Three Misconceptions of Heritage Foundation's Energy Proposal

I hope my readers aren't growing tired of hearing about it, but the Heritage Foundation recently released a Backgrounder report calling for a near dismantling of energy innovation programs at the Department of Energy, going as far as to suggest that "elimination of the entire department" might be called for. I took issue with this report right out of the gates. Subsequently, three organizations I proudly associate myself with (Breakthrough, ITIF, and AEL) released a counterpoint memo (PDF), systematically deconstructing Heritage's error-prone arguments.

A new rebuttal report that I co-authored was released yesterday and is available at ITIF. In it, we challenge the fundamental misconceptions and false assumptions adopted by the Heritage Foundation in their call for such dramatic cuts to DOE. We identify three chief misconceptions that lead Heritage to propose such dangerous and irrational cuts.

1. The proposal fails to meaningfully reduce the budget deficit now or in the future.
2. Heritage fails to understand where technological innovations come from.
   
3. The proposal ignores the immediacy and enormity of US energy challenges.

The DOE programs that Heritage recommends pruning or outright eliminating are key sectors for energy technology innovation, which will be key for American energy security, economic competitiveness, and fiscal health. The errors and misconceptions riddling the Heritage report bespeak the failure of neoliberal ideology to address the challenges presented by energy infrastructure and decarbonization.

Americans for Energy Leadership and the Breakthrough Institute each have excellent coverage of the new report.

• Download the report, "All About the Fundamentals: Three Misconceptions of the Heritage Foundation's Deficit/Energy Proposal" here (PDF)