The World's #1 Renewable Energy Network for News & Information
Sign In or Register
Renewable Energy World Logo
Wednesday, May 22, 2013
  • Sections
    • Home
      • News
      • Opinion & Commentary
      • Featured Blogs
      • Research & Reports
      • Video
      • Press Releases
      • All Blogs
      • Events
      • Products
      • Finance
    • Solar
      • News
      • Opinion & Commentary
      • Featured Blogs
      • Research & Reports
      • Video
      • Press Releases
      • All Blogs
      • Events
      • Products
      • Finance
    • Wind
      • News
      • Opinion & Commentary
      • Featured Blogs
      • Research & Reports
      • Video
      • Press Releases
      • All Blogs
      • Events
      • Products
      • Finance
    • Geothermal
      • News
      • Opinion & Commentary
      • Featured Blogs
      • Research & Reports
      • Video
      • Press Releases
      • All Blogs
      • Events
      • Products
      • Finance
    • Bio
      • News
      • Opinion & Commentary
      • Featured Blogs
      • Research & Reports
      • Video
      • Press Releases
      • All Blogs
      • Events
      • Products
      • Finance
    • Hydro
      • News
      • Opinion & Commentary
      • Featured Blogs
      • Research & Reports
      • Video
      • Press Releases
      • All Blogs
      • Events
      • Products
      • Finance
    • Careers
    • Companies
      • Company Directory
      • Press Releases
      • Products
      • Events Calendar
      • White Papers
    • Webcasts
      • Upcoming Webcasts
      • Featured Webcasts
      • Archived Webcasts
      • Events Calendar
    • White Papers
    • Magazines
      • Renewable Energy World
      • Wind Technology
      • Large Scale Solar
      • Hydro Review
      • HRW - Hydro Review Worldwide
      • Renewable Energy World (North America Edition)
      • Photovoltaics World
    • Awards
  • Account
    • Sign In
    • Register
  • Search
Don't Miss The Great Solar Debate: Where Does the Global Solar Industry Stand? ×

Obama Re-pledges Renewables Commitment as E&Y Reports US Falling Behind

Vince Font, Contributing Editor
September 07, 2012  |  15 Comments

When he stepped up to the podium on Thursday night to accept his party's nomination at the Democratic National Convention, President Barack Obama had quite a few things on his mind. One of those things was renewable energy. Another was climate change. In a speech that touched on issues ranging in scope from health care to job creation, Obama took time to restate his commitment to the improvement of fuel standards and continued investment in renewables.

Obama emphasized some of the positive energy gains that have been made in the past four years. “We raised fuel standards so that by the middle of the next decade, cars and trucks will go twice as far on a gallon of gas. We’ve doubled our use of renewable energy, and thousands of Americans have jobs today building wind turbines and long-lasting batteries,” he explained. “In the last year alone, we cut oil imports by one million barrels a day…and today, the United States of America is less dependent on foreign oil than at any time in nearly two decades.” 

Touching on solar power and biofuels, Obama said his administration will offer “a future where we keep investing in wind and solar and clean coal; where farmers and scientists harness new biofuels to power our cars and trucks; where construction workers build homes and factories that waste less energy; where we develop a hundred year supply of natural gas that's right beneath our feet.” 

Obama’s recommitment to eco-friendly initiatives comes at a critical time, fast on the heels of Ernst & Young’s renewable energy country attractiveness indices report, which again found China in the lead for renewable energy market dominance. According to the report, the United States is currently tied with Germany for second place, having dropped 1.5 points on the ARI (All Renewables Index) in the second quarter of 2012. 

Although the chief reasons for this drop are said to be a result of continued uncertainty with respect to the United States’ long-term renewable energy strategy — in addition to lingering doubts surrounding a much needed extension to the Production Tax Credit (PTC) for wind power producers — there was some encouraging news revealed by the report. Utilities in the U.S. are predicted to spend some $567 million in 2012 on smart grid-related software, with a further increase of 19 percent in the next two years.

Barack Obama’s stated plans to combat global warming were also aptly timed, with a recent Wall Street Journal article reporting record ice thaws throughout the Northern Hemisphere. In his speech, Obama called climate change “no hoax” and said his plan will place heavy emphasis on carbon pollution reduction. 

