Looking past the hyperbole and faux incredulity that the government would actually try and do something about climate change, the article in the url below from the WSJ's op-ed page makes an essential point that many in the area of sustainability seem unable to comprehend:
"As much wood is burned in the U.S. today as in 1885, when coal surpassed it to become our largest energy source. Wind and hydropower were in use centuries before fossil fuels arrived and never stopped growing. Solar voltaic has grown like topsy since its invention in the 1950s."
The point:
"There's only 'additional' energy and no upward limit on humanity's willingness to consume it except through the workings of price. If energy were cheap enough, we'd have flying cars, supersonic airlines and space travel for the middle class. You would open your windows in the winter to enjoy the benefit of fresh air and heat at the same time. Energy is convenience. Energy is control over our environment. Humans will consume all the energy it makes sense to consume at the available price."
To emphasize the final sentence of that previous paragraph:
"Humans will consume all the energy it makes sense to consume at the available price."
In other words, the price of that energy matters (see Strategic CSR – Carbon Tax and also Strategic CSR – Carbon tax). The makeup of our energy profile also matters – the more sustainable our energy mix, the better. The trouble is that we do not appear to be making much progress on that front:
"Cut to the chase: global CO2 emissions actually grew 12% faster in 2022 than energy consumption did. … [That year] around the world, wind and solar still accounted for less than 2.4% of humanity's total energy consumption. Their annual increase was still a small fraction of the annual increase in fossil-fuel consumption. They remain functionally additive to humanity's energy budget, rather than displacing coal or oil on a global basis."
In short, we cannot escape the laws of fundamental economics – what the author terms "the price effect":
"When certain consumers are subsidized to use less fossil energy, others in the U.S. and world will take advantage of lower prices to consume more."
Thus, our fundamental problem. Even though we are capable of enforcing higher prices of unsustainable energy (ideally through a carbon tax, which is applied worldwide) than the market would otherwise make available, our current track record suggests that is unlikely. In this, and many other ways, we are the architects of our own fate.
Take care
David
David Chandler
© Sage Publications, 2023
Instructor Teaching and Student Study Site: https://study.sagepub.com/chandler6e
Strategic CSR Simulation: http://www.strategiccsrsim.com/
The library of CSR Newsletters are archived at: https://strategiccsr-sage.blogspot.com/
Why Are Carbon Emissions Up?
By Holman W. Jenkins, Jr.
August 16, 2023
The Wall Street Journal
Late Edition – Final
A13
