By Jim Clarkson
Ed. Note: Jim Clarkson is a soft-spoken everyday man who has experienced first-hand the ins-and-outs of crony public-utility regulation, first as the energy manager at a large industrial user and more recently as an energy procurement/installation consultant. Clarkson, a classical liberal, has also been instrumental in the development of the Institute for Energy Research (IER) as a free-market education and advocacy organization.
“A Federal employee asked what I did and why I was on the Board…. I airy waved at the group and said: ‘I’m the only one here making an honest living.’ That didn’t go over very well. I shouldn’t have said it, but after over 50 years of observing state utility regulation, it still upsets me to see smart young people devoted to limiting freedom and prosperity when they could be doing something useful.”
Late in the Trump administration I was appointed to be on a U.S. Department of Energy advisory board. The State Energy Advisory Board consisted of some 20 state-level bureaucrats and one private sector person – me. The advisory board’s mission was to give advice on energy efficiency and renewable state policies to an Assistant Secretary of DOE.
I quickly found the swamp culture is not confined to Washington. The other members of the Board were appointees of Governors, usually the state government energy manager, state consumer advocate or a public utility commissioner. All sincerely believe there are no limits on government actions, as long as the goals are politically popular. This is a whole other world; I was on Mars.
After my first meeting I made a policy proposal for the Board to adopt and submit to the Assistant Secretary. The first sentence read: “The Department of Energy should not in any way encourage Utility EE programs, nor should any state agencies encourage utilities in their state to have such programs.” This was followed by a pithy but profound list of reasons for such a recommendation.
I wasn’t so surprised this proposal was overwhelmingly rejected, but the Board further adopted a recommendation saying the exact opposite of my proposal. The official recommendation was sent up the DOE hierarchy, so I sent my proposal as a dissent up the chain also. I was told it was improper to file dissents. Oh, well. Wading in the swamp.
The Board meetings consisted mostly of presentations by various other departments in DOE. These folks are really good at Power Point. They all discussed how they “touched base” and “plugged in” with other groups in DOE and other federal agencies.
These people spend a lot of money. The Board recommendations to these various groups was that they should publicize their programs better. The DOE presenters said they already had their program information on line for the state level energy managers to see.
In a social gathering of DOE people and Board members, a Federal employee asked what I did and why I was on the Board. I tried to describe what I do, but she looked confused. I airily waved at the group and said: “I’m the only one here making an honest living.” That didn’t go over very well. I shouldn’t have said it. After over 50 years of observing state utility regulation, it still upsets me to see smart young people devoted to limiting freedom and prosperity when they could be doing something useful. They are not really communists or socialists’ they are just “governmentists”.
Hand raised in the back of the room
Q. What is a libertarian who is hostile to all government intervention in the economy doing on a Board that wants to expand government in the first place?
A. Good question. I was told the Trump transition team wanted to see new ideas on these various Boards of questionable value. Actually, my ideas are not new but date back to the founding of this country.
Familiar ground. We took a federal Minister to court because he was proceeding to use a UN treaty to deprive us of valuable property with no compensation. The High Court judges mumbled to each other a brief “Tut! Tut! International treaties have to be respected and honoured. Can we really question them?”
They proceeded to fiond no finding of any value to us.
It is hard to comprehend the commercial world if you have not been a player. Geoff S
How science works – today
“”The Scientific Committee on Antarctic Research’s (Scar) biology symposium was enriched by addresses by Sir Tipene O’Regan and Dr Michael Stevens, noted Māori historians””
https://www.theguardian.com/world/commentisfree/2023/aug/04/antarctica-heatwaves-sea-ice-levels-melting
Put the Erlenmeyer down….
Jobs for the boys. Moari historians? What have Moaris ever done in the Antarctic? The nearest possibility is Whale hunting, but do they, did they? Lets see the ships!
As far as I can glean, they have a claim to discovering the continent by sailing into Antarctic waters. Beyond that…
““There are lots of Maori working in Antarctica as researchers, participating in New Zealand fishing vessels in the Southern Ocean,”
https://edition.cnn.com/2021/06/10/australia/new-zealand-maori-antarctica-intl-hnk-scn/index.html
…seems rather recent
Good post! For a few years I was an energy manager under contract for a rapidly expanding local dairy processing plant. I recall a teleconference with staffers of our state’s energy efficiency agency on how “Renewable Energy Credits” worked. I remember remarking, “Sounds like a pretty lucrative racket!” Silence. You see, the agency retained ownership of any REC’s derived from participating in one of their ratepayer-funded incentive programs for “renewable” energy.
