VIDEO: Is America Losing the Clean Energy Race?

The United States is quickly falling behind Asian rivals in the race to corner the burgeoning global clean energy market, according to a report released last week by the Breakthrough Institute and the Information Technology and Information Foundation.

The new report, "Rising Tigers, Sleeping Giant," is the first to thoroughly benchmark the clean energy competitiveness in four nations: China, Japan, South Korea and the United States. The report analyzes clean energy investments and policy support for research,, manufacturing, and domestic demand, with a particular focus on six key technologies: wind, solar, nuclear, carbon capture and storage, hybrid and electric vehicles and advanced batteries, and high speed rail.

At a briefing hosted by the Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources, Breakthrough Institute and ITIF outlined the key findings and their significance for U.S. energy and economic policy. The report's co-authors were joined by Congressmen Ron Klein (D-FL) and Rush Holt (D-NJ) who make remarks underscoring the critical role an effective clean energy economy strategy robust enough to counter Asian challengers will be to America's short-term recovery and long-term economic progress.

You can read an overview and download the report here and watch video of the briefing below (thanks to the folks at ITIF for the video):



EVENT DETAILS

Event: Is the U.S. Losing the Clean Tech Race?
Date: Wednesday, November 18, 2009
Time: 10:30 AM – 11:45 AM
Location: Senate Energy Committee Hearing Room 366, Dirksen Senate Office Building

Moderator and Presenter
Robert Atkinson (bio)
President, The Information Technology and Innovation Foundation

Presenter
Michael Shellenberger (bio)
President, The Breakthrough Institute

Jesse Jenkin (bio)
Director of Energy and Climate Policy, The Breakthrough Institute

Special Guests
Member of Congress Ron Klein (D-FL) (bio)

Member of Congress Rush Holt (D-NJ) (invited) (bio)

Read more!

South Korea to Invest 5 Percent of GDP in R&D

Originally posted at the Breakthrough Institute

The government of South Korea has announced a plan to increase investments in research and development (R&D) to 5 percent of the nation's GDP by the year 2012, according to an article by Nature News. The new goal, unveiled by South Korea's Ministry of Knowledge Economy on Monday, would channel funds to a number of priority sectors, including information technology, energy and environmentally-related technology, nanotechnology, and biotechnology.

According to the article, experts expect "green technology" to benefit most from the government's new plans, as energy and environmental issues have become a major focus of South Korean President Myung-bak Lee's young administration.

Indeed, South Korea is dramatically increasing government investments in a suite of clean energy technologies in order to boost its competitiveness in the global clean energy industry. According to a new report by the Breakthrough Institute and the Information Technology and Innovation Foundation (ITIF), "Rising Tigers, Sleeping Giant," South Korea is planning to invest $46 billion over the next five years--a full one percent of the nation's GDP each year--in clean energy technology R&D, manufacturing, and deployment.

South Korea's government views R&D investment as critical to making Korean industries more competitive globally, according to Oh Se-Jung, a physicist at Seoul National University who was interviewed by Nature News:

"The government considers R&D the only way to achieve international competitiveness at this stage"

The new R&D investment plan is meant to bolster some of South Korea's most powerful industries in order to make them more competitive and reduce their reliance on imported parts and materials from other nations, especially Japan.

According to Yu Young Moon, a materials science researcher at the Korea Photonics Technology Institute,

"The major trade imbalance between Korea and Japan comes from parts and materials. Eventually we would like to supply Korean-made parts and materials to Korean companies."

In July, South Korea announced plans to more than double its current public investments in energy R&D to $1.3 billion per year from 2009 to 2013.

As a share of each nation's GDP, both South Korea and Japan already invest double the amount of funds in energy R&D as the United States, according to the Breakthrough Institute/ITIF report.

While the United States has historically been one of the most innovative nations in the world, South Korea's recent announcement is one more indication that the United States' Asian competitors are moving aggressively to close the innovation gap. By making direct, strategic investments, particularly in the clean energy sector, South Korea is enhancing its ability to compete in one of the next great growth sectors of the 21st century.

In order for the United States to remain competitive its leaders must not ignore the gathering innovation consensus and dramatically increase federal investment in clean energy R&D. Without substantial investments of its own in clean technology research and development, the United States may find itself out-innovated, out-competed, and out-matched in the global clean energy race.

Read more!

Public Investment in Science Works For US, too

Originally posted at the Breakthrough Institute

On Tuesday, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) and Rep. Rush Holt (D-NJ), were joined by university leaders and researchers to launch a new initiative, ScienceWorksForUS, as part of a press conference discussing ARRA-backed funding for research, recovery, and reinvestment opportunities. The science initiative, whose new website went live on Tuesday as well, is being sponsored by the Association of American Universities (AAU), the Association of Public and Land-grant Universities (APLU), and The Science Coalition (TSC).

ScienceWorksForUs is a collaboration of the AAU, APLU, and TSC to demonstrate the positive impact that direct government funding, in this case the stimulus dollars from American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA), can have on university research efforts.

While ScienceWorksForUS focuses on general scientific research, the AAU and APLU are part of a growing consensus of experts that have called for direct public funding for clean energy R&D on the order of $15 billion dollars per year. In addition, the AAU and APLU joined the Breakthrough Institute this summer, as well as 100 universities, professionals, and youth groups, in submitting a letter to Congress asking them to fully fund President Barack Obama's national math and science education program, RE-ENERGYSE, a program which needs to be funded in FY2011.

The press conference and ScienceWorksForUS bring to light some of the important research projects being funded by ARRA and underscore the importance of investments in research and development in a range of areas, including clean energy.

Pelosi remarked at the event:

"Through our ongoing support for researchers across the country, we will ensure that the Recovery Act was not the end of our investment in innovation, but the beginning of a sustained commitment to science."

University of Arizona President Robert Shelton expanded:

"...these investments are even more important as part of the 'Reinvestment' component of ARRA. The funds for research are part of the reinvestment the nation must make to grow a strong economy that is based on addressing 21st century challenges, including improving health and meeting energy needs in ways that help slow climate change."

Rep. Rush Holt (D-NJ), who recently joined the Breakthrough Institute and Third Way to support a call for a new National Institutes of Energy, added:

"When we invested nearly $22 billion in the Recovery Bill for scientific discovery, we set the stage not just for job creation today, but for the economic growth of tomorrow. It is vital for our long-term economic prosperity that we maintain this robust commitment to scientific research and development."

As Holt suggests, the investments in research and innovation made by ARRA are crucial, but innovative sectors, such as the clean energy sector, run the risk of falling off a funding cliff if more long-term support is not guaranteed, in this case by pending climate and energy legislation. Institutions, like a National Institutes of Energy, dedicated to targeting long-term investments to promising research efforts are critical to maintaining the "robust commitment to scientific research and development" that Holt says the U.S. needs.

Neglecting to dedicate long-term investments in clean energy R&D could have serious economic implications for the United States. A recently released report by the Breakthrough Institute and the Information Technology and Innovation Foundation (ITIF), finds that Asia's "clean tech tigers" - China, South Korea, and Japan - will out-invest the United States in research and development and calls for the United States to increase its R&D spending or risk ceding leadership in clean energy innovation, and the associated economic benefits, to these Asian nations. Congressman Holt joined Breakthrough and ITIF at the release event earlier this week to highlight how critical these investments in science, innovation and technology are to U.S. competitiveness in the clean energy race.


