Energy Misinformation, Shadow Bans, Biased Fact-Checking, Effects on Project Opposition, and Valid Concerns

 

     What constitutes energy misinformation depends on who you ask. A recent article in The Cool Down by Tokollo Matsabu laments that certain ‘mysterious’ Facebook groups are influencing public opposition to renewable energy projects by spreading misinformation to local communities about the dangers of wind and solar. Climate journalist Michael Thomas joined 40 of these groups to evaluate whether misinformation was a factor. He concluded that wind and solar were being misrepresented as much more dangerous than they really are, and that this misperception was influencing ‘not in my backyard’ anti-renewables activism or NIMBYism. While this may well be true, there is nothing illegal or particularly nefarious about it. Other warnings include things like ‘wind turbine syndrome,’ where people claim they are harmed by the low frequency noises and vibrations of the turbines. This may be partially or mostly placebo effect, but it has not been thoroughly discounted. Activist groups opposed to things like hydraulic fracturing, or fracking, which has come to represent the whole oil and gas development process, have long misrepresented facts with little to no retribution. Both sets of groups stretch the truth and free speech allows them to do so. Attempts to quell so-called climate misinformation are wrought with potential free speech curbs.

     Social media groups like Facebook, Twitter, and others, and business network group LinkedIn have attempted to flag and tag posts for possible misinformation, with results that have been entirely unsatisfactory. In 2021 Facebook was utilizing strongly biased climate alarmist and environmental groups to fact-check posts, tagging them as false or partially false. I was stunned by the list of radical groups that were entrusted with this fact-checking. In my opinion, many of these groups are so biased that they are not even well-acquainted with facts! I believe this biased fact-checking has been significantly toned down due to legitimate backlash, but it remains a concern. In many cases, this is certainly a form of censorship. Another is the manipulation of algorithms to suppress the range of who gets to see posts. This was revealed in the recent ‘Twitter Files’ and even scientists with a minority view have noted that they were subjected without a doubt to these “shadow bans,” many of which Elon Musk lifted. I do think some of the Covid misinformation has been particularly egregious and should be flagged and tagged but the same is not true of climate and energy issues, which still have high degrees of uncertainty and debatability. Indisputably, alarmism has tended to be tolerated much more than anti-alarmism. In recent times, many media outlets including the Guardian and even Scientific American, have chosen to portray climate change as climate crisis or climate emergency. David Wallace-Wells can speak freely about an ‘uninhabitable earth,’ and anyone can declare a mass extinction, it seems, but downplaying alarmism or saying it is overblown, can subject one to fact-checking censorship. There is a long history of predicted environmental apocalypses that have never materialized. People like biologist Paul Ehrlich, whose predictions about world hunger have been extremely wrong and influenced harmful population control, is still able to put forth alarmist predictions without being fact-checked. Real harm can come from overly aggressive climate policies as well. Incidentally, I have never heard of people calling for anti-fracking acticvists, anti-fossil fuel activists, or anti-GMO activists to be fact-checked and censored, even though it can be argued that much of their rhetoric involves misinformation.

     However, in Matsabu’s article he suggests the opposite, that Meta, or Facebook’s algorithms are amplifying climate misinformation. He acknowledges that Facebook has fact-checkers but that they are spread thin and generally don’t mess with Facebook groups, especially closed groups. He whines about “echo chambers” and while he may have a point, echo chambers exist on all sides of debates. He finishes the article by noting that we have a responsibility to the facts. He notes that wind and solar are cheaper than fossil fuels. That is quite debatable and very likely not true at all if one accounts for needed backup of variable and intermittent wind and solar which is often natural gas and expensive energy storage. The upfront costs of wind and solar are much higher than those of natural gas, which is a “pay-as-you-go systems involving buying fuel. He also says that “dirty” fossil energy is hurting our communities. While that may have some truth in terms of pollution from coal and diesel, these energy sources are also providing energy reliability and affordability to our communities, which translates on the overall to better human welfare.

     Meanwhile, several articles have come out in just the last few days concerning potential dangers, reliability issues, and other downsides of wind turbines, solar panels, battery materials, and EVs. I want to highlight some of these issues to make the point that some concerns about these technologies are warranted. Consumer Reports has highlighted three EV’s with below average reliability: they note: “The (Ford Mustang) Mach-E has experienced battery issues that cause immobility, brake shudder and vibration issues, and plenty of other problems that have made consumers doubt the SUV’s reliability.” Next is the VW ID.4, a competitor of Tesla’s Model Y: “Some VW ID.4 drivers have experienced battery cooling pump failures, which could lead to battery overheating. Consumer Reports claims that the Volkswagen ID.4 has below-average reliability as well.” Consumer Reports has also tagged the Hyundai Kona Electric as having below average reliability. Of course, these issues are likely to be worked out in the future but who wants to get stuck with unforeseen problems in a very expensive new vehicle. Such problems surely undermine consumer confidence. EV maker Rivian has experienced numerous problems with charging causing battery drain, as a Washington Examiner article notes. “This excessive drain (also known as 'vampire drain') has been reported by Rivian owners for months.”

