I’ve heard arguments for “clean coal”. I’ve heard arguments for “Green energy”. Proponents of clean coal deride Green supporters as damp hippies. Proponents of the Green revolution call supports of clean coal apologists of Big-Oil and Big-Coal. The only problem is, it’s the same wishful thinking behind clean coal that prevails with supporters of the Green revolution.
If we really want to spur development, we’ll need more than national solidarity. We are going to need the three principles of economic development: plausibility, entrepreneurship, and a unhampered market third. Clean coal, and clean gasoline, for that matter, are within the scope of human innovation, as is efficient economically-conscious solar and wind power.
Proponents of both fail to understand the market-forces behind technological development and economic growth. They fail to understand human drives and motivation. Plausibility is first. This is likely where carbon-emission mandates and subsidization of “green” industries will go wrong. Consider the realities of the public policy process — the decision-making process in Congress isn’t really independent of external pressures, i.e., lobbyists — and you’ll start to see how things could go really wrong with things as important as the future of our planet.
Entrepreneurship is second. Entrepreneurship is not Al Gore’s plan, nor is it the T. Boon Pickens Plan. Entrepreneurship comes from individual innovators, not from a government or industry mandate — commands and quotas will only stifle initiative and innovation. If the people in charge have the answer, why do we need to come up with one?
Unhampered markets are third, and key. Economic growth is about maintaining the ethic of innovation and growth, not about maintaining the status quo. In a way, this component is really a fundamental to the entire deal. If you want to adapt, and to unleash the bridled creative potential of man, ideas, and the market, then you have to let it run free. You can’t bitch slap the market and then expect it to work for you.
[Via http://kevinduewel.wordpress.com]
No comments:
Post a Comment