Profile Network Activity Comments Articles Blog Bookmarks Contact
 

Why We 've Failed Again

By Stephen Lacey
August 6, 2010   |   34 Comments

Do you like this blog post?

Email   Bookmark Bookmark   Print   Share
 

The information and views expressed in this blog post are solely those of the author and not necessarily those of RenewableEnergyWorld.com or the companies that advertise on this Web site and other publications. This blog was posted directly by the author and was not reviewed for accuracy, spelling or grammar.

34 Reader Comments
Comment
1 of 34
August 7, 2010
Before you can move forward, you need to have a plan. Before you can have a plan you need to think about a plan and then draft it and then have a few meetings about it in order to finalize it.

We have no plan, no path to a plan and no one wants to meet.....

China is winning the race, but we are not even in the race....
Comment
2 of 34
August 8, 2010
Two words in the article defined our whole country's problem "partisan bickering". The children, 'the rest of us Americans', should never be forced to lead stupid parents, 'our government', but that looks like what the children of this country will have to do.

Since President Carter seemed to be the only president who cared enough for this country to start the process of moving us forward to a clean energy source, installing solar panels on the White House, we will have to turn to President Carter again to lead the nation back in the right direction. He started one of the greatest programs in the country, "Habitat For Humanity" and we are very grateful. President Carter, can you backtrack and start installing solar panels on all those homes you built for us and this time include the seniors and minimum wage working people with families? You are the only one who can show our childish bickering government how to do it. We, the little people in America, will be grateful to you again.
No image available
Comment
3 of 34
Anonymous
August 9, 2010
Partisan bickering is the symptom. Entrench financial and corporate interests in oil are the disease. Private public utilities included. Corporate personhood is at the base of it, allowing these large financial interests to rule through their money. We cannot make a plan because we lack the national will to control the very source of the political stalemate that leaves us in this continuing slide into global warming. This is the same problem that killed meaningful health care reform.
Comment
4 of 34
August 9, 2010
Hi:

"Let's hope that Congress pulls it together and has the sense to give the industry some clarity for 2011."

Wouldn't count on it....
Anon... you got it right... its just that there is so much more to define the problem in its entirety...

.....Bill
Comment
5 of 34
August 9, 2010
Excellent post! Bill, I agree with you and the Anonymous commenter at least to the point of saying that "entrenched financial and corporate interests in oil (and other fossil fuels) are the disease".

Though, I might take it a step further and lay the blame not so much at the feet of these entrenched financial interests, but rather at the feet of us, the public. I say this because we still have the right to vote or not vote for these politicians that cow tail to these entrenched interests. Instead, the vast majority of us bury our heads in the sand and pay more attention to America's Next Top Model than to what our politicians are doing and why they are doing it!

Bob "Free As The Wind" Mitchell
Comment
6 of 34
August 9, 2010
william-fitch-22587
August 9, 2010
Hi Bob:

I would agree with you except for the "lie" factor.
After all, if xyz says they will do this and then
they don't do it and do something else, its not instantly correctable
and there is always another to take their place and do
exactly the same thing.... and the reason for that is the kind of "thing" anon was referring to...
Ultimately "currency" is the problem, it is a system without a counter balance.

.....Bill
Comment
7 of 34
August 11, 2010
Hey Bob,

I seem to be following you..."we still have the right to vote or not vote for these politicians that cow tail to these entrenched interests" we do, but the problem is that SO many people believe the rubbish these politicians spout (too much Fox news!) that voting for an independent candidate is considered a wasted vote (no one seems to get that if WE ALL do it, it WILL have an effect) and not voting is 'unpatriotic' or 'apathetic'.

For me, the fact is that I haven't actually seen anyone worth voting for (in the UK) for the past 16 years. All of the available candidates have proven themselves corrupt and self serving.

