3 ms·

My point was that people take an idealized view of solar power that causes them to see it as purely good, rather than as it really is: a mix of good and bad, li

My point was that people take an idealized view of solar power that causes them to see it as purely good, rather than as it really is: a mix of good and bad, like any real-world technology. In response, you call me out for attacking solar power (pointing out bad parts), and being inconsistent about it (pointing out good parts). So this reply looks like an example of the black-and-white thinking about solar power that I was complaining about above. I say "looks like" because I don't understand your second sentence. I agree with the all the facts you brought up, but I don't see the point of mentioning them. Please correct me if I'm missing something.

oelewapperke 15y ago
Of course the reality is that solar power is barely break-even in energy (power actually delivered to customers when they want it - cost (in watts) to produce ALL OF the infrastructure needed for that). In reality, solar power is a waste. A stupid diversion at best, the cause for starvation of lots of people (because of diverting energy from providing for real people). In reality, green kills. Given the denial that persists around this little inconvenient truth, we all know what the responses are going to be here. E.g. http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/environment/article3500954.ece http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/environment/article350... Of course, it would be entirely unfair to blame the green party for killing millions. That'd be like blaming Bush for 9/11 ... oh wait ... loads of people do that.