After Cap-and-Trade, Next on the Clean Energy Agenda… Keeping it American
So far, much of the clean energy debate has focused on cap-and-trade, but little attention has been paid to the other rationale put out by the Obama administration in defense of its green energy plan – JOBS. That changed yesterday, with the (unofficial) roll out of the administration’s new clean energy talking point: “Green energy creates jobs…” or something like that.
This PR-driven White House engineered a two-part roll out. First, it began with an event, the White House Energy Forum, (PR 101: create an event to decimate a specific message), moderated by Energy Secretary Steven Chu and Commerce Secretary Gary Locke. Next came a presidential speech – that was earlier today at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, where President Obama dusted up old campaign rhetorics on green energy as a job creator.
(The Environmental Capital’s Keith Johnson take on the speech: “There was little new.” See here for the whole speech or here for GER’s take on it.)
Will this tested talking point stick? Time will tell. But with the Senate getting ready to debate Kerry – Boxer, energy and carbon pricing is slated for a comeback on the 24-hour media cycle. So, White House PR pros are working overtime to ensure that the right message gets out: Forget cap-and-trade, this bill is about jobs.
Since the days of the campaign, Obama has been selling his green energy plan as a massive job generator. But the “Made in the USA” message is not just a PR concoction. There’s definitely concern at the White House that its much touted cleantech revolution ends benefiting China rather than the U.S.
In a speech at the White House Energy Forum, Commerce Secretary Locke lifted a veil on these concerns:
We were in China to pursue clean energy opportunities there. It was an eye-opening experience, and I can tell you—the Chinese are making some major advances in this area that we had better pay attention to.
Locke warned that China is investing some $9 billion a month in clean energy (the energy portion of the U.S. stimulus accounts for a little more than $3 billion a month).
He added:
Those investments are designed to turn China into the global destination for clean energy innovation. And if we don’t get our act together, we’re going to be watching the capital, the businesses and the good paying jobs ending up in Shanghai instead of Silicon Valley or other communities across America.
Coincidentally (or not) while the White House was deploying its new jobs message, up on Capitol Hill the House approved — 310 to 106 — H.R. 3585, the Solar Technology Roadmap Act, which seeks to flow more private and public money to solar startups developing cutting edge technology. Why just solar – why not include all clean energies? We’ve reached out to bill sponsor Rep. Gabrielle Giffords (D-Ariz.) and will update you when we hear back from her.
On H.R. 3585, Rep. Steve Israel (D-N.Y.), a co-chair of the House “green” caucus, said:
H.R. 3585 will help to ensure that solar energy technology, and the clean-energy jobs that come with it, are produced here in the United States.
A White House event, a presidential speech, a congressional vote… as of yesterday the White House has rolled out the talking points likely to frame the upcoming (Kerry – Boxer) energy debate: It’s about jobs and it’s about China.
It’s very interesting that when the polls get bad on legislation, the Administration finds a way to change the name or speak about in different terms in order to get its agenda passed. That doesn’t change the fact that millions of Americans will lose their jobs. It’s also curious that only certain green energy options are being explored. This is bad legislation that will ultimately hurt the US economy and not do anything for the environment. Visit http://tiny.cc/pxIgi to voice opposition to cap and trade.
Yes green energy needs to be discussed and debated. It is not something that can be adopted overnight and yet there must be a concerted effort to adopt it. I’m sure not all will be happy but with proper planning and investment in the right direction one can hope to make it as easy as possible. I think companies like ABB and Pacific Crest Transformers who are doing work in energy efficient transformers need to be recognized and encouraged.