UCLA climate change panel — follow-up

April 17, 2009 by Keith Lockitch

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.

I hadn’t heard that one before. I haven’t tried to dig up data regarding the surface area covered by our freeways, but I don’t dispute it in terms of the quantity of energy flowing from sunlight: it’s also true that if you covered the entire state of Utah with solar panels you could generate power equal to the whole world’s energy consumption–at least when the sun is out. But so what? Such facts are beside the point because they completely ignore practical realities.

To try to drive those realities home, I suggested to the questioner that if he thought it was such a great idea to install solar cells next to freeways then he should go ahead and launch it as a venture: start a company, draft a business plan, seek out investors and so on–and then go ahead and try to sell his electricity on the market.

I told him that my prediction would be that his venture would fail because among the myriad practical obstacles to the idea is the bottom line fact that there would be no way he could deliver power at anywhere close to a competitive per-kilowatt-hour rate.

I tried to make it clear that I have no objection to people exploring new ways of producing energy, including energy from solar and wind–as long as they do it on their own initiative, on their own property, and fund it with private capital.

What’s objectionable is the fact that technologies that are currently impractical and expensive are going to be forced upon us by sundry “energy czars” who, in the name of the latest environmentalist scare-scenario (the claim of catastrophic climate change), will blithely wreak havoc on the economy–and therefore on all of our lives.

The real threat we face is not “anthropogenic climate change,” but what you could call misanthropogenic climate policy.