Stopping the stupid in energy policy

Two NY Times columnists have illustrated the stupidity of American energy proposals in the last week.  And sadly, they both recognize that we have a serious lack of political will to meet the energy challenge.

Last week, Paul Krugman noted that the GOP is making a name for itself as the "know nothing" party - proposing simplistic and naive "solutions" for energy problems and calling detractors terrorists or French. 

What I mean, instead, is that know-nothingism — the insistence that there are simple, brute-force, instant-gratification answers to every problem, and that there’s something effeminate and weak about anyone who suggests otherwise — has become the core of Republican policy and political strategy. The party’s de facto slogan has become: “Real men don’t think things through.”

But it's not just Republicans that are selling America short.  Friedman tours the Scandinavian countries and marvels at their commitment to energy efficiency and renewable energy.  Hotel hallways have lights on sensors in Greenland.  Half of Copenhagen commuters ride bikes and 20% of their electricity comes from wind turbines (in the U.S., it's 1%).   

The Danes responded to the 1973 Oil crisis with a commitment to being free from foreign oil addictions.  They made gasoline cost $10 a gallon and juiced their economy by lowering income and other personal taxes. 

In 1973, said [climate and energy minister] Hedegaard, “we got 99 percent of our energy from the Middle East. Today it is zero.”

Back home, both presidential candidates are proposing to add to offshore drilling and even tap the Strategic Petroleum Reserve to give addicted Americans another hit on the oil bong.  Where's the vision?  Even the previously-staid Al Gore has a better offer - getting 100 percent of our electricity from renewable, domestic resources in 10 years. 

Now that's worth voting for.

The housing bubble reminds me of An Inconvenient Truth

Basically, if housing prices get too high, people shouldn't be buying houses because renting will be cheaper. The linked chart shows the ratio of housing prices to rental prices, a measure of the imbalance in the residential market. The tail end we're on reminds me of the global carbon increase chart that Al Gore required a hydraulic lift to illustrate. This bubble hasn't begun to burst.

The Inanity of Electability

Political writers like a good story, a horserace, a poll, which is why election coverage in this country resembles sports more than it does democracy. One artifact of this tendency is the "electability" issue, the supposed obsession of voters with which of their party's candidates is most able to win the general election.

Electability represents one thing:

The ability of the media to set the terms of the debate during an election. Instead of picking the candidate who best fits their political beliefs or inspires them, political writers like to think that the average voter spends his time like the backroom party leaders of old, smoking cigars and strategizing who can win. And since that's a more interesting story to write, when election time comes that's all people can remember hearing/reading about when they go to the polls - who the media thought was most electable.

The beautiful irony is that John Kerry was anointed the "more electable" candidate by the press prior to the 2004 general election. And he lost, worse than Al Gore (another electable guy). Candidates fit the requirements the electorate sets for them, whether in terms of experience, honesty, values, or inspiration. But these days, it seems like the press would have us use only one criteria - electable.

Al Gore's personal call to action

Before you hear the mainstream media account of Al Gore's energy usage, reported by the conservative Tennessee Center for Policy Research, here's a few thoughts offered by energy blogger Robert Rapier:

1. As the most prominent environmentalist in the US (and perhaps the world), it's a shame that Gore hasn't done more to reduce his ecological footprint. Even George W. Bush's Texas ranch is more environmentally sound.
   
2. Buying carbon offsets to combat global warming is like buying a hybrid SUV to reduce gas usage.
   
3. Gore's personal energy use should not detract from his message - global warming is going to be extremely costly and action is necessary now.
   

To Mr. Gore:
Preventing global warming starts at home - try some energy reduction.

To Matt Drudge and the rest of the conservative chattering class:
How's your energy usage? What have you done to solve global warming (other than accosting one leading activist for his hypocrisy)?

This hypocrisy call is valid, but let's not kill Paul Revere just because he bought some English tea, eh?