No Public Money for Bad Actors: Voters Don’t Want Law-Violating Developers to Get Federal Clean Energy Funding

By Catherine Fraser

Following the passage of the Inflation Reduction Act and Bipartisan Infrastructure Law, the U.S. is distributing billions of dollars in public funding for new clean infrastructure projects, like carbon capture, carbon dioxide removal, and renewable energy technologies, to project developers across the country. 

New polling from Data for Progress finds that a majority of likely voters (67%) support these recent investments in clean infrastructure projects. This includes 85% of Democrats, 69% of Independents, and 50% of Republicans.

 
 

However, some developers currently receiving funds from the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) for clean infrastructure projects are actively not complying with laws regulated by other federal agencies, like the Environmental Protection Agency and Department of Labor.

For example, ExxonMobil’s Baytown Olefins Plant has committed at least 25 air quality violations over the last five years and been fined eight times by the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) in the last decade, yet could receive more than $330 million in DOE clean energy grant funding. In 2019, the plant experienced a major explosion that injured 37 workers. 

Additionally, natural gas company CNX Resources is receiving DOE funding despite more than 2,000 environmental violations this century. And a Houston-area Shell plant, whose affiliate Shell Catalysts & Technologies is collaborating with Calpine Texas CCUS Holdings LLC on a local DOE-funded carbon capture study, has experienced two major air pollution lawsuits and more than 500 chemical leaks this century — leaks that emitted the carcinogen benzene

Often, companies operate as if penalties for environmental, labor, and other violations are the cost of doing business, given slap-on-the-wrist fines and lax enforcement from regulators.

The survey finds that voters don’t want federal funds to go to bad actors. A strong majority of voters want developers to be required to be in compliance with worker safety (83%), clean water (80%), fair labor (78%), clean air (77%), and civil rights (74%) laws to receive federal funding.

 
 

Data for Progress finds that a bipartisan majority of voters (76%) support the DOE consulting other federal agencies to ensure developers are in compliance with relevant federal laws before receiving federal funding. This includes 87% of Democrats, 70% of Independents, and 69% of Republicans.

 
 

Next, respondents were informed that the DOE has awarded funds to developers that are currently in violation of environmental and labor laws, including some companies that have had major accidents that have killed workers and polluted the environment in recent years. After learning this information, 71% of voters — including majorities of Democrats, Independents, and Republicans — agree that the DOE shouldn’t give public funds to developers that are currently in violation of environmental and labor laws, compared with just 18% who say the DOE should.

 
 

As the DOE and other federal agencies consider future clean infrastructure projects for federal funding, voters clearly want public funds to be reserved for actors in good standing when it comes to environmental, civil rights, and labor laws.


Catherine Fraser (@cathwfraser) is the Senior Climate and Energy Program Associate at Data for Progress.

Survey Methodology

From October 2 to 3, 2024, Data for Progress conducted a survey of 1,211 U.S. likely voters nationally using web panel respondents. The sample was weighted to be representative of likely voters by age, gender, education, race, geography, and 2020 recalled vote. The survey was conducted in English. The margin of error associated with the sample size is ±3 percentage points. Results for subgroups of the sample are subject to increased margins of error. Partisanship reflected in tabulations is based on self-identified party affiliation, not partisan registration. For more information please visit dataforprogress.org/our-methodology.