Radical Environmentalism or Human Progress. Pick Only One

Why only one? Because the two are fundamentally inapposite. They are matter and anti-matter. Polar opposites. Black and white. False and True.



O.K., O.K., I realize that was too provocative without an explanation. Let me explain.

Environmentalists argue that using of energy is polluting the planet, causing toxins that cause immediate harm, and greenhouse gases that cause global warming. From there, their solution is to use less. Many go so far as to argue that humans must be forced to use less, even if it means lowering our standard of living. That's where the real problems begin. Because in the rush to reach for the simple-sounding solution that feel good, no one calculates the harm that using as much energy as humans do avoids. That's right, our "energy intensive" lifestyle saves more lives than it harms.

Want proof? Think of all the life-saving progress that the world has seen in the last 100 years.

Take Norman Borlaug. Borlaug revolutionized modern agriculture, in the process he saved somewhere around one billion lives, and counting. Couple Borlaug's agricultural revolution with fertilizers, machinery, and all manner of modern energy intensive conveniences and you're looking at savings billions of lives.

Sitting in our comfy chairs in front of our televisions, it's easy to agree with using less energy, so we pass some taxes on coal, or nuclear, or gas or oil. But in agreeing to make energy more expensive, we're not only making our lives less "comfortable" we're inadvertently making it harder for the Borlaug's of the world to buy the energy he needs to research his revolutionary wheat strains. We're making it harder to make inexpensive computers and to ship them, so that poor farmers in India can google a better way to learn about Borlaug's advances. And when we've made energy more expensive, and that computer doesn't get made and the farmer never learns about the advances, and hundreds or thousands of his countrymen die, because they don't have enough to eat, no one is going to blame a "green" tax.

Don't buy it. Humans have an incredible capacity to solve problems. If you set them free, rather than shackle them.