By offering specific information about funding recipients, ScienceWorksForUS, should be a resource for policymakers looking to make the much-needed public investments in research and development, particularly those working to craft pending climate and energy legislation in the Senate. As this new initiative showcases, the direct investments in research made under ARRA are having significant impacts on innovation in the United States. If the U.S. wants to ensure the continuation of the important work that ARRA has germinated, policymakers must ensure that these investments are not just short-term stimulus measures, but large, long-term, direct investments in the innovation that drives the U.S. economy.

Read more!

COP15 and Beyond- The Climate Movement Fights On!

After working tirelessly to push federal politicians to be accountable to the will of the people through Powershift regional summits, 350.org’s day of action, local events and direct actions, you’d think exhaustion would be setting in on the ranks of the US youth climate movement. Especially after the demoralizing blow that was delivered last weekend with the Obama administration’s official declaration that there will be no binding agreement at COP15. On the contrary, these young visionaries are just getting started!

With the chips stacked against meaningful action by the Senate and our administration, there is something contagiously spreading from campus to campus and community to community. Something political movements of the past that faced less dismal realities have lacked- unwavering hope. Not the kind of hope a charismatic politician espouses during campaign season to generate warm fuzzy feelings, or the kind that surges in the dark hours of prayer for a divine force to alter your circumstances.

This hope is wedded to action and commitment. A hope that if we push hard enough, continue to innovate, and remain fiercely inclusive and creative we will succeed. A hope that stands guard against the disenchanting forces of political compromise, or the covert attacks of apathy that arise when tangible progress cannot be seen. This is the hope that continues to inspire young people in communities across the country, even as the Senate bill crawls forward and President Obama refuses to commit to attending the most important international negotiations of our lifetime. This hope is inspiring the action of young organizers across the nation as they finish one last push by coordinating Clean Energy Forums in the run-up to Copenhagen.

“The students I work with everyday are not discouraged by the Senate’s snail pace or weakening attempts, and they still believe that they can persuade the president they elected to take a position of leadership on the international stage,” said Alicia Eimer, National Organizer at Focus the Nation (FTN). “Failure is not an option for these young folks,” Trell Thomas, another National Organizer at FTN added. “If the Senator doesn’t show up, well so be it. They are still going to build systems of political accountability in their community. And we’ll bring the forum to them.” The exact systems of accountability that will make our federal politicians regret failing our generation in this moment of supreme opportunity.

Read more!

Rising Tigers, Sleeping Giant - Overview

Asian Nations Set to Dominate Clean Energy Race by Out-Investing the United States - New Breakthrough Institute and the Information Technology and Innovation Institute report.

"Rising Tigers, Sleeping Giant: Asian Nations Set to Dominate Clean Energy Race by Out-Investing the United States," a major new report released today by the Breakthrough Institute and the Information Technology and Innovation Foundation, is the first to comprehensively benchmark the competitiveness positions of the United States and key Asian challengers - China, Japan and South Korea - in the global clean energy race.

The new report examines the competitive position of each nation in core clean energy technologies, including solar, wind, and nuclear power, carbon capture and storage, advanced vehicles and batteries, and high-speed rail, as well as the government strategies each nation hopes will strengthen their position in the competitive global clean technology sector.

To view the full report, click here (pdf).
An abridged, summary version can be found here (pdf).

Core findings of "Rising Tigers, Sleeping Giant" include:

1. Asia's rising "clean technology tigers" - China, Japan, and South Korea - have already passed the United States in the production of virtually all clean energy technologies, and over the next five years, the government's of these nations will out-invest the United States three-to-one in these sectors. This public investment gap will allow these Asian nations to attract a significant share of private sector investments in clean energy technology, estimated to total in the trillions of dollars over the next decade. While some U.S. firms will benefit from the establishment of joint ventures overseas, the jobs, tax revenues, and other benefits of clean tech growth will overwhelmingly accrue to Asia's clean tech tigers.



2. Large, direct and sustained public investments will solidify the competitive advantage of China, Japan, and South Korea. Government investments in research and development, clean energy manufacturing capacity, the deployment of clean energy technologies, and the establishment of enabling infrastructure, will allow these Asian nations to capture economies of scale, learning-by-doing, and innovation advantages before the United States, where public investments are smaller, less direct, and less targeted.



3. Should the investment gap persist, the United States will import the overwhelming majority of clean energy technologies it deploys. Current U.S. energy and climate policies focus on stimulating domestic demand primarily through indirect demand-side incentives and regulations. Should these policies succeed in creating demand without providing robust support for U.S. clean energy technology manufacturing and innovation, the United States will rely on foreign-manufactured clean technology products. This could jeopardize America's economic recovery and its long-term competitiveness while making it even more difficult to reduce the U.S. trade deficit.



4. Proposed U.S. climate and energy legislation, as currently formulated, is not yet sufficient to close the clean tech investment gap. In contrast to more direct investments by Asia's clean tech tigers, current U.S. policies rely overwhelmingly on modest market incentives that are viewed by the private sector as more indirect, create more risks for private market investors, and do less to overcome the many barriers to clean energy adoption. The American Clean Energy and Security Act, passed by the U.S. House of Representative in June 2009, includes too few proactive policy initiatives and allocates relatively little funding to support research and development, commercialization and production of clean energy technologies within the United States. Including investments in clean energy R&D, demonstration, manufacturing and deployment in both U.S. economic recovery packages and the House-passed climate and energy bill, the United States is poised to invest $172 billion over the next five years, which compares to investments of $397 billion in China alone, a more than four-to-one ratio on a per-GDP basis.



5. If the United States hopes to compete for new clean energy industries it must close the widening gap between government investments in the United States and Asia's clean tech tigers and provide more robust support for U.S. clean tech research and innovation, manufacturing, and domestic market demand. Small, indirect and uncoordinated incentives are not sufficient to outcompete China, Japan, and South Korea. To regain economic leadership in the global clean energy industry, U.S. energy policy must include large, direct and coordinated investments in clean technology R&D, manufacturing, deployment, and infrastructure.

See also: "Asia Beats U.S. 3-1: Major New Report on US vs. Asian Competitiveness in Clean Energy Technology"

Media coverage of "Rising Tigers, Sleeping Giant"

• Financial Times: "Asia set to overtake US in green technology"


• Wall Street Journal, Environmental Capital: "Flying Tigers: More Reasons to Worry About Asia's Clean-Tech Push"


• New York Times, Green Inc: "Study: Asia Surging in Clean-Tech Manufacturing"


• E&E News, ClimateWire: "Report warns of 'Asian Tigers' surging ahead"


• Stanford Review: "Winning the Clean Energy Race: A New Strategy for American Leadership"


• SolveClimate.com: "Made in America by China: New Turbine Factory Offers Glimpse into the Future"

Read more!

Asia Beats U.S. 3-1: Major New Report on US vs. Asian Competitiveness in Clean Energy Technology

By Michael Shellenberger, originally at the Breakthrough Institute

Asia is poised to dominate the fast-growing clean energy industry by outspending the United States by at least three-to-one on infrastructure and technology, according to a new report, Rising Tigers, Sleeping Giant, which was released today by the Breakthrough Institute and Information Technology and Innovation Foundation at an event hosted by the Senate Energy & Natural Resources Committee.

The summary and full report, "Rising Tigers, Sleeping Giant: Asian Nations Set to Dominate the Clean Energy Race By Out-Investing the United States," can be downloaded here:

Full Report (pdf)
Summary Version (pdf)

The report comes at a time of rising anxieties in the U.S. about a jobless economic recovery, and new reports showing that over 85 percent of President Obama's economic stimulus clean tech grant program went to foreign firms. Recently Senator Chuck Schumer (D-NY) wrote to Department of Energy Secretary Steven Chu opposing a $1.5 billion Texas wind farm to be built with Chinese turbines. In response, China's A-Power Generation Systems wind manufacturer announced plans to open a factory in the U.S.

