As our president and Congress continue to work their various priorities our nations energy policy once again languishes. Worse yet, many of the stated policies which already exist ignore the reality of a national economy firmly wedded to fossil fuels for the foreseeable future.
Today we have an economy that struggles to produce high paying jobs while we send billions of dollars every month overseas, often to countries that are not friendly to America. Meanwhile substantial opportunities for domestic development go unrealized due to environmental claims which are often little more than luddite objections to everything technological.
Fortunately a path exists to sustainable energy independence, reduced CO2 emissions, reduced environmental impacts, AND robust economic growth. This diary will propose such a path for consideration.
OIL/Fossil Fuels
Under even the most optimistic scenario's for the adoption of green and alternate fuel technologies the USA will require many billions of barrels of oil in the coming years. We can continue to purchase that oil or we can aggressively develop our own domestic resources as part of a multifaceted plan to reduce emissions and improve our energy independence. Every BTU we source from our own lands under our own environmental regulations is a BTU we don't buy from countries that care far less about the environmental impact of fossil fuel operations than we do.
Note well our country WILL require for many years far more oil and natural gas than we can produce with current industry capacity. Hence, the current policies of our government which prohibit development of domestic reserves merely insure that we will continue to have an economy at risk to shocks in the world price of fossil fuels.
It could also be argued that true energy independence would dramatically reduce the probability that American presidents would be sending our sons and daughters off to fight and die in foreign lands. Would the USA have intervened in Kuwait if we didn't need their oil? If we had not would Osama have pursued his mad scheme for 9-11? If the muslim countries were not flush with the many many billions of dollars paid for their oil would they have had the means to underwrite their WMD and nuclear ambitions?
JOBS
Today we suffer from an economy that seems incapable of generating the kind of high paying jobs which historically have provided so many Americans with a standard of living that was the envy of the world. Aggressive development of our fossil fuel resources would generate tens of thousands of high paying jobs. The money earned by those workers would remain in our economy instead of flowing overseas.
CO2 Emissions
While the contribution by man to global warming is still debated I believe it's irrevelant. The idea that man can continue to dump vast and ever increasing amounts of CO2 into the atmosphere without negative consequences simply doesn't make sense. It is likely there are substantial negative impacts to such a course that are not even suspected at this time. Consequently, the argument about whether or not human generated CO2 is a prime driver of global warming becomes moot.
So, to summarize:
- CO2 emissions should be curtailed
- our economy will require billion of barrels of oil in the coming years
- Our country need jobs
- we need alternate technologies to fossil fuels
The proposal is as follows:
Congress writes legislation to include the following:
- a $5 per gallon tax on gasoline to be implemented at a rate of $0.25 per quarter for the next 5 years.
- a BTU equivalent on other fossil fuels (with the possible exception of natural gas which is both domestically abundant and cleaner burning)
- Revenues from the tax will be offset dollar for dollar with tax reductions in other areas. This is a vastly important caveat as any other approach would cripple our economy indefinitely. It would also make the new tax far more acceptable to the public.
- Legislation to "fast track" approval of Nuclear and Hydroelectric power, the only 2 alternatives which are both zero emission and cost competitive with fossil fuels. They have the additional advantage of being the only alternatives which are also 24/7, a dramatic advantage vs. other alternates.
- Legislation to open the areas which presently offer substantial opportunity for recovery of fossil fuels on land controlled by the USA. Included in such legislation are provisions to eliminate the on-going and massively expensive legal manipulations currently used to delay such projects.
The probable outcomes include the following:
- Tens of thousands of high paying jobs are created in the fossil fuels industry. This change would occur rapidly and the effect would last for many years. Some areas of the USA like Texas, Wyoming, and Alaska would be literally booming in a few short years.
- Consumer purchase decisions which impact fossil fuel usage would experience an immediate and lasting impact. The payback for investments which today are marginal or negative such as geothermal heating, small windmills, additional insulation, and a myriad of others would immediately improve WITHOUT GOVERNMENT SUBSIDIES. For example, the average consumer will give far more consideration the the fuel economy of a new car if that person knows for certain gasoline will be $5 or $6 or $7 per gallon a few years in the future. Us auto companies could make money on small cars because that's what people would want to buy. No CAFE standard required.
A personal note: I have investigated the payback on "small air" windmills (less than 40 kw.) even with a government grant covering 30% of the purchase price the windmill takes 10 years to break even assuming you already own the land and a 10% annual increase in electricity costs. If electricity costs were projected to rise substantially faster (as they would with the fossil fuels tax) you'd see such windmills popping up like dandelions in spring even without the subsidy.
- Tens of thousands of additional jobs would be created in the Nuclear power and Hydroelectric industries. This change would occur rapidly and the effect would last for many years.
- America's scientists, engineers, and businessmen would develop the processes, machines, and business models to exploit alternative technologies which suddenly become attractive investments when compared to the steadily escalating cost of fossil fuels. The USA would become the world leader in such technologies and we would sell those technologies to other countries for many many billions of dollars. No congressional input required. We won't get more politically attractive but technically foolish "alcohol fuel programs" that don't save oil while delivering unintended consequences like higher food costs and billions of gallons of fresh water wasted yearly.
There would no doubt be a great many other beneficial effects. Most importantly America would be taking control of her future in an environmentally responsible way while leading the world into the inevitable future where dirt cheap fossil fuels are no longer available.
The primary objections to this approach will, of course, come from the environmentalists. However, I believe it is inevitable that the environmental lobby will have to abandon it's current approach and get behind a program or programs that actually have potential for success. Windmills and solar simply can provide enough reliable energy to make a dent in CO2 emissions and anyone that studies the topic a bit and can do simple math knows this. Recent articles about the land use impact of mega solar and wind power projects might provide some justification for environmentalists to open their minds to the suggestions presented above. A rational environmentalist that believes in global warming as a threat to humanity should be ardently supporting a resurgence of Nuclear Power.