Best of the Week
Most Popular
1. Gold vs Cash in a Financial Crisis - Richard_Mills
2.Current Stock Market Rally Similarities To 1999 - Chris_Vermeulen
3.America See You On The Dark Side Of The Moon - Part2 - James_Quinn
4.Stock Market Trend Forecast Outlook for 2020 - Nadeem_Walayat
5.Who Said Stock Market Traders and Investor are Emotional Right Now? - Chris_Vermeulen
6.Gold Upswing and Lessons from Gold Tops - P_Radomski_CFA
7.Economic Tribulation is Coming, and Here is Why - Michael_Pento
8.What to Expect in Our Next Recession/Depression? - Raymond_Matison
9.The Fed Celebrates While Americans Drown in Financial Despair - John_Mauldin
10.Hi-yo Silver Away! - Richard_Mills
Last 7 days
Silver Springboards Higher – What’s Next? - 26th May 20
Stock Market Key Resistance Breakout Is Where the Rubber Meets the Road - 26th May 20
5 Ways To Amp Up Your CFD Trading Today - 26th May 20
The Anatomy of a Gold Stock Bull Market - 26th May 20
Stock Market Critical Price Level Could Soon Prompt A Big Move - 25th May 20
Will Powell Decouple Gold from the Stock Market? - 25th May 20
How Muslims Celebrated EID in Lockdown Britain 2020 - UK - 25th May 20
Stock Market Topping Behavior - 24th May 20
Fed Action Accelerates Boom-Bust Cycle; Not A Virus Crisis - 23rd May 20
Gold Silver Miners and Stocks (after a quick drop) Ready to Explode - 23rd May 20
3 Ways to Prepare Financially for Retirement - 23rd May 20
4 Essential Car Trade-In Tips To Get The Best Value - 23rd May 20
Budgie Heaven at Bird Land - 23rd May 20
China’s ‘Two Sessions’ herald Rebound of Economy - 22nd May 20
Signs Of Long Term Devaluation US Real Estate - 22nd May 20
Reading the Tea Leaves of Gold’s Upcoming Move - 22nd May 20
Gold, Silver, Mining Stocks Teeter On The Brink Of A Breakout - 21st May 20
Another Bank Bailout Under Cover of a Virus - 21st May 20
Do No Credit Check Loans Online Instant Approval Options Actually Exist? - 21st May 20
An Eye-Opening Perspective: Emerging Markets and Epidemics - 21st May 20
US Housing Market Covid-19 Crisis - 21st May 20
The Coronavirus Just Hit the “Fast-Forward” Button on These Three Industries - 21st May 20
AMD Zen 3 Ryzen 9 4950x Intel Destroying 24 core 48 thread Processor? - 21st May 20
Dow Stock Market Trend Analysis and Forecast - 20th May 20
The Credit Markets Gave Their Nod to the S&P 500 Upswing - 20th May 20
Where to get proper HGH treatment in USA - 20th May 20
Silver Is Ensured A Prosperous 2020 Thanks To The Fed - 20th May 20
It’s Not Only Palladium That You Better Listen To - 20th May 20
DJIA Stock Market Technical Trend Analysis - 19th May 20
US Real Estate Showing Signs Of Covid19 Collateral Damage - 19th May 20
Gold Stocks Fundamental Indicators - 19th May 20
Why This Wave is Usually a Market Downturn's Most Wicked - 19th May 20
Gold Mining Stocks Flip from Losses to 5x Leveraged Gains! - 19th May 20
Silver Price Begins To Accelerate Higher Faster Than Gold - 19th May 20
Gold Will Soar Soon; World Now Faces 'Monetary Armageddon' - 19th May 20
Gold Mining Stocks Fundamentals - 18th May 20
Why the Largest Cyberattack in History Will Happen Within Six Months - 18th May 20
New AMD Ryzen 4900x and 4950x Zen3 4th Gen Processors Clock Speed and Cores Specs - 18th May 20
Learn How to Play the Violin, Kids Activities and Learning During Lockdown - 18th May 20
The Great Economy Reopening Gamble - 17th May 20
Powell Sends a Message With Love for Gold - 17th May 20
An Economic Renaissance Emerges – Stock Market Look Out Below - 17th May 20
Learn more about the UK Casino Self-exclusion - 17th May 20
Will Stocks Lead the Way Lower for Gold Miners? - 15th May 20
Are Small-Cap Stocks (Russell 2k) Headed For A Double Dip? - 15th May 20
Coronavirus Will Wipe Out These Three Industries for Good - 15th May 20
Gold and Silver: As We Go from Deflation to Hyperinflation - 15th May 20

Market Oracle FREE Newsletter

Coronavirus-stocks-bear-market-2020-analysis

Climate Change, Renewable Resources and Economics

Politics / Climate Change Oct 14, 2015 - 06:10 AM GMT

By: Frank_Hollenbeck

Politics

Many socialists have conveniently repackaged themselves as environmentalists and latched onto climate change as a convenient means to preach the standard socialist agenda of planning and control.

These socialists will talk about glaciers retreating and the need to force farmers in Normandy, for example, to stop running their tractors on Tuesday. Anyone who questions the basic precepts of climate change are instantly viewed as ignoramuses who deny the overwhelming scientific evidence that climate change exists.