"Should the investment gap persist," the report warns, "the United States will import the overwhelming majority of clean energy technologies it deploys."

"Rising Tigers, Sleeping Giant" is the first report to comprehensively benchmark clean energy competitiveness and government investments in cleantech by China, Japan, South Korea, and the United States. These Asian governments will invest $519 billion in clean technology between 2009 and 2013, compared to $172 billion by the U.S. government. Climate and energy legislation, which passed the House in June, would contribute $28.7 billion of the $172 billion five year total. China alone will spend $440 billion to $660 billion over the next ten years on clean tech.

The direct, immediate, and coordinated nature of Asian government investments stands in contrast to the sporadic regulatory approach pursed in the United States. The report suggests that government investments will allow Asian nations to create innovation "clusters" of manufacturers, universities, R&D labs, suppliers and other firms, much as the Pentagon helped create Silicon Valley in the fifties and sixties. These clusters will be attractive to U.S. firms, the report argues, which are already making large investments in China.

Indeed, the United States' traditional prowess in attracting venture capital and other private funding could soon be eclipsed by Asia. China and other Asian nations, the report concludes, are offering a better business and investment climate than the United States. And China's share of private sector clean tech funding is growing rapidly. Between 2000 and 2008, the United States attracted $52 billion in private capital for renewable energy technologies, but China alone attracted $41 billion. China secured more private investment in renewables and efficiency technologies than the U.S. for the first time in 2008.

Investment bank giant Deutsche Bank recently concluded that "generous and well-targeted [clean energy] incentives" in China and Japan will create a low-risk environment for investors and stimulate high levels of private investment in clean energy because those nations rely on a "comprehensive and integrated government plan, supported by strong incentives." In contrast, Deutsche Bank says, the United States is a "moderate-risk" country since it relies on "a more volatile market incentive approach and has suffered from a start-stop approach in some areas."

"While some U.S. firms will benefit from the establishment of joint ventures overseas," the report warns, "the jobs, tax revenues, and other benefits of clean tech growth will overwhelmingly accrue to Asian nations."

New pollution regulations, a national renewable energy standard, and efficiency regulations in the U.S. will not, the report finds, be sufficient to close the technology investment gap between the US and Asia. New climate pollution regulations will not be strict enough to send much private investment to clean technologies, and large infrastructure barriers such as the need for new transmission lines stand in the way of greatly expanding solar and wind.

"Small, indirect and uncoordinated incentives are not sufficient to outcompete Asia's clean tech tigers," the report says. "To regain economic leadership in the global clean energy industry, U.S. energy policy must include large, direct and coordinated investments in clean technology R&D, manufacturing, deployment, and infrastructure."

Michael Shellenberger is the President and co-founder of the Breakthrough Institute and a co-author of "Rising Tigers, Sleeping Giant."

Read more!

Winning the Clean Energy Race: A New Strategy for American Leadership

By Teryn Norris & Devon Swezey
Originally published by The Stanford Review

You know the world is changing when the president's first trip to Asia is defined by a new U.S. foreign policy dubbed "strategic reassurance" - convincing China that the United States has no intention of containing its growing power or endangering its foreign investments. As the New York Times put it, "When President Obama visits China for the first time on Sunday, he will, in many ways, be assuming the role of profligate spender coming to pay respects to his banker."

You also know times are changing when China, the world's greatest polluter, and other Asian nations are poised to dominate the burgeoning global clean-tech industry by out-investing the United States. That's the conclusion of a large new report we co-authored called "Rising Tigers, Sleeping Giant," released this week by the Breakthrough Institute and Information Technology & Innovation Foundation. The report is the first to thoroughly benchmark clean energy competitiveness in four nations - China, Japan, South Korea, and the United States - and finds the following:

"Asia's rising 'clean technology tigers' - China, Japan, and South Korea - have already passed the United States in the production of virtually all clean energy technologies and over the next five years will out-invest the U.S. three-to-one in these sectors... While some U.S. firms will benefit from the establishment of joint ventures overseas, the jobs, tax revenues, and other benefits of clean tech growth will overwhelmingly accrue to Asian nations... Should the investment gap persist, the U.S. will import the overwhelming majority of clean energy technologies it deploys."

What do these two changes have in common? They both reflect the accelerating shift of global power from America to Asia, caused in large part by the serious mismanagement of U.S. economic policy.

The Pacific power shift is not a new phenomenon, and the Obama administration is wise to seek stronger ties with the region. The U.S. should applaud Asia's growth, which is partly an outcome of our own success at promoting economic liberalism and international development. This shift in power is not a zero-sum game, nor should it be: the U.S. and Asia should avoid trade wars at all costs, and we should seize opportunities for partnership on a range of issues, from climate change to nuclear proliferation.

But the growing pace of this power shift should be a cause of major concern for Americans, and it should raise serious questions about our economic policies at the highest level. While the U.S. economy has suffered greatly from a crisis produced by its own financial sector - losing millions of jobs, trillions in economic output, and demanding huge spending packages financed by borrowed money - China has shrugged off the global recession with high levels of growth and self-financed stimulus, all while purchasing billions of Treasury bills to fund a U.S. deficit that has reached historic highs.

Last November, addressing the nation on the evening of his election, President Obama declared that "a new era of American leadership is at hand." And indeed, his new administration has taken significant steps to remake U.S. foreign policy. But unless the U.S. quickly improves its economic competitiveness, our global leadership will be severely damaged. What is demanded now is a major, coordinated national project to regain our economic competitiveness in strategic sectors while permanently correcting the imbalances that led to the Great Recession.

Correcting Imbalances & Fixing Finance

Speaking at the San Francisco Fed last month, Federal Reserve chairman Ben Bernanke declared it "extraordinarily urgent" that the U.S. and Asia take steps to prevent a revival of global economic imbalances. There is now broad consensus on how these imbalances - the huge gaps in trade deficits and surpluses, and the associated gaps in national savings, consumption, and investment rates - helped caused the housing bubble and the Great Recession. Alan Greenspan offered a concise explanation in a widely-read column this spring:

"The presumptive cause of the world-wide decline in long-term [mortgage] rates was the tectonic shift in the early 1990s by much of the developing world from heavy emphasis on central planning to increasingly dynamic, export-led market competition. The result was a surge in growth in China and a large number of other emerging market economies that led to an excess of global intended savings relative to intended capital investment."

In other words, the U.S. housing bubble was caused in large part by the buildup of savings in emerging market economies, especially China, accumulated from their large trade surpluses. As this large "pool of money" was invested internationally, it drove down the costs of borrowing, drove up subprime lending, and created large demand for mortgage-backed securities. This era of easy credit - combined with the use of "innovative" financial instruments, which relaxed mortgage standards, concealed risk, and enabled the mass packaging and sale of these securities - gave rise to the U.S. housing bubble.

This "global pool of money" wouldn't have existed without the U.S. running an enormous trade deficit, relying on imports and debt to support a high consumption rate - hence the global "imbalance" of high-saving versus high-consuming countries. The U.S. deficit in the trade of goods and services in 2008 was $695 billion, according to the Department of Commerce, compared to China's surplus of $297 billion.

