Now, helping with emissions benefits the world no matter where a fuel is burned, for emissions are globalized. But jobs and energy security and food security are not.
And how are voters going to support carbon policies that build companies in the US and EU — at least partly to increase national energy or food security and jobs from projects and steel in the ground — but that end up providing food, feed or fuels to India and China?
It is not an insurmountable challenge, but policies that are national and nationalistic will clash with problems that are global. Policy uncertainty, as we have seen, crushes investor enthusiasm and makes them crave higher returns. It makes products more expensive to generate those returns, and makes us need tougher and more expensive carbon policies to generate the margins for investors.
If you see a spiral there – tougher carbon policies that delivering global benefits which must be sustained by voters in this country or that who might not realize the actual social benefits — well, you would not be alone.
It is the task for our times, it is your task. But you may find that in solving the coming trade crisis that you will do so more to accelerate the transition to new fuels, chemicals, materials, foods and feed than anything else that anyone can do.
That’s a big task for the people of the forest, but no one knows better the promise untapped in the land and the science all around you. No one has a better chance of getting it done and making it happen.
Knock on wood.
Use your ← → (arrow) keys to browse
