More

Clean Energy Industry Skeptical Of Obama's Goals

First Posted: 01/27/11 10:21 AM ET Updated: 05/25/11 07:30 PM ET

Cleantech Obama

Despite the President's strong affirmation of his clean energy goals during Tuesday's State of the Union Address, the clean energy industry has been reserved in its enthusiasm.

Among President Obama's promises were that the U.S. would reach 80 percent dependence on renewable sources by 2035, and that he would put 1 million electric vehicles on the road by 2015. But Obama has set clean energy goals before that have failed to materialize in the governmental support necessary for their completion.

One concern many seem to share is the President's grouping of nuclear energy under the same umbrella as other renewable sources. Nuclear energy has the potential to create long-lasting radioactive wastes, as well as carrying other associated security terms.

"If you think of the sources of electricity that are absolutely carbon free--in the generation sense--photovoltaics, wind, geothermal, nuclear--we're over thirty percent now," said Secretary of Energy Steven Chu, on a conference call with reporters. "If you then give partial credit to natural gas, in that it's roughly speaking, half the carbon emission of coal, then we go higher."

For those in the auto industry, reaching the goal of one million electric vehicles on the road by 2015 will be a matter of bridging rhetoric and reality.

"You could get close to a million on the road with a little more push. We just dont see that push," said Philip Gott, Managing Director of automotive consulting at IHS Global Insight. "The thing that politicians fail to realize is that if you turn around and say, 'I want a million vehicles out there next year,' it wont necessarily happen. It takes a while to ramp up production, to get the facilities in place."

And even though Obama seems to understand the urgency of pushing for a clean energy future, in the short term the industry still lacks the kind of federal support it requires to thrive. The president's statement that he would cease subsidies to oil companies to help create the capital for green investments will surely be subject to aggressive opposition by powerful fossil fuel interests. Chu stated that the president would seek $8 billion in clean energy spending in the new federal budget.

Funding for cleantech companies could be complicated by the government's approach to investment subsidies, many of which renew on short-term time periods, and can make the long-term development of the industry murky. China -- a country the president called out in his speech as a global competitor to watch -- has policies so attractive that numerous U.S. companies have set up shop there.

The U.S. failed to pass a comprehensive green energy policy (like the one China, among other countries, has) this past summer. With Congress divided, it seems questionable that Obama will have the chance to push through that kind of omnibus bill -- though he did not promise to do so in this year's State of the Union, as he did in 2010.

But for now, the industry will just have to wait and see if words will be matched by action.

"It's an ambitious goal just as the moon shot was ambitious," said Chu. "But it is an achievable goal."

FOLLOW HUFFPOST BUSINESS
Subscribe to the HuffPost Money newsletter!
Despite the President's strong affirmation of his clean energy goals during Tuesday's State of the Union Address, the clean energy industry has been reserved in its enthusiasm. Among President Obama...
Despite the President's strong affirmation of his clean energy goals during Tuesday's State of the Union Address, the clean energy industry has been reserved in its enthusiasm. Among President Obama...
 
 
  • Comments
  • 26
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Recency  | 
Popularity
11:52 PM on 02/01/2011
A hard task to accomplish with the GOP fighting you every step of the way. Although it's over stated people really do need to work towards more bipartisanship. This is done by electing leaders who actually want to work together as opposed to those in it for the pay check and special intrests
04:02 PM on 01/28/2011
Obama will be able to pass energy legislation if he is reasonable about what can get passed. Nuclear and natural gas, while not the greenest of greens, are a substantial improvement over coal. For you "anti-fossil fuelists" out there, NG has approximately 4x the heating value of coal per unit of CO2 generated. Its a huge difference. Wind is fun, but according to studies, it is only able to produce at capacity, during peak demand 5% of the time. It is inconsistent. Solar panels are great! Technology and economics just aren't there yet.

