That's obvious bullshit. Somebody invents a better battery, that's definite net plus and a delta, even if a tiny one.
Conversation
Replying to
You said climate not energy. Those making fusion work will profit. What's marginal is benefit related to climate based on existing data
3
Replying to
But sure, based on scariest projections of unverified climate models incestuous profiteering already abounds m.washingtontimes.com/news/2015/aug/
1
Replying to
Not on energy. We should all be passionate about 2.7bn without cheap, reliable electricity. Righteous profit worldenergyoutlook.org/resources/ener
1
Replying to
Yeah, go ahead, assume the systemic decouplings convenient to your righteous positions and politics :)
1
Replying to
Cheap reliable energy is good news to poor. Creation of ambiguity there is entirely dystopian. Amazing left wingers have fallen for it
1
1
Replying to
Dude. You're derping. We're past this level of conversation. There is a genuine question here underneath the partisan crossfire.
2
Replying to
If you seriously think there's nothing to talk about here, move on. The other side isn't all idiots, your side isn't all geniuses.
1
Replying to
Those who help energy poor deserve to profit. Like cell/smart phones. That's where your side should devote its greater cleverness :)
1
Replying to
I only ascribed a side to you because you did to me :) I am for energy innovation. But not for burdening 2.7bn with false models & R&D
1
Replying to
Situation for 2.7bn is clear to me. Only use new tech when it's cheaper and more reliable. Chinese get this. Don't gamble with poorest

