Americans are continuing to digest Trump's upset election victory on Nov. 8, but the continuing debate and uncertainty over what's ahead isn't limited to social issues.
Two major energy policy issues in particular – Trump's promise to make America energy independent and his stated desire to renegotiate or cancel the "nuclear deal" with Iran – have insiders all over the world concerned as well.
A great many of those insiders are here with me in the United Arab Emirates for meetings on the future of energy, particularly over the next four years.
But amid all the uncertainty, there's a big issue out there that isn't really being addressed. It's on the table here in the Emirates because it could have the biggest impact of all.
This Should Be the Ultimate U.S. Policy Goal
I've said throughout the election season that, whoever won, the pursuit of a balance of sources, above all else, must be the target.
And this single element may have a greater impact.
This approach requires us to optimize the usage of oil, natural gas, coal, nuclear, and renewables in a multi-sourced environment. The key is to provide as much interchangeable energy as possible.
That allows one source to compensate for others in a more efficient and available network. But for this to happen, there needs to be continued expansion in all of the major energy categories and some serious attention given to the production and delivery infrastructure among them.
But Trump's campaign pledge to make the U.S. "energy independent" has largely been regarded as nothing more than a move to support more oil and natural gas drilling, as well as an increasing reliance on coal.
To focus on any one at the expense of another would be a big mistake.
Today, I want to focus on a necessary cog in the energy balance and national energy self-sufficiency: renewables. Specifically solar and its place in the national energy sector under a Trump administration…
Trump's Administration Seems Set to Deprioritize Solar
At the outset, nobody associated with the incoming White House has voiced any particular opposition to solar. After all, in many parts of the country, solar has made significant gains over the past several years and reached grid parity, that is, equal or lower power generation cost with more conventional sources of power generation, like coal and gas.
The problem comes from elsewhere.
Republicans kept their majorities in both houses of Congress, and many Republican members of Congress have long voiced disapproval about the subsidies that solar and other renewables have been provided.
But they're looking for subsidies in the wrong place.
Join the conversation. Click here to jump to comments…
About the Author
Dr. Kent Moors is an internationally recognized expert in oil and natural gas policy, risk assessment, and emerging market economic development. He serves as an advisor to many U.S. governors and foreign governments. Kent details his latest global travels in his free Oil & Energy Investor e-letter. He makes specific investment recommendations in his newsletter, the Energy Advantage. For more active investors, he issues shorter-term trades in his Energy Inner Circle.
"crashing more than 10%?" That's what you call a 'crash.' LOL. I can point to numerous 'crashes' of solar stocks that had nothing to do with a presidential election, let alone Trump.
Would be great if people would stop overly and negatively dramatizing the election affects of Trump. I don't see any of you guys lauding Trump for the stock market rise after his election – despite all the fear scare tactics that accompanied the prospects of him winning. Several of you guys were predicting sell-offs of 10%-30%. Oops.
Solar stocks have dropped almost 50% this year and many are selling at way less than book value such as First Solar(FSLR), which I see as a takeover candidate.
I see solar as the cleanest and most cost efficient source of power and I know our president elect will have an energy policy that is best for this country and that will include solar and the efficient uses of oil, coal and natural gas.