Renewable Energy Advocacy Editing and Proofreading Services

A company announces it runs on "100% renewable energy," and a reader pictures solar panels or wind turbines directly powering the building. What the claim actually rests on is a set of renewable energy certificates purchased separately from the company's actual electricity supply, which continues to come from the regional grid exactly as it did before, and which is often generated substantially from fossil fuels. Both the physical electricity and the certificate purchase are real. The claim built on top of them implies a physical reality that the certificate mechanism was never actually designed to represent.

We edit what organisations produce to communicate a renewable energy claim — renewable energy percentage claims and their accounting method disclosures, certificate and power purchase agreement explanations, additionality and matching methodology descriptions, and the correspondence responding to a stakeholder's question about what a specific renewable claim actually involves. Our editors work on the gap between an accounting mechanism and the physical picture a reader forms from the headline claim.

The disclosed accounting method is what a renewable energy claim actually needs attached to it, and its failure is a percentage presented as a physical fact when it is actually the result of a specific mechanism — certificate purchase, direct power purchase agreement, or on-site generation — that the claim never names. 100% renewable energy describes an outcome achieved through one of several genuinely different mechanisms, and a reader who assumes physical, direct supply has been let down by a claim that omitted which mechanism actually produced it. We work through these so the specific mechanism behind a claim is stated explicitly — unbundled renewable energy certificates purchased separately from electricity supply, a power purchase agreement with a specific renewable generator, or on-site generation — since these represent very different relationships between the organisation and actual renewable electricity, and a single percentage figure collapses that difference entirely; so the timing and location matching of certificates or contracts is disclosed, given that annual matching against a grid that is not renewable in real time is a different claim from generation matched to actual consumption hour by hour, and additionality — whether the purchase caused new renewable capacity to be built — is a further distinction that changes what the claim actually represents; so the organisation's actual physical electricity source is stated honestly alongside the claim, because a reader deserves to know that the building's lights are still running on the regional grid mix regardless of what has been purchased on paper; so any claim of driving new renewable development is supported with the specific project and mechanism, rather than implied by the renewable percentage alone; and so a stakeholder's specific question about what the claim actually involves receives the actual mechanism, not a repetition of the percentage. Claims written this way let a reader understand what relationship to renewable electricity actually exists behind the number.

Everything you send is treated in confidence, including energy procurement data, contracts and stakeholder correspondence. We are editors rather than energy analysts, sustainability consultants or renewable energy specialists, and we offer no view on energy procurement, additionality or claim validity. What we can do is make sure the mechanism behind the claim is actually named.