Aidan,

You showed your colours on yesterday's thread about ERoEI by John Morgan 'Catch 22 of Energy Storage'.

You didn't address the issue. Instead you preferred to argue about the Opera House. Your avoidance of the ERoEI issue shows clearly you are intellectually dishonest, weren't game to make your point about ERoEI when you had the opportunity to test your beliefs and point with a person who is highly qualified and highly competent to explain your misunderstandings to you. An earlier comment by you on this tread showed you either hadn't read the link I gave, to the ERoEI article by John Morgan on BNC or the source documents, or if you had you hadn't understood. It's clear you don't have any in-depth understanding about ERoEI, or you would have been game to ask questions of John Morgan,

Furthermore, it is clear you are not interested in honest debate. You use the intellectually dishonest tactics that the zealots, deniers and ideologues use. You have provided plenty of evidence demonstrating this is a fair description of you. There is no point me trying to discuss these issues with a RE ideologue / zealot. So, I've dismissed you as not honest and not capable of debating in good faith.

Peter Lang,

Choosing not to write a lengthy response there does not show anything about my true colours. The issue was being discussed in depth here and I saw no benefit in splitting our discussion of it over two threads. Plus I was using my iPad, which isn't very well suited to long responses.

However I did choose to write brief responses to three of the comments, one of which was about the Sydney Opera House. Do you have a problem with that?

BTW your assumption that I'm not game to ask questions of John Morgan is also wrong. But on what do you base your assumption that he'd answer them? He hasn't participated in any discussions n this site, and it's been over a month since he last participated in the Catch22 discussion on BNC.

Why would he bother to respond to your silly, ignorant, trivial, dishonest comments of which there are 99 on that thread on BNC? He knows full well there is no point debating a zealot, and you clearly are one.

You also demonstrated you colours elsewhere - you quote sources such as Climate Spectator - an Green extremist's website edited by Green Extremist Tristan Edis, and where only Green Extremists are welcome. Previous Editor was Giles Parkinson, an other RE zealot, nuke denier and Green extremist. And commonly publishes posts by Matthew Wright and Mark Diesendorf, more of the RE zealots, anti-nuke zealots, Green extremists and haters of rational economic policies.

What a joke you are Aidan. Thanks for continually making it clearer what you trust for your sources.

sheesh, Peter, speaking of zealots...

Congratulations, you win, you can rant away to your heart's content, safe in the knowledge that one less person can be bothered reading what you write or reading the clickbait you substitute for reasoning. Well done.

PL's exasperation is understandable. All there is out there against him is wishful thinking and the inability or unwillingness to grapple with his analysis.

For example, Craig Minns, you opine, "Distributed generation and storage is going to be the paradigm for future energy and small nuclear plants may be significant in supporting that, but central generation using nuclear is unlikely to be a very significant contributor." Really? Why? Is this what you wish for or is it where we should head regardless of cost or comparison? Support the assertion or counter PL's analysis, especially on EROEI, hopefully without sweeping it away, as has Aiden, with, "There are obvious technical obstacles, of course, but those can be overcome."

There is no time for faith-based assertions.