Until we can weed the corruption out of politics (good luck!) this will not change. The only time we'll start to see more real political support for renewables is when the renewables industry gets enough money and clout to pull the same dirty tricks that fossils and nuclear do.
Comment
8 of 34
August 11, 2010
Better and cheaper alternatives exist than renewable energy and investors and states know this.
First,existing rail lines link most coal fired plants.The right of way owned by the railroads can be used by new gas depositsBuffett).This reduces carbon footprints at existing coal fired plants.
Second,cheaper,smaller,and more efficient French nuclear plants can be set up on coal fired sites.They also recycle existing waste now being held at these plants,an unforeseen result of Senator Reid's blocking action.
Finally,tidal,hydro,solar,and wind power groups act exactly like the early captains of industry in Silicon Valley.What is needed is financial consolidation,and the oil companies will gladly do this for they want to slow down the transition out of oil.And I might add the investors in the Middle East have the most to lose and will fight strenuously to invest in more efficient automobiles and far more efficient replacements for coal fired plants.They definitely want to remain in the energy business,and who can blame them.If cars and railroads become electrified what will be the demand for electricity?The major cost of all renewables is not production,it is the grid.Ifyou have to charge the cars,lawn mowers,scooters,and bicycles,the demand will dampen production of off the grid solutions,especially in larger housing units like condominiums.
Comment
9 of 34
August 11, 2010
Grid is expensive and really, really BIG. "Big" takes time to implement. Compressing the time leads to error and even more expense.

What we need right now is very inexpensive, very dense energy storage that can be purchased and used by anybody.

It is simple and relatively cheap to fill a can with gasoline, take it home and fill up the lawn mower. There is no equivalent for the world of electricity. Yet.
No image available
Comment
10 of 34
Anonymous
August 11, 2010
All great points - however - the comments have veered away from the central point I think. This is NOT about the technology required or available, it is about having and creating a stable policy that supports renewable energy generation. As long as our elected officials are preoccupied with making the other side look bad, and are not actually addressing ANY problem head on - particularly in the energy space - we are stuck with the ebb and flow and uncertainty that ensures that nothing gets done.

It is up to us to take action. The elections in the fall are a perfect time to 'sweep out the trash' and install a fresh batch of elected officials. The corruption and entrenchment is too endemic, let's replace them ALL.

Secondly, WE must be active. Even if our first timid step is only to pick up the pen and write to our senators and congresspeople, we have to be active.

finally, it comes down to us. We must create the renewable energy business on our own backs and just get it done.

Thomas Dinkel
CEO
SunReports, Inc.
Comment
11 of 34
August 11, 2010
Excellent commentary Mr. Lacey. You nailed it pretty much. The unstable RE situation will remain so as long as the government appears to not want to function above the level of toddlers in a sandbox. RE development is a major headache, particularly with finance models that don't support it much. Not good for investor confidence.
Comment
12 of 34
August 11, 2010
william-cormeny-116859
"Better and cheaper alternatives exist than renewable energy and investors and states know this. First,existing rail lines link most coal fired plants. The right of way owned by the railroads can be used by new gas depositsBuffett).This reduces carbon footprints at existing coal fired plants.
Second,cheaper,smaller,and more efficient French nuclear plants can be set up on coal fired sites.They also recycle existing waste now being held at these plants,an unforeseen result of Senator Reid's blocking action."

How are any of these 'better' than renewable energy. Don't forget that coal is ENTIRELY dependent upon oil for extraction and transport. And if the whole world goes nuclear, we will be reaching peak uranium in under 70 years. Not sustainable.
Comment
13 of 34
August 11, 2010
Having been involved in grass roots endeavors for 30 years I've learned that the one element that can and will "make" politicians pay attention is public involvement on election day. That being said the entire renewable industry must hammer their politicians from the state levels to the federal levels with demands that they do their job and if they don't they will be replaced. This effort must be applied thru the media (all outlets) and with letters to the various politicians involved with energy, climate legislation, and natural resource committees. Without the threat of losing their office, politicians will not act rather they will continue to infight in DC. They need a serious slap up the side of their egos.
Comment
14 of 34
August 11, 2010
GE,(Seimens, Westinghouse, et. al.), may be big in the power industry, but distributed solar thermal has been bigger in China for longer than GE's recognition of it.
There is also much confusion added by the PV industry. They largely push the assumption that solar energy is (only) electricity and focus much of their monolog in this vein. Until the PV industry and govt begin a more realistic portrayal of distributed solar thermal as the most efficient of the solar options, follower by PV, wind, CST, bio gas, et al., little in the way of confidence in what ways should be explored first for maximum savings and pollution abatement will occur.
The ego will explore and expound on every option that will not work, before finally settling on the only answer that will work. The ego answers quickly and loudly and in legion. But the ego is always wrong because it's purpose is insane.
Comment
15 of 34
August 11, 2010
As noted above, this is a long known problem. At last year's Intersolar, Deutsche Bank's Steve O'Rourke was asked to compare the US' PV market direction vs. Europe's lead. He invoked Churchill (as does commenter Phil Manke above): the US eventually "does the right thing, after exhausting all other alternatives." Getting a national PV plan will require convincing bickering politicians (some from very powerful constituencies with PV-opposing interest, e.g. midwest coal regions) how fossil-fuel is "better" than other options, and probably in this order of criteria: economics, politically savvy, efficient & long-term & safe energy generation. Maybe the current antagonistic political climate will help to clear the air, so to speak?
Comment
16 of 34
August 11, 2010
Hi:

