So, finally the veil has been lifted. It turns out, according to one submission to the Senate inquiry into climate and energy integrity, that I am not who I say am.
I am not, says R.W. Cumming, just an ageing, bald journalist of 45 years experience, writing and publishing widely-read newsletters and websites on renewables and EVs in between surfing sessions and beach walks.
It turns out I am barely 40 years old, the head of a vast global funds management group, I live in England and I have – gasp – a full head of hair! And, it is claimed, I have a PhD in accounting, which would be a bit of a laugh for my actual accountant. Only one of these attributes I wish to be true. Ok, so maybe two.
Of course, the claims by R.W. are a complete nonsense. A quick check of our respective LinkedIn profiles – here and here – might have confirmed that he has confused me with another Giles Parkinson. We are different people.
But whether it was with the help of an AI chatbot, or through his own grim determination, R.W. dedicated a whole 10 pages of his submission to my apparent conflict of interest – to lay bare, he claimed, the heresy and duplicity of our publications.
The committee secretariat asked me to vet the claims and invited me to respond, and even gave me a right of veto against the publication of R.W.’s submission.
I did respond, and I asked that my response and the original submission be published, because it is just one small example of the extent that some will go to in pursuit of their ideological hatred of climate science, and renewables in particular.
The secretariat blacked out the specific claims, for fear that AI would suck it up and spread it round the metaverse as though it was true.
As laughable as this is, it matters because misinformation and disinformation are now rife within our society, and it is keenly felt in the energy and climate space.
It has become the biggest issue for the energy transition in the last year, and now – with the aid of AI and the complicity of the world’s increasingly powerful tech barons – it will multiply in the years ahead.
It is quite likely the biggest threat to that transition, because of its implications and impact on planning and social licence issues, the uptake of key technologies such as EVs, and the cynicism of populist, right wing politicians who trade on a powerful currency – fear and ignorance.
Misinformation and disinformation have already become the official policy of the US, the world’s biggest economy, where climate science has been defunded, the records torched, the very word eradicated from wherever the ideologies can find it in government records.
Even institutions with renewables in their title are being renamed, the National Renewable Energy Laboratory is now the National Laboratory of the Rockies.
In the latest attack on science, the US National Centre for Atmospheric Research, located near the former NREL in Boulder, Colorado, one of the world’s premier climate and weather institutions, is being dismantled.
Why? Because the trump Administration’s Russell Vought has decided that the NCAR is “one of the largest sources of climate alarmism” in the US.
The campaign group Global Witness last week produced a remarkable report into the actions of AI Chatbox, particularly on climate and energy during the recent COP-30 climate conference in Brazil. The performance of the chatbots varied significantly. It pointed to Elon Musk’s Grok as the worst offender.
“Grok shared climate conspiracy tropes, recommended that we follow climate disinformers, and offered to make anti-COP social media posts more ‘violent’ to boost engagement,” the report found.
It questioned whether climate data was being manipulated and said that ‘you’ll feel policy pain long before any weather pain.’ Sound familiar? You might just find that as the de-facto policy of Australia’s conservative parties.
The accusations against myself are just a small drop in the ocean of the forces that are at work in Australia. At Renew Economy we are used to attacks from the fossil fuel lobby, their political actors and their trolls. Others are stunned at what is served up.
The Senate committee, as Renew Economy has reported, has unearthed some harrowing evidence of abuse, threats, and intimidation – much of it driven by fear and loathing inspired by deliberate campaigns to demonise renewables, and the mainstream and other media that amplify it.
Read an example of Anne Delaney’s stories from the Senate inquiry here: “A culture of fear”: Bushfire survivor tells Senate inquiry how climate misinformation fuels trauma and silences voices
And: “Every component of my life was attacked:” How wind farm misinformation tore community apart, and “The wheels fell off:” Farmer tells Senate how misinformation killed a community battery project
The organisation mentioned in that story, Rainforest Reserves, even made a submission against virtual power plants (the aggregation of behind the metre technologies such as rooftop solar and home batteries), arguing that they threaten marine ecosystems and species such as the southern right whale and bottlenose dolphins.
The opposition to renewables has now become an industry in itself. Wind, solar and even battery projects are being forced into review panels even when no one within 50 km of the projects have opposed the idea.
These projects are the target of long distance objectors, many of them just angry and making wild claims that feed off the misinformation created by the Trump’s attack on science, the support of the AI Chatbots, and the misinformation funnelled regularly through the Murdoch media and other news organisations.
This is not to excuse the renewables industry of any and all blame.
The independent MP for Indi in Victoria, Helen Haines, the most visible supporter of renewables of all the MPs representing regional Australia, recently told Renew Economy’s Energy Insiders podcast of the cack-handed efforts of some renewable developers as they engage with local communities.
It’s that sort of arrogance that lights the fire for the merchants of misinformation. Haines points to regions where communities and proponents have developed trusting relationships through early, effective community engagement.
She cites examples such as Dubbo, Armidale and Hay, but right now, Haines says, these examples are the exception, not the rule.
There are some remarkable stories. The story of Meering West, for instance, where a group of 25 different farmers, from 15 different families, in a region beset by division over the path of a proposed new transmission line and big renewable project proposals, decided to take matters into their own hands.
They held their own tender ran a tender process to select a renewable energy developer to progress a massive 1.5 gigawatt wind farm on their land. And as a result of the landowner-led nature of the project, the design was co-designed to minimise the impact on farming practices on the 20,100 hectare area, it says.
That might sound like a good project for the other Giles Parkinson to invest in, were he at all interested in the Australian renewable industry. But it would probably just be fuel for yet another conspiracy.
