Energy Policy: No Solutions

   Daniel Greenfield's blog posting on Free Republic titled "A Little Energy is a Dangerous Thing" is a right-leaning commentary on our nation's lack of planning for the future.  He lauds the steps currently being taken by China to invest in their nation's infrastructure to keep winning in the future when and if the value of the US dollar increases in strength.  The audience the author intends to reach is a wide-ranging one because many American readers and also many around the world will find his points about American leaders lacking planning and innovation and instead sticking to dogmatic principles when confronted with problems interesting and convincing. 

   Although Greenfield's argument centers around a lack of planning for the future, the examples he uses to make his points are mainly centered around energy policy and regulations in the energy industry that he believes have led to the loss of many American jobs.  Greenfield states that "there is no such thing as clean and safe energy. Energy is inherently dangerous and polluting."  Green energy options, in the opinion of Greenfield, are at this point still way too expensive to be feasible as energy providers for a nation that uses energy as much as we do.  He also points out that all forms of affordable energy have a human cost.  "Technology isn't magic.  It's a set of implemented techniques that work around the laws of the universe to achieve human ends."  Here Greenfield is making a strong conservative point that the primary goal is to make available as much of a good as possible to the public and take care of humans first.  Going on to make the point that our politicians continued to regulate industry until most of our factories moved to China, Greenfield casts this as a parallel to increased reliance on government to help provide Americans with the opportunity to land a good job, through such programs as financial aid for college and welfare programs. 

   Finally, in attacking our nation's leadership, or lack thereof, Greenfield defines real leadership as "planning for the future by balancing risk against reward, setting goals and achieving them", going on to say that it has been quite a long time since American leaders followed that path, instead concentrating on rewards and claiming any policy that will meet their desired rewards is risk-free.  This, he says, is the circular logic of children.  "We no longer consider whether things will work--instead we decide that the must because we want them to."