1 00:00:05,000 --> 00:00:09,040 Speaker 1: Hello, and welcome back to Drilled. I'm Amy Westervelt. We 2 00:00:09,280 --> 00:00:12,720 Speaker 1: are running a new series right now in both the 3 00:00:12,720 --> 00:00:17,079 Speaker 1: podcast and on our website at drilled dot Media, focused 4 00:00:17,280 --> 00:00:21,200 Speaker 1: on what we've been calling false solutions. These are really 5 00:00:21,680 --> 00:00:26,800 Speaker 1: new climate problems masquerading solutions, things that the fossil fuel 6 00:00:26,840 --> 00:00:33,080 Speaker 1: industry has suggested as ways to decarbonize, but that actually 7 00:00:33,120 --> 00:00:36,559 Speaker 1: just lock us into more fossil fuel development for the 8 00:00:36,600 --> 00:00:41,040 Speaker 1: next several decades. I'm talking about things like liquefied natural gas, 9 00:00:41,200 --> 00:00:46,280 Speaker 1: carbon capture, hydrogen, renewable natural gas. There's a whole host 10 00:00:46,440 --> 00:00:50,680 Speaker 1: of these technologies and new products that are being sold 11 00:00:50,760 --> 00:00:56,200 Speaker 1: to both US and European and Asian consumers as quote 12 00:00:56,280 --> 00:01:01,360 Speaker 1: unquote green, when actually they come with ever more greenhouse 13 00:01:01,400 --> 00:01:05,319 Speaker 1: gas emissions. We've already put one story out about a 14 00:01:05,800 --> 00:01:11,080 Speaker 1: fossil fuel lobbying group that's trying to rebrand liquefied natural 15 00:01:11,120 --> 00:01:15,720 Speaker 1: gas as a clean, low, or even zero carbon fuel. 16 00:01:16,040 --> 00:01:18,360 Speaker 1: Go check that out on our website. We'll have a 17 00:01:18,720 --> 00:01:23,000 Speaker 1: corresponding podcast episode about the LNG boom in the next 18 00:01:23,040 --> 00:01:25,919 Speaker 1: week or so. In the meantime, today we're talking about 19 00:01:25,959 --> 00:01:29,080 Speaker 1: something that's really insidious and that it's kind of hard 20 00:01:29,080 --> 00:01:31,800 Speaker 1: to cover because it gets into the weeds a little bit. 21 00:01:32,200 --> 00:01:35,280 Speaker 1: And that is the role that management consultancies play and 22 00:01:35,319 --> 00:01:39,800 Speaker 1: all of this they have mostly been flying under the 23 00:01:39,920 --> 00:01:45,119 Speaker 1: radar where disinformation and false solutions is concerned, but they 24 00:01:45,160 --> 00:01:48,880 Speaker 1: play a really important role in shaping information and data 25 00:01:49,440 --> 00:01:53,800 Speaker 1: and giving the industry sort of a credible bent to 26 00:01:53,960 --> 00:01:59,560 Speaker 1: its proposed solutions. And they do that by providing data 27 00:01:59,600 --> 00:02:04,640 Speaker 1: and a nonnalysis and technical reports to industry groups and companies. 28 00:02:05,520 --> 00:02:09,839 Speaker 1: The catch is that the data is highly limited by 29 00:02:09,880 --> 00:02:14,280 Speaker 1: parameters at the companies and industry groups set, so while 30 00:02:14,360 --> 00:02:19,040 Speaker 1: the consultancy is doing a rigorous analysis, it's also being 31 00:02:19,080 --> 00:02:23,639 Speaker 1: asked to leave out some pretty key components of that analysis. 32 00:02:24,600 --> 00:02:26,360 Speaker 1: This allows them to sort of hold up their hands 33 00:02:26,400 --> 00:02:29,320 Speaker 1: and say, hey, we did the data and analysis they 34 00:02:29,400 --> 00:02:33,280 Speaker 1: asked us for. You know, that's that's our contribution. We 35 00:02:33,800 --> 00:02:36,400 Speaker 1: aren't the ones that are saying that that justifies this, 36 00:02:36,520 --> 00:02:39,480 Speaker 1: that and the other. But really that's kind of a 37 00:02:39,520 --> 00:02:42,679 Speaker 1: cop out because of course these reports are then being 38 00:02:42,760 --> 00:02:48,280 Speaker 1: used to lobby for particular policies or to convince people that, 39 00:02:48,400 --> 00:02:51,239 Speaker 1: you know, energy transition is going to be too expensive, 40 00:02:51,400 --> 00:02:55,800 Speaker 1: all those kinds of things. Un group called Reese to 41 00:02:55,919 --> 00:02:58,800 Speaker 1: Zero is actually starting to look at these kinds of 42 00:02:58,840 --> 00:03:01,600 Speaker 1: things in a more serious way. So they are looking 43 00:03:01,680 --> 00:03:07,280 Speaker 1: at professional services providers PSPs, and they're including management consultancies 44 00:03:07,320 --> 00:03:10,639 Speaker 1: in that, as well as PR and advertising firms, which 45 00:03:10,680 --> 00:03:13,280 Speaker 1: of course we've looked at a lot over here at Drilled. 46 00:03:13,440 --> 00:03:17,040 Speaker 1: Several months ago, a former employee from a management consultancy 47 00:03:17,200 --> 00:03:20,320 Speaker 1: reached out to me with some information about how that 48 00:03:20,440 --> 00:03:24,400 Speaker 1: firm was approaching its fossil fuel clients. This happens to 49 00:03:24,400 --> 00:03:27,400 Speaker 1: be a firm that also does quite a bit of 50 00:03:27,480 --> 00:03:32,160 Speaker 1: work for the US government on really robust climate analysis, 51 00:03:32,600 --> 00:03:36,080 Speaker 1: and there's a reason that the industry also goes to 52 00:03:36,160 --> 00:03:40,360 Speaker 1: them because they know that the government trusts their technical analysis. 53 00:03:40,840 --> 00:03:44,200 Speaker 1: So again, it's just not as innocent as a lot 54 00:03:44,200 --> 00:03:46,960 Speaker 1: of consultancies would like to make it out. As I 55 00:03:47,000 --> 00:03:50,440 Speaker 1: asked reporter Matty Stone to look into those leads, and 56 00:03:50,480 --> 00:03:54,600 Speaker 1: she did and she found a lot. So she is 57 00:03:54,640 --> 00:03:58,520 Speaker 1: here today to talk me through what she found and 58 00:03:58,640 --> 00:04:01,960 Speaker 1: why it's important to look at these things. You can 59 00:04:02,080 --> 00:04:05,960 Speaker 1: also find a written version of that story on our 60 00:04:06,000 --> 00:04:10,600 Speaker 1: website at Drilled dot Media. After the break, Maddie Stone 61 00:04:11,000 --> 00:04:13,280 Speaker 1: on management consultancies. 62 00:04:22,920 --> 00:04:27,440 Speaker 2: Hi I'm Maddie Stone. I'm a freelance journalist covering climate change, 63 00:04:27,680 --> 00:04:32,120 Speaker 2: energy transition, and lots of related topics. Okay, Maddie, we 64 00:04:32,160 --> 00:04:32,560 Speaker 2: asked you. 65 00:04:32,560 --> 00:04:38,200 Speaker 1: To look into this particular management consultant for this story. 