Delaware's Bloom Energy: Expensive Lessons Repeated

Delaware’s partnership with Bloom Energy in 2011, which led to massive subsidies for the production of fuel cells that relied on natural gas, is emblematic of the state’s pattern of political expediency and corporate profits taking precedence over long-term sustainability. The Bloom Energy deal, driven by closed-door decisions, is not an isolated case. Similar issues are now being seen in Delaware’s Low-Income Solar Program, which, like the weatherization programs and the Delaware Sustainable Energy Utility (DESEU), is benefiting corporate vendors more than the residents it was designed to help.

The Bloom Energy Debacle

In 2011, the governor at the time led Delaware into a high-profile agreement with Bloom Energy, touting it as a major advancement for the state’s renewable energy future. The state provided Bloom with over $300 million in subsidies, funded by public money and utility surcharges. The project was presented as a win-win for the state, promising both significant job creation and reductions in carbon emissions through Bloom’s “Energy Servers,” which ran on natural gas.

However, natural gas—despite being a fossil fuel—was controversially redefined as a “renewable resource” to qualify for subsidies under Delaware’s Renewable Portfolio Standards (RPS). This reclassification allowed Bloom Energy to access funds intended for renewable energy projects, drawing criticism for bending the rules in favor of corporate profits rather than public benefit.

Corporate Profits at Public Expense

While the project was promoted as a step toward clean energy, the biggest beneficiaries were Bloom Energy’s corporate shareholders. The promised local jobs and emissions reductions fell short of expectations, and Delaware residents saw their utility bills rise as a result of the deal. The fuel cells’ reliance on natural gas also contradicted the state’s clean energy goals, making the project more about securing corporate profits than fostering genuine sustainability.

Political Expediency and Closed-Door Decisions

The decisions leading to the Bloom Energy deal were made largely behind closed doors, with little public input or scrutiny. This lack of transparency raised concerns about how taxpayer money was being allocated and whether it was being used to serve the public interest. These closed-door decisions highlight how corporate interests were prioritized over the needs of Delaware residents.

Delaware’s History of Closed-Door Energy Decisions

Delaware’s troubled energy policymaking is not limited to Bloom Energy. The state has seen similar issues with its weatherization programs. A 2010 federal audit of Delaware's Weatherization Assistance Program (WAP) revealed significant mismanagement and oversight failures, including the misuse of funds meant to help low-income households make their homes more energy efficient. This mismanagement led to poor program outcomes and a failure to meet its stated goals, echoing the concerns raised with the Bloom Energy deal. The full audit findings can be found here.

The Delaware Sustainable Energy Utility (DESEU) has also faced criticism. The Caesar Rodney Institute gave DESEU low ratings due to its lack of transparency and its failure to deliver promised environmental and financial benefits. DESEU has struggled to meet its targets for reducing greenhouse gas emissions and increasing energy efficiency, despite receiving significant public funding. The Caesar Rodney Institute's assessment of DESEU can be read here.

Delaware’s Low-Income Solar Program: Repeating the Same Mistakes

Delaware’s Low-Income Solar Program is following a familiar pattern. The program, which was designed to help low-income residents access solar energy, has instead prioritized corporate vendors who stand to gain from state contracts. According to Garret Blain's article, the program offers only a $35 savings on participants' monthly electric bills, while costing millions in combined subsidies and credits from the Inflation Reduction Act.

This minimal benefit to residents raises serious questions about who is truly benefitting from the program. Corporate vendors are receiving lucrative state contracts, while low-income residents, who were meant to be the primary beneficiaries, see only modest savings. The program’s reliance on significant public subsidies, including those from federal sources like the Inflation Reduction Act, adds to the concern that these programs are enriching businesses at the expense of taxpayers.

Conclusion: Lessons Not Learned

Delaware’s experience with Bloom Energy, its weatherization programs, DESEU, and now the Low-Income Solar Program reveals a pattern of closed-door decisions, political expediency, and corporate profits driving state energy policy. Despite the 2010 federal audit exposing the failures of Delaware’s weatherization efforts, and the low ratings of DESEU from the Caesar Rodney Institute, the state’s leadership has continued to prioritize corporate interests over public good.

The Low-Income Solar Program’s failure to deliver substantial benefits to the residents it was meant to help—while costing millions in subsidies and taxpayer dollars—echoes the same mistakes made in the Bloom Energy deal. By offering only a $35 savings to low-income participants while corporate vendors profit handsomely, the state is once again repeating its costly and misguided energy decisions.

To avoid further missteps, Delaware must prioritize transparency and public accountability in its energy programs. Rather than continuing to funnel public funds into projects that disproportionately benefit corporate interests, the state should focus on policies that deliver real, sustainable benefits to its residents. Until these issues are addressed, Delaware’s energy future will remain fraught with the same problems that have plagued it for more than a decade.

By revisiting these flawed policies and committing to transparency, Delaware can move toward a future where renewable energy truly benefits its residents—not just its corporate contractors.

Photo byMike HindleonUnsplash