Skip to main content

image of President Obama visits to a wind turbine factory
President Obama visits a wind turbine factory
A couple of my conservative friends post on Facebook with glee every time a green energy company that received government loans fails or if the Chevy Volt has problems. They are against spending any tax payer money on research or production of technology that will free us from a dying petroleum based energy system. They are missing the point. The failure of specific companies doesn't mean the technology is faulty. Government support for innovation of technology is actually a common practice and is one reason we enjoy some of the things we have in our lives like computers. It would also strengthen our country against the evildoers.

One of my conservative friends posted me a link to this article:

It is no secret that President Obama's and green-energy supporters' (from both parties) foray into venture capitalism has not gone well. But the extent of its failure has been largely ignored by the press. Sure, single instances garner attention as they happen, but they ignore past failures in order to make it seem like a rare case.

The truth is that the problem is widespread. The government's picking winners and losers in the energy market has cost taxpayers billions of dollars, and the rate of failure, cronyism, and corruption at the companies receiving the subsidies is substantial. The fact that some companies are not under financial duress does not make the policy a success. It simply means that our taxpayer dollars subsidized companies that would've found the financial support in the private market.

President Obama's Taxpayer-Backed Green Energy Failures

Contrary to my conservative friend's belief, just because some green energy businesses have failed doesn't mean the technology is faulty.

Government support for green energy is a good thing due to climate change and we reportedly reached peak oil in 2006. That means we will see higher costs to produce oil and that will trickle down to all finished goods made with oil like plastic and increase transportation costs of goods like food. Any country that is dependent on resources outside its borders is vulnerable so research on green energy is a matter of economic health and national security.

In 2008 the United States imported oil from 10 countries currently on the State Department's Travel Warning List, which lists countries that have "long-term, protracted conditions that make a country dangerous or unstable." These nations include Algeria, Chad, Colombia, the Democratic Republic of the Congo, Iraq, Mauritania, Nigeria, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, and Syria. Our reliance on oil from these countries could have serious implications for our national security, economy, and environment.

Oil Dependence Is a Dangerous Habit

Innovation in the green energy industry is still in the young stage and would benefit from government backing. Conservatives seem to believe that a technology isn't viable unless it can be sustained by the "market". History shows that this idea is wrong.

One huge example is semiconductors. Government funding led to the technology you are using to read this post right now:

The federal government contributed over half of all R&D funds [for the microelectronics industry] until well into the 1970's. The military in turn accounted for the greatest proportion of federal R&D expenditures in the industry for some time after the war (WWII). In only one year, 1966, did the military's portion of the federal R&D spending fall below 50%

By creating, supporting, and disseminating diverse approaches to the technical innovation in semiconductor microelectronics, government agencies were extremely important in the overall development of the microelectronics industry.

Government Support of the Semiconductor Industry

Also from the 40's through the 60's there was a battle between what form microelectronics would take - modular, thin-film, molecular, and integrated. But ironically while integrated circuits became the dominate form, the other forms also could be applied to the integrated format.

Back then the government picked a lot of winners and losers and no one complained. There was not a consumer market for semiconductors like we have now. Imagine if the conservative thinking today was around back in the early days of semiconductors. Would we even have computers we have now? I doubt it.

We need to go full go on government support of green energy development much like we did for the atom bomb, putting a man on the moon, and the arms build up during the cold war. Sure there will be some failures but the point is the long term solution and that takes investment.

For those conservatives who think any investment should be based on a strong business plan I just need to mention the dotcom bubble of the 1990's when billions of dollars were spent on startups who's only accomplishment was having expensive furniture in their loft offices.

Government funding could help unleash the power of our R&D as it has in the past and finally break us of our dependence on fossil fuels. If that happens then no country could touch us.

Why do conservatives fear energy independence?

EMAIL TO A FRIEND X
Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags

?

More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site