Obama’s deputy assistant for energy and climate change, Heather Zichal, indicated that renewable energy will remain a chief focus of the President’s goals if re-elected for another term in office, as will his efforts to convince Congress to enact a long-term energy policy. According to Zichal, the President “has talked continuously about the need for a long-term energy policy, and I think that will be something that he will obviously remain focused on in the second term.”

Lead image: Spirit of America via Shutterstock

15 Comments

Register To Comment
Peter Bradshaw
Peter Bradshaw
September 16, 2012
Human societies have shown a strong tendency to ignore problems that will destroy the way they operate. Jared Diamond's books, especially "Collapse", show some typical examples. The growing evidence confirming the scientific predictions of climate change shows that we are close to another such human-caused disaster. If we do not convert rapidly to renewable energy, we will again suffer a serious societal collapse.

If we really must take actions only on economic grounds (does this make Bernie Madoff a hero?), then we had better start accounting for those consequential costs that we currently ignore. Such as the estimated 50,000 premature deaths per year from pollution products of coal burning; at even just $1,000,000 each, that is a big number. Any estimates on the cost of coral reef deaths and fish stock die-offs caused by the acidification of the oceans, due to higher CO2 levels (you did do high school chemistry, didn't you?)?. And the hundreds of other similar effects, like loss of habitat due to strip mining of coal, the loss of fisheries due to oil spills, etc.

While we wait for society to start doing this, we had better work on renewable energy as hard as we can in themeanwhile, because otherwise we might be overwhelmed by our own stupidity if we don't.
ANONYMOUS
September 12, 2012
"I am not sure it's constructive to argue about which energy source is cheapest. I believe a viable energy policy calls for diversified sources of energy."

reese-charles,

The US energy market is almost entirely defined by cost, so COE cannot be ignored. On the other hand, because the US economy uses so much energy, we must consider the full impact of what each energy source costs versus the economic effects. For example, the states and federal governments receive huge annual revenues from the oil and gas industry, but very little from the RE industry. If the US economy were to rapidly transition from oil/gas to RE, not only would the massive revenues from oil/gas be lost, but there would also be billions in new subsidy costs to pay out. Where would those billions come from?

I'd love to see a US economy based on cost-effective RE supplies. But that's not reality based on current science. And to congratulate President Obama for making a vague statement "pledging a commitment to renewables", which completely ignores the current fundamental scientific realities of RE physics and economics, simply makes those individuals "science deniers".
Gerry Wootton
Gerry Wootton
September 10, 2012
"I am not sure it's constructive to argue about which energy source is cheapest." and yet so much of the discussion is based on cost. The fossil fuel sector still gets away with not complying with the same environmental standards as most other industries based on the cost argument. I agree that, in the sense of protecting the environment or preserving human life, arguing about cost IS counterproductive; unfortunately, it is still very effective.

"I believe a viable energy policy calls for diversified sources of energy." - absolutely but it also includes efficiency, conservation, a robust network, effective power system management and comprehensive policy and planning.

"The financial case for wind is still evolving and must include distribution costs." Not that old saw again: name one utility scale energy source that does not require distribution. Also, let's not denigrate the professional analysts as if they were too lame to include distribution costs, where appropriate, in their LCOE models.

Hopefully, the environmentalists will turn their attention equally to all hazards. We are a long way from winning the battle against acid rain, mercury in the environment, disposal of energy related waste, destruction of forests and waterways by energy projects, GHG emissions and so on. Unfortunately, many environmentalists confuse maintaining the status quo with protecting the environment.
CHARLES REESE
CHARLES REESE
September 10, 2012
I am not sure it's constructive to argue about which energy source is cheapest. I believe a viable energy policy calls for diversified sources of energy. The financial case for wind is still evolving and must include distribution costs. As environmentalists become more concerned about windmills, the time required to bring wind on-line will also extend.
Gerry Wootton
Gerry Wootton
September 10, 2012
@max-adams - regardless of whether or not Obama has done the math, wind is inexpensive and can be deployed quickly. According to EIA math, wind has an LCOE of 96.8 $/MWh, nuclear 112.7, advanced coal with CCS 140.7. Natural gas is the cheapest at 92.8 (NGCC with CCS). The data says that wind costs are still on a downward experience curve while all of these others have an upward trend.

