Ed. Note: Classical liberalism lost a prominent expositor with the death of Steve Horwitz (1964–2021). His 2012 piece below argues that physical science is only the beginning to determine climate policy. Nine years later, the public-policy debate is going Horwitz’s way with a greater appreciation of both analytical failure and government failure relative to “market failure,” pointing toward adaptation to weather/climate change, not activist mitigation of carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions. (Part II tomorrow examines Horwitz’s Austrian-school takedown of a carbon (CO2) tax.
“In fact, those who think they can go directly from science to policy are, as it turns out, engaged in denial – denial of the relevance of social science.”
Good analysis survives the test of time–and should be periodically revisited as such. Stephen Horwitz’s Global Warming Is about Social Science Too: Who’s in denial?…
Continue ReadingA major component of Senate Bill 3 was a requirement that electric companies weatherize their facilities to withstand future freezes…. Some researchers have put [this cost] at billions of dollars. (Houston Chronicle, below)
I hope that at least the free-market community realizes what central planning and renewables forcing have done to the Texas grid. Electricity provision in the state is wounded–and the great costs already incurred (and socialized to a large extent) only promise to grow in the future as more renewables ruin the economics of the conventional, reliable power generators, causing price spikes and shortages.
The latest was reported this week on the front page of the Houston Chronicle: “Costs of plant fixes may fall to Texans: Companies seeking to have consumers pay for the upgrades.…
Continue Reading“The only person who can truly persuade you is yourself. You must turn the issues over in your mind at leisure, consider the many arguments, let them simmer, and after a long time turn your preferences into convictions.”
– Milton and Rose Friedman, Free to Choose (1979), p. xii.
I have fruitfully engaged in debates regarding energy and climate on social media, some on Facebook and most at LinkedIn. I comment on views I agree with to add insight. But I commonly engage with my intellectual foes, some of whom are quite confident they have the science on their side and share links to prove it.
I learn, while noting the areas of disagreement and why. I remain persuaded that the climate crusade is wasteful and futile–and wealth-is-health entrepreneurship is the way forward, whatever the weather and climate of the future.…
Continue Reading