‘Climate change’ schemes just too costly, dangerous
Technology can be built on several foundations. These include existing technology, necessity and even luck. Regardless of how new technology comes into existence, its initial cost may well be out of reach for the ordinary person. What occurs then, over time, is a buildup in supply and demand, resulting in manufacturing processes and competition that drive down costs. Then the new technology becomes common, possessed by nearly everyone.
The process, though, has to take its course. Trying to force the issue would be problematic, inefficient and costly. It also could be devastating.
A big issue for many in our society these days is “climate change,” leading to various odd, hysterical schemes to eliminate the use of fossil fuels. Perhaps those proposing the changes simply want to get the ball rolling and do not really mean what they are saying. We hope so. Because if they mean it, they are not living in reality. There is simply not enough quantity and quality in wind, solar or other sources to replace the oil, coal and natural gas needed to power and heat human existence.
So it was on Tuesday that Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz’s plan for a carbon-free Minnesota (for electric production) by 2050 met with skepticism and criticism at a legislative hearing. Walz’s plan puts citizens and businesses at risk, forced to face higher energy costs and less reliability. Those who favor Walz’s plan do not talk about these factors. Rather, they are climate change prophets of doom.
It’s not even clear Walz’s plan would do any good in reducing “global warming.” Or that Minnesota’s alleged contribution to the problem amounts to much of anything. So why not let technological change, if any is actually needed, play out naturally over time?