Surface    |    Backfill    |    About    |    Contact


10.6.06

Military Precaution

More evidence (via Jonathan Adler) for GGCT's assertion that it's not about whether you're a risk-taker or risk-avoider, it's a matter of which risks you worry about.

Wind-Power Projects Halted

More than 130 wind turbines are proposed for the hilltops of central Wisconsin, but that project and at least 11 others have been halted by the Defense Department as it studies whether the projects could interfere with military radar.

... Defense and FAA officials said the "proposed hazard" letters are not prohibiting the wind farms, just delaying them until any risks to military operations can be assessed and resolved.

"We're not saying, 'No, you can't do this,' " Spitaliere said. "We're looking to work with the proposals to mitigate the hazard."


It's easy enough to read this move as transparently political and conclude the military is making bad-faith claims. But even so, there's something important in the fact that the language of physical risks is being used to defend a hierarchy of values in which military security is prioritized and other considerations must bear the burden of proof of showing that they won't interfere with military needs.

In the Hierarchical worldview, the system is isomorphic with nature. So it's dangerous to entertain the idea that natural limits (which are the motivation for renewable energy like wind farms) or entrepreneurial activity might interfere with, rather than reinforce, the system's prerogatives.

0 Comments:

Post a Comment

Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home