Cleantech isn’t dead: Sell the Tech, Not the Clean
As the Trump administration shifts focus to oil and gas and threats to the Inflation Reduction Act (IRA) mount, many fear the death of cleantech. But for two decades, the industry has made a crucial mistake: leading with environmental benefits rather than practical value.
Cleantech isn't dying—it just needs to be reframed in three critical ways:
Costs matter more than carbon.
The economic argument for cleantech hinges entirely on reducing costs and improving efficiency. Solar didn't take off because it was green—it did because it became cheaper than fossil fuels. Businesses and consumers consistently respond to lower prices, not environmental promises.
Affordability drives adoption.
Resource security should be the banner message.
Foreign dependence on critical materials, manufacturing, and energy creates dangerous vulnerabilities. Just as Europe’s natural gas dependence on Russia proved catastrophic, US reliance on Chinese rare earth processing and battery supply chains poses similar risks. Domestic cleantech production strengthens national security, stabilizes costs, and creates local jobs.
A resilient economy controls its own resources.
Cleantech must embrace resource maximalism.
A diversified, innovative, and decentralized supply of energy and materials reduces the risk of shortages and disruptions. Tesla proved this principle brilliantly—it didn't win by asking customers to sacrifice, but by building faster, sexier cars. The future demands abundance, not constraints.
The goal is more energy, more materials, and more resilience.
The irony is clear: for cleantech to succeed, it must create exceptional systems that deliver sustainable human benefits through advanced technology while de-emphasizing environmental messaging. The impact will happen regardless of sentiment—what drives mass adoption is cheaper, more secure, and more abundant resources.
Perhaps the most impactful strategy is to drop the word "clean" altogether and let the tech speak for itself.