Well, I know one thing for sure... if we don't solve the problem, I guarantee Mother Nature will....

.....Bill
Comment
17 of 34
Gre
August 12, 2010
Easy. Once in USA you had production AND financial control. Then you send production in the third-world to save, and kept just the financial control, then you loose the finance. China is not producing anymore for you but for themselves, and they do it with long-term planning, while you are just looking for the money to get your car next week and blindly hoping in free competition. Best wishes.
Comment
18 of 34
August 12, 2010
Hey Guys,

Much of the gridlock comes from the renewable energy folks hitching their wagon to the "man-made climate change" theory. When that theory is rejected (or shown to be faulty or dis-honest) we are left with empty hands. We must pretend that "deniers" have no good points. If the foundations of the theory are torn away we must continue to believe (and close our eyes to legitimate issues). This is what happens when a movement hitches their horse to a "theory." All alternative evidence or facts must be denied. (is that the position that we want to be in?) Answer: NO- Renewable energy makes perfect sense apart from the theory of man-made climate change!

Our next problem is expecting the government to be our solution. All government exists to do is protect special interests. If you want to play that game YOU have to become a special interest (and lose your soul in the process).

A level playing field is all we need. If we lobby corrupt politicians to tip the field in our favor are we not becoming corrupt ourselves? To say that it has been corrupt for a long time is obvious. Still no reason to lobby for anything other than a level playing field.

Just move forward with clean renewable energy and the benefits will become obvious. Especially as we show that it works- and that it makes sense economically.

Until that day you would do better wasting your energy fighting the tide than thinking that you will not become corrupt by throwing your hats in with the corrupt politicians.

Movements work because they make sense. Renewable energies make sense. We will prevail. Let's make sure that we do not become what we despise as we try to get the "upper hand."

Randy
Comment
19 of 34
August 12, 2010
Who says we've failed? And, when did this become a race? There are a couple of truths that always seem to get lost in this discussion.

1. The energy economics of Europe and elsewhere are different than they are in the US.

2. Innovation diffusion ALWAYS takes longer than predicted.

We need to quit comparing the U.S. to Italy or China or wherever and whine that they installed more of this or more of that and therefore we should too. That's not a reason to do anything. What the renewable industry has done a very poor job of in the U.S. is to define the value proposition for consumers. Simply whining that country X installed so many MW of (insert favored technology here) and therefore we should too is baseless.

This is also where the discussion of feed-in tariffs is an unwelcome distraction. The U.S. consumer will rightly ask "And tell me again why I should pay higher electric rates that guarantee a rate of return to some developer to build (again insert favored technology here)?" The bottom line is simple. First, get the costs down. Then, explain the value proposition to those who are paying the bill and be considerate of their financial situation.
Comment
20 of 34
August 12, 2010
Rich --
Good points. But I think you're missing the broader point: Not creating clarity for the investment community means we're failing in providing the base-level support the industry needs to actually drive down costs. R&D is extremely important. But many technologies are able to compete TODAY, with fair incentives that keep the playing field level.

How are we supposed to drive down costs when developers are already shelving projects this year because they don't know if the incentives will be in place next year? How does that help us build a sustainable industry that can continually lower costs dramatically?

