India , the US and developed countries have to lead especially with R&D and if/when the US/OECD develops cost effective battery storage, the game is over for fossil fuels.

      Fossil Fuels only hope is that such technology is never developed.

      1. William O'Keefe Avatar
        William O’Keefe

        You live in a dream world. China is demonstrating what it thinks about this nonsense by opening a new coal fired plant weekly.

        1. LarrytheG Avatar
          LarrytheG

          see comment up thread.

  2. tmtfairfax Avatar
    tmtfairfax

    China is not a developing country. It’s a developed country. The middle class in India is estimated to be between 300-350 million people. China’s is estimated at around 400 million.

    And the poll is a lie. If solar is cheaper, why does Dominion send bill inserts and emails urging me to pay more for renewable energy. These guys doing the poll are so crooked that they could fill in writing editorials at the Post when everyone else is on vacation.

    1. LarrytheG Avatar
      LarrytheG

      Per capita income in China is about 17K. Their “middle class” is not really equivalent to USA.

      ” Officially about 400 million Chinese are categorised as middle income, which is generally defined by the National Bureau of Statistics as a family of three earning between 100,000 yuan (US$15,200) to 500,000 yuan annually, though the definition is not always consistent.”

      But the more relevant point is that China wants their electricity grid to extend to much more of the country – not unlike the US did with the rural electrification program under Roosevelt.

      They are not just building coal plants. They are also building hydro, and nukes and solar …

      But like India – there are billions of people who actually use far less electricity and energy than we do which makes it a tougher thing to reduce overall power.

      So, yes, it’s a much bigger issue with developing countries that the developed countries.

    2. DJRippert Avatar
      DJRippert

      Inhale deeply and you might just smell the stench of a certain hedge fund manager from Charlottesville emanating from that poll.

      1. LarrytheG Avatar
        LarrytheG

        That’s rich. Not like Youngkin? 😉

        1. DJRippert Avatar
          DJRippert

          Younkin was a private equity guy but nonetheless … he’s running for office and his ideas are subject to intense public scrutiny. The hedge fund manager in question operates secretly, behind the scenes.

          1. Nancy Naive Avatar
            Nancy Naive

            What ideas? Where are these ideas written down? Aside from a total ban on abortion, what idea has he had?

          2. LarrytheG Avatar
            LarrytheG

            so secretly that every Conservative in Virginia knows him and his “evil” machinations?

            Funny as hell!

            You guys are one trick ponies. Boogeyman. Boogeyman. Bogeyman!

            Do you REALLY THINK Youngkin never donated to the GOP?

            😉

  3. It’s like a reverse push poll – does that mean it’s a pull poll?

    1. LarrytheG Avatar
      LarrytheG

      It’s a totally bogus poll but the GOP never does such things…. so bad on the folks who do push polls…

      1. I made absolutely no mention of the actions/antics of any political party in my comment, nor did I accuse any political party of anything. Why, then, did you deem it necessary to mention one in your response?

        1. LarrytheG Avatar
          LarrytheG

          Just a comment dude. The basic tenor of the article was about bogus push-type polls and my comment basically was that I agree it was and both parties do it.

      1. energyNOW_Fan Avatar
        energyNOW_Fan

        Good one,,,exactly

  4. Stephen Haner Avatar
    Stephen Haner

    Also telling they kept wind totally out of the questions. Probably saw this coming:
    https://www.cnbc.com/2021/08/12/low-wind-speeds-hurt-profits-at-two-of-europes-major-energy-firms.html

    1. Nancy Naive Avatar
      Nancy Naive

      Nevertheless, line #2 is…
      Danish energy firm Orsted states it will maintain its full-year guidance for 2021 even though lower wind speeds have affected output.

      1. LarrytheG Avatar
        LarrytheG

        hey… that’s including ALL of the article. No fair!

        1. Stephen Haner Avatar
          Stephen Haner

          I linked to the full article, you dishonest …

          1. LarrytheG Avatar
            LarrytheG

            Geeze -Steve… my point was that the article itself had a slightly different tenor than “wind is failing as an energy source”.

