Welcome to European Tribune. It's gone a bit quiet around here these days, but it's still going.
Display:
What seems remarkable about these numbers is how quickly the US economy has been able to respond to the Stimulus given the huge project finance, production and logistical lead times that are required to get such projects off the ground.  Presumably there was some element of anticipating an Obama victory and a more favourable regulatory regime in these numbers.

Your previous diary noted that European Off-shore new capacity delivered in 2009 was 600 Megawatts and represented c. 10% of total new wind capacity in Europe.  Thus Europe delivered only c. 6 Gigawatt of new wind capacity in 2009 compared to 10 for the US.

Is there a danger that whilst the EU talks a good game on climate change and sustainable energy, the US actually gets on with the job and delivers more?  For how much longer can European firms maintain their lead in design and production technologies?

I appreciate that onshore is quicker, cheaper and easier to deliver, and the US has a huge advantage in onshore wind resources.  But they also have a crap grid and poor corporate infrastructure for enhancing it.  So who is going to hit capacity constraints for integrating wind power sooner?  Where are the EU and US on developing smart grids and efficient means of moving gigawatts of power from wind resource rich regions to wind poor but high demand regions?

It's great news for the US and the planet, but is the EU, once again, in danger of being left behind having made the running for so long?

notes from no w here

by Frank Schnittger (mail Frankschnittger at hot male dotty communists) on Tue Jan 26th, 2010 at 10:39:17 AM EST
who cares if we're "left behind" as long as we do what is right for us? Why should we grow as fast as developing countries or, in the case of wind, of laggards like the US?

Europe's number is likely to be above 8,000 MW (I don't know, thus the rounded percentage for the offshore portion), continuing on a stable trend over the past few years.

The onshore wind resource in Europe is weaker and harder to tap than in the US (population densities et al) - except in the UK which has its specific set of NIMBY and regulatory issues hampering the development - so what has been done in Europe is not bad, and the push into offshore ensures that this continues.

I'll let CH comment on technology, but most of the R&D is in Europe, still, and the developments for offshore will remain here - and that's the big growth area for us.

But I find such comparisons and questions about decline (or being "left behind") silly. Why even think that?

In the long run, we're all dead. John Maynard Keynes

by Jerome a Paris (etg@eurotrib.com) on Tue Jan 26th, 2010 at 12:11:59 PM EST
[ Parent ]
I'm thinking like that because:

  1. If the US is considered a laggard then I wondered whether the EU was also starting to lag (behind its own commitments) despite the history of a more positive regulatory environment and the 20/30% commitment to reducing carbon emissions

  2. I would like to see the EU continuing to lead in such progressive industries (as opposed to armaments, oil, exotic financial engineering etc.)

  3. Whether we like it or not we are in competition with the US, China etc. for jobs and sustainable living standards/state services.

  4. The sustainable electricity generation and distribution infrastructure is an example, par excellence, of the benefits of cross-border cooperation in finance, R&D, regulation, market access, production and distribution - and thus an important driver of EU cooperation and integration.

  5. What's wrong with having another EU "success story" to counter the neo-lib narrative?


notes from no w here
by Frank Schnittger (mail Frankschnittger at hot male dotty communists) on Tue Jan 26th, 2010 at 01:16:09 PM EST
[ Parent ]
  1. I don't see how US = laggard leads to Europe = laggard. Seriously. Why??
  2. Sure. Haven't you been reading my previous diaries on wind?
  3. Most of the discourse is about the relative decline of Europe because Asia is catching up on us. Their catching up does not mean we get any poorer or less sustainable; quite the opposite, it's likely that the more they 'catch up', the less sutainable their economies are. Maybe this needs to be pointed out too.
  4. well energy regulation is made in Brussels. And again, this is the only exemple that works in the world.
  5. nothing's wrong with that. But we're talking about wind, one of the great European success stories of the past decade or two, and yet you come up with that notion of decline. Maybe the neo-lib narrative is in your head!


In the long run, we're all dead. John Maynard Keynes
by Jerome a Paris (etg@eurotrib.com) on Tue Jan 26th, 2010 at 01:52:11 PM EST
[ Parent ]
If the US is delivering 10 Gigabytes and the EU (by your previous diary) is producing c. 6 Gigabytes of new capacity in 2009 then I found it surprising that the EU was delivering less new capacity than the US especially considering the much greater and longer term commitment to wind in the EU - even given the EU's greater installed base and other constraints.  