Secondly, yes -- the energy economics are different in every region and country (and indeed in areas across the U.S.) But this again misses the point. There is long-term clarity in those countries which are installing far more. I hardly call that whining -- it is a fact that these countries are much farther ahead because in many cases (certainly not all, like Spain) they are making a more stable investment climate for renewables. The comparison highlights the differences in support schemes.

I agree with both of your points: Clearly, energy transitions don't happen overnight. And yes, we also need to define the value proposition. But on both of those points -- the fact of the matter is that it will take a lot of economic and energy resources to make that transition. Pretending that it won't cost us all up front avoids the reality of the transition.
Comment
21 of 34
August 12, 2010
Just what are the goals America wants concerning energy? As the worlds number 1 consumer in most every category Americans have become gluttonous and expect their cake served to them on a silver platter. Agreed we're in a fix economically at this time and folks are hurting but one things for sure, America will never be the same again because they are slowly waking up to the fact that we need clean energy and the alternative is the opposite - polluting fossil fuel which by the way will not be cheap in the future. What happens when fuel prices skyrocket? Do Americans quit driving? No! they may drive less but they refuse to give up the luxuries they've grown use to. What will happen when energy prices go up? Do you really think Americans will turn off their air conditioners? Not for a minute because we are also use to that luxury.There are some of us who remember when fuel oil and coal were the preferred method of heating our homes however we also remember the gray snow and sooty curtains from those fuels but we accepted them because it was easier than cutting wood; though its not shouted out by the senior class if you ask them they will all prefer clean energy in spite of its higher price if they can keep their appliances, computers and TV's running. Life is good or at least better than years ago and most are willing to pay the price to keep it that way.
Comment
22 of 34
August 12, 2010
Stephen,

And in your rebuttal you've now begun to do a better job of explaining the why and that is the direction in which the discussion should move. Any industry that relies for its life blood on incentives that are subject to political vagaries should feel uncomfortable. So, focus on those technologies that you mention are competitive today (or nearly so) and talk up the successes. That's part of explaining the value prop. How much PV has been installed in Italy is irrelevant.
Comment
23 of 34
August 12, 2010
Rich

There's more to it than that; the technologies that are competitive have other nexus attached to them. Hydro for example, the licensing process takes far more time than any of the variable renewables yet there is the potential for 50,000Mw on EXISTING structures with nearly benign environmental effects and it is a base energy, stable and in most cases rural meaning it can back feed the transmission system thus reducing the need for more transmission. But the field is not level because of incentives. Get government out of the equation, drop the incentive's and unleash capitalism.
Comment
24 of 34
August 12, 2010
The choke in Washington is the senate. We have 20 states with 10% of the population and 40 senators who control what gets done. There are over 12,000 lobbyists registered in Washington. The fossil fuel boys have had huge influence in Washington for decades. Until recently they, along with Detroit, were able to keep renewables cornered. The car owns the culture. Renewables are now a serious threat to the fossil fuel empire and are being treated accordingly. World dynamics will carry renewables forward. U.S. policy is likely to follow Detroit's lead off the cliff.
Comment
25 of 34
August 13, 2010
The Patent Department and Congress could unlock the Logjam of patents. In that logjam is more technology for renewable energy inventions that could amaze us all.

I faxed congresswomen Marcy Kaptur in Ohio (whom I have not yet heard from) to introduce legislation in |Congress that would change the US Patent Office operation so it will serve the inventors not just big corporations.

The present patent fee system for garage lab inventors is allowing the big corporation to steal and tie up the little guy's energy inventions. This must stop.

Gov. grants to the big banks, Insurance, and auto companies could divert some grant money to our inventors in Renewable Energy invention startup companies.

Jobs, Jobs, Jobs are tied up in the Patent Office, sitting on fantastic energy inventions while small companies and their inventors in renewable Energy looking forward to real progress are going broke. While congress promotes a Patent log jam, and bankrupting America's prim asset, its inventive people.

