• Jim Rose is an economic consultant in Wellington
Thank Greenpeace for cheap petrol prices. If Greenpeace really wants to slow carbon emissions, they should quit their activism now because of a green paradox arising from their calls to leave fossil fuels in the ground.
If investors feel insecure in their property rights over oil or gas fields or coal deposits, they are drifting into a use it or lose it situation. If they think higher taxes or bans are on the horizon, they will pump oil and gas faster and dig out the coal quicker.
Insecurity in property rights has been the main driver of trends in oil prices since at least 1950. You do not have to be a geopolitical genius to see the rise of Arab nationalism and with it the prospect of nationalisation of oil fields. In anticipation of these nationalisations, the oil companies were pumping as much oil as they could. This depressed oil prices prior to these nationalisations for as far back as the mid-50s. After these nationalisations, oil prices went up in the 1970s because the host countries had longer investment horizons than an oil company expecting to be nationalised soon.
Since the rise of the environmental movement in the 1980s and its concerns about global warming, a new force arose to keep petrol prices down. Once again, threats of bans or carbon taxes put resource owners, government and private, again in a use it or lose it situation. Faster rates of depletion kept energy prices low despite strong growth in demand including from the rise of China.