            Maybe I should have put it that way?

  5. LarrytheG Avatar
    LarrytheG

    Wow. This sounds like something the competitive enterprise institute or CATO would do!

    I don’t disagree with the sentiment but any tears would truly be crocodile.

    But I’d bet you dollars to donuts if Youngkin came out and said that he opposed wind and solar because of all the issues cited by Conservatives opposed to wind/solar – it would not benefit him.

    So , should Youngkin take that principled “true” Conservative stand and believe that it’s way more than Conservatives that also are on board with that view?

    Pretty sure he’d get most of RoVa that way, no?

    1. Stephen Haner Avatar
      Stephen Haner

      Every discerning mind should always look to the questions and examine for bias, right or left, etc. And had YOU done so (you never do) with this you’d see a question about “all of the above” being a popular line with the voters, one many politicians use to dive for cover. VCEA is not “all of the above.” The cost of VCEA if and when known will sink it.

      1. LarrytheG Avatar
        LarrytheG

        No. I actually totally agreed with you on the bias. No?

        But again, I ask you if Youngkin should come out against wind and solar to win votes especially if it is true that VCEA is a ruse? Surely you can weigh in on that? 😉

        1. Stephen Haner Avatar
          Stephen Haner

          You don’t think I write these things to send a message to YOU, do you? You are not my audience.

          1. LarrytheG Avatar
            LarrytheG

            Of course not. But the question to you about Youngkin and solar remains if you feel that the issue actually has import to voters.

          2. Nancy Naive Avatar
            Nancy Naive

            Me?

          3. No, me!

          4. Nancy Naive Avatar
            Nancy Naive

            Aw…

        2. DJRippert Avatar
          DJRippert

          Nobody is going to come out against wind and solar. If wind and solar’s total cost were the same as fossil fuel there would be no debate. Other than narrowly defined special interests, who doesn’t want a cleaner environment.

          One question is whether the speed and costs of getting to wind or solar are worth the benefits.

          1. LarrytheG Avatar
            LarrytheG

            If wind and solar are such a bogus scam then I would expect principled Conservatives to run on it instead of hiding from it.

            Why not tell the truth to voters and be rewarded with votes for doing it?

            Or are we talking about hypocrisy ?

          2. DJRippert Avatar
            DJRippert

            Quantum computing isn’t a bogus scam but I wouldn’t through out your Macbook just yet expecting to replace it with a quantum computer tomorrow.

          3. LarrytheG Avatar
            LarrytheG

            Whats a MacBook?

            But again, if wind and solar are such a bogus scam according to most/many Conservatives… why not run on it?

            Why not promise to not give subsidies and favorable treatment to it?

            I smell a whiff of something… here.. no?

  6. LarrytheG Avatar
    LarrytheG

    If this actually happens, the game changes, and wind/solar displace fossil fuels including in China and India. This is not some front-group – this is the Wall Street Journal:

    ” Startup Claims Breakthrough in Long-Duration Batteries
    Form Energy’s iron-air batteries could have big ramifications for storing electricity on the power grid

    A four-year-old startup says it has built an inexpensive battery that can discharge power for days using one of the most common elements on Earth: iron.

    Form Energy Inc.’s batteries are far too heavy for electric cars. But it says they will be capable of solving one of the most elusive problems facing renewable energy: cheaply storing large amounts of electricity to power grids when the sun isn’t shining and wind isn’t blowing.

    The work of the Somerville, Mass., company has long been shrouded in secrecy and nondisclosure agreements. It recently shared its progress with The Wall Street Journal, saying it wants to make regulators and utilities aware that if all continues to go according to plan, its iron-air batteries will be capable of affordable, long-duration power storage by 2025.”

    https://www.wsj.com/articles/startup-claims-breakthrough-in-long-duration-batteries-11626946330

    Now, this could be a scam like Cold Fusion was, so we’ll have to see how it plays out but from what I read , research in this field is widespread.

    Why are Conservatives not supporting this concept?