'Wind energy is not a fast pay back and in many instances will not pay back the initial cost or the energy used to build a complete turbine.' - not true. The EROI of wind is ~80% better than for nuclear. A wind farm will have been producing energy for at least 15 years before a nuclear plant started at the same time goes online and will have repaid its energy investment well before the nuclear plant even starts.

'One nuclear power station will cost a fraction of the money to build than all the hundreds of turbines for equivalent power level' - Hardly - levelized capital cost $/MWp: wind 28.3, nuclear 79.9.

'nuclear station will reliably return each year more energy than the equivalent turbines in 5 years in a good wind area' Capacity factor is 90% versus 34%, ratio is 2.6:1 (not 5) but LCOE - which takes into account capacity factor - is the better indicator to consider. Also, no source is reliable - take San Onofre nuclear as a case in point - the reliability that matters is the reliability and quality of the system as a whole.
James Holtzman
James Holtzman
September 10, 2012
Max-Adams.
Prove it. You talk like many on the side of un-common sense but offer few facts besides your opinion...
tom clark
tom clark
September 9, 2012
GO MITT GO
Max Adams
Max Adams
September 9, 2012
Like many politians Obama has not done the financial mathematics. Wind energy is not a fast pay back and in many instances will not pay back the initial cost or the energy used to build a complete turbine. One nuclear power station will cost a fraction of the money to build than all the hundreds of turbines for equivalent power level and the nuclear station will reliably return each year more energy than the equivalent turbines in 5 years in a good wind area. NO gambles on weather patterns. People have not even done an environment study on the effect of withdrawing all that wind energy on downstream weather patterns. All that is looked at is possible potential wind energy that might be harvested. Obama, promise all you like, and spend the taxpayer's money like happened in the great railway buidling spree that occured in the late 1800's. How many lost their money in that dash for cash. History repeating itself again.
John Bronson
John Bronson
September 8, 2012
Perhaps a review of Obama's previous promises is in order:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o8R5GvwUFU8

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fZgQhnNRSuw
Anumakonda Jagadeesh
Anumakonda Jagadeesh
September 8, 2012
Yes. President Barack Obama's commitment to promote Renewables is total and so is his concern on Climate change.
Dr.A.Jagadeesh Nellore(AP),India
E-mail: anumakonda.jagadeesh@gmail.com
James Holtzman
James Holtzman
September 8, 2012
Yes, I agree. The administration current record is spotty. And this administration turned their back on a carbon bill when it was ready to be signed and on his desk early in his administration in favor of health care (what I still believe was a mistake). But, that does not change the fact that everyone of the Republican candidates is a climate denier and Romney has plans to kill the 30% RE Federal Tax Credit so the fossil fuel industry can continue to have it both ways (denouncing RE incentives while crying foul when such issues (i.e., oil depletion allowance) are put on the block. It is crystal clear that the country is run by big money when the centralized energy industry sees the small incentives we currently have in place as a threat to their continued rape of the country and the environment. RE, "wind and PV provide more than 40% in employment than coal per dollar of investment". Ref:The Work That Goes Into Renewable Energy, by. V Singh...
JOBS, JOBS, JOBS. "It's the economy, stupid!!!"
Thomas Poppitz
Thomas Poppitz
September 8, 2012
To the first "Anonomous" poster above -- It's a myth that they had total control of Congress. The Republicans had completely stacked the "staff" seats behind the scenes (that you don't see) with people absolutely hostile to renewable energy. This is the legacy of Dick Cheney's "energy policy" and huge lobbying funding from the Koche Brothers and the like. The Republicans then went on to block an unprecedented number of Presidential appointees -- they same higher positions appointees that would then replace those hostile staff members who were upholding Mitch McConnell's directive to kill anything-Obama. Regretfully some of this nonsense still persisted today which absolutely requires reform! I personally regret that Obama burned the bulk of his political capital on health care instead of energy reform in his first term. Let's all hope for our kid's future that he makes energy and political reform his primary priorities for his second term.
ANONYMOUS
September 8, 2012
THE PRESIDENT BECOMES MR OBAMA WHEN IT COME TO ENERGY AND HELTH ISSUES


