Saturday, 19 March 2011

Filibustered

David Reid:
"You’ve had plenty of opportunity to put forward your arguments."
Yes, and put them forward I did: my first comment argued that the financial grounds on which David claimed that renewables were preferable to nukes were flawed. Rather than choosing to concede or defend this point, he sidestepped it to move on to other issues. The remainder of my comments were mere responses to his, so...
"When you veered off into discussing land acquisition and property rights you had me confused. They are barely related to the topic of this post."
... I was not "veering off", I was simply explaining why EROEI - which he brought up, not me - was at best only marginally relevant to considerations of "efficiency" in the context of making a decision on what type of energy plant to invest in. His confusion surely underscores my point that he has little grasp of the basic economic context of such investment decisions.

And yes "marc" - I'll argue against anyone who can argue back, but certainly not over anything. If it's a "waste of time" arguing with me, then perhaps that's because you're not interested in arguments and what they signify, but only in reaching consensus and what it signfies.

* * *

Elsewhere, also on the subject of nuclear energy, part of my comment awaiting moderation to "ifan":
"...you think I’m both “reasonable” and “extreme”. Intriguing combination."
Posted by at

3 comments:

  1. blobOfNeurons8 April 2011 at 21:15

    LOL

    You may not remember but way back in September of 2010 Reid had the following to say:

    "Of course you are always welcome to comment on my blog, but whether I reply to your comment is entirely my own choice."

    ReplyDelete
  2. Mike Fagan8 April 2011 at 22:13

    So?

    ReplyDelete
  3. Mike Fagan8 April 2011 at 22:26

    Oh I see... you thought my comments on land aquisition were relevant.

    Yes, well what David fails to consider - again - is the nature of politicized economics. Why wouldn't the farmers club together and take the Government, via Taipower, to the cleaners for the lease value? They know Tsai Ing-wen is committed to getting 25% of electricity generation by renewables by 2025, and they also know that wind is pretty much the only way to do this... so unless Tsai goes fascist on them, then they're going to absolutely fleece the taxpayer.

    I'll see if I can cross post this at David's joint, but I doubt he'll allow it. I'm not a "sensible" commie like he and his mates are.

    ReplyDelete

Comment moderation is now in place, as of April 2012. Rules:

1) Be aware that your right to say what you want is circumscribed by my right of ownership here.

2) Make your comments relevant to the post to which they are attached.

3) Be careful what you presume: always be prepared to evince your point with logic and/or facts.

4) Do not transgress Blogger's rules regarding content, i.e. do not express hatred for other people on account of their ethnicity, age, gender, sexual orientation or nationality.

5) Remember that only the best are prepared to concede, and only the worst are prepared to smear.

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)