Wednesday, March 12, 2008

The Price of Environmental Faddism

Price #1: We leave ANWR undrilled and leave offshore areas undrilled and consequently face higher oil prices and bigger trade deficits because of it. The cost in more exact terms is now about $1.5 trillion in oil we are leaving in the ground. USGS estimates 10 billion barrels of oil in ANWR, worth $1 trillion. Minerals Management Service director Randall Luthi makes the case for environmentally responsible energy exploration: " The National Academy of Sciences, in a 2002 study, reported that over the past 20 years, less than .001 percent of the oil produced in U.S. waters has spilled. The same study reported that 150 times more oil enters the ocean every day from natural cracks in the ocean floor than from oil and gas activities."

Price #2: Costly Ethanol subsidies ( aka "the stupidest subsidy") are leading to skyrocketing food prices and hurt chicken and beef producers and consumers. Not only does it do little to curb oil imports, it costs Costs $1700 per ton of CO2 saved. See also Taxpayers for Common Sense on this boondoggle.

Price #3: Environmentalist phobia of nuclear power has slowed development of a cost-effective and environmentally sound energy source .

Meanwhile, our faddism leaves the real problem of foreign oil dependency unresolved. Samuelson on how we help OPEC: "By doing so little to check its own thirst for imports, the United States has contributed to OPEC's present triumph." Teh result of our failure to have real energy independence policies means that oil prices are not coming down: "The savvy economist, investor, politician and consumer ought to be encouraging as much development as possible. However, with policies like the renewable fuel standard and corn-based ethanol, restrictions on drilling sites, and emissions standards that prohibit diesel cars, we cannot foresee anything that brings those prices down."

UPDATE: A smarter solution - use money from ANWR drilling to fund renewable energy.

UPDATE II: More stupidity from the Democrats - they want to close off the possibility of USA benefitting from commercializing the 800 billion barrels (thats $80 trillion worth) of shale oil.

1 comment:

Anonymous said...

Allow me to shed some light on the problem of letting politicos manipulate environmental science:

DDT has been banned for decades because of the harmful effects it has on species like birds. We now know that bad science was involved in the determination that it was harmful. It actually has been found to be acceptable for use now. Unfortunately, since a ban was placed on it, it is nearly impossible to raise the ban and begin production of it. In Africa alone, tens of thousands of real people of all ages die because DDT can't be used to kill off the insects you mention and eliminate the diseases they spread.

Like something closer to home? How's this:

Remember the big worry that "everyone" had before Climate Change/Global Warming? The hole in the ozone layer? Remember how we eliminated highly efficient refrigerants in order to slow the growth of the ozone hole? We now all use more energy in everything from our homes to our cars to keep things and ourselves cool. Oh yeah... there is no hole in the ozone layer after all.