The debate is between those who see the “Big, Beautiful Bill” as sparking an energy renaissance in the United States and those who think it is a big catastrophe.
On July 4, and after contentious debates in both the Senate and the House of Representatives, President Trump signed the “Big, Beautiful Bill” into law. While the bill’s impact on your finances and on your healthcare is discussed elsewhere, its impact on American energy often falls by the wayside. Specifically, the law attempts to position the United States to acquire “energy dominance” by making it less dependent on foreign sources of energy, such as Middle Eastern oil.
But is the “Big, Beautiful Bill” the path to energy prosperity? The answer to that question is, as Bob Dylan noted, “A blowin’ in the wind.”
To Read the Pro Side of This Debate, Go Here.
One side of the argument states that, yes, the law will play a role in healing the damaged American energy sector, especially in the fields of energy-related fiscal responsibility, energy reliability, and energy security. Criticizing the billions of dollars given to wind power development as distorting the market and putting competitors out of business, the “Big, Beautiful Bill” will correct the problem by ending the subsidies and resurrecting coal from the ashes of its destruction, improving energy reliability. No more will America be at the mercy of unreliable green power, forcing it to quake in fear of another Iberian blackout.
For the Con Side of This Debate, Go Here.
The other side of the argument completely disagrees, claiming that the law upends a great deal of the work that has been done since the 1973 Oil Crisis to make America energy independent. For instance, the law guts the federal fuel economy program and weakens tax incentives for adopting electric vehicles, better batteries, and critical minerals. The recent war crisis in the Middle East regarding the fighting between Israel and Iran, as well as Iran’s threat to block the Strait of Hormuz, shows that America is far too dependent on foreign oil. If the 1973 oil crisis were to repeat itself, the consequences would be even more catastrophic than they were back then.
For an Alternative Con Side of This Debate, Go Here.
A different author partially disagrees with the notion that the “Big, Beautiful Bill” will irreparably damage the clean energy industry. Yes, project managers will have to be more selective about which projects to fund as the governmental money spigot has been cut off. But this is not, by itself, a bad thing. The costs of green technology are falling, even as demand is still rising. And both of these factors will ensure that only projects that meet the needs of consumers, rather than being simply dependent on taxpayers, will become reality.
Image: Shutterstock/tech_BGT