    If Youngkin advocated Virginia supporting companies that were involved in this – would it win votes from both Conservatives and liberals, or would Conservatives abandon him for Climate Change blasphemy?

    .

    1. William O'Keefe Avatar
      William O’Keefe

      Please DO THE MATH before any more blathering.

      1. LarrytheG Avatar
        LarrytheG

        explain?

        1. William O'Keefe Avatar
          William O’Keefe

          If you calculate the amount of emissions from China, India, and poor developing countries, they are greater than the reductions that will be achieved by your expensive breakthroughs.

          1. LarrytheG Avatar
            LarrytheG

            You mean if there are battery breakthroughs? How do you know?

          2. DJRippert Avatar
            DJRippert

            That is a very good point. Sometimes it seems like our aggressive and expensive timetable in Virginia is more like spitting into the ocean (or virtue signaling) than a meaningful change for the world environment.

          3. LarrytheG Avatar
            LarrytheG

            Ya’ll sound like luddites… So let me ask you direct. If there is a real battery breakthrough, do you think it changes things?

          4. DJRippert Avatar
            DJRippert

            I hold two US patents – one for cloud and one for cyber-security. I may be a lot of things but Luddite isn’t one.

            Driving the price of electricity through the roof in Virginia won’t stop China from producing new coal fired generation plants.

            Moore’s Law applies to semiconductors not everything. There is no guarantee of a price performance breakthrough in wind or solar.

          5. LarrytheG Avatar
            LarrytheG

            But you surely know that innovation is the path forward. No?

            Do you not have any faith in innovation?

            Do you not believe innovation is not going to happen with battery technology?

            Would you be against it?

          6. Nancy Naive Avatar
            Nancy Naive

            The US has innovator’s dilemma. Frozen for fear of becoming OBE.

          7. Nancy Naive Avatar
            Nancy Naive

            Hey! Just two? Well, my name’s on mine, but that’ll get me a cup of coffee from the office kitchen.

          8. Nancy Naive Avatar
            Nancy Naive

            Sound like? They ARE the dictionary picture.

          9. William O'Keefe Avatar
            William O’Keefe

            Have you even tried to calculate what a breakthrough would mean in terms of emissions between when it took place and when it was fully commercialized? You are in never, never land.

          10. LarrytheG Avatar
            LarrytheG

            under no illusions, decades and longer , not in many of our lifetimes.

          11. William O'Keefe Avatar
            William O’Keefe

            And you are someone who is blinded by industrial policy even though is history is dismal

          12. Nancy Naive Avatar
            Nancy Naive

            So, look at it this way. Let’s assume the emissions are destroying the atmosphere. They’ll all be dead and we’ll have the planet to ourselves.

      2. John Harvie Avatar
        John Harvie

        what math do you want?

    2. John Harvie Avatar
      John Harvie

      I’ve done some studying up on this and believe a key sentence in your post to be important:

      ” Startup Claims Breakthrough in Long-Duration Batteries
      Form Energy’s iron-air batteries could have big ramifications for storing electricity on the power grid”

      Not all present technology is long-duration. The definition of long duration, of course is in the mind of the beholder, to paraphrase.

      This applies to wind too.

      1. LarrytheG Avatar
        LarrytheG

        Yes. I don’t know how it will play out. But I’m convinced, that R&D efforts are widespread in this area and we have had successes in the past when we focus on the issue.

        Battery technology to this point has already changed the world. Look at cell phones. Where was cell phone technology 10-15 years ago?

        Is it so hard to not believe that in 10-15 years that battery technology will not make leaps like we have seen in other technologies?

        If and when such a breakthrough occurs, everything changes… and business folks have a name for it – disruptive innovation.

        Seven different types of disruptive technologies

        Cloud computing. An obvious one for us, this has completely revolutionised how IT and tech firms operate – cloud computing replaced hardware. …

        Internet of things. …
        Mobile Internet. …
        Renewable Energy. …
        3D Printing Technology. …
        Next-gen storage solutions.

    3. First you said it might be a scam and we need to see how it plays out. Then you asked why conservatives are not supporting it. Really?