66 00:04:38,320 --> 00:04:40,200 Speaker 1: Can you tell us a little bit about who they 67 00:04:40,240 --> 00:04:42,599 Speaker 1: are and what they do? 68 00:04:43,720 --> 00:04:47,080 Speaker 2: Yes? So, the management consultant I've been looking into is 69 00:04:47,120 --> 00:04:52,960 Speaker 2: called ICF. They are a multinational consulting firm that works 70 00:04:53,000 --> 00:04:57,600 Speaker 2: in a variety of different sectors, providing data and analysis 71 00:04:57,640 --> 00:05:03,080 Speaker 2: to government regulators and private industry clients. But one of 72 00:05:03,080 --> 00:05:07,360 Speaker 2: their biggest practices is climate and energy, and so they 73 00:05:07,440 --> 00:05:11,640 Speaker 2: have more than two thousand people employed across their climate practice, 74 00:05:11,880 --> 00:05:15,880 Speaker 2: which does a lot of work with the US federal 75 00:05:15,920 --> 00:05:19,119 Speaker 2: government as well as state governments and local governments around 76 00:05:19,160 --> 00:05:24,279 Speaker 2: the country, including a lot of really legitimate and sort 77 00:05:24,320 --> 00:05:30,640 Speaker 2: of respected work studying decarbonization pathways that cities, states and 78 00:05:30,800 --> 00:05:37,040 Speaker 2: governments can use, helping to implement energy efficiency programs for 79 00:05:37,279 --> 00:05:42,200 Speaker 2: municipalities as well as utilities, and even helping to do 80 00:05:42,360 --> 00:05:47,720 Speaker 2: the analysis underpinning some really high level and influential climate documents. 81 00:05:48,080 --> 00:05:53,680 Speaker 2: ICF contractors have helped to author and coordinate several recent 82 00:05:53,800 --> 00:05:57,560 Speaker 2: installments of the National Climate Assessment, which is this very 83 00:05:57,600 --> 00:06:00,800 Speaker 2: authoritative federal government report that comes out every few years 84 00:06:00,800 --> 00:06:04,400 Speaker 2: on how climate change is impacting the US. So that 85 00:06:04,720 --> 00:06:09,240 Speaker 2: is sort of the climate and energy work that ICF 86 00:06:09,480 --> 00:06:13,160 Speaker 2: likes to present to the world. However, what my investigation 87 00:06:13,320 --> 00:06:17,760 Speaker 2: found is that the firm is also hired by industry 88 00:06:17,839 --> 00:06:22,280 Speaker 2: groups like the American Petroleum Institute and the American Gas Association. 89 00:06:22,400 --> 00:06:25,880 Speaker 2: These are fossil fuel lobby groups that want to maintain 90 00:06:25,960 --> 00:06:29,880 Speaker 2: the fossil fuel centric status quo, and they hire this 91 00:06:30,080 --> 00:06:35,240 Speaker 2: respected so called objective energy and climate consultancy to produce 92 00:06:35,320 --> 00:06:40,600 Speaker 2: reports for them that they have a hand in shaping. 93 00:06:40,960 --> 00:06:43,920 Speaker 2: They can tell the consultancy, we want you to model 94 00:06:44,040 --> 00:06:47,040 Speaker 2: this and that, and don't model this and that, and 95 00:06:47,560 --> 00:06:51,360 Speaker 2: the end result is these very technical, official looking reports 96 00:06:51,440 --> 00:06:59,560 Speaker 2: produced by this credible consultancy that the industry ultimately uses 97 00:07:00,080 --> 00:07:05,600 Speaker 2: to promote itself and its positions, namely that we should 98 00:07:05,680 --> 00:07:10,240 Speaker 2: continue using gas and other fossil fuels, and that decarbonization 99 00:07:10,400 --> 00:07:17,400 Speaker 2: strategies should embrace the potential for things like fossil gas 100 00:07:17,480 --> 00:07:23,720 Speaker 2: and industry preferred solutions. And it's a really sort of 101 00:07:24,040 --> 00:07:31,120 Speaker 2: tricky issue that you have this very highly regarded climate 102 00:07:31,200 --> 00:07:38,120 Speaker 2: consultancy best known for work on decarbonization and actually tackling 103 00:07:38,120 --> 00:07:43,760 Speaker 2: climate change, that has an albeit seemingly fairly small part 104 00:07:43,760 --> 00:07:49,200 Speaker 2: of its business devoted to producing reports that are then 105 00:07:49,600 --> 00:07:53,560 Speaker 2: used by fossil fuel industry interests, lobby groups. 106 00:07:53,720 --> 00:07:57,480 Speaker 1: Yeah, and you spoke with Julie McNamara at the Union 107 00:07:57,560 --> 00:07:59,800 Speaker 1: of Concerned Scientists right about this. 108 00:08:00,200 --> 00:08:01,240 Speaker 2: I thought what she had. 109 00:08:01,160 --> 00:08:04,160 Speaker 1: To say was really interesting because I think people tend 110 00:08:04,200 --> 00:08:08,080 Speaker 1: to think of anything that's modeled as being objective in 111 00:08:08,160 --> 00:08:12,880 Speaker 1: some way, like if it has a chart, then it's objective, exactly. 112 00:08:13,160 --> 00:08:17,960 Speaker 2: And Julie McNamara is someone who has a lot of 113 00:08:18,000 --> 00:08:22,800 Speaker 2: technical expertise on climate and energy modeling. She herself has 114 00:08:22,880 --> 00:08:27,800 Speaker 2: worked for a organization that did government contracted analysis work 115 00:08:27,880 --> 00:08:31,119 Speaker 2: not too dissimilar from ICF, is familiar with their work, 116 00:08:31,720 --> 00:08:36,360 Speaker 2: And Yeah, she was kind of able to help me 117 00:08:36,720 --> 00:08:42,440 Speaker 2: understand what exactly it is that makes this so sort 118 00:08:42,480 --> 00:08:46,280 Speaker 2: of tricky and nefarious, what consultancies like ICF are doing 119 00:08:46,320 --> 00:08:48,840 Speaker 2: when they work with fossil fuel industry groups. 120 00:08:48,640 --> 00:08:52,720 Speaker 3: Or in an era where it's clear that climate change 121 00:08:52,760 --> 00:08:56,839 Speaker 3: is happening and that fossil fuel is the cause, right, 122 00:08:57,160 --> 00:09:01,160 Speaker 3: that we need to transition away from our current practices, 123 00:09:01,800 --> 00:09:04,960 Speaker 3: processes that are all reliant on the fossil fuel industry. 124 00:09:05,000 --> 00:09:09,360 Speaker 3: The fossil fuel industry has responded with every single possible 125 00:09:09,400 --> 00:09:12,720 Speaker 3: way to delay and distract action, and these types of 126 00:09:12,760 --> 00:09:17,120 Speaker 3: technical analysis allow the fossil fuel industry to hold up 127 00:09:17,120 --> 00:09:19,679 Speaker 3: the report in one hand and say no, look, we're 128 00:09:19,800 --> 00:09:24,760 Speaker 3: working on it, we have answers while continuing to solidify 129 00:09:24,920 --> 00:09:28,800 Speaker 3: policy outcomes that perpetuate investments in fossil fuel infrastructure today. 