Finding Alternatives to Oil and Fossil Fuels

the case for and against relying on the market mechanism to produce clean alternatives sources of energy that can replace fossil fuels such as oil and coal. (15)

Fossil Fuels are non renewable resources. Therefore, as they run out, the price will rise. This will create an incentive for firms to look for alternative sources of energy. (draw supply and demand diagram) As prices rise consumers will look for alternatives.

However, fossil fuels create negative externalities (pollution). The market mechanism fails to take these externalities into consideration. There is over consumption of negative externalities in a free market.

If an alternative fuel is clean, it creates positive externalities (less global warming) however, firms may not have sufficient incentive to develop these alternatives because they don’t get rewarded for the positive externalities of being clean.

Therefore, to have the best future for energy, the government should subsidise the production of these clean alternatives (e.g. solar panel, wind).

Fossil fuels may not run out for many years. If you leave it to the market alternative fuels may not get developed until it is too late and prices are too high. To develop alternative years requires a long time of investment. The market usually has no incentive to think of the future. Firms need profits now.

However, there are drawbacks of the government intervening in the market for energy. Government intervention is often characterised by government failure. The government may have poor information about what type of subsidy to give. Working for the government may create inefficiency. Also government intervention requires higher taxes.

Therefore, it better be better to leave it to the free market.

Another market based option is for the government to try and tax fossil fuels so that the price reflects the externalities involved. This will make the market create alternative fuels quicker.