Sunday, September 25, 2005

Warming threat loses punch against autos

By Thomas Bray / The Detroit News

Error processing SSI file Comment on this story Send this story to a friend Get Home Delivery

Reality keeps getting in the way of those who want to use the threat of global warming to end the age of fossil fuels.

Ten days ago a federal judge in New Jersey dismissed a lawsuit by eight states, including California, New York, New Jersey and Wisconsin, demanding that power producers be subjected to caps on emissions of carbon dioxide. They had tried to argue that excess carbon dioxide from power plants is causing climate changes that potentially harm their citizens.

The judge, Loretta Preska, wisely didn't take a position on global warming. She merely pointed out that she lacked the constitutional authority to decide policy questions. It's up to the legislative and executive branches of government to decide whether global warming is indeed a threat to humanity and, if so, what to do about it. Alas for global warming enthusiasts, there appears to be little appetite in Washington for doing so.

Former Vice President Al Gore's masterwork, the 1997 Kyoto agreement calling for a rollback of carbon dioxide emissions to pre-1990 levels, remains dead in the U.S. Senate. Though Sen. Pete Domenici, R-N.M., last week added his voice to the call to regulate carbon dioxide emissions, there is growing recognition in Washington and beyond that such regulations would yield little benefit while costing stupendous amounts.

At an unofficial "summit" sponsored by Bill Clinton two weeks ago to discuss global issues, Britain's Prime Minister Tony Blair, once a supporter of the Kyoto treaty, conceded that his thinking has changed. "The truth is that no country is going to cut its growth or consumption in the light of a long-term environmental problem," he was quoted by Greenwire, an environmental news service.

Blair appears to be coming around to President Bush's insistence that the best way of dealing with such is to subsidize the development of energy technologies, such as hydrogen. An even better strategy is to leave technology to the marketplace and focus on adapting to changes as they materealize instead of chasing every phantom risk alarmists suggest.

For example, remove barriers to the development of genetically engineered crops that can better withstand the slight increase in temperatures that are predicted. If oil is running out, let prices rise, discouraging consumption and encouraging new technologies, rather than demanding price controls. And stop subsidizing flood insurance that encourages settlement in low-lying areas like New Orleans -- or at least build better levees.

The Los Angeles Times recently reported that an environmental lawsuit in the 1970s succeeded in killing a Corps of Engineers plan to strengthen the storm surge barriers on Lake Pontchartrain and eastern New Orleans -- exactly the sites of the catastrophic flooding in that city, killing 1,000 or so citizens.

The specter of global warming makes a particularly handy club for the anti-automobile set to bash Detroit with. But one of the lessons of Katrina was that automobile owners escaped the storm's worst fury. The evacuation of the Texas coast by car and bus allowed even more to escape Rita.

The automobile is a life-saver, not just a convenience. It is also a key component of the nation's prosperity. The most important element of a strategy of adaptation is to make sure that society has the wealth to deal with threats as they arise. What country besides "auto-dependent" America has the wealth to even think about rebuilding a city like New Orleans?

Thomas Bray is a News columnist. Reach him at (313) 222-2544 and tbray@detnews.com.