Finding a rational energy policy

There are undoubtedly people calling for the end of civilization to prevent climate change. That doesn’t mean we shouldn’t try to prevent it. There are many sensible ways to do that. In his May 28 column “Looking at Fossil Fuels Through a Different Lens”, Don Brunell states “many activists simply demand an end to the use of fossil fuels now”, and articulates the many ways we use fossil hydrocarbons (oil, gas, coal) in medicine and other aspects of life.

Don doesn’t argue against preventing climate change, but calls for a “rational energy policy”. What might that look like?

Let’s start with a steadily increasing national fee on fossil hydrocarbons at the source (coal mine, oil or gas well, or imports).

A fee would account for costs that consumers of fossil hydrocarbons do not presently pay: military costs of ensuring access to middle east oil, health care and life insurance payments for coal miners and those sensitive to particulate air pollution, and impacts of climate change.

A fee lets the market find fossil carbon-free substitutes for energy (nuclear, hydroelectric, wind, solar, ...) and other uses of fossil hydrocarbons (such as medicine, and kayaks!).

There is plenty of land for wind and solar, which provide reliable electricity when coupled with hydroelectric across the grid.

There are plant-based substitutes for plastics derived from fossil hydrocarbons. Even if there are no substitutes in some cases, the use of fossil hydrocarbons just becomes more expensive, not prohibited.

If all of the revenue from a carbon fee is immediately returned to the economy as a uniform monthly dividend (a check or bank deposit) to all legal residents, and if there are border adjustments to protect trade with countries without a price on carbon, analysis has shown that such a revenue-neutral carbon fee and dividend could be good for the economy, and would reduce U.S. carbon emissions by 50 percent in twenty years.

The impact on agriculture would be negligible.

It is true that we must start such a rational energy policy now. The carbon dioxide concentration is already greater than it has been since three million years ago, when Greenland had little ice, Antarcic less, and sea level was 80 feet hgher. Carbon dioxide stays in the climate system for hundreds of years, so we can’t wait until climate change is severe and then expect to quickly reduce the severity by reducing emissions.

By starting now we can avoid the need for a sudden carbon price rise or worse yet, prohibition. This is a rational energy policy that I think our Congressman Newhouse could support. Perhaps Don Brunell could too.

Steve Ghan

Richland