renewable energy workers

By Johanna Bozuwa, Arturo Massol-Deya, Patrick Robbins, Ted Glick, Seth Berry, and Gaby Sarri-Tobar - Center for Biolgical Diversity, April 24, 2023

By Andy O’Brien - Maine AFL-CIO, April 20, 2023

The Maine Lobstering Union (IAM 207) and the Maine AFL-CIO Executive Board have voted to support a proposal that would protect fishing grounds while also allowing offshore wind development in a way that creates good union jobs. The Maine Lobstering Union, IAM Local 207, the building trades, the Maine Labor Climate Council and others have worked tirelessly on the legislation, LR 741, -- with the support of bill sponsor Sen. Mark Lawrence and Senate President Troy Jackson -- to protect core fishing grounds and set high fisheries, environmental, equity, and labor standards on offshore wind development.

"We applaud the Maine Lobstering Union, Building Trades locals and others for doing the spade work to develop a solid plan for workers that protects Maine fisheries and guarantees good union jobs in the development of this new industry," said Matt Schlobohm, Maine AFL-CIO Executive Director. "When we work together to develop a worker led vision for climate action, we can create new union jobs, protect existing industries and tackle climate change head on."

By staff - Trade Unions for Energy Democracy, April 8, 2023

On Tuesday, the Mexican Government signed an agreement to purchase 13 power generation plants from the Spanish multinational Iberdrola. Purchase turns the State Company into a majority owner in electric energy generation in Mexico.

Three weeks after hundreds of thousands mobilised to mark 85 years since the expropriation of oil by former Mexican President Lazaro Cardenas, the federal government announced it is purchasing 13 electric energy generation plants owned by the Iberdrola for nearly USD $6 billion. The 13 plants represent 8,539 MW of installed capacity, with 8,436 MW corresponding to combined cycle gas and 103 MW to wind. Altogether, the purchase represents 77% of Iberdrola’s installed capacity in the country, although the Spain-based multinational would remain the main private generator of renewable energy in Mexico.

While many details are yet to be made public around the financing structure, according to the finance ministry, a new trust fund managed by Mexico Infrastructure Partners (MIP) will own the power plants, with a majority of its capital sourced primarily by Fonadin, the public infrastructure fund of Mexico. The federal power utility, Comisión Federal de Electricidad (CFE), will operate the plants.

"This means, without exaggerating (...), the rescue of the CFE and is a new nationalisation of the electricity industry. Most important of all, in this way, we guarantee that electricity prices will not increase for consumers, as has been the case in the last four years,” said President Andrés Manuel López Obrador (AMLO). “In other words, the CFE becomes the majority company. If we add to this that final plants are being built, hydroelectric plants are being rehabilitated with new turbines, all under the CFE, we can affirm that the Mexican state will maintain around 65 per cent of all energy generation at the end of the six-year term,” added AMLO in Tuesday’s televised announcement.

“The CFE is the only company with permission to commercialise electricity. The CFE had to buy electricity from these 13 Iberdrola plants in order to sell it. Today, we will no longer need this intermediation,” said Rocío Nahle, Secretary of the Energy Ministry (Sener). “The Mexican people are therefore favoured because we are able to sustain affordable electricity costs. In Mexico, we are the country with the lowest energy rates in the OECD because we have an energy policy that the President reviews daily, and with PEMEX, CFE, it allows us to have rates below inflation,” she said.

By staff - National Union of Rail, Maritime and Transport Workers (RMT), April 5, 2023

OFFSHORE union RMT today demanded trade union rights and fair pay in the Offshore Wind industry following an independent report by the UK government’s Offshore Wind Champion Tim Pick.

RMT general secretary Mick Lynch said that it was disappointing that trade unions were not consulted as part of the report, especially as it acknowledges the importance of a just transition to the 50,000 jobs which are expected to be lost from the oil and gas industry by 2030.

“RMT is calling for mandatory collective bargaining in the offshore wind supply chain for fixed and floating projects, including in low tax low regulation Freeports where the government intend much of this accelerated offshore wind activity to take place.

“However, we welcome the recognition of the delay in skills passporting for our offshore members, the move away from voluntary local content targets and the linking of seabed leasing rights to supply chain development, which could be funded out of Crown Estates’ profits. 

“The recognition of the advantage gained in the US and EU by massive subsidy commitment to green energy is also significant but we need some reality to prevail over the damaging effects of government policy to date on increasing jobs, safety and skills across the offshore wind supply chain.

“For example, crew in the offshore wind supply chain can be paid below the national minimum wage to work at sea for months on end and that needs to change fast,” he said.

By Mary Church, Craig Dalzell, Roz Foyer, Sean Sweeney, Mika Minio-Paluello, et. al. - Just Transition Partnership, March 8, 2023

An online conference organised by the Just Transition Partnership to set out why public ownership of energy production and infrastructure is an essential part of any plans to hit climate change targets.

This event featured experts on how the privatised energy system is giving us fuel poverty, soaring energy prices and profits; and failing to deliver a Just Transition as well as reviewing the publicly-owned solutions in key sectors, from local to national levels.

Introduction: Mary Church - Reclaiming our Energy introduction

By Devin Keats and Don Hill - Iron and Earth, March 6, 2023

By Johanna Bozuwa, Sarah Knuth, Grayson Flood, Patrick Robbins, and Olúfẹ́mi O. Táíwò - Climate & Community Project, March 2023

The Inflation Reduction Act provides tax incentives for corporate investment in renewable energy — but what if “we the people” created our own publicly owned and community controlled renewable energy system?

Building Public Renewables in the United States, a new report from the Climate and Community Project, proposes a “Federal Public Power Program [that] would inject straightforward, public investment into the electricity system.”

