Considering the trillions spent on subsidies for oil and gas, it beggars belief that a relatively modest $40bn spent on creating thousands of jobs, promoting energy security and greening the economy is getting it in the neck.

Yet that's the fate of the US government's loan's programme, which has so far supported over 40 clean energy projects ranging from new nuclear, through to geothermal, wind and solar projects, funding innovative manufacturing processes and technologies as well as building new low carbon energy capacity.

The loan guarantee programme, which closed on Friday, has been a constant target for Republican criticism. Politicians have pointed to the collapse of PV panel maker Solyndra, which declared itself bankrupt at the end of August after receiving a $535m loan guarantee, as evidence that the government is doling out cash without a thought to financial prudence.

Reports that Nevada Geothermal, another company supported with a Federal grant and loan guarantee, is going under and at least two loans failed amid Department of Energy bureaucracy, have certainly not helped matters.

But it must be stressed that these are just a small handful of failures that needs to be set against the numerous successes the programme has enjoyed.

The money handed out by the Obama administration and, credit where it's due, the previous Bush government that actually started the scheme, has helped fund projects that simply would not have happened otherwise, at relatively little cost to the taxpayer.

The main focus has been on large solar schemes, such as Blyth, Ivanpah or the 250MW Mojave Solar Project, which will increase the US's concentrated solar power capacity by 50 per cent.

But projects such as 1366 Technologies' manufacturing plant, which promises to halve the cost of producing solar wafers by cutting production time from three days to 25 seconds, or Abengoa's commercial-scale cellulosic biofuel plant, are also serving to create the bedrock on which new US clean tech industries can flourish and compete internationally.

Solyndra (and Evergreen Solar and SpectraWatt) complained of being undercut by cheap Chinese imports. Well, there are two options: give up, or design something cheaper and better. Federal money is helping firms pursue the latter option.

And by guaranteeing the loans, the government has driven forward projects that would otherwise have been impossible considering that the US is highly unlikely to develop a comprehensive clean energy policy framework for as long as its political system remains so dysfunctional.

Moreover, the scheme has delivered, at relatively low cost, an important consideration given concerns over government spending.

The administration has provided loan guarantees, not loans themselves, meaning the taxpayer steps in only if projects fail and end up unable to make repayments. Yes, this means that the government has to recognise the liability on its books, and yes, it means the taxpayer is left on the hook if a company fails, as happened with Solyndra. But many of these projects will succeed, meaning that the government will end up enabling them without having to put its hand in its pocket.

In fact, the programme is doing exactly what the UK's much heralded Green Investment Bank could be doing from next year, if it had not been hamstrung by the Treasury until 2015.

It's easy to look at the States and see a mire of partisan politics in which half of the country doesn't see a looming environmental crisis, but in this case the US is well ahead of where we are in the UK.

It's just a shame that the programme ended last week.