Title: some truth mixed in with a jumble of misleading statements
Product review: page 10 is misleading, comparing the 6% output of solar power generation versus the predicted 36% of 2000 projection of "soft energy paths". So the author is equating all soft energies with just solar. Amory Lovins soft energy paths wasn't just talking about solar, it was talking about all soft energies (all different types of renewables AND co-generation!) in that 36%, which turned out to be very close to projection. This is an example of the lack of thoroughness, or possibly, intentional misleading by the author.I agree that solar is an expensive technology for the efficiency rates it achieves, but consider this: If we had the same subsidies in renewable technologies as coal and oil do, how much better would they be now? Seems like coal and oil are the only ones that don't play by the rules of the "free market" w/o help, especially if you take into account the indirect subsidies of needing to protect pipelines or go to war.
Would you say this review depicts the product in a flattering or unflattering light?
