Eradicating rural poverty with renewable energy

So, what are you doing to keep the elderly warm in your country?

And how does attacking an institute that advocates making RE projects available to poor communities in third world countries with no energy access have anything to do with elderly pensioners in UK being cold in winter?

Is it really so hard to understand the articles?

British people pay green taxes on energy. This money goes to buy people in foreign countries energy for mobile phone chargers and for watching TV (that is clearly stated in the original article). Because British (and people worldwide) people pay extra green taxes they have less to use on their own energy needs. Therefore people in my country cannot afford to keep warm during cold periods like the one we're experiencing at the moment.

So how about you, what are you doing for the poor or elderly in your country?

There is not one word anywhere in the article that mentions UK, green taxes or any other funding.

--------" My work, both paid and unpaid, goes some way towards aiding the elderly, but I don't intend going into any detail here."------

Uh huh.

------" I'm sure you understand that much?"-----

I think I understand perfectly. Your concern for the elderly is limited to wringing your hands and using them as shills to promote your anti-liberal conservative political agenda. Save the crocodile tears sweetie.

------" So how about you, what are you doing for the poor or elderly in your country?"--------

I provide financial and hands on work support to my church run program that provides temporary housing, food, medical care, and life re-establishment aid to homeless individuals and families. And before you launch off into green taxes out of your pocket going to help homeless people----not one cent of funding comes from UK. We run entirely on voluntary contributions and work.

"Save the crocodile tears sweetie."
You really are a disgusting piece of work, aren't you. At least this post wasn't as disgusting as the one that was removed last week.
Now go away and stop trying to use everything I say as ammunition against me.
Your church must be proud to have you!!!

Right, so when you cannot discuss the topic look to discredit the source. Typical. So obvious you fear change. Especially when you take the time to write such verbose garbage.

Oh you daft old ___, and you've never attacked the source of any article?

And from what I can see, I have been discussing the topic, it's you who has only been able to resort to ad-hominem abuse, such is your way. You see, Jan, this is where you fail time and time again. Apart from your severe lack of knowledge of science or real life, you have no credibility or ability to discuss the issues with an open mind.

So here's another point. From the article, "In 2005, Kenya was home to just over 150 000 solar systems with a median size of 25 watts; coverage has since reached some 300 000 households. "
Coverage has now reached 300,000 households, but it doesn't say at what Wattage. How much does it cost to get 25 Watts of solar power to 300,000 homes compared to what nuclear would have provided? Western people can't afford to keep warm this winter in order to give Africans 25 Watts of power. Is that really good use of money or resources?

My goodness----all that just for suggesting that renewable energy is well suited to provide energy to poor people in third world countries who have little or no access now.

Pigs like to wallow in mud. Pigs have a reason to wallow in mud.

You don't.

Desperate, isn't it?

Oh, piss on your negativity. Spare us all your constant harranging rhetoric meant to continue to support the OIL OLIGOPOLY that is destroying this planet's ability to sustain life which exacerbates poverty. Again, piss on your negativity, untruths, and lack of vision backed up by NOTHING.

"You need to make existing energy sources less expensive"

Absolutely right. I can never work out why some people seem to want energy to cost more, it's an extremely anti-human way of thinking.

If supporting oil means more people live happier and more comfortable lives, then that's the way to go until someone finds a real affordable alternative.
Your dreams of 'free' energy are a complete fallacy, idealistic and unworkable, and you know it. Your problem is you're too politically motivated and driven by your sycophantic love of Al Gore to see the reality beyond the scary headlines. You have zero credibility.

More research and development is needed before renewable energy is fit for purpose, and in the meantime people need to have access to cheaper energy from conventional sources.

The planet isn't just for the people of the future - it's for the people living here now.

Al Gore is not part of this post, nor why I posted it. I would dare say your syncophantic HATRED of him which you channel to me when you follow me in these threads is far more pitiful and in need of your attention. But keep showing how much of a shill you are to the status quo. You already know you have no credibility here. So much so you have now tag teamed with one of the most ignorant backwards posters on this site just because he too hates Al Gore and only comes in these threads to purposefully be contrarian and vent his frustration on me. So much for credibility or even giving a damn about the issue. You are both actually quite pitiful in your determination to see the ruination of our environment because you are too visionless and lazy to see anything else but the usual.

NOWHERE here were the words free energy bantered. NOWHERE here was there any mention of anything else but giving developing nations a chance to have energy sources that preserve their way of life and environment and give them a chance to escape the crushing poverty that inhibits their ability to have self sufficiency and self determination and in the process do something to work towards decreasing the very pollutants and GHGs that are negatively affecting this planet as a whole. And they are doing it. But of course, based on your prior postings here you don't want to see brown- skinned people or indigenous people or poor people have that chance. Why a poor farmer being able to have a solar powered irrigation pump that brings him better yield through conserving water and preserving his land and improving his and his family's health is something that bothers you so only shows what a heartless b_____ you are. Which is why your only respondant here is someone just like you. A clear representation of the backwards, selfish, fearful people whose time is now up in regards to your propaganda. This change will come, and you will simply have to deal with it regardless of the lame excuse you now use to post in these threads. The fossil fuel/nuclear boondoggle is no longer sustainable. Either you move into the future or get left behind.