Bureaucrats are the same all over. They are prone to fall in line, whether it’s a big organization or a small organization. Thinking outside the box is not welcome.
Yep, groupthink rules!
Bureaucrats love regulations written by others — think a county employee that has material from a state or federal agency to follow. If that county person just follows the regulations regardless of those being silly in the local context all will be fine. (promotions, pay, etc.) If one makes a common-sense local decision criticism is likely to follow.
The Public Service is very similar to the peace-time military. They follow von Moltke’s principle, but have filters in place to keep the clever and lazy in line. If one does slip through and tries to do something innovative, the higher management levels either reduce the head count or change the KPIs to increase responsibilities to occupy all available time.
There are lots of clever and industrious people in higher management levels.
A good number of years ago, as an auto industry member, I participated in a California Air Resources Board (CARB)discussion about airborne asbestos reduction in the state. It was pointed out by another person that the vast majority of airborne California asbestos was caused by an unpaved road through asbestos bearing gravel in the state. Another pointed out that auto brake lining asbestos was of a minimally ‘toxic’ variety, and that the vast majority, more than 99% of these asbestos fibers convert to non-toxic materials (basically dirt) when brake linings wear. Even so, if all of the materials stayed as asbestos fibers, they would only account for a fractional percentage (less than 0.01%) of released asbestos in California. Even this fractional percentage reduces by a factor of more than a hundred due to high temperature wear at the lining/drum interface.
I then made the somewhat snarky comment that “Why don’t we as an industry make up a collection to pave the asbestos road and take out the vast majority of airborne asbestos in California”.
An angry CARB member turned and glared at me with the comment “Because we regulate YOU, that’s why!”
The arrogance of the Deep State never decreases.
Having worked in an industry “regulated” by CARB, their attitude is that if they can measure it, they can ban it. The Volatile Organic Compounds allowance for the Los Angeles air basin was exceeded by emissions from foliage. If you can smell the eucalyptus or sagebrush, it is an emitter.
“…it still upsets me to see smart young people devoted to limiting freedom and prosperity when they could be doing something useful.”
Amen. Imagine how prosperous we’d be again if that was not the case.
Well maybe….or is there a percentage of those fairly uselessly employed people who, if they has no job, would become muggers, thieves, pickpockets, burglars….making the rest of our lives miserable ?
“Impartial” government boards. Its the age-old problem of governments constantly wanting to grow in size and power at the citizen’s expense, citing all of the supposed benefits to the people. Our Founding Fathers tried to write a constitution to keep it from happening to us but money and power always corrupts.
“but money and power always corrupts.”
One of our big problems.
“but money and power always corrupts.”
One of our big problems. It’s a continuous fight.
If it weren’t for corruption, I’d advocate for an Anti-Corruption Bureau.
Energy efficiency (EE) and energy conservation (EC)
. . . do not appear in the acronym finder searches
| “Clarkson, a classical liberal, has also been instrumental in the development of the Institute for Energy Research (IER) as a free-market education and advocacy organization.”
Classical liberal? I think not. [Unless one is referring to Thomas Paine, etc]. Clarkson makes it clear, in his answer above to the hand raised in the back of room, that he is a libertarian. Somewhat the opposite of what ‘liberal’ means today.
But that is what I have heard is a classical liberal, one who supports individual autonomy and limited government authority. That is, in favor of liberty. The leftists and Progressives started calling themselves liberals for the same reason communists call themselves Democratic Republics, it sounds better. (Calling oneself the tyrannical dictator party doesn’t sell well)
| The leftists and Progressives started calling themselves liberals
Yes, I agree, and I think that tends to blur the definition of “classical liberalism”, which some distinguish from ‘libertarianism’.
Libertarianism vs. Classical Liberalism: Is there a Difference?
Classical liberal (look it up) is libertarian, basically. Liberal, in today’s speak, is the opposite.
I had the same experience in Canada working in healthcare. Bureaucrats, administrators and policy makers are mostly people without insight who believe you can make society better by controlling everything in a top down fashion though none of them seem to understand what it is they are trying to control and how it works.