Being Uneconomical for an Uncertain Future
.There is a common line of thought that argues that we should undertake a massive restructuring of the economy, even if it has no current clear benefit, in preparation for some dramatic future change like climate change or peak oil. Folks like Bill McKibbean have the logic, unless we make drastic changes now, the future will be bleak.
Their logic reminds one a lot of the logic of a High School Guidance Counselor, pushing over-priced college educations at so-called “select institutions” that are very over pricd. They argue unless one gets an expensive college education, the future will be bleak. They say, unless you go seriously in debt, you will have no future and be without a good job.
Nobody today can tell us for sure about when or if climate change will occur, or for that matter what the impacts of peak oil will be. We have projections and models that extrapolate data based on today’s conditions and projected changes, but they probably are not accurate as effects rarely are linear. It�s quite possible that effect our growing use of fossil fuels may be far different then anything yet predicted.
Yet, it�s also hard to object to efficiency standards and pollution controls on power plants that benefit society now. More energy while burning less fuel will benefit the economy by lowering costs over the long-run. More fuel efficient cars, while possibly more expensive up front, will provide drivers with lower fuel bills over the car�s life. Good standards that improve efficiency, conserve resources, and reduce pollution, help us now.
I disagree with folk like Bill McKibbean who argue for a radical transformation of the economy based on a projection of climate change or peak oil. We should work to conserve resources and clean up our generating plants, but not because of a future projection, but to improve economic efficiency and the quality of our lives today. If with incidentally also help change the projection for bad things to happen tomorrow, then all the better.