Rudy and Romney's Big-Government Energy Plans

Back to blog

Well, if you want the market to accurately value technology.

So what you're saying is that instead of supporting renewables.

We should instead yank out all subsidies towards non-renewables.

_

Yes, in a perfect world, that would be the ideal approach. But that's politically impossible.

So at best, all they can do is attempt to level the playing field. At least then you would still achieve an "efficient" market result.

http://greyfalcon.net/fossiltaxes.png

http://greyfalcon.net/energyresearch.png

http://greyfalcon.net/iraqvsenergy.png

_

Even merely adding in the hazardous air quality aspects to the market price, makes a huge difference.

http://greyfalcon.net/costlycoal

Even better, would be to put a market price onto atmospheric pollution.

http://greyfalcon.net/costlycoal2

_

So in a perfect market we would:

1. Remove all fossil fuel subsidies

2. Monetize the cost of air pollution

3. Monetize the cost of atmospheric pollution

Is this what you are suggesting? Since I can agree with that.

GreyFlcn of CA @ Nov 28, 2007 12:25:45 PM

ES cells and other errors

Can we please stop having people who know exactly jack about biology comment on biological research in major publications? The state of science journalism in the US is bad enough without idiots like this guy commenting on it. Why is the generation of human iPS cells bad news for the states that have funded research on human ES cells? It's not at all. Any findings made using human ES cells should be easily and cheaply transitioned to human iPS cells, if iPS behave are what the research groups (and Mr. Pethokoukis) says they do. On the other hand, if these states had waited until iPS cells were generated, we'd just know that much less about human pluripotent stem cells than we do now. We already knew how to get human ES cells from a blastocyst, the research CA and other states sponsored certainly wasn't for that. Rather, it was for what to use those cells for once we got them, and now the development of iPS cells enables a wider and cheaper supply of them.

The actual subject of the article is even worse. Giuliani and Romney are explicitly proposing an Apollo or Manhattan style initiative, and yet Mr. Pethokoukis pretty much ignores the wild success those two initiatives had, particularly the more expensive Manhattan Project. Would winning WWII be worth $140 billion? Not, apparently, to Mr. Pethokoukis. Achieving energy independence will likewise be vital to a long-term victory in the War on Terror, but Mr. Pethokoukis thinks we shouldn't spend money on it. We've already spent how many hundreds of billions in Iraq alone, but we can't spend money to generate the technology that will allow us to really lean economically on terror sponsors like Saudi Arabia? Is he serious?

Andrew of IL @ Nov 27, 2007 21:43:01 PM

Stem Cell Research

Your comparison to stem cell research proves nothing. The breakthrough with reprogramming skin cells required experimentation with embryonic cells first. Also, skin cell reprogramming may not pan out as we hope without further research with embryonic cells. To say that California and other State are engaging in industrial policy and may be on the wrong technological track is incorrect and premature, respectively. Investment in basic research is what made this country the innovation leader.

luke of IL @ Nov 27, 2007 19:18:12 PM

US Energy Independence

We need the next President of the United States to lead on this issue and set the agenda, not legislate government interference. This issue also needs to be looked at from a holistic point of view and not through the myopic lens of intrest groups. We should look at countries like France and Brazil who have become energy independent or nearly so to see how they were able to overcome there dependence on foreign oil. We need to encourage cities and communities much like Mayor Daley is doing in Chicago, using both legislation and incentives to make Chicago a sustainable, less energy dependent city. We need to incentivize and not penalize our auto industry to develop technologies that will make the combustion engine a thing of the past. Also incentivize industry to become more energy efficient and sustainable in how they manufacturer products, build factories, transport goods, and locate business. This is the type of vision and leadership needed by the next President; similar to JFK's vow to land a man on the moon before the end of the decade without creating government agencies and subsides but work with free enterprise to solve the problem.

David Hronek of GA @ Nov 27, 2007 13:30:02 PM

Back to blog

Add Your Thoughts
About You
Capital Commerce

Capital Commerce

U.S. News business reporter Matthew Bandyk examines the issues, people, and debates that shape the nexus of political and economic life in the nation's capital.

advertisement

advertisement

Subscribe

U.S. News Digital Weekly

A weekly insider's guide to politics and policy — in a multimedia, digital format. 52 issues for $19.95!

U.S. News & World Report

6 months of U.S. News & World Report's print edition for only $15. Save up to 67% off the cover price!