I was raising a question that those numbers suggested to me and looking for clarification - not making a proclamation - and am happy to see that those numbers were not quite accurate and don't give the full picture.  No need to see all questions as evidence of hostility.

notes from no w here

by Frank Schnittger (mail Frankschnittger at hot male dotty communists) on Tue Jan 26th, 2010 at 02:28:51 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Not repeating what Jérôme already answered to this; why do you focus on comparing new installations only? By adding 10GW, the USA only reached 35GW total -- while by adding 6-8GW, the EU will reach 71-73GW. Quite a different level to have high growth at, especially considering our less good on-shore potential. Once European off-shore construction gears up, it will be a question if the USA will ever catch up.

*Lunatic*, n.
One whose delusions are out of fashion.
by DoDo on Wed Jan 27th, 2010 at 03:22:27 AM EST
[ Parent ]
of course, DoDo, some of us are too close to the trees to remember the forest, thanks for the most simple answer.

"Life shrinks or expands in proportion to one's courage." - Anaïs Nin
by Crazy Horse on Wed Jan 27th, 2010 at 04:27:46 AM EST
[ Parent ]
This is like GDP and GDP growth (or indeed, especially for Ireland, wealth and GDP).

*Lunatic*, n.
One whose delusions are out of fashion.
by DoDo on Wed Jan 27th, 2010 at 08:28:47 AM EST
[ Parent ]
...and in the US overweening significance of changes in housing inventory (e.g. MoM new constraction and existing "supply", commercial and residential "investment", average unit price) rather than cumulative housing stock.

Diversity is the key to economic and political evolution.
by Cat on Wed Jan 27th, 2010 at 10:59:34 AM EST
[ Parent ]
DoDo:
why do you focus on comparing new installations only?

Because that was the focus of Jerome's diary. Jeez - is one not allowed to ask a question around here?!

For the record:  I am delighted that (despite a less optimal wind resource) the EU is so well advanced in developing its wind power and still retaining a significant if lesser share in new installations.  I am sure we would all like to see both the EU and the USA continuing to do more and accelerating the rate of growth and overcoming the technical and infrastructural obstacles to doing that.

Sustainable energy production and CO2 emissions reduction is one of the shining lights of the EU and I was disappointed to see the EU lose much of its political leadership position on the issue at Copenhagen.  I am glad that, as CH has confirmed, it is not losing its economic and technological leadership role in that area and hope it will lead to reduced use of gas and other carbon energy sources as time goes on.

I really don't see any room for complacency on this issue - we should be fighting for the EU to do better on a broader range of fronts - rather than being overly self-satisfied at what we have achieved to date.  Jerome has already written about the headwinds he faced in putting a financial deal together and there are many other factors inhibiting the development of the industry.  

Ireland, for example, has an almost incomparable wind resource but its development is being inhibited by a lack of finance, entrepreneurial activity, regulatory restraints on the national electricity supplier increasing its output, and lack of integration with a broader European electricity grid which could help to smooth out the peaks and troughs of wind power production.

Instead of arguing about how great we are, we have to do better.

notes from no w here

by Frank Schnittger (mail Frankschnittger at hot male dotty communists) on Wed Jan 27th, 2010 at 08:59:00 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Because that was the focus of Jerome's diary.

Sigh. Jérôme's focus was US growth, not the comparison of US and other growth, and even less an analysis of falling behind...

I really don't see any room for complacency on this issue - we should be fighting for the EU to do better on a broader range of fronts - rather than being overly self-satisfied at what we have achieved to date.

That's good. Though it is more local, with the obstacles typically being local regulations.

Instead of arguing about how great we are, we have to do better.

You were arguing that we are worse than others -- if you wanted to speak about doing better compared to ourselves, you derailed your own argument there.

*Lunatic*, n.
One whose delusions are out of fashion.

by DoDo on Wed Jan 27th, 2010 at 09:46:10 AM EST
[ Parent ]
DoDo:
You were arguing that we are worse than others -- if you wanted to speak about doing better compared to ourselves, you derailed your own argument there.

