Green Auto Loan and Grant Programs on Trump's Budget Chopping Block

Steph Willems
by Steph Willems

Automakers would have to fund a larger share of future green technology projects if the Trump White House’s budget blueprint passes as written.

The administration proposes to do away with a little-used — and sometimes controversial — U.S. Energy Department loan program, as well as a grant program dedicated to spurring advanced fuel-saving technologies.

Contained in the budget blueprint is the elimination of the federal government’s Advanced Research Projects Agency-Energy program, known as ARPA-e. That initiative, created in 2007, doles out $300 million each year for environmentally friendly research initiatives.

While automakers tapped into the program, a number of Silicon Valley startups used the fund as seed money for marketable technologies. Green energy companies also received money from the program.

In light of Trump’s intent to reduce funding to the Environmental Protection Agency, as well the government’s plan to re-open the EPA’s midterm review of 2025 fuel efficiency targets, it’s not surprising the proposal has met fierce criticism. In response, the Trump administration claimed that the “private sector is better positioned to finance disruptive energy research and development and to commercialize innovative technologies.”

ARPA-e isn’t the only federal initiative poised to bite the dust, but it’s arguably the most controversial of the proposed eliminations. Also on the chopping block is the Advanced Technology Vehicle Manufacturing loan program, created in 2008. That program, unused since 2011, became a political lightning rod after low-cost loans were awarded to ill-fated Fisker Automotive and another failed startup. Taxpayers, still recovering from the recession, took a bath.

Three existing automakers received billions of dollars from the program. Ford walked away with a $5.9 billion loan in 2009, while Nissan saw $1.45 billion the following year. Also in 2010, upstart Tesla Motors claimed $465 million from the program’s $25 billion pool.

While it hasn’t been used in years, the program’s existence provides hope and opportunity to companies, argues the National Resources Defense Council. The environmental advocacy non-profit has stated the program “plays a critical role in bringing promising technologies out of the lab and into the real world, bridging a funding gap that entrepreneurs call ‘the valley of death.'”

[Source: Reuters] [Image: David Villarreal/ Flickr ( CC BY-SA 2.0)]

Steph Willems
Steph Willems

More by Steph Willems

Comments
Join the conversation
2 of 100 comments
  • Ronnie Schreiber Ronnie Schreiber on Mar 19, 2017

    The purpose of the ATVM program was ultimately environmental. Meanwhile, fracking is making America's air cleaner because utilities are switching from coal to natural gas

  • Art Vandelay Art Vandelay on Mar 19, 2017

    Agreed. Coal will go away in the US, not because of regulation killing the industry, but because economics. if our elected officials were smart we'd be preparing that workforce for that eventuality rather than pandering to them though.

  • Calrson Fan Jeff - Agree with what you said. I think currently an EV pick-up could work in a commercial/fleet application. As someone on this site stated, w/current tech. battery vehicles just do not scale well. EBFlex - No one wanted to hate the Cyber Truck more than me but I can't ignore all the new technology and innovative thinking that went into it. There is a lot I like about it. GM, Ford & Ram should incorporate some it's design cues into their ICE trucks.
  • Michael S6 Very confusing if the move is permanent or temporary.
  • Jrhurren Worked in Detroit 18 years, live 20 minutes away. Ren Cen is a gem, but a very terrible design inside. I’m surprised GM stuck it out as long as they did there.
  • Carson D I thought that this was going to be a comparison of BFGoodrich's different truck tires.
  • Tassos Jong-iL North Korea is saving pokemon cards and amibos to buy GM in 10 years, we hope.
Next