In his new book, Hard Green, Peter Huber lays out a conservative manifesto for saving the environment, built around the conservation ethic of Teddy Roosevelt. He argues for an activist role for government in saving the environment, but one that is radically different from today's environmental agenda. His manifesto recognizes the strength of government in helping to preserve unique wilderness areas. Mr. Huber's provocative new ideas were critically examined in the Joint Center seminar.

Peter Huber, The Manhattan Institute

In Mr. Huber's view, environmental conservation efforts should focus on the conservation of pristine wilderness areas-not the conservation of all of the earth's natural resources. Mr. Huber focuses on the modern environmental movement's "deep-seated revulsion against fossil fuels that animates so much of the modern green debate."

Mr. Huber believes that the key to future environmental conservation lies in the use of more oil, fossil fuels, and other sub-surface energy resources mined from below the surface of the earth to decrease the impact of environmental damage on the earth's surface. This argument is contrary to the popular assertion of environmental groups that the earth's resources must be conserved by developing alternative sources of energy, such as photovoltaics. Mr. Huber asserts that alternative energy sources have not yet reached the point at which they could replace traditional sources, and adds that the use of alternative energy sources could actually do more harm than good.

Mr. Huber argues that the mining and refining of fossil fuels uses less land, and is therefore better for the environment, than alternative energy sources, such as wind, biomass conversion, and wood. The use of fossil fuels also made the production of cement, steel, and bricks possible, which replaced wood as the primary building material. He further states that modern agricultural methods not supported by many environmentalists, such as pesticides, fertilizers, and genetically altered seed, allow farmers to use less land to produce food for growing populations than was possible in the early 1900s. Since the early 1900s, he argues that a "remarkable reforesting of this continent" has occurred because of country's transition to fossil fuels and new farming techniques.

Mr. Huber concludes that the modern environmental movement's preoccupation with the dangers and drawbacks of fossil fuel use has caused it to overlook the vast benefits that it brings to environmental conservation on the earth's surface.

Jessica Mathews, The Carnegie Endowment

Ms. Mathews argues that Mr. Huber's environmental manifesto, which he calls "Hard Green," is an outdated and elementary approach to environmentalism. Ms. Mathews feels that Mr. Huber's theory of environmentalism, based on Theodore Roosevelt's philosophy, oversimplifies the complex nature of environmental issues. In Ms. Mathews' opinion, Mr. Huber's approach overlooks the thousands of important invisible elements of the ecosystem that need to be guarded and conserved. Although Ms. Mathews agrees with Mr. Huber's contention that wilderness areas should be preserved, she feels that his neglect of other less obvious elements of the environment is misguided. Ms. Mathews believes that Mr. Huber's exchange of natural resources for wilderness areas is not the best path for future environmentalists to take. Ms. Mathews believes that environmental policy makers should focus on getting the marketplace to work correctly. This means that policy makers must make the marketplace internalize more externalities and eliminate subsidies that harm the environment.

Gregg Easterbrook, The Atlantic Monthly

Mr. Easterbrook offers mixed reviews of Mr. Huber's book and arguments. He feels that Mr. Huber's book tends to caricature the arguments of environmentalists, policy makers, and journalists, and that the book makes vast generalizations. He further asserts that the Mr. Huber does not adequately support some of his key claims.

Mr. Easterbrook states that he feels comfortable with a policy shift in the direction that Mr. Huber proposes if "it were done properly." Mr. Easterbook argues that "mistakes that we make with pollution are, by and large, reversible," and that "mistakes that we make in land use are hard to reverse." Since reversing these mistakes is difficult, Mr. Easterbrook feels that land preservation should be a primary environmental goal in the future. Mr. Easterbrook asserts that one could have a fully market-based system of pollution control, but not in areas for land conservation.