Search Results for: "Ken Lay"
Relevance | DateMilton Friedman on Mineral Resource Theory (remembering a giant of social thought)
By Robert Bradley Jr. -- July 31, 2017 2 Comments“I think [Julian Simon] probably should have been considered for a Nobel Prize. He took a very independent position with little backing, dug deep and provided very good evidence for his predictions and expectations.”
“I do not believe there is a natural resource economics. I believe there is good economics and bad economics.”
- Milton Friedman (below)
Editor note: Milton Friedman would be 105 this day. Born July 31, 1912, in New York City, he died on November 16, 2006, in San Francisco, age 94.
Reprinted below is an exchange between Robert Bradley Jr. and the Milton Friedman when the Nobel Laureate was 91 years old–a testament to the patience, scholarship, and longevity of one of the greatest social thinkers of modern time.
Friedman had not met Bradley but was in the habit of actively communicating with scholars until his final illness.
Wind News Update: Falmouth Says Enough—But at a High Price!
By Lisa Linowes -- July 20, 2017 7 Comments“It may be a decade or more before Falmouth can heal from the divisive battle that raged since 2009. Paying off the $14 million will be a constant reminder. It is unlikely that the residents, the locals, will be quick to trust local and state officials who put ideology and self-serving monetary gain ahead of the health and welfare of others. In that respect, Falmouth is like every other wind project battle we’ve followed.”
After seven years of public hearings, nuisance complaints, state-funded facilitations, dueling noise experts, and several fatal court rulings costing hundreds of thousands, the Town of Falmouth has finally decided to abandon its defense of the town’s two Vestas V82 (1.65 megawatt) turbines.
The last straw came on June 19, 2017, when Massachusetts Superior Court Judge Cornelius J.…
Continue ReadingRethinking Energy Efficiency: Reason Foundation Comments to DOE
By Julian Morris -- July 18, 2017 No Comments“DOE’s energy efficiency regulations generally have the effect of increasing the cost of products and reducing competition and innovation.”
“In most other cases, it would be better for DOE to scrap its rules and allow private market actors to develop standards and information tools in their place.”
Julian Morris of the Reason Foundation recently submitted COMMENTS OF REASON FOUNDATION ON THE REGULATORY BURDEN REDUCTION in a Request for Information (RFI) by the U.S. Department of Energy (Document Number 2017-10866, Docket ID DOE_FRDOC_0001-3375, 82 FR 24582, 5/30/2017.)
Excerpts from his comments follow. (For the full comments, including footnote sources, see here.)
This comment seeks to address questions raised by the Department of Energy in its Request for Information regarding “existing regulations, paperwork requirements and other regulatory obligations that can be modified or repealed, consistent with law, to achieve meaningful burden reduction while continuing to achieve the Department’s statutory obligations.”…
Continue ReadingResponse to MIT President: Paris Exit Scientifically Sound (Part I)
By Willie Soon and Christopher Monckton of Brenchley -- July 5, 2017 12 Comments– by Istvan Marko, J. Scott Armstrong, William M. Briggs, Kesten Green, Hermann Harde, David R. Legates, Christopher Monckton of Brenchley, and Willie Soon
MIT president’s letter repeats standard climate alarm claims. Here are the facts (also see Part II tomorrow).
———————-
… Continue Reading“Fortunately, contrary to Professor Reif’s claims, the actual current scientific understanding of Earth’s climate dispels the popular delusion that any manmade global warming will be dangerous. That means adhering to the Paris agreement would be ‘a bad deal for America,’ and not only on economic and equity grounds, as President Trump stated.”
“In the last 20 years, humans have released over a third of all the CO2 produced since the beginning of the industrial period. Yet global mean surface temperature has remained essentially constant for at least 15 years – a fact that has been acknowledged by the IPCC, whose models failed to predict it.”