Check an example in Google Patent application US 2010/0043729 AEPB Generator





Example:
Comment
26 of 34
August 14, 2010
Again, great conversation! One thing that I would like everyone to take into account is a lesson that I learned a long time ago about human behavior. That is, "No one changes unless there is enough pain to make them want to change"

The problem in the US is that right now, we are still just too damn comfortable in terms of our energy needs. For evidence of this phenomenon all you have to do is to look back a couple of years to when gas jumped to $4.00 a gallon in the US.

Only then did people get the dander up and start calling for alternatives. The sad part is that when gas prices went back down, people became comfortable again and went back to ignoring the problem.
Unfortunately, this type of behavior seems to be part of human nature. That's where government has a legitimate role to play. That is, to look down the road a bit further than the average Joe and to organize public policy in such a way that we all benefit.

This seems to be one thing that non-democratic governments have an advantage on and that democratic governments aren't quite as good at. Whereas China's government can look at the energy landscape and dictate a change in policy, our government is so hog tied by special interest groups, that it seems to be incapable of "doing the right thing".
The only way to "fix" this problem with our government is to make our politicians feel enough pain to make them want to do the right thing.

Unfortunately, this would require the population as a whole to wake up and to turn the AM radio down. Being that I don't see this happening anytime soon, I think that Bill's comment (If we don't do it, Mother Nature will) may be the only way that we make this happen.

Hopefully, I'm wrong and people will wake up sooner and MAKE their politicians do the right thing, but I have my doubts…

Bob "Free As The Wind" Mitchell
Comment
27 of 34
August 19, 2010
To me,there is only one way out of this delemma: Power to the people!

Having said that, why not start today building up a modern, decentralized energy system to fulfill not only our`s, but also for next generation`s power needs.
Not to forget so called "emerging Countires like India and China".
And how to built up the flooded energy infrastructure in Pakistan?
I hope not on monopolistic structures
and the priciples of thermodynamics again.

More here:
http://www.hydrogenambassadors.com/meet-aae/fuelcellseminar2009/poster.php
Comment
28 of 34
Gre
August 19, 2010
Dear all,
I'm a bit afraid hearing RE experts to be so pessimist. You have the solution for the future problems in your hands and just wait for people or government to do something for you.
I think that you feel too "americans". The plauground now is worldwide.
Yes, there is no competition, we are all just struggling to get a small place in the world for ourselves.
Don't ask what America can do for you, think what you can do for the world and for yourselves, understand the rules and play the game, that's what China does.
You will never be as rich as before, and the indefinite growth is just a child dream. 9/11 should have teached something.
It seem that you are afraid to restart from zero, or panicking thinkig that without your car you are surely dead.
You have many of the best brains and technology of the world, but you don't have anymore a strong central government, so you don't have to expect any help from above and you can't think as a lobby.
The game of RE is more opened then ever, and multinational energy bosses are trying to close it, but they will never succeed.
We all are working for that, and for now it's very much.
Comment
29 of 34
August 19, 2010
I agree with both Arno and Gre to a certain extent, but also disagree to a certain extent as well. I do think that we need to consider "Modern, decentralized energy systems" and that there is a certain amount of truth that "the people" need to be leading in the switch to renewable energy sources.

That said, I don't think that the 89 year old widow, living on a fixed income can be expected to buck up to make herself energy self-sufficient. She's still going to need to be able to walk over to the light switch and flip it to find where she left her "clapper".

Regarding Gre's comment about, "Not asking what America can do for you", again, I agree. In a perfect world renewable energy sources would be available on a level playing field with fossil fuels and I have no doubt that "the people" would do the right thing.

It's not a perfect world though. Fossil fuels have a huge head start and also enjoy systematic, structural advantages that will at least delay the adoption of renewables. These advantages, such as not having all of their true costs reflected in their retail prices and special tax considerations are hurdles that are truly difficult for renewables to over-come.

This is where government action comes into play. At the very least, our government should remove these structural advantages and then the free markets will indeed be free to respond. I'm confident if this were the case, that renewables will be able to stand on their own two feet!

Bob "Free As The Wind" Mitchell
Comment
30 of 34
August 19, 2010
Conventional energy sources have thermodynamics and the laws of nature on their side. That's why they are successful.

