VitalAccurateThinking

A Little Eco-Nomics Never Hurt

This from Roy Spencer over at TCS:

TCS Daily - A Little Eco-Nomics Never Hurt

Fear of the ultimate environmental threat, global warming, is now striking at the very heart of modern life, casting doubt upon the future availability of inexpensive energy that is necessary to keep society running. Al Gore's movie 'An Inconvenient Truth', Discovery's recent special 'Global Warming: What You Need to Know with Tom Brokaw', and a deluge of media stories and editorials are all dedicated to convincing you that we need to be saved from ourselves.

And while it is true that there are potential negative side effects of our use of fossil fuels (as well as most other natural resources), little attention is ever paid to the practical question: what should be done about it? It is much easier to point out a problem than it is to actually fix it....and 'fixing problems' too often leads to unintended negative consequences.

I think this is a valid question: should we reach a consensus as a society that global warming is indeed real and is a threat to life on earth, what can and should be done?

And we indeed should do those things that make the most economic and scientific sense -- for instance national investments in energy research.

But when the pundits push for solutions that will not work (the Kyoto Protocol, or the rapidly failing EU carbon trading scheme), one begins to wonder about either their intelligence or their motives. In the end, these efforts do little more than redistribute wealth and let their proponents feel good about themselves.

Could redistributing wealth be the true motive? Disdain for 'wealth' and 'big business' arises when people neglect the fact that these conditions only occur when someone figures out a better way to provide more desirable goods and services, at a lower cost, that people want. Economic transactions benefit the seller and the buyer, otherwise they would not occur.

This is a concern of mine. I see the Kyoto Protocol and these carbon trading schemes and the skeptic in me asks if they are just another method to redistribute wealth without really solving the problem.

Once again, once we come to a consensus and reach critical mass on Global Warming, what are the solutions?

posted by Jim VAT @ 7:27 AM