Peter Boogaart: Are you up for a challenge? Why America Needs Another 'Kennedy moment'

EDITOR'S NOTE: The views and opinions expressed are those of the writer and not of Ottawa News Network.

Speaking at Rice University on Sept. 12, 1962, President John F. Kennedy addressed a nation which was at the time uncertain and anxious. Cosmonaut Yuri Gagarin, the first to leave Earth and return, had won the race into space. The USSR seemed to be ascendant, and the U.S. was in danger of being left behind and ultimately subservient. 

At this inflection point in history, President Kennedy addressed the challenge: “So it is not surprising that some would have us stay where we are a little longer, to rest, to wait … We choose to go to the moon in this decade and do the other things not because they are easy, but because they are hard. Because that goal will serve to organize and measure the best of our energies and skills, because that challenge is one that we're willing to accept. One we are unwilling to postpone.”  

Now, in 2026, history has brought us to yet another inflection point. Reliance on earthbound fossil fuel is threatening our survival, and the race is on to build a new renewable energy future. As was the case in 1962, the U.S. is not in the lead, and yet our current leadership is saying “stay where we are a little longer.” 

In a recent news conference, EPA Secretary Lee Zeldin, shoulder to shoulder with Michigan House Speaker Matt Hall, Colorado Congressman Tom Barrett, and major utility executive Robert Richard, said that energy transition wasn’t a survivable strategy for us. At this time, we have to postpone any contrary efforts, they said. And, oh, by the way, all that renewable energy stuff isn’t going to be a significant component of our energy dominance policy. 

Each of the speakers was correct in understanding the uncertainty, which comes with an inflection point. Yet none of them had the courage or insight to recognize the moment. None of them dared to set a goal. None of them understood that goal setting will “serve to organize and measure the best of our energies and skills.” 

Each of the speakers understood that the work of charting a better future would be hard. Transitions are always hard; utility interconnections have to be reconfigured and new transmission lines built. Disruption and uncertainty are guaranteed, and people will blame you for their discomfort. All these problems are a given, but when faced with a critical threat, real leaders say, “Damn the torpedoes, full speed ahead.” For these energy leaders, the challenge of building a better energy future is “one they are not willing to accept.”

Globally, however, others recognize the advantage of taking on the challenge, especially in Asia. As Bill McKibben reports: “A new gas-fired power plant in Asia needs to sell electricity for more than $100 per megawatt-hour to break even. Even existing plants, whose construction costs have long since been paid off, need $70/MWh or more if they’re fueled with LNG. Photovoltaic solar power, or PV, can be had for half the new-build price, at around $50/MWh or less. You can even add a battery and wind turbines and have round-the-clock clean electricity for less than what established gas plants are paying just for their fuel and maintenance.”

The United States is fully capable of meeting this global challenge. We have great research and engineering resources. We know how to ramp up supply chains. We have the necessary investment and large-scale project expertise. 

The rewards for meeting this challenge are astronomical. Elimination of fossil fuel pollution alone will cut billions of dollars in medical costs. Household utility bills will shrink dramatically (wind and sun are everywhere present and free). And, households and rural towns everywhere will enjoy energy independence and the job growth which that security stimulates.

The global competition is on, and we can do very well in this arena, but not if we’re sitting in the bleachers watching the game. Only the competitors on the field will determine this outcome. In 1962, President Kennedy defined the space race as a challenge “that we're willing to accept. One we are unwilling to postpone.” For us, in 2026, that kind of determination is still required.  

— Peter Boogaart is a resident of Zeeland.

How to submit an opinion

Ottawa News Network accepts columns and letters to the editor from everyone. Letters should be about 300 words and columns should not exceed 1,000 words. ONN reserves the right to fact-check submissions as well as edit for length, clarity and grammar. Please send submissions to newsroom@ottawanewsnetwork.org.