130 00:09:29,240 --> 00:09:33,000 Speaker 3: So those technical reports, they just by time, they are 131 00:09:33,120 --> 00:09:37,080 Speaker 3: absolutely a greenwashing mechanism to say we're not ignoring the problem, 132 00:09:37,200 --> 00:09:39,520 Speaker 3: we're not saying it's not here, we have a plan, 133 00:09:39,720 --> 00:09:43,959 Speaker 3: and at the same time doing absolutely nothing to prove 134 00:09:44,000 --> 00:09:47,840 Speaker 3: out whether that plan would ever be viable, would ever 135 00:09:47,920 --> 00:09:50,800 Speaker 3: be in the public interest, and is even something they 136 00:09:50,800 --> 00:09:55,320 Speaker 3: would ever be actually working towards. The question becomes who 137 00:09:55,400 --> 00:09:59,080 Speaker 3: is running those models, how are they being shaped, what 138 00:09:59,200 --> 00:10:02,040 Speaker 3: are the questions being asked, and what are the assumptions 139 00:10:02,200 --> 00:10:07,439 Speaker 3: being entered. Because it is absolutely the case that analyzes 140 00:10:07,480 --> 00:10:09,640 Speaker 3: are only as good as the questions being asked and 141 00:10:09,679 --> 00:10:13,959 Speaker 3: the assumptions being employed. Models can be so readily co 142 00:10:14,040 --> 00:10:17,520 Speaker 3: opted to justify favored results. They can also be readily 143 00:10:17,559 --> 00:10:24,040 Speaker 3: deployed for rigorous, right extremely helpful, and insightful analyses. The 144 00:10:24,160 --> 00:10:27,800 Speaker 3: difference comes in who is doing the work and who 145 00:10:27,840 --> 00:10:32,040 Speaker 3: is overseeing that selection process. And to me, that's one 146 00:10:32,040 --> 00:10:35,880 Speaker 3: of the most insidious things about an organization that simultaneously 147 00:10:36,000 --> 00:10:39,640 Speaker 3: use even the exact same model, but to use it 148 00:10:39,760 --> 00:10:42,520 Speaker 3: for fossil fuel lotty groups on the one hand and 149 00:10:43,000 --> 00:10:46,640 Speaker 3: state policy implementation on the other, because it muddies the 150 00:10:46,760 --> 00:10:50,600 Speaker 3: water of what's real and what's not, what's rigorous and 151 00:10:50,640 --> 00:10:55,160 Speaker 3: what's not because the model doesn't change the assumptions that 152 00:10:55,200 --> 00:11:00,440 Speaker 3: are used due but suddenly write this organization that can 153 00:11:00,480 --> 00:11:04,679 Speaker 3: be seen as doing very rigorous work, puts its analytical 154 00:11:04,760 --> 00:11:07,280 Speaker 3: stamp on a set of questions and a set of 155 00:11:07,320 --> 00:11:11,319 Speaker 3: assumptions put forward by the fossil fuel lobby, and that 156 00:11:11,440 --> 00:11:17,040 Speaker 3: is a fundamentally different outcome than something being informed through 157 00:11:17,040 --> 00:11:20,560 Speaker 3: a rigorous public stakeholder process like one might see at 158 00:11:20,600 --> 00:11:21,319 Speaker 3: the state level. 159 00:11:21,600 --> 00:11:25,840 Speaker 2: What they're doing is they're supplying a model, and in 160 00:11:25,880 --> 00:11:29,480 Speaker 2: many cases it's a perfectly legitimate model that might also 161 00:11:29,640 --> 00:11:32,560 Speaker 2: be used by the Department of Energy or the EPA 162 00:11:33,200 --> 00:11:38,600 Speaker 2: to do perfectly legitimate climate and energy modeling. But when 163 00:11:38,640 --> 00:11:41,000 Speaker 2: they go to an industry client like the American Gas 164 00:11:41,040 --> 00:11:46,560 Speaker 2: Association for example, that client might tell them, okay, only 165 00:11:47,200 --> 00:11:53,200 Speaker 2: use this model to study XYZ and ignore xyz other scenarios, right, 166 00:11:53,320 --> 00:11:57,920 Speaker 2: And so, for example, ICF provided the analysis. Is how 167 00:11:58,000 --> 00:12:01,720 Speaker 2: they put it behind it twenty twenty one American Gas 168 00:12:01,800 --> 00:12:08,959 Speaker 2: Association report looking at various decarbonization pathways that the gas 169 00:12:09,000 --> 00:12:12,760 Speaker 2: industry could follow. And so this was a report specifically 170 00:12:12,880 --> 00:12:17,280 Speaker 2: set up by the gas industry to demonstrate how it 171 00:12:17,360 --> 00:12:22,720 Speaker 2: could zero out its carbon emissions. So the underlying assumption 172 00:12:22,880 --> 00:12:27,719 Speaker 2: there that the client came to ICF with was we 173 00:12:27,760 --> 00:12:30,600 Speaker 2: can be part of the climate solution and a big 174 00:12:30,640 --> 00:12:33,240 Speaker 2: part of the climate solution. And here are all these 175 00:12:33,440 --> 00:12:39,480 Speaker 2: very technical, rigorous, you know, science backed data points showing 176 00:12:39,520 --> 00:12:42,120 Speaker 2: how we can eliminate our carbon emissions. 177 00:12:41,640 --> 00:12:44,640 Speaker 1: By the same consultancy that you know, you guys and 178 00:12:44,720 --> 00:12:47,480 Speaker 1: the government use exactly exactly. 179 00:12:48,040 --> 00:12:51,800 Speaker 2: But you know what's left unsaid There is everything that 180 00:12:51,920 --> 00:12:55,240 Speaker 2: is excluded from the model. So, for example, an economic 181 00:12:55,280 --> 00:12:59,600 Speaker 2: comparison of what it's going to cost to implement all 182 00:12:59,600 --> 00:13:04,600 Speaker 2: these gas industry preferred solutions versus simply switching to renewable 183 00:13:04,679 --> 00:13:09,360 Speaker 2: energy and electrifying buildings. And you know, there are other 184 00:13:09,440 --> 00:13:13,559 Speaker 2: things that might go into that model that the gas 185 00:13:13,600 --> 00:13:17,440 Speaker 2: industry wants to put in. For example, not saying this 186 00:13:17,520 --> 00:13:20,760 Speaker 2: went into this specific case, but maybe a gas industry 187 00:13:20,760 --> 00:13:24,240 Speaker 2: client would come to a consultancy with some numbers around 188 00:13:24,320 --> 00:13:28,960 Speaker 2: the cost of electrification, right, And maybe those numbers are 189 00:13:29,280 --> 00:13:34,319 Speaker 2: considered unrealistic today, but those are the numbers that the 190 00:13:34,400 --> 00:13:37,840 Speaker 2: industry wanted to use to run its models. And then 191 00:13:38,400 --> 00:13:41,520 Speaker 2: as a result you get a report that has some 192 00:13:41,640 --> 00:13:46,120 Speaker 2: conclusions that appear to favor gas over electrification. 