Presidential Candidates Clash Over Energy Policy During Second Debate
| in News Departments > Policy Watch |
 Disagreement over gasoline prices and oil companies' drilling leases led to some of the candidates' most contentious exchanges of the night. Overall, however, Romney and Obama wound up stressing similar platforms: U.S. energy independence and their support of all types of energy - both fossil fuels and renewable sources such as solar. "[W]e can't just produce traditional sources of energy; we've also got to look to the future," Obama said, noting that his administration has "doubled clean energy production, like wind and solar and biofuels." Obama added that under his presidency, oil imports have fallen to the lowest level seen in 16 years, and he plans to continue to make the development of natural gas a priority. According to Romney, however, Obama's restrictions on oil and gas drilling have resulted in a decline in domestic production of these sources on federal lands. An energy policy paper released by the Romney campaign in August calls for removing regulatory hurdles to developing all types of energy. In Tuesday's debate, Romney reiterated his support of making full use of "our oil, our coal, our gas, our nuclear, our renewables." "I believe very much in our renewable capabilities - ethanol, wind, solar will be an important part of our energy mix," he continued. "But what we don't need is to have the president keeping us from taking advantage of oil, coal and gas." Although Obama and Romney did not delve into specific solar incentives, renewable energy reappeared later in the debate as the candidates discussed the wind production tax credit's (PTC) looming year-end expiration, which has already had a detrimental effect on the wind energy industry. Some solar executives fear that a similar cliff could occur in the solar sector as the scheduled 2016 expiration of the investment tax credit approaches. Romney has stated that he does not support extending the PTC - a position Obama criticized as "not an energy strategy for the future." Obama also called out Romney for the latter's characterizations of green energy jobs, such as wind industry jobs in Iowa and Colorado, as "imaginary." "I don't have a policy of stopping wind jobs in Iowa … they're not phantom jobs," Romney countered. "They're real jobs. I appreciate wind jobs in Iowa and across our country. I appreciate the jobs in coal and oil and gas." Staying neutral? As the debate played out, the solar sector's leadership and professionals actively weighed in on social media. The Solar Energy Industries Association (SEIA) led an effort on Twitter to tout statistics on the industry's job-creation power and other accomplishments. But as the election race heats up in its final weeks, some solar professionals have noticed what they believe is illogical neutrality in SEIA's approach to presidential politics. Despite Obama and Romney's similar debate-night rhetoric about an "all of the above" energy strategy, the two candidates have presented plans with starkly different implications for the solar sector. Back in August, SEIA's largely supportive statement in response to Romney's official energy paper - which calls for major cutbacks in government spending on renewable energy - raised a few eyebrows. During the debate, some also questioned the accuracy of a tweet from Rhone Resch, president and CEO of SEIA, who wrote, "Romney believes in renewables - wind and solar" - but did not mention any of Obama's solar initiatives. Resch explains the careful approach that the group must take as it navigates the maze of Washington politics. "As a trade association, we have a pretty structured policy not to endorse one candidate over another," he tells Solar Industry. Ultimately, the group must maintain a balance between reflecting the legislative priorities of its members and keeping lines of communication friendly with politicians of all persuasions. "You have to hedge your bets and work with whoever gets elected," Resch points out. Resch notes that Obama has done a "great job" supporting solar deployment during his presidency, and that the Romney and Obama camps emphasize different types of energy in their respective platforms. However, he adds, both candidates endorse renewables - and both parties can expect to continue to hear from SEIA's legislative outreach team. "We are working with both campaigns and both parties to advance solar energy," Resch says. "We're spending a significant amount of time educating them about the importance of solar to the economy." Even in the case of candidates whose policies are perceived as blatantly unfriendly to the solar sector, SEIA avoids public rebuke. "In that type of education, criticism doesn't play a particularly productive role," Resch explains. As for the "Romney believes in renewables" tweet, Resch says that - like many industry professionals watching the debate - he was simply excited to see solar receive several specific shout-outs from both sides of the aisle. During George W. Bush's administration, mentions of solar power were few and far between, he notes. Resch remains optimistic about the future of the industry, no matter who is occupying the White House in January. "I'm confident that both candidates will embrace solar and its potential," he predicts. |
