George Will on Cap and Trade: A Policythought Response

George Will, one of the few columnists out there that actually comments on policy. This week, gives his scathing critique of the carbon cap-and-trade system being debated in congress this week. I don't always agree with Mr. Will, this is yet another example. Will argues, that cap and trade is essentially a very well-cloaked tax. That a carbon-tax is politically untenable so instead a cap and trade system is the way to go for greedy politicians that essentially want more power over the our lives. He continues to argue that since the funds collected from cap and trade will fund government investment program, dedicated to fighting the climate crisis and building an alternative energy program, it's a form of pervasive socialism dedicated to destroying the free market, with governments picking and choosing winners and losers and fundamentally shaping our economy. Take a minute to read his column, then come back and read my retort.

George Will seems, at least in his tone, skeptical of the idea of man-made global warming and climate change. I don't expect everyone to agree with prevailing scientific opinion or logic. Just because many do, doesn't mean everyone should. The science behind global warming is as certain as any science can be, it's good enough for most of the world's experts (i.e. those not paid by oil companies to think otherwise) but it doesn't have to be good enough for Mr. Will.

What is an economic imperative however, is the oil economy. We have built our economy and indeed our lifestyle on the idea of personal autonomy- the idea that anyone can own a car and drive wherever they please to do whatever they like. It's as American as apple pie. Cheap energy, largely based on a ready supply first of domestic, then foreign oil and coal led to our automobiles, homes, factories, and offices burning fossil fuels at an unprecedented rate and fundamentally changing the way the nation worked, lived and played.

Now as the developing world begins to move from childhood to adolescence, they demand the same energy use that we bask in. The need for carbon-based fuel is rising more rapidly than supply can keep up. It is this issue that the government must attack. The problem of both domestic and worldwide energy shortage. If that is dealt with intelligently, then we solve an economic woe for our nation, but also, stem the tide of global warming.

The economic issues we are facing require a governmental response on the level of the New Deal. The private sector is concerned, rightly, with is its own short term economic viability-not with the long term problems of energy crisis. As a nation we need governmental intervention to create market conditions that will stimulate innovation and growth over the long term. We encourage diversification in all other manner of investment. Yet when it comes to our energy investment portfolio, we invest only in Oil and Coal. Conservatives, like Mr. Will would have you believe that the market can solve any problem. The Great Depression was not solved by the market alone. The Federal works programs of FDR's new deal were the bedrock of the new solution.

Am I likening the Cap and Trade Program under consideration today with FDR's New Deal? Of course not, however I believe the government must create a challenging environment for industry to come up with solutions to problems. The government must create the kind of challenge, and crisis that we could see in the future, today. To solve a this giant problem before we really are behind the 8-ball. If, for instance Saudi oil supplies were cut off from us by some natural disaster out of man's control, would we simply cease to function? If every drop of oil disappeared tomorrow, what would we do?

We would solve the problem, we would go through a devestating period, and then the nation would pick itself up and build wind, hydro, solar, nuclear and coal plants (clean or not) to solve the energy crisis. Why do conservatives fear government intervention when it comes to solving the greatest problem in our history? Mr. Will, cap and trade solved the acid rain problem. Why shouldn't we try it to solve not global climate change, but our Oil problem?

Gases Prices are Going Up...and that's a good thing

I've blogged on this before. Gas is getting more expensive, there isn't a damn thing the government can do about it, and it's a good thing. Nothing more expediently creates change than rising prices. Last summer Al Gore's Inconvenient Truth was exalted as the kind of national call to action we finally needed. It won an Oscar and a Nobel prize for its merits. While we are still seeing its effects on our culture, what is really motivating people to change their behavior are prices at the pump. High gas prices are forcing Americans to change their behavior in ways that Al Gore cannot. Don't believe me? Check out this article in Time about families cutting back their vacation plans and getting more local this summer. The article describes the beginning of a shift in lifestyle choice by average Americans.

But we need action on the federal level. As global demand for energy increases we need local governments to begin funding mass transit initiatives. Cities like New York, Chicago, and Boston went through a mass transit renaissances long ago. We need to foster the same in cities like Las Vegas, Phoenix, Miami, and yes Los Angles.

Less talk of Green, more talk of Green Backs

I believe man-made global warming and climate change are real. Why? Because I believe in science. However, my beliefs are not shared by all Americans and never will be. Many Americans don't believe in Global Warming and think Al Gore is crazy. I think that PR action for climate change is all mixed up.

Even if you don't believe in big bad global warming, all Americans should want to end our dependence on foreign oil. If I were running an anti-carbon organization, it wouldn't be targeted at a disaster some where in the future. It would be targeted at the already-present energy we have that will only get worse if we remain dependent on carbon. So here are a few bullet points that I think we can all agreed on, that should be the forefront on the anti-oil campaign.