193 00:13:45,640 --> 00:13:48,920 Speaker 1: Right, right, and so and the consultancies kind of go, oh, well, 194 00:13:48,920 --> 00:13:50,720 Speaker 1: we just provided the data thing. 195 00:13:50,559 --> 00:13:54,280 Speaker 2: Exactly exactly, so the consultancy can say, you know, we 196 00:13:54,400 --> 00:13:57,400 Speaker 2: just did this objective, science based analysis. We don't take 197 00:13:57,440 --> 00:14:01,360 Speaker 2: any policy or advocacy positions based on it. But what 198 00:14:01,559 --> 00:14:07,480 Speaker 2: makes that so problematic in a way is that it's 199 00:14:07,720 --> 00:14:14,520 Speaker 2: allowing industry groups to take this white paper and say 200 00:14:14,520 --> 00:14:18,960 Speaker 2: this is a completely objective, third party analysis. You know, 201 00:14:19,040 --> 00:14:23,640 Speaker 2: that supports all of our preferred policy positions. And that's 202 00:14:24,720 --> 00:14:28,600 Speaker 2: only true on this very you know, surface level, where 203 00:14:28,600 --> 00:14:31,640 Speaker 2: you're not considering all the ways that the industry might 204 00:14:31,720 --> 00:14:36,400 Speaker 2: have informed or shaped or restricted how that analysis was done. 205 00:14:36,640 --> 00:14:41,800 Speaker 1: Yeah, yeah, that's it's super interesting. We interviewed Ben Fronta 206 00:14:41,880 --> 00:14:43,640 Speaker 1: a couple of years ago when he had this paper 207 00:14:43,680 --> 00:14:46,280 Speaker 1: out that was called weaponizing Economics. I don't know if 208 00:14:46,360 --> 00:14:49,880 Speaker 1: you if you read that paper, but he he talked 209 00:14:49,920 --> 00:14:52,880 Speaker 1: to an economist who worked for a firm called Charles 210 00:14:53,000 --> 00:14:57,040 Speaker 1: River Associates, and they were contracted by the API, like 211 00:14:57,640 --> 00:15:00,160 Speaker 1: I want to say, in the nineties early nineties to 212 00:15:00,280 --> 00:15:05,240 Speaker 1: run economic models that would show that the cost of 213 00:15:05,360 --> 00:15:09,120 Speaker 1: acting on climate change was like just way too expensive 214 00:15:09,440 --> 00:15:12,560 Speaker 1: and not realistic, and they left out the cost of 215 00:15:12,640 --> 00:15:17,360 Speaker 1: not acting on change. And so like Ben found this 216 00:15:17,440 --> 00:15:20,000 Speaker 1: economist who'd been part of that work who said, you know, 217 00:15:20,320 --> 00:15:23,400 Speaker 1: we did rigorous analysis of the stuff that we were 218 00:15:23,480 --> 00:15:27,720 Speaker 1: like told to look at, but I regret that, you know, 219 00:15:27,760 --> 00:15:30,680 Speaker 1: we went along with this thing of like not including 220 00:15:31,160 --> 00:15:36,040 Speaker 1: this other scenario, which is clearly important for policymakers to understand, 221 00:15:36,120 --> 00:15:39,920 Speaker 1: and that model got used for years to justify no, no, no, 222 00:15:39,960 --> 00:15:43,240 Speaker 1: we shouldn't be doing anything. Look at how expensive it 223 00:15:43,320 --> 00:15:46,680 Speaker 1: is and all of that stuff. So, I know, ICF 224 00:15:46,880 --> 00:15:48,240 Speaker 1: kind of came back to you and said, look, this 225 00:15:48,280 --> 00:15:51,200 Speaker 1: is a very small part of our business. And that's 226 00:15:51,440 --> 00:15:55,480 Speaker 1: quite a common response I think in these kinds of cases. 227 00:15:56,080 --> 00:16:00,160 Speaker 1: But I know you also talk to some people who 228 00:16:00,200 --> 00:16:04,360 Speaker 1: have seen this ICF report for the AGA, for example, 229 00:16:04,480 --> 00:16:08,560 Speaker 1: or the API be cited kind of every time policy 230 00:16:08,600 --> 00:16:12,240 Speaker 1: debates come up about this. So yeah, I'd love to 231 00:16:12,280 --> 00:16:13,840 Speaker 1: have you to kind of talk about that, like how 232 00:16:13,960 --> 00:16:16,880 Speaker 1: much I guess, like how much this stuff gets leaned 233 00:16:16,960 --> 00:16:18,840 Speaker 1: on in these policy conversations. 234 00:16:19,120 --> 00:16:22,920 Speaker 2: The sense I have is that certain reports ICF has 235 00:16:23,000 --> 00:16:27,120 Speaker 2: authored for certain fossil fuel interest groups have been leaned 236 00:16:27,120 --> 00:16:29,680 Speaker 2: on a lot in recent years, that twenty twenty one 237 00:16:29,680 --> 00:16:33,440 Speaker 2: American Gas Association reports sort of being a very prominent 238 00:16:33,560 --> 00:16:36,840 Speaker 2: example of that. I spoke with some folks at the 239 00:16:37,360 --> 00:16:42,480 Speaker 2: climate change think tank Influence Map who have been closely 240 00:16:42,640 --> 00:16:48,320 Speaker 2: tracking the gas industri's influence in policy debates over things 241 00:16:48,440 --> 00:16:54,560 Speaker 2: like building decarbonization and electrification and even gas stove debates 242 00:16:54,560 --> 00:16:57,840 Speaker 2: in recent years, and they told me they've seen this 243 00:16:57,960 --> 00:17:02,240 Speaker 2: AGA slash ICF report come up over and over again 244 00:17:02,800 --> 00:17:07,679 Speaker 2: in formal comments submitted on rulemakings to various agencies, in 245 00:17:07,800 --> 00:17:12,280 Speaker 2: letters to business leaders and politicians, and basically every context 246 00:17:12,320 --> 00:17:16,520 Speaker 2: you can imagine where the American Gas Association wants to 247 00:17:17,720 --> 00:17:23,960 Speaker 2: point out to influential politicians or regulators or folks in 248 00:17:24,000 --> 00:17:26,840 Speaker 2: the business world that hey, look, there's a way for 249 00:17:26,880 --> 00:17:29,680 Speaker 2: the gas industry to be part of the future, even 250 00:17:29,680 --> 00:17:32,680 Speaker 2: a decarbonized future, and we don't actually have to do 251 00:17:33,080 --> 00:17:39,119 Speaker 2: all of this complicated and in their view, costly switching 252 00:17:39,280 --> 00:17:45,080 Speaker 2: to electrification because we have this analysis showing all the 253 00:17:45,119 --> 00:17:48,800 Speaker 2: ways that we can decarbonize gas. So it's really become 254 00:17:48,840 --> 00:17:52,959 Speaker 2: a powerful tool for them in helping to bolster their 255 00:17:52,960 --> 00:17:57,320 Speaker 2: own credibility and influence and shape policy conversations. The really 256 00:17:57,359 --> 00:18:02,280 Speaker 2: tricky part about that is how then do you quantify 257 00:18:03,000 --> 00:18:03,760 Speaker 2: that impact? 