Going, Going ...

America needs an energy policy today that will bring together our best and brightest, harness the limitless capabilities of our research institutions, and invest whatever it takes to ensure America’s leadership in clean energy technologies. The result will be to create billion-dollar industries and millions of new jobs.

The 14 million Americans unemployed and 8.8 million under-employed feel left out of the American dream. The almost limitless opportunities available to the post-World War II generation simply aren’t there today. But there are opportunities. They might require re-training or relocating; and they might provide less pay or benefits. But, for sure, opportunities exist. But—and equally for sure—the people seeking those opportunities require help.

What better way to help them than by taking advantage of opportunities to create new energy jobs?

In the 2011 World Energy Outlook, the International Energy Agency estimates that between 2011 and 2035, roughly $38 trillion in energy infrastructure will be required to meet global demand.¹ Investments in the power sector alone will equal roughly $16.9 trillion to maintain current supply levels.²

Surely President Obama and Congress can develop a bipartisan plan leveraging both government spending and private investment for home-grown energy solutions that heads America down an R&D path that eventually will produce more job-creating clean energy technologies. It’s fundamental that America must remain the land of innovation and opportunity when it comes to clean energy. But we can’t wait until new clean energy technologies arrive at our shores; we also can’t postpone domestic development, production, or manufacture of the entire spectrum of America’s energy resources.

America needs an energy policy today that will bring together our best and brightest, harness the limitless capabilities of our research institutions, and invest whatever it takes. The result will be the creation of billion-dollar industries, new technologies with applications heretofore unimaginable, and—critically important in today’s fragile economy—a million-plus new jobs.

Falling Short of Independence

Seven U.S. presidents have signed energy legislation to foster energy efficiencies, conservation, and, ultimately, energy independence. In 1946, President Truman signed the first Atomic Energy Act,³ creating the Atomic Energy Commission. Then President Eisenhower signed the Atomic Energy Act of 1954,⁴ opening the way for civilian nuclear power and the world’s first nuclear power plant in Shippingport, Pa., in 1957. In 1973, President Nixon launched Project Independence with the goal of achieving energy independence by 1980.⁵ In 1975, President Ford moved the date for achieving energy independence to 1985 and signed the Energy Policy and Conservation Act,⁶ mandating vehicle fuel economy standards and authorizing the creation of a strategic petroleum reserve. President Carter’s 1978 National Energy Act⁷ was designed to reduce the use of fuels by industry; in 1980, he signed an Energy Security Act⁸ promoting solar energy and other renewable energy sources. President George H.W. Bush signed the Energy Policy Act of 1992⁹ to reduce U.S. dependence on foreign oil by requiring certain fleets to acquire alternative fuel vehicles capable of operating on non-petroleum fuels. Between 1993 and 2001, President Clinton announced initiatives to stabilize greenhouse gas emissions and increase the use of sustainable energy technology.¹⁰ In 2005, President George W. Bush signed another Energy Policy Act¹¹ aimed at encouraging energy efficiency and conservation, promoting alternative and renewable energy, and promoting the expansion of nuclear energy. In 2007, President Bush signed the Energy Independence and Security Act,¹² which, among other things, increased automobile fuel economy standards and provided incentives for increased energy efficiency in public buildings and lighting. Finally, on Feb. 17, 2009, President Obama signed the American Reinvestment and Recovery Act,¹³ a $787.2 billion economic stimulus package providing energy development incentives, tax incentives, direct grants, and financing assistance.

Notwithstanding the efforts of seven U.S. presidents, these policies have fallen far short of their laudable objectives. In the meantime, world energy consumption continues to grow, including a 5.6 percent increase in 2010 alone, which represents the largest increase since 1973.¹⁴ The year 2010 was also significant as China, which increased its consumption by more than 11 percent, surpassing the U.S. as the world’s largest energy consumer.¹⁵

By 2035, word energy consumption is estimated to increase by 53 percent over 2008 levels and China is projected to use 68 percent more energy than the United States by that year.¹⁶ By 2020, the global clean energy market is expected to reach $2.3 trillion. First Solar, a major solar manufacturer headquartered in Tempe, Ariz., announced the largest solar project in the world in a joint venture with China Guangdong Nuclear (CGN) Solar Energy Development Co. Even as this investment by China in green technologies will ultimately be subsidized by taxpayers in the United States and other Western countries where it’s exported, China is moving forward in the development of new clean energy resources—in fact, investing nearly double what the U.S. invests in green technologies.

