climate change — VOICES for REASON

My speaking event with Willie Soon went off well. This is the third panel event we have done together and I expect we’ll continue to do them as opportunities arise.

Willie gave an excellent presentation that focused on debunking the claim that atmospheric carbon dioxide is the dominant driver of changes to the Earth’s climate.

I argued that the real threat we face is not the threat of becoming increasingly vulnerable to climate disasters, but the threat of coercive political policies aimed at cutting off our access to cheap, abundant energy. I also presented some basic facts concerning current energy consumption and the inadequacies of so-called green energy sources to supply our energy needs.

During the Q&A, I was challenged on the latter point by a student claiming that by covering the land area adjacent to American’s freeways with solar cells, one could produce enough electricity to meet America’s current demand.

Read the rest of this entry »

Next Monday I will be speaking about the destructiveness of policies aimed at cutting off fossil fuels and promoting “green energy.” I will be on a panel discussion at UCLA with Dr. Willie Soon of the Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics. Here is the description:

 It is now widely believed that man-made greenhouse gases are causing an unnatural warming of the earth that will have devastating consequences for human life. Environmentalists and politicians are pressing for severe restrictions on greenhouse gas emissions in order to prevent climate change. But what does the scientific evidence actually support regarding the causes of climate variability and the role of anthropogenic greenhouse gases? Are the predictions of catastrophic changes supported by scientific fact? Are governmental economic intervention and restrictions on emissions an appropriate policy response? Drs. Keith Lockitch and Willie Soon will address these critical issues in a lively panel discussion and afterward take your questions.

I’ve had the pleasure of appearing on several panels with Dr. Soon over the last year. He has excellent knowledge of the science at the center of the climate change debate. If you’re in Southern California, come check it out!

I mentioned a few weeks ago that Yaron Brook and I were invited to speak at the International Conference on Climate Change sponsored by the Heartland Institute. I, unfortunately, had to cancel at the last minute, but Yaron was there and gave an outstanding presentation.

Free recordings of the conference proceedings are now available online. If you’re interested in educating yourself on the facts of the climate change debate, you’ll find a lot worth listening to (and there’s much more on the Heartland website).

Here’s a direct link to Yaron’s talk, in which he discusses the moral factors that explain why environmentalism continues to grow in power despite its record of failure and destructiveness.

There has been a lot of commentary recently on the relevance of Atlas Shrugged to our economic woes and our government’s response. But the novel’s relevance to current issues extends far beyond the financial crisis.

Consider the phenomenon of Earth Hour, which takes place this Saturday (March 28), and which I criticized in a recent op-ed. During Earth Hour, participating cities turn off the lights of major skylines and landmarks to signal a commitment to fighting climate change. In my article I discuss why I think this is a travesty.

So how does this relate to Atlas Shrugged?

Read the rest of this entry »

Yaron Brook and I are scheduled to speak at the International Conference on Climate Change sponsored by the Heartland Institute. The conference brings together scientists, economists, policy analysts and politicians who are critical of the claims of catastrophic global warming.

The main point we’ll be stressing is the importance of identifying the philosophy underlying environmentalism.

Why is it that environmentalism is so convincing to so many people? Read the rest of this entry »

The economic pain we’re all feeling right now is nothing compared to the pain we would feel if we adopt green energy and climate policies that restrict fossil fuel consumption.

There is a close relationship between the use of energy and a healthy economy, as highlighted by this New York Times story, “Oil Demand Down; 1st Time Since ’83.”

Global oil consumption will drop this year for the first time since 1983, as an economic downturn in the West and slower growth in China cut fuel demand…

The International Energy Agency, an adviser to industrialized nations, said on Thursday that it projects worldwide demand to fall by 200,000 barrels a day, to 85.8 million barrels a day, in 2008….

The Energy Department said earlier this week that global consumption would probably fall by 450,000 barrels a day in 2009, the first time in more than 30 years that demand will decline for two consecutive years.

Energy is the motive power that fuels production and trade. When economic activity slows, so does energy demand. But what people really need to recognize is that it goes the other way too. Imposing restrictions on the use of energy–as would occur under a system of carbon regulation–would choke off the economy’s fuel and shut down productive activity.

For one thing, a recession is a temporary downturn; we can expect that once the economy picks up again, producers will increase their demand for energy toward renewed growth and prosperity. Also, nobody sets out to cause a recession. There’s no excuse for the devastation wreaked by the political leaders, Fed Chiefs, and sundry economic Czars and bureaucrats who caused our current mess, but one can, at the very least, assume they didn’t intend to ruin the economy. But if we voluntarily adopt green policies that force cutbacks in energy, the result would be a self-inflicted depression–or worse–that would cause economic pain for as long as the policies are in place.

This recession, with all its grim news of job loss and economic hardship, should be seen as a cautionary tale against coercive energy and climate policies.