+
Sign up for
The Upworthiest
Our top stories of the day delivered straight to your inbox.
upworthy

wind power

Science

Red states account for 3 of the top 5 states for clean energy in 2021

Photo via Canva

The Clean Power Report found that political leanings don't seem to matter when it comes to building up clean energy capacity.

Environmentalism, climate change action and the like are terms usually associated with liberal politics in the U.S. That association might lead one to believe that blue states have a leg up on implementing earth-friendly technologies and practices, but that's not always the case.

In fact, the most recent report from American Clean Power shows the No. 1 state for clean energy installations in 2021 was Texas—a traditionally red state—and it wasn't even a close contest.

Texas had more than double the clean power additions as the No. 2 state, California, last year—enough to power Delaware and Hawaii combined. After the Golden State came Oklahoma, Florida, New Mexico, Kansas, Illinois, Virginia, Indiana and Georgia. In other words, a total political mix.

According to the Clean Power Report, the states with the highest growth rates for clean power were Alabama, Virginia and Connecticut—also a political split.

In fact, throughout the report, we see states where legislators tend to reject climate change policies actually embracing clean energy sources.

For example, the report shared which states hold the most cumulative capacities for the three primary clean energy sources—wind, solar and battery storage. The top five states in each category are:

WIND

1. Texas

2. Iowa

3. Oklahoma

4. Kansas

5. Illinois

(Four out of five = traditionally red states.)

SOLAR

1. California

2. Texas

3. North Carolina

4. Florida

5. Nevada

(Three out of five = traditionally red states.)

BATTERY STORAGE

1. California

2. Texas

3. Florida

4. Massachusetts

5. Illinois

(Two out of five = traditionally red states.)

So what's the story here?

There are several reasons why renewable energy is booming in conservative areas.

One is that it simply makes good economic sense. Wind and sun are free and plentiful, so once the initial investment is made in the infrastructure to generate power from them, they are more cost-efficient than fossil fuels.

Another is that these clean energy sources make land more valuable. If farmers and ranchers can lease out their land for a wind turbine or solar farm, it's good for their bottom line in addition to being good for the Earth. Some see it almost as an insurance policy that keeps them afloat during drought or crop failure years.

A third reason is that these clean energy sources create jobs. Lance Hull, an Oklahoma power plant manager who switched from natural gas to wind power, explained to CNN how the move took the plant from around 30 to 40 employees to about 50, negating the argument that dropping fossil fuels kills jobs.

"There are a lot of jobs with the wind farm that you don't have at the typical power plant," Hull said. "Industries change, things change, but there's a lot of automation in the gas plants as well. It's automatic control, people monitoring operations. It's very similar."

President and founder of the American Conservation Coalition Benji Backer says focusing on those benefits is exactly how to bring more conservative-leaning people into the climate conversation.

"These states aren’t embracing these energy sources because they are necessarily better for the climate," he tells Upworthy. "They’re doing it because it’s good for the economy, and it’s creating jobs and it’s lowering their energy costs."

Backer says we need to stay open-minded about how we bring people into the climate dialogue because there are lots of ways to push toward a pro-climate future.

"It doesn’t really matter why people embrace certain energy sources—it’s what actually ends up occurring because they embrace those energy sources," he says. "There needs to be a bigger focus on tangible, relatable impact in people’s lives, whether that’s improving their day-to-day life by lowering costs or creating a job or creating efficiency in their life.

"Those are the sorts of things people take action on," he adds. "That builds real support, not just political support, and it allows things to happen like we’ve seen in these red states."

Backer says focusing on the benefits to people's daily lives, not what they might lose, is the key to reaching more people with climate change messaging.

"By fighting climate change, we’re giving a lot of opportunities to communities and improving lives, instead of taking away." he says.

It's not as if environmental protection is unfamiliar to conservative ideology. In fact, the National Park Service, the United States Forest Service, the Environmental Protection Agency and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Association were all started under Republican presidents. The Clean Air Act of 1970 and the Clean Air Act amendments of 1990 were championed and passed by Republican administrations. A Republican president also signed and ratified the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change.

There is a long history of conservative conservation (it's right there in the name, after all), so it's a shame that the political divide has pushed so many away from those roots. Hopefully, these clean energy numbers are a sign that the tide is turning. Climate change is apolitical and all of us benefit from environmental protection regardless of political ideology. As long as we ultimately end up on the same page with our actions, how and why we get there doesn't really matter.

From Your Site Articles
Related Articles Around the Web
Heroes

18 spellbinding pictures that tell the story of coal country's past and present.

