Building the Energy Innovation Consensus

As the national debate on federal energy and climate legislation continues to unfold, Americans for Energy Leadership has been working to advance energy innovation and education investment as a critical component, adding to the growing “energy innovation consensus.”   These efforts have been recognized by a number of outlets and experts.  Some recent examples include:

In Time Magazine’s Special History Cover Issue, “The Electrifying Edison,” Bryan Walsh wrote:

“Even when America’s scientific preeminence was threatened by the Soviet Union’s Sputnik launch in 1957, the U.S. only came back stronger. “The federal response to Sputnik was an overwhelming investment in science and engineering education,” says Teryn Norris, director of Americans for Energy Leadership. “That had spillover benefits across the board.”

At the National Journal, in “Bill Will Slight Technology Innovation,” Mark Muro from Brookings Institution wrote:

“As we and many others have been saying for years, the nation badly needs to sign up for a new push for energy system innovation that seeks countless efficiencies but also triples to quintuples today’s anemic baseline level of federal energy innovation R&D. (For some great discussion of this need see recent posts by Microsoft founder Bill Gates, a group of 34 Nobel Laureates, NYT Dot Earth blogger Andy Revkin, and Teryn Norris of Americans for Energy Leadership).”

At New York Times Dot Earth, in “Quantum Dots, Obama and the Energy Quest,” Andrew Revkin wrote:

“I asked Dan Kammen, along with Teryn Norris, an energy policy blogger affiliated with the Breakthrough Instituteto assess the energy innovation report. Their views are appended below.  Interestingly, there’s a decent amount of agreement between Norris and Sean Pool, the author of the Center for American Progress report. Here’s Norris’s take on the innovation analysis, followed by Kammen’s:”

At New York Times Dot Earth, in “A 2-Cent Solution to Help Fuel an Energy Quest,” Andrew Revkin wrote:

“But for [Obama] to really dive in will require jettisoning the status-quo approach to the energy and climate challenge, which still frames global warming mainly as a conventional 20th-century-type pollution problem to be solved with the old tool kit of litigation, legislation and regulation.  Teryn Norris, someone who is clearly part of what I call Generation E, reacted to Obama’s speech with ideas for ways to stimulate the energy innovation pipeline at Huffington Post.”

At The New Republic blog, in “America (Begins to) COMPETE,” Mark Muro and Sarah Rahman wrote:

“On Friday, though, S&T Committee Chairman Bart Gordon (D-TN) used a rare procedure called a division of the question, which allowed separate votes on various parts of the amendment included in the May 13th Motion to Recommit.  This, as Teryn Norris of the Breakthrough Institute explains, effectively allowed the House to pass the bill with a standard majority vote, so that the original bill could be passed with only a few amendments, including a total authorization for five years and approximately $86 billion.”

Leave a Reply