The very diffuse, erratic and low temperature nature of renewable energy means that harvesting the resource is inherently difficult and expensive.

Seems to me the entire energy industry would do well to remember that those who live by subsidies can die by them when the next administration is voted into office. Better to provide a competitive product that can stand on its own two feet without the government's crutch.
Comment
31 of 34
GRW
August 20, 2010
I AM SO PLEASED THAT I LIVE IN EUROPE!!!
UNFORTUNATELY U.S. POLUTION AND ENERGY USAGE WILL STILL IMPACT ON MY GRANDCHILDREN AND THEIR CHILDREN.

MAYBE THE E.U. SHOULD SUE THE U.S. FOR DAMAGES TO THE ENVIRONMENT??
Comment
32 of 34
August 21, 2010
Energy Independence: We've talked about an "energy crisis" in the USA for decades without real energy conservation or practical energy alternatives. As gas prices peak, we hear speeches; as prices abate, we return to business as usual. I propose an immediate 10 cent per gallon monthly increase in gas tax until we no longer need to import oil. The funds could fund an energy credit to low income families and help reduce the national debt. With 10 cent monthly increases, gasoline prices would roughly double to $6 in 30 months - the price our colleagues in the UK enjoy today. This program would encourage energy conservation now and the predictable pricing trend would motivate alternative energy innovation. Oil is a limited resource and global demand is expanding; we can pay now or we can pay later. Perhaps in 3 years cheap solar powered photovoltaic cells will electrolyze unlimited clean hydrogen from seawater to power vehicles and factories. We must take control of our destiny.
No image available
Comment
33 of 34
Anonymous
August 24, 2010
This has been an interesting conversation but one thing must be recognized. Our government is influenced by "special interests". That is how it has always run and always will. WE are a "special interest". We are doing a poor job of influencing the government. RE must do a better job of making its case in Washington. Our representatives get their information from those we call "lobbies", professionals who are paid to get their information to the right people in Washington. If you want government to do anything, you must recognize how it works and not complain. Everybody thinks the other guy is a special interest but my ideas are what is right.

Larry
Comment
34 of 34
August 24, 2010
We've seen the enemy and he is us. I live in a State where coal and natural gas are a very big part of the economy and the politicians are reluctant to even commit to any kind of RES; they set goals without any backbone. My job as a government relations consultant for a hydro energy development company is tough at best when dealing with State and local representatives however when offering an alternative to another coal fired plant the PEOPLE do rule. I don't think the "special interest groups" rule when voting day roles around and there is an issue on the ballet that affect health and environmental quality unless those elections are taking place in a region whose economy depends totally on the mines or gas wells. That being said most renewable energy needs government help so one has to be careful when dealing with politicians if that help is needed; a tricky situation at best. Regulations need relaxing, licensing, permitting, and siting regs need to be leveled, and incumbents need to be put out to pasture, then we could move forward. Oh yeah, paint the wind mills something other than white; something like the bottom of a stealth bomber; the NIMBYism is a nexus as well.
Add Your Comment

Registered users, please make sure to Sign-In. We and others want to know your ideas and opinions. If you are not yet Registered -- it's quick and easy. Just click below.
Thanks!

Register Now   Sign-In

Stephen Lacey

View Stephen Lacey's Profile
About: I am a reporter with ClimateProgress.org, a blog published by the Center for American Progress. I am former editor and producer for RenewableEnergyWorld.com, wh... more »

Advertise With Us

KACO new energy, Inc. Solmetric Corporation Applied Energy Technologies (AET) Talesun Solar DNV KEMA Energy & Sustainability Canadian Solar Inc. Magnum Energy Inc.
World's #1 Renewable Energy Network
PennWell
Renewable Energy World Magazine International Renewable Energy World Conference & Expo North America Renewable Energy World Conference & Expo Europe Renewable Energy World Conference & Expo Asia Renewable Energy World Conference & Expo India Renewable Energy World Conference & Expo Africa
RenewableEnergyWorld.com Solar Power Gen Conference & Expo Hydro Review Magazine Hydro Review World Magazine
HydroVision International HydroVision Brazil HydroVision India HydroVision Russia
Twitter Facebook Linked In RSS Feeds e-Newsletters