frankel128_ plus49Construction PhotographyAvalonGetty Images_emissions

Politics

أسعار النفط المرتفعة من الممكن أن تساعد البيئة

Oct 25, 2021 Jeffrey Frankel

كمبريدج ــ في شهر أكتوبر/تشرين الأول، سجلت أسعار الوقود الأحفوري ارتفاعا حادا. فقد بلغت أسعار الغاز الطبيعي الأوروبية ذروة غير مسبوقة. كما وصلت أسعار الفحم الحراري في الصين إلى أعلى مستوياتها على الإطلاق. وتجاوزت أسعار النفط الخام الأميركي 80 دولارا للبرميل، وهذا أعلى مستوياتها في سبع سنوات، مما دفع إدارة الرئيس الأميركي جو بايدن في أغسطس/آب إلى توجيه الدعوة إلى منظمة أوبك والدول الرئيسية الأخرى المصدرة للنفط لزيادة إنتاجها.

على الرغم من أن هذه الأسعار تعكس جزئيا عوامل خاصة بكل بلد، فمن المؤكد أن الأمر لا يخلو من سبب أكثر جوهرية. فكما هي الحال مع أسعار الوقود، تعافت أيضا مؤشرات أسعار السلع المعدنية والزراعية من ركود دام ست سنوات، لتعود إلى مستويات 2014. وتشير علاقة الارتباط الطويلة الأجل بين أسعار السلع الأساسية المختلفة إلى تفسير يتعلق بالاقتصاد الكلي. والسبب الواضح وراء ارتفاع أسعار الطاقة في عام 2021 هو النمو الاقتصادي العالمي السريع.

لكن ما هي الآثار البيئية المترتبة على ارتفاع أسعار الوقود الأحفوري، وتحديدا في ما يتعلق بمكافحة تغير المناخ؟ يبرز هذا السؤال بشكل خاص مع استعداد المسؤولين من أكثر من 200 دولة للتجمع في جلاسجو لحضور مؤتمر الأمم المتحدة لتغير المناخ (COP26)، حيث من المتوقع أن يعلنوا عن اعتزامهم الوصول بصافي انبعاثات ثاني أكسيد الكربون إلى الصِـفر بحلول عام 2050.

To continue reading, register now.

Subscribe now for unlimited access to everything PS has to offer.

As a registered user, you can enjoy more PS content every month – for free.

Already have an account? Log in

Subscribe to PS Digital

Access every new PS commentary, our entire On Point suite of subscriber-exclusive content – including Longer Reads, Insider Interviews, Big Picture/Big Question, and Say More – and the full PS archive.

Subscribe Now

new comment has been posted. new comments have been posted.

0 Comments on this paragraph, 8 Comments on this article

Petey Bee Oct 28, 2021

Time for our daily dose of pessimism:

After so many years, low motor fuel prices are a structural requirement of life in the US. Tolerating high fuel costs would mean breaking free of the single-occupancy-pickup-truck paradigm. This, in turn, means destigmatizing vehicle occupancy greater than one, and vehicle mass below 2 tons. A common answer to this is electric vehicles, but accelerating the adoption of this technology, in effect forcing new vehicle purchases (at a time when we can't even sustain regular production) would cause even harsher economic pain to voters. Add to this capture of the federal government regulating enviro policy (Exhibit A: Chairman of the Senate Environment and Natural Resources Committee - look it up). The political results will surprise noone. Instead, a few years down the road from now, if the usual tendency of energy markets to overcorrect does not materialize, I would expect policies aimed at decoupling domestic fuel costs from the international market, with the goal of making energy in all forms more affordable for Americans. Reduction of per-capita energy use is for "the other people".
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
Oct 27, 2021

This comment was removed by a moderator. Replies to this comment may also be deleted. Please note that we moderate comments to ensure the conversation remains topically relevant. We appreciate well-informed comments and welcome your criticism and insight. Please be civil and avoid name-calling and ad hominem remarks.
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
Edward Gallagher Oct 26, 2021

$4 a gallon home heating oil costs will cause an increase in wood burning use in the frost belt. There is no win for the environment with this lunacy unless millions of people freezing to death and resultant drop in demand is considered a win.
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
Constance Underfoot Oct 26, 2021

JEFFREY FRANKEL: "Millions dead in a pandemic helps population control."

