ReeferMadness

The scholars are a broad cross-section of different sciences from sociology to business to engineering to climate science. Which is exactly what is called for when looking at an issue this broad. Your posts are nothing but your own opinions. Given that you've admitted having a vested interest in the current means of generating electricity, I find your accusing me of being a hypocrite rich.

You mean people who have a vested interest in the status quo and would prefer not to face reality. You certainly don't mean the vast majority of scientists, particularly the 70 Canadian scholars who think it is quite feasible to move to a low-carbon economy.

Pretty much.

Fair enough - head of government. My mistake and yes, I do understand the difference. In our system of government, head of state is a powerless, pointless drone. Head of government is effectively a dictator.

Maybe but I doubt it. There have been cases of other politicians who have been able to maintain authenticity. Joe Clark Preston Manning Peter Lougheed

Tom's Take on Elizabeth May Authenticity.

Because... you think that the only position of any importance is the head of state? Wow. Sounds like our system of government has real problems.

Yeah. Reactors that don't take a decade to build. And don't require huge government subsidies. And are insurable. And don't produce wastes that are toxic for thousands of years. And aren't huge nuclear bombs in waiting.

Please. Do tell me who has tried to "mandate or outlaw specific sources of power".

What??? You've explained nothing. C'mon bud. You claimed that the manifesto would reduce us to the standard of living of Venezuela. Either back it up with some figures or admit you just made it up.

Hey, bud. I'm still waiting for you to show how you figured that moving to renewables would lower us to the standard of living in Venezuela. I know all this stuff is scary for those of you in the energy business who make your living from holding the rest of us to ransom.

That didn't take long. Repeat after me. IT'LL NEEEVVVVEEERRRR WOOOOORRRKKKKK!!!! NEEEVVVVEERRRRRR

You're really obsessed with our manifesto. Maybe if you're nice, Michael Moore will develop a manifesto for you guys... and then you won't be so sad.

Please do share with us your method of calculating how transitioning to renewables over the next 35-50 years will result in having a standard of living comparable to Venezuela. It would be nice if you would share your scientific credentials as you do.

Uhhhh Because I quote scientists and you just pull stuff out of your butt???

Another bit of good news came across my twitter feed. The state of Hawaii will be deploying its first battery backup system for solar power. That removes the last significant obstacle for PV power, interruptibility. It's definitely a modest step and it is in Hawaii, a prime location for solar power. But like PV itself, battery costs will drop over time. Now, I'll sit back and watch as the apologists for big utilities around here throw wet blankets of pessimism and cynicism over this good news. Altogether guys, give us the zombie cheer "IT'LL NEEEEVVVERRRR WOOOORRKKKKKK!!!!!"

Don't we already have a thread on this?

So, I take my information from a variety of sources and that makes them "propaganda". You get yours exclusively from industry insiders who have a vested interest in the status quo and that makes them "authoritative". I readily share my sources and yours apparently have no names. I can definitely see how you are so sure of yourself. :rolleyes:

I read and quote a huge variety of sources. Most of what I quote comes from mainstream media. Yesterday I quoted the Union of Concerned Scientists. You, on the other hand, only believe what people in your industry tell you. Maybe you can. Or maybe you can't. I doubt very much you really know. But there are a lot of electricity executives who are crapping their pants at the thought of being nothing more than grid providers where the energy is produced by a widely distributed network. How do they make a huge profit from that?

The amount of money that is going into battery research is a rounding error compared to the trillions we spend pulling hydrocarbons out of the ground. A lot of the research is partly to support good PR for dirty or immoral corporations. Look! We spent a million dollars over 5 years to do a bit of research. Oh, yeah and our profit last quarter was $3 billion. And I don't care what you think of the Manifesto. For something that you think is so irrelevant, you sure spend a lot of time thinking about it.

Let's review the history of the climate change debate from the perspective of right wing and the industry shills: Climate change is a myth OK, maybe climate change is real but it's due to natural climate fluctuations OK, maybe climate change is real and caused by humans but it won't be that bad OK, maybe climate change is real and cause by humans and it will be bad but it's too expensive to do anything about it OK maybe it's real, caused by humans, will be bad and we can do something but we need to replace yesterday's expensive, centralized, complicated, dangerous, and polluting solutions with solutions tomorrow's expensive, centralized, complicated solutions that are either just as dangerous, just as polluting or don't actually exist yet. I'm willing to bet that many of you that are now insisting that nuclear/thorium/fusion/antimatter are the only possible options if we don't want to go back in live in caves spent time arguing one or more of the previous points. Don't make me go back in MLW archives and prove it.

Why? In 2011, about 5.8 million people voted Conservative which is around 17% of Canada's population. In return for convincing 17% of the population to vote for him, he received 54% of the seats, which gave him 100% of the power. So, at the very most, he needs to consider how 17% of Canadians will view his policies. And that 17% is not spread across the population. It is mostly older, less educated, less intelligent, white middle aged males. But it gets worse than that. Most of the party's core supporters have decided well in advance of the election where their vote is going. So barring something truly bizarre, he has to focus on a much smaller number of people in "swing ridings" where the seats will be determined on the basis of undecided voters. yay for democracy in Canada.

There is no 'may'. The path away from fossil fuels will take decades. The intelligent thing to do would be to research heavily in technologies like electrical storage which will be needed along the way.

You mean your perception of reality. Like Tim, if you actually have any sources of information, you keep them to yourself.

You don't like my links? Refute them. Supply some links of your own. Of course you can't because you get your information from crackpot blogs and industry insiders with a stake in the results. Which is exactly the same as the other 7 billion people on earth. Aaaaahhh. So you don't like solar and wind because they're threats. As Upton Sinclair put it, It is difficult to get a man to understand something when his job depends on not understanding it. It takes time to go and actually do the research to properly respond to something. You can just pull crap out of your ass and write a book in the time it takes me to research and respond to a page.