Coal has been part of America's past for just about as long as there's been an America.

It was the energy source du jour for the Industrial Revolution. In the 1300s, some Native Americans used it for cooking fuel. And the first North American coal deposits may even predate the dinosaurs!

But if we're talking America the post-colonial country, then nowhere was it more important than in the Appalachian Mountains, in places like Pennsylvania, Kentucky, Tennessee, and West Virginia.

Unfortunately, what coal mining looked like back then and what coal mining looks like now are stunningly different. According a new study, coal mining is actually changing the entire landscape of Appalachia.

So let's jump in the Wayback Machine to 1930s Appalachia and see what things were like (and how things have changed for the better and worse) in 18 pictures:

1. Everyone looked dapper as hell back in 1935.


Sunday, 1935. Image from The New York Public Library.

2. Including this ridiculously photogenic schoolteacher.

Schoolteacher in Red House, West Virginia, 1935. Image from The New York Public Library.

3. Who may have actually taught in this somewhat photogenic classroom.

School in Red House, 1935. Image from The New York Public Library.

4. Check out the awesome kid in the front. Respect.

Schoolchildren of Omar, West Virginia. Date unknown. Image from The New York Public Library.

Unfortunately, the kids in this picture and the one above it probably wouldn't have been seen in the same classroom. Segregation was still very much a thing in the '30s, which meant that many public spaces, including schools, were divided by race. Things would largely remain this way until the mid-1960s.

5. Outside of school and work, people went to the movies – which cost a dime.

Movie theater in Omar, 1935. Image from The New York Public Library.

6. They entertained themselves by playing music.

Musicians in Maynardville, Tennessee, 1935. Image from Ben Shahn/Wikimedia Commons.

Appalachia is home to some of America's richest musical traditions, including country and bluegrass.

7. They even "pirated" football games.

Men watching football in Star City, West Virginia, 1935. Image from The New York Public Library.

If by "pirated" you mean "watched through a fence while nobody was looking."

8. This is Williamson, West Virginia, in 1935.

Image from The New York Pubic Library.

It's changed a lot since then.

9. This is Williamson in 2008.

Image from Flo Night/Wikimedia Commons.

Williamson is home to the Williamson Rail Yard, which serviced the many coal mines in the region.

10. Coal miners worked long hours in dark, dangerous mines.

Coal miners in Kentucky, 1935. Image from The New York Public Library.

11. Coal mining was tough, dangerous work.

Slate pickers separating the coal from rock in Scranton, Pennsylvania. Date unknown. Image from The New York Public Library.

Coal mining required workers to do backbreaking labor in cramped conditions, often deep underground.

12. But it was honorable work and, for many people, the best way to provide for their families.

A coal miner with his family in 1938. Image from The New York Public Library.

13. As much respect as we have for coal miners of the past, it can be hard to support the industry today. Because in 1935, coal mining looked like this:

Image from The New York Public Library.

14. But now, coal mining looks like this:

GIF from Smithsonian Channel/YouTube.

See how flat that is? A lot of modern coal companies use a technique known as mountaintop removal mining to get at the remaining coal seams tucked deep into the mountains.

15. Mountaintop removal mining is exactly what it sounds like: blasting away the entire top of a mountain to get to the coal below.

Image from ilovemountains.org/Flickr.

This practice is widespread throughout coal country. In fact, a new study found that the area of study became 40% flatter after mountaintop removal mining. This has a lot of people worried about the effects on the geology and ecosystems in the area.

"Even if we stopped mountaintop mining tomorrow, what kind of landscape is going to be left behind?" said study author Emily S. Bernhardt.

16. Even more worrisome is what mountaintop removal mining may be doing to the water.

Image from ilovemountains.org/Flickr.

Excess rock and refuse often ends up dumped in gigantic piles in the valleys and streams below the mountain. Heavy metals and chemicals can leach out of the pile into the waterway, affecting any animals or people downstream.

17. The hardworking men and women who've done this job for generations deserve respect. But ... there's a better way.

Coal is an intimate part of Appalachia's history and the last thing we want to do is claim that it's not important. But Appalachia has a long history of renewables too. They've had hydroelectric power plants for over 100 years!

A wind farm in Somerset, Pennsylvania. Image from Jeff Kubina/Flickr.

Even though coal production has been falling in the last few years, many coal companies are indicating that they want to double down on mountaintop removal mining.

But now that we know how harmful coal mining can be for the environment and have the technology and wherewithal to do something different, we can and should be looking elsewhere for our electricity.

