|
|
Post by see2 on Mar 30, 2023 20:04:56 GMT
King Charles flew to Germany on board an RAF Voyager fitted out for VIP's, the aircraft would normally carry 266 passengers. The Voyager was followed by a second aircraft which carried his car, a gas guzzling purple Rolls Royce. He then made a speech in which he impressed on his audience the importance of forcing the proles to accept the green dream and net zero. King Charles is an out of touch hypocrite. It sounds like he should have kept his gob shut. It makes me wonder if any of our people can get their shit in order. He is an embarrassment. As too are so many of your posts, pity you don't recognise the state of many of your posts. |
|
|
|
Post by Toreador on Mar 30, 2023 20:07:32 GMT
It sounds like he should have kept his gob shut. It makes me wonder if any of our people can get their shit in order. He is an embarrassment. As too are so many of your posts, pity you don't recognise the state of many of your posts. That's harsh see2, you'll get a bad name talking about the Baron like that, he'll be making a doll and buying a packet of pins. |
|
|
|
Post by see2 on Mar 30, 2023 20:31:11 GMT
As too are so many of your posts, pity you don't recognise the state of many of your posts. That's harsh see2, you'll get a bad name talking about the Baron like that, he'll be making a doll and buying a packet of pins. I don't mean to be too harsh it's just that sometimes it makes me feel better  |
|
|
|
Post by Baron von Lotsov on Mar 30, 2023 21:00:47 GMT
It sounds like he should have kept his gob shut. It makes me wonder if any of our people can get their shit in order. He is an embarrassment. As too are so many of your posts, pity you don't recognise the state of many of your posts. You can't argue with them so they must be smarter than you are. |
|
|
|
Post by Red Rackham on Mar 31, 2023 8:03:23 GMT
I am against unilateral net zero. Unilaterally we in the UK can not make a difference, we are too small. If the worlds biggest polluters were on board I would be more inclined to support it, but they're not. All UK net zero will achieve is making the UK poorer by damaging the economy which in turn will make the people poorer, and increasingly angry as the government show the world how virtuous they are. Are you aware that in 2019 China said they will build no more than 'two' (2) new coal fired power stations a month until 2030. That's another 288 to add to the 1,182 they already have, they are also building coal fired power stations in at least six other countries. All net zero will achieve, other than damaging western economies, is a power shift from west to east, and China know it. I see absolutely no reason to believe that the UK will make itself poorer over net zero, we are already building a carbon capturing power station' The UK will do and IMO should do what it can do regardless of what other countries do. What you appear to be suggesting is that this country should continue to pollute the air we breath because other countries do just that. Quoting what China intends to do without posting just how much China has in green energy already or what plans they have for green energy in the future, is only looking at one side of the coin. OK, read this ↓ then have a guess who wrote it... Quote: Low-carbon technologies are more expensive than the fossil-fuel related technologies they replace, and this increases energy costs to households and firms, which reduces households’ expenditure on other goods and services and the competitiveness of firms, which damages their sales in both home and export markets. Lower economic activity, income (GDP) and employment is the result. Moreover, this effect will be exacerbated if the investment in low-carbon technologies is greater than the investment in fossil-fuel technologies that it replaces.
That is from the independent Climate Change Committee. All the information is out there, believe me it is not a secret that net zero will have a negative effect on the economy. The problem is, left wing bedwetters refuse to accept anything they disagree with. |
|
|
|
Post by jonksy on Mar 31, 2023 8:12:47 GMT
I see absolutely no reason to believe that the UK will make itself poorer over net zero, we are already building a carbon capturing power station' The UK will do and IMO should do what it can do regardless of what other countries do. What you appear to be suggesting is that this country should continue to pollute the air we breath because other countries do just that. Quoting what China intends to do without posting just how much China has in green energy already or what plans they have for green energy in the future, is only looking at one side of the coin. OK, read this ↓ then have a guess who wrote it... Quote: Low-carbon technologies are more expensive than the fossil-fuel related technologies they replace, and this increases energy costs to households and firms, which reduces households’ expenditure on other goods and services and the competitiveness of firms, which damages their sales in both home and export markets. Lower economic activity, income (GDP) and employment is the result. Moreover, this effect will be exacerbated if the investment in low-carbon technologies is greater than the investment in fossil-fuel technologies that it replaces.
That is from the independent Climate Change Committee. All the information is out there, believe me it is not a secret that net zero will have a negative effect on the economy. The problem is, left wing bedwetters refuse to accept anything they disagree with. It will fall on deaf ears mate. |
|
|
|
Post by see2 on Mar 31, 2023 9:02:07 GMT
As too are so many of your posts, pity you don't recognise the state of many of your posts. You can't argue with them so they must be smarter than you are. What has that to do with Charles talking to the German government? |
|
|
|
Post by see2 on Mar 31, 2023 9:05:14 GMT
OK, read this ↓ then have a guess who wrote it... Quote: Low-carbon technologies are more expensive than the fossil-fuel related technologies they replace, and this increases energy costs to households and firms, which reduces households’ expenditure on other goods and services and the competitiveness of firms, which damages their sales in both home and export markets. Lower economic activity, income (GDP) and employment is the result. Moreover, this effect will be exacerbated if the investment in low-carbon technologies is greater than the investment in fossil-fuel technologies that it replaces.