1. We don't have enough of it. Worldwide demand for energy is growing exponentially. China and India are going through a revolution. In China alone 200 million will shift from poverty to a middle-class lifestyle in the next decade. I say good for them, but if they emulate the American standard of living that means they'll want at least one car, and one house that burns energy. This will increase the demand for oil and again raise global prices as the commodity becomes more scarce. That's not environmentalism talking, that's the free market talking. Middle class Americans will not be able to afford a gallon of gas, or to heat their homes, unless we change our ways.

2. Oil is a security threat. When we buy gasoline, or home heating oil, we are indirectly funding regimes, and individuals who hate America. Their oil revenues fund all Middle Eastern life. We are actually funding our enemies every time we go to the pump. Forget surging prices, what happens if production is halted by surprise? A terrorist attack or an earthquake hits? We could see unfathomable economic harm. We need a diverse energy portfolio so our grid can keep working and powering our vehicles not matter what.

3. Strategic assets. Whenever you hear a politician talk about Middle Eastern strategic assets they are talking about Oil. John McCain even said in reference to our oil dependency that getting off foreign oil would ensure "we never have to send our young men and women into harm's way in the middle east again."

4. Economic diversity. We always hear about diversifying out portfolio. We need to do so in energy as well. It's just senseless to rely on one source of fuel. Solar, wind, hydro-electric, biofuels, nuclear power, all should be in the mix to keep each supply in competition with the others and relatively cheap.

So those are the bullet points, but I think you get my point. Independent of the environment or global warming there are very cogent reasons for us to get off oil. Perhaps these inconvenient truths will push people to action.

Support American Ingenuity

Many have pointed out the lack of discussion about global warming in the presidential debates. Indeed, among our politicians in general, there seems to be a void when it comes to addressing the problems of our oil dependency and alternative energy. Sure, they'll do some lip service to the idea of energy independence if asked, but no one has really formulated a concrete plan for making it happen. Where is the pioneering, innovative spirit America is known for? Where is our faith in our own ingenuity?

TIME magazine published an article highlighting a few ways scientists are harnessing energy; you can read it here: http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1720111,00.html

Among them is the idea of harnessing the kinetic power from the motion of person walking. "You won't feel comfortable or fashionable walking around with Max Donelan's invention strapped to your knee. The bulky 3.5-lb. (1.6 kg) gadget "is not that pleasant," says Arthur Kuo, a biomedical engineer at the University of Michigan....Using the same principles that allow hybrid cars to recycle energy created in braking, braces worn on both knees can generate 5 watts of electricity by harvesting the energy inherent in a walker's stride. That may not sound like much, but it's enough to charge 10 cell phones, and it's absolutely free."

Plenty of people strap on weights to their ankles when they walk...why not generate electricity instead? If this kind of innovation can happen on its own, imagine what we could do with a President aggressively encouraging industries to create this kind of technologies with competitive deadlines, generous grants, and the enthusiasm and focus of the nation as a whole. What could be more patriotic than that? So, c'mon...Support American Ingenuity!

The truth about Biodiesel

You're in for a real treat, two posts in one day. I was reading the news and just couldn't help myself.  The BBC's recent report that food prices and shortages are expected to rise in developing nations around the world didn't come as a shock. However, it was somewhat disconcerting to discover one major causes of this problem is the high demand of biofuels.  Damn you Willie Nelson! Here I thought you were acting socially progressive when it's your lifestyle that give Sally Struthers a job. Alright, so I'm being melodramatic, but this completely blew my mind. According to the report food prices will rise as high as forty percent, causing impoverished nations to make dietary sacrifices. I couldn't help but roll my eyes when I saw that Afghanistan was one of the hardest hit when wheat prices rose sixty percent last year. (Please reference my last blog post on helping the poor and repairing international reputation). I am all about finding alternative sources of energy, but it seems that an exploding global population and low food stores trumps any country singer's agenda. Let's hope that the Ford Escort that runs on water is indeed the real McCoy. 

Introducing The $5 Gallon of Gas

Don't think the "myth" of global warming is enough impetus to seek out alternative energy sources? Then how about the fact that gas prices have reached their boiling point.

Two summers ago, I pitched an ad campaign to a client - the nation's leading provider of commuter benefit programs. The campaign was titled "Fight The Five." The concept: a fervent movement to turn back the potential of an impending $5/gallon gas price by encouraging more people to use mass transit (and save a considerable chunk of change on commuting) with tax-free commuter benefits. The client loved the idea, but passed. (It's all good...we won an APTA Award for the ad they chose).

While the concept of a $5 gallon was very real, as suggested by research, the reality of it seemed too distant to resonate with employers or their employees. Now, fast-forward 18 months: today, I saw this article on The Huffington Post about a California town charging over $5 per gallon. And, statewide, the price of regular gas is 58 cents higher than one year ago with a 20 cent increase expected in the weeks to come. Continuing to give oil companies record profits by paying through the nose at the pumps is only hurting Americans. Now, if that's not an inconvenient truth we have to start accepting, then I don't know what is.