Tomorrow’s debate will likely produce few sparks. I’m against nuclear energy subsidies and don’t think the industry would survive without them. Thursday and Friday, however, will be more interesting. I don’t have the faintest idea what sort of personal automobiles will be on the market in, say, 2030, and even less idea what the energy economy of the next generation will look like. I suspect, however, that John thinks it’s all rather obvious where energy markets and technologies are heading and that he has the perfect master plan to most efficiently accelerate all the big-time changes that history has in store for us.
Saying “I don’t know” to questions like these is never that good of an idea if you want to dazzle people with your wisdom and insight. On the other hand, it’s hard to marshall the argument that “the oil age is over and the age of genetically modified gerbils on treadmills is coming” (or whatever) and then say that the government needs to do something to get us there. Well, if its so inevitable, then why must
government act at all? We’ll find out if John can manage to resolve that tension in what will likely be his argument.
He's referring to V. John White, executive director of the Center for Energy Efficiency and Renewable Technologies and a debate they're having at the LA Times about the future of energy use and generation. I guess it's hard to be considered an expert when you don't know what's going to happen. Unfortunately, no one knows what's going to happen (although some might guess correctly on occasion), but admitting that doesn't put food on the table.
No comments:
Post a Comment