Saturday, September 5, 2009

Countering Green Conventional Wisdom

A great piece in Foreign Policy, a favorite journal of mine, confronts head-on several common assumptions about renewable energy that hold greater sway over policy debate than they should.

While a couple of the 7 myths are straw men intended to frame the discussion, several others are so spot on it's hard to believe anybody promoting these orthodoxies about renewables is still getting a pass.


For example, the myth that we should be doing everything possible to promote alternative energy is ridiculous on its face, because panicky and ill-thought-out responses aggravate the disease they purport to cure.

Case in point is the biofuels movement, which Congress rammed through under pressure from the farm lobby. As if the pervasiveness of subsidized corn in our food diets isn't enough, we are pressing corn into action to power our fleets. Not to say that cleaner fuels aren't desirable, but there are probably cheaper and more efficient feedstocks (switchgrass from Montana, sugar cane from Brazil) than corn.

Add to this the fact that a lot of petroleum (fertilizers, tractors) is consumed harvesting corn, to say nothing of the carbon emissions resulting from such effort.

Another related myth is that biofuel mandates will evolve and we'll get better resolving these contradictions in the future. The author quite correctly points out that so long as agriculture-for-fuel's footprint grows, displacing valuable forest cover, we are hardly out of the woods, and may in fact be increasing emissions over the long term and doing greater harm.

The logic of all this may be too compelling for even the most powerful vested interests in biomass and biofuels to stop: that it may be wiser to mandate lower fossil fuel consumption and carbon emissions through aggressive auto fuel economy standards, carbon sequestration, and other energy efficiency measures than ravage the world's forests.

"Deforestation accounts for 20 percent of global emissions, so unless the world can eliminate emissions from all other sources--cars, coal, factories, cows--it needs to back off forests."

Bottom line, says the author, and most non-PC, is that we'll still need gas and oil and coal for some time to come, we just need to use a lot less of it. It seems unorthodox, even today, to suggest that Jimmy Carter was right, we need to change our behavior, and that while energy efficiency can do great things, conservation may be even better.

So, turn down the thermostat, put on a sweater, car pool to work, or better yet, ride a bicycle.

No comments: