The Trump Administration tends to raise concerns whenever its gaze lands on an issue to address. It’s particularly confusing when the President addresses one aspect of the problem and his cabinet ministers deal with another aspect, often with contrasting views.
In the renewable energy sector, such confusion is no different.
President Donald Trump loves the notion of the solar and wind industries creating new, and higher paying technology-based jobs. He has even gone so far as to threaten to slap tariffs on China for dumping low-cost solar modules on the American market [1], in order to protect existing American jobs.
However, his Energy Secretary, Rick Perry, is concerned that the rise of renewable energy sources may be destabilizing America’s electric grid. Perry, in April 2017, raised the concern that renewables “are responsible for forcing the premature retirement of baseload power plants.” Here, Perry is referring to the numerous coal plants being closed by utility companies such as DTE and the shuttering of nuclear power plants by utility operators such as PG&E.
In the renewable energy sector, such confusion is no different.
President Donald Trump loves the notion of the solar and wind industries creating new, and higher paying technology-based jobs. He has even gone so far as to threaten to slap tariffs on China for dumping low-cost solar modules on the American market [1], in order to protect existing American jobs.
However, his Energy Secretary, Rick Perry, is concerned that the rise of renewable energy sources may be destabilizing America’s electric grid. Perry, in April 2017, raised the concern that renewables “are responsible for forcing the premature retirement of baseload power plants.” Here, Perry is referring to the numerous coal plants being closed by utility companies such as DTE and the shuttering of nuclear power plants by utility operators such as PG&E.
Even Perry, in his own analysis, contradicts himself. As industry observer Julian Spector points out, “The arrival in recent years of new solar photovoltaics, concentrating solar power, onshore wind, offshore wind, geothermal and various waste-to-energy systems can only be described as enhancing the diversification of power sources from the previous options of coal, gas, hydro and nuclear. However, Perry incongruously heralds the proliferation of new sources of electrical generation as a ‘diminishing diversity’ of the overall mix.”
So while Donald Trump wants more jobs, Perry is hinting at a return to the old centralized power production model with King Coal [2] and Noble Nuclear holding court. Perry is out of step on so many levels. Economics, for example, don’t support the Energy Secretary’s thesis. Running massive, centralized plants all day makes no sense, when peak power loads can be accommodated by activating “a gas combustion turbine or a large lithium-ion battery exactly when you need extra capacity.” Similarly, building a massive coal or nuclear plant comes with lengthy timelines and prohibitive costs, two factors that did not come into play when “the monopoly utilities didn't have to worry about competition.”
I suspect that Trump will reign in Perry and we’ll see the business rationale for solar and wind to be supported over coal and nuclear. It just makes economic sense, even without the benefit of a reduced carbon footprint being used to promote the renewable energy sector, as was done under the previous White House administration.
The future of solar remains bright and the headwinds for wind energy are abating, despite Secretary Perry’s thoughts.
[1] President Trump is looking at layoffs and project delays at American manufacturing facilities such as Suniva, Mission Solar, Tesla’s Solar City, First Solar, and Panasonic, to determine if action against China is warranted.
[2] King Coal, ironically, is a real partner with renewable energy sources in many applications. Existing coal and new solar, for example, form a good marriage in Kentucky, according to Stephen Lacey, for a couple of reasons. First, “A coal history museum in a small Kentucky town is going solar in order to save up to $10,000 in electricity costs per year.” And second, “Another coal strip mine [project] is considering a [photovoltaic] project of up to 100 megawatts -- both as a way to put the land to use and to put coal miners back to work.”
So while Donald Trump wants more jobs, Perry is hinting at a return to the old centralized power production model with King Coal [2] and Noble Nuclear holding court. Perry is out of step on so many levels. Economics, for example, don’t support the Energy Secretary’s thesis. Running massive, centralized plants all day makes no sense, when peak power loads can be accommodated by activating “a gas combustion turbine or a large lithium-ion battery exactly when you need extra capacity.” Similarly, building a massive coal or nuclear plant comes with lengthy timelines and prohibitive costs, two factors that did not come into play when “the monopoly utilities didn't have to worry about competition.”
I suspect that Trump will reign in Perry and we’ll see the business rationale for solar and wind to be supported over coal and nuclear. It just makes economic sense, even without the benefit of a reduced carbon footprint being used to promote the renewable energy sector, as was done under the previous White House administration.
The future of solar remains bright and the headwinds for wind energy are abating, despite Secretary Perry’s thoughts.
[1] President Trump is looking at layoffs and project delays at American manufacturing facilities such as Suniva, Mission Solar, Tesla’s Solar City, First Solar, and Panasonic, to determine if action against China is warranted.
[2] King Coal, ironically, is a real partner with renewable energy sources in many applications. Existing coal and new solar, for example, form a good marriage in Kentucky, according to Stephen Lacey, for a couple of reasons. First, “A coal history museum in a small Kentucky town is going solar in order to save up to $10,000 in electricity costs per year.” And second, “Another coal strip mine [project] is considering a [photovoltaic] project of up to 100 megawatts -- both as a way to put the land to use and to put coal miners back to work.”