Quote:
Originally Posted by Tacopuck
Humans are changing the climate at a faster rate than natural (non-human) processes.
Human energy consumption will increase in perpetuity as we have a continuously growing population and we are continuously trying to do more and more.
Assuming the two points above that makes this a complex technological problem. Complex problems are best solved by free markets. There has never been more demand for non-carbon based energy, and its only increasing.
Taxation inhibits innovation. While in theory tax revenue directed towards projects could lead innovation however that is based on the assumption that the politicians deciding what projects are and what are not worthy of redirected tax revenue are competent in the field of which they are directing tax revenue and are not privy to political pressure, this is extremely rare. Unfortunately a politician deciding on how to spend OTHER peoples money does not have the same risk associated with individuals risking their own capital, this causes money to be allocated improperly risk adjusted to project results.
I'm all for transitioning to a non-carbon based energy system, but any government solution is the wrong approach.
Capitalism will solve this. Book it.
|
Government solution has proven to work in the past. When I was growing up, acid rain was seen as the most pressing environmental issue. Legislation like the Clean Air Act, cap and trade programs, and imposing stronger emission standards on the industrial and transportation sectors have made the problem so much more manageable that acid rain is hardly a topic people talk about anymore. Government has to lead the way and provide the appropriate market incentives for this problem to be solved.