Sign up | Login with →

Comments by Mark Lazen Subscribe

On The Unlevel Playing Field for Energy

Thanks for the heads up about the comment line break problem Geoff.

If this is two paragraphs, it's fixed :-)

August 30, 2012    View Comment    

On Last Hurrah for the Wind Power Tax Credit?

Hi Kent--Thx for your comment.

Siemens sponsors the Energy Collective, but the site is editorially independent. Siemens has always demonstrated a laudable commitment to ensuring that a diverse range of civil and thoughtful voices can be heard here.

I suspect Geoff Styles may weigh in with his own response to you--but suffice to say that while we can all lament the fact that progress towards a truly sustainable and abundant energy future is a messy and imperfect business at best, Geoff is only a (very knowledgeable) messenger in this case. He calls them like he sees them and always has his facts in order.

Mark Lazen, The Energy Collective.

August 3, 2012    View Comment    

On Using insights from social science to understand climate change deniers

Great stuff Karen. I've just finished Jonathan Haidt's The Righteous Mind, and I would articulate the relevant takeaway a tad differently: until those that disagree with you on climate change come to like you, they will be impervious to your arguments. This is going to require a lot of patient and sincere one-to-one interaction.

July 30, 2012    View Comment    

On You Suddenly Know What The Picture Is....

My father was the Associate Executive Director for the NAS' Commission on Life Sciences for many years. I know the Academy has earned its immense credibility.

Nice post David.

May 18, 2011    View Comment    

On Statement from All of Us at Social Media Today, Hosts of The Energy Collective

John,

All thoughtful and civil comments survive moderation here.

At the time we published Dr. Oehmen's original piece, we did so not because of his rosy prediction, but in spite of it. Because we felt that the informational aspect of the piece filled an important need at a time when the mainstream media was failing to convey all the facts.

In Dr. Oehmen's defense, we suspect he never intended his note to get such wide distribution or receive the scrutiny it did. If he had known, I imagine he would have been more circumspect.

And in hindsight we clearly should have given greater weight to our qualms about the subjective elements of his piece rather than our reluctance to selectively edit it.

So auto-critique: on. It's our mission here provide a forum for knowledgable, fact-based analysis. While everything we publish represents the views of the author, not The Energy Collective, we want very much to stick to the facts and to avoid the appearance of certainty where certainty doesn't exist. Especially in a case of profound human tragedy like this.

Thanks for your comment.

Mark Lazen
CTO, Social Media Today 

March 17, 2011    View Comment    

On Stewart Brand: Fearless Follower of Lovelock, not science

I'll be so bold as to speak for most in this community: it's a whopper of a false equivalency to put scientists into the same bucket as corporate lobbyists or citizens if you're trying to understand human impact on climate. You'll find plenty of opinions here regarding what the science actually tells us, and some skepticism about the integrity of the science itself. But I suspect we all agree that give the scale and complexity of the questions involved, science is far and away the most important tool in our toolbox.

November 16, 2010    View Comment    

On National renewable power standards? Still not practical

Todd--Welcome to The Energy Collective. We invite you to add your blog to the community. More here.

November 8, 2010    View Comment    

On Update on BP oil disaster and the Gulf’s Murky Future

David--

Because many of the posts contributed on our site come from the authors' own blogs, the issue of "guest posts" is one we struggle with every day. We generally decline to publish posts where the guest author is not clearly identified, but all these are judgement calls and our readers may not always agree with our decisions.

Sometimes we look back and find that we don't agree with our decisions either.

Our advisory board does not have day-to-day editorial responsibility for the site. They are a representative cross-section of the opinions we feature on the site, frequent contributors of exclusive content, and some of the smartest people thinking and writing about energy and climate today. They are responsible for many of our community's finest moments. Our full time staff here are responsible for the others. :-)

And Charles--I would argue that there is a direct connection between the ongoing success of what you so graciously refer to as the Energy Collective "experiment" and what you believe to be its many flaws. We have been honored by the recognition of The New York Times and The Wall Street Journal, by the participation of two U.S. Senators, and by the expressed support of some of the most highly respected figures in academia, policymaking, and business. If this is the result of our flaws, I hope we shall become ever more profoundly flawed.

But in all seriousness, we very much appreciate the passion and knowledge you and all of our commenters bring to the community, even when your thoughts come with sharp edges. It drives us to be better, and we will strive to meet the mark.

Mark Lazen
CTO, Social Media Today--parent to The Energy Collective

July 21, 2010    View Comment