Speaking in Tokyo last week, President Obama extended this problem to its logical conclusion, calling for rebalanced growth and a new U.S. economic strategy based on exports: "One of the important lessons this recession has taught us is the limits of depending primarily on American consumers and Asian exports to drive growth... [our] new strategy will mean that we save more and spend less, reform our financial systems, reduce our long-term deficit and borrowing. It will also mean a greater emphasis on exports that we can build, produce, and sell all over the world."

The implication is clear: the United States must shift away from a "financial" economy to an "innovation" economy, one that focuses on creating industries that produce real innovative products to sell around the world. After years of creating imaginary wealth on the pile of sand that was the U.S. financial sector, America must once again get into the business of producing real goods and services. This means reducing the size of the financial sector and the Wall Street "brain drain" - which has distracted the nation's best and brightest minds from the work of real innovation and entrepreneurship - and refocusing on productive, export-oriented industries. And it means adopting a new era of innovation policies to ensure the U.S. economy is the most competitive in the world, directing targeted public investments into strategic technologies, infrastructure, and high-tech education programs.

This new economic strategy is necessary not just for short-term recovery, but for avoiding future credit bubbles and financial crises, slashing our trade and budget deficit, producing more innovative technologies to improve our everyday lives, and regaining our international leadership.

The Clean Energy Race

What's the biggest new industry that can boost America's exports, grow the economy, create better jobs, and tap our innovative potential? In a word, clean-tech.

Here's why: Reducing global greenhouse gas emissions, while simultaneously meeting the surging demand for energy in developing countries, requires the development and deployment of clean energy technologies on a massive scale. Indeed, while global energy demand is expected to double or even triple by 2050, emissions must fall by at least 80 percent over the same period to avoid the worst consequences of climate change.

Meeting this challenge requires nothing short of a revolutionary shift toward clean energy and a dramatically increased level of investment in these technologies. The International Energy Agency estimates that achieving a 50 percent reduction in emissions by 2050 will require total additional global investments of $45 trillion. "Rising Tigers, Sleeping Giant" notes that "global private investment in renewable energy and energy efficient technologies alone is estimated to reach $450 billion annually by 2012 and $600 billion by 2020, and much larger if recent market opportunity estimates are realized." Recognizing these trends, an increasing number of analysts are calling the clean-tech industry a "guaranteed-growth" sector.

No wonder President Obama has made this his signature statement: "The nation that leads in the creation of a clean energy economy will be the nation that leads the 21st century global economy."

Make no mistake: healthy international competition in the clean-tech industry will not hinder the global transition to clean energy, but rather will act as one of the most powerful accelerators for clean energy development and deployment in the world. International collaboration, such as technology partnerships, will be important to promote clean energy development in China and other developing countries, but we also need to think about how to leverage competitive forces. International competition in the clean energy industry can improve technologies and reduce their price at a rapid pace, and governments can play a more active role in promoting these activities. For example, we should consider establishing an official "U.S.-China Clean Tech Competition" - jointly funded by each country - to promote competition between U.S. and Chinese firms in developing the most innovative technologies and business models.

Unfortunately, the United States is already falling behind its competitors in this critical industry. Just for starters, we rely on foreign companies for the majority of our wind turbines, produce less than 10 percent of the world's solar cells, and we're losing ground on hybrid and electric vehicle technology and manufacturing. China leads the global production of solar cells and wind turbines, and it is expected to become the number one solar market within five years. By 2012, China, Japan, and South Korea are expected to produce 1.6 million hybrid gas-electric or electric vehicles annually compared to North America, which is projected to produce 267,000, less than a fifth as many, according to industry forecasts.

China, Japan, and South Korea plan to gain even greater "first-mover" advantages and solidify this lead with coordinated and comprehensive policies based largely on direct government investment. These governments are expected to invest a total of $509 billion in clean technology over the next five years, compared to $172 billion in the United States, assuming passage of the proposed American Clean Energy and Security Act and including current budget appropriations and recently enacted stimulus measures. According to a recent Deutsche Bank report, "generous and well-targeted [clean-tech] incentives" backed by "comprehensive and integrated government plans" in China and Japan will create a low-risk environment for investors and stimulate high levels of private investment.

As John Doerr and Jeff Immelt, two of the country's top business leaders, recently wrote in the Washington Post, "We are clearly not in the lead today. That position is held by China, which understands the importance of controlling its energy future. China's commitment to developing clean energy technologies and markets is breathtaking."

A New Project for Energy Competitiveness

Without a large national project to regain competitiveness in the clean-tech sector, the United States will miss a major opportunity to grow our economy, correct our trade imbalance, and reduce our national deficit. Indeed, even if we transition to clean sources of energy, we risk trading our dependence on foreign oil for dependence on foreign clean energy.

Fortunately, the United States has a history of regaining competitiveness in strategic industries. Decades ago, after trailing Europe in aviation and aerospace, we raced ahead through sustained federal support for aviation technology development. After the Soviet Union launched Sputnik, we invested heavily in education, science, and technology, enabling us to put the first man on the moon and achieve breakthroughs in information-age technology. When the Japanese took the lead in the semiconductor industry in the 1980s, we formed SEMATECH, a public-private partnership that successfully repositioned the U.S. as the global market leader.

What each of these stories has in common is direct public investment in technology innovation and deployment, education, and infrastructure, aimed at generating competitive private industries. Fareed Zakaria explains the primary reasons for America's previous innovation leadership in the current cover story of Newsweek: "The third tidal wave was massive government funding... After World War II, the Cold War drove this funding to new highs, so that by the 1950s, the United States was spending 3 percent of GDP on R&D, which amounted to a majority of the total spending on science on the planet. Government funding of basic research has been astonishingly productive." (Zakaria cites a report that one of us co-authored called "Case Studies in American Innovation.")

Indeed, the United States did not invent the Internet by enforcing a cap and trade system on fax machines, nor did we create the personal computer by taxing typewriters. Those who suggest we can simply rely on indirect, market-based mechanisms to achieve a clean energy revolution fail to understand the history of technology innovation and competitiveness, and they risk relegating our clean-tech industry to second-class status or worse. Indeed, the same Deutsche Bank report above noted that the U.S. is a "moderate-risk" country compared to the lower-risk environment of China and Japan, because we rely on "a more volatile market incentive approach and has suffered from a start-stop approach in some areas."

What is demanded today is a national energy competitiveness project based on the success of past U.S. innovation policy, including targeted support for technology research, development, demonstration, deployment, education, infrastructure, and manufacturing. A large and growing group of energy experts, think tanks, and companies - including Google, Brookings Institution, dozens of Nobel Laureates, Association of American Universities, Breakthrough Institute, and Third Way - has united behind a target for federal clean energy R&D at $15 billion per year. Unfortunately, the climate bill under consideration in the Senate would only invest around $1.4 billion per year in energy R&D. Similarly, the bill would only offer a one-time capitalization of $10 billion for a Clean Energy Deployment Administration. Another good provision is the IMPACT Act, focused on clean technology manufacturing, but here again it is unclear whether it will be adequately funded.

As we conclude in "Rising Tigers, Sleeping Giant": "If the United States hopes to compete for new clean energy industries it must close the widening gap between U.S. and Asian government investments in research and innovation, manufacturing, and domestic market demand. Small, indirect and uncoordinated incentives are not sufficient to outcompete Asia's clean tech tigers. To regain economic leadership in the global clean energy industry, U.S. energy policy must include large, direct and coordinated investments in clean technology R&D, manufacturing, deployment, and infrastructure."

