Detailed cost-benefit analysis needed for green-energy transition

Published 1:30 am Tuesday, August 22, 2023

There are no official figures regarding the costs and benefits of any of the net-zero carbon reduction programs. The leading advocates for moving to net zero assure us it will be good for growth. They tell us about the new jobs that will be created to make batteries, wind turbines, solar panels, electric cars and heat pumps. They never tell us how much taxpayer investment must be put into such an energy transition.

We need facts. We need to know how many of these jobs are likely to come to the U.S., and how many green energy items will need to be imported. So far the West has let China build a huge lead in making electric car batteries, securing the minerals for making batteries, wind turbines, and electric cars.

We need to know how government will replace the revenues that now come from taxing the extraction of our own oil and gas, or from using gas and diesel in our vehicles. Or on our domestic natural gas? What new taxes need to be imposed on the use of electrical alternatives for cooking, heating and air conditioning?

We need to know how much capital has to be written off as we close car factories, gas stations, refineries and oil fields? We need to know how much taxpayer money will be available to compete with the China in attracting green energy investments, and getting many reluctant consumers to switch to electric cars and heating systems.

A true published analysis, with options and assessment of cost benefits, would allow for better decisions making and a more buy-in by the public. After all tax payers will be paying the bills.

Government needs to provide honest assessments of which measures will serve to lower world carbon dioxide. No matter how you look at the situation, almost all net-zero programs require massive imports of products from China. Show us the best analysis available, if there is one.

John Branthoover

Arlington