I Expected More

Today I read on Next Big Future about Obama’s recently announced clean energy goals. The key is his commitment to “catalyze private sector efforts to build a ‘clean energy future'” with 15 billion a year of federalm money. While this is nice, sure, it’s certainly a lot less than I expected. For an annual budget of almost 3 trillion a year, this breaks down to about a half of one percent of the total.  We spend almost 20 times that amount on the interest on the national debt alone. Forgive me if I don’t take this as a sign of Obama’s seriousness to renewable energy. We should be spending that much on fusion research alone (if not more), no matter solar, wind, geothermal, and other long shot renewables.

It’s early, of course, and he’s not even president yet. There may be a whole lot of inventive and smart things coming other than this to spur the “green energy revolution”. This, though, certainly isn’t it.

3 responses to “I Expected More

  1. If this is to based on reduction of carbon emissions, then I think exactly ZERO tax dollars should spent on it. There is still no proven science to qualify how much effect – I’m not stupid enough to say none – our CO2 emissions are having on the climate.

    That’s the problem with federal subsidies; they’re attached to political goals as opposed to logical goals.

    Now, if the focus was on sustainable domestic energy production instead of “greenhouse gas reduction” I’d be all for it.

  2. I wasn’t really talking about his cap and trade shell game he’s setting up. It’ll likely fail just like Europe’s is failing. As soon as it actually threatened to slow their economy further, they started the process of modification to their own rules, taking out most of the animal’s teeth. We’ll probably do the same.

    No, I was just referring to the modest 15 billion a year for energy research. There are lots and lots of reasons to develop clean energy other than any potential harm that anthropogenic climate change might pose to us. At the very least, not having to rely upon some of the most odious regimes on Earth for our energy would be awfully nice.

  3. Oh, I agree and wholeheartedly. It just that in politics there are agendas attached to those funds. In this case it would be the unproven anthropogenic climate change. Good ideas would remain unfunded and backwatered due to not meeting this criteria.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s