     A recent report from Bloomberg recounts increased incidences of large wind turbines falling over and attributes these to quality control issues related to manufacturing. Popular Mechanics reporting on the Bloomberg report said that “turbines are falling for the three largest players in the industry: General Electric, Vestas, and Siemens Gamesa. Why? “It takes time to stabilize production and quality on these new products,” quoting GE CEO Larry Culp. The failures are concerning as bigger turbines are perhaps being deployed faster than manufacturing QC and supply chains can handle. “Bloomberg reports that Siemens has endured quality control issues on a new design, Vestas has seen project delays and quality challenges, and GE has seen an uptick in warranty costs and repairs. And this all comes along with uncertain supply chain issues and fluctuating material pricing.” Siemens has been experiencing product quality issues throughout 2022 and recently had to write down significant sums due to turbine flaws. Wind companies have taken losses due to high steel prices and supply chain disruptions. These production issues are not likely to affect the industry long-term, but they are the kind of issues that can plague new technologies that are accelerated beyond the capabilities of quality control and assurance.

     Another issue that certainly does have to do with safety is the potential of EV fires. The Washington Examiner reports that Norwegian shipping company Havila Kystruten has banned hybrid and electric vehicles due to their fire risk. This is due to their onboard fire control systems. Their systems can handle their own battery banks which were designed with fire safety and fossil fuel fires but not fires from lithium car batteries, they said. In September 2022 insurer Allianz issued a warning, citing the primary EV hazards of fire, explosion, toxic gases, and thermal runaway. They noted that onboard fires are one of the biggest safety issues for shipping companies. They noted that onboard fires are increasing and are the most expensive cause of losses, amounted to 18% of all industry insurance losses.

     Hype can be considered as a kind of misinformation and the capabilities of renewables and EV’s have certainly been hyped up. EV company Lightyear just announced that it is halting production on its solar powered Lightyear 0, an EV with the truly astonishing price of $270,000 due to a strategic restructuring. The model was a “flagship” model, presumably a kind of prototype, and they had planned to make 946 of them. They claimed it could get 44 miles of range from the solar panels alone. I am skeptical. Instead, they said they will focus on the Lightyear 2, a model projected to be under $40,000 and go into production in late 2025. It will be a much-slimmed down version of the Lightyear 0. It would have to be at just 14% of the cost. They say they have 20,000 orders from fleet owners for the Lightyear 2.

     And speaking of hype, a new solar EV startup Aptera is claiming their new three-wheeled (trike) solar EV will be able to get 400 miles of range on a full charge and 40 miles a day from the mere 700 watts of solar panels. It must be really light. It is a strange looking vehicle. They plan to produce 5000 of them beginning in 2023 pending funding. This is the company’s second attempt to enter the market. They tried in the late 2000’s and ended up closing in 2011 due to financial problems. I am skeptical.

     Comparing the life cycle emissions reductions of different EVs is complicated. Bloomberg Media is attempting to do just that with their proprietary EV rating system. This calculates battery manufacturing differences, electricity generation differences, and overall efficiency differences. Bloomberg notes that they based their ratings on two main metrics: “driving economy, which captures just how well a car uses its resources to get down the road, and battery size, which serves as a proxy for the carbon cost of actually making the vehicle. The former accounts for 70% of the score, while the latter makes up 30%. Our model doesn’t directly account for the carbon cost of actually bolting together the parts and panels of a vehicle.” They did it this way since it is estimated that 70% of an EV’s carbon footprint is based on driving and 30% on manufacturing. I wonder if they consider the mining of the required metals.

