You DO Have a Voice

A reader commented that she loved the quote of Henry Kissinger that I used in a recent post:  “If it weren’t for the wrath of the American people about our presence in Vietnam, we’d STILL BE THERE.”  (emphasis added) I used that to illustrate that we DO, despite all indications to the contrary, have an important voice in determining the outcome of our civilization.

I happened to run across this one from Noam Chomsky just now:

All over the place, from the popular culture to the propaganda system, there is constant pressure to make people feel that they are helpless, that the only role they can have is to ratify decisions and to consume.

Pay It NOW — In Energy Policy — Or Anywhere Else — It’s Wrong To Pass Burdens On

More people each day are disgusted with the course our civilization is taking. Whether your main concern is social injustice, proliferation of nuclear weapons, environmental ruination, white-collar criminality, the decay of morality, growing rates of addiction to recreational and psychiatric drugs, the decline in educational standards, or the ravages of corporatocracy, one thing’s for sure: you’re one of very few if you believe the human race is on the right track.

I don’t have a lot of answers. But I think I can say this without fear of contradiction: It’s up to all of us to raise our voices when we see things we don’t like.

Here’s something else I suggest we do with issues: analyze them honestly. Is there any commonality among all these social ills? I believe there is: the concept that someone else – another person living now somewhere on Earth – or someone who will be born in the future – should pay for the benefit you’re taking here and now. Read More »

Obama’s Approval Ratings — and Energy

Below is a link to a piece I wrote recently for Renewable Energy World in which I attempt to explain President Obama’s falling approval ratings. In it, I point out that, although his administration has been hamstrung with compromises from Congress whose end products are garbled, wrong-headed trash that wind up pleasing no one, he has been far more effective than its predecessors in supporting the development of clean energy. Read More »

Aiming at Fairness

PhotobucketI have a great deal of respect for PBS, but in many ways they’re no better than CBS’s 60 Minutes – whose every story is about one thing: convincing us of something. Pick an item – normally an emotionally explosive one – and then gather, twist, and force-feed every piece of evidence possible to convince us of whatever the editor has decided that we must believe.

A recent episode of the PBS program SoCal featured California’s poor, neglected Occupational Safety and Health Administration — OSHA, and documented that a few companies in Southern California had been neglectful of some of their workers. For 30 minutes, viewers had one idea rammed down their throats: government needs to have more power to investigate companies’ facilities, business practices, and records — and to impose harsher fines for safety violations.

I think pretty-much everyone accepts that cases of corporate malfeasance happen every day. But mightn’t viewers here have been interested in a voice from another point of view – even if it lasted on the screen only a few brief seconds? Instead, we received a half-hour drumbeat: business owners are selfish monsters, and only more intrusion of government into the private sector can protect us from their callous disregard for our safety.

It might have been instructive to examine — if only for a moment — the mass exodus of business from California, much of the cause of the $42 billion state budget deficit, and the crash of real estate values as millions of workers are laid off from companies that are failing — or pulling up roots and going to more business-friendly parts of the country. Can’t we hear even a suggestion that the world of hurt in which we live may be due to too much government intrusion, in the form of onerous taxation and regulation?

I was amused to learn that SoCal received an award for its journalistic excellence. If PBS wants to know what would have represented even greater excellence, it would have been a bit of fairness, e.g., a tiny bit of the other side of the argument.

When I think of what 2GreenEnergy represents, I think of that fairness. We all want clean energy, but we acknowledge that we live in a world of tough realities. Outside of the shareholders in the fossil fuel companies, no one wants oil, coal, and gas. But, unfortunately, the world is just a wee bit more complicated than simply shutting off the pumps.

Let’s advocate for renewables, but let’s push even harder for a fair and level-headed discussion.

Energy Policy and Land Use

The migration to renewable energy is complicated by a great number of factors in the renewable energy “triumvirate” -technological, economic, and political. The chart below shows one of many different dimensions of this complexity: land use – which, when you think about it, touches on all three. The data in the chart is derived from:

1) a paper titled Alternative Energy and Land Use from Clinton Andrews et al.
2) land intensiveness data from McDonald et al (2009)
3) land area data from Melillo et al (2009), and
4) global energy demand data from EIA

Photobucket
Read More »

Role of Government in Forming Energy Policy

Craig Shields, former Libertarian, speaks on the role of government should play in energy policy, citing the need for a level playing field for renewable energy.

Free-market Capitalism as a Driver of Energy Policy

I notice – with no particular level of surprise – that many of the comments we get on business blog posts suggest fairly radical ideas in terms of social reform. I am by no means an expert on this, though I do try to keep an open mind to ideas other than garden-variety capitalism.

In fact, I often ask myself: What would have happened in Cuba over the past 50 years if the US hadn’t done everything in its power to ensure the most miserable lives possible for those people? Are there valid alternatives to our way of life?

But, looking at these ideas in a cold and pragmatic light, it seems that these alternative social and economic construct only replace one set of horrors with another – in many case, horrors that are far greater. If market conditions do not set levels of production and consumption of goods and services, who or what does? Can anyone reasonably believe that a centralized government will do a better job than free-market capitalism?