The report proposes to “counter the monopolized, fossil-fueled, and profit-driven status quo of today” with a federal program that would invest in:

• Existing publicly owned and cooperative utility energy providers

• Tribal Nations

• Newly authorized Regional Power Authorities

• Grants for democratic development and transparency

The report says, “The transition to renewable energy requires far more than just a technological swap driven by private companies. It requires reordering the electricity system so that it values good-paying jobs, justice, and democracy.”

A federal program could require projects to provide good jobs, prioritize funds to disadvantaged communities, and demand real accountability to the community.

Download this document (PDF).

By Michael Levien - Historical Materialism, March 2023

Review of Matthew Huber, (2022) Climate Change as Class War: Building Socialism on a Warming Planet, London: Verso.

The year-long American saga that culminated in the Inflation Reduction Act (IRA) underscored the difference between two ways of mitigating climate change at the national level. The first is elite climate policy in which wonks and technocrats come up with the smartest policies to incentivise private capital to invest in the right technologies. This is, ultimately, what we got with the IRA, which has been accurately characterised as the triumph of ‘green industrial policy’.¹ The second is popular climate politics which seeks to build a broad political coalition for decarbonisation by tying it to social programmes that directly improve people’s lives. This is the idea behind the Green New Deal, which to a surprising extent made its way into the initial Build Back Better bill before Joe Manchin got his hands on it. Matthew Huber’s book Climate Change as Class War provides a powerful critique of the first while advancing a labour-centred version of the second.

Huber lands many good punches against what he calls professional-class climate politics. Building on the Ehrenreichs’ concept of the professional managerial class (PMC),² Huber argues that PMC climate politics characteristically over-emphasises that class’ stock-in-trade: education and credentials. In their hands, climate politics thus becomes a matter of knowledge (communicating the science) more than one of power (tackling the class power of the fossil-fuel industry). PMC policy technocrats further internalise neoliberal logic with their obsession with pricing carbon – a policy that ultimately balances the carbon budget on the backs of working-class consumers. In its more radical manifestations, PMC environmentalism – degrowth being the main target here – espouses an ascetic ‘politics of less’ that has no resonance with working-class people who already do not have enough. This type of environmental politics, Huber argues, explains why the right has been able to mobilise the working class against the environment.

By way of alternative, Huber advances a theory of working-class climate politics which he dubs ‘proletarian ecology’. The starting point, developed over Chapters 1 and 2, is to recognise that industrial fossil capital is responsible for the vast majority of emissions. As Huber sketches with discussions of the cement and fertiliser industries – for the latter, Huber draws on some interviews with managers of a fertiliser plant in Louisiana – their carbon intensity is not a matter of greed but of the structural imperative to produce surplus value, and therefore will not be halted (as opposed to greenwashed) by any amount of shaming. Thus, ‘Climate change requires an antagonistic approach towards owners of capital in the “hidden abode” of production’ (p. 106). The problem is that ‘the climate movement today – made up of professional class activists and the most marginalized victims of climate change – is too narrowly constructed to constitute a real threat to the power of industrial capital’ (p. 69).

This brings us to the bold and controversial claim of Climate Change as Class War: it is the working class (and organised labour in particular) that must be the main agent of radical climate politics, not the diverse coalitions of ‘marginalised groups’ – which includes Indigenous movements against pipelines and Black-led environmental justice organisations – who are currently the vanguard of the climate justice movement. What Huber calls ‘livelihood environmentalism’ only sees the working class as having environmental interests when their communities’ land, water or health are directly threatened (p. 195). Huber’s theory of proletarian ecology, by contrast, proceeds from the broader recognition that ‘a defining feature of working-class life under capitalism is profound alienation from the ecological conditions of life itself’ (p. 188). Thus ‘a working-class interest in ecology will emerge not from the experience of environmental threats, but from a profound separation from nature and the means of subsistence’ (pp. 181–2). Rather than defending bodies or landscapes, it will focus on the working class’s material interest in decommodifying the means of subsistence (p. 196).

By Shawn Hubbard and Don Hill - Iron and Earth, February 28, 2023

By Clifford Krauss - New York Times, February 27, 2023

Solar, wind, geothermal, battery and other alternative-energy businesses are adding workers from fossil fuel companies, where employment has fallen.

Emma McConville was thrilled when she landed a job as a geologist at Exxon Mobil in 2017. She was assigned to work on one of the company’s most exciting and lucrative projects, a giant oil field off Guyana.

But after oil prices collapsed during the pandemic, she was laid off on a video call at the end of 2020. “I probably blacked out halfway,” Ms. McConville recalled.

Her shock was short-lived. Just four months later, she landed a job with Fervo, a young Houston company that aims to tap geothermal energy under the Earth’s surface. Today she manages the design of two Fervo projects in Nevada and Utah, and earns more than she did at Exxon.

“Covid allowed me to pivot,” she said. “Covid was an impetus for renewables, not just for me but for many of my colleagues.”

Oil and gas companies laid off roughly 160,000 workers in 2020, and they maintained tight budgets and hired cautiously over the last two years. But many renewable businesses expanded rapidly after the early shock of the pandemic faded, snapping up geologists, engineers and other workers from the likes of Exxon and Chevron. Half of Fervo’s 38 employees come from fossil fuel companies, including BP, Hess and Chesapeake Energy.

Executives and workers in energy hubs in Houston, Dallas and other places say steady streams of people are moving from fossil fuel to renewable energy jobs. It’s hard to track such movements in employment statistics, but the overall numbers suggest such career moves are becoming more common. Oil, gas and coal employment has not recovered to its prepandemic levels. But the number of jobs in renewable energy, including solar, wind, geothermal and battery businesses, is rising.