18. Then maybe, just maybe, we can leave the dangerous job of coal mining and its effects on the environment where they belong: in the past.

Coal miners in Williamson, 1935. Image from The New York Public Library.

Heroes

3 countries are capturing wind to power all our futures.

As Bob Dylan once sang, "The answer, my friends, is blowin' in the wind."

Reflecting on 2015 from our cozy perch here in early 2016, it would seem as though Dylan was right, at least in terms of wind energy. 2015 was one of the best years for wind energy ever, even better than 2014, which saw remarkable growth in wind power around the world.

According to the Global Wind Energy Council, there were about 268,000 wind turbines spinning around the world at the end of 2014.

And as the 2015 numbers continue to roll in, it would appear that more and more countries are increasing their efforts and commitments by producing clean, renewable wind energy.

Three countries in particular stepped up their wind power game so much last year they deserve a special shoutout.

Like pinwheels but, you know, gigantic. Photo by Martin Bernetti/AFP/Getty Images.

1. First up, Denmark.

Also known as Germany's cowlick, Denmark is home to Danish pastries, Grundtvig's Church, and popular cult filmmaker Lars von Trier, who directed 2009's feel-good comedy "Antichrist."

In 2015, Denmark emerged as the world's leading wind energy producer for the second year in a row.

According to Danish utility company Energinet, an incredible 42% of the country's energy came from wind power last year, which is the highest proportion achieved by a single country.

Is there a blog for pretty pictures of wind turbines? Photo by Jonathan Nackstrand/AFP/Getty Images.

While this success is partly due to an extremely windy year in Denmark, the results are consistent with the country's efforts to produce more and more wind power, as part of its commitment to hit some significant goals: relying on 50% wind power by 2020 and being 100% renewable by 2050.

The country's goals may be lofty but, as Denmark's minister for energy, utilities, and climate, Lars Christian Lilleholt told The Guardian, hitting them should provide a case-study in what is economically possible when you're committed to renewable energy:

"Hopefully, Denmark can serve as an example to other countries that it is possible to have both ambitious green policies with a high proportion of wind energy and other renewables in the energy supply, and still have a high security of supply and competitive prices on electricity."

Nicely done, Denmark.

2. Next, we have Morocco.

Morocco is the home of spiced coffee, beautifully intricate architecture, and of course Casablanca — the best town in the world to walk into a gin joint and annoy Humphrey Bogart.

Morocco is also the home of Africa's largest wind energy project: a farm that covers an area of 8,900 hectares with 131 turbines.

The wind farm in Tarfaya, Morocco. Photo by Fadel Senna/AFP/Getty Images

Morocco's investment in wind energy has definitely paid off, as the price of wind power has just reached a new global low for Moroccan citizens with the lowest bids being around $25 per megawatt-hour.

Normally, reaching a new low is a bad thing (like starring in a road trip movie with Zac Efron), but in this case, it means that the cost of wind energy is now cheaper than it's ever been in Morocco. Wind energy is even cheaper than coal power, which is often described as the "dirty but cheap" energy option.

Clean, renewable, dare I say ... sexy wind power. Photo by Desiree Martin/AFP/Getty Images.

The results of the wind energy project are "amazing" according to Abderrahim El Hafidi, vice minister of energy and environment in Morocco, who hopes that it points to a "real revolution" in energy production around the world:

“Isn’t that amazing that we can have confidence in renewable energy for the future of our energy and for the future of the planet?”

Hey, Morocco, I know we don't talk much but ... you're pretty awesome.

3. And finally, we have China.

China, the "Greatest Wall" winner of 206 B.C., has had a tumultuous relationship with renewable energy in the past, to put it lightly.

The country is the biggest polluter in the world and emitted about 10,540,000 kilotonsof carbon in 2014. (Before you get too judge-y, America had the dubious honor of coming in second place.)

Recently though, China has made efforts to turn that number around. Late in 2015, China committed to cap and trade carbon emissions and sharply increased its targets for both wind and solar production.

Because of those efforts, as of last year, China is believed to be the largest installer of clean energy in the world.

Wind turbines in northern China. Photo by STR/AFP/Getty Images

According to a report from British research firm GlobalData, in 2015, China accounted for 40% of all renewable energy projects. Which is representative of their shift in policy and consciousness.

Energy company Maxwell Technologies also recently announced that it had been selected by a Chinese electric company to build the world's first megawatt-scale, ultracapacitor-based wind farm energy storage system. Or, to put it simply, they're creating one of the most efficient and powerful wind power systems on the planet.