"Al Gore is not part of this post..."
He's in your name, that makes him/you a valid target. If I had adopted the name ___forExxon you would have plenty to say about it.

"But keep showing how much of a shill you are to the status quo. "
Absolutely not. I would love nothing better than to have new forms of energy and actively promote research in that area. The difference between us (well, one of them) is that I understand that these things will come when the time is right, and don't try to push unsustainable and unaffordable technologies onto other people while taking away their cheap sources of energy now.

"You already know you have no credibility here."
Adopting the line I've been using on you doesn't bump-up your credibility.

"You are both actually quite pitiful in your determination to see the ruination of our environment... "
On the contrary. I can only speak for myself but I am less determined to see the ruination of our environment than you are to see the deaths of poor people that live in it by forcing onto them 'green' taxes that mean they cannot afford to keep themselves warm. And all this while we live in a cooling climate too, shame on you!

"NOWHERE here were the words free energy bantered. "
I don't need your say-so in order to write the words 'free energy'. Green energy is usually described as being free, solar and wind power for instance. Unfortunately, they both cost far too much to be of any real use at the present time.

"...giving developing nations a chance to have energy sources that preserve their way of life and environment... "
New energy sources will not preserve someone's way of life. New energy sources will enhance their way of life. But by giving them 'renewable' energy you will be condemning them a lower standard of energy that will be more costly for those who pay for it.

In the article it states, "During the past eight years in Bangladesh, close to half a million solar home systems have been installed, mostly between 50 and 75 Watts-peak" So you want western nations to be paying extra, unaffordable taxes in order to give homes in Bangladesh 50 - 75 Watts? That's barely enough to light a lightbulb! Wouldn't a better idea be to have installed a nuclear power station instead? But no, you don't want that do you? You would prefer to have people in western nations paying money they cannot afford while they die of cold themselves.
But that's what this is really about, isn't it? A re-distribution of wealth. We already know that so there's no point in trying to defend it.

And there you go again, bleating on about pollution and 'greenhouse' gases. How much pollution would a nuclear power station produce? And greenhouse gases, surely in a cooling world the first thing we need is more greenhouse gases? But you know as well as I do that even pumping twice as much CO2 into our atmosphere would have virtually no measurable effect on our environment.

You're right, Jan, there is a future out there for renewable/green/free energy, and the sooner it comes the better. Believe me, there's nothing I would love better than for the people of this world to have cheaper energy that causes less pollution. Its time will come, but it isn't here yet. Until then we could do without people like you who are hell-bent on seeing people suffer and die in order to feed your feel-good addiction.

"It's good for the environment" is something I hear on a daily basis over here in the UK. A lot of things are being sold on their 'green' credentials but fortunately most people can see right through them. It's actually a dying fashion, people over here are sick to death of eco-this and green-that. But the most amusing thing we have is our Met Office who constantly make predictions based on their undying belief of and constant promotion of global warming. Their latest prediction, released in October: "This winter will be mild." This morning I woke up to news stories of record low temperatures, and early snowfall. Once again they stuff it up badly, and we're supposed to believe them when they tell us it's going to be +4C warmer in a hundred years time!

More fearmongering "distribution of wealth" garbage. This isn't about distribution of wealth this is about SAVING LIVES. And you know what, you can keep up the lame excuse about "my name" to keep whacking at the man who wouldn't debate that buffoon Monckton, a man you support because he was proven to be a fraud and a shill as well just like you are. It speaks volumes. And you don't need to put EXXON in your name, it is already spelled out in your oily posts. You are only here to perpetuate negativity and fear about anything that will now save lives in order to preserve the life YOU are comfortable with. If the only barometer you use to base the worth of life is the dollar bill, I feel sorry for you. You are truly a lost soul.

"Climate policy has almost nothing to do anymore with environmental protection, says the German economist and IPCC official Ottmar Edenhofer."
"The next world climate summit in Cancun is actually an economy summit during which the distribution of the world’s resources will be negotiated. – Ottmar Edenhofer"

There, Jan, if an IPCC official says it, why won't you believe him? After all, you believe with religious fervour everything else the IPCC spews out. Ottmar Edenhofer is the co-chair of the IPCC Working Group III.

Ask yourself why Gore wouldn't debate Monckton. We all know what would have happened, Gore would have been made to look more of a fool than he already does. Why does Gore not take questions from journalists? Hardly a scientific approach, is it? Openness and fairness doesn't come into his code of ethics. Similar with the so-called 'climate scientists' who are unwilling to debate openly their methods and results. They hide their data, lose it and do anything they can to avoid freedom of information requests to see their methodology or results. They are remarkably similar to you in their ways, 'global warming' is happening - because I say it is!