Or, in a less sarcastic and more reality-based response: "High energy prices increase the use of alternative fuels, such as wood to heat homes. Four cords of wood burned in the Northeast over the winter will add over 20,000 pounds of CO2 to the atmosphere."

Whew, well at least they won't be burning natural gas or oil. So smart.
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
Greg Daniels Oct 26, 2021

You'd think that the Democrats would jump on a carbon tax as a way to discourage fossil fuel use, but they aren't. They seem to believe that the battle can be won with no sacrifices needed among the poor and middle classes. I think that's impossible.
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
Mirek Fatyga Oct 25, 2021

Clueless elites, treating common people like some sort of a fodder in their games of decarbonization are facilitating and in fact accelerating the return of Fascism in the Western World.

Cease and desist. The world cannot survive in this century without fossil fuels. Politically motivated suppression of fossil fuels can end one way only: an energy crisis which brings about an economic crisis, which brings about populism.

The real crisis is one of scarcity brought about by the population growth. One needs to accelerate the development of alternatives while also maintaining a robust effort to provide energy with fossil fuels. I know this is hard to see from the perspective of a lobster dinner at a climate conference that we jetted into, but do try. The verdict of history will be really harsh. For an imperfect comparison, think Marie Antoinette, or Nevil Chamberlain. Time is short.
- Jeffrey Frankel Oct 25, 2021
  
  So you feel that incentivizing decarbonization is elitist and facilitates the return of Fascism in the Western World; and yet it sounds like you favor some sort of government action to prevent people from having as many children as they want? -- JF
  - Mirek Fatyga Oct 25, 2021
    
    suppressing fossil fuel production, which is part and parcel of so called decarbonization will strengthen populism which can smoothly transition into fascism with nukes. Populism emerged in developed countries because of a strong downward pressure on living standards that cannot be fixed by playing with money. You can't eat money.
    
    The numbers are pretty clear and stark. If one wants to extend North American oil consumption per capita to 8 billion people, oil production has to go up by ~600%. To the EU level, by ~300%. This is the scale of the problem and it will get worse before it gets better.
    
    In some ways you can have your cake and eat it too. I am in favor of subsidizing alternatives to fossil fuels to give them the market push, while at the same time making sure that there is enough energy to go around ,which requires continuing investment in fossil fuels by the private sector. For this to happen we have to stop demonizing carbon dioxide and squash the hyperventilating catastrophism that has nothing to do with reality. No catastrophe is happening ,just predictions of the catastrophe that have been around ever since I can remember, I am old, so I went through quite a few tipping points, including when we were surely sliding into an ice age in the 1970-ies.
    
    As far as the population growth is concerned. The growth occurred mostly in the developing world because of culturally sudden reduction in the mortality of the young. The only country that moderated this growth was China, using pretty drastic measures. You can't stop it, really, it has to run its course. Nonetheless, there are consequences of this growth that one needs to be aware of. I mentioned these consequences in the previous post.
    
    World elites appear to be living in a bubble which is increasingly disconnected from reality. The "Humanity" needs to focus on overcoming the consequences of XXth century population growth, not on chimeras of climate change. As I said, the time remaining is short and there are plenty of nukes to go around if this all deteriorates into social implosions followed by wars, as in 1930-ies.
    
    And finally, we need to return environmentalism to its proper function, protecting the environment, not playing fashionable politics. The developing world will face environmental devastation due to overpopulation, which can be stopped only by pulling people out of poverty, which requires energy. Meanwhile, the developed world will face intensifying migration pressures, not because of climate, but because of the interaction between climate fluctuations and overpopulation. Old fashioned fluctuations, like periodic droughts.
    A new reply to this comment has been posted.
  A new reply to this comment has been posted.
A new reply to this comment has been posted.

https://prosyn.org/e3GQAqzar

أسعار النفط المرتفعة من الممكن أن تساعد البيئة

Subscribe to PS Digital

Market Failure and Political Failure

New Comment

Contact us

Log in/Register

أسعار النفط المرتفعة من الممكن أن تساعد البيئة

Subscribe to PS Digital

Edit Newsletter Preferences

Set up Notification