Climate and energy

Resolved: The United States federal government should substantially increase alternative energy incentives in the United States.

In high schools across the nation, this year’s national debate topic is alternative energy. CEP has invited some of the best and brightest Kansas high school debate students to weigh in on the topic. Our Energy Debate ‘08 Guest Blog series will feature six debate teams across the state, from Dodge City to Overland Park.

Today’s contributor is Evan Hernandez, a junior at Wichita East High School. Here’s his answer to the question we posed: What does Kansas’ energy future hold?

The problem with the current United States policies towards alternative energy is that they assume that either there is one type of energy that is the end all, panacea for our energy problems, or they believe that providing incentives for a myriad of different energies will eventually lead us to a solution.

We are too focused on one form of energy, and by becoming too attached to a good thing we leave ourselves open for disappointment. On the other hand, often we find we are not focused enough on deciding on a small number of possible options, but rather throwing ourselves at anything new. This puts us in the mindset that if we don’t “pick the winner” ourselves, we just need to increase incentives for many different forms of alternative energy, sit back, and let the market do the rest.

In Kansas, people often get into the habit of putting their alternative energy eggs into the wind basket, understanding on only a very surface level what it would mean to be completely reliant on wind for power. Few people know that the intermittency of wind energy wouldn’t actually provide too large of a decrease in the use of fossil fuels such as coal to provide power.

Just a few years ago, policymakers in Washington decided that corn ethanol was the panacea for transportation fuels, mandating that a certain percentage of our fuel would be from corn ethanol in only a matter of years. While this was good news for Kansas corn growers, it proved devastating to the impoverished around the world. Using a staple crop like corn for fuel as it turns out is causing food prices to spike worldwide. The increased price of corn drives up the prices of other commodities as well. It only takes minor price fluctuations to put food out of reach of thousands.

Instead of throwing ourselves at one or two, or one hundred types of alternative energy, Kansans and policymakers should narrow our choices down to a only a few options without restricting ourselves to anything in particular. Hopefully that really will give us the security to just sit down, relax, and let the market do the rest.

CEP Debate ‘08 series coordinated by CEP Director of Outreach, Eileen Horn