Will America Lose the Clean-Energy Race?
As Congress debates climate and energy legislation, Asian challengers are moving rapidly to win the clean-energy race. China alone is reportedly investing $440 billion to $660 billion in its clean-energy industries over 10 years. South Korea is investing a full 2 percent of its gross domestic product in a Green New Deal. And Japan is redoubling incentives for solar, aiming for a 20-fold expansion in installed solar energy by 2020.
In contrast, the United States would invest only about $1.2 billion annually in energy research and development and roughly $10 billion in the clean energy sector as a whole under the Waxman-Markey bill - less than 0.1 percent of U.S. GDP. A group of 34 Nobel laureates recently wrote a letter to President Obama decrying the lack of investment and calling on him to uphold his promise to invest $15 billion annually in clean-energy R&D.
The United States is also falling behind in energy science and technology education. Only 15 percent of undergraduate degrees earned in the United States are in science and engineering, compared with 50 percent in China, according to the National Academies.
In spring, Obama proposed a program designed to inspire young Americans to pursue careers in clean energy. The program, called RE-ENERGYSE (Regaining our Energy Science and Engineering Edge), would fund new undergraduate and graduate energy curriculum and research opportunities to prepare up to 8,500 highly educated young scientists and engineers to enter clean-energy fields by 2015 alone. Unfortunately, the U.S. Senate and House recently rejected the proposal, with the Senate cutting the program from $115 million to zero and the House appropriating only $7 million.
If the United States had responded to the Soviet launch of Sputnik the way today's Congress is responding to the Asian energy challenge, America would have lost the space race and been left behind in the industries that fueled a half century of economic progress. The National Defense Education Act of 1958 was critical to developing the skills necessary to put a man on the moon and invent the technologies that catapulted our world into the Information Age. Last week, a group of more than 100 universities, student groups and professional associations submitted a letter to each member of the Senate urging full support of RE-ENERGYSE, which they said "will train America's future energy workforce, accelerate our transition to a prosperous clean-energy economy, and ensure that we lead the world's burgeoning clean technology industries."
To win today's clean-energy race, the United States must respond with the same vigorous commitment to education and innovation that won the space race four decades ago. Congress should begin by strengthening RE-ENERGYSE to the full $115 million requested and pass energy legislation that invests $30 billion to $50 billion annually in low-carbon energy.
If America does not take immediate action to bridge its energy education gap - and if we fail to make substantially larger investments in our own clean-energy economy - we will effectively cede the clean-energy race to Asia. A decade from now, we may still find the burgeoning clean-energy economy promised by Obama and Democratic leaders. It will simply be headquartered in China.
Twitter
StumbleUpon
Facebook
Delicious
Digg
Newsvine
Google
Yahoo
Technorati
16 Comments so far
Show AllLoose the race?.... Hell, the US isn't even at the starting line, and we're too drunk on our own egos to make a showing any ways.
Gee, which direction do you reckon the US is racing?
Generally speaking, less people use less energy.
Good principle, with the United States being the leader among several significant exceptions.
thank god we'll have energy, so I can buy and use and get bored with and break and throw away a bunch of crap I don't need in the first place...what the hell is life about?
sex and music and marijuana don't bore, or require electricity...
Unless you plan on having a jazz quartet in your bedroom, you'll need electricity if you want music with your sex and weed.
Of course, you could both sing while you're going at it.
q
That's music and electricity!
Yee-ha!
ah, q...always enjoy your posts...interesting the way the words need and want populate our thinking...need electricity if you want music...sounds reasonable, but is not true...electrical devices do not make music, musicians do...birds and whales do...streams and tree-breezes do...electrical devices record or reproduce music, but don't create it...just as my computer is allowing me to communicate these thoughts, yet is not creating the thoughts, themselves...I am...
The tough choices will need to be made one day...negotiation and compromise regarding economy are merely delaying, not circumventing those choices...worse, they may even be eliminating opportunity for effective recourse...
Doing without will one day trump doing with...whether it is in time or not, is the question...
Keep the faith, brother! Let's get naked, get high, get singing and fucking, and get those gardens growing!
For an investment of 20 trillion dollars we could be completely energy independent using solar (PV) in the US southwest and hydrogen as a storage and transportable medium. We just gave 12.8 trillion dollars to make the ultra-rich rich again so 20 trillion does not seem like that much anymore.
Yesterday, July 28, the Department of Energy sent out over 3,000 official letters of discouragement advising developers of new clean energy ideas to not submit proposals for research and development concepts due to the lack of available government funds.
Title: Recovery Act - ARPA-E
Reference Number: DE-FOA-0000065
The press should investigate this discouragement of American ideas and inventions.
We've already lost the race - not even third place.
But, by retooling our weapons and automotive industries, we could catch up and be world leaders.
Ahh, dream on. Go back to sleep.
Well heck if the Japanese or Chinese get too uppity the USA could just bomb them back into the stone age under the guise of "Bringing them democracy".
Van Jones could be trying to whip things up but I don't know how much power he really has or perhaps he was appointed to put a happy face on empty rhetoric?
The problem seems to be that Obama has appointed all the wrong people for all the major positions in his administration which may have been deliberate or he didn't have a clue?
RE: Great Goals to Strive For
Where are the great goals Obama is telling the country to Strive For?
How about 20 million solar water heaters and 20 million heat pump installs throughout the nation in the next 4 years?
Solar water heaters are much lower tech (glass, steel, a little copper) and cheaper than solar electric and it could be installed at lower income multifamily units to boot.
How many jobs would that create?
In 1995 i graduated from a 2 year associate program in Energy Conservation. It was the only one in the country at the time. It still might be the only one in the country now 14 years later? Most of those folks have been placed in decent jobs in the field especially if they were willing to move anywhere in the U.S. However with current regulations in the solar energy field you need at least 1 years schooling and 5 years apprenticeship to become a certified solar water heater installer. The solar energy field has been so tight especially now with the economy that no one is hiring apprentices at all.
Give me and tens of thousands around the country the training in the solar energy and heat pump installation field without going bankrupt. Then i and others around the country could be helping our people and the nation out of this climate and energy crisis.
RE: Rial vs Freeway Pork
The rail vs expansion of bigger and new freeways around the country is a whole other issue altogether. Look who Obama appointed as Secretary of Transportation. The king of paving pork in the whole country, LaHood. What else needs to be said. Replace him with someone who believes in rail not more paving pork for the paving mafia.
Nothing changes; it's all about the money.
Rather than worrying about China getting there first, I would be glad to see ANYONE coming up with a workable clean energy formula that would keep transportation transporting (that's the hang-up; using clean energy to replace coal for powering the light bulbs and pc's is do-able). Knowledgeable quasi-pessimists like James Howard Kunstler (http://kunstler.com/) keep putting it out there that there is nothing practical that can replace gasoline, and he envisions a localized bunch of economies without a lot of driving hither and yon. I don't think that can work in a 7 billion people world. But if the Chinese or the Indians can figure out a way to make it happen and beat us to it, I say GO!
Kunstler' ideas about replacing suburbia with car free communities does not mean economies have to be local.
Commodities and goods can move very efficiently on electric train, pipe lines, and power lines.
People likewise travel by intercity electric train, as they already do in many places.
Localazation is incompatable with renewable energy sources - they are going to have to have an interconected transcontinental grid to be provide reliable base-load.
Rural areas may still need fossil-fueled transportation for a lot of purposes, but that's a small fraction of what is currently used.