The Energy Generation

The remaining piece is clean energy education. It is well known that America is falling behind in high-tech education. What's less well understood is that nearly half the U.S. energy workforce is expected to retire over the next decade. Federal investment in education, from the G.I. Bill to the National Defense Education Act, was vital for U.S. competitiveness in the post-war era, and it will be vital for competing in the burgeoning clean energy industry. As Nobel Laureate Paul Krugman recently put it, "If you had to explain America's economic success with one word, that word would be 'education.'"

In April, President Obama proposed an important initiative to inspire the next generation of clean energy innovators. The program, called RE-ENERGYSE (Regaining our Energy Science and Engineering Edge), would prepare thousands of highly skilled scientists and engineers to enter clean-energy fields by supporting energy education programs at universities, technical colleges, and K-12 schools. According to the Department of Energy, the program would educate between 5,000 and 8,500 energy scientists, engineers, and other professionals by 2015, rising to 10,000 to 17,000 professionals by 2020.

RE-ENERGYSE is critical for reclaiming U.S. leadership in the clean energy sector. As a group of over 100 universities, professional associations, and student groups stated in a recent letter to the Senate, "RE-ENERGYSE is an innovative program that 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."

Unfortunately, Congress failed to provide any funding for RE-ENERGYSE for 2010. But the administration is not giving up, and it intends to pursue funding for RE-ENERGYSE in its 2011 budget proposal. College students have a unique role to play in advancing this initiative and the broader energy competitiveness agenda. RE-ENERGYSE needs a much stronger base of support to pass Congress next year, and as the primary stakeholders in the program, students can be uniquely influential in organizing a coalition of supporters and directly voicing their concerns to members of Congress. That's why students at Stanford University are currently launching a national effort called Americans for Energy Leadership, aimed at advancing RE-ENERGYSE and inspiring the next generation of energy innovators.

Fifty years ago, in the wake of the launch of Sputnik, the United States launched a massive national effort to lead the space race and win the Cold War. Today, the clean energy race represents one of the greatest opportunities and challenges for American leadership in a generation. If we do not take immediate action to launch a national energy competitiveness project based on large, direct, and coordinated innovation policies, we will effectively cede the clean-energy industry to Asia and other competitors. The mass majority of exports, jobs, tax revenues, and other economic benefits will accrue to foreign countries, and we will miss a historic opportunity to achieve a new era of American leadership. The choice should be clear.

--
Teryn Norris is a Senior Advisor at the Breakthrough Institute, Public Policy major at Stanford University, and Director of Americans for Energy Leadership. Devon Swezey is Project Director at the Breakthrough Institute and graduated from Stanford University in 2008. They are co-authors of the new report, "Rising Tigers, Sleeping Giant: Asian Nations Set to Dominate the Clean Energy Race by Out-Investing the United States."

Read more!

Winning the Clean Energy Race: A New Strategy for American Leadership

By Teryn Norris & Devon Swezey

Originally published by The Stanford Review

You know the world is changing when the president’s first trip to Asia is defined by a new U.S. foreign policy dubbed “strategic reassurance” – convincing China that the United States has no intention of containing its growing power or endangering its foreign investments. As the New York Times put it, “When President Obama visits China for the first time on Sunday, he will, in many ways, be assuming the role of profligate spender coming to pay respects to his banker.”

You also know times are changing when China, the world’s greatest polluter, and other Asian nations are poised to dominate the burgeoning global clean-tech industry by out-investing the United States. That’s the conclusion of a major new report we co-authored called “Rising Tigers, Sleeping Giant (PDF),” released this week by the Breakthrough Institute and Information Technology & Innovation Foundation. The report is the first to thoroughly benchmark clean energy competitiveness in four nations – China, Japan, South Korea, and the United States – and finds the following:

“Asia’s rising ‘clean technology tigers’ – China, Japan, and South Korea – have already passed the United States in the production of virtually all clean energy technologies and over the next five years will out-invest the U.S. three-to-one in these sectors… While some U.S. firms will benefit from the establishment of joint ventures overseas, the jobs, tax revenues, and other benefits of clean tech growth will overwhelmingly accrue to Asian nations… Should the investment gap persist, the U.S. will import the overwhelming majority of clean energy technologies it deploys.”

What do these two changes have in common? They both reflect the accelerating shift of global power from America to Asia, caused in large part by the serious mismanagement of U.S. economic policy.

The Pacific power shift is not a new phenomenon, and the Obama administration is wise to seek stronger ties with the region. The U.S. should applaud Asia’s growth, which is partly an outcome of our own success at promoting economic liberalism and international development. This shift in power is not a zero-sum game, nor should it be: the U.S. and Asia should avoid trade wars at all costs, and we should seize opportunities for partnership on a range of issues, from climate change to nuclear proliferation.


But the growing pace of this power shift should be a cause of major concern for Americans, and it should raise serious questions about our economic policies at the highest level. While the U.S. economy has suffered greatly from a crisis produced by its own financial sector – losing millions of jobs, trillions in economic output, and demanding huge spending packages financed by borrowed money – China has shrugged off the global recession with high levels of growth and self-financed stimulus, all while purchasing billions of Treasury bills to fund a U.S. deficit that has reached historic highs.

Last November, addressing the nation on the evening of his election, President Obama declared that “a new era of American leadership is at hand.” And indeed, his new administration has taken significant steps to remake U.S. foreign policy. But unless the U.S. quickly improves its economic competitiveness, our global leadership will be severely damaged. What is demanded now is a major, coordinated national project to regain our economic competitiveness in strategic sectors while permanently correcting the imbalances that led to the Great Recession.

Read more!

DIY Solar Part 5: Tools For Installing a System

So, now its down to the fun part. You've designed a system, found the kit, its here, its ready to be put up. Now what? Let me start by saying that installing a solar power system is WAY too big a subject to cover in a couple blog posts. In fact its something most people should leave to a professional. But, since we're all about empowering people with do it yourself knowledge, we'll cover the basics and offer suggestions for finding more details for your specific situation. In this example remember we're talking about a 2000 Watt roof mounted grid tied system, one of the most popular.

This tool set by Klein would come in very handy on a project like this.

Safety Equipment
As always safety comes first. For starters makes sure you have a really good, solid ladder. Make sure it doesn't have broken or loose rungs and it should extend at least 3 feet PAST the top of your roof when leaned against it at a safe angle. Don't scrimp here, you'll be going up and down that thing a lot and most accidents occur falling off ladders, not falling off roofs. Technically you are supposed to have a rope and harness system at all times as well. These systems can attach to ridges and will save your life if used properly. Many equipment rental stores will rent large ladders and harnesses.

As always a good set of gloves, safety glasses, and work boots are indispensable. That roof surface can be more slippery than you think, especially in cold weather. For 10:12 roofs and above you may want to install a temporary walkway system with 2 x 4's running perpendicular to the slope. This will take some extra time but can actually speed up the actual installation process. If you've got the budget, or the fear of hospital bills, a boom lift (sometimes called a JLG or a cherry picker) can lift you into hard to reach places safely and quickly. These too can be rented easily.

This is a good example of a roof where you could use a mechanical boom lift.
The roof is steep, there is little room to work, and plenty of room on the
ground for the machine.

Hand Tools
If you are buying a prepackaged kit, your tool requirements are pretty basic. The kits these days come connectors, often multi-contact type, that are very simple to connect. There are many projects though that bits and pieces of wire that must be cut to fit, so a standard electrician's list of pliers (small and heavy duty), wire strippers, utility knife, and diagonal cutters will be helpful. You'll also need a small torpedo level, multimeter voltage/amperage tester, chalk line, and a set of sockets for assembling rail hardware. If you are building your own system from scratch you'll need heavy duty cutters for large gauge wire and crimpers for attaching connectors, check with your local equipment rental shop for these (they are very expensive!).

