Joe Biden’s new Energy Secretary gives us a taste for his plans for a Green New World
Most people don’t spend their weekdays glued to C-SPAN and coverage of the United States Senate and its committees. Last week, however, the energy and natural resources committee conducted a confirmation hearing for President Biden’s nominee for secretary of energy, Jennifer Granholm.
The committee approved Granholm’s nomination, which was then confirmed 65-34 by the whole Senate. There was no visible drama, no partisan clashes. But, the process was notable for what Granholm said about her intentions while in office, and can tell us a lot about plans for the US green agenda.
Two issues of personnel are worth noting here. Jennifer Granholm was formerly attorney-general and then governor of Michigan, the home of the American motor industry (Ford, General Motors and Chrysler all have their headquarters in the state). The Senate committee is chaired by Senator Joe Manchin, regarded as one of the most conservative Democrats in the Senate, and he represents West Virginia, the second-biggest coal producing state in the union.
During last year’s presidential election, the more radical wing of the Democratic Party lobbied hard for the adoption of the “Green New Deal”. This is a rather nebulous plan—more of a collection of broad principles. It’s aim is to achieve net-zero greenhouse gas emissions by 2030 and ensure the inclusion of various minority groups in the new economy, including indigenous peoples, ethnic minorities, immigrants and those from de-industrialised areas. Biden was conspicuous among Democratic candidates in declining to support the Green New Deal in toto, though he described it as a “crucial framework”.
So what will a Biden environmental policy look like, to judge by the words of the woman who will be in charge of implementing it? Her experience in Michigan, as mentioned above, is important: as governor, she cooperated with the car manufacturers but pressed them to speed up their adoption of electrification. Granholm secured $1.35 billion of federal funding for the Michigan auto industry and worked closely with the White House to secure the bail-out of Chrysler and General Motors in 2009.
By the end of her tenure, federal grants had brought 18 companies working on lithium-ion batteries to the state, which is projected to generate 63,000 jobs.
The administration will be looking to balance environmental radicalism with economic growth and competition. It is committed to achieving a carbon pollution-free energy sector by 2035.
Senator Manchin’s ears will have pricked up at this: West Virginia relies almost wholly on coal for its power, and indeed produces a surplus. He asked Granholm about workers who would be threatened by this shift. “How do we basically keep them in an opportunity situation?”
Granholm had a ready and reassuring answer: her department’s principal focus would be maintaining employment for those currently in doomed carbon-heavy industries. “We cannot leave our people behind”, she affirmed, going on to point out potential opportunities in blue hydrogen and the technology required to support it.
Her summation was comprehensive, and worth repeating in full:
“That hydrogen requires equipment. Who’s making that equipment? If we’re getting that equipment from another country we’re missing an opportunity to put our people to work,” she said.
“So, in West Virginia, and in other coal states, in other fossil fuel states, there is an opportunity for us to specialize in the technologies that reduce carbon emissions, to make those technologies here, to put people to work here.”
So much for good intentions. Granholm faces two major challenges in pursuing an economically sustainable environmental policy.
The first is the technology to which she referred in her remarks. Innovation is one thing, and a laudable aim for any government. The hurdle to be cleared is scaling that technology to a profitable size. The department of energy has a very modest budget to support innovation, most of its $35 billion is being spent on maintaining and modernising the US nuclear infrastructure.
However distasteful it may be to hyper-progressive supporters of the Green New Deal like Rep. Alexandra Ocasio-Cortes, the federal government may be well advised to explore engaging with the private sector and accessing the vast cash reserves of the global capital market which are currently lying idle. Modernisation rarely comes cheap.
The second challenge is regulatory. The energy crisis in Texas and the associated deaths have amplified calls for more oversight of the industry in the state, where it is minimal-touch regulation and almost entirely left to the free market. The savagery of the recent weather has made some think again about the adequacy of that situation. Granholm herself linked Texas with the wildfires in California, and tweeted that “we need to upgrade our grid infrastructure ASAP”.
So there are the bare bones of Biden’s green agenda. Progressive and ambitious targets, but an acknowledgement that investment in technology and ensuring that economically vulnerable communities are not left behind.
The UK would do well to note these elements, especially in the run-up to November’s COP26, and explore areas in which we can cooperate. Clean air doesn’t come for free, so both the US and UK governments need to be creative in finding sustainable ways to protect our future and that of our habitat.