     I think that consumer concerns about EVs are warranted and based more on fact than misinformation, as some of the previous examples show. A Market Watch article explores the biggest consumer concerns based on polling. EV sales in the US did climb significantly in 2022 to 5.8% of all vehicles from 3.2% in 2021. In California they accounted for 19% of all vehicle sales, which is quite an accomplishment. Consumer doubts are rooted in being wary of a new technology but mostly I would argue it is cost and reliability that are the biggest concerns. Many models are in short supply and require long waits. Most EV’s cost $40,000 or more. I bought a $30,000 new car, a PHEV, once in my life and that may well be the only time. Range anxiety and concerns about availability of charging stations are also significant. Cold weather range anxiety is especially pertinent as it has been noted that freezing temperatures can reduce EV range by as much as 32%! There have also been reports of charging stations not working in cold temps. Some people don’t have the option of installing a home charging station as they live in apartments. Costs for EV-SUVs and larger family vehicles are very high, a minimum of $70,000 for a 3-row family vehicle. Another warranted concern is the high cost of battery replacement. EV battery warranties cover at least 8 years or 100,000 miles, with some automakers covering even more. However, if you drive a lot that 100,000 miles may come in 5 or 6 years and at those prices you could lose a lot of value if the battery needs to be replaced early. While EV pick-ups have a lot of power, doing things like towing or carrying heavy weight can reduce the range significantly. This is a concern where applicable. The last thing mentioned is repair options, which sometimes require bringing in a mechanic from far away.

     A new article in the Guardian by climate justice reporter Nina Lakhani seems to suggest that lithium is set to become the new coal. She cites new research that suggests that “the US’s transition to electric vehicles could require three times as much lithium as is currently produced for the entire global market, causing needless water shortages, Indigenous land grabs, and ecosystem destruction inside and outside its borders.” The research apparently argues that the answer to this predicament is a massive increase in public transit, walkable cities, and smaller batteries in EVs. With current concerns about range anxiety, I doubt smaller batteries will be well-received. The price of lithium has already shot up by five times in a few years and is likely to stay high. This will keep EV prices and lithium batteries for other uses at high prices. A lithium supply crunch is predicted in the next 5-10 years and may come sooner if usage is ramped faster. Prices are already high so they could get higher. In any case, this article shows once again that the faster the energy transition happens the more complicated and chaotic it will be. The problems with wind turbine manufacturing show the same thing.

 

 

References:

Mysterious Facebook groups may be to blame for shuttering solar and wind projects across the country: ‘It’s changing voters’ minds’. Tokollo Matsabu. The Cool Down. January 20, 2023. Mysterious Facebook groups may be to blame for shuttering solar and wind projects across the country: ‘It’s changing voters’ minds’ (msn.com)

Consumer Reports Claims These 3 Popular Electric SUVs Have ‘Below-Average’ Reliability. Charles Singh. Motor Biscuit. January 19, 2023. Consumer Reports Claims These 3 Popular Electric SUVs Have ‘Below-Average’ Reliability (msn.com)

Giant Wind Turbines Keep Mysteriously Falling Over. This Shouldn't Be Happening. Tim Newcomb. Popular Mechanics. January 23, 2023. Giant Wind Turbines Keep Mysteriously Falling Over. This Shouldn't Be Happening. (msn.com)

Siemens’ troubles mount on wind turbine flaws. The Star. January 24, 2023. Siemens’ troubles mount on wind turbine flaws | The Star

Electric vehicles don’t pass shipping line safety assessment: ‘We will never compromise’. Heather Hamilton, Washington Examiner. January 23, 2023. Electric vehicles don’t pass shipping line safety assessment: ‘We will never compromise’ (msn.com)

Allianz Warns Number of Fires at Sea Increased Significantly. The Maritime Executive. September 4, 2022. Allianz Warns Number of Fires at Sea Increased Significantly (maritime-executive.com)

Electric truck charges for entire week, shows dismal 8 miles of range per day. Heather Hamilton. Washington Examiner. January 24, 2023. Electric truck charges for entire week, shows dismal 8 miles of range per day (msn.com)

Lightyear has stopped production on its solar-powered EV after three months. Mitchell Clark. The Verge. January 24, 2023. Lightyear has stopped production on its solar-powered EV after three months (msn.com)

Solar electric vehicle startup says its car will go 400 miles on a full battery and never needs to be charged. Tim Levin. Business Insider. January 24, 2023. Solar electric vehicle startup says its car will go 400 miles on a full battery and never needs to be charged (msn.com)

Here’s the Least “Green” Electric Vehicle You Can Buy, According to Bloomberg. Alex Lauer. Inside Hook. January 24, 2023. Here’s the Least “Green” Electric Vehicle You Can Buy, According to Bloomberg (msn.com)

11 reasons why the road to EV ownership remains closed for most Americans. Russ Heaps. Market Watch. January 24, 2023. 11 reasons why the road to EV ownership remains closed for most Americans (msn.com)

Revealed: how US transition to electric cars threatens environmental havoc, Nina Lakhani. The Guardian. January 24, 2023. Revealed: how US transition to electric cars threatens environmental havoc (msn.com)