Is it not possible to note both that - as Jerome's figures revealed - the EU installed less new capacity than the US last year, and that the EU should try to do better?  I am now left wondering what all this extreme sensitivity and slightly insulting responses to asking a simple question means.

notes from no w here

by Frank Schnittger (mail Frankschnittger at hot male dotty communists) on Wed Jan 27th, 2010 at 10:02:12 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Is it not possible to note both that - as Jerome's figures revealed - the EU installed less new capacity than the US last year, and that the EU should try to do better?

That would be two independent statements -- but didn't you conclude one from the other? (If not, what was the point of noting that the EU may have installed less?) Did our replies not challenge the rationale for comparison, in multiple ways (resource to exploit, level of current exploitation, long-term trends)? It read like an argument about US and EU GDP growth.

I am now left wondering what all this extreme sensitivity and slightly insulting responses to asking a simple question means.

Well -- I can't speak for others whether they actually felt sensitivity (extreme or not) or intended to hurl insults (slight or not), but I myself sighed because I didn't think your re-framed version meant the same as what you yourself and Jérôme said earlier.

*Lunatic*, n.
One whose delusions are out of fashion.

by DoDo on Wed Jan 27th, 2010 at 10:18:47 AM EST
[ Parent ]
DoDo:
Did our replies not challenge the rationale for comparison, in multiple ways

Perhaps you missed the following in the original question:

Frank Schnittger:

I appreciate that onshore is quicker, cheaper and easier to deliver, and the US has a huge advantage in onshore wind resources.  But they also have a crap grid and poor corporate infrastructure for enhancing it.  So who is going to hit capacity constraints for integrating wind power sooner?  Where are the EU and US on developing smart grids and efficient means of moving gigawatts of power from wind resource rich regions to wind poor but high demand regions?

The reality is that both continents face differing challenges of geography, infrastructure, finance and politics, and I was trying to find out more about how well both were doing in addressing them.  I don't think that is a silly question that only neo-libs would ask, and I don't know what your sighing added to the conversation. Wind energy is hardly my specialist subject but I had been planning to do a diary on the Irish Electricity Supply Board's plans in sustainable and intermittent power sources in the area and wanted to get a handle on the bigger picture.

notes from no w here

by Frank Schnittger (mail Frankschnittger at hot male dotty communists) on Wed Jan 27th, 2010 at 10:57:44 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Perhaps you missed the following in the original question:

I shall reply to it more specifically below, but it (1) doesn't justify the comment's title, (2) doesn't change the validity of our challenges of the rationale for comparison.

But they also have a crap grid and poor corporate infrastructure for enhancing it. So who is going to hit capacity constraints for integrating wind power sooner?

As a serious problem, that's in the future, on both continents. As an excuse raised by regulators stopping wind in certain regions, that's the recent past: see the crash of the market a few years ago in Hungary and Austria, and that's Europe. Meanwhile, zoning laws and the scramble for the best on-shore wind sites are real constraints on rapid on-shore expansion at the present, in Europe.

*Lunatic*, n.
One whose delusions are out of fashion.

by DoDo on Wed Jan 27th, 2010 at 03:12:39 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Besides, though Crazy Horse will argue that there is still plenty of room for expansion on-shore, methinks the bulk of that is in certain problematic countries (UK, France), off-shore is rolling off now, and the focus should now be on photovoltaic, and more pilot projects for others (like concentrated solar or hot-dry-rock geothermal, the second also for distance heating).

*Lunatic*, n.
One whose delusions are out of fashion.
by DoDo on Wed Jan 27th, 2010 at 09:51:04 AM EST
[ Parent ]
because your whole premise is based on saying that only 6GW will have been built in Europe last year, a number you pulled out of incomplete and voluntarily approximative data on the proportion of offshore in the total, and you then jumped right into a "Europe is declining theme" which I find exasperating, and not just from the WSJ.


I was disappointed to see the EU lose much of its political leadership position on the issue at Copenhagen.

As far as I can tell, the EU lost the leadership of nothing: China, the US and others all happily agreed between themsleves to ignore the problem and do nothing. That's not leadership, that's denial.

In the long run, we're all dead. John Maynard Keynes

by Jerome a Paris (etg@eurotrib.com) on Wed Jan 27th, 2010 at 11:48:26 AM EST
[ Parent ]
No, my whole premise was that I could ask a civil question based on approximate data you had provided and get a civil reply. Noting that Europe installed less new capacity than the US may not be on message for an EU PR flunkey but that is not my role.  Neither do I parrot a WSJ "Europe is declining" meme and I would thank you for not seeking to brand me with that ideology.

