President Obama discussing clean energy during the state of the union. Source: whitehouse.gov

Going into his first State of the Union address to Congress, I was curious to see if Obama would scale back initiatives that he has placed at the center of his agenda in the face of the US’ fiscal problems. I wanted to highlight and provide commentary of his points relevant to Project Groundswell – namely energy, climate change, and transportation.

Obama’s words are in italics. My comments are in plain text. His first mention has to do with infrastructure and transportation:

Next, we can put Americans to work today building the infrastructure of tomorrow. From the first railroads to the Interstate Highway System, our nation has always been built to compete.  There’s no reason Europe or China should have the fastest trains, or the new factories that manufacture clean energy products.

For anyone who has travelled in Europe or East Asia, the convenience of high-speed rail is without question. The US has eschewed rail as a viable form of transportation (except the northeast corridor) in favor of automobile and air travel. Rail travel has numerous benefits including: comfort, direct access to the center of cities, less of a hassle compared with air travel (security checkpoints, baggage claim), not to mention the environmental benefits. Those that argue that investing in rail travel will involve massive government subsidies fail to mention that air travel and roadways receive massive subsidies.

Tomorrow, I’ll visit Tampa, Florida, where workers will soon break ground on a new high-speed railroad funded by the Recovery Act. There are projects like that all across this country that will create jobs and help move our nation’s goods, services, and information.

The Florida high speed rail network is a start (watch Obama and Biden in Florida announcing this yesterday)– however the fact that high speed rail is such a miniscule part of our national transportation system is unlikely to change very rapidly in the near future. The California high-speed rail plan, linking Sacramento, San Francisco/San Jose, Los Angeles, and San Diego is expected to cost upwards of $40 billion and take decades to build. This initiative was just awarded $2.25 billion in stimulus funds, out of a total of $8 billion just announced.I support these efforts, and wish that larger, more concrete plans were underway nationwide.

We should put more Americans to work building clean energy facilities — and give rebates to Americans who make their homes more energy-efficient, which supports clean energy jobs.

Yes. Investing in clean energy and energy efficiency will: create jobs, meet our growing energy needs, reduce dependence on fossil fuels, and help mitigate global warming and other forms of pollution.

From the day I took office, I’ve been told that addressing our larger challenges is too ambitious; such an effort would be too contentious.  I’ve been told that our political system is too gridlocked, and that we should just put things on hold for a while. For those who make these claims, I have one simple question: How long should we wait?  How long should America put its future on hold?

You see, Washington has been telling us to wait for decades, even as the problems have grown worse.  Meanwhile, China is not waiting to revamp its economy.  Germany is not waiting.  India is not waiting.  These nations — they’re not standing still.  These nations aren’t playing for second place.  They’re putting more emphasis on math and science.  They’re rebuilding their infrastructure.  They’re making serious investments in clean energy because they want those jobs.  Well, I do not accept second place for the United States of America.

Clean energy investment in Asia surpassed that in the Americas for the first time. China is rapidly changing its image from that of a polluting, industrial behemoth to the leader in green technology. Government support and investment in this type of research and infrastructure should be advanced.

Next, we need to encourage American innovation.  Last year, we made the largest investment in basic research funding in history — an investment that could lead to the world’s cheapest solar cells or treatment that kills cancer cells but leaves healthy ones untouched.  And no area is more ripe for such innovation than energy.  You can see the results of last year’s investments in clean energy -– in the North Carolina company that will create 1,200 jobs nationwide helping to make advanced batteries; or in the California business that will put a thousand people to work making solar panels.

Yes success stories, but a drop in the bucket when looking at the 10% unemployment we are facing. We need more stories like these.

But to create more of these clean energy jobs, we need more production, more efficiency, more incentives.  And that means building a new generation of safe, clean nuclear power plants in this country. It means making tough decisions about opening new offshore areas for oil and gas development. It means continued investment in advanced biofuels and clean coal technologies. And, yes, it means passing a comprehensive energy and climate bill with incentives that will finally make clean energy the profitable kind of energy in America.

I was surprised that Obama led with nuclear power in this list. Ditto with offshore drilling. Not only a smart political move, as most republicans support expansion of nuclear power (and drill baby drill), but necessary. The new (and next) generation of nuclear power stations will provide us with a low-carbon energy source to help us meet our growing energy demands.

I am grateful to the House for passing such a bill last year. And this year I’m eager to help advance the bipartisan effort in the Senate.

I know there have been questions about whether we can afford such changes in a tough economy.  I know that there are those who disagree with the overwhelming scientific evidence on climate change.  But here’s the thing — even if you doubt the evidence, providing incentives for energy-efficiency and clean energy are the right thing to do for our future -– because the nation that leads the clean energy economy will be the nation that leads the global economy.  And America must be that nation.

This is a great way to frame the debate, in my opinion. Even if you are not convinced (despite the overwhelming amount of evidence) that climate change is a large threat to the planet, what do you have against clean energy sources and improving energy efficiency? Not to mention the growing worldwide demand for these products – why not support private businesses in America that can design and manufacture green tech?