The main takeaways? (1) Relative to other expenditures, like health and national defense, America has over the years spent paltry sums on energy research and development. (2) Of the R&D funds allocated for energy, most of it has gone to fossil fuels and nuclear technologies (though the share going to renewable energy and energy efficiency is growing). (3) As Mackenzie notes, compared to other industrialized countries (save Japan) the U.S. is not alone in its spending habits. Take a look at the accompanying charts:

Looking at that pale blue-bulge during the 60s and 70s (labeled “Space” in the second chart), I can see why Al Gore has chosen to at times describe the drive for renewable energy as our generation’s “space race.” There have also been recent alternative references to a “new Manhattan project.” Metaphors aside, it’s clear the Obama Administration is set on boosting R&D for renewables and energy efficiency. Don’t believe me? Just check out this post from Cleanbeta (Just what you wanted, another chart…).

UPDATE: Geoffery Styles offers his take on how the historic moon landing of Apollo 11 — which took place 40 years ago this coming Monday — is similar, but not identical, to efforts needed to develop and deploy clean-energy technologies:

Yet as impressive and unprecedented as that was, and in spite of a host of valuable breakthroughs and spinoffs in electronics, medicine, and other fields, this is precisely where all of the analogies between energy and Apollo break down. Remaking our energy systems to provide the safe, secure, affordable and environmentally-sound means of energizing the entire economy–national or global, take your pick–will be nothing like making a few trips to the moon and then turning our back on it for four decades. It will require a durable bi-partisan consensus in government for at least a generation and enduring public support of a kind that NASA was ultimately unable to sustain.

a