If you read editorials on energy development in the United States you will surely see that folks regularly celebrate the potential for the new “Green Economy” to deliver money and jobs in a way that would make Santa Claus envious. OK, fine. Let’s just believe that for the time being. Assume that the planners get that right. Consider that sentiment alongside the arguments that editorialists make against development of fossil fuel resources in the United States. Here is one such argument:
Also, fracking is basically a boom and bust-type industry, and there is a concern that once-prosperous towns will collapse economically after all of the natural gas has been extracted.
Without an economic exegesis here, think about the two big ironies (among others) here:
There are of course other ironies, not the least of which is that the environmental movement likes to take up the mantle of “social justice.” I guess that keeping poor people and poor towns permanently poor is just. By the reasoning above of course you might just conclude that NO economic activity is justified because the process of creative destruction inevitably leaves certain industries in the dust. Wouldn’t the world be better off if the personal computing industry never got started? Seriously. The PC is on its way to the history books with the emergence of advanced mobile computing, which one day may not even require a physical device. We should have nipped this in the bud 50 years ago and pushed for a national ban on the development of PCs.
Have you read that Matt Ridley book? Just finished it, HIGHLY recommended. And on-topic. He spends a great deal of time discussing energy.
Nothing like kicking off the day with some fresh thinking. Well said.
WHAT Matt Ridley book, Speedmaster? If I were to buy it, would that qualify as credit in commissar Rizzo’s buy a book program?
Oh, Sorry. The Rational Optimist.