One of the biggest arguments against converting America to clean energy is that it will dramatically hurt our economy. Is there any truth to this beyond what the Competitive Energy Institute (Exxon Mobil) wants us to believe?
Short answer: no. The only change in our economy that will occur by converting to clean energy is that the oil industry will fall to pieces and be replaced by a clean energy industry. Sure, there will be a transition period that will be iffy – but we’re not going to destroy our economy by building more wind, solar, geothermal, hydroelectric, some nuclear, etc power plants. Our economy will not collapse if we heavily research electric cars, try to develop efficient fuel cells, and simply wean ourselves from oil (and being reliant on foreign governments for it)
The thing that puzzles me so much is that people who are so gung-ho about America’s national security are the ones who don’t think we should devote a second to a very serious alternative energy policy. Instead they think we should just continue to supply these foreign governments, many who probably have connections with terrorists, tons of money.
Look at how unstable the stock market is now. Inflation is much to blame. But what is another factor that drives stock prices way up and down? The price of a barrel of oil. Imagine if the price of a barrel of oil had absolutely no meaning anymore. Imagine if we could buy 25% of the oil we buy now because we’re running on alternative energy sources? Imagine if we could clear up a lot of our foreign debt because we wouldn’t have to spend so much on importing oil?
We need to put some serious thought AND MONEY into alternative energy research and development, and conservation initiatives.
Buying foreign oil versus become energy independent is like renting versus buying. When you rely on foreign oil – you have to keep buying and buying and take whatever price is available. The more you buy doesn’t get you any closer to financial independence. Becoming energy independent through alternative energy research and conservation initiatives has a much larger upfront cost – but in the long haul we are way ahead.
Let’s buy instead of rent and become energy independent.
3 Comments for Clean Energy Confusion
joe | June 25, 2006 at 1:16 pm
Waco Kid | June 26, 2006 at 4:59 am
Companies and the govt are investing in the R&D for alternative fuels in a big way.
Research and discovery takes time and is not often able to meet timely deadlines.
To turn towards an alternative energy that is (if it is) significantly more expensive will be harmfull to the economy.
Also to label people who are “gung ho” about national security as not caring about foreign dependence on oil is simply wrong. Some of the biggest supporters of advancements in alternative fuels are those who are supposdly “gung ho” about national security.
Shaniqua | June 26, 2006 at 9:34 am
The case is often made that people displaced by technology, global markets, etc., should stop bitching about it, get retrained/re-educated and get back on the horse after being thrown. This same American self-gumption attitude can be applied to large corporations and business sectors, that start whining about “what will happen to the economy” if we switch gears because they’ve become irrelevant and need to exist through actual competition vs. favorable legislation.
And the answer is: Well, the same thing that happens to our personal economies when we’re forced to switch gears halfway through our lives. Sometimes we never recover and realize that yesterday was the highpoint of our lives and economic wellbeing — all our days from that day on are measured as a downward slide — so hopefully we weren’t too nasty to everyone on the way up, because we’re due some nuggies on our way down past them the second time. Or maybe we discover that being an economist isn’t nearly as self-fulfilling as being a dictator of a small nation somewhere.
The “let them swim if they can” argument seems not to apply to large corporations for some reason although applied constantly to the losers among us being off-shored or replaced by local automation (such as self-checkouts at Wal*Mart). I suspect it’s because they have an army of corporate apologists in the wings waiting to make easy money and don’t want to be bothered to learn or keep up with the fast rate of uncontrolled change as the changes occur. The risk (to making money) during times of change is high, but with high risk, comes potential for high gains for the untimid.
I’ve heard people rationalize that global warming is an opportunity for technology to help us overcome. And I say, well, bring it on biyotch, if downsizing one American is good for the world economy, downsizing GM, FORD, ExxonMobil would be like, a lot better for the evolution of the economy on the whole.
Get thee your pitchfork and torch ready, just in case you want to storm a gated community somewhere. (Have you checked my on-line pitchfork and torch store on froogle? Opportunity abounds for the untimid…)
you make it sound so simple and easy but in many cases its not as easy as just deciding to walk to work instead of driving. you really have no clue what will happen.