258 00:18:04,000 --> 00:18:04,200 Speaker 3: Right? 259 00:18:04,520 --> 00:18:08,080 Speaker 2: You know, it's like it's a hard thing to put 260 00:18:08,119 --> 00:18:12,639 Speaker 2: a carbon amount on ICF. One of their specialties as 261 00:18:12,680 --> 00:18:15,399 Speaker 2: a consultancy is carbon accounting, and they love to point 262 00:18:15,400 --> 00:18:19,520 Speaker 2: out all of the emissions reductions associated with the work 263 00:18:19,560 --> 00:18:22,959 Speaker 2: they do with the EPA for its energy efficiency programs 264 00:18:23,000 --> 00:18:27,040 Speaker 2: and with utilities to implement energy efficiency programs, all the 265 00:18:27,080 --> 00:18:29,879 Speaker 2: millions of tons of carbon they're saving per year. But 266 00:18:30,600 --> 00:18:35,600 Speaker 2: what is the climate impact associated with producing a report 267 00:18:35,720 --> 00:18:38,960 Speaker 2: that an influential gas industry trade group can then use 268 00:18:39,040 --> 00:18:41,879 Speaker 2: to block decarbonization policies. 269 00:18:42,040 --> 00:18:44,600 Speaker 1: Yeah, that's a great question. Yeah, that would be really 270 00:18:44,680 --> 00:18:45,560 Speaker 1: interesting to study. 271 00:18:45,600 --> 00:18:48,760 Speaker 2: Actually, it's a hard thing to study, and it's allowed 272 00:18:49,359 --> 00:18:54,040 Speaker 2: consultancies like ICF to sort of exist in this gray 273 00:18:54,400 --> 00:19:00,800 Speaker 2: space of you know, we are just these objective information providers, 274 00:19:00,840 --> 00:19:04,400 Speaker 2: these data analysts who can crunch numbers and will provide 275 00:19:04,400 --> 00:19:06,960 Speaker 2: that service to anybody. But we're not going to take 276 00:19:07,560 --> 00:19:13,800 Speaker 2: action positions. We're not going to you know, say, policymakers 277 00:19:13,800 --> 00:19:15,719 Speaker 2: should do X, Y and z based on the results 278 00:19:15,720 --> 00:19:16,359 Speaker 2: of this work. 279 00:19:16,560 --> 00:19:19,959 Speaker 1: Yeah, but they will say, you know, like we're a 280 00:19:20,000 --> 00:19:25,200 Speaker 1: climate leader exactly, you know, helping to decarbonize and those 281 00:19:25,280 --> 00:19:25,680 Speaker 1: kinds of. 282 00:19:25,640 --> 00:19:29,280 Speaker 2: So the positive you know, the aspects of the work 283 00:19:29,320 --> 00:19:33,200 Speaker 2: that are positive for climate, of which I should emphasize again, 284 00:19:33,359 --> 00:19:36,000 Speaker 2: this firm does a lot of good climate work. Are 285 00:19:36,080 --> 00:19:39,680 Speaker 2: things that ICF really likes to tout. Yeah, and as 286 00:19:39,720 --> 00:19:42,600 Speaker 2: you pointed out a moment ago, they emphasized to me 287 00:19:42,920 --> 00:19:45,719 Speaker 2: that the work for fossil fuel trade organizations is a 288 00:19:45,760 --> 00:19:48,440 Speaker 2: small part of their practice in terms of in terms 289 00:19:48,480 --> 00:19:51,840 Speaker 2: of their revenue. But again, I think it's an open 290 00:19:51,960 --> 00:19:56,280 Speaker 2: question as to what the overall climate impact of that 291 00:19:56,359 --> 00:20:00,240 Speaker 2: work is, even if it's just a few reports every 292 00:20:00,240 --> 00:20:03,480 Speaker 2: couple of years, If those reports can be used to 293 00:20:04,119 --> 00:20:10,399 Speaker 2: delay or block important electrification measures in cities or states 294 00:20:10,400 --> 00:20:12,840 Speaker 2: across the country. Like that could have a big ripple effect. 295 00:20:12,960 --> 00:20:16,399 Speaker 1: Yeah, and to lend credibility to you know, kind of 296 00:20:16,400 --> 00:20:19,720 Speaker 1: industry preferred solutions and all of that kind of stuff too. 297 00:20:20,080 --> 00:20:24,440 Speaker 1: And you know, I always whenever companies or agencies or 298 00:20:24,480 --> 00:20:27,160 Speaker 1: consultancies are like, it's only a small part of our work, 299 00:20:27,320 --> 00:20:31,040 Speaker 1: my immediate thought is like, then why do it at all, 300 00:20:31,160 --> 00:20:35,399 Speaker 1: especially if, like you know, you spend a significant amount 301 00:20:35,480 --> 00:20:39,760 Speaker 1: of your marketing space and I would imagine budget like 302 00:20:39,880 --> 00:20:43,800 Speaker 1: talking about decarbonization and climate and all these other things. 303 00:20:43,960 --> 00:20:47,359 Speaker 2: You know, it is an interesting question, you know, why 304 00:20:47,640 --> 00:20:50,159 Speaker 2: why do that? Why not just decide you're going to 305 00:20:50,240 --> 00:20:52,040 Speaker 2: draw a line in the sand with certain types of 306 00:20:52,040 --> 00:20:53,840 Speaker 2: projects or certain types of clients. 307 00:20:53,880 --> 00:20:56,520 Speaker 1: And yeah, yeah, I want to on that note, I 308 00:20:56,560 --> 00:20:58,760 Speaker 1: want to ask you about that. There was one thing 309 00:20:58,840 --> 00:21:01,520 Speaker 1: that they that they worked on that made me laugh 310 00:21:01,520 --> 00:21:04,919 Speaker 1: out loud, and that was the idea that you know, 311 00:21:05,720 --> 00:21:08,119 Speaker 1: a gallon of oil from the Gulf of Mexico is 312 00:21:08,200 --> 00:21:10,040 Speaker 1: like lower carbon than you know. 313 00:21:10,200 --> 00:21:14,760 Speaker 2: Other price. So yeah, that was a really interesting finding 314 00:21:15,040 --> 00:21:18,840 Speaker 2: and report. So ICF was hired by the National Ocean 315 00:21:18,880 --> 00:21:23,359 Speaker 2: Industries Association several years back. This is a trade organization 316 00:21:23,560 --> 00:21:29,080 Speaker 2: that largely represents oil and gas producers and affiliated industries 317 00:21:29,119 --> 00:21:34,119 Speaker 2: and interests of offshore producers. Correct, so a lot of 318 00:21:34,640 --> 00:21:37,240 Speaker 2: oil and gas producers who have assets in the Gulf 319 00:21:37,280 --> 00:21:39,800 Speaker 2: of Mexico and who want to you know, build more 320 00:21:39,840 --> 00:21:41,840 Speaker 2: oils and drill more oil in the Gulf of Mexico. 