I was notified of the ISBN for the book this morning - hooray - things are moving fast.

SAFE PLANET  shows, using real meteorological data and existing tried and tested technologies, how we can generate all our energy and power. It tackles the main barrier to change  -  the global political and economic power structures that make up the capitalist system.
The book will be divided into three parts.
The first part explains why energy storage must play a central part in a future renewable electricity generation system and describes a paradigm shift in how we use vehicles – a step change in energy storage.
Intermittent renewable energy can become a source of firm 'dispatchable' power when combined with a suitable energy store.
Real meteorological data is used to show how two example states – the UK and California - can be powered by renewable generators alone.
The second part of the book examines the political and economic barriers to a zero carbon world.
The third part of the book identifies the agent for change.
Essentially, the book argues that fighting for good conditions and safety at the places where people work, and fighting for the safety of the environment – the place where we all live - are not separate struggles.
The workers at Bhopal died in the same way that the people outside the plant died.
With effective organisation they could have prevented the disaster.
The impending climate disaster is preventable in a similar way.
The book concludes by arguing for a campaigning strategy which will engage with and develop the agencies that can deliver a safe planet.

A good omen.
I received a publishing contract yesterday - May 1, May Day, International Worker's Day!  - to write a book.
The book is called SAFE PLANET  - Worker's Power plus Renewable Energy
SAFE PLANET should be out by the end of 2012 or early 2013 if i get cracking.

Bias

Geoff Chaplin of the Carbon Capture and Sequestration Association says:
'we can't get rid off CO2 without  Carbon Capture and Sequestration' BBC 03 April 2012

I suppose in a way that's true. If you are going to burn coal, then you will produce CO2.

Three things. Firstly,what he was implying was, we cannot produce our energy without CCS. That is not true. It can be done with renewables.
Secondly, CCS is completely untried and untested, for energy production, in any commercial form.
Thirdly, the technology seems to fly in the face of the laws of thermodynamics.The energy cost of shoving CO2 back into a confined space will possibly make the operation futile in terms of the energy out. It will certainly add to the money cost of burning coal for energy. This is an attempt by the coal lobby to claim coal can be clean. In the meantime it can continue to pollute the planet and continue making its dirty profits

Big oil is anti-wind

Big Oil and the entrenched energy corporations (like the nuclear power industry) are not supportive of wind energy. It cuts into their profits. Every extra wind turbine producing electricity 24 hours a day 365 days of the year is producing energy that the fossil fuel industries would prefer that they were selling. Contrary to what is being repeated by commentators, wind will bring the cost of energy down.

These interests are doubtless applauding actions like this one by Powys

Daily Mail today:

Man dies in explosion at nuclear waste processing plant in France

• Four others injured and airlifted to hospitals
• 'No radioactive leak' says French nuclear safety watchdog
• Site is near to French Riviera and cities of Montpellier and Marseilles

Nuclear power stations.

Aren't they just steam engines powered by a controlled explosion?

I'm not sure what this plant does, but i wouldn't like to work there or live anywhere near it

Nuclear power stations are an expensive and dangerous way to produce electricity.

Of course, they make it a lot easier for states to have a nuclear bomb.

Is that the ulterior motive for nuclear power?

I looked through the Guardian this morning, looking for anything on renewable energy or climate change.
Couldn't see anything.
'The greatest challenge facing humanity this century' (T Blair 2002) seems to have completely dropped out of the news.
The 'challenge' has been dropped.
The challenge of climate change is on such a scale that any solution will need the organised application of the most resources possible. That means we must organise.
People individually are interested and try to do 'a bit', but this is not anywhere near enough.The solution lies in collective action by the vast majority - by those not profiting from the status quo.

However, some of the individual solutions are interesting.
Like this farmer in Wales who is covering his barn with PV panels and building an electric tractor.