The 1970s called — it wants its elitist energy policy and depressingly pessimistic narrative back. We should happily oblige and move toward a more optimistic, more realistic narrative of abundance and innovation supported by public policy.
Deprivation and crisis marked U.S. energy policy in the 1970s. Too reliant upon unfriendly regimes, the Arab oil embargo caused fuel shortages, skyrocketing gas prices, and long lines at the gas pump. President Gerald Ford told the public to “drive less, heat less.” President Jimmy Carter, who put solar panels on the White House, then warned of a pending “national catastrophe” unless the public curbed its energy consumption.
Their words fit neatly with environmental elitists such as scientists Paul Ehrlich and Amory Lovins, who believed the problem was a society with access to “cheap, abundant energy.” They were particularly worried about the peaceful usage of nuclear power.
“It’d be little short of disastrous for us to discover a source of cheap, clean, and abundant energy because of what we would do with it,” Lovins said in 1977, referring to nuclear energy.
Nearly five decades later, the “consume less” narrative is being implemented through energy efficiency programs for everything from lightbulbs to leaf blowers, bans on natural gas appliances, fuel standards for cars, and mandates to electrify transportation. At the same time, energy efficiency advocates, such as Lovins, are championing less efficient, intermittent sources such as wind and solar to power our grid, thereby forcing energy scarcity upon us.
We should challenge the energy deprivation narrative. The public is fortunate to live in a country that is resource-rich and diverse, where coal, natural gas, and oil can be responsibly developed and new technology is encouraged. Three uranium mines opened late last year. And the Fervo-Google project in Nevada demonstrates the promise of geothermal.
In a 2022 paper, energy optimists Austin Vernon and Eli Dourado from the Center for Growth and Opportunity at Utah State University dared to ask, “What would it be like if we were able to consume vastly more energy?” Coining the phrase “energy superabundance,” they explored the idea that energy policy should focus on being clean, cheap, and plentiful rather than restricted, unreliable, and expensive. They encourage looking at resources through the lens of their potential rather than simply emissions.
The optimism of their premise is attractive.
U.S. energy production has tripled since 1950, as reported by the Energy Information Association. In the second week of December 2023, the United States set a production record of 13.3 million barrels of oil per day despite a 69% decline in oil rigs. The country is well positioned to stake its flag in energy dominance on the global stage.
At the same time, we’ve cleaned up the planet, too. The Environmental Protection Agency reports that between “1970 and 2020, the combined emissions of the six common pollutants dropped by 78%.” In addition, we’ve cleaned up our waterways. The bottom line is we’ve become great stewards of our environment.
What should we do to benefit from energy abundance? First, dump the energy poverty mindset. Energy usage, educational attainment, and economic prosperity go together. We should instead develop a reality-based mindset that we can develop our natural resources responsibly, enjoy a clean environment, and benefit from a healthy, thriving economy that relies upon clean, affordable, reliable, abundant energy.
Second, the government should get out of the way and let the markets work. The government is lousy at picking winners and losers, usually influenced by political motives rather than scientific principles. Stop using public funds to support costly, unreliable, and weather-contingent energy sources that squander financial resources and destabilize the power grid. Similarly, taxpayer money should not be used to back products such as electric vehicles that lack consumer demand.
Lastly, we must educe green tape and unleash innovation. Today, environmental concerns are used to delay or halt necessary generation and production projects for sources that work. The Keystone Pipeline and the recent “pause” on approvals of much-needed liquefied natural gas exports are recent examples. We’ve proven we can develop resources responsibly and be good environmental stewards. We need regulatory reform and the streamlining of our permitting process to reflect that reality, especially for clean, reliable nuclear energy.
Energy is our economic paradigm. It’s in everything. To ensure our children and grandchildren enjoy a higher standard of living and a clean environment, we need to embrace energy abundance so that energy costs are lower, innovation is rewarded, and consumption isn’t demonized. Otherwise, they’ll be destined to relive the 1970s.
CLICK HERE TO READ MORE FROM RESTORING AMERICA
Amy O. Cooke is a visiting energy policy fellow at State Policy Network.