That is from the independent Climate Change Committee. All the information is out there, believe me it is not a secret that net zero will have a negative effect on the economy. The problem is, left wing bedwetters refuse to accept anything they disagree with. It will fall on deaf ears mate. Daft comments always fall on deaf ears. For instance wind energy is half as expensive as Gas. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 31, 2023 14:11:12 GMT
[ For instance wind energy is half as expensive as Gas. So what jiggery-pokery is going on which says gas is 12p per kWh and electricity is 50p per kWh? Perhaps when we see the cheap electricity, we'll believe it. |
|
|
|
Post by see2 on Apr 1, 2023 19:45:54 GMT
[ For instance wind energy is half as expensive as Gas. So what jiggery-pokery is going on which says gas is 12p per kWh and electricity is 50p per kWh? Perhaps when we see the cheap electricity, we'll believe it. That particular claim has been made a few times on TV. But here is a report that makes a claim. Onshore wind is cheaper than coal, gas or nuclear energy when the costs of ‘external’ factors like air quality, human toxicity and climate change are taken into account, according to an EU analysis. The report says that for every megawatt hour (MW/h) of electricity generated, onshore wind costs roughly €105 (£83) per MW/h, compared to gas and coal which can cost up to around €164 and €233 per MW/h, respectively.
Nuclear power, offshore wind and solar energy are all comparably inexpensive generators, at roughly €125 per MW/h.
“This report highlights the true cost of Europe’s dependence on fossil fuels,” said Justin Wilkes, the deputy CEO of the European Wind Energy Association (EWEA). “Renewables are regularly denigrated for being too expensive and a drain on the taxpayer. Not only does the commission’s report show the alarming cost of coal but it also presents onshore wind as both cheaper and more environmentally-friendly.” www.theguardian.com/environment/2014/oct/13/wind-power-is-cheapest-energy-unpublished-eu-analysis-finds |
|
|
|
Post by Baron von Lotsov on Apr 1, 2023 22:51:09 GMT
So what jiggery-pokery is going on which says gas is 12p per kWh and electricity is 50p per kWh? Perhaps when we see the cheap electricity, we'll believe it. That particular claim has been made a few times on TV. But here is a report that makes a claim. Onshore wind is cheaper than coal, gas or nuclear energy when the costs of ‘external’ factors like air quality, human toxicity and climate change are taken into account, according to an EU analysis. The report says that for every megawatt hour (MW/h) of electricity generated, onshore wind costs roughly €105 (£83) per MW/h, compared to gas and coal which can cost up to around €164 and €233 per MW/h, respectively.
Nuclear power, offshore wind and solar energy are all comparably inexpensive generators, at roughly €125 per MW/h.
“This report highlights the true cost of Europe’s dependence on fossil fuels,” said Justin Wilkes, the deputy CEO of the European Wind Energy Association (EWEA). “Renewables are regularly denigrated for being too expensive and a drain on the taxpayer. Not only does the commission’s report show the alarming cost of coal but it also presents onshore wind as both cheaper and more environmentally-friendly.” www.theguardian.com/environment/2014/oct/13/wind-power-is-cheapest-energy-unpublished-eu-analysis-findsLying bastards. The US is why our gas costs so much. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 2, 2023 15:24:44 GMT
So what jiggery-pokery is going on which says gas is 12p per kWh and electricity is 50p per kWh? Perhaps when we see the cheap electricity, we'll believe it. That particular claim has been made a few times on TV. But here is a report that makes a claim. Onshore wind is cheaper than coal, gas or nuclear energy when the costs of ‘external’ factors like air quality, human toxicity and climate change are taken into account, according to an EU analysis. The report says that for every megawatt hour (MW/h) of electricity generated, onshore wind costs roughly €105 (£83) per MW/h, compared to gas and coal which can cost up to around €164 and €233 per MW/h, respectively.
Nuclear power, offshore wind and solar energy are all comparably inexpensive generators, at roughly €125 per MW/h.
“This report highlights the true cost of Europe’s dependence on fossil fuels,” said Justin Wilkes, the deputy CEO of the European Wind Energy Association (EWEA). “Renewables are regularly denigrated for being too expensive and a drain on the taxpayer. Not only does the commission’s report show the alarming cost of coal but it also presents onshore wind as both cheaper and more environmentally-friendly.” www.theguardian.com/environment/2014/oct/13/wind-power-is-cheapest-energy-unpublished-eu-analysis-findsSo despite your Googling you can't explain why gas is 12p per kWh and electricity is 50p per kWh in my house. STOP PRESS Gas 16p, Electricity 45.5p day rate from 1st April. |
|
|
|
Post by wapentake on Apr 2, 2023 15:57:16 GMT
You can't argue with them so they must be smarter than you are. What has that to do with Charles talking to the German government? Mind Charlie does natter to plants so bending politicians ears ain’t much different. |
|
|
|
Post by see2 on Apr 2, 2023 18:09:27 GMT
And you are a grade 'A' whinger. If you expect him to do all his expected Royal duty journeys according to the green agenda, then you and your ilk are just dreamers who like whinge. Do you think that people should either stop taking holidays in Europe, or make the journey by ship and electric vehicles? We don't expect Eco warriors namely Just Stop Oil to be jet setting round the globe in planes, when they are trