Dpt. of State / Energy / Events / Regulation

The Future of Energy and Water Availability in the United States: Has the Marketplace Failed Us?

Earlier today the Hudson Institute hosted a four hour panel discussion titled, “Energy, Water, and Debt: Linked Problems, Common Solutions?” Among the ten panelists was Jim Nussle, a former member of the U.S. House of Representatives for 16 years and now Growth Energy’s COO; Craig Zamuda, a senior policy advisor with the Office of Policy and International Affairs at the U.S. Department of Energy; John R. Lyman, the Director of the Energy and Environmental Program at the Atlantic Council; Sheila Olmstead, an environmental economist, and former Yale University professor; and Jes Munk Hansen, the President of Grundfos North America.

Nussle opened the discussion by giving the audience a recap of his morning routine, explaining how he, and many other Americans, he presumes, take the many natural resources at our disposal for granted. We shower; we turn on the heater; we light up the stove; we put gas in our cars, etc. all without any conscious thought as to where these resources come from and how long they will last. He then went on to explain how Americans can solve potential energy and water shortage problems calmly and soberly, or through war and conflict. Nussle was adamant that energy and water scarcity will be the defining issues of the 21st century.

Zamuda followed Nussle with a presentation on the role of the Department of Energy (DOE) in the areas of energy, water, and national security. He spoke of the challenges the DOE faces as they too are still trying to “enhance their scientific understanding” of the issues. The senior policy advisor closed with the cheerful proposition that we may have the “perfect storm” coming our way, as increased demand for energy and water, population growth, and reduced environmental flexibility (from what he believes to be man-made global warming) will all collide to create a major national security threat.

Then came Lyman; he further pushed what seemed to be the common mantra: something has to be done. The states have to work with the federal government; “some people won’t like this, but it has to happen.” He then went on boldly with a statement proclaiming that all the talk about states’ rights issues is only stopping the progress needed to affect the type of change he is looking for.

Later, Sheila Olmstead spoke about altering the market so that the administration can affect a sort of forced behavioral change in the general public. For instance, she found that when the government enters the marketplace and mandates a 10% price increase on residential water sources (an overt violation of water producers’ right to set their price), the demand responds with a 3-4 percent reduction in the short term, and a 6-7 percent reduction in the long term. Similar results appear when this is done with commercial piped water, creating a reduction anywhere from 1-8 percent in the short term, depending on the industry type. Olmstead also suggested forced change that didn’t involve the marketplace: certain families may only use certain natural resources on odd days, and on even days they may use the remaining resources. This is the height of regulation and a complete slap in the face to the free-market.

Hansen, the Grundfos President, emphasized that we “need a change of behavior.” He does not view building more pipes or more power plants as a viable option; in his view, that simply won’t work.

All the speakers seemed to have one thing in common: they believe the free market has failed to create the “proper” ratio of supply and demand for energy and water. There are “gaps” as they call it. Government subsidies and forced regulation are the only way to solve what they see as an apocalypse. As a free market thinker, and avid liberty advocate, I find these ideas to be not only an extreme invasion of the government into the private sector, but also an expensive, dooms-day prognosis.  If true, not even government can save us from ourselves.



3 thoughts on “The Future of Energy and Water Availability in the United States: Has the Marketplace Failed Us?

  1. These self-elected, self-appointed panelists we’re never voted in to represent any real portion of American thought or direction. The only consensus they share is their own. Unfortunately, by combining their fancy titles and their fringe beliefs into a meeting like this, they force themselves -and everyone else around them- into being given some sort of recognition. The much larger portion of Americana (and the common sense one) thinks very differently: our gas comes from the gas company because we paid our bill this month. Same with the water, the electricity, etc. etc. As long as customers pay their bills and buy the goods being offered, companies/merchants/vendors are happy to oblige in offering their services and products. It’s a symbiotic relationship that been operating without fail for thousands of years. It used to be fuel was grain for horses/camels/oxen, etc, Now fuel is gasoline for cars/trucks/tractors/stoves/generators, etc.. Only a change in products, not a change in need for fuel. In addition, the amount of resource available is really not the problem either; actually it’s access to them. If grain for horses or camels wasn’t available in the vast prairies of Mongolia, it’s was probably available along the lush river beds of Egypt. Or maybe Israel. Or storehouses in Rome. And if not available in bundles, then maybe in bushels, baskets, or bales. And traders and merchants would ship, trade and transport that grain from wherever it was to wherever the market was willing to purchase it. The same goes with fuel today. Whether it’s underground, underwater, in the air, or from the sun, be it in Canada, the Middle East, the Gulf of Mexico, the Hoover dam, the solar fields or AZ, or the wind farms of TX, you can bet some person or company will figure out where it’s being mined, dug, generated, and stored, and market it to a consumer somewhere in this world who is willing to pay for it. So where were those gaps that we needed the US government to fill again?

  2. Hey there! I could have sworn I’ve been to this website before but after checking through some of the post I realized
    it’s new to me. Nonetheless, I’m definitely glad I found
    it and I’ll be book-marking and checking back frequently!

Comments are closed.