Power Tools
For 90% of solar installations all you'll need is a power drill. Depending on your roof anchoring system and your roof makeup you may want an impact drill, but usually not. For standard residential roofs with asphalt shingles and wood rafters, a simple battery pack drill will do just fine. You'll want a nice long bit (refer to your roof anchor instructions for bit sizing) and some socket inserts to tighten rail hardware.

Next we'll get into the laying out the system and putting up panels. Kriss Bergethon lives off the grid with his wife in Colorado. For more information visit his website at Thin Film Solar.

Read more!

EVENT: Rising Tigers, Sleeping Giant: Major New Report on US vs. Asian Competitiveness in Clean Energy Technology

A new report by the Breakthrough Institute and the Information Technology and Innovation Foundation, "Rising Tigers, Sleeping Giant," is the first to thoroughly benchmark clean energy competitiveness in four nations: China, Japan, South Korea and the United States.

Developing better and cheaper clean energy technologies will be central to addressing climate change, securing U.S. energy independence, and creating new clean energy jobs. Increasingly, nations are seeking to gain competitive advantage in this rapidly growing, high-technology sector and the stakes for the United States are significant: will the United States largely be an importer of these clean technologies and lose the jobs related to them, or can America emerge as a global leader, driving exports and high-wage jobs?

The report analyzes clean energy investments and public policy support for research and innovation, manufacturing, and domestic demand, with a particular focus on six key technologies: wind, solar, nuclear, carbon capture and storage, hybrid and electric vehicles and advanced batteries, and high-speed rail.

Please join the Breakthrough Institute and ITIF for a discussion of the report's findings.

EVENT DETAILS

Date: Wednesday, November 18, 2009
Time: 10:30 AM - 11:30 AM
Location: Washington, D.C. - Senate Energy Committee Room, Dirksen Senate Office Building (SD-366)

Moderator and Presenter

Robert Atkinson (bio)
President, The Information Technology and Innovation Foundation

Guests

Congressman Rush Holt (D-NJ, bio)

Congressman Ron Klein (D-FL, bio)

Presenters

Jesse Jenkins (bio)
Director of Energy and Climate Policy, The Breakthrough Institute

Michael Shellenberger (bio)
President, The Breakthrough Institute

Gary Fazzino, Vice President of Government Affairs, Applied Materials (Invited)

Read more!

The Real Policy Lesson From the Chinese Wind Turbine "Scare"

Originally posted at the Breakthrough Institute

By Yael Borofsky and Jesse Jenkins

Outcry over a planned Texas wind farm, which will be the first project to import wind turbines from a Chinese manufacturer, has resulted in calls to prevent government stimulus money from funding the project. As Bloomberg reported, in a letter to U.S. Energy Secretary Steven Chu, Senator Charles Schumer insisted that funding only be granted to U.S. manufactured turbines.

"I urge you to reject any request for stimulus money unless the high-value components, including the wind turbines, are manufactured in the United States...China is fast emerging as one of our main rivals in the race to build the technology that can help us achieve energy independence. We should not be giving China a head start in this race at our own country's expense."

But those expressing alarm that money from the stimulus package will accrue to China are forgetting that importing wind turbine components is actually nothing new in the United States. In fact, this story broke at almost that same time that a new investigative report by the American University School of Communication revealed that 84% of the U.S. stimulus money for renewable projects has been given to overseas companies.

It is certainly symbolic that this project, which is being carried out by a consortium of Chinese and American companies, will be built with the first wind turbines imported from China. Yet, imported wind turbine components made up about 50% of installed capacity this year, with parts largely being exported from Europe. General Electric (GE) is the only American company represented among the top five wind component manufacturers in the world. As long as the U.S. lags in domestic turbine manufacturing, and as long as wind projects need turbines, it is inevitable that the parts for these efforts will be sourced from the foreign market.

According to Bloomberg, the lack of domestic manufacturing in wind turbine components prompted the Alliance for American Manufacturing to ask:

"Why aren't American firms building this clean-energy project?

The reason for the lack of American presence in wind turbine manufacturing is clear: inconsistent government investment and public policy support. Prior to 2006, the U.S. production tax credit (PTC) for wind installations expired on an almost annual-basis before eventual reinstatement, leading to a boom-bust domestic market that created crippling investor uncertainty and prevented major investments in U.S. manufacturing capacity.

In contrast, Denmark's Vestas became the world leader in wind turbine manufacturing with the crucial support of consistent, long-term public investment from the Danish government. The same situation is true for Germany's Siemens and Spain's Gamesa, where feed-in tariff policies provide strong and consistent support for domestic markets as well as investor certainty for manufacturing and technology companies. The same story is now taking shape in China, where new guaranteed wind tariff prices have been launched and the Chinese government has provided direct support for China's turbine manufacturers.

The good news for the U.S. is this: the share of foreign-manufactured turbine components used in U.S. wind farms has been falling - we imported 70% of components in 2005, compared to the 50% today. This improvement is due to the instatement in 2006 of a long-term production tax credit (PTC) that, thanks to subsequent extensions, will now remain in force through the end of 2012. And as our European competitors have shown, leadership in wind turbine manufacturing has far less to do with the price of labor than it does with sustained and effective public policy support. After all, EU labor prices hardly offer an inherent comparative advantage over the U.S., let alone over Chinese or Indian wind competitors.

Now, with relatively consistent public policy support finally in place - at least for the next few years - there has been a subsequent increase in investment in U.S. manufacturing capacity. Still, with U.S. wind companies long lagging behind their foreign competitors, much of this new investment comes as leading foreign companies like Vestas, Siemens, and Gamesa all open U.S. manufacturing sites. To be certain, that means more U.S. jobs and foreign investment - both good for the faltering U.S. economy. But ensuring American leadership in the burgeoning global wind market will clearly require significant, long-term public investment and support for both domestic markets and U.S. manufacturing. After years of negligence, getting ahead in the clean energy race won't be easy.

Senator Schumer and others who seek to bar Chinese manufacturers from stimulus funds are missing the point. Keeping foreign companies from stimulus funding is a misplaced effort to treat the symptom not the problem.

If the U.S. policy environment continues to focus on short-term measures to spur demand, we will consistently see investment accrue to foreign imports. If we want domestic manufacturers to supply the technology to meet our clean energy needs, the U.S. needs both long-term support for manufacturing capacity as well as consistent, targeted deployment incentives to create a stable domestic market. Equally important in the long-run will be large investments in research and innovation that can secure U.S. technological leadership and ensure the next generation of clean energy technologies are invented and commercialized here in the U.S.

Until the U.S. gets serious about a coordinated, consistent, and aggressive package of policies supporting U.S. clean energy innovation, manufacturing and markets, we will continue to see short-term bursts of funding, like the stimulus-funded cash grant program, end up invested in foreign innovation and technology.

Read more!

VIDEO: Jumpstart Clean Energy with a National Institutes of Energy

Thanks to Senator Brown's staff for providing this video of the September briefing on the Hill releasing a paper I co-authored with Avi Zevin and Josh Freed of Third Way's clean energy program, "Jumpstarting a Clean Energy Revolution with a National Institutes of Energy" (pdf).

