So, just how many federal agencies are going to play venture capitalist? The Oregonian reports:

In a few years, you could be filling up with fuel made from Oregon poplar trees, wheat straw and corn stalks.

Financed in part with a $235 million loan guarantee from the U.S. Department of Agriculture announced today, ZeaChem plans a $390 million biofuel refinery in Boardman capable of producing up to 25 million gallons of ethanol per year.

 

The Colorado-based energy company expects to be producing fuel and valuable by-products by late 2014. It’s the third U.S. commercial-scale advanced biofuel refinery on the drawing boards.

 

The plant in Boardman, a town of about 3,500 along the Columbia River in eastern Oregon, will make what’s called cellulosic ethanol. Unlike conventional corn ethanol, it uses wood, switchgrass and agricultural waste instead of food for fuel. Production also generates considerably less greenhouse gas, ZeaChem said, and uses less water.

 

The plant will create 65 local jobs and 118 construction jobs, the company said.

 

U.S. Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack said producing biofuels is a national security matter, crucial to reducing dependence on foreign oil. Such projects create jobs in rural areas and are more environmentally friendly than corn refineries, he said.

Um, where was this in 2008? From last night’s SOTU:

Nowhere is the promise of innovation greater than in American-made energy.  Over the last three years, we’ve opened millions of new acres for oil and gas exploration, and tonight, I’m directing my Administration to open more than 75 percent of our potential offshore oil and gas resources.  Right now, American oil production is the highest that it’s been in eight years. 

That’s right — eight years.  Not only that — last year, we relied less on foreign oil than in any of the past sixteen years. But with only 2 percent of the world’s oil reserves, oil isn’t enough.  This country needs an all-out, all-of-the-above strategy that develops every available source of American energy — a strategy that’s cleaner, cheaper, and full of new jobs.

We have a supply of natural gas that can last America nearly one hundred years, and my Administration will take every possible action to safely develop this energy.  Experts believe this will support more than 600,000 jobs by the end of the decade.  And I’m requiring all companies that drill for gas on public lands to disclose the chemicals they use.  America will develop this resource without putting the health and safety of our citizens at risk.

The development of natural gas will create jobs and power trucks and factories that are cleaner and cheaper, proving that we don’t have to choose between our environment and our economy.  And by the way, it was public research dollars, over the course of thirty years, that helped develop the technologies to extract all this natural gas out of shale rock — reminding us that Government support is critical in helping businesses get new energy ideas off the ground.         

What’s true for natural gas is true for clean energy.  In three years, our partnership with the private sector has already positioned America to be the world’s leading manufacturer of high-tech batteries.  Because of federal investments, renewable energy use has nearly doubled.  And thousands of Americans have jobs because of it. 

When Bryan Ritterby was laid off from his job making furniture, he said he worried that at 55, no one would give him a second chance.  But he found work at Energetx, a wind turbine manufacturer in Michigan.  Before the recession, the factory only made luxury yachts.  Today, it’s hiring workers like Bryan, who said, “I’m proud to be working in the industry of the future.”

Our experience with shale gas shows us that the payoffs on these public investments don’t always come right away.  Some technologies don’t pan out; some companies fail.  But I will not walk away from the promise of clean energy.  I will not walk away from workers like Bryan.  I will not cede the wind or solar or battery industry to China or Germany because we refuse to make the same commitment here.  We have subsidized oil companies for a century.  That’s long enough.  It’s time to end the taxpayer giveaways to an industry that’s rarely been more profitable, and double-down on a clean energy industry that’s never been more promising.   Pass clean energy tax credits and create these jobs.   

Oh, and I love this section. . .

We can also spur energy innovation with new incentives.  The differences in this chamber may be too deep right now to pass a comprehensive plan to fight climate change.  But there’s no reason why Congress shouldn’t at least set a clean energy standard that creates a market for innovation.  So far, you haven’t acted.  Well tonight, I will.  I’m directing my Administration to allow the development of clean energy on enough public land to power three million homes.  And I’m proud to announce that the Department of Defense, the world’s largest consumer of energy, will make one of the largest commitments to clean energy in history — with the Navy purchasing enough capacity to power a quarter of a million homes a year.

Planet Gore readers, however, know this as the “Pollowitz Plan.” My post from June 25, 2008:

Go Navy! Go Nuclear!

I came across this interesting bit of news the other day:

“Nellis Air Force Base near Las Vegas opened one of the largest solar arrays in the US, a 140-acre field of 72,000 motorized panels that powers the base and sells energy to nearby communities.”

If we’re allowing the military to generate it’s own electricity with solar power and dump the surplus into the grid, why not go one step further and put nuclear reactors on military bases? With enough reactors, we could make the entire military and federal government energy independent, as well as add much-needed energy into the economy. As for who would run the reactors, that’s the easy part. We have the most successful nuclear reactor operators in the world at our disposal: the U.S. Navy.

Senator McCain has proposed 45 new reactors by 2030, but in reality, how likely is that to happen in the current regulatory environment? Not very. But expanding the current naval nuclear program to include land-based reactors would seem to be an easier path to accomplishing the same overall result with the added benefit of having the nation’s most competent nuclear operators in charge of the entire program.

