Well, these folk didn't get where they are by being thick between the ears or afraid of a challenge or thinking outside the box.

I agree with BEA and that we must explore all the avenues open to us, and if the very best of these all but walk out the door and are taken up en masse by the poorest nations, with a little help from genuinely concerned philanthropists, all well and good!

If they want to build many small reactors at their own expense and if those reactors could be cheaper than coal, thorium, with no weapons spinoff, we should invite them here.

Simply put, we can't have the current coal industry and a future, one or both have to go?

Unless those who are mindlessly bound and determined to earn all their income from coal or its use, are prepared to invest in allied industries that then produce so called clean coal as well as additional income streams!

But only if we finally force them to bit the bullet and compete on a level playing field with some of the emerging or lower cost carbon free/neutral technologies! If that then forces idealogues and denialist dinosaurs to go broke and get out, that can be no bad thing?
Rhrosty.

Perhaps if they spent their money directly at the third world, particularly in other areas like education, for women especially and on birth control, water conservation, innovative food production etc the energy issue would be less of a priority, probably not much profit in that so let's forget that happening

Additionally, the mantra underlying the entire article is climate change. If this is so, can the author advise what the worlds nominal temperature should be so we can all benchmark the mix of energy which will be needed in the future to mitigate climate related problems, if there are in fact going to be any?

Cheers Geoff

The Gates Foundation and a bunch of others already do that Geoff. Public health, education, birth control, food production etc., you name it.

This is additional to that and with a focus that seems to be lacking from major governments.

As Jardine always says: Governments can't innovate, so if we're going to innovate our way out this, then this is probably a better way than having Gates buy a bunch of soon-to-be obsolete solar panels for Africa. Innovation, if it happens will help everyone. It's the rising tide that lifts all boats.

Hi Geoff, in many cases improving food production is limited by water availability. Overcome by recycling or desalination water!?

And this takes energy, as does keeping the lights on, so the most disadvantaged can get some schooling, in the only hours available to them!

Cheap energy is the missing factor in clean safe water for the masses or improved food production or even algae production, which by the way mate, only uses 1-2% of the water needed by traditional irrigation! and pound for pound, spirilina (Green blue algae type) is the most nutritious food on the planet!

You and your family have a nice as possible xmas.
Cheers, Rhrosty.

Thanks Rhrosty, the same goes for you and your family.

I agree energy is crucial in the mix, we just have too many vested interests keeping innovation at bay. It is always about the money, greed wins every time.

Cheers Geoff

Geoff
Well if it's not about the profit, it's about the loss, which is less productive, not more.