If Obama proposes legislation to bolster nuclear, natural gas (which is domestic), and renewables, we could be able to cut carbon emissions from power generation by 75% in 15 years, and you would hardly see a difference in your electricity bill, compared to wind, geo, and solar.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
logicanada
Blogger, radio co-host, writer, editor, voice-over
12:07 PM on 01/28/2011
But Obama has set clean energy goals before that have failed to materialize in the governmental support necessary for their completion. . . at the hands of Republicans fighting against all things Obama.
10:12 AM on 01/28/2011
When every other country is well into it's energy indepindance, that's when the US will enter into the fray. Not until then. A very sorry state of affairs!
07:00 AM on 01/28/2011
If there wasn't Republican resistance it wouldn't be important. If people aren't debating it , then it must be inconvenient. Say what you will it's not enough and should be completed 10 years earlier then projected. www.myhumanism.org.uk What we really need to do is double is goals and slash the time line down to a third. That would be change I could believe in!
01:50 AM on 01/28/2011
The growing demand for more energy has forced the world to seek other sources of energy. Among the main contenders for this are the renewable sources of energy. The renewable energy sources are known for their environment friendly attributes that contradicts the harmful nature of gases emitted on combustion of the fossil fuels. The key renewable energy sources of today include the sun, ocean water and the wind. Although the usage of these renewable sources is limited to only 1%, it carries a great potential. One of the issues faced by the renewable energy sources is the high initial cost of installing the plant. There is a need to streamline the cost of clean energy and make it more competitive with traditional fossil fuel energy.
08:13 PM on 01/27/2011
Big oil serves our lifestyles. They change when our lifestyles change.

Step beyond Obama's promises and 1 million electric vehicles in 5 more years. Congress and the president move at their pace. Quicken their pace.

If urgency surrounds clean green energy, then vote with your daily lifestyle. Personally reducing gasoline use by 20% is a great alternativ­e for the next 2 years. Make an economic, social, and environmen­tal statement now. lifestyle change to your once every 2 year vote.

Imagine the changes if 5% of USA drivers reduced their gasoline consumption by 20%. Get noticed by politicans, big oil and importers.

Make a powerful statement. Vote every day with your lifestyle and dollars.

Action expresses priority - Gandhi.
ThePeacemakers
Concerned Citizen
05:16 PM on 01/27/2011
"And even though Obama seems to understand the urgency of pushing for a clean energy future, in the short term the industry still lacks the kind of federal support it requires to thrive."

Didn't the banks get stress tested? Aren't they still getting free money?
Why can't the industry get a bank loan?
02:17 PM on 01/27/2011
Diverting some or all of the ethanol subsidies might be a good first step.
photo
AyeChart
Retired Army, half-retired physician
01:19 PM on 01/27/2011
Green energy is a job killer.  A job murderer, in fact, because it appears that it's premeditated, deliberate.
12:06 AM on 01/28/2011
Sarcasm?
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
logicanada
Blogger, radio co-host, writer, editor, voice-over
12:09 PM on 01/28/2011
Tell that to the tens of thousands employed in China right now making solar panels.
photo
AyeChart
Retired Army, half-retired physician
01:18 PM on 01/27/2011
Actually, if you do the math, the percentage of energy in this country generated by solar, wind, and all non-nuclear sources is about 1-2%.  That's a far cry from the hope-you'd-fall-for-it 30% that our esteemed Secy claims.

But the main problem with the entire argument is that nobody's shown that carbon is significant.  Why spend all the time and money making our energy uneconomical and handicapping our economy if it's not significant?
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
polishlogician
No sugar tonight in my tea..
02:35 PM on 01/27/2011
he included nuclear in the 30% figure; and you must have known that because you write "non-nuclear" in your post...you're deliberately deceptive...
11:57 AM on 01/27/2011
After visiting with leadership in China, I covered China's new Green Plan recently in a post. They are systematically gearing up their economy, cities and businesses to be low carbon: http://bit.ly/g3LuOj
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
StansDad
Guy who eats food
12:43 PM on 01/27/2011
What does china have to do with this article? Or are you just looking for another reason to praise the strong government of china?
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
RRK70
11:49 AM on 01/27/2011
we'll see, but Obama's funding for renewables in the stimulus funding wasn't exactly earth shattering. 

As Eisenhower did with the Interstate bill, he should make renewable energy and energy independence a matter of national security.  If renewable energy and conservation measures were implemented on military bases and perhaps government buildings then it would serve to support the fledgling industries, and as it is defense related domestic suppliers would be required to be used.
photo
PoloniumMan
"It worked." J. Robert Oppenheimer
12:33 PM on 01/27/2011
Already happening.
http://www.nellis.af.mil/news/story.asp?id=123079933

The DoD is also looking to convert domestic coal and biomass into jet fuel.
http://www.af.mil/news/story.asp?id=123026906
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
RRK70
01:32 PM on 01/27/2011
nice to see, thanks for the link!

They need to expand it.  PV, biomass, solar hot water, bio-fuels, tidal power, wave power, wind, etc.

Eventually branch out and do the same for all government buildings.
01:06 PM on 01/27/2011
Jimmy Carter tried this 30 years ago. Didn't work then.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
10:09 PM on 01/27/2011
Wow, I could write your posts. Variations of "no", "nope", "won't work", "can't work", "don't bother", "waste of time" oh, and "ban the gays".