Dear Barack: I’m on my way to D.C. today and am available for a meeting if you’d like to discuss my idea in greater detail. Thanks!

Hey, let’s pour water in a volcano and see what happens:

Geothermal energy developers plan to pump 24 million gallons of water into the side of a dormant volcano in central Oregon this summer to demonstrate technology they hope will give a boost to a green energy sector that has yet to live up to its promise.

They hope the water comes back to the surface fast enough and hot enough to create cheap, clean electricity that isn’t dependent on sunny skies or stiff breezes — without shaking the earth and rattling the nerves of nearby residents.

Renewable energy has been held back by cheap natural gas, weak demand for power and lack of political concern over global warming. Efforts to use the earth’s heat to generate power, known as geothermal energy, have been further hampered by technical problems and worries that tapping it can cause earthquakes.

Even so, the federal government, Google and other investors are interested enough to bet $43 million on the Oregon project.

The rest here.

Washington — President Barack Obama announced the formation today of a Photo Task Force to bail out Kodak and save it from Chapter 11 bankruptcy.

Like the Detroit auto industry, the president said Kodak is a victim of “cutthroat competition from Japanese firms and a seismic shift to the digital technology it pioneered but couldn’t capitalize on.” He criticized Mitt Romney for his New York Times op-ed titled, “Let Kodak Go Bankrupt.” Obama says bailing out the 132-year old America business icon is crucial to American manufacturing and saving jobs. He said in return for federal assistance Kodak has agreed to invest in new green print and ink technologies.

Just kidding.

Obama is letting Kodak go bankrupt. The company’s workers aren’t represented by the UAW.

Heckuva job:

President Barack Obama’s decision yesterday to reject a permit for TransCanada Corp.’s Keystone XL oil pipeline may prompt Canada to turn to China for oil exports.

Prime Minister Stephen Harper, in a telephone call yesterday, told Obama “Canada will continue to work to diversify its energy exports,” according to details provided by Harper’s office. Canadian Natural Resource Minister Joe Oliver said relying less on the U.S. would help strengthen the country’s “financial security.”

The “decision by the Obama administration underlines the importance of diversifying and expanding our markets, including the growing Asian market,” Oliver told reporters in Ottawa.

Currently, 99 percent of Canada’s crude exports go to the U.S., a figure that Harper wants to reduce in his bid to make Canada a “superpower” in global energy markets.

The rest here.

The Obama administration’s decision to kill the Keystone XL pipeline (which would bring oil down from Canada’s province of Alberta to refineries on the U.S. Gulf Coast) is emblematic of the pervasive, systematic hostility the administration has shown to all forms of fossil-fuel production and consumption. 

Whether it’s coal production and use, oil production and use, or natural-gas production and use, the Obama administration has been consistent in its efforts to stymie production and force conservation (a.k.a. rationing) by limiting access to supply or jacking up price through regulations.

Given the extensive network of crude-oil pipelines that already criss-cross the United States, and its history of largely safe operation, it seems clear that the decision to deny the Keystone XL pipeline was political. Over at the Daily Beast, Daniel Stone suggests that the administration acted in order to deny Republicans a victory, and to get the issue out of the way so Obama can focus on his own grand energy vision in the upcoming State of the Union address. I have my doubts about that, given the utter debacles that the administration has made with regard to Solyndra and their entire renewables/electric-car agenda. On the other hand, this President has a history of doubling- and tripling-down on his more absurd energy policies, and isn’t afraid of over-the-top Orwellian speaking.

Whether it represents Obama’s ongoing crusade against fossil fuels; a fit of pique over Congress’s decision to force the President’s hand (he had until February 21 to decide); or the Obama campaign thinks that the inevitable response from Republicans will help to rally his base, the decision is guaranteed to make regular appearances for the rest of the presidential-campaign silly season.

Finally, Obama has certainly strengthened Canadian prime minister Stephen Harper’s hand in pushing for a West Coast terminal to send oil-sand oil off to China. Harper should send him a commemorative hockey puck. 

In stopping the Keystone pipeline, the administration is acting to blockade Canadian oil from reaching the world market.

This supports the interests of OPEC against those of the United States, Canada, Europe, Japan, and the rest of the civilized industrial world, and imposes a cruel, extremely regressive, tax on the globe’s poorest nations. It imposes a tax on the American economy that is inimical to an economic recovery, without even offering the fiscal benefit of other taxes, since the revenue in question will be paid not to our own government, but to other governments, several of which are engaged in, supporting, promoting, or preparing acts of war and terror against the United States.

At a time when the need for action to deal with the threat of the Iranian nuclear bomb program demands that the government do everything in its power to assure supplies of liquid fuel from non-mideast sources, the Obama administration is doing the exact opposite.

Instead of seeking to create energy security, it is maximizing our energy vulnerability.

Instead of seeking to reduce oil prices, it is acting to increase them.

Instead of seeking to expand our economy, it is acting to contract it.

Instead of seeking to stop the Iranian nuclear bomb program, it is acting to protect it and help fund it.

Instead of seeking to strengthen America and weaken our enemies, it is acting to weaken America and strengthen our enemies.

The question that needs to be put to the Obama administration is this: Which side are you on?