BPL Should be sold at the earliest possible moment to a qualified and capable purchaser who will then commit to a solar roll out and a phase out of all fossil fuel generation.

Or I suppose we could all stick our heads in the sand and pretend there isn't a fiscal crisis going on with BPL and there isn't a climate change crisis and just spend years blaming x party or y party or just making comments that point to no productive solution. I guess its up to everyone which path they want to go.

You are saying all the Canadian banks will reopen all their branches if the PLP was back in power? Seriously?

BPL should have been privatized ages ago, now the Bahamian people are on the hook for a huge bond with 10-15% interest rates. Just think how much further we'd all have been if BPL was privatized with a condition it move to solar for all new plant investments?

Why spend so much time digging a further hole with this bond and LNG? Just privatize the whole thing to a new buyer who will be obligated to role out solar.

Couldn't agree more. At this stage more fossil fuel plants is basically suicidal.

Time to go solar, its cheaper even and no risk of oil spills, from oil tankers nor oil wells. Look at that big stranded tanker off Trinidad threatning to sink, do we want that in Bahamian waters?

Yes, all the forest fires are a myth. Australia did not have hundreds of wild fires, we do not see twice the number of named storms we did 20-30 years ago. Get your head out of the sand, or at least don't drag down people who didn't cause climate change with you.

Are solar panels toxic? Yes! A good reason why society must use less overall power.

And fixing billion dollar hurricane damage is free? (from the climate change from burning fossil fuels)

What stability did Abaco have post Dorian by the way?

If you hadn't noticed, solar and wind are now the cheapest way for islands to get power.

Since this gurantees we would never hit any serious reduction in emissions as part of all these various legal processes I assume our withdrawl from the Paris Agreement will be formally indicated?

Clearly remaining in it at the same time as you are entering multi decade plans for new fossil fuel plants is not an act one can honestly say is consistent with the goal of Paris.

Also, no mention of climate change again in these articles on LNG, and no mention of life cycle emissions from the LNG Shell is proposing to bring in terms of where it stacks up with what BPL does now? Could it be because those life cycle emissions are probably worse than even what we do now? (by emissions I mean climate trapping gasses not visible pollutants)

LNG is both cleaner to burn and in fact likely WORSE for the climate than burning Bunker C or diesel depending on where and how the LNG is sourced. (as it takes a lot of energy to produce the LNG, as there is no natural LNG flowing out of the ground somewhere)

Ah, there is no plan to go renewable. Once you sign a long term LNG contract, you are locked into it. So the Bahamas is going to do nothing on climate change.

Drowning in sea level rise brought on by climate change would be. (which is in part fueled by projects like this)