Here’s we in the United States should be doing now to keep up with the rest of the world’s investment in research and development of green energy technologies:
The United States needs to more than triple its spending on energy research, development and demonstration projects, from about $5 billion now to $16 billion, and should review national energy policy every four years, an advisory group of scientists and engineers said in a report to President Obama this week.
The US is falling behind almost every other major developed country in the world. Look at this chart from 2007 that shows R & D spending as a percentage of Gross Domestic Product:
Since that time, China has increased its R&D spending on renewable wind energy technology to 10 BILLION DOLLARS alone, or almost half of all the investment in wind powered renewable energy in the entire world. China’s total investment in “cleantech” reached $13.5 BILLION DOLLARS just in the third quarter of this year alone, dwarfing Europe’s investment of $8.5 BILLION for the quarter.
Stephen Chu, Secretary of the Energy Department sounded the alarm about our failure to adequately keep pace with China and other countries in developing clean energy alternatives in a speech on Monday, November 29th in which he warned that America faces a “Sputnik” moment when it comes to the development of clean energy:
Energy Secretary Steven Chu today warned that “time is running out” for the U.S. to be the global leader in clean-energy technologies because China and other countries are racing ahead.
Chu gave a speech at the National Press Club where he suggested that the U.S. is reaching a “Sputnik moment” where political leaders and the general population will realize how the U.S. has fallen behind other countries in science and technology. […]
“America still has the opportunity to lead in a world that will need a new industrial revolution to give us energy we want inexpensively and carbon free,” he said during his presentation, which was Webcast. … “I think time is running out.” […]
He said there are risks in the status quo which were detailed in a report called Business Plan for America’s Future which was authored by business leaders including Bill Gates, venture capital investor John Doerr, GE CEO Jeff Immelt, and former Lockheed Martin CEO Norman Augustine.
The report said there are many benefits to moving to a cleaner energy system in the U.S., including public health, protection from climate change, and cleaner air, but none of these are recognized by the free market. Also, the scale of investment required in new energy technologies in beyond the scope of commercial companies, which is why the government should fund research and development.
Cutting research and development during the a slow economic period is “like removing an engine from an overloaded aircraft,” Chu said, quoting former Lockheed Martin CEO Augustine. […]
Chu said the Energy Department has established two new research channels: ARPA-E, which is focused on breakthrough technology research within three to five years, and Energy Innovation Hubs, where larger groups of people at universities focus on specific areas, such as bio energy and building efficiency, for several years.
One lesson that the U.S. can learn from China is the importance of long-term planning and investment, Chu said.
Read more: http://news.cnet.com/8301-11128_3-20024018-54.html#ixzz173NjUwiX
You can watch his entire speech to the National Press Club here:
A copy of Chu’s powerpoint presentation (which he was unable to show at the National Press Club) regarding the vital need to immediately increase our investment in clean technology can be downloaded from this link (.pdf) or a link to a .PPD file can be found at this webpage from the Department of Energy website.
I urge you to listen to the entire speech by Secretary Chu and the Question and Answer period that followed. It makes a clear case that government investment in clean technology is critical even in a period of deep recession if we hope to revitalize our economy and maintain our position as an economic power. Otherwise we face a decline that will leave us a second rate power like Russia, or worse. In short, this is the most important national security issue we face, far more important than international terrorism.
Unfortunately, Republicans take a dim view of investment in clean tech. They already intend to eliminate House Select Committee on Energy Independence and Global Warming. And Rep. Dana Rohrabacher(R-CA), a vehement climate change denier, is making a bid to chair the House Science Committee in order to to denounce “phony science.”
Mr. Rohrabacher has long maintained that carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases pose no threat to the environment and that the scientific basis for man-made climate change is a fraud.
“We must not allow our future to be stolen by hucksters who would frighten us into giving up our birthright in the name of saving the planet,” he said in a lengthy floor speech in March 2009. “It sounds good and noble, as most scams do, but it is just a trick, a hoax.” […]
You think the Republicans in Congress are going to support increased federal investment in the research and development of any energy sources other than corporate welfare for the Big Oil and Big Coal? Do you think the “Party of No” is going to to pass legislation for a massive increase in the development of green tech (a progressive and Democratic proposal) initiative) when their own leaders deny the reality of climate change? Do you think they care about investment in US innovation that won’t benefit their friends at Exxon Mobil and BP, despite the fact that innovators like Bill Gates and other business leaders are advocating government investment to compete effectively with other nations on developing the critical energy infrastructure the world needs? Do you think the GOP gives a damn about the decline in our economy and the loss of critical jobs and capital that the failure to make these investments in research and development for clean tech will do to our country.
Yeah, me neither. Promoting clean technology through government investment isn’t in their DNA. They will spend the next two years pushing an energy policy that will call for more the increase in older technologies, ones that we know damage the environment (off-shore drilling, hydrofracking) and will do little if anything to make us energy independent or increase job growth.
What is worse, do you think the Obama administration will make this a critical issue in the next two years to accentuate a major difference between a corrupt, backward looking Republican Party and a forward looking, progressive Democratic Party truly seeking to improve our economy and increase our national security?
I’d like to say I believe the answer to that question is yes. However, I’ve seen nothing from the Obama administration (other than the efforts of Secretary Chu) to indicate pushing a policy of investment in green technology is a major part of President Obama’s agenda, even as a political strategy for the 2012 elections.
And when you don’t even try, failure is predestined.
