This likely isn’t the first time you’ve read something written with the help of artificial intelligence, but it might be the first time an author admitted it to you.

My inspiration came from a breathtaking package of energy bills that were passed by the Legislature in early November and signed by Gov. Gretchen Whitmer right after Thanksgiving. The new laws require Michigan energy utilities to generate 100% so-called clean energy by 2040.

Breathtaking because that mandate is so expensive, radical and grandiose as to be impossible. It reminds me of other absolutist political promises, like sending every kid to college, ending homelessness and creating gun-free zones.

We’ll probably never get to 100% renewable energy, but even if it were possible to reach that goal, government shouldn’t force it before its time. Renewable energy is improving, but we can tell it’s not ready for prime time because it still needs the twin fists of subsidies and mandates. If green energy were less expensive and more reliable, customers would adopt it without the need for force.

Stunned by the legislative hubris of the renewable mandate, I asked one of the most popular AI tools, ChatGPT, “What happens when public policy denies human nature, laws of economics, and reality?” The program instantly provided ten themes and elaborated on them as if it had been programmed by Friedrich Hayek, Milton Friedman and Thomas Sowell:

• Inefficiency and economic distortions


• Unintended consequences


• Reduced incentives for productivity


• Erosion of individual liberty


• Social and cultural discontent


• Market distortions and cronyism


• Budgetary challenges


• Environmental degradation


• Failure to achieve policy goals


• Loss of public trust

I asked what would happen if the policy was a 100% renewable energy mandate by 2040. ChatGPT said this policy was “aligned with environmental sustainability goals,” but it had much more to say about related challenges:

• Technological and infrastructure challenges


• Reliability and intermittency of renewable sources


• Economic and cost considerations


• Impact on energy prices and affordability


• Job transition and economic impact


• Flexibility and realistic timelines


• Integration with existing energy infrastructure


• Public engagement and acceptance

The software was beginning to sound like my colleague and Very Real Intelligence Jason Hayes, the Mackinac Center’s director of energy and environmental policy. That’s remarkable because ChatGPT was built by a Silicon Valley tech company of the kind we are led to believe teems with left-thinking engineers, managers and leaders. The program denied pandering to me just because it knows I’m a free-market proponent at the Mackinac Center.

I can only conclude that, at least as far as this type of AI is concerned, the conclusions enumerated above (and the detailed treatment that I cannot include here) are fair and objective, and do not come from a built-in, Jason-like bias. They flow naturally from the policy proposition, and they should be examined, debated and weighed.

The AI was an interesting starting point, and Jason needn’t worry about being replaced. It’s going to take all the Very Real Intelligence we can muster to deal with the consequences of fantasy policy. Thank you for your support.