| |
 |
Comments
 | nick dalacu | Reply |
| 19 Oct : 06:13 | ||
Presidential Candidates Clash Over Energy Policy During Second Debate The republicans learned to tell “not for profit” institutions that they can lose their status if they get involved in politics. But is it politics to say as you are convinced it is in the field where you are a specialist? | ||
| ||||||||
| Tdub | Reply |
| 19 Oct : 07:11 | ||
Presidential Candidates Clash Over Energy Policy During Second Debate Romney only mentions solar to look good. I'm afraid he'd let the industry die away just like Reagan did. | ||
| Upontheroof | Reply |
| 19 Oct : 07:56 | ||
Presidential Candidates Clash Over Energy Policy During Second Debate It's time for solar to stand on its own. This country cannot afford to subsidize ANY energy source. Eliminate all governmental subsidies for all energy production and we will still have the lowest cost energy in the world. Let the free market choose and if it turns out that it just isn't time yet for solar, well, then, try again later. | ||
| ||||||||
| ||||||||
| ||||||||
| Bagman | Reply |
| 19 Oct : 09:13 | ||
Presidential Candidates Clash Over Energy Policy During Second Debate SEIA is pandering to politicians who are pandering to voters. But we don't have to play the game that way. Let's speak the truth and let the people decide. Solar not only makes sense for the environment, it also helps create jobs locally. If we had a sustained national policy to support the industry, we might even grow the manufacturing sector. Instead, we've ceded that role to China. | ||
| Rod | Reply |
| 19 Oct : 10:14 | ||
Presidential Candidates Clash Over Energy Policy During Second Debate The approach that the current adminstration has taken has been PR mess for solar... so many Americans now think of solar industry tied to " products & companies that fail " . I hear everyday how so many people think of us as scammers , taking tax payer money to enrich themselves , buy influence and bankrupt companies , then walk away . Billions and billions of dollars have been wasted ... it is hard enough to compete as it is and the bad decisions by current adminstration has made it harder... | ||
| BUYUSA | Reply |
| 19 Oct : 11:01 | ||
Presidential Candidates Clash Over Energy Policy During Second Debate I think SEIA should work with both political parties.. unfortunately... Romney and Republicans keep using Solyndra as an example for Solar energy failture.. Remember back in spring he did campaign speech outside Solyndra's closed HQ?! So I DO NOT BUY Romney saying now he supports renewables.... frankly I think Romne will say ANTHING to gt elected... -he has flip flopped on many issues... What is SEAI doing with money conributed and our Dues? I am in Florida -a swing state with 29 electorial votes! .. I do not see any ads on solar working...We need more sucess stories about solar and other renewables so the voting public understands solar is here now, more practical than ever... It is also important to court congrssmen/women from both parties -remembr they write the laws !.. the president hen gets to sign or veto laws.. And while solar and wind have been getting subsidies and grants .. so has coal, oil, nat. gas... It is in our countries national security and economic interests to promote renewables incliding wind and solar... so in future we will have low cost diversified energy supply... | ||
| Nick | Reply |
| 19 Oct : 11:10 | ||
Presidential Candidates Clash Over Energy Policy During Second Debate I think that any administration is intimidated and manipulated by lobbyists. When it is about solar, it is almost impossible for a politician to use his own judgement. Big business knows that and use it merciless. If the business model for solar manufacturers is not changed, the plenitude of renewable energy will come too late and at an enormous cost. God forbid! PS: maybe somebody would like to talk here about an alternative business model. | ||
| Flyboy | Reply |
| 19 Oct : 11:30 | ||
Presidential Candidates Clash Over Energy Policy During Second Debate As Mitt Romney continues his Magical Mystery Tour and panders to anyone with a heartbeat; listening to his words carefully during the last debate, it is apparent he is beholden to the oil/gas industry and will make certain that renewable energy will die a painful death should he be elected POTHUS. | ||
| solarvern@hotmail.com | Reply |
| 19 Oct : 11:34 | ||
Presidential Candidates Clash Over Energy Policy During Second Debate If it aint good for everyone then its not really that good. How good is the Sun it is good for everything ,solar is it ! Save the very nature of all, good begats good | ||
| CRL | Reply |
