A guy named Tim Worstall has a great post up today about climate change as an ideology dedicated to pumping money into technology that doesn’t provide the claimed benefits while neglecting others that might for reasons that are, shall we say, not entirely connected to saving the planet from climate change:
To subsidise one uneconomic and unproven technology but not another, both equally capable of solving the problem supposedly under discussion, non-carbon (or rather low-carbon, there are no non-carbon systems) energy generation, well, there’s at least a soupcon of a suspicion that the choice there is being made on ideological, not practical grounds.
* * *
I just don’t get why we’re pumping tens, possibly hundreds, of billions into technologies like windmills, which we know won’t work, to solar which doesn’t need subsidies any more, but not willing to put money into other interesting things which might work, like thorium just as one example.
Unless, of course, I’m right in that what we should do about this problem has been hijacked by those who don’t in fact want to solve this single, particular, problem of requiring low carbon energy generation but who want to use this agreed upon problem as a means of imposing their vision of the desirable lifestyle upon the rest of us. And so we go with solutions which won’t in fact work because they desire that the problem not be solved, but that we should accord with their instructions upon how society should be.
Yes. The climate change movement is in large part more about reshaping society to more closely correspond with the greens’ view of what a “sustainable” anti-globalization society should look like than protecting the environment.
Otherwise, enviros would prefer, for example, to tap our natural gas and oil resources at and close to home rather than, as Obama recently did, exhort others who lack our environmental protection standards and resources to tap their reserves more vigorously. If the world is one system — which in large part it is — encouraging more production in countries that less sensitive to environmental concerns than the U.S. is certainly not the answer.
But that is not what the green movement is really about for many adherents. It is about social change, not climate change.
Via Ace of Spades.