321 00:21:42,280 --> 00:21:46,879 Speaker 2: So this organization hired ICF to produce a report that 322 00:21:47,040 --> 00:21:51,360 Speaker 2: looked at a very narrow technical question of what are 323 00:21:51,840 --> 00:21:57,480 Speaker 2: effectively the emissions associated with producing a barrel of oil 324 00:21:57,720 --> 00:22:00,919 Speaker 2: in the Gulf of Mexico. They also, i should add, 325 00:22:00,920 --> 00:22:03,720 Speaker 2: looked at the United States as a whole, So they 326 00:22:03,720 --> 00:22:07,320 Speaker 2: looked at you know, land based oil and gas production, 327 00:22:07,480 --> 00:22:10,000 Speaker 2: and they also looked specifically at the Gulf. And then 328 00:22:10,040 --> 00:22:15,000 Speaker 2: they created this huge database of data points for addressing 329 00:22:15,000 --> 00:22:17,879 Speaker 2: the same question elsewhere around the world. So what are 330 00:22:17,920 --> 00:22:21,359 Speaker 2: the emissions associated with producing a barrel of oil in 331 00:22:21,960 --> 00:22:24,760 Speaker 2: this part of the Middle East or you know, offshore 332 00:22:24,840 --> 00:22:26,840 Speaker 2: in the Baltic Sea. So they looked at all these 333 00:22:26,840 --> 00:22:33,040 Speaker 2: different regions around the world and ultimately concluded that the 334 00:22:33,359 --> 00:22:37,119 Speaker 2: emissions associated with producing a barrel of oil in the 335 00:22:37,200 --> 00:22:42,159 Speaker 2: Gulf are relatively low compared with most other parts of 336 00:22:42,200 --> 00:22:46,000 Speaker 2: the world. I keep emphasizing the word producing because the 337 00:22:46,040 --> 00:22:49,880 Speaker 2: emissions that they looked at are the emissions that come 338 00:22:49,920 --> 00:22:53,240 Speaker 2: along with literally pulling the oil out of the ground 339 00:22:53,240 --> 00:22:54,359 Speaker 2: and packaging it up. 340 00:22:54,560 --> 00:22:59,080 Speaker 1: Yeah, so not distribution, not burning, right, So we're talking 341 00:22:59,200 --> 00:23:01,800 Speaker 1: like maximum eight to ten. 342 00:23:01,760 --> 00:23:05,159 Speaker 2: Percent a small Yeah. These are what would be called 343 00:23:05,280 --> 00:23:10,440 Speaker 2: in greenhouse gas reporting lingo, the Scope one and Scope 344 00:23:10,480 --> 00:23:12,120 Speaker 2: two emissions, yeah so. 345 00:23:12,320 --> 00:23:14,240 Speaker 1: And not even all of Scope two, not even. 346 00:23:14,080 --> 00:23:17,520 Speaker 2: All of scope too. So the downstream Scope three emissions, 347 00:23:17,560 --> 00:23:22,080 Speaker 2: aka the vast majority of emissions associated with fossil fuel products, 348 00:23:22,119 --> 00:23:25,480 Speaker 2: the actual burning of that oil and gas are not 349 00:23:25,720 --> 00:23:31,720 Speaker 2: something that we're considered here. So again ICF was contracted 350 00:23:31,720 --> 00:23:35,840 Speaker 2: to do was probably a totally solid technical analysis looking 351 00:23:35,920 --> 00:23:39,880 Speaker 2: at this narrow technical question. And then with this report 352 00:23:40,000 --> 00:23:44,520 Speaker 2: in hand, this oil and Gas Industry trade association put 353 00:23:44,520 --> 00:23:48,240 Speaker 2: out press releases and blog posts saying, look, how much 354 00:23:48,560 --> 00:23:52,280 Speaker 2: climate friendlier oil production in the Gulf of Mexico is 355 00:23:52,400 --> 00:23:54,800 Speaker 2: compared with all over the world, And wouldn't it be 356 00:23:54,840 --> 00:23:58,160 Speaker 2: great if America produced more oil in the Gulf of Mexico. 357 00:23:58,640 --> 00:24:01,280 Speaker 2: Isn't that a great idea? Both for our economy and 358 00:24:01,359 --> 00:24:03,359 Speaker 2: the climate. Yeah. 359 00:24:02,840 --> 00:24:07,680 Speaker 1: Yeah, that's so interesting because we've been looking at LNG 360 00:24:07,840 --> 00:24:10,840 Speaker 1: producers in the US too, and one of them, EQT, 361 00:24:11,640 --> 00:24:16,920 Speaker 1: commissioned a very similar type of report from McKenzie that shows, 362 00:24:17,080 --> 00:24:21,520 Speaker 1: you know that US LNG in particular is a you know, 363 00:24:21,600 --> 00:24:25,919 Speaker 1: climate solution because yeah, these production emissions are lower, and 364 00:24:26,000 --> 00:24:29,119 Speaker 1: then you know, I don't know the location and the 365 00:24:29,119 --> 00:24:30,800 Speaker 1: way we get it and all this kind of stuff, 366 00:24:30,800 --> 00:24:33,040 Speaker 1: and because you know, they all love to say that 367 00:24:33,800 --> 00:24:38,080 Speaker 1: US companies operate within stricter environmental regulations and that that 368 00:24:38,359 --> 00:24:41,720 Speaker 1: helps as well and all of that stuff. And there again, 369 00:24:41,840 --> 00:24:44,320 Speaker 1: McKinsey was sort of like, we just supplied the data 370 00:24:44,600 --> 00:24:48,399 Speaker 1: and the you know, technical analysis. We didn't come to 371 00:24:48,440 --> 00:24:51,359 Speaker 1: any conclusions or write this report or you. 372 00:24:51,280 --> 00:24:55,680 Speaker 2: Know, exactly exactly. Yeah, and that's that's exactly what happened here. 373 00:24:55,720 --> 00:24:58,600 Speaker 2: And this report in particular was like pounced on by 374 00:24:59,119 --> 00:25:03,640 Speaker 2: Republican Congress people who are advocating for you know, more 375 00:25:03,680 --> 00:25:06,520 Speaker 2: oil and gas production in the Gulf. I think I 376 00:25:06,560 --> 00:25:10,800 Speaker 2: saw the American Petroleum Institute cite it in a press 377 00:25:10,840 --> 00:25:16,080 Speaker 2: release on a lawsuit it was launching against the Biden 378 00:25:16,119 --> 00:25:21,920 Speaker 2: administration for essentially not not permitting more oil and gas 379 00:25:21,960 --> 00:25:25,400 Speaker 2: drilling to occur in the Gulf of Mexico. So it's 380 00:25:25,520 --> 00:25:28,640 Speaker 2: it's it's worked its way into the conversation. 381 00:25:29,119 --> 00:25:32,280 Speaker 1: Yeah, yeah, that's I didn't even think about the litigation piece, 382 00:25:32,320 --> 00:25:35,879 Speaker 1: but yeah, that kind of stuff absolutely gets pointed to 383 00:25:35,920 --> 00:25:39,320 Speaker 1: as sort of evidence in those kinds of situations too. 384 00:25:39,680 --> 00:25:43,560 Speaker 1: That it's interesting. Okay, tell me about the Race to 385 00:25:43,720 --> 00:25:47,320 Speaker 1: Zero and how they're looking at these kinds of firms. 