The Case for Combating Climate Change with Nuclear Power and Fracking

I share the concern of liberal environmentalist about climate change. I accept that climate change is real. However, I think the biggest friend climate change has is liberal environmentalist. Rejecting technology and market forces is assuring that climate change will continue. I think many environmentalist are so enamored of big government solutions that they are determined to lose the battle against climate change. They think that embracing solar and wind power and "economic justice" is a solution. I think they are really more concerned about economic redistribution and changing attitudes than they are about meaningful solutions. Many of the solutions they embrace, such as ethanol and focusing on mandating higher CAFE standards, are counter productive and properly inflating your tires and turning off lights is like handing out sponges to the passengers of the Titanic. Many of the solutions advocated by environmentalist make people feel virtuous but do nothing to solve the problem.

Many environmentalist oppose the solutions that could make a meaningful impact on climate change such as increasing the use of nuclear power and fracking. America's reduction in CO2 emissions has primarily occurred because of an increase in the use of natural gas, that came about due to fracking.

This article from the Harvard Business School explains why nuclear power and shale gas are on the right side of the fight against climate change, and why markets have a better shot at winning the fight against climate change than governments do.
The Case for Combating Climate Change with Nuclear Power and Fracking

Top Stories