What the climate alarmists are basically arguing is that decisions on energy use and production should be determined by government on the basis of their preferences. If they were being logical they would need to find that the long used decision making system on these issues consisting largely of private decisions in the economic marketplace are leading to faulty decisions. They have utterly failed to do this. In fact, just the opposite is the case. Governments make bad decisions on economic issues all the time. And on “climate” issues, they almost always do so.
The advantage of the marketplace approach to economic decision making is that those making the decisions must live with the consequences. If they make a bad decision, they will end up losing money and may lose some or all of their investment. If government makes a bad economic decision, on the other hand, all that happens is that the taxpayers or ratepayers get stuck with the bill. Climate alarmism has given rise to an amazing number of terrible economic decisions. In fact, it is hard to find any good ones.
A Few Examples
The examples are found wherever climate alarmist ideology has been used to make energy-related decisions. German and UK electricity prices have doubled and tripled as a result of government decisions. South Australia’s electric grid has failed five times in the last six months after government meddling. And all for what? The myth that carbon dioxide generated by the use of fossil fuels will result in higher global temperatures. This is just one more government-generated idea that can now be shown to be wrong. But as long as taxpayers or ratepayers end up paying the bills, it will continue in those areas where economic decisions are made by governments rather than the economic marketplace.
What needs to be reformed is not energy use and generation determined by the private marketplace, but special interest interference in the process without a careful showing of serious problems arising from marketplace-based decisions.