So many Americans—spoon-fed by a "go green" education system and media—live under the delusion that things were better in the past than they are now. Sure the economy is bad, but all we had to do is live for 72 hours without AC, TV, a dishwasher, a hair dryer and Google to appreciate how much progress has been made in the past 20, 30, and 50 years. Today a larger percentage of poor people have access to air conditioning than the average middle-class family did in 1960.To Daphne Wysham of the Institute for Policy Studies, it's cause to contemplate the connection between the power for those conveniences and the immoderate weather.
Solar and wind power may seem like pricey alternatives to you, versus energy derived from coal, nuclear reactors, oil, and gas. But they also don't enjoy the same hefty subsidies. People, governments, and companies are spending countless dollars adjusting to the costs of a crisis of our own making. It’s a big gamble. In the best-case scenario, we may just throw out a refrigerator’s worth of spoiled food or spend a night or two in a hotel. In the worst-case scenario, the Earth will become uninhabitable.One quibble. Years ago, I did some work with the Energy Department and the Environmental Protection Agency's Common Sense Initiative, and in those days, which coincided with the 1988 midwestern drought, we understood that nuclear-steam generating stations had a lot of potential for reducing greenhouse gases at the power plant. By all means, continue the research on wind and solar and bio-coal, but don't rule out some of the legacy power sources.
Is it really more expensive to switch to greener power sources and drive less? When you add up all the costs of doing otherwise — no way. By investing in cleaner energy sources now, we can save the lives of countless innocent victims — perhaps even those we love the most — from storms that should only appear in our nightmares.