How Harris could take U.S. climate tech global
Add Axios as your preferred source to
see more of our stories on Google.
Illustration: Allie Carl/Axios
To find out how Kamala Harris might approach climate issues, check out the latest issue of Foreign Affairs, where Harris adviser Brian Deese offers an aggressive plan to get countries to buy much more U.S.-made technology.
Why it matters: The idea is to position the U.S. and its allies — rather than China — as the partners of choice for developing countries looking to invest in climate resilience.
Where it stands: "The United States has yet to offer a full-throated answer to China's Belt and Road Initiative," writes Deese. "Ceding this space is a failure of American leadership and a missed economic opportunity."
- The Belt and Road Initiative was China's attempt to finance the export of its technology to developing countries. BRI seems to be winding down, so the U.S. has an opening to fill the vacuum.
The big picture: President Biden's Inflation Reduction Act included billions of dollars to build American strength in climate tech like renewable power and carbon storage.
- Deese's plan aims to give developing countries access to the funding they need to import that technology.
- Most of the money would come from market mechanisms like bond and stock issues, Deese writes. Less than 10% would come from direct grants by the U.S. government.
State of play: Deese argues that while the IRA can help support global cleantech adoption, the spread of such technology internationally is not happening fast enough.
- His proposed "Clean Energy Finance Authority" would finance projects like battery manufacturing, carbon capture, and building nuclear or geothermal power plants — all supplied by companies in the U.S. or its allies.
- The U.S. already has the Development Finance Agency, which has financed billions of dollars of climate projects in recent years.
- It's part of the G7's Partnership for Global Infrastructure and Investment, a broader international investment pact. Both, however, can be accused of not moving fast enough to meet the climate challenge.
Between the lines: The Deese proposal could be seen as foreign aid or corporate welfare for U.S. companies — or both.
- Unlike the IRA, however, it can't be criticized because it could cause inflation domestically — because the projects it financed would all be overseas.
- If anything, U.S. corporations might be able to lower their domestic prices if they can scale up internationally and spread their fixed costs across more countries.
The bottom line: Deese's proposed system is designed to be large and nimble at the same time. But Harris couldn't implement it on her own — she'd need Congress to get on board.