Senator Sherrod Brown of Ohio and Congressman Rush Holt of New Jersey joins Matt Bennett and Josh Freed of Third Way and Ted Nordhaus and Michael Shellenberger of the Breakthrough Institute in this video to call for a dramatic scale-up in federal funding for clean energy innovation and create a new federal institution singularly focused on the kind of research and development that can make clean energy cheap and abundant, enable deep cuts in global warming pollution, and finally secure our nation's energy independence.



For more on the need for a major scale-up in federal R&D investments and the need for a National Institutes of Energy, see archives here.

Read more!

DIY Solar Part 4: System Costs

We've been talking about Do It Yourself Solar and the steps involved. Today let's get down to the brass tacks: system costs. We'll approach it from two directions, component costs and complete system costs. We'll use a 2 kilowatt, grid tied, roof mounted example system where applicable.


Component Costs
Let me start out by saying that I do not think its a good idea to go out and try to build a system from individual components yourself. Unless you have experience in electrical work or are already a solar professional, this can over complicate what is already a complicated process. I also get calls from people who have inherited some solar panels or bought an inverter on Ebay. You can certainly cobble a system together with used parts but keep in mind that efficiency is advancing in this industry fast enough that even panels made 4 years ago are behind the times. The best way to start is with new, brand name products.

Panels
Solar panels vary widely in cost now but are quickly becoming a commodity in terms of pricing. You can find many Chinese manufacturers that will provide panels for $2/watt. But what will you do when you have a warranty issue? Odds are your panel company will be defunct or impossible to reach.

I would suggest using a name brand for the panels. In my opinion, Sharp, Sanyo, Mitsubishi, and Kyocera are all excellent panels. Evergreen panels, which are American made, and REC which are made in Norway, are good panels but less prevalent. For these name brand solar panels you can expect to pay anywhere from $3.00 to $4.00 per watt retail. Obviously the more you buy the better your price per watt will be.

Inverters
There are three major inverter companies that do the lion share of solar installations: SMA (the Sunny Boy line is one of the most popular in the world); Fronius (like SMA a German company); and Xantrex (which makes a wide variety of electrical gear). You really can't go wrong with these brands, but of course that means they cost a little more too. For pure sine wave inverters, which is what you'll want for 99% of American homes, you can expect to pay about $2,500 for a 2000 watt inverter.

There are many other brands that you can get inverters for closer to $2000 (PV Powered, Outback, and Samlex come to mind) and could be perfectly acceptable for your system. One thing to keep in mind is that since you are connecting to the grid, your utility probably has a list of acceptable inverters. Be sure to check with them before buying ANYTHING.

Racking
There are so many racking makers and types (eg roof, ground, pole) it seems like every day I learn of a new manufacturer. Generally I don't get too picky about the racking companies. The key part is making sure that you are buying the right racks for the panels and installation type you have. Uni-Rac, Iron Ridge and DPW are all reputable brands and can handle 90% of installation specifications. For a 2000 watt flush roof mount system you can expect to pay about $800-1000 for the rails, mounts and clamps. Ground mount and tilt systems get more expensive because there is just more parts involved.

Wiring, Disconnects, and Accessories
This is a hard part to estimate because it depends on your installation and the distance between the panels and the inverter. One key concept is to realize the larger the distance between the panels and inverter, the larger and more expensive that wire will be. DC power, much like water, must travel through larger wire at higher amperages to maintain efficiency. For a 2000W system I would budget about $400 for a typical wiring, disconnect, fuses, lighting arrestor, and conduit setup.

Complete System Costs
Ok, so that was the hard way to estimate a system. The fact is that companies have recognized that most people want an all-in-one-system (full disclosure: my company sells solar power kits for just this purpose). These kits can be customized for your particle application and come with the parts you need and, most importantly, instructions and drawings! Now this isn't quite like putting together that entertainment center from Target, but with some patience, tools, and a little help from an electrician, these kits are actually very doable.

The best part of the kit is the cost. If you do the math on the system talked about before you're looking at about $12,000-$14,000 and you have to match all your components. Kits generally run about $5-$6 per watt. So our 2000 watt example system would be closer to $10,000. And its a complete package, some customers have to add conduit and some wiring, but for the most part its a turn-key system.

Micro-inverter Systems
We touched in micro inverter system before but I wanted to talk about cost quickly. These inverters are meant to be connected directly to one panel of around 230W. Then the inverter can be connected to the grid. This changes the economics of systems significantly because you can get a 230W panel for around $700, a micro inverter for $230, and a small rack system for $100. Add in some wiring, a fuse and a disconnect and you've just gone solar with grid connection for around $1300. Not bad eh?

Next week we'll start the install.

Kriss Bergethon lives off the grid with his wife in Colorado. For more information visit his website at Solar Film.

Read more!

Enough is Enough with Joe Romm's Climate McCarthyism

Breakthrough Institute founders Michael Shellenberger and Ted Nordhaus published a post today that finally calls out ClimateProgress' Joseph Romm for his repeated use of bullying and intimidation, ad hominem assaults and character assassination, and highly suspect efforts to prove guilt by association, arguing that it all adds up to one thing: Climate McCarthyism. Here's an excerpt, and you can find the full post here.

The character assassination, the bullying, the psychological projection -- it all adds up to Climate McCarthyism, and Joe Romm is Climate McCarthyite-in-chief. Joe Romm's "Global Warming Deniers and Delayers" play the same role as Joe McCarthy's "Communists and Communist sympathizers." While Romm built a loyal liberal and environmentalist following for attacking right-wing "global warming deniers" -- a designation meant to invoke "Holocaust denier" -- he spends much of his time attacking well-meaning journalists (e.g. here, here, and here), academics (here and here) and activists (here, here and here) who take the issue of global warming seriously, accept climate science, and support immediate action to address it. His aim is to intimidate and prevent increasing numbers of people from questioning climate policy orthodoxy, and especially Democratic efforts to pass cap and trade climate legislation.

As a climate and clean energy activist and analyst who's dedicated the entirety of my career (and countless hours of my personal life) to advocating immediate and effective climate and clean energy solutions, coming under fire from the nation's most-read climate blogger, Joseph Romm, has been one of the most distasteful and saddening parts of my career. And not because I fear for my career or my reputation - although having to undergo such attacks should not be something any young policy analyst should have to endure - but because of what it says about the state of the climate debate, and because of the silence from other quarters of our broad movement for climate solutions.

Dr. Romm has inaccurately slandered my work, at various points accused me and my colleagues of lying and plagiarism, and even labelled me "a leading disinformer" for daring to point out critical shortcomings in the Waxman-Markey climate bill.

Michael and Ted are right: enough is enough, and Romm's Climate McCarthyism should not be tolerated. While I retain a belief that Dr. Romm - motivated as he is by the same desire to see effective solutions to climate action that fuels my own work each day - can once again be a constructive force in the climate debate, it's long past time for him to cease his attacks on reporters, academics, and climate advocates and organizations that dare to differ from Romm's approved set of solutions or criticize the legislation he now champions (and once skewered with far more fervor than I muster in any of my posts). I hope this is the beginning of the end of such distasteful tactics.

As Michael and Ted write:

There will always be bullies like Joe Romm -- they are not the problem. It is the the establishment figures who goad them on, and the bystanders who could speak up but do not, fearing the consequences of doing so. If we are to move to real solutions to global warming, and protect some level of basic human decency, Joe Romm and his enablers must be challenged. For Climate McCarthyism isn't just bad for climate policy, it's anathema to liberal and democratic values.

Please read the full post by Michael and Ted here.

Read more!

