People need to see that NOT fixing energy will cost them MORE money....

Today's post: Wednesday, 12-23-2009

We need an 80% reduction in fossil fuel use by 2050 to avoid the worst global warming effects. And, practically speaking, we need to also double our electricity generation and double the useful work done per unit of electricity & other energy sources as well during that same time to have a decent economy.

At some point, the oil that we’ve been using to power much of our economy will begin to run low enough that our world economy will shrink due to lack of supply or excessive costs or both.

And, once the demand for oil picks up again with the apparent economic recovery or supply begins to plateau or drop, the prices will again go back up. That will cause more hard times economically unless we have enough alternative sources of energy to turn to.

Further, it’s extremely clear that the most supported and economically beneficial solution to add energy that does not use oil nor burn fossil fuels to release more CO2 into air that already has too much is to build massive amounts of new renewable energy production, particularly those that generate electricity & to dramatically increase energy efficiency and reduce the amount of energy that is now wasted.

And, of those the more important long range solution is to build massive amounts of new renewable energy generation.

Today’s post:

Last Tuesday, 12-17-2009, I found that a recent AP-Stanford University poll found that while 75% of respondents said they support action to stop global warming, 75% said they would oppose specific plans to do so if their electricity bills went up by $25 a month. And 59 % said they wouldn't support such action if their electricity bills just $10 more.

This shows that one or more of several things are true.

75% of the people are so tight on money, that they would find having their monthly costs go up that little a hardship.

75% of the people are scared to part with more than a very small amount of money they don’t absolutely have to because of the recession.

I suspect both of these things are true.

But it also means that people have not yet learned that:

$25 a month added to their utility bills right away and spent effectively on fixing the energy situation and strongly slowing our dependence on coal and petroleum will help ensure that they can avoid:

paying MORE than $25 more a month for their utility bills as energy costs increase AND

paying more than an extra $50 a month on gas for their car AND

paying an extra $50 a month for food due to increased transport costs & reduced yields

AND

having taxes of all kinds go up $50 a month to pay for increasing damage control due to the extra global warming – costs doing the fixes now would prevent

AND

having the recession come back even worse as discretionary incomes and other spending shrink due to all these extra costs preventing that discretionary spending.

Yes, any action program needs to show it will help solve the problems enough to prevent more of these added costs than it costs to implement.

But, NOT having the increases in utility bills going to pay for far more renewable energy installations & some more nuclear power; many more effective energy efficiency programs, & more and better transmission lines to get the electricity from large scale renewable energy or new nuclear plants to where it’s needed and used will create exactly those results.

So, paying $25 a month extra now may not be comfortable. But it’s far less than the $175 a month or more added costs it will prevent.

And, if more than half of all Americans don’t realize that -- & this research shows that they do not, we may well not do enough to prevent these very harsh results that cost far more.

Global warming may be the bigger threat in the long run.

But in the short run, having enough people know these economic risks may be more important in determining if we will do enough in time to prevent both problems.

I think President Obama actually understands and himself knows these economic risks.

That’s why I voted for him & supported him.

But unless he sells and educates the people of the United States well enough that they also know and understand these economic risks, he won’t be effective enough while he is President and may not be elected to a second term in office.