46 Countries Are More Than 60% Renewable

Momentum for renewable energy is growing. Solar and wind are now competitive with fossil fuels. And the rate of innovation for solar cells, storage systems, more efficient wind turbines and other cost saving measures in alternative energy systems is expected to increase for the next few years, dropping prices even further. Around the world, many countries take global warming seriously. And many countries are discovering that renewable energy has a longterm future while fossil fuels are simply getting harder and more expensive to produce and bring to market.

On a site called Lenz Blog is a list of 46 countries that are now more than 60% renewable. (Thanks to  Cleantechnica for the link).

It's a shame that the U.S. has so much opposition to alternative energy coming from the fossil fuel industries. Global warming has been seriously on the radar for 25 years. That's 25 years that fossil fuel companies could have spent making the transition to a diverse energy portfolio. Luckily, there's still time to diversify. The sooner fossil fuel companies start diversifying, the easier the transition to alternative energy will be. And the less risk we will pose to our planet from excessive fossil fuel emissions.

Is Cheney Running for President in 2016?

My apologies to anyone with a heart condition who reads the title of today's post. Cheney, who was less than honest with the American people in 2000, 2001, 2002, 2003…. and yes, 2014, has never acknowledged the blunders made during the George W. Bush presidency, nor has he acknowledged the many inaccurate statements he made and continues to make.

Please see: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/06/20/dick-cheney-obama_n_5516405.html?utm_hp_ref=mostpopular.

Look, I'm not a pacifist but war is not an option that should be treated as lightly as Rumsfeld, Cheney, Karl Rove, Paul Wolfowitz, Richard Perle, Bill Kristol did in 2003. I can say they treated the war in Iraq with less than due diligence for the simple reason that in March 2002, they stopped trying to get Osama bin Laden. In fact, they simply abandoned any coherent policy in Afghanistan. Their attitude, which I'm admittedly surmising since they never clearly explained themselves, seemed to be: Okay, never mind that the bullets are still flying, and that we didn't catch bin Laden and that Afghanistan is a mess: we won and we're moving on to the next war.

Once the new war started, what was supposed to happen at that point? We know Rumsfeld had no plan after taking the city of Baghdad, but let's say the Iraqis had miraculously greeted Americans as liberators and miraculously ended the animosity among Iraqi factions and had actually created a democratic government in two months. What was supposed to happen next? Does anyone know? Were we headed to Iran? Syria? Pakistan? Where were we headed next? That's a question that neither Cheney or Rumsfeld have the nerve to answer. Why? Because we would quickly begin to understand how flawed the thinking in the Republican Party has become.

Smart people learn from their mistakes. Even smart conservatives. Winston Churchill wasn't a conservative purist but he was certainly very fond of colonialism and the manner of the British Empire and all its pomp and ceremony. He made a number of mistakes in during World War I. But he learned from them and was instrumental in holding off the Germans long enough for the Germans to change their target to Russia. He also gave the United States enough time to make an enormous difference in the outcome of the war.

So, is Cheney running for president in 2013? I hope not. There's absolutely no sign that he has learned anything.