| 19 Oct : 14:13 | ||
Presidential Candidates Clash Over Energy Policy During Second Debate I think the strategy of working with both parties is smart--ultimately, whichever administration gets elected will make the rules that govern this industry. Personally, I have experienced the success of providing incentives for entrepreneurs who are dedicated and willing to take personal risk to develop PV systems. I think that US policy should continue to support these initiatives by providing access to capital while still maintaining an entrepreneurial approach which preserves personal responsibility. The result will be social good and sustainable economic growth. www.crlsolar.com | ||
| ||||||||
| jw@solarscapellc.com | Reply |
| 19 Oct : 18:12 | ||
Presidential Candidates Clash Over Energy Policy During Second Debate I, too, am an "energy voter." I, too, see all of the ads placed for "clean coal." I'm aware of the benefits provided by natural gas. I'm disgusted by all the subsidies and tax relief provided for "dirty oil". Solar energy has become a step-child. How many jobs will be LOST if emergent EV manufacturing (and its support system) is throttled. The utilities and their friends made out like bandits under Section 1603. Letting them get their "noses under the tent" was the greatest recent example of "them that has, gets." It is time to encourage "Distributed Generation" and storage of clean power for use on the spot (or forwarded to utilities at hours of peak consumption. These are minor issues. Hold the candidates' feet to the fire Monday night. Force discussion of specifics on all fronts! I suggest we "drone" the Iranian Hitler as well as a few of the miscreants from the "Arab Spring". They killed 4 good men. Let's don't spend more lives or treasure on them. This is war (and should be handled accordingly). JW | ||
| 102743 | Reply |
| 19 Oct : 21:14 | ||
Presidential Candidates Clash Over Energy Policy During Second Debate Fossil fuel campaign $ is going to Romney at a 50 to 1 ratio over Obama. That tells you the story. Renewables are coming into direct competition with the fossil fuel boys. They are pushing back heavily before it's too late. They funded the campaign against the climate crisis as a baseline for the anti-renewables propaganda. Luckily the game is world wide and they will lose in the end. | ||
| Nick | Reply |
| 20 Oct : 07:37 | ||
Presidential Candidates Clash Over Energy Policy During Second Debate Ladies and gentlemen: Check out “CRL Solar”!! It should become a model of new “solar companies”. CRL obviously is on a learning curve but is a healthy one. Same model should be used to support a “Pleiades” of manufacturers of solar equipment (where supply chain is not overwhelming). Very large solar projects, of any type, will only put Godzillas on the move. They will trample on everything! | ||
| Neither Candidate Will Be Good For the USA | Reply |
| 23 Oct : 12:40 | ||
Presidential Candidates Clash Over Energy Policy During Second Debate http://economyincrisis.org/content/three-warning-signs-america-is-losing-the-global-clean-energy-race EXCERPT: the fundamentals of America’s clean energy economy are not strong. The warning signs are staring us in the face. The first sign is America’s dwindling investments in clean energy innovation.... The second warning sign is America losing the clean energy trade war with China.... The third warning sign is America’s failure to effectively support clean energy manufacturing. Bankrupt clean energy producers have become house-hold names – Solyndra, Evergreen Solar, and Beacon Power to name a few – but the overall trend is more troubling. America’s global share of solar exports has fallen from 30 percent in 2000 to 7 percent today... America losing the global clean energy race is not set in stone. The United States must triple its investments in innovation to make clean energy cheap and competitive everywhere. It must aggressively fight international green mercantilism to level the playing field. And it must implement a cohesive national manufacturing strategy that will help all manufacturing sectors not just clean energy.... END EXCERPT The USA "must implement a cohesive national manufacturing strategy that will help all manufacturing sectors not just clean energy" --this is so true. "Free trade" policies are incentivizing the dismantling and export of America's industrial ecosystem, something that will not be easily rebuilt as we lose our edge in sector after sector, as the skills and knowledge and capacities disappear, leaving our country exposed as the pathetic thing we are becoming: unable to make the things we use and, as the dollar loses international reserve currency status, unable to import the dirty energy on which we depend. Unfortunately, the Dems and Repubs agree that we must continue the free trade policies liquidating the American middle class and future prosperity for the sake of quick profits and bonuses to the 1% getting rich on offshoring. | ||
Submit comment
