Just dropping fossil fuel
subsidies and eliminating hydraulic fracturing (fracking) within the USA would
raise the price of natural gas significantly. Before fracking became a routine
practice, natural gas cost roughly 2.75 times its current price. Abandoning fracking
and subsidies would perhaps raise the price to 5 times its current level. There
would be knock-on effects. Roughly 35% of US electric power comes from natural-gas
fueled plants. But doing that alone would simply lead to a shift to petroleum,
which is priced on an international market. So there have to be other changes: tariffs
on imported petroleum to maintain parity with still-subsidized imported fuels
as a start. This would raise energy prices overall. Plastics are made from
natural gas and petroleum byproducts and those prices would also be affected.
In turn, the prices of products made from plastics will rise.
Wind and solar energy might, if
brought online fast enough, fill much of the gap in energy production, but those
technologies have their limits. (I’ve written about this before, in several
posts. Start with The
Green New Deal: Running the Numbers.) And there are sure to be problems,
because there are always problems.
The cascading changes and the need
to respond to unexpected consequences demand a managed economy. Not managed in
minute detail, no, there is no need to pre-calculate exactly the number of each
type of widget a factory is to produce, but management that responds to gross
systemic needs as they emerge. This is exactly what conservatives have been
fighting against, all these years. In their fight, they rejected every moderate
solution, until a managed economy is the best hope that remains.
If this is not quite the
moneyless planned economy of communism, it is at least Keynes’ “somewhat comprehensive
socialization of investment” and nearer to planned state socialism than
anything that has previously been attempted.
The best green future may be
socialist.
No comments:
Post a Comment