President Obama had a realism moment last week when he responded, off-script, to a question posed to him at a meeting with the Business Roundtable in Washington.  In response to a challenge to costly carbon-dioxide (CO₂) regulation by Weyerhaeuser President Daniel Fulton, Obama opined:

I’m not somebody who — I’ve never bought into these Malthusian, woe, Chicken Little, the earth is falling — I tend to be pretty optimistic. I wouldn’t be here if I weren’t pretty optimistic. But I think this is–the science is overwhelming. This is a real problem. It will have severe economic consequences, as well as political and national security and environmental consequences.

Well, here is a little secret that should be brought out in the open. …

MasterResource is nearing its three-month anniversary. Our total views have exceeded 50,000–not bad for a start-up, energy-focused blog. We have had as many as 3,200 views on a day and now have a base daily viewership of around 500.

We have had 111 posts (at least one per day!) from 21 different authors. Our post categories exceed 50. Nearly 500 comments from more than 150 individuals have been received, and more comments are being added to different posts. We welcome critical comments so long as they are made in good faith and in good taste.

Our most popular posts (and comments on posts) to date have been:…

[Editor note: Also see “Joseph Romm and Enron: More for the Record” (May 8, 2009) and “Enron and Waxman-Markey: Response to Joe Romm” (July 2, 2009)]

The headline at Climate Progress, the blog site of Joseph Romm, senior fellow at the Center for American Progress, read:

MYSTERIOUS INDUSTRY FRONT-GROUP AFFILIATED WITH KEN LAY’S FORMER SPEECHWRITER LAUNCHES ANTI-WAXMAN-MARKEY ADS WITH PHONY MIT COST FIGURE

And here is what Romm specifically says about me:

Who is the [American Energy Alliance]?  Good question.  The AEA says on its website:

“AEA is an independent affiliate of the Institute for Energy Research (IER)….”Aside from the cryptic nature of the oxymoronic phrase “independent affiliate,” it is worth noting that the Institute for Energy Research “has received $307,000 from ExxonMobil since 1998.”

“Today the conservation movement is led by sober business men and is based on the cold calculations of the engineers. Conservation, no longer viewed as a political issue, has become a business proposition…. The old school looked on conservation as a governmental function; the new school believes in entrusting it to the hands of business men and engineers.”

– Erich Zimmermann, World Resources and Industries (New York: Harper & Brothers, 1933), pp. 784–85.

Profit-seeking conservation is nothing new, as economists have noted. So why must we assume that self-interested conservation is a ‘market failure’ requiring government subsidies and mandates? Why is market decision-making with energy necessarily sub-optimal?

And if “market failure” is posited, what must be said about “government failure”? Political processes are human too, and worse, bureaucrats do not have their own hard-earned cash on the line.…