Energy and irony?

Within the last week two news stories have caught my attention.

First, the announcements coming from the Inter-governmental Panel on Climate Change have been more definitive than ever about our own contribution to climate change and its consequences.  This is a shift from the more usual scientific caution.

Second, Ed Miliband (the leader of the Labour party) has declared he will freeze energy bills for about 18 months if he wins the next election.  This has angered energy companies, who claim it will impede investment and possibly delimit the supplies we require from outside the U.K.

So, on the one hand we are asked to consider the short term gain of reduced energy bills in order to help the average household along.  And on the other we are shown data demonstrating our over reliance on hydro-carbons, as a consequence of our gluttonous energy consumption.

I need to think the interaction of these two issues through, but it occurs to me that we should be paying a considerable financial cost for our energy, but that should be a form of taxation which is invested into alternative energy supply.

In the meantime, Thomas Friedman's arguments on these issues are compelling and worth serious consideration.  We face a potentially catastrophic common resource problem, but our governmental systems are not allowing clear social norms to emerge that will manage it.  Our dependence upon the oil producing nations of the middle east is analysed in great detail by Friedman. The impact upon the environment is tremendous, but so is the impact upon democracy and peace.