"If the only barometer you use to base the worth of life is the dollar bill..."
No dear, I'm English so I use the £. However, I do have a drawer stuffed with $ bills from my not too infrequent hops across the pond :)
Seriously though, trying to make me out as being some kind of heartless soul who revels in death is a bit low, especially seeing as my initial post on this topic was about my concern for the people in my country who are dying because they cannot afford to keep warm because they are forced to pay for costly schemes to fund green ideology.

Please... forced to pay for green ideology that is keeping them cold? God you are so full of it. "Green ideology" is what you call it, I call it saving this planet for future generations. It's obvious where you come from and I don't mean country, and indeed by your own admission from your own posts you are clearly a heartless soul who cares nothing for anything but yourself. I don't have to make you out to be anything you do a very good job of that all on your own. And no, Mr. Gore doesn't have time nor needs to debate the likes of a fake like Monckton who has nothing better to do as a shill for the oil industry. He is way above that and too busy actually working to do something constructive instead of just looking for his fifteen minutes of fame. Monckton could have debated anyone in the scientific community, but he was looking to make $$$$ by attacking him because he was the man who made more people aware of the truth people like Monckton do all in their power to misrepresent with forged slides and slight of hand. Oh well, so sad for you. I do hope once renewable energy is the way we must go as Peak Oil will have set in that you can handle it. I hope the sun doesn't make you shrivel up. Perhaps, you will simply choose to live in the dark and cold because God forbid you let the sun in.

"...have energy sources that preserve their way of life and environment and give them a chance to escape the crushing poverty that inhibits their ability to have self sufficiency and self determination..." -JanforGore

Hmmm... seems their crushing poverty might have something to do with their fondness of television.
"In China, the main use of larger 50-watt solar household systems, after lighting, is for viewing television..."
At least when they get short of food those "poor farmers" will be able to call for help, "Many battery systems in developing countries are used extensively for television viewing, and more recently, mobile phone charging..."

"He [Gore] is way above that and too busy actually working to do something constructive..."

Yes, he's too busy flying around the world indoctrinating schoolkids and also just generally admitting he got it wrong:
_____________________________________________________
Gore's big environmental lie
By Pittsburgh Tribune-Review
Sunday, November 28, 2010

Al Gore has been exposed as the global-warming, climate-change fraud that he is. And that's being charitable.

Mr. Gore, of course, is the well-heeled Oscar- and Nobel Peace Prize-winning former Democrat U.S. congressman, senator and vice president who lost his race for president in 2000. Already quite accomplished in the view of many, he then decided to save the planet. Ahem.

You remember the spiel — be afraid, be very afraid.

Well, it seems the fella behind "An Inconvenient Truth," a "documentary" whose "truth" repeatedly has been debunked, told a "green" energy conference in Greece that he supported tax breaks for farmers to grow corn for ethanol for political reasons, not environmental.

Can you believe it — a politician pandering for votes? Get outta town!

And Gore now admits that the energy conversation ratios of corn-based ethanol "are at best very small" (we'd argue that they're negative) and that, given so much of the corn yield has been diverted to the fool's gold that is ethanol, yes, food prices have risen. And the less fortunate among us shafted, we might add.

Al Gore owes the world an apology. And the Oscar and Nobel judges owe the world a reconsideration of honors whose award criteria likely were as suspect as Ozone Al's "science."
___________________________________________

http://progressivesforgore.blogspot.com/2010/11/gore-calls-for-bold-thinking-on....
Such syncophantic hatred. No amount of garbage you post here will change my support. It takes a good man to admit a mistake. Hopefully you and your climate denial friends will have the same humility once your scam is fully exposed. But I doubt it.

I'm aware of your blog already, I've seen it a few times. Well done. I'm pleased you have only one story on each page, it makes it so much quicker to load than some blogs that contain the entire history of the site on one page.
I hope you continue to support him when he admits to making a mistake about global warming.
Not a lot of comments on your blog though Jan, is that because no-one is interested or because you have to continually reject the adverse comments?

I don't know, don't see much on many blogs as a whole. People seem to be too busy BSing about tv shows and unimportant issues on Facebook to care. And don't worry, I will continue to support him. He's a bigger man to admit his mistakes than the oil cowards who hide behind their shills.

Aw come on Jan, you know we just can't start helping Africans when us Westerners are freezing in our mansions. This site is a trip.

Gulf of Mexico.

I think the only happy, more comfortable life you are concerned with is your own.

Your only interest seems to be for the world to hand you everything you want for free.

And you want everything you see.

You lack the intelligence to do anything other than hurl childish and unwarranted insults, one of which I had removed from Current due to its vulgar content. You obviously cannot read, or choose not to understand what I have presented, and now you assert that I expect a free ride from the world!
As you said in your banned comment, you do not know me or what I do for a living, yet you accuse me of expecting a free ride, and top it off with labeling me as a black hearted ___.

Your comments say a lot more about you than they do about me.

------" Your comments say a lot more about you than they do about me."------

Yes, I could have been more polite. But nothing has changed my impression of you and your motives.

good post!