THE RECENT SUPREME COURT PUT ENERGY AND HEALTH ISSUES BACK IN THE HANDS OF THE STATES BUT WITH ADDITIONAL INFORMATION

EPA ISUUES ARE DEAD I KNOW FOR FACT CARON IS ALIVE AND WELL AND TOO MUSH OXYGEN KILLS

WE HAVE BEEN USING RENEWABLE BIO ENERGY FOR YEARS

I HATE WHEN PEOPLE TRY TO PLAY GOD
Peter Bradshaw
Peter Bradshaw
September 8, 2012
At least Obama is talking positively about renewable energy and reducing climate change,unlike his competition Romney who makes snide jokes about rising sea levels. Particularly not funny just after hurricane Isaac left sizable portions of Plaquemines parish in Louisiana under water for days.

As to production subsidies, much of the growth in the IC semiconductor industry in the 1960s and 1970s was due to effective government subsidies via military and NASA purchases of products that otherwise would not have been available for the true commercial market to take off. Yes, part of the subsidy supported R&D as well, but both were key to the establishment of the present industry. I think the same is true now for the RE industry.
ANONYMOUS
September 7, 2012
Pledges made during campaign speeches are just worthless, empty promises. And the ones President Obama made are no different. President Obama and the Democrats had complete control of the federal government from Jan. 2009 until Jan. 2011, and they could have passed any energy legislation that they wanted, including a long term extension of the federal PTC.

As for his claiming success for reducing oil/gas imports, he had little to do with that. That has come about due to fracking making domestic gas production more economic.

The best thing the president and congress can do to help RE in the US is to make better use of the billions of taxpayer dollars being spent for RE. More of it needs to go to R&D efforts, and less to financially subsidizing production. There needs to be real accountability for the use of taxpayer money.

Add Your Comments

To add your comments you must sign-in or create a free account.

  • Create a Free Account!
  • Sign-In
Vince Font

Vince Font

Vince Font is a professional freelance writer specializing in the fields of renewable energy, high tech, travel, and entertainment. Read his blog at www.vincefont.com or follow him on Twitter @vincefont.
  • About
  • Articles
  • Contact
  • FOLLOW
  • CONTACT
Stay Connected
         
To register for our free e-Newsletters, create your free account here:

Editors' Picks

  • America's Real Problem with Solar Energy
  • EU Debate Over Climate Change Policy Could Dampen Renewable Energy Growth
  • Massachusetts Resets Its Solar Energy Bar, Four Years Early

Most Commented

  • 17
    The Economic Case for Divesting from Fossil Fuels
  • 12
    Breakdown: Penetration of Renewable Energy in Selected Markets
  • 12
    Fracking and Solar: Friends, Foes or the Bridge to Clean Energy Adoption?
  • 4
    China Solar Update: Trina Improves, Suntech Scores Extension, Beijing Awaits EU Tariff Decision

Total Access Partners

Growing Your Business? Learn More about Total Access
  • ImagineSolar
  • AR Power Company, Ltd.
  • Valentin Software, Inc - providing Solar Design Software
  • EcoFasten Solar
  • Kipp & Zonen
  • 3TIER
  • UnThink Solar
  • SunHedge
News
  • Renewable Energy
  • Solar Energy
  • Wind Energy
  • Bioenergy
  • Geothermal Energy
  • Hyrdo Power
  • Blogs
  • Video
  • Finance
Resources
  • Companies
  • Products
  • Careers
  • Events
  • Webcasts
  • White Papers
  • Magazines
  • Press Releases
  • e-Newsletters
Company
  • About Us
  • Our Team
  • Contact Us
  • Advertising & Services
  • Privacy Policy
  • Terms & Conditions
  • Site Map
Network Partners - Magazines
  • Hydro Review Magazine
  • Hydro Review Worldwide Magazine
  • Renewable Energy World Magazine
Network Partners - Events
  • Power-Gen 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 Africa
  • Renewable Energy World Conference & Expo India
  • HydroVision International
  • HydroVision Brazil
  • HydroVision India
  • HydroVision Russia
© Copyright 1999-2013 RenewableEnergyWorld.com - All rights reserved.
RenewableEnergyWorld.com - World's #1 Renewable Energy Network for news & Information