RERUNNING Y2K:

Profit motives will force US to clean up its act (ALEX MASSIE, 2/18/05, The Scotsman)

Most American politicians view Kyoto as a tax on economic growth. They may have a point. While US emissions have increased by 13 per cent since 1990, the fast-growing economies of countries such as Spain and Ireland have been responsible for increases in emissions of nearly 40 per cent in the same period. [...]

The only thing likely to halt global warming is technology. Here the US is, unsurprisingly, taking the lead.

New energy-producing and consumption technologies that can reduce emissions will be worth billions of dollars in the years to come. It’s not that Texans don’t care whether penguins and polar bears have anywhere to live in years to come, it’s more that they’d rather make money out of ensuring that the polar ice caps remain intact. By creating markets for emissions Kyoto reinforces the triumph of capitalism. Enlightened self-interest is the only long-term solution to the problems of global warming. Regulation and punishment without the profit motive for agreeing to reform is doomed to failure.

If there’s one thing the US understands it is profit. Investment in new technologies such as hydrogen-fuel cells could bring enormous rewards in the future. Just as importantly, it is becoming increasingly clear that the US’s national security interests are not best-served by relying upon middle-eastern oil for the country’s energy needs. That, in turn, makes investment in alternative energy sources all the more important. No wonder car companies are developing electric and hybrid cars as fast as they possibly can.

In the long-run, that combination of security and economic self-interest will ensure that the US becomes engaged in climate control efforts. The US may not always feel bound by the same rules as other countries, but it is still playing on the same field.

Having avoided the transnational entaglement of Kyoto we should now move towards imposing limits on ourselves, which would indeed fuel innovation and the economy, even if global warming science is as dubious as it appears.

Posted by Orrin Judd at February 18, 2005 7:49 AM