386 00:25:47,840 --> 00:25:53,520 Speaker 2: Yeah. Race to Zero is a un associated initiative. It's 387 00:25:53,560 --> 00:26:00,240 Speaker 2: sort of a coalition of businesses and university leaders and 388 00:26:00,760 --> 00:26:04,680 Speaker 2: members of civil society who are trying to come up 389 00:26:04,720 --> 00:26:10,840 Speaker 2: with decarbonization strategies for various sectors of society that align 390 00:26:10,960 --> 00:26:13,879 Speaker 2: with the Paris Agreement goal of limiting global warming to 391 00:26:14,000 --> 00:26:18,400 Speaker 2: one point five degrees. And there is a new Race 392 00:26:18,440 --> 00:26:23,720 Speaker 2: to Zero initiative to develop a set of effectively a 393 00:26:23,720 --> 00:26:28,200 Speaker 2: set of best practice guidelines for professional service providers, including 394 00:26:28,280 --> 00:26:33,560 Speaker 2: consultancies and ad agencies and law firms to adhere to. 395 00:26:34,359 --> 00:26:37,560 Speaker 2: So the reason Race to Zero is now focusing on 396 00:26:38,080 --> 00:26:43,639 Speaker 2: professional service providers like consultancies is exactly because they're in 397 00:26:43,720 --> 00:26:49,720 Speaker 2: this unique position of having influence and of not necessarily 398 00:26:49,920 --> 00:26:54,000 Speaker 2: having a large carbon footprint on their own. When you 399 00:26:54,040 --> 00:26:56,560 Speaker 2: think about what is the carbon footprint of a consultancy 400 00:26:56,600 --> 00:26:59,280 Speaker 2: like ICF, Well, they use energy to keep the lights 401 00:26:59,320 --> 00:27:02,200 Speaker 2: on in their office space. You know, maybe they're you know, 402 00:27:02,359 --> 00:27:07,119 Speaker 2: driving to work. It's it's it's relatively you know, small 403 00:27:07,160 --> 00:27:10,320 Speaker 2: potatoes types of things. They're not running huge industrial facilities 404 00:27:10,359 --> 00:27:12,560 Speaker 2: that are creating a lot of pollution. But what they 405 00:27:12,560 --> 00:27:16,359 Speaker 2: are doing is they're working with clients who run huge 406 00:27:16,359 --> 00:27:19,119 Speaker 2: industrial facilities. They create a lot of pollution, and the 407 00:27:19,200 --> 00:27:22,120 Speaker 2: advice that they provide to those clients or the types 408 00:27:22,160 --> 00:27:26,720 Speaker 2: of technical analysis they do, has these downstream ripple effects 409 00:27:26,760 --> 00:27:33,080 Speaker 2: on really like the entire economy and Race to Zero's 410 00:27:33,359 --> 00:27:36,800 Speaker 2: contention here is that those ripple effects and the emissions 411 00:27:36,800 --> 00:27:40,560 Speaker 2: associated with them are likely to be a lot greater 412 00:27:41,000 --> 00:27:45,160 Speaker 2: than the emissions that a firm like ICF can kind 413 00:27:45,200 --> 00:27:50,720 Speaker 2: of claim a flame as their own emissions. So we're 414 00:27:50,760 --> 00:27:55,119 Speaker 2: talking emissions that are even a little bit beyond the 415 00:27:55,200 --> 00:28:00,359 Speaker 2: scope one two three sort of standard reporting framework. This 416 00:28:00,400 --> 00:28:04,879 Speaker 2: is indirect emissions associated with giving advice. So if you 417 00:28:05,000 --> 00:28:09,240 Speaker 2: tell a utility it's going to cost you this amount 418 00:28:09,280 --> 00:28:11,359 Speaker 2: of money to decarbonize, and the utility looks at that 419 00:28:11,440 --> 00:28:13,160 Speaker 2: number and goes, oh, oh, we're not going to do that, 420 00:28:13,640 --> 00:28:16,120 Speaker 2: you know, right, that has a climate impact. 421 00:28:16,720 --> 00:28:21,760 Speaker 1: And or if a report is used for lobbying exactly successfully, 422 00:28:22,000 --> 00:28:22,560 Speaker 1: then that. 423 00:28:22,960 --> 00:28:25,399 Speaker 2: That has a climate impact too. And these impacts can 424 00:28:25,440 --> 00:28:29,080 Speaker 2: be both positive and negative. What Race to Zero is 425 00:28:29,119 --> 00:28:32,320 Speaker 2: saying is that PSPs need to account for them when 426 00:28:32,320 --> 00:28:37,040 Speaker 2: they're attempting to account for their own climate impact. And 427 00:28:37,400 --> 00:28:39,600 Speaker 2: here are some best practices you can follow if you 428 00:28:39,680 --> 00:28:45,680 Speaker 2: want to drive down emissions and climate impact throughout your practice, 429 00:28:46,000 --> 00:28:50,520 Speaker 2: such as maybe taking a hard look at your entire 430 00:28:50,560 --> 00:28:54,200 Speaker 2: client base and what sorts of projects you're working on 431 00:28:54,280 --> 00:28:57,240 Speaker 2: for them and the climate impact of those projects, and 432 00:28:57,920 --> 00:29:01,480 Speaker 2: making some high level corporate decisions about the types of 433 00:29:01,600 --> 00:29:04,320 Speaker 2: work you will continue to do if you want to 434 00:29:05,160 --> 00:29:09,720 Speaker 2: align your practice with a decarbonized future. 435 00:29:09,960 --> 00:29:13,240 Speaker 1: Yeah. Yeah, I feel like another place that this shows 436 00:29:13,320 --> 00:29:15,520 Speaker 1: up a lot is in the sort of support of 437 00:29:15,720 --> 00:29:19,880 Speaker 1: false solutions kind of realm. And I know we've been 438 00:29:19,880 --> 00:29:23,400 Speaker 1: talking about doing like a follow on story because there's 439 00:29:23,440 --> 00:29:28,560 Speaker 1: so much around ICF and other consultancies work supporting the 440 00:29:28,640 --> 00:29:32,880 Speaker 1: idea of renewable natural gas as a climate solution. But 441 00:29:33,040 --> 00:29:35,240 Speaker 1: just give us like a little tease of what what 442 00:29:35,440 --> 00:29:39,920 Speaker 1: exactly are the sorts of things that that they're doing 443 00:29:40,160 --> 00:29:45,240 Speaker 1: to just like I don't know, kind of like provide 444 00:29:45,960 --> 00:29:49,320 Speaker 1: the evidence base for this being a good idea. 445 00:29:49,600 --> 00:29:56,480 Speaker 2: Yeah. So ICF is contracted by both utilities and government 446 00:29:56,600 --> 00:30:03,000 Speaker 2: agencies to look at certain climate solutions quote unquote that 447 00:30:03,480 --> 00:30:09,840 Speaker 2: the gas industry is really heavily promoting and pushing for. 448 00:30:10,400 --> 00:30:13,840 Speaker 2: So chief among those being this idea of renewable natural 449 00:30:13,880 --> 00:30:19,640 Speaker 2: gas or RANG, which is essentially methane gas that was 450 00:30:19,720 --> 00:30:24,440 Speaker 2: produced from a biological source. So maybe it's gas escaping 451 00:30:24,600 --> 00:30:29,840 Speaker 2: from landfills during decomposition, or maybe it's methane that is 452 00:30:29,960 --> 00:30:35,520 Speaker 2: synthetically manufactured by taking crop residues and subjecting them to 453 00:30:35,920 --> 00:30:40,920 Speaker 2: a gas production process. It's this umbrella term that can 454 00:30:41,040 --> 00:30:43,520 Speaker 2: refer to a lot of different things, but it's effectively 455 00:30:45,440 --> 00:30:47,680 Speaker 2: methane gas that can be a drop in replacement for 456 00:30:48,040 --> 00:30:55,520 Speaker 2: fossil gas. And there's a lot of debate and controversy, 457 00:30:55,560 --> 00:30:58,520 Speaker 2: to put it mildly, around how much of a climate 458 00:30:58,560 --> 00:31:02,600 Speaker 2: solution this can actually be. But to the gas industry, 459 00:31:02,880 --> 00:31:07,360 Speaker 2: it's like it's this amazing thing that allows them to 460 00:31:08,200 --> 00:31:14,600 Speaker 2: effectively do nothing to change their infrastructure or their operations. 