Yet, what we have learned from economics is that these claims about climate change cannot scientifically be made. It is beyond man’s scientific abilities to do so, just like it is impossible for economists to draw conclusion of causality from empirical data. Empiricism can support a theoretical argument in economics but empiricism can never prove or disprove an economic theory.

In the past, economists were the intellectual roadblock to popular misconceptions, bad ideas, or more importantly, government policies sold to the public on false assumptions. But today, few economists challenge many of the environmentalists’ essential precepts about climate change or discuss the logic behind the environmentalists’ positions on renewable resources. Too many economists nowadays have sold themselves to the enemy, and have relinquished any role as defenders of common sense or rational thought.

So what does economics have to say about the environmentalists’ essential position that carbon emissions leads to climate change?

Over 100 years ago, the limits of empiricism in economics were made crystal clear. In the article, “The Elasticity of the Demand for Wheat”, R.A Lehfeldt (1914) attempted to determine the elasticity of demand by looking at the historical data of the price of wheat against the consumption of wheat. He attempted to correct for changes in other factors (ceteris paribus) and he found the elasticity of the demand for wheat to be a positive 0.6.

Should we conclude from this study that the demand curve for wheat is, in reality, upward sloping?  Hasn’t this empirical study showed that economic theory is wrong?

Any sensible economist would explain that what is observed are not points on a stable demand curve, but ever-changing intersection points between demand and supply or points moving toward equilibrium. A demand curve is like a photograph: It is only valid for that instance since other factors change constantly so that the position of the curves are different from one instance to the next. It is impossible to empirically measure the slope of a demand curve.

So what is the economist to do? He goes back to theory, realizing that empiricism is to help theory but not to be confused with the foundation or replacement of economic theory. Many economists (some with Nobel prizes) take too much liberty in throwing up an empirical relationship between two variables and implicitly assume a causal relationship. This type of economic analysis is a serious disservice to the profession.

Since we do not have a laboratory to conduct economic experiments, it is difficult for the economist to distinguish between association and causation or correctly determine the direction of causation.

The same logic applies to climate change proponents. The world is extremely complex and ever-changing. It is impossible for the environmentalist to make the claim of causation that carbon emissions lead to global warming, or the latest buzzword, climate change. Environmentalists face the same limits as economists- the inability to run a laboratory test. Hence, it is inadmissible to limit freedoms or liberties on something that will always remain nothing more than a possible hypothesis.

Another pet peeve of the environmentalist is renewable resources. According to many leading environmentalists, the government should spend taxpayers’ dollars to subsidize the development and research of renewable resources. Some universities have even created economic professorships in renewable resources economics.

This whole discussion on renewable resources is mostly unnecessary, and is, in reality, subterfuge to push the climate change agenda.

Take oil, for example. We currently have an abundance of oil available. Many oil companies have discovered large oil deposits but have determined it is not economically viable to develop these fields. They have determined that it is not worth using the two non-abundant renewable resources, capital and labor, to develop these fields. If labor and capital were free goods, then this oil would already have been extracted from the soil. What limits the extraction of oil is the scarcity of these two renewable resources, capital and labor, and not the availability of oil. So why should we be concerned about a resource we have too much of?  Why should we be concerned about an overly abundant resource?  The Institute of Energy Resources estimates that the US has over 400 years of recoverable oil. The words renewable or nonrenewable in front of the word resources are meaningless words used to push a socialist agenda.

Environmentalists will say we need to develop these renewable resources because one day we will run out of non-renewable resources. President Carter in 1980 declared that oil would be scarce by the year 2000 and President Obama used this logic to justify spending $100 billion of taxpayers’ dollars on renewable resources, such as Solyndra. Environmentalists obviously believe they are, like most statists, in the best position to predict the future. This argument is without any real substance. The reason we use oil today is because it is the cheapest form of energy. If it wasn’t, we would be using something else. As we run out of oil, prices will rise, inducing substitution and the development of alternatives.

Yet, we do not need the government to induce such changes or take our tax dollars to implement policies that allocate resources sub-optimally.  The cost of wind turbines has dropped 30% in the last five years. Solar panels are becoming cheaper and more efficient, reminiscent of advances in microchips technology.  One day, these may be the cheapest form of energy, and the markets will determine when that occurs. Let the market decide how resources should be allocated to best meets consumers most urgent needs. Subsidies and tax advantages (to both renewable and non renewable resources) are unnecessary and distortive.

Frank Hollenbeck, PhD, teaches at the International University of Geneva. See Frank Hollenbeck's article archives.

You can subscribe to future articles by Frank Hollenbeck via this RSS feed..

© 2015 Copyright Frank Hollenbeck - All Rights Reserved Disclaimer: The above is a matter of opinion provided for general information purposes only and is not intended as investment advice. Information and analysis above are derived from sources and utilising methods believed to be reliable, but we cannot accept responsibility for any losses you may incur as a result of this analysis. Individuals should consult with their personal financial advisors.


© 2005-2019 http://www.MarketOracle.co.uk - The Market Oracle is a FREE Daily Financial Markets Analysis & Forecasting online publication.


Post Comment

Only logged in users are allowed to post comments. Register/ Log in

6 Critical Money Making Rules