As for Copenhagen, you must be one of the few people that doesn't think that it represented a setback for attempts to mitigate climate change and the EU's attempt to lead that process forward.

notes from no w here

by Frank Schnittger (mail Frankschnittger at hot male dotty communists) on Wed Jan 27th, 2010 at 01:26:54 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Neither do I parrot a WSJ "Europe is declining" meme

You kicked off this whole meandering subthread with

EU being left behind again?


*Lunatic*, n.
One whose delusions are out of fashion.
by DoDo on Wed Jan 27th, 2010 at 03:03:44 PM EST
[ Parent ]
I think it was the "again" that rubbed people the wrong way, because it implies a trend of being overtaken by other powers. Such a trend does not seem to be in evidence.

- Jake

Friends come and go. Enemies accumulate.

by JakeS (JangoSierra 'at' gmail 'dot' com) on Wed Jan 27th, 2010 at 03:23:22 PM EST
[ Parent ]
The again was actually a reference to the Copenhagen debacle where the EU had been in a leadership position but was left out of the talks which led to what little agreement was eventually reached.

notes from no w here
by Frank Schnittger (mail Frankschnittger at hot male dotty communists) on Wed Jan 27th, 2010 at 06:44:21 PM EST
[ Parent ]
There was nothing in the initial comment to indicate that this was a Copenhagen reference, so you have to acknowledge at least that you left yourself open to misinterpretation.

*Lunatic*, n.
One whose delusions are out of fashion.
by DoDo on Thu Jan 28th, 2010 at 07:07:11 AM EST
[ Parent ]
So no one is allowed to ask the question whether it is possible that the EU is falling behind in some aspect or other without being accused of being a silly WSJ neo-lib?  A simple factual reply - such as that provided by CH - would have sufficed.

Indeed I was glad to read his comments that the 2009 rate of installation in the EU need not be a cause for concern - although I am concerned that progress in Ireland seems to have slowed and the senior manager from the ESB I spoke to seemed to have little time for wind power as a priority despite the fact that the ESB's own strategic plan calls for a €22 Billion investment in renewable energy and a commitment to generate one third of all power from renewables by 2020.

notes from no w here

by Frank Schnittger (mail Frankschnittger at hot male dotty communists) on Wed Jan 27th, 2010 at 07:33:06 PM EST
[ Parent ]
So no one is allowed to ask the question whether it is possible that the EU is falling behind in some aspect

See discussion of "again" elsewhere. (And your above reply could have reflected that, coming after your reply to JakeS.)

A simple factual reply - such as that provided by CH - would have sufficed.

Your thread-starter wasn't or at least couldn't be read obviously as a simple factual question, you have to see that.

I am concerned that progress in Ireland seems to have slowed

I would more characterise the situation there as "still hasn't taken off". 2008 installations were 208 MW, this year's seem to be 250 MW (Or maybe even 500 MW -- it's confusing because the Irish Wind Energy Association's statistics page is a mess, and they seem to insist on including Northern Ireland in Ireland.)

*Lunatic*, n.
One whose delusions are out of fashion.

by DoDo on Thu Jan 28th, 2010 at 07:17:04 AM EST
[ Parent ]
don't put "Europe left behind again" as your title if you have such innocuous intentions.


As for Copenhagen, you must be one of the few people that doesn't think that it represented a setback for attempts to mitigate climate change and the EU's attempt to lead that process forward.

Where did I say that it was not a setback for attempts to mitigate climate change? All I said is that it is easy to "lead" to a deal if the deal is to do nothing. That the EU was not involved in such deal is not a valid criticism of its leadership. Its leadership is demonstrated by the fact that it is the only one to have binding targets on itself - and it has the credibility of having met the Kyoto targets it imposed on itself in the 90s. Whether these targets are enough is another issue, but at least the EU has acted, both in setting goals and, so far, in fulfilling them.

The only way to pull China in will be through an all out trade war, and I expect we'll get there eventually, if no deal happens.

In the long run, we're all dead. John Maynard Keynes

by Jerome a Paris (etg@eurotrib.com) on Wed Jan 27th, 2010 at 03:38:30 PM EST
[ Parent ]
We would have to purge a number of Quisling governments first.

