Re: “Why is Lamborn tilting at successful windmills?” June 8 editorial; and “Lamborn has it backward,” June 9 Vincent Carroll column.
For the record, I support continued funding for the National Renewable Energy Laboratory and its 2,300 jobs in Golden. I have toured NREL in the past, and am on record as supporting it. Any reporting to the contrary is simply inaccurate.
Having said that, I have some serious concerns about the Department of Energy’s Efficiency and Renewable Energy (EERE) programs, from which NREL gets most of its funding. This is what I intended to convey when I signed on to a recent letter to House appropriators.
President Obama wants to increase funding for EERE programs to $3.2 billion — that’s 36 percent more than last year, and almost double what it was in 2006. A million dollars was set apart this year to help China and India become more energy-efficient. Money has also gone to Central America and Mexico. Large corporations have been given EERE handouts. Food giant Sysco, worth $16 billion, was given $1.2 million to buy about 100 energy-efficient forklifts.
When we are borrowing 40 cents of every federal dollar we spend, we simply cannot throw away money like that.
I strongly support reductions in funding levels proposed by the Appropriations Committee to trim back EERE programs to $1.3 billion. This would still substantially fund NREL.
I would like NREL to focus more on pure research and development. This is the same vision President Reagan had for the lab. I believe NREL’s recent emphasis on commercialization leads to bureaucrats picking winners and losers. Also, although I believe the core mission of NREL is well-intentioned, I am skeptical about the ability of government incentives to match the private sector.
The much larger issue here concerns our national energy policy. Are renewable and alternative energy sources ready to replace conventional energy? If not, are taxpayer subsidies and government mandates the way to bring them on line?
As chairman of a subcommittee on energy and minerals, I believe increased domestic energy production is essential to America’s economic recovery. We need an all-of-the-above approach, including both traditional and renewable energies. Just this week, several colleagues and I introduced four bills to help eliminate the regulatory confusion, lawsuits and permitting delays that are currently stifling wind and solar development on public lands.
But even with lots of government help, many Americans believe that renewable energy is not ready for prime time. Propping up inefficient energy sources, such as windmills generating electricity through heavy subsidies and mandates, exempts them from the rigors of the marketplace and does no favor to the taxpayer.
I would like to see laboratories, whether government or private, do more to make conventional and available sources of energy even cleaner. America has more BTUs of energy, when you add it all up, than any other country. It is premature and even foolhardy to throw any of it away unless and until renewables can stand on their own. I wish the best to NREL, but right now renewable energy is still a dream.
U.S. Rep. Doug Lamborn represents the 5th District of Colorado.