Everything EPW Republicans Need to Know They Should Have Learned in Kindergarten

By Yael Borofsky and Jesse Jenkins, originally at the Breakthrough Institute

"Their behavior challenges everything that we're about here. If you don't like it, turn your back and walk out. It's almost like school children over there."

Those were the remarks of Sen. Frank Lautenberg (D-N.J.), chastising the Republican members of the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee (EPW) who have spent the past two days showboating for the press while boycotting the committee's markup of pending climate and energy legislation.

Sending just one Republican member to monitor the stalled hearings each day, the Republicans are using procedural tricks (rules require at least two members of the minority party present to consider amendments to pending legislation) to block any debate on the Kerry-Boxer climate bill.

The excuse for these schoolyard tactics? Republicans complain that the U.S. EPA has not fully analyzed the Kerry-Boxer climate bill, despite the fact that Agency analysts spent weeks looking at impacts of key differences between the House and Senate climate bills, which are nearly identical in most major components.

Sen. Barbara Boxer (D-CA), chair of the EPW committee, tried to appease any substantive Republican concerns by bringing EPA analysts back to answer questions from the minority members of the committee, but they refused to show up. According to a series of E&E reports (subscription required), both Sen. George Voinovich (R-OH) and Sen. James Inhofe's (R-OK) brief appearances over the past two days have merely reinforced the childish Republican demand for an EPA analysis of the bill and their complete unwillingness to cooperate.

While the Breakthrough Institute has leveled it's fair share of criticisms at both the House and Senate climate bills, identifying key weaknesses that must be remedied, the behavior EPW Republicans are demonstrating is reprehensible and detrimental to the functionality of our democracy. Targeted, constructive criticism is one thing, throwing a tantrum to delay productive debate, educated discussion, and ideally, reform, is quite another.

Sen. Lautenberg got it right: like the schoolyard kid who starts losing a ballgame and then storms off in a huff with the ball to deny anyone else the ability to play, the behavior of the EPW Republicans does not befit serious representatives of the American people.

If Republicans are serious about improving the bill, they would forego the blatant stall tactics in favor of submitting well-reasoned amendments to the legislation and then engage in serious debate with their Democratic counterparts. Continuing to boycott, which at this point amounts to a political version of a temper tantrum, is not guaranteed to get the Republicans what they want regardless of whether its actually the EPA data or just further delays. After all, Boxer has intimated more than once that she can and will pass legislation on without any Republican input if need be:

"You have to at some point say that you move forward with the bill the way it is now, and when there is a new bill, you do another analysis, and Senator Reid has given his word to the Republicans and to us that that is what he will do,"

Instead of acting recalcitrant, Republicans should come to the table prepared to suggest proposals to address their major concerns: the cost of a proposed cap and trade system and support for domestic low-carbon energy sources, particularly nuclear energy.

Recent Breakthrough analysis of the Kerry-Boxer bill reveals that the bill would invest far too little, just $1.2 billion, in clean energy technology R&D. This dollar amount is at least an order of magnitude, if not two, less than a growing innovation consensus suggests is critical to spur the necessary innovation to make clean energy cheap. Investing today in R&D means clean and cheap technologies, that can tap homegrown American energy sources, will be ready tomorrow to affordably transition away from imported oil and fossil fuels.

Clean energy R&D is critical to controlling the costs of the cap and trade program. So instead of foot stamping, Republicans who are really serious about controlling the costs of the legislation should be pushing for increased investments in clean energy R&D -- on the order of $15 billion annually -- that will ultimately serve to alleviate the costs of transitioning from current energy sources, to clean ones, including nuclear power.

Furthermore, Republicans could address their concerns about maintaining American jobs by supporting Sen. Sherrod Brown's (D-OH) IMPACT (Investments for Manufacturing Progress and Clean Technology) Act. The bill is designed to aid manufacturers in their efforts to streamline the manufacturing process and increase their production of clean energy technology parts and systems thus supporting the competitiveness of clean energy manufacturing that is being directly challenged by China, in particular.

Finally, Republicans who strongly support nuclear energy should propose greater investments in the commercial-scale demonstration of first-of-their kind clean and low-carbon energy technologies. With $85 billion in loan guarantees and multiple indirect incentives on the table for nuclear power already, the industry is still stalled. At some point, Republicans should embrace the realization that big, direct public investments to build a new generation of nuclear plants is necessary to kick-start the U.S. nuclear industry and compete with nations like France, China, South Korea, India and Japan, who all have a head-start on the nuclear front. A new agency or fund capable of spurring next generation nuclear technologies would also be capable of speeding the deployment of a suite of other clean energy sources that will all be critical to a future economy built on clean, cheap, American energy.

In grade school, young children are taught to "use your words" instead of simply withdrawing when something doesn't go their way. Republicans on the EPW committee could use a refresher course in this simple lesson in productive human interaction. It is important that their behavior not be reinforced lest it be repeated at other committee markups. Republicans should be clearly shown that the only way to have an impact on the committee's deliberations are to come to the table with a plan, prepared to debate a piece of legislation that could affect America's response to climate change, our energy use, and our economic competitiveness for years to come.

Read more!

Clean Energy Forums are popping up in target states across the country. What about your state?

Cross posted from grist:

From coast to coast, teams of young volunteers are organizing Clean Energy Forums. As part of Focus the Nation‘s campaign Community and the Road to Copenhagen, young organizers are engaging their communities for a day of climate dialogue and reaching out to their senators to join the conversations. Through this nationwide effort, we hope to distill the political will for a strong U.S. commitment at COP15, the U.N. climate conference that will take place in Copenhagen in December.

Out of each forum, Focus the Nation HQ will generate a Clean Energy Action List. We will take these to COP15 as evidence of the American people’s desire for clean energy solutions, and of the hard work of the U.S. climate movement this fall.

The campaign kicked off Friday, Oct. 23rd in Durango, Colo., in conjunction with a 350.org event. In Durango—a coal-, oil-, and gas-dependent town near the four corners of the United States—rural Southwest youth, like youth around the country, are demanding inclusion in the conversations about how their energy is generated. The Durango event featured a diverse panel including local politicians, representatives from the Navajo Nation, and forward-thinking business leaders.

Now the campaign is going national with Clean Energy Forums in November:

• Friday, Nov. 6—New York City
• Saturday, Nov. 7—Santa Cruz, Calif.
• Thursday, Nov. 12—Jonesboro, Ark.
• Thursday, Nov. 12—Southfield, Mich.
• Saturday, Nov. 14—Tallahassee, Fla.

If you’d like to get involved, sign up on Focus Local and find your region’s team to join in the organizing fun.

We still need organizers for events in the key states of Alaska, Delaware, Iowa, Maine, Minnesota, Montana, New Mexico, Nevada, North Dakota, South Dakota, Virginia, and West Virginia. Focus the Nation is offering organizing stipends and funds for event budgets (when was the last time you turned down some cash?), so recommend a talented organizer or sign up yourself to help. You don’t even have to wait to hear from a Focus the Nation staffer—you can start organizing today using the Organizing Guide and Clean Energy Forum Module.

Consider the Clean Energy Forum to be the final ingredient for this fall of climate action. First, there was the creative outburst for 350.org’s International Day of Climate Action on Oct. 24. Then the training and excitement from Energy Action Coalition’s regional Power Shift summits. Sprinkle in pranks from the Yes Men on the Chamber of Commerce for its anti-climate stance. And you can top it all off with high-level civic engagement and dialogue by organizing your very own Clean Energy Forum.

You don’t want to miss this opportunity to help the lay the road to Copenhagen!

Read more!