Thinking about a risk-benefit analysis seems almost guaranteed to make the eyes glaze over. Yet, its something we all do every day.
Whats the benefit of doing something? Whats the risk involved in doing it?
Consider driving an automobile. Talk about risky. Thousands of Americans die each year in auto accidents. At the same time, almost all of us accept that risk and climb into the vehicle to get where we need to go. Benefit outweighs risk.
Alternatively, consider skydiving. Regardless of whatever thrill might be involved, the death rate per jump is significantly higher than the death rate per automobile trip. That means most of us will decline the opportunity to jump out of a perfectly good airplane.
As a nation, we must also make decisions about the relative risks and benefits of societys actions. Energy is one such area.
Japan has long pushed for nuclear power. As it turns out, the risks of the particular boiling-water reactor design used at the Fukushima site were much higher than expected. Now Japan is reconsidering its nuclear policies.
In the United States, coal-fired power plants provide a major part of the nations electricity. Even if you leave out climate change, these plants present their own risks from the release of radioactive material. Coal has trace amounts of uranium, thorium and some other radioactive isotopes. Trace amounts can become significant when you burn coal by the ton.
Then theres the Fayetteville shale formation, which is a big new source of energy and growth, as well as controversy, in Faulkner County.
The benefits are unmistakable. Jobs abound. Growth is taking place. Speaking recently on CBS-TVs 60 Minutes, Chesapeake Energy CEO Aubrey McClendon said that In the last few years, weve discovered the equivalent of two Saudi Arabias of oil in the form of natural gas in the United States. Not one, but two.
This is a big development when you consider that about half of the balance of payments deficit goes abroad in the form of payments for energy.
On the other hand are the potential risks.
Injection wells may be the cause of recent earthquakes in northern Faulkner County.
Natural gas may be escaping into the water table.
The chemicals used in hydraulic fracturing, or fracking, may one day escape to the earths surface.
Or maybe not. That uncertainty about the risk is what makes these issues so difficult.
State and federal regulators must look carefully at the issues and find the best possible answer to what the risks truly are.
Industry must show accountability and be willing to change practices that are found to cause problems. McClendon has already indicated such a willingness. I think the EPA will do a good job of examining it, he told a Tulsa TV station, and if were doing something wrong . somehow hurting the environment and we dont know about it, then we want to fix what were doing.
America needs affordable energy. We also need clean water and safe houses. Getting any degree of those things will entail some risk. And we must start deciding, now, what level of risk is acceptable.
Sometimes doing nothing carries the greatest risk of all.
