Green dreams and nightmares.(Global Warming and Other Eco-Myths: How the Environmental Movement Uses False Science to Scare Us to Death)(Book Review)

Global Warming and Other Eco-Myths: How the Environmental Movement Uses False Science to Scare Us to Death Edited by Ronald Bailey Prima Publishing, 320 pages, $24.95

Global Warming and Other Eco-Myths, a new book edited by Reason magazine's science editor Ronald Bailey, breaks no startling new ground. It does gather an impressive array of researchers to explain that the things environmentalists think they know aren't necessarily so. Global Warming follows up its injection of impertinent reality into public debate by demonstrating the links between environmentalists' bad science and their worse policies.

Take energy policy. Environmentalist solutions to non-existent energy short-ages seem grounded more in science fiction than science fact. One of the most frequently proposed solutions is the fuel cell. Fuel cells emit no potentially dangerous gases into the atmosphere because they are not based on combustion. Instead, they chemically transform hydrogen into electricity. The devices are generally safe, quiet, efficient, and non polluting. The technology is already in use in spaceships and as back-up power sources for hospitals and some vehicles.

They have serious drawbacks, however. Global Warming explains that the hydrogen which powers the cells has to come from somewhere--and that's usually natural gas, propane, or gasoline. " While the cells are "clean" once generating, Greenies ignore the environmental impact of producing the hydrogen needed to fuel them. Creating hydrogen throws off emissions, including more carbon dioxide than is emitted by reformulated gasoline. In addition, hydrogen contains only one sixth the amount of energy of a comparable volume of gasoline. That means much larger tanks and many more refills will be necessary.

"Renewable" and "environmentally friendly" energy sources, despite the cries of activists, remain niche technologies-too costly or unruly for general use, compared to our mainstays of coal, natural gas, oil, and nuclear power. Innovation may eventually improve alternative energies' prospects, but so far, even with substantial government subsidies, progress has been slow. The Energy Information Agency predicts that by 2020 all "renewable" energy sources will account for less than 4 percent of the U.S. energy supply. In 1999 they contributed 3.37 percent.

Ironically, environmentalists often slow the pace of technological progress, rather than speeding it. While the American public sees many benefits in advancing knowledge and science, environmentalists see problems lurking behind every corner. In order to prevent "disaster," they insist that science and ...