Please consider what you are saying in light of the fact that renewable energy is renewable meaning renewed, as in biomass. The wind does not always blow, the sun does not always shine, but stored solar energy in plant matter, is the third and most important pillar of renewable energy, its always available when you need it, the others you just cant depend on 100%.

I agree to the concern over major new industrial biomass electrical power only projects but we have to provide renewable heat energy to the existing building stock. Doing this via high efficiency Biomass Combined Heat and Power I see as the only way.

At the crux of all our discussions in the Climate Ark community, two groups of people make their appearance.

In one group, we recognize the "people of the economy" who have managed to institutionalize the 'goodness' of greed and arrogance associated with their idolatry of wealth consolidation and the power to continue accumulating filthy lucre. These people will uniformly say that their drive for economic growth and the power wealth purchases is not only good but also primary. They make it crystal clear that the protection of the Earth from industrialization and big business is secondary. In the other group, we have "people of Earth's ecology" who see, as you do, that the preservation of the Earth needs to be primary and the growth of global economy secondary because there can be no such thing as a manmade economy without the resources and ecosystem services the Earth, and only the Earth, can provide.

The Earth can get along quite nicely without the Masters of the Universe and their idolatrized global economy; but I do not think anyone can sensibly argue with the point that the economy cannot exist without a planet to provide for its viability. Even so, both of us recognize that there are many ideologues who do voceriferously argue that the human economy can exist independent of the Earth. I call it "money for nothing" thinking of do-nothing people. We also know that these ideologues are the very people who actually produce nothing, but end up with most of the world's wealth. In our time timorous emasculated, absurdly high-paid "talking heads" in the mainstream media support this perverse situation. People who are actual producers lose their jobs, health care, pensions, etc while the Masters of the Universe, who produce nothing, walk away with millions of dollars in neatly packaged "golden parachutes" into carefree lives of effortless ease.

As I see it, this is a problem. The institutionalized power of a few million selfish people who currently organize and manage the global political economy {for their own interests primarily} is much greater than the power that belongs to the billions of people who have very little wealth but hold a priceless vested interest in the preservation of the Earth as a fit place for human habitation by our children and coming generations.

The struggle today between the "haves" and the "have-nots" -- between the self-proclaimed Masters of the Universe and the people these masters call simpletons -- can be likened to the Biblical confrontation between Goliath and David.

Let's make no mistake about it. The duplicitous, avaricious Masters of the Universe among us are a modern representation of Goliath and the people these masters have dubbed simpletons, the ones who are honest, transparent, productive and accountable for their actions, are living examples of the courageous David.

Sincerely,

Steve

Steven Earl Salmony
AWAREness Campaign on The Human Population
established 2001
http://sustainabilitysoutheast.org/index.php

In the interests of "to the point" comments as opposed to rants, let me be brief.
One, fossil fuels such as as coal, oil, and tar sands are perhaps the most securely stored carbon. This means they are the least desirable to use.
Second if we uses biomass alternatives to replace fossil fuels we must do it in the most efficient manner possible. This means consuming as little energy as tolerable which should start in the US, perhaps the most wasteful country on earth according to Worldwatch statistics.

Hello
please put in this email what is good sustainable energy for all to read. To be clear.

Most sustainable is to use less. Drive less, drive smaller (bike,walk, scooters), don't fly in planes, heat less, insulate more, wear more clothes,,etc.

It looks like California and Congress are beginning to get the message on corn ethanol's gross wastefulness.
Hopefully they are calculating the carbon costs of fertilizing and growing the corn as well as harvest and topsoil disturbance impacts on carbon storage.
Sugar is a much better feedstock for ethanol with more efficient energy conversion. Brazil has used this fuel for many years.