Increasing Funding for Micropower (Alternative Energy)

Since my last alternative energy debate was so interesting, I thought I'd keep it up by starting another one, with more specific wording to avoid the meta-debates that occurred in my last debate. This topic is: "The United States federal government should increase funding for the Department of Energy's Industrial Technologies Program (ITP) to give grants for micropower." 1. My first argument is that the status quo is unacceptable: a. According to the Department of Energy, the current electricity generation and distribution model in the United States is based on a centralized grid. b. There are (at least) five problems with the centralized grid model: i. Sabotage: According to the Council on Foreign Relations, the because much of the grid is unprotected, our energy infrastructure is one of the most vulnerable targets to terrorists. A terrorist strike would cause nationwide blackouts. ii. Global Warming: The centralized grid promotes fossil fuel based energy sources such as coal, oil and natural gas. Fossil fuels have caused global warming, which threaten to destroy the planet. iii. Economic Competitiveness: The ITP program is vital to nine key energy intensive industries, supply 90% of the materials to the U.S., produce $1 trillion in revenue, directly employ 3 million people, and indirectly employ 12 million people. iv. Spillover: Micropower can be used to aid developing countries. According to Seth Dunn, an energy specialist at the WorldWatch Institute, providing micropower to North Korea can reduce the chance of nuclear proliferation. v. Oil dependence: Currently, the U.S. imports more than 60% of the oil it consumes. According to Dr. Martin Feldstein, our dependence on oil is a security threat. Iran has declared that any hostile actions taken by the United States would cause them to destroy the Straits of Hormuz, cutting off 20% of the U.S. oil supply. c. Current subsidies for non-alternative forms of energy prevent micropower from becoming mainstream. According to Bioenergy Update, the $120 billion in subsidies for fossil fuels prevents a shift away from the centralized system. 2. My second argument is that the ITP/micropower program can solve these problems: a. First, micropower is a system of distributed generation of electricity, using solar, wind, biomass, geothermal, hydro, and other forms of renewable energy. Essentially, a business would generate its own electricity on-site, based on the most appropriate renewable source, thus bypassing the need for a centralized electric grid based on fossil fuels. Although it has become more popular in recent years, there are still barriers to widespread adoption. b. The ITP program currently gives out $175 million in grants for micropower projects. However, this amount is tiny compared to the $120 billion in annual subsidies for fossil fuels. c. Micropower can solve the five harms I outlined above: i. Sabotage: A decentralized grid means that there would be no place for the terrorists to strike if they wanted to disable the electricity supply. Since each business would generate their own electricity, there would be no supply to interrupt. ii. Global Warming: According to Bioenergy Update, if the U.S. switched to a micropower based system, we could cut carbon emissions by 50%, much more than our current targets. iii. Economic Competitiveness: The ITP program funds projects in nine key industries, several of which are struggling for global competitiveness. If they were able to access low cost renewable energy, they could better compete with their foreign rivals. iv. Spillover: As stated above, micropower gives countries an opportunity to work together and increase international cooperation. According to Mr. Dunn, this lessens the risk of North Korea becoming belligerent. v. Oil Dependence: According to NPR, developing alternative fuels has the ability to shift us away from oil dependence to a form of domestically generated renewable energy. d. The ITP program actually works. According to the Department of Energy, more than 140 new technologies have been created by ITP-private firm cooperation. e. The plan can be accomplished without adding to the deficit if fossil fuel subsidies were ended. With the $140 billion in money that goes to oil and coal companies, the ITP program can develop and spread micropower technology to businesses, which can then spread it to consumer use, all without adding a dime to our budget deficit. Hopefully, someone will pick up the gauntlet for this debate, and it will be an interesting discussion!