Another U.S. company, Chevron, is the largest producer of geothermal energy in the world; however, the company’s prominence is attributable mostly to its geothermal operations in Indonesia. Meanwhile, Iceland is the world’s largest exporter of geothermal technology and expertise, and India is developing cutting-edge wave technology with pending construction of a tidal power project. And Denmark continues to outpace the United States in installed offshore wind capacity, with nine offshore farms and more than 300 turbines.

Nothing less than a Sputnik response is required by the president and Congress to catapult the U.S. back to the forefront of the current race for clean energy technology and energy independence. Providing for U.S. energy security requires a Sputnik-like technology commitment—a national effort to develop technology that will provide America with energy independence while cleaning up the air, land and water for our children and their children, and ensuring energy for our national defense. And, importantly, a Sputnik commitment would provide the United States with millions of jobs.

A lack of commitment will still result in new investment and millions of jobs—just not in America.

A Sputnik Moment

President Kennedy’s goal to close any illusion of a space technology gap between the Soviet Union and U.S. was met with Neil Armstrong’s “one small step for [a] man; one giant leap for mankind.” Today, President Obama has established the goals of 80 percent of U.S. energy coming from clean generation sources by 2035 and closing the clean energy gap that exists between the U.S. and other countries like China. This is an admirable goal, but not if American workers aren’t at the forefront of developing and manufacturing the next clean energy resource.

America can be the innovator and leading exporter of clean energy technology in a $2.3 trillion market, or we can be a major importer. What we can’t be is an indifferent “porter.” The train is leaving the station full of future energy jobs. The destination should be the U.S. homeland, but it takes more than politicians’ speeches to create job opportunities. It requires hands-on action—a John Kennedy commitment, a Steve Jobs imagination, the force of Ronald Reagan and, above all, Americans helping Americans.

Endnotes:

1. World Energy Outlook, 2011, (Executive Summary), p. 2, International Energy Agency.

2. World Energy Outlook, 2011, “Cumulative investment in energy infrastructure, 2011-2035.”

3. Atomic Energy Act of 1946, 60 Stat. 765 (1946) (current version at 42 U.S.C. § 2011 et seq.) (2006).

4. Atomic Energy Act of 1954, 68 Stat. 921 (1954) (current version at 42 U.S.C. § 2011 et seq.) (2006).

5. See http://www.energy.gov/about/timeline 1971-1980.htm, last visited July 22, 2009.

6. Energy Policy and Conservation Act, 94 Pub. L. No. 163, 89 Stat. 874 (1975) (current version at 42 U.S.C. § 6201 et seq.) (2006).

7. National Energy Act of 1978 comprised five separate statutes: the Public Utility Regulatory Policies Act of 1978, Pub. L. No. 95-617, 92 Stat. 3117 (1978) (16 U.S.C. §§ 796(17)-(18), 824a-3, 824i, 824k (2006); the Energy Tax Act of 1978, Pub. L. No. 95-618, 92 Stat. 3174 (1978 ); the National Energy Conservation Policy Act, Pub. L. No. 95-619, 92 Stat. 3206 (1978); the Powerplant and Industrial Fuel Use Act of 1978, Pub. L. No. 95-620, 92 Stat. 3289 (1978); and the Natural Gas Policy Act of 1978, Pub. L. No. 95-621, 92 Stat. 3351 (1978).

8. Energy Security Act of 1980, Pub. L. No. 96-294, 94 Stat. 718 (1980) (16 U.S.C. §§ 2705, 2708) (2006).

9. Energy Policy Act of 1992, Pub. L. No. 102-486, 106 Stat. 2776 (1992) (codified as amended in scattered sections of U.S.C.) (2006).

10. The Clinton Presidency: Protecting Our Environment and Public Health.

11. Energy Policy Act of 2005, Pub. L. No. 109-58, 119 Stat. 594 (2005) (codified as amended in scattered sections of U.S.C.) (2006).

12. Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007, Pub. L. No. 110-140, 121 Stat. 1492 (2007) (codified as amended in scattered sections of U.S.C.) (2006).

13. American Reinvestment and Recovery Act of 2009, Pub. L. No. 111-5, 123 Stat. 115 (2009).

14. BP Statistical Review of World Energy, at 1 (June 2011).

15. BP Statistical Review of World Energy, at 2 (June 2011).

16. EIA International Energy Outlook 2011, Press Release, Sept. 19, 2011.