I believe there are still serious concerns with deployment strategies that put all of our eggs in one basket. Loss of power on the grid as we've seen in the past is crippling. Compound this with the loss of personal transportation is stupefyingly arrogant to pursue. Consider the grid has been in existence for 50 years and was state of the art at the time of its inception. Neglect has set in and expansion is hindered by epic proportions of environmental and bureaucratic red tape. So the question becomes, do we wish to place additional burden on this aging infrastructure without mandating updates and infrastructure improvements? Given the crucial nature of those arteries it seems foolish to run them to capacity all day every day. It's an issue that deserves fudge factor in favor of over engineering. It's also important to understand that the infrastructure and the power generation facilities are two different entities to consider. Power generation facilities from an operations perspective operate at a higher efficiency and reduced maintenance if they can be operated at a constant load. It can take hours to respond to large power loading as commissioning and syncing generators is no small task. Thus continuous load would improve their operations. The grid on the other hand is an aging infrastructure with increasing demand and load. It's capacity and lifespan are finite.

Speaking of Hostile and Aggressive...my manager's approach in dealing with people is nothing but solid intimidation. Someone wrote on the wall in the washroom (employee or random stranger we know not) and his solution was to remove the stall doors. Anal management is becoming an ever more popular methodology for management styles