Privatization: The Key to the Coming Solar Age

[CrisisPapers]

| Ernest Partridge |

How is industrial civilization to deal with the end of the petroleum age and the onset of global warming?

The answer seems obvious to Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. On Air America's "Ring of Fire" radio program ten days ago, he remarked: "Solar energy is hitting the earth for free - the tides, the wind, the sun are all free. All we need is to implant the infrastructure to harvest those electrons, and in a few years we'll be off of foreign oil."

Typical wooly-headed liberalism! And yet, RFK Jr. may have inadvertently hit upon the reason why research, development, and implementation of a large-scale solar energy industry has lagged: precisely because it is free.

The obvious solution? Privatize the sun! If title to the sun were turned over to the oil companies, we would see an immediate flourishing of a solar industry and an easy transition from the petroleum economy. Conversely, as long as the incoming solar energy remains "free," why should any corporation invest as much as a cent on something it cannot own and therefore control?

If the sun is privatized, then by implication so too should be the global forces that the sun sets in motion, namely the wind, the ocean currents, and the tides, all of these potential sources of energy.

Far-fetched? Hardly. After all, the Bush administration and its corporate sponsors have privatized war (Halliburton and Blackwater), the Congress (Big Pharma, General Electric, etc.), and elections (Diebold and ES&S), so why not the sun?

Some bold-thinking libertarians have even proposed the privatization of nature. For example, Robert J. Smith asks: "why the buffalo nearly vanished, but not the Hereford; ... why the common salmon fisheries of the United States are overfished, but not the private salmon streams of Europe." The reason? Nobody owned the virgin prairies and nobody owns the oceans. They were and are public commons, thus fated for over-exploitation and ruin. Private resources, on the other hand, are wisely managed, due to the self-interest of the owners. The solution? "We should explore the possibilities of extending ownership of native game animals and wildlife to property owners." Smith then leaps to a broader conclusion: "The problems of environmental degradation, pollution, overexploitation of natural resources, and depletion of wildlife all derive from their being treated as common property resources. Whenever we find an approach to the extension of private property rights in these areas, we find superior results." (My emphases. For a contrary opinion, see "Privatism and Public Goods").

The implications of the privatized sun are enormous. For example, while you could not put solar panels on your roof without the permission of the solar conglomerate TACEMS (Texaco-Amoco-Chevron-Exxon-Mobil-Shell, UnLtd.), TACEMS might rent that space in exchange for a modest reduction in your electric bill. If you refused, the energy conglomerate might seize your roof anyway, under the newly acquired corporate power of eminent domain. (See SCOTUS ruling, Kelo v. New London).

Beach resorts would, of course, be required to pay for the use of the sun, as would sailboats for the use of the wind.

Likewise, farmers would be assessed a fee for the use of the sun to grow their crops. Sunlight would then have acquired the same legal status as seed grain which, until now, had, from time immemorial, been part of the free bounty of nature. But now seed grain is patented, requiring payment to multinational corporations such as Monsanto and Cargill.

There might be some downsides for the energy conglomerates. For example, the solar energy causes storms such as hurricanes and tornados, not to mention sunburns. Accordingly, liability claims against TACEMS could be enormous.

Not to worry, however. Corporate overseers of the Congress (i.e., lobbyists) have instructed the lawmakers to institute "tort reform," which has reduced citizen complaints against mega-corporations to insignificance.

In sum, with the privatization of the Courts, the Congress, the Military, elections, and virtually of government itself, privatization of the sun, the wind, the tides, the ocean, would seem to be the logical next step.

On the other hand, we might reconsider the dogma that privatization is the solution to all social, environmental and political problems. We might, for a moment at least, revive the ancient notion that some institutions and resources are, and justly should be, the common property of the public at large.

But that would be SOCIALISM!!!

-- EP

[Joe Chi Minh]

1. Surely, everyone would prefer ANTISOCIAL- ISM? You know it makes sense.

It worked for Enron, Worldcom, Bear Sterns, Berings, Societe Generale, Northern Rock, etc.

[bluescribbler]

2. A modest proposal, indeed

Any time some GOPig tries to tell me about the benefits of privatization, I talk about firefighting. In the early days, fires were fought by private fire companies. The first company to the fire got to try to put it out, and they were paid by the property owner. Often, they demanded payment before they would begin to pump water. If the owner couldn't pay, their property burned to the ground. Tough luck. If two or more companies arrived on the scene, they might fight among themselves for the privilege of putting out the fire. Often, the building would burn to the ground while the competing companies sorted out which company got to fight the fire. Again, tough luck.

All that changed when municipalities began installing their own fire departments, either professional or volunteer. Now the market place had no need to "work its magic." All property owners enjoyed the same protection, regardless of their personal wealth, or lack thereof. There was no question of whose responsibility it was.

[puebloknot]

3. And who will be our Gandhi, and lead us to the seaside to make salt?

The English insisted that Indian citizens buy salt from their companies, rather than harvesting it easily from the sea for free.

For every crazed idea like this one you outline, there's a precedent somewhere. But if not ... do it anyway!

[midnight]

4. Why do they hate our FREEdoms?

The answer seems obvious to Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. On Air America's "Ring of Fire" radio program ten days ago, he remarked: "Solar energy is hitting the earth for free - the tides, the wind, the sun are all free. All we need is to implant the infrastructure to harvest those electrons, and in a few years we'll be off of foreign oil." Hey hands off my sun, water, and wind.

[Celebration]

5. That is brilliant!!

But let's not forget privatizing the wind, while we are at it. Oh, and the rain--especially rain water that we catch in a cup.

We need to license and tax oxygen too. It shouldn't be free--people that are breathing need to pay for the privilege.

[Overseas]

6. And look how successful privatized medical care has been !

Billions of dollars already, with more and more sick people every day !

[eppur_se_muova]

7. "Since the dawn of time man has yearned to destroy the sun."

for *precisely* that reason!

[yurbud]

8. serious about one thing: wind and sun too plentiful to be monopolized, therefore ignored

[Yavapai]

9. A Friend of mine, back in the 60's,

used to say we would "have solar energy as soon as Con Edison figured a way to meter it"