Articles by Clark Williams-Derry

Driving less is great, but producing more oil is a less-desirable reaction

In this post, David echoes what seems to be conventional eco-wisdom on high gas prices:

It's good that gas prices are rising. We want people to buy more fuel-efficient cars and drive less.

I'm not so certain.

Should enviros view high gas prices as good news?

Like many environmentalists, I tend to think that gasoline prices -- even at today's wallet-rending heights -- are too low.

In fact, no matter how high the market price for petroleum goes, it ought to be higher, since it won't include the so-called "external costs" of using oil. For example, whenever I burn a gallon of gas in my car, I'm creating pollution and climate-warming emissions; fostering overseas military entanglements; increasing the risk of oil spills and pipeline leaks; siphoning money from the local economy into the bank accounts of unsavory oil magnates; yada yada. Each of those factors carries a cost -- sometimes intangible, often hard to quantify, but real nonetheless. And because I don't pay those costs when I fill up -- I just let the rest of the globe pick up the tab -- I tend to buy more gas than I otherwise would.

Biodiesel: The slippery facts

Biodiesel -- the cleaner-burning vegetable-based oil that can be substituted for ordinary petroleum diesel -- is getting a lot of press these days. That's not too surprising: alternatives to oil tend to get a lot of attention when fuel prices are rising, which they're certainly doing right now.

Perhaps the biggest piece of recent policy news is Washington state's new renewable fuels standard, passed just last month, which mandates that 2 percent of the diesel sold in the state must be biodiesel by the end of 2008.

That got me thinking -- why just 2 percent? Couldn't we do better than that?

Well, maybe so. But perhaps not by a whole lot.

Toxic (press) releases

Good news about pollution? The U.S. EPA says so. This Washington Post story makes it seem like the U.S. made great strides in reducing toxic emissions in 2004.

The Environmental Protection Agency said Wednesday that chemical pollution released into the environment fell more than 4 percent from 2003 to 2004...The agency said releases of dioxin and dioxin compounds fell 58 percent; mercury and mercury compounds were cut 16 percent; and PCBs went down 92 percent. [Emphasis added.]

Now, the fall in dioxins in particular seemed like pretty big news. But it also struck me as a bit suspicious. So I looked into the numbers a bit.