“The misconceived greening of children calls for a major grassroots pushback to entirely de-list wind power from curricula. Rip those wind power pages out of textbooks. Or one day soon, tell the truth about industrial wind, NOT story book bucolic tales of wind ‘farms’ or ‘parks’.”

Any parent involved with their children’s homework or school knows that “green” is in. But too often more than that, “green” notions are presented as self-evident truths where there should be critical thinking and discussion. Also too often, federal and state funds are being dispensed to create the ‘greenest’ possible hearts and minds for tomorrow.

Such is the case with an industry that is economically useless and environmentally destructive: industrial wind power.

A website of the U.S. Department of Energy, Wind Powering America, describes how schools can receive taxpayer funding for wind projects.…

“The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design. To the naive mind that can conceive of order only as the product of deliberate arrangement, it may seem absurd that in complex conditions … adaptation to the unknown can be achieved more effectively by decentralizing decisions…. Yet that decentralization actually leads to more information being taken into account.”

– F. A. Hayek, The Fatal Conceit: The Errors of Socialism (1988), p. 76.

Stephen Chu, Secretary of the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE), announced last week his intention to step down once a replacement is found. His 3,800-word resignation letter should be critically studied by students of energy policy and, indeed, public policy more generally.

I offer ten critical points to bear in mind as Chu’s letter is read (other points can be added in the comments section).…

As previous posts have tried to show. we already have too many “answers” from the political class and their allies. What we need is realistic questions to start anew.

We hope Part I (“Spinning Climate and Weather”), Part II (“Political Actions”), and Part III (“Warnings Given and Ignored”) will inspire people to interact in the comment section by raising still more needed questions, rather than only expounding on policy “fixes.”

Questions like the following are an essential first step.

Communication, Risk, and Decision-Making

1. How do we communicate flood, wind and wave storm risks in understandable, consistent,and actionable terms to the public and elected officials, and among the various federal and state agencies? How can we create a consistent policy with respect to warnings and evacuation orders?

2. What safety factors should we use in risk analyses and our decision making process, and why?

In Hurricane Sandy’s aftermath – with millions freezing and hungry in dark devastation, including nursing home patients that he failed to evacuate – Mayor Bloomberg sidetracked police and sanitation workers for the NYC Marathon, until public outrage forced him to reconsider.

While federal emergency teams struggled to get water, food, and gasoline to victims, companies, religious groups, charities, local citizens, New Jersey Governor Chris Christie and other state and local agencies worked tirelessly to raise money, truck in food and water, and organize countless relief efforts.

The hard reality, however, was how ill-prepared the region was for another major storm. The political body pretended the great storms had not occurred, virtually assuring that any repeat of the 1893, 1938, 1944, and 1992 storms, among others, would bring devastation far worse than before.…