So near but yet so far

LeBron points us to Daron Acemoglu writing at the HBR blog, saying that he makes "many good points". Indeed, I'd say of the 7 he makes, 6 are good to very good.

However, that last one is a real doozy:

Focus on green technology, the next area that has the best promise of creating a platform for more innovation. Innovations in information and communication technology starting in the 1960s have had a transformative impact on the world economy by creating a platform upon which myriad other technologies and products could be developed. Green technology has the potential to cut carbon emissions, sure, but we also need to transform the way in which energy is delivered, utilized, and monitored. This necessitates innovation and significant investment not only in power generation but also in the electricity grid, in the transport system, and in homes and factories. The United States is lagging behind other countries in these activities. To regain leadership, we need both more and smarter subsidies to research in green technologies and a carbon tax that naturally encourages the use of cleaner technologies and triggers more research to seek such technologies.

First, what standard are we to judge the statement that green technology "has the best promise"? At least give us some reasons why. To me this is more of an article of faith to people than the product of any kind of cost-benefit analysis.

Second, Why does it matter where an innovation takes place? Ideas are public goods. If the Chinese figure out how to somehow make solar power cost effective, why shouldn't we just be happy and use the invention?

It's not about nationalism and competition between nations; innovation anywhere is good for every place that is able to absorb and implement it. It is the global amount of R&D and innovation that we should care about, not whether the US can "reclaim leadership", especially in an area where no one can make money without continual large subsidies.

About the only part of DA's quoted paragraph I agree with is that we should introduce a Pigouvian carbon tax. I'd like to do so in a way that's revenue neutral, but even if it isn't, a carbon tax is probably the simplest and one of the best things we can do for the environment.

Grand Game: Jeannie Needs A Solar

Excellent Grand Game topic, from Anonyman.

Toronto schools go solar! They suck down solar subsidies for new roofs.

There's a bunch of dumb stuff here, but the one that made me gasp was their stating all the electricity generation in terms of "capacity." Friends, the "capacity" of solar power is calculated under the assumption that the sun is directly over head 24 hours per day, there are no clouds, and the sun does not move.

This is TORONTO.

The sun moves everywhere. But for 5 months of the year in Toronto the sun is nearly invisible, or at such a low angle that it will generate next to nothing.

And there are two other problems:
Even in Toronto, the sun moves.
Even in Toronto, even in the summer, they have the phenomenon known as "night." It's between evening and dawn (sun moving thing, again), both of which are bad for solar power. But not as bad as "night."

The actual performance of the solar roof? Likely to be 7% of the "capacity" numbers. We are talking about generating power at a cost of 20 cents / kwh, or more, and even then most of the time there won't be any power. If you include the cost of the panels when they are not generating power (Night. Winter. Clouds. That sort of thing.), the cost is probably nearly 50 cents per kwh. (Canada generates power at about 10 cents per kwh, on average, btw, from coal and nuclear plants).

I find it amazing that these schmoes in far northern countries where IS NO FREAKING SUN are the ones who think that anything they do to worship Gaia the Earth Mother is better than having actual schools.

Anyway, your turn. And, enjoy. (I have to go back this, because it is fantastic. First two paragraphs amazing. The reason sunny countries don't use solar is NOT that oil is too cheap. It's that...solar is too expensive! The only reason idiots in Germany and Canada do it is the artificial subsidies, and the belief that no cost is too high if it involves worship of Gaia.)

Quotes entirely relevant for these troubled times

"The pet-wheelchair industry is one manufacturing niche the U.S. still dominates"

--Timothy Aeppel, WSJ