That book was a helpful contribution to the debate when it was published in 2008, but by 2017 people were already pointing out[0] its obsolete assumptions about

That book was a helpful contribution to the debate when it was published in 2008, but by 2017 people were already pointing out[0] its obsolete assumptions about renewables, and there is now an open source collaborative effort to produce a more accurate and up-to-date version.[1] I don't want to speak ill of the late great David MacKay, but it does seem that reality has exposed his pro-nuclear bias, which was already apparent[2] just from the choice of language he used when describing the different technologies. [0] https://www.carboncommentary.com/blog/2017/3/30/l6qcqgoedse1wmjjz87t09usoq6jva https://www.carboncommentary.com/blog/2017/3/30/l6qcqgoedse1... [1] https://climate.lifeitself.us/without-hot-air/#why-this-project https://climate.lifeitself.us/without-hot-air/#why-this-proj... [2] https://www.reddit.com/r/environment/comments/d1rwe/david_mackay_without_the_hot_air_antirenewable/ https://www.reddit.com/r/environment/comments/d1rwe/david_ma...