Comment 43591

By BobInnes (registered) - website | Posted July 17, 2010 at 15:41:08

Kiely - the essence of our debate:

I don't believe anything gets solved by focusing on the negative.

I do. Especially in/with Hamilton, but also this oil thing. I don't understand why you can't see the positive side of being negative. It's the social FUEL for the change, no? If the problem isn't held before the public, where will the political will come from? If Hamilton is so great, why change? Especially if there is public pain involved. So, whether you like my schoolboy question or not, will you not accept that we need not one but 100 McKillops? If the Mackillops were not around, wouldn't the public conclude that the easing of oil prices indicates that the whole peak oil thing was complete nonsense? You and I may know the story already but believe me, most do not, nor are they willing to read MacKillop's details.

You really think they haven't improved the generator???

I can't let you get away with that can i??? ;-) When i left school, i think electric motors/generators were almost 90% efficient. Are they 5% better now? Don't confuse increasing sophistication with efficiency, don't believe everything in Popular Mechanics. I don't mind you calling me anything you like, my concern is for readers who might think you had actually addressed my questions or refuted my assertions.

But i think we do agree on most stuff and even how to fix it, given both technology and social change are required. But between the two, social change is far more potent - and painful. Let's work on the difficult task of defining a reasonable (non-manipulated) objective and getting folks to accept the more or less painful inevitable, while holding on to the great civilizational legacy we were given by our parents.

Permalink | Context

Events Calendar

Recent Articles

Article Archives

Blog Archives

Site Tools

Feeds