“[A]n analysis of some of the calamities reported in doom and gloom media accounts shows some—at times, severe—disconnect with actual observations. For instance, there is no evidence that ocean acidification has killed jellyfish predators, nor that jellyfish are taking over the ocean, and predictions that the killer algae, Caulerpa taxifolia, was going to devastate the Mediterranean ecosystem have not been realized, despite claims to the contrary from the media.”
– Carlos Duarte et al., “Reconsidering Ocean Calamities,” BioScience, December 31, 2014.
“Ocean Life Faces Mass Extinction, Broad Study Says” stated a recent headline in the New York Times. Is it true? Has a “groundbreaking” analysis “from hundreds of sources” of the world’s oceans unearthed signs of human-caused global catastrophe, as claimed? Or is this just another alarmist narrative that’s all wet?…
Economic conservation of energy consists of voluntary actions and investments that make sense to the decision-maker in a free-market setting. Political conservation is government-directed energy reduction measures. The later, conservationism, is energy savings for its own sake through monopolistic coercion or special favor (tax beak, crony regulation, or public check).
Demand-Side Management (DSM) programs by electric utilities are a major element of conservationism. Those who support reasonable efficiency and the elimination of waste should let the energy-efficiency politicos have the DSM term and use other words to describe what is favored.
DSM rose to regulatory prominence during the late 1980’s following the disastrous nuclear generation construction programs of the electric utilities. The confidence of the utility industry and its regulators in high-cost building programs shaken, they listened to new other approaches to meet future energy demand.…
“Higher prices would discourage over-buying and help ensure that useful consumer goods get distributed to more households, not just the households best able to rush to the store. Consumer sentiment against higher prices during emergencies, by discouraging a price response and encouraging shortages, tends to put the burden of the shortages on those consumers least able to run to the stores in emergencies.”
When consumer demand shoots up and supplies are limited, either prices must increase or shortages will result. Consumer sentiment leans strongly against such price increases, and sometimes that sentiment is enshrined in anti-price gouging laws. It is this sentiment and such laws that unintentionally put a burden on less-able consumers.
As a heavy winter storm was projected to slam into Mid-Atlantic and Northeastern states earlier this week, a familiar scenario emerged: state officials urged citizens to stay safe and to report suspected price gouging.…