With my eight-year old, everything’s a contest: Who can get dressed the fastest? Who can eat the most ice cream? Who can bend their index finger back the farthest? It’s all good fun (sometimes), but I expect that the day will come when he outgrows the childish tendency to turn everything into a win-lose competition. If only I could say the same for U.S. officials and opinion leaders and their anti-Chinese drum-beating.

As the global quest for renewable energy heats up, many clean energy advocates and leaders resort to jingoistic rhetoric to make their case. Worried that Americans aren’t concerned enough about the climate to make the case for a clean energy revolution, they often opt to appeal to the public’s supposed anti-Chinese sentiment. The sound byte goes something like this: “The Chinese are way ahead of us when it comes to clean energy. We can’t let them beat us. The United States can and must be Number 1.”

Is it true that the Chinese clean energy industry is way ahead of us? Yes. Is it true that the industry benefits from strong government policies like low-interest loans and cheap land? Right, again. In fact, the U.S. Trade Representative announced last week that it would  investigate a complaint filed by the U.S. Steelworkers and may take action against China at the World Trade Organization.  I find this somewhat astounding—instead of throwing everything we’ve got at ramping up our own clean energy industry, we’re wasting time trying to interfere with China’s. Doing so only makes sense if you view clean energy as a zero-sum game with one winner, but the reality is that we all win or we all lose, unless someone’s got a summer home on Mars I haven’t heard about.

China’s national energy policy strongly incentivizes the manufacturing of solar cells.  Would that the U.S.’s energy policy did the same. (Would that the U.S. even had an energy policy).

The clean energy race is not a race between nations, it’s a race against time, a race against climate tipping points and against dwindling fossil fuel reserves. This isn’t a football game, it’s a mobilization to maintain a habitable planet. It’s important to ensure that Chinese manufacturers (not just of solar panels but of all exports) treat their workers fairly and deal with their toxic waste appropriately—no argument there. But let’s be careful not to play into the hands of those who are bent on demonizing China and stirring up public animosity toward its 1.3 billion citizens who, like us, simply want a future for their children.

–Erica Etelson

President Obama is coming to town tomorrow to visit Solyndra, a solar panel manufacturer in Fremont that received a $535 million federal loan guarantee to build a second plant that will employ 1000 people.  Presidents don’t spend a whole lot of time touring factories but, when they do, they select their sites carefully.  Sagging auto industry?  Visit a GM plant in the mid-west.  Need to reassure worried NASA employees that they won’t be losing their jobs?  Head for the Kennedy Space Center in Florida.

It’s noteworthy that the few manufacturing plants Obama has visited as President have mostly been in the green tech sector–a lithium battery plant in North Carolina, a wind turbine blade manufacturer in Iowa, an electric vehicle research lab in Pomona and, tomorrow, Solyndra.  You don’t need Cliff Notes to decipher the symbolism behind Obama’s visits–he clearly believes that clean energy technology is the path to rebuilding our economy, enhancing national security and averting climate chaos.

We’re pleased to welcome the President to the Golden State and to remind him that energy independence begins at home.  Nothing would symbolize his commitment to a clean energy future more than solar on the White House.  If you haven’t yet, take a moment to add your voice to the thousands who are calling for the Obamas to retrofit their home for the 21st century by adorning it with a PV array donated by Sungevity.  And be sure to check back later this week when we announce a fun new way to win prizes by spreading the Solar on the White House virus.

–Erica Etelson

Reason No. 3 is sponsored by VoteVets.org, which has launched a $2 million ad campaign in support of a clean energy and climate bill.  Watch their one-minute ad called “Tough” and forward it to anyone you know who calls themselves a patriot.

The VoteVets ad clarifies a simple truth:  Over the next few decades, we’re going to follow one of two paths.  We will either waste money and lives fighting for every last drop of recoverable oil on the planet and then, when fossil fuels finally run out, witness economic devastation the likes of which we’ve never imagined.  Or we will devote our financial and human resources to a clean energy infrastructure that will help us transition smoothly to a post-carbon economy.  Which will it be?

–Erica Etelson

SF Green/The Thin Green Line, the San Francisco Chronicle’s community page for environmental issues, plugged our new home solar lease today.  You can read the post, “Paying for Clean Energy Just Got Easier” here.

We’re thrilled to see our local news organizations recognize that new financing mechanisms like the solar lease are game changers in the world of distributed solar power generation.  The more homeowners understand how easy and affordable it is to go solar now, the more the solar industry will continue to grow and kick some coal n’ nuclear booty.

Reflect for a moment on how earth-shattering (or, should I say, “earth-saving”) Gates’ epiphany could be:  Here’s one of the wealthiest and most influential individuals on the planet asserting what we climate freaks have been trying to communicate for the past decade–that if we want to have a life-sustaining planet, we can and must get to zero.  And when Bill Gates talks, people with money listen.

Gates begins the talk with a simple math equation even I was able to understand:  Global CO2 levels = # of people on the planet  x services people use (eg. electricity, food) x energy required per service x CO2 per unit of energy.  As you might recall from 4th grade, if the product of an equation is zero, at least one of the factors being multiplied must be zero.  Of all the factors, the only one that could conceivably be reduced to zero is the amount of CO2 per unit of energy.  To do so will require major advances in the scale and reliability of five energy technologies–solar PV, solar thermal, wind, nuclear and carbon capture.  Gates believes we must work intensively on all five fronts by investing heavily in research & development and creating market incentives to move away from fossil fuels.

We couldn’t agree more (with respect to the first three energy technologies on Gates’ list).  Dubious and unsafe technologies aside, we applaud Gates for embracing the gravity of our energy predicament and using his platform to inspire innovation.

Green energy overtook fossil fuels in attracting investment for power generation for the first time last year, according to figures released by the United Nations.  Wind, solar and other clean technologies attracted $140bn compared with $110bn for gas and coal for electrical power generation. The Guardian, where I got this from, noted that more than a third of the green cash is destined for Britain or the rest of Europe.

Shine on indeed, me hearties!