We (USA) gave up on being clean energy leaders decades ago and now China has emerged in our place.
Now, between meddling in our universities, research granting system, and an insane HHS Secretary, we’re headed on the same path in a larger number of other science and technical fields, especially Medicine.
The US has never been a clean energy leader.
The article mentioned solar tech being first patented in the US, and even as recently as the 70s the government injected cash to push it forward.
So maybe not “Clean energy leader” per se, but certainly tech leader in the clean energy space.
A tech leader 55 years ago isnt a tech leader anymore. I donated a dollar to a solar development program, which is a larger percentage of my wealth than the US put forward of its. Am I a tech leader now too?
Because we gave up on it decades ago.
The correct wording would be to give up on becoming, giving up on being indicates that they were at the point they gave up.
Why are patents on clean energy developments allowed to begin with?
The same reason we allow them on any other technology — they create a financial incentive for innovation.
Because you need to horde the technology in order to secure private financing that builds the industrial productive capacity.
Who else is going to cover the up front costs? The government? Fuck you, that’s Communism! You’re going to kill 100 Zillion people
awful lot of astroturfing for China recently.
They’ve gone ahead and built a solar and wind power manufacturing juggernaut. Its a big deal for anybody like me who wants those deployed at scale. You’ll find that I’m also critical of China on other topics.
Why is NYTimes saying this?
In the useless hope that it will convince people who otherwise don’t care about “green energy” that it’s something they should care about. If it ever worked in the past, the effect was minimal at best. As evidenced by the fact that its need is still “hotly debated” in this backwater shithole of a country.
Is it debated? Maybe there are Fox News talking points to drag renewables, but here on the ground, in the most conservative place I’ve ever lived, solar is booming. I cannot imagine talking to anyone, of any political stripe, would debate the usefulness.
I have a feeling home solar is big for the obvious reason: lower power bills. Depending on needs and future residence plans, they pay themselves off in somewhere between 12-20 years. What they tend not to like is government investment in research and municipal projects to build out green energy in the grid. That’s communism!
Plus, (human-caused) climate change denial is certainly back on the rise. It’s more than talking points with many of the right wing politicians. It’s funny. I remember when global warming “wasn’t a thing.” Then, after it was changed to “climate change,” they kept banging on about the global warming hoax with BS like snowballs on the Senate floor. Then they came around to, “OK, climate change is real, but it’s cyclical. This isn’t caused by us!” They keep tiptoeing to the left on this, and recently, they’ve regressed back to “clean coal,” and “drill baby drill!”
Even if the voters know it’s bullshit, and believe climate change is man made and a real problem, it isn’t affecting their voting, so what they actually think doesn’t really matter. At least not until they force their party to get its head out of its ass.
Oh, and “is it debated?” Among rational adults, not at all.
I dont mind them harping on it, being afraid of being overtaken is the only thing that’s driven US tech since the Space Race started (as long as we ignore finding ways to swindle or torture poor folk)
I just think it’s sad that the country needs a “Bad Guy” for the government to think about driving serious innovation that doesn’t just benefit the military (see: DARPA &, to a lesser extent, the Interstate Highway System).
