On Sat, 21 May 2011, Keith Hudson wrote:
At 13:56 21/05/2011, Arthur wrote:
Subject: Inconvenient Truths About 'Renewable' Energy - The Wall Street
Journal.
I thought you would be interested in the following story from The Wall
Street Journal.
Inconvenient Truths About 'Renewable' Energy
<http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703421204576327410322365714.html>http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703421204576327410322365714.html
Yes, this is a pretty accurate summary of the 'renewables. What the article
should also have said that the techno-renewables -- wind, solar, nuclear
power -- are uneconomic and all require government subsidies. And this, long
before their long-term maintenance costs (and de-commissioning costs in the
case of nuclear) are known.
Keith
Well, I'm afraid I disagree utterly, I think the article is a scurrilous
mass of festering disinformation and nonsense liberally mixed with
non sequiturs, but I don't particularly care. Those idiots can think
what they want, they're going to have to get to know and love
alternative energy very very soon, or else go back to living in
the stone age. I currently estimate that the energy crunch will
be upon us hard in under four years. The blind reliance on oil will
mean they have no fall back position, and they will lose the race
to build the bridge infrastructure to the new energy regime before
the old world crumbles around them. I just wish I didn't have to
share the same planet with them when it happens.
-Pete
_______________________________________________
Futurework mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.uwaterloo.ca/mailman/listinfo/futurework