461 00:31:14,840 --> 00:31:18,280 Speaker 2: They just need to partner with companies that can supply 462 00:31:18,400 --> 00:31:22,520 Speaker 2: and produce a lot of this RNG, and using some 463 00:31:22,640 --> 00:31:26,480 Speaker 2: tricky and again very controversial math, can claim that they've 464 00:31:26,640 --> 00:31:28,680 Speaker 2: canceled out most of their emissions on paper. 465 00:31:28,880 --> 00:31:35,520 Speaker 1: Yeah, yeah, and yeah. So what is ICF done in Yeah. 466 00:31:35,880 --> 00:31:40,600 Speaker 2: So, ICF has again worked with utilities and government agencies 467 00:31:40,680 --> 00:31:46,560 Speaker 2: to produce reports looking at overall potential for RNG in 468 00:31:46,640 --> 00:31:49,479 Speaker 2: certain scenarios. So they were contracted in twenty nineteen by 469 00:31:49,520 --> 00:31:54,480 Speaker 2: the American Gas Foundation, another gas industry trade association not 470 00:31:54,560 --> 00:31:58,760 Speaker 2: to be confused with the AGA, to look at RNG 471 00:31:59,640 --> 00:32:03,840 Speaker 2: production potential nationwide. So they looked at all these different 472 00:32:04,080 --> 00:32:09,640 Speaker 2: possible sources of RANG from cow manure to methane to 473 00:32:10,360 --> 00:32:15,160 Speaker 2: synthetic production of RANG from energy crops and forest residues, 474 00:32:15,160 --> 00:32:21,920 Speaker 2: and effectively summing all those sources up for every state 475 00:32:22,000 --> 00:32:25,400 Speaker 2: in the country, found that there's this huge potential supply 476 00:32:26,000 --> 00:32:29,360 Speaker 2: potential supply of RANG out there. This is, I want 477 00:32:29,360 --> 00:32:32,160 Speaker 2: to be very clear, doesn't really exist today, right, This 478 00:32:32,240 --> 00:32:36,200 Speaker 2: is an industry that is like largely on paper at 479 00:32:36,240 --> 00:32:40,320 Speaker 2: this point, but effectively, I think the top line conclusion 480 00:32:40,360 --> 00:32:44,320 Speaker 2: of that report was that ninety five percent of residential 481 00:32:44,920 --> 00:32:49,120 Speaker 2: natural gas usage could be replaced with RANG. Wow, which 482 00:32:49,160 --> 00:32:49,600 Speaker 2: is huge. 483 00:32:49,800 --> 00:32:53,280 Speaker 1: That's huge, But it's also like a massively more than 484 00:32:53,320 --> 00:32:54,120 Speaker 1: what I've seen. 485 00:32:54,320 --> 00:32:59,520 Speaker 2: It's like actually more than what any like reasonable independent 486 00:32:59,600 --> 00:33:03,000 Speaker 2: side studying this will say is realistic. And that was 487 00:33:03,040 --> 00:33:05,600 Speaker 2: the whole point I think of the report was to 488 00:33:06,320 --> 00:33:10,280 Speaker 2: show that there's this great potential if we make a 489 00:33:10,280 --> 00:33:13,800 Speaker 2: lot of assumptions, you know, and one of those assumptions 490 00:33:13,960 --> 00:33:17,080 Speaker 2: is that we actually want to do this and that 491 00:33:17,160 --> 00:33:20,720 Speaker 2: this is a good climate solution, which a lot of 492 00:33:20,760 --> 00:33:25,520 Speaker 2: independent researchers who've studied RANG have pushed back pretty strongly 493 00:33:25,560 --> 00:33:29,760 Speaker 2: against the idea that this is going to significantly reduce 494 00:33:30,520 --> 00:33:35,440 Speaker 2: the gas industry's emissions. There's a case to be made 495 00:33:35,600 --> 00:33:38,120 Speaker 2: that if we're capturing methane that would have escaped to 496 00:33:38,160 --> 00:33:43,040 Speaker 2: the atmosphere anyway, Yeah, that is preventing pollution, and that's 497 00:33:43,080 --> 00:33:47,440 Speaker 2: a good thing. But this report and subsequent reports that 498 00:33:47,640 --> 00:33:53,320 Speaker 2: ICF has worked on for states and for individual utilities 499 00:33:53,360 --> 00:33:58,240 Speaker 2: and cities, don't just look at that narrow, that sort 500 00:33:58,280 --> 00:34:02,440 Speaker 2: of narrow slice of the RANG production, that is the 501 00:34:02,480 --> 00:34:05,240 Speaker 2: methane that would have escaped as pollution anyway. They look 502 00:34:05,280 --> 00:34:08,400 Speaker 2: at how could we make as much of this as possible, 503 00:34:08,480 --> 00:34:11,879 Speaker 2: And to make as much RANG as possible, you need 504 00:34:11,920 --> 00:34:16,640 Speaker 2: to literally produce new methane. So at that point you're 505 00:34:16,640 --> 00:34:19,799 Speaker 2: not talking about capturing pollution. You're talking about producing more 506 00:34:19,840 --> 00:34:23,640 Speaker 2: greenhouse gases, right, some of which are inevitably going to 507 00:34:23,719 --> 00:34:27,280 Speaker 2: leak to the atmosphere and compound the climate problem. 508 00:34:26,880 --> 00:34:32,319 Speaker 1: Right right, Yeah, Yeah, it's so interesting. Okay, awesome, Well, 509 00:34:32,040 --> 00:34:34,200 Speaker 1: we'll have you back on to talk more about RANG 510 00:34:34,480 --> 00:34:36,320 Speaker 1: when when that comes together. 511 00:34:36,560 --> 00:34:37,560 Speaker 2: Looking forward to it. 512 00:34:37,680 --> 00:34:40,319 Speaker 1: Yes, thank you, and you can read the story on 513 00:34:40,360 --> 00:34:41,200 Speaker 1: our website. 514 00:34:41,920 --> 00:35:01,520 Speaker 4: Thanks Maddie, Thanks Amy. 515 00:34:54,160 --> 00:34:55,840 Speaker 2: It for this week, Thanks for listening. 516 00:34:56,600 --> 00:34:59,560 Speaker 1: Keep an eye out for that LNG episode coming soon, 517 00:34:59,719 --> 00:35:05,719 Speaker 1: as well as episodes on lots of other faulty problems 518 00:35:05,800 --> 00:35:10,240 Speaker 1: masquerading as solutions from the fossil fuel industry. Thanks for listening, 519 00:35:10,239 --> 00:35:11,239 Speaker 1: and we'll see you next time.