Starting with the COP15 hosts...

- Jake

Friends come and go. Enemies accumulate.

by JakeS (JangoSierra 'at' gmail 'dot' com) on Wed Jan 27th, 2010 at 10:42:55 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Short answer is no, the EU is not being left behind.

First, on the manufacturing side, nearly half of the installations were produced in Europe.  In Q4 alone, US manufacturing accounted for 1848.5 MWs, while EU accounted for 1652.9 MWs in the US. (Siemens, Vestas, REpower, Acciona, others; and that's just Q4.)

Second, some of the largest developers in the US are already owned by EU utilities.

Both continents are moving aggressively toward grid enhancement.

I've got more, but there's a webinar on the results right now.

"Life shrinks or expands in proportion to one's courage." - Anaïs Nin

by Crazy Horse on Tue Jan 26th, 2010 at 12:40:00 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Thanks.

notes from no w here
by Frank Schnittger (mail Frankschnittger at hot male dotty communists) on Tue Jan 26th, 2010 at 01:23:23 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Back of envelope numbers (very rough) based on AWEA preliminary data, for capacity additions in the US 2009:

The EU supplied somewhere between 42-45% of the total installed.

  •  Vestas  (DK)              16%
  •  Siemens  (DK/D)      13%
  •  Gamesa  (SP)              7%
  •  REpower  (D)              4%
  •  Acciona  (SP)              2%
  •  Nordex  (D)              <1%   (new to market)

  •  Mitsubishi  (J)             8%
  •  Suzlon  (I)                   6%

  •  Clipper  (US)               3%
  •  GE  (US/D)                  41%

Some portion of US manufactured turbines use European components, as do those from Asia.  Towers are largely produced domestically for all turbines.  Rotor blades are often from European companies with facilities in the US, though some are shipped.

The first Chinese manufactured turbines have already been installed in the US, with the first significant order already in place for 2010 delivery.

US jobs in the industry remained steady at an estimated 85,000.  Increased were construction and O&M, decreases were in manufacturing.

Projecting into 2010, market signals remain mixed, with some growth and CAPEX decisions awaiting the results from a disfunctional Congress.  

We're still awaiting 2009 EU stats, and while one can safely say the EU numbers won't be aggressive, they won't be lagging too much either.  The EU is in a transition phase, hurt by the lack of push to further develop onshore but helped by the beginnings of the repowering sector, where older, smaller turbines are reaching the end of their economic life, and will be replaced.

Anecdote from the wind geek dinner:  wry smiles as we remarked on the turbines (installed years ago) spinning at the edge of the airport, while politicians in the UK are still looking for solutions to the "radar problem."  (censored)


"Life shrinks or expands in proportion to one's courage." - Anaïs Nin

by Crazy Horse on Tue Jan 26th, 2010 at 02:51:40 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Perhaps as interesting is that over one-third of all 2009 US projects were developed by European-owned companies.

  •  Iberdrola              (SP)            1241.1   MWs
  •  E.on Renewables (D)              993.5
  •  Horizon  (EdP)     (P)               769.4
  •  EnXco   (EdF)        (FR)             355

If one counts BP as being European, with some 725 MWs, the total is over 40% of projects.  Note also that the US branches of European banks traditionally make up a significant portion of the lenders.

"Life shrinks or expands in proportion to one's courage." - Anaïs Nin
by Crazy Horse on Tue Jan 26th, 2010 at 04:19:26 PM EST
[ Parent ]
If one counts BP as being European
What do you mean if?

En un viejo país ineficiente, algo así como España entre dos guerras civiles, poseer una casa y poca hacienda y memoria ninguna. -- Gil de Biedma
by Migeru (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Tue Jan 26th, 2010 at 04:27:06 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Oh, did i forget to include the smiley for zee leetle yoke?  And pretty strong showing from the Iberian peninsula, na?

"Life shrinks or expands in proportion to one's courage." - Anaïs Nin
by Crazy Horse on Tue Jan 26th, 2010 at 04:30:41 PM EST
[ Parent ]
And pretty strong showing from the Iberian peninsula, na?

So what, I'm not a nationalist.

