Chicago Boyz

                 
 
 
What Are Chicago Boyz Readers Reading?
 

 
  •   Enter your email to be notified of new posts:
    Loading
  •   Problem? Question?
  •   Contact Authors:

  • CB Twitter Feed
  • Blog Posts (RSS 2.0)
  • Blog Posts (Atom 0.3)
  • Incoming Links
  • Recent Comments

    • Loading...
  • Authors

  • Notable Discussions

  • Recent Posts

  • Blogroll

  • Categories

  • Archives

  • Unintended Secondary Effects Revisited

    Posted by Mitch Townsend on November 26th, 2005 (All posts by )

    A little less than a week ago, the Boston Globe featured a rather naive article entitled In Praise of High Gas Prices. The author argued that ultimately higher energy costs were a good thing, since they would drive consumers to more frugal habits (a Prius rather than an Escalade, for example) and spur investment in “alternative” sources of energy. He is conflating several issues. First, there is a straightforward assertion of the law of substitute goods, which states, in effect, that an increase in the price of Coca Cola will lead to an increase in demand for Pepsi. That’s fine, as far as it goes, but he also assumes that an increase in the price of the cost of production is a good and beneficial thing, if it in fact causes the subsitution. This is a political value judgment having nothing to do with economics. He makes this assumption because the alternatives are thought to be more desirable than the original. Wind power and shale oil are mentioned (more on these later).

    Today, without reference to the earlier article, the Globe notices that at least one of the substitutes is maybe not such a good thing. In the San Joaquin Valley of California, it looks like the substitution of firewood for heating oil and natural gas will cause the region to fail its air pollution remediation plan. While unintended, this outcome is by no means unexpected. The same thing happened during the Carter administration, when parts of the Northeast were enveloped by a thick haze of smog from wood-burning stoves. The article doesn’t even touch on the worst aspect of the substitution, which is the loss of life from fires.

    On the other hand, higher fuel prices seem to have led to innovation, in some cases representing a definite improvement over some of the previous technology.

     

    3 Responses to “Unintended Secondary Effects Revisited”

    1. Shannon Love Says:

      Another unintended consequence often neglected is that price is often a good proxy for measuring the overall energy cost of manufacturing a product. A higher cost product like a hybrid may in fact have higher total life-cycle energy consumption than an older and cheaper technology.

    2. David Still Says:

      Burn up gas, no matter how inexpensive, and the earth might run out of oil…prices very high for gas, people will turn to an alternative. My friends now consider mileage when buying new cars; formerly, they didn’t care at all about gas prices per mile.

    3. Enoch Says:

      A horse!!!! My kingdom for a horse!!!!!