Before launching into today’s rant, a quick update on my recent article on property rights – specifically the case of Sheetz v. El Dorado County wherein Mr. Sheetz was charged what he considered an extortionate ‘mitigation fee’ to obtain a building permit for his property. After decisions in favor of the County in lower courts, the U.S. Supreme Court voted unanimously on April 12 in Sheetz favor. The court found that such fees may violate the Fifth Amendment IF they do not have an ‘essential nexus’ to the government’s land use interest and ‘rough proportionality’ to the actual development’s impact on that interest. It noted that withholding or conditioning a building permit for unrelated reasons amounts to “extortion.” In other words, a city or county can’t just pull a fee amount out of their keister as a way to augment their budget. The fee must be tied to the actual project and must be in proportion to the project’s impact on the infrastructure. A win for the little guy!!!
Climate Change. I think we can all agree that the climate is changing. The history of the world has been marked by shifting climate patterns. It’s the reason we find sea shells on Rocky Mountain peaks and remains of three masted schooners in the Sahara Desert. We have experienced extinction events that defy explanation, tectonic movements altering the face of our globe, sinking cities, growing islands, melting glaciers, freezing passages, you name it, we’ve had it.
What we didn’t have until the late 1960’s was the theory that all this change was caused by… US – man-made global climate change. My first exposure was in 1970 when the national high school debate topic was ‘The Coming Ice Age’. We debated that with all the sincerity we could muster, both for and against, quoting the notable scientists and scholars of the day and trumpeting competing articles and covers by Time, Newsweek, and others.
Of course, if you look that up now you’ll find that many of today’s scientists pooh-pooh the notion and lay it off as a media driven frenzy rather than a valid scientific concern. They say it was an ’infant science’ at the time and merely a precursor to the more accurate portrayal of ‘global warming’, which has subsequently morphed into the broader catch-all ‘global climate change’.
But regardless of your personal beliefs, whether you follow the science or the money, the fact is the push for climate action is upon us and it costs money. Lots and lots of money. Over the years various administrations have provided massive subsidies and grants (read – your tax dollars), to a variety of ‘earth saving’ technologies and products. States like California and New York have proscribed often unrealistic goals for consumers and businesses while ignoring the needed infrastructure to support those goals. Not enough power in the grid to turn on your air conditioner? No problem. Just go out and buy a (government subsidized) EV. Yeah, that’s the ticket!
This push for EV’s continues despite growing reluctance by automakers, push back from consumers, and environmental and geopolitical concerns about the mining and processing of materials needed to manufacture and dispose of the batteries to power them. The downsides and expense of ‘renewable’ power sources like solar farms and wind turbines has led to the cancellation of numerous off-shore construction projects just the past year alone. Environmental activists who decry the use of fossil fuels are equally outraged by the footprint impact of solar and wind farms on a scale to actually power a city. And while domestic electricity prices have increased by nearly 30% since 2021, China and India are building coal fired power plants at astonishing rates and 3rd world countries are demanding that the US subsidize their power grid if we expect them to meet our arbitrary climate goals while climbing out of debt themselves.
Here’s the rub. We’re going to continue to pursue this climate agenda whether it’s fact or folly – there’s no turning back after all the investment of time, money and hysteria. So why not pursue it with an already proven solution that is gaining popularity in other progressive nations, a solution that’s sustainable, scalable, available during peak demand periods regardless if the wind is blowing or the sun shining. I speak of (cover your ears children) nuclear power.
Given the aggressive goals set in place by our government and international climate accords, there is no way, absolutely none, that the world’s energy transition away from fossil fuels can be achieved without a massive increase globally of nuclear power. Outdated anti-nuclear opinions and fears, a crushing and irrational regulatory framework, and potentially massive initial capital costs have kept even exploratory discussion of the solution off the table, especially in the U.S.. But caught between the energy crisis and climate change, we may no longer have the luxury of choice, or continuing to spend our capital and time on less efficient, more costly ways to address the issue.
Research into more secure, less costly materials and techniques has brought significant changes to an industry where Three Mile Island and Chernobyl still resound in our nightmares. There can be no serious discussion of a truly sustainable, cost effective power source to address the needs of our world until nuclear power is on the table. If you’re not building dams to support hydro, if you’re decommissioning coal and natural gas fired plants, when you realize wind and solar are limited by cost and availability, your options dwindle to a precious few. Time to get real if you’re going to get real.
This is just a very limited discussion of a very expansive issue, but a discussion that needs to be had. Of course that’s just my opinion. What do I know?