The “All First” Energy Policy is a Compromise That Reverses Human and Environmental Progress – Are You Satisfied?
By Dr. Indur Goklany
The Net Zero energy policy pursued by the current administration will essentially phase out fossil fuels sooner or later. That would roll back much of the progress America and the world have seen since the 19th century.order century on the economy and human welfare while increasing pressure on the rest of nature.
An alternative, favored by many conservatives, is the “all above” (ATA) policy. This approach preserves the option of using fossil fuels but with strict limitations, however, not based on empirical science. Furthermore, ATA will impede economic growth, increase the cost of living, and especially harm those on the lower economic ladder. We will all be poorer.
New fossil fuel-powered power plants will have to use technologies to capture CO2 emissions, being able to convert them, if necessary, to other forms and store them in stable geological formations or use them in commercial products. However, to date, there has been no successful demonstration that such technologies, while technically feasible, are economically viable at the scale required to significantly reduce greenhouse gas emissions. CO2 emissions. It has also not been determined that a reduction in atmospheric CO2 would be desirable when the gas significantly contributes to crop production in a still developing but starving world and to habitat conservation. and ecosystem health. Equally important, imposing limits on fossil fuels beyond current best practices is not supported by science.
The fundamental problem with the ATA approach is that it accepts the claim that CO2 is a problem that exists when there is no empirical confirmation of the warmingist apocalypse.[1] Instead, the following global trends are widely recognized:
- Deaths from weather and climate events (hot and cold, hurricanes, tornadoes, floods and droughts) have decreased by 98% since the 1920s. Studies show that more people die from cold many times more than hot. The economic loss from such events, as a share of global wealth or GDP, has decreased.
- The extent of wildfires peaked globally in mid-19order century.
- Grain production has tripled since 1961, while food supplies have increased by 31%.
- Sea levels have risen continuously by 400 feet since the end of the last ice age without a significant acceleration in the modern era.
- Access to clean water has increased, mainly due to improved sanitation and technical solutions to water and wastewater treatment.
- Mortality rates from climate- and weather-sensitive vector-borne and parasitic diseases have decreased.
It is important that, since the Industrial Revolution, virtually every important, measurable indicator of human well-being has been enhanced by economic growth and technological change. generated through the consumption of fossil fuels and the economic surpluses they generate.[2] The use of fossil fuels has freed up resources, most notably the time and mental power that people had previously had to devote to agriculture and other tasks that were more muscular than mental. highly appreciated. Thus, globally:
- People are living longer and healthier lives.
- Income levels have improved, and poverty rates have decreased.
- The human development index has increased almost everywhere.
For environmental health, fossil fuel-related technologies – including machinery, fertilizers and pesticides – have help increase global food production by at least 62.5% directly or indirectly and has allowed humans to dedicate 20.4% of the global land area (GLA) to the rest of nature. This exceeds both the habitat currently lost to cropland (12.2% GLA) and the global cumulative area currently conserved or identified as protected area (14.6% estimated). GLA).[3] For context, the area saved from conversion to agriculture is 25% larger than in North America.
Thus, the notion that, despite significant reductions in traditional air pollutants from fossil fuels, they need to be further controlled or phased out due to CO2 emissions is unscientific. and goes against human health and the environment. More importantly, the elimination of coal, oil, and natural gas would negate much of the progress humanity has made since the 18th century.order century and would sacrifice a substantial portion of the earth in pursuit of agriculture.
In short, the policy of all of the above, while surprisingly appealing, is a futile concession to fossil fuel adversaries – a compromise that would make undermine humanity’s two and a half centuries of progress in taking care of itself and the Earth.
Dr Indur Goklany is the author of several books, including “The Improving State of the World: Why We Are Living Longer, Healthier, More Comfortable Living on a Cleaner Planet,” and is a member of the Association CO2 Alliance, Arlington, Virginia. He holds a degree in electrical engineering from Michigan State University (PhD) and Indian Institute of Technology, Bombay (B.Tech.).
[1] Goklany IM (2021). The Impact of Perceptions and Practices on Climate Change. Global Warming Policy Fund. London.
[2] Goklany IM (2012). Humanity is not bound: how fossil fuels have saved humanity from nature and nature from humanity. Policy analysis. 2012 December 19(715). Catholic Institute. Washington DC
[3] Goklany IM (2021). Reduce global habitat loss due to increased productivity of fossil fuel-dependent arable land. Conservation biology. 35(3):766-74.
Related