      Perhaps conservatives are not currently jumping up and down about it because it might be a scam and we need to see how it plays out. As far as your “advice” to Glenn Youngkin goes, if a Youngkin administration used taxpayer dollar to entice a company to Virginia and that company turned out to be a fraud, you [and everyone else] would rightfully criticize him.

      It works you great for you, though. You get to criticize conservatives no matter which way it turns out.

      As far as the claim itself, although I am skeptical, I hope this claimed breakthrough is real, and that it moves battery technology forward exponentially. That might make solar and wind power generation both economically and functionally viable as permanent, full-time, replacements for fossil fuel power plants. Because, until the electric power generated by them can be efficiently stored and retrieved, intermittent sources like wind and solar can never be anything but a partial replacement or augmentation of fossil fuel powered sources.

      1. LarrytheG Avatar
        LarrytheG

        So you start off with YOU!

        How about you start off with Your point rather than YOU?

        Then you can discuss the issue and your view and how you disagree with the one I expressed, so on and so forth.

        How about that?

        1. How about you start off with Your point…

          I did. Your hypocrisy and double-standards were my first point.

          1. LarrytheG Avatar
            LarrytheG

            that’s not about the issue being commented on and when you make it personal about the commenter, that’s an ad hominem.

            Say all you want about the issue and disagree but when you attack the person – you’re being an idiot which you seem to not be able to break that habit so I’m thinking it’s in your personality itself.

            You have a problem there.

        1. This looks promising. If these guys can deliver on their iron-based electricity storage technology, it will be a game changer. Once the technology has been demonstrated to be cost-effective and reliable, I’ll be singing a very different tune. A 100% renewable grid could be feasible.

          But we’ve heard lots of promises before. Anyone remember cold fusion? And even if the technology pans out, it might take a while to work out all the kinks. You don’t premise the future of the entire electric grid upon promises. Let’s see how the technology works, and if it does, let’s forge ahead.

          1. LarrytheG Avatar
            LarrytheG

            It will and I’m surprised that Conservatives are not on board with the idea of “American free market ingenuity”.

            Just imagine if this is real, how countries like China and India would be transformed and all the angst about Global Warming would evaporate!

            Naw… it’s probably like cold fusion!

            But I’d like to see someone like Youngkin support it and have an optimistic view about wind/solar and the future.

  7. Nancy Naive Avatar
    Nancy Naive

    A Cheney Choice. Similiar to a Hobson’s Choice… in a way.

  8. Nancy Naive Avatar
    Nancy Naive

    The cost of things.
    A dairy cow requires 40 gallons of water and produces 7 gallons of milk per day.

    A single almond takes 1 gallon of water to grow. A cup of almonds is roughly 100 almonds and after soaking and blending with 3.5 cups of water will produce 1/4 of a gallon of almond milk.

    No wonder California is on fire. Burn the almond groves first.

    1. LarrytheG Avatar
      LarrytheG

      A whole lot of hurt is gonna happen to farmers…

  9. Ron Butler Avatar
    Ron Butler

    In a 2019 interview with Bloomberg Editor-in-Chief John Micklethwait, Glenn Youngkin talked about his views on energy production:

    “I think what has happened over the last few years is the economic reality of renewables has settled in. What I mean by that is they have come way down the cost curve and so literally on a power production basis it is wildly competitive with competitive fuel sources, and so that is enabling wind and solar to compete on its own… the economic reality coupled with the clear political momentum for renewables in our mind makes renewables a very good place to invest over a very long time. If global energy consumption… continues to grow at 1.5 to 2%, all forms – other than in our view coal – will grow. It just so happens that wind and solar will grow at 10x the rate of oil and natural gas.”

    1. LarrytheG Avatar
      LarrytheG

      Did not know that. Thank You.

      Wondering why Youngkin has not touted wind/solar currently. Trying to not turn off his base?

      I think he is still deciding whether to run on the culture war wedge issues or as a moderate GOP .

      He needs his base but he also needs independents and maybe even some Dems.

      I notice he came out against Northam on the mask issue yesterday.

Leave a Reply