En un viejo país ineficiente, algo así como España entre dos guerras civiles, poseer una casa y poca hacienda y memoria ninguna. -- Gil de Biedma

by Migeru (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Tue Jan 26th, 2010 at 04:34:20 PM EST
[ Parent ]
But aren't you a Europhile and supporter of progressive industries in Europe??

notes from no w here
by Frank Schnittger (mail Frankschnittger at hot male dotty communists) on Tue Jan 26th, 2010 at 05:33:57 PM EST
[ Parent ]
What do you mean if?

Well, given the behaviour of the Anglo-Iranian Oil Company, I think many of us would prefer to not count BP as "European."

- Jake

Friends come and go. Enemies accumulate.

by JakeS (JangoSierra 'at' gmail 'dot' com) on Tue Jan 26th, 2010 at 08:17:42 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Um, no true Scotsman?

En un viejo país ineficiente, algo así como España entre dos guerras civiles, poseer una casa y poca hacienda y memoria ninguna. -- Gil de Biedma
by Migeru (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Wed Jan 27th, 2010 at 03:00:02 AM EST
[ Parent ]
BP's environmental record in the US is disasterous, regardless of what it did 70 years ago in an earlier incarnation, and regardless of it's PR budget  Beyond Petroleum.  BP has played a decent role in the US wind industry, though perhaps not when measured against its potential or size.  And their technical choices do not evince what one would expect of an engineering company.

"Life shrinks or expands in proportion to one's courage." - Anaïs Nin
by Crazy Horse on Wed Jan 27th, 2010 at 04:26:19 AM EST
[ Parent ]
by rootless2 on Tue Jan 26th, 2010 at 02:33:11 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Siemens has located an R&D facility in Bolder, Colorado, but has only 800 employees in its US Wind Power department - and is planning to double this in the next 2/3 years - seems quite small for such a large market share - but presumably its US operations are only beginning to substitute European Sourced nacelles etc.

notes from no w here
by Frank Schnittger (mail Frankschnittger at hot male dotty communists) on Tue Jan 26th, 2010 at 09:24:39 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Your previous diary noted that European Off-shore new capacity delivered in 2009 was 600 Megawatts and represented c. 10% of total new wind capacity in Europe.  Thus Europe delivered only c. 6 Gigawatt of new wind capacity in 2009 compared to 10 for the US.

EWEA's numbers are still not out, but,

  • incidentally, the German Federal Wind Energy Association just released its numbers: 1,916.8 MW added (reaching a total of 25,777.01 MW), higher than in the last two years, and higher than what I expected from the half-year numbers and the general economic and regulatory situation.

  • The Spanish numbers aren't out yet, but AEE reports that wind power increased its share in the supply of demand from 11.5 to 14.3% (with 20.1% reached in windy December and a record 54.1% at 03:50 on 30 December), so, I think they exceeded last year too. One can also guesstimate the current total from the figures here, which is about 2 GW above last year's total, so it should be around 1.9 GW too.

  • The UK's BWEA lists projects summing up to around 1075 MW [BWEA is notoriously bad at checking its numbers], though that's not final.

  • French wind power is a 4,522 MW, that's another increase by 1.1 GW.

So four of the the big ones sum up to 6 GW already. Portugal, Italy, Greece, Ireland and the rest should add at least another 3 GW, so I think expectations will be well exceeded in the EU, too: should be around 9 GW.

*Lunatic*, n.
One whose delusions are out of fashion.
by DoDo on Wed Jan 27th, 2010 at 03:00:05 PM EST
[ Parent ]
I've seen that Italy is at 1.1GW as well

In the long run, we're all dead. John Maynard Keynes
by Jerome a Paris (etg@eurotrib.com) on Wed Jan 27th, 2010 at 03:32:04 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Cool! I read of a prediction of 800 MW only.

(Can you tell where if it's not confidential?)

*Lunatic*, n.
One whose delusions are out of fashion.

by DoDo on Wed Jan 27th, 2010 at 04:38:21 PM EST
[ Parent ]
I'm betting on a mini-surge in eastern Yurp as well.

"Life shrinks or expands in proportion to one's courage." - Anaïs Nin
by Crazy Horse on Wed Jan 27th, 2010 at 05:04:29 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Display:

Top Diaries

Impeachment gets real

by ARGeezer - Jan 17
20 comments

A Final Warning

by Oui - Jan 10
112 comments

Environment Anarchists

by Oui - Jan 13
4 comments

More Spanish repression

by IdiotSavant - Jan 6
8 comments

Occasional Series