Model A's to Solar Cells

Richmond, CA -- The spacious, airy offices of the SunPower Corporation here in Richmond tell an interesting story of America's industrial evolution. The building was constructed as a Model A Ford assembly line. Then, during World War II, it became a tank factory where the legendary Rosie the Riveter worked. Now it houses both the corporate and manufacturing facilities of SunPower. And within a month, it will be powered entirely by photovoltaics.

Former Stanford President Donald Kennedy and I are here to lunch with Tom Dinwoodie, the head of SunPower, to help figure out how we can make sure that the forthcoming economic stimulus and reform agendas from the Obama administration are as effective as possible in revitalizing the renewable energy sector, which is currently stalling out because of the credit crunch and economic meltdown.

Dinwoodie identifies the key barrier -- interest rates have just soared, putting capital-intensive solar and wind projects on hold. The solution would appear to be tapping into government capital, which carries effectively zero interest rate, perhaps combining it with some of the money that the Treasury lent to the big banks but which, thus far, the banks have been unwilling to lend back out.

Wonderful as the space in this building is, it's a painful reminder that when we don't move quickly to do the right thing, we end up doing the wrong thing. Even as we're meeting, Congress is trying to figure out how to keep General Motors and Chrysler from failing -- and Ford, which originally built this, won't be far behind if an agreement isn't reached. But what's slowing it up today? Unbelievably, Republicans in the Congress are objecting to provisions in the bill that would preclude the companies getting bailed out from lobbying or litigating against improved fuel-efficiency standards:

"The Democrats' call to include the California waiver provision in the auto bailout bill would mean Detroit would gain next to nothing in terms of help from Washington," said Sen. James Inhofe (R-Okla.), the ranking member of the Environment and Public Works Committee.

Has no one learned anything? Detroit's dedication to fighting technological innovations in fuel economy was the biggest factor in costing the Big Three so much market share that a recession could send them into bankruptcy. None of the innovative companies -- Toyota, Honda -- are in this kind of trouble, even though their sales, too, are down -- because they have been growing and profiting, not shrinking and bleeding red ink.

A recent story in the New York Times directly traced GM's travails to its consistent unwillingness to invest in innovation because the profits would come in the future. It's short-sighted, bottom-line greed that threatens to destroy the company -- and much of America with it.

Somehow, somehow, Congress and President Obama must find a way to rekindle the innovative spirit that created the Model A and won WWII -- perhaps from SunPower to the Big Three.

Comments

[UN]

No one posts here anymore. People have lost interest because you are about politics and not the environment - else you'd be pushing the UN study on meat consumption. The movement is dwindling - just watch the next few years and see .... time will tell.

[Jim G]

Survival of the fittest. On the one hand I'd like our myopic companies to go belly up. "Japanese company" is not entirely true. Americans can buy stock in Toyota and Honda and be American owners of Japanese companies. And both of those companies have built manufacturing plants in the US and as a result employ American auto workers. The dealers are probably mostly American, and certainly their employees are -- it doesn't matter to a car dealer if they are selling "Japanese" or "American" cars. The only Americans who really lose out are the employees in the headquarters and the stockholders. Yet it is the stockholders fault essentially -- combined with the yes men/women who are hired as highly paid executives with top notch resumes but apparently zero visionary skills -- either that or they ignore their vision in order to say yes to short term profit.

http://www.ford.com/microsites/sustainability-report-2007-08/overview-letter-mulally . This report sounds great -- but it would seem a day late and a dollar short.

I remember my high school physics teacher complaining in 1979 or 1980 that the US auto industry invented the 4 cylinder engine, yet they didn't implement it in time for the oil crunch of the 70's, (which is when the Japanese auto companies grabbed their initial market share in the US,) because changing the assembly line to accomodate smaller chasses would have cut into short term profits. It's been almost 30 years since they should have learned their lesson. So I have no sympathy for them.

Darwin's rule should apply in the business world just as in nature, IMO. Let it be a lesson to investors to buy stock in companies who consider their "marketing decisions" to be "business decisions."

[Dr. James Singmaster]

Well, I will post perhaps mainly for Mr. Pope's benefit asking if he read my forwarded letter sent to SF Chron's The Bottom Line concerning the write-up, Dec. 8, about the National Intelligence Council(NIC) report "Global Trends 2025". Concerning energy, the NIC views "Clean Coal and Synfuels" as the energy of the future, and it sounds like it was written up by the coal industry. Since Sierra Club has been battling the "Clean Coal" BS, Mr. Pope ought to take the NIC to task. Dr. J. Singmaster

[Jim G]

p.s. Obviously, reinstating the federal tax deductions for purchases of clean energy products (adding services) would be a good idea. (i.e. tax deduction for buying a rooftop solar panel electricity generating system.) That accomplishes the same thing as government direct investments in clean energy which is independent of capital markets but delays the goverment cash flow outlay to the following year (when tax returns are filed.) Plus it encourages individuals and businesses to be personally responsible for global warming.