Regulation and Sustainability

Concerning a new EPA regulation, Jennifer Ko writes,

many industry and environmental groups have failed to address one important aspect of biofuel regulations—the effect that increased ethanol use will have on dwindling water supplies in the United States. Jay Famiglietti, a senior water scientist at the U.S. National Aeronautics and Space Administration, questions the prudence of policy decisions that drain stressed water supplies to irrigate water-intensive crops. Many of the nation’s top ethanol producing states sit in the “breadbasket” of America where farmers irrigate crops, such as corn, using water from underground aquifers. In Kansas, the main source of water—the largest basin of freshwater in the United States—is dwindling rapidly, in part due to the water used up by massive acres of crops earmarked for ethanol production.

If policymakers fail to consider the relationship between energy and water, Famiglietti warns that “consequences will be huge.”

Pointer from Mark Thoma.

In Specialization and Trade, I argue that market prices tend to do a better job than environmentalist intuition at indicating sustainability. Water tends to be under-priced, in part because agricultural interests lobby for low prices. They also lobby for higher ethanol mandates. And the EPA, which is supposedly here to protect the environment, helps the agricultural interests.

3 thoughts on “Regulation and Sustainability

  1. Water tends to be under-priced, in part because agricultural interests lobby for low prices.

    Also agricultural interests help create the economy of scales for water districts. Water company love agri. business because it is large and without lobbying the market would naturally discount their prices.

  2. “In Specialization and Trade, I argue that market prices tend to do a better job than environmentalist intuition at indicating sustainability. ”

    And we don’t even want to have sustainability, right? Sustainability is just a longer word for stagnation. We are not going to sustain the state of the environment nor the technology for using resources at the 2016 level in 2026 and this is good news.

  3. If you want them to, you should favor more flexibility and independence for them and less legislative direction.

Comments are closed.