An Objective Without a Strategy

Writing in the Christian Science Monitor Kurt Cobb outlines several competing “ultimate goals” for U. S. energy policy:

Seek the cheapest price for energy with the implication that environmental consequences should not be tallied as part of the cost.
Complete a transition to renewable energy as quickly as possible while drastically reducing the burning of fossil fuels.
Replace all fossil fuel energy with nuclear power.
Develop all sources of energy to make sure we have enough at reasonable prices. This is often called the “all-of-the-above strategy.”

Goal 1 is really the argument put forth by the fossil fuel industry and therefore a defense of the status quo. Goal 2 is the dream of every climate change activist and clean-tech executive. Goal 3 seemed to be gaining some momentum before the accident at Japan’s Fukushima Daiichi nuclear plant dashed hopes for a widespread nuclear renaissance.

Goal 4 is the non-choice choice preferred by many mugwump Congressmen, including Kurt Cobb’s.

The problem I have with Goal 2 is that I see no practical strategy for accomplishing it. Any strategy that takes place in something other than geological time includes removing heavy manufacturing from the United States.

Heavy manufacturing wouldn’t just disappear. It would move to China where the environmental problems produced by heavy manufacturing would become intractable. What would that accomplish? It certainly wouldn’t do anything about climate change.

George Santayana once wisecracked that fanaticism consists in redoubling your effort when you have forgotten your aim. Goal #2 is a fine example of just that sort of fanaticism.