The proles are pushing back against green energy, primarily because of reliability and cost. From Irina Slav at oilprice.com:
Greenlash” sees conservative governments challenge ESG investment legitimacy and alter energy targets, signaling a shift in political and public sentiment.
Rising living costs combined with financial commitments for green transitions have sparked concerns among the public, leading to greater scrutiny of transition policies.
Experts suggest reframing the green agenda as an industrial policy to address the growing dissent and ensure continued support for climate initiatives.
When Sweden’s new government took office, they abandoned the country’s previous goal of “100% renewable” electricity in favor of a “100% fossil-free” target.
In the UK, Prime Minister Rishi Sunak outraged environmentalists by saying his cabinet will issue hundreds of new oil and gas licenses for the North Sea if reelected.
A wave is rising across Europe and the United States, and it’s a wave that should concern transition advocates, including those in government. Because that wave threatens to carry away their seats.
In the U.S., the trend that media have called a “greenlash” has mostly taken the form of conservative state governments challenging the legitimacy of ESG investment requirements.
In some cases, these governments have plainly stated that there is no legitimacy to these requirements, and they are, in fact, a form of discrimination against certain industries, chiefly oil and gas. As such, ESG investing had an issue with anti-monopoly legislation, those governments said, and made for good ground for lawsuits.
