Comments on: Remembering a Biased Energy Encyclopedia (2004 Review of the "Hummer" 6 Volume Set)

By: Dick Gordon

Dick Gordon — Mon, 07 Jun 2010 20:33:02 +0000

Thanks for the kind words. Energy unfortunately is but one of many areas cursed by beliefs that markets do not work well. In retrospect, the encyclopedia was less stupid than what is coming out these days. At least some competent people contributed. In Regulation, I have had to denounce several very bad newer energy books that had no redeeming merits. I have since received four others so bad that I will not assign them to others or myself for review in the Energy Journal or suggest to Regulation. We have massive bipartisan stupidity on energy with no sign of relief in sight and too many self-appointed experts are spewing nonsense.
I had forgotten that Cleveland complained about the absence of peer review. Book reviews traditionally do not undergo peer review. I have never seen an explanation
but reasonable explanations are that the process is painfully slow without further review and that being expressions of opinion reviews of book reviews are pointless.

By: rbradley

rbradley — Mon, 07 Jun 2010 12:15:38 +0000

Thank you Jon. I put a lot of time into this review. I thank Richard Gordon, the book review editor of the Energy Journal, for the opportunity.

By: Jon Boone

Jon Boone — Sat, 05 Jun 2010 16:14:11 +0000

The passing of only a little time has been kind to this erudite review, once again affirming that comprehensive knowledge aligned with an informed sense of history and culture are safeguards against the thuggery of lightweight intellectual fashion that too often seeks to hijack public policy. Thanks, Rob, for this timely reprint–and for your prescience.