President Obama spent his weekly address talking about renewable energy and the jobs that come with that growing industry. American jobs for American workers, in an area that is vital to the future of the United States in so many different ways. The President is on the right track here, despite the naysayers. And for those who advocate for only utilizing the source of power that is the cheapest today that attitude will leave us in the grips of a dependence on foreign oil that endangers the national security interests of this country, now and especially in the future. As China leaps ahead of us in this field we are being positioned to convert to renewables, and then purchase all of the tools to do that from China. From the New York Times:
These efforts to dominate renewable energy technologies raise the prospect that the West may someday trade its dependence on oil from the Mideast for a reliance on solar panels, wind turbines and other gear manufactured in China.
“Most of the energy equipment will carry a brass plate, ‘Made in China,’ ” said K. K. Chan, the chief executive of Nature Elements Capital, a private equity fund in Beijing that focuses on renewable energy.
The President has this one right, and Republican pledges to halt critical American investment in this field has to be considered as maybe the most destructive policy plank in their playbook.
Read the New York Times story here.
Bill Manzi.com 
Your Honor,
As a committed ‘naysayer’ who has heard this speech several times (yaaaawwwnnn, excuse me). Actually you will find most of these green industries are funded by you Democrats.
It’s a lie, just like all his other commentary. Actually, your honor, just listen to those Oboma worshiping voter who have let him have it at those town meeting messes.
Naysayer Jules
Jules
LikeLike
Jules,
Yes, we must disagree on this one. The countries that recognize the need all feel that the future costs of inaction are so large (based on the expected diminishing of fossil fuels) that they are making the necessary investments in the energies of the future. I guess you think the Chinese government is wrong as well.
Bill
LikeLike
Your Honor,
I have been hearing about the scarcity of carbon fuels since the gas lines of the 70’s.
You rightly point out that all over the world very little private money is going into the development of these systems because they are not ready for “Prime Time’. They are more expensive than existing systems.
Local example. Cape Wind. I thought it was privately funded but, in fact, it is heavily subsidized. Then a private power company agreed to buy a contracted amount of electricity from Cape Wind and charge their rate payers 4 to 5 times the amount they pay for regular carbon produced energy.
I don’t want to pay a higher amount than is available.
Wind and solar are not ready for large operations. There are small wire free systems used on a small scale. A remote sensor. Portable signs even some expanded local use.
The president is a community organizer and this his political ploy to make us think he is working on the future. It’s bogus.
Jules
LikeLike
Jules,
A couple of points. I do agree that subsidy is needed in order to gain deployment of solar and wind resources. The disagreement is over whether that subsidy is worth it. The gas lines of the 1970’s were not caused by a lack of supply but by an embargo by the Arab states angry over our Middle East politics. So I think that I come at this from several different perspectives.
1) The national balance of trade deficit is not just with China but has been caused by years on over reliance on foreign oil. It needs to be stopped. We are a debtor nation in part because of our huge thirst for imported oil. The trade deficit numbers are almost as corrosive as the national deficit numbers. It needs to be addressed.
2) The above does not mention the national security implications of reliance on oil exporters from the Middle East. The implications of that reliance are clear, and negative.
3) The supply of fossils is finite. We all know that. And while the exact nature of reserves is debatable it is not unreasonable to assume that at some point we will need alternative sources for that reason alone. It is incumbent on governments throughout the world to make provisions for that time. Most are making huge investments, like the Chinese. Just cannot for the life of me see the argument that demands we exacerbate our balance of payment problems, national security issues, and long term price issues because some object to government involvement.
Bill
LikeLike
Your Honor,
Before I answer your last entry let me suggest you read the Cape Wind story in yesterday’s herald.
Note: our government is incapable of running anything. When you see private investment going to Green Things then it is getting ready for prime time.
Jules
LikeLike
Jules,
The government is not running Cape Wind, but rather subsidizing the operation. And Cape Wind opponents point to the higher costs of energy as a reason not to do the project. As I said in my earlier post if price alone is going to be the criteria then you would not have any renewable energy. And that, in my opinion, would be a mistake.
Bill
LikeLike
Your Honor,
I do not share your Global Warming anxiety.
Business exists where profits are made and private investment expects a return on its risk.
I have done contract engineering for various government entities. My work for DOE (department of energy) was eye opening. Even you would be appalled.
Jules.
LikeLike