|
What is the point in hoarding petroleum? The price of fuel will force hoarding without some damn-fool bureaucrat deciding when prices are "too low." IMO no price for anything is too low.
As prices rise people will either burn less or pay more. To burn less they may change their driving habits, lifestyle, or energy source. These are individual choices made of their own free will and imposed impartially by the market.
If the market price goes high enough formerly 'unrecoverable oil' suddenly becomes commercially recoverable. Competing or alternative sources become viable and fuel-saving technology suddenly becomes reasonable, all without bureaucratic intervention.
Concerning the global warming issue, I don't know. I am leaning increasingly to the belief that humanity is a significant contributor. The most dire predictions are a run-away greenhouse effect that will essentially convert Earth into a planent like Venus. If that were preventable by curtailing carbon release then that would be an occaission that government intervention would be more than reasonable.
What if it is something that doesn't threaten life on Earth but will raise sea-level by a meter? That would essentially destroy all communities around the world within a couple of kilometers of the coast. Yeah, Big Sur would be okay but Bangledesh would all but disappear. Billions of people would be displaced. If that could be prevented by cutting carbon emissions by some percent, would that be a reasonable intervention by government? What percent cutback would be acceptible? Should it be per capita? Should it be by nation? GDP? Energy produced?
|