When it comes to green energy, politicians across the spectrum agree renewables have some good qualities, but the point of contention seems to be how much of a push the government should be making to move in that direction.
The House Energy and Commerce Subcommittee on Environment, Manufacturing and Critical Materials conducted a hearing Wednesday to shed some light on whether President Joe Biden is moving too fast on renewable energy and electric vehicles (EVs).
“We must get this right,” Rep. Cathy McMorris Rodgers (R-WA) said in summing up the perspective of Democrats and Republicans. How one defines getting it right, though, varies.
The cost of energy, the effect on the climate, toxic waste from green energy products, forced labor being used in the production of components and reliability of energy delivery are among the myriad concerns. But the biggest one is whether a hurried approach will put America under the thumb of China, which controls a large part of the minerals needed for green-energy products.
In 2021, the U.S. imported $160 million worth of rare earth minerals, an increase from $109 million in 2020, the U.S. Geological Survey said, with 78% of those coming from China. More than 80% of the global supply of solar panels stems from China, and that share is expected to increase to 95% by 2025, Down To Earth reported.
Although the Biden administration has tried to increase domestic production of lithium and other materials, U.S. mining projects face challenges related to environmental regulations, Greenwire reported, putting a damper on this country’s ability to compete with China in terms of accessing the minerals.
“The actions we have seen from the administration have really been contrary to providing that domestic mineral production,” Mark Compton, executive chairman for the American Exploration and Mining Association, told Greenwire. “Right now, permitting is still creating an unfavorable environment for attracting mining investment in the United States.”
Against that backdrop, Republicans emphasized during Wednesday's hearing that they want to slow, not stop, the push to go green.
“Solar and wind energy, and other renewable sources, can and should be part of our energy mix, but not the only part,” Subcommittee Chair Bill Johnson (R-OH) said in criticizing what he termed a “forced march to green” that “is far from over.”
Committee members heard testimony about the reliability and cost of green energy, how much the transportation sector benefits from EVs or is dependent on fossil fuel vehicles, how the Biden administration’s Inflation Reduction Act (IRA) has contributed to the economy, and what needs to be done to reduce America’s dependence on China and other countries that have abusive labor standards.
As an example of abusive labor, an investigation found that Uyghur Muslims in China's Xinjiang province have been forced to participate in labor to help produce solar panels, the BBC reported last year. "The [Chinese] government claims that these programmes are in accordance with PRC [the People's Republic of China] law and that workers are engaged voluntarily, in a concerted government-supported effort to alleviate poverty," according to the report, which was authored by researchers at Sheffield Hallam University in the UK. "However, significant evidence — largely drawn from government and corporate sources — reveals that labour transfers are deployed in the Uyghur Region within an environment of unprecedented coercion, undergirded by the constant threat of re-education and internment."
Ranking member Paul Tonko (D-NY) summarized why Democrats support the green movement. “We know the consequences of unmitigated climate change will be significant. It will harm our environment, public health, our economy and national security,” he said. “If we do not respond to climate change effectively, we will be a poorer, sicker and less competitive nation.”
But the Biden administration’s rushed agenda “empowers the world’s dirtiest polluter, China. It makes America dependent on supply chains that use slave and child labor, it increases poverty and it threatens our national security,” Rodgers said, adding that it is forcing an expensive transition on the American people.
Mark Mills, a senior fellow at the Manhattan Institute, detailed the long-term ramifications of rising energy costs. “Economic growth is the driver of energy demand,” he said, adding that if energy is too expensive, it stifles that growth.
Green energy today, Mills said, is not cost effective, and renewable tech is far from green when you consider what goes into it. One drawback is that wind and solar are low-energy density industries. That means they require more space and machines, per energy unit, compared to conventional power plants.
Although EVs are pricey and will remain so, Ashley Nunes, director of Federal Policy, Climate and Energy at the Breakthrough Institute, testified that there are ways for the country to continue reducing emissions without mandating such a drastic move toward EVs. He cited one success as more fuel-efficient gas vehicles.
Trevor Higgins, senior vice president of the Energy and Environment department at American Progress, talked about how the Inflation Reduction Act (IRA) is creating jobs in the energy sectors and said it gives the country a good chance to reach the sought-after greenhouse emissions reduction by 2030.
“I agree that the policies in the Inflation Reduction Act directly lead to incredible benefits on the ground,” Rep. Frank Pallone (D-NJ) said, adding that they keep the U.S. competitive on the global stage.
Regarding the cost of EVs, Higgins answered a Tonko question by saying there should be price parity with gas cars within three years.
In addition, Daniel Simmons, principal of Simmons Energy and Environment Strategies, told the representatives that if the country wants to get away from depending on China and other nations, we need to increase mining capacity, something that is hard to do in a highly regulatory environment.
“We are at a crossroads,” Rodgers said. “We can choose a path of economic growth, human rights, prosperity, energy security and embrace American energy dominance and innovation to reduce emissions, or we can continue down a path of more reliance on China, less energy affordability and reliability.”
The latter path sacrifices American values, she said.
The main reason Republicans say they want to move toward green energy cautiously is so the country can take on some of the production responsibility; relying too much on China will ultimately be a death knell for America.
“China’s objective is not to save the planet from climate change,” Rep. Rick Palmer (R-GA) said. “China’s objective is is to rule the planet as the sole superpower.”