Dr. Franz Fink, Maxwell's president and CEO, noted the unique opportunity is indicative of a growing demand for clean energy in China and around the world:

"With growing demand, we see a great deal of opportunity to partner with more Chinese customers to expand ultracapacitor-based energy storage in more applications."

Here's to you, China.

As wind power technology continues to advance, it will only get more efficient and more cost-effective.

One of the reasons wind power is on the rise is because the business of wind power is improving. While clean renewable energy is good for the health of the planet, a lot of countries can't or won't reasonably make the shift until it's a good economic decision to do so.

If that's not a sign, I don't know what is. Photo by Philippe Huguen/AFP/Getty Images.

With wind power costs being so affordable in Morocco, and with Denmark and China leading the way into a wind-based energy future, it won't be long until every country can find the economic justification to follow suit, for the good of humanity as well as our collective wallets.

Heroes

Bill Gates thinks the 1% should foot the bill for renewable energy, and he's offering the first $2B.

He also has some insights into social welfare and the problems with the private sector.

True
Natural Resources Defense Council

Whatever you might think of him, Bill Gates is a man who knows a thing or two about a thing or two.

After all, he is the richest man in the world. And while money isn't necessarily an indication of intelligence, he's clearly doing something right.

(I don't say this lightly either; I've been a loyal Apple user for 22 years, and even I can admit the guy's had a few good ideas here and there.)

But when Gates says something like "We need an energy miracle," he's got my attention.

Gates recently sat down for a lengthy interview with The Atlantic about energy, the economy, and innovation.

Specifically, he talks about the relationships between research and development (R&D) and public versus private funding and how a historical look at the radical advancements in cancer treatment, the Internet, and more could serve as a guide for the future of the clean energy industry.

Sure, there are some people who have interpreted the article as an attempt by Gates to justify his refusal to divest from anything related to the fossil fuel industry. But at least in this case, he's putting his money where his mouth is.

Photo by TNS Sofres/Flickr.

Gates has committed $2 billion of his own to incentivize clean energy R&D, and he thinks others should do the same.

Here's a problem with investment strategies: Venture capitalists are looking for a return. And they usually want it fast, and they want it to be bigger than the cash that they put up in the first place.

Gates points out that this money-as-sole-incentive approach is kinda BS when the future of the planet is at risk. Instead, the people like him who can afford to take risks should be the ones doing so — even if the ROI doesn't come through quite as quick or strong as some hip tech startup.

Of course, there's more than one kind of clean energy and no guarantee of which works best. So Gates says fund 'em all!

There's no clear consensus on the most effective form of renewable energy — another factor that keeps those potential risk-taking investors away. After all, why should they throw their money at hydroelectric power if solar's going to end up running the market? And then what happens in another 100 years when wind power emerges as the best option?

Unfortunately, we can't make those perfect predictions until we've done more research and development, which is why Gates says we should take those risks while we still can and invest in everything that might help us to combat the climate crisis.

But should that funding come from private or public sources? Gates says: Why not both, like everything else?

"U.S. government R&D has defined the state of the art in almost every area," Gates says, pointing to the development of nuclear energy, hydropower, shale-gas, and more. He argues that, historically speaking, most advancements of the 20th century came from government incentivizing the private sector, which in turn then invested in the people (because when profit is the only motivator, altruism is often left behind).

That being said: It's not up to the U.S. to fix the climate problem alone.

It's easy for individuals and countries alike to say, "Well, one electric car isn't going to make that much of a difference anyway," or "Who cares if an island nation of 1,400 people runs on entirely sustainable energy?" Which, hey, might be a valid point.

But the change has to start somewhere, right? We've already wasted too much time waiting for someone else to take the lead, which only allows for the problem to get worse. (Spoiler alert: It has.)

The whole interview is worth a read. It's an eye-opening look at the intersections of energy and economics.

A lot of the issues he addresses about the current climate threat boil down to the never-ending debate between public and private sectors, between capitalism and socialism. But as Gates rightly points out, those issues are not nor have they ever been black and white.

(Gates does, of course, point out that companies like IBM and Google are the random flukes that keep the venture capital machine going.)

If you want to make a difference, join us in demanding that our world leaders take action at the upcoming Paris climate talks.

Maybe that way we won't be have to choose between cash or the survival of the human race as our only two choices for return-on-investment. Because if "life itself" is not incentive enough to inspire innovation, what else is left to do?

Trending Stories