On Tuesday, a group of the nation’s most formidable business leaders — including Microsoft founder Bill Gates and Bank of America Chairman Chad Holliday – gathered in Washington, DC to deliver a full-throated warning to lawmakers: increase the federal government’s investment in energy innovation or risk losing out on a $5 trillion global industry.

“If the U.S. fails to invent new technologies and create new markets and new jobs that will drive the transformation and revitalization of the $5 trillion global energy industry, we will have lost an opportunity to lead in what is arguably the largest and most pervasive technology sector in the world,” they stated.

The seven-member group, called the American Energy Innovation Council (AEIC), also includes Jeffrey Immelt, CEO of General Electric; Norman Augustine, former CEO of Lockheed Martin and undersecretary of the U.S. Army; John Doerr, a leading venture capitalist; Ursula Burns, CEO of Xerox Corp.; and Tim Solso, CEO of Cummins Inc.  The group gained national recognition in 2010 in releasing its first report, A Business Plan for America’s Energy Future, which called for a three-fold increase in federal energy innovation budgets.

This week, the group released a new report called Catalyzing American Ingenuity: The Role of Government in Energy Innovation. In a rare move for high-profile business leaders, the report directly challenges the notion that government should cut investments in technology and calls energy innovation spending “a top national priority.”

“In these debates, some argue that government serves little essential role in innovation… Based on history and on our own experiences leading innovative companies, we disagree,” states the report. “In a time of austerity, the last thing one should do is under-fund R&D and high technology priorities… to do so is the equivalent of removing an engine from an overloaded aircraft in order to reduce its weight.”

(more…)

As President Obama emphasized earlier this week in his State of the Union address, U.S. clean energy innovation has a crucial role to play in tackling climate change and ensuring the future vitality of the United States economy. However, at least two other factors – creating a demand “pull” for clean energy sources and shifting towards more sustainable lifestyles – are also crucially important and should not disappear from our policy discussions.

As my colleague Teryn Norris has argued here, the Obama Administration’s commitment to U.S. innovation – especially in the clean energy field – is a wise decision, and we can only hope that legislative victories follow. But while energy innovation can indeed boost U.S. economic leadership, it won’t be enough if we also hope to address the further problems of energy independence and climate change. In other words, technological innovation shouldn’t become the only focus of our energy discussion.

With repeated disappointments in climate and energy policy in recent years, it is indeed tempting to give up on conventional policy mechanisms and hope that a new technology will solve the problem. Some thinkers, such as Time magazine’s Bryan Walsh have argued recently that “putting a price tag on pollution isn’t solving our climate-change woes. It’s time to invest our muscle—and money—in breakthrough innovation.” Although I would be the last person to question the benefits of technological breakthroughs, I believe we shouldn’t overlook how policy, economics and human behavior ultimately determine how much we’re able to take advantage of these breakthroughs.

(more…)

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:”

(more…)

A Bipartisan Strategy for Energy Leadership

By Teryn Norris & Clifton Yin
Published by The Huffington Post

When President Obama and key Senate leaders meet today to reach a compromise on energy and climate legislation, they should strongly consider increasing federal investment in clean energy technology to at least $15 billion annually. This is a comprehensive third way strategy to improve U.S. energy independence, economic competitiveness, and climate security, and it deserves bipartisan support.

We are a Democrat and Republican. One of us campaigned for Barack Obama in 2008, the other as a delegate for John McCain. One of us worked on energy and climate policy for the progressive Breakthrough Institute, while the other worked on similar issues for the conservative American Enterprise Institute. We disagree on a wide range of issues, and we hold different economic philosophies.

Despite our differences, we are strongly united behind a serious federal agenda for clean energy innovation. Regardless of the future of cap and trade, robust federal investment in clean energy technology can effectively tackle both energy and climate policy reform. In addition to reducing our oil addiction, it can help build new export-oriented and manufacturing-intensive industries, seize global market share, drive down the price of clean energy technologies, and accelerate the transition to a cleaner, low-carbon economy.

(more…)

Edison_Time_Magazine_CoverWelcome to our new Time Magazine readers.  Americans for Energy Leadership was just featured by Time’s must-read Special Annual History Cover Issue on Thomas Edison and U.S. technological leadership (July 5th), called “The Electrifying Edison.”  Time’s lead energy and environment reporter Bryan Walsh wrote:

“Inventors like Edison helped build America’s unparalleled scientific and technological dominance, a dominance that, more than any other single factor, made the 20th century the American century… the federal government played an important role through its own research laboratories and investments in education. 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.” (emphasis added)

The article explains the critical importance of large-scale federal investment today in clean energy technology and education for the sake of America’s global leadership and competitiveness, adding Time’s voice to the ever-growing national “energy innovation consensus.”  It cites statistics from the previous report I co-authored with Breakthrough Institute and Information Technology & Innovation Foundation, “Rising Tigers, Sleeping Giant,” a widely acclaimed study containing the first comprehensive international review of clean energy competitiveness (see our updated “The Power to Compete” policy memo for more).  The article continues:

“It’s ironic that nowhere is America’s position in science and technology more threatened than in the industry that Edison essentially invented: energy. Clean power could be to the 21st century what aeronautics and the computer were to the 20th, but the U.S. is already falling behind. China, South Korea and Japan are set to invest more than $500 billion combined in clean technology over the next five years, while the U.S. is likely to invest less than $200 billion, and that’s assuming clean-energy legislation makes it into law. Meanwhile, Congress remains largely paralyzed.

The article, available in news stands this week, concludes by pointing to Bill Gates and Jeffrey Immelt, who recently joined forces with other business titans to launch the American Energy Innovation Council, calling for at least $16 billion per year in federal energy RD&D.

“In mid-June, a group of corporate titans, including Microsoft co-founder Bill Gates and GE CEO Jeffrey Immelt, descended on Washington to call for U.S. spending on energy research to be tripled.  They noted that the government today spends less than $5 billion a year on energy research and development – not counting temporary stimulus projects – compared with $30 billion annually on health research and more than $80 billion on military R&D. At a time when energy is more important than ever – and while oil from a blown well bleeds into the Gulf of Mexico – the U.S. no longer seems willing to create the environment that can engender the innovation we were once known for. “The world is not going to wait for the United States to lead,” said Immelt.  “This is about innovation.  This is about competition. This is about energy security.”

Some erosion of the U.S.’s scientific dominance is inevitable in a globalized world and might not even be a bad thing. Tomorrow’s innovators could arise in Shanghai or Seoul or Bangalore.  And Edison would counsel against panic – as he put it once, “Whatever setbacks America has encountered, it has always emerged as a stronger and more prosperous nation.”  But the U.S. will inevitably decline unless we invest in the education and research necessary to maintain the American edge.  The next generation of Edisons could be waiting.  But unless we move quickly, they won’t have the tools they need to thrive.”

On June 10th, a group of the country’s top business leaders including Bill Gates and Jeff Immelt launched a new initiative, the American Energy Innovation Council, calling for major new federal investments in clean energy technology research, development, and demonstration — at least $16 billion annually, more than triple the current level.

Their report, “A Business Plan for America’s Energy Future,” was released a day after the Breakthrough Institute and Americans for Energy Leadership published a new policy brief on the Kerry-Lieberman American Power Act, “The Power to Compete,” providing the most comprehensive assessment of the bill’s energy innovation provisions to date.  It finds that Kerry-Lieberman does not contain a comprehensive innovation strategy would only increase federal clean energy RD&D investment by as little as $2.2 billion per year.

Below is a roundup of news coverage on the American Energy Innovation Council to date:

(more…)