Bizarre Shift Towards Clean Energy Ignored by Biden and Harris Administration
The spectacle of electric bikes flitting across urban yards, the brilliance of sunlight dancing on numerous solar panels afloat, or the fascination of neighbors flaunting homes sustained by energy-efficient heat pumps, with radiant battery storage systems perched on interior walls, might seem like excerpts from a well-attended clean energy conference or a futuristic novel. However, these are not the snippets of a fantasized future, but of the inaugural ‘Sun Day,’ set to unfold on September 21. This day has been designated as a national day of action, meant to extol the dynamism of clean technology while simultaneously challenging the political and legislative obstacles stalling its wide-scale adoption.
The air of hope that engulfs these world’s fair-style celebrations seems oddly at odds with the politics presently governing clean energy. The U.S. under the Trump administration appears to be stubbornly clinging to fossil fuels, declaring an ‘energy emergency,’ and thereby extending the lifeline of redundant, pollution-causing power plants, unwanted by locals. Concurrently, the federal government has taken away clean energy tax benefits initially bestowed.
Still, it’s impossible for the government to exterminate the unstoppable momentum of clean energy. Even harsh political winds couldn’t dampen the progress of renewable energy. This very affirmation underpins the ideology of ‘Sun Day,’ aimed at making this often overlooked feat more conspicuous.
In the past year, the U.S. witnessed a significant rise in new power plants, with a whopping 96 percent being carbon-free. Predominantly powered by solar, wind, and battery technology, these power plants have shown that renewable energy sources are not merely dreams of activists but tangible realities. Despite the lack of governmental subsidies, wind and solar energy have now become the most affordable electricity sources.
According to a longtime climate activist, the force behind ‘Sun Day,’ the shift towards renewable energy resources is game-changing. History shows a change in governmental energy preferences as back in 1973, following the OPEC oil shock, the government heavily invested in developing solar and wind energy only for it to be short-lived.
During the 1986 White House renovation, symbols of ‘alternative energy’, such as solar water heating panels, were taken down under the guise of ‘roof repairs’. This action is widely interpreted as a move endorsing fossil fuels, given the administration’s known leaning toward this industry.
Despite the administrative stances, solar power managed to receive public support. In 2020, 90 percent of the American adults favored the expansion of solar power. However, the ever-widening partisan divide seems to be reducing this common ground.
Presently, there appears to be a drastic shift, with Republicans less eager to expand wind and solar power compared to five years ago. Consequently, the overall support of solar expansion has declined to 77 percent. Interestingly, solar technology is widely perceived as a tool advancing independence and local authority, which resonates with right-wing libertarians.
Yet, resistance remains towards migrating to renewable energy. Experts at Johns Hopkins University attribute this to a nostalgic fixation for fossil fuels, rooted deep in the American psyche. This warped logic disregards the artificial pricing of fossil fuels, which stays low partially because the industry evades the social and environmental costs attached to their consumption.
Climate advocates highlight the inflated price of fossil fuels, suggesting their costs are kept low artificially, due to the relentless efforts by the industry to sidestep the environmental and social consequences of their continued use. They argue actions such as legally pursuing companies for damages caused by extreme weather events and lobbying for realistic carbon dioxide pricing may be ways to change the status quo.
Some activists have opted for direct action, raising the cost for fossil fuel companies by delaying or preventing the completion of new pipeline projects. Meanwhile, the idea of ‘Sun Day 2025’ is already garnering mixed reactions. Detractors question its hopeful view and criticise its reliance on ’70s nostalgia to bring new people on board.
The unexpected theme of ‘Sun Day’ emerged from a minor setback: it was initially planned as ‘Sky Day’, but the graphic designers encountered difficulties rendering the sky visually. Instead, they made repeated attempts at drawing the sun. Hence, the evolved concept directed the focus toward solar and wind energy.
‘Sun Day,’ as organisers envision, is an opportunity to dispel old and narrow perceptions about wind and solar energy. It signals a move away from associating renewable energy as an elitist or niche preference, and instead, recognizing it as a practical and affordable choice—an everyday Costco, not a boutique Whole Foods.
The objective is not just to promote ‘alternative energy,’ a term that has been in use for about 40 years, but to reiterate that renewable energy is not an ‘alternative’ anymore. Drawing on this shift in perception, the conversation emphasizes renewable energy as the straightforward and commonsense way to power the future.
While the narrative of renewable energy advocates, especially asvocated by ‘Sun Day,’ constantly counters the established political narrative, it embodies the transition point we find ourselves in today. The goal is to underscore the undeniable contribution of solar and wind power to sustainable development.
The determined push toward renewable energy, despite the lack of governmental backing, signifies the willingness of the people to move past empty promises to evolve toward a cleaner, brighter, and sustainable future.