How do enviro groups and clean tech stack up against oil and gas for lobbying money?

(Photo of oil rig from Flickr and photographer crashworks/Elan Ruskin.)

In Washington, D.C., it was raining lobbying dollars this summer. Both sides were trying to influence all-important climate legislation.

The oil and gas industry spent $38.4 million in Q3 (July-September), while environmental groups spent a fraction of that -- $6.1M and renewable energy just 6.6M. Exxon alone matched each of the latter and then some with it $7.2M.

Electric utilities spent almost as much as oil and gas -- $37.4M. And they're doing it with our rate money. Their argument is they don't want our rates to go up. So concerned about the consumer are they. Lesser amounts fueled lobbying from coal mining ($3.6M), natural gas ($3.1M) and forestry/forest products ($2.9.)

Industry groups were largely trying to get more allowances in a cap-and-trade system, but some were trying to block a climate bill entirely.

The summer quarter roughly matched the time between when the House bill was passed at the end of June and the Kerry-Boxer Senate bill was released in the fall.

Environmental groups went all out with spending to keep the momentum going for a bill they wanted to see passed by the Senate before the December international meeting in Copenhagen.

The World Wildlife Fund spent $1 million, way up from $45,000 last summer. They ran ads targeted senators from the swing states of Alaska, Arkansas, Indiana, Maine, Montana and North Dakota.

Environmental Defense was second with $430,000, nearly double what it spent last year. Overall, enviro group lobbying money was up 33% from $4.6M last summer.

Their money, of course, came from concerned citizens like you. Keep the donations flowing.

(Source: Greenwire. E&E analysis based on data from the Center from Responsive Politics.)

Feds backs down on 2-year moratorium on new solar plants for public land

News Update 3: The Bureau of Land Management reversed itself Wednesday on its plan to block any solar installations on public land while it assessed the environmental impact, apparently bowing to public pressure. New projects would have been blocked for 2 years while the study took place. This is the same Bureau of Land Management that has allowed drilling for oil and gas in thousands of spots and wants to permit uranium mining by the Grand Canyon. There are, of course, environmental concerns, especially with large projects. Impact on wildlife, water use and land reclamation after the life of the installation need to be considered. But many environmental groups agreed with the fledgling solar industry that there is a strong need to move forward more quickly on solar energy, a clean alternative to coal. There are no solar installations on federal land to date, but 125 applications are awaiting action. Much of the 119 million acres of federally managed land in the West is ideal for solar – flat, sunny desert. There are 9 utility-scale solar plants operational on private land that can produce 425 megawatts of power. At the opening of a plant in Nevada this week Sen. Majority Leader Harry Reid had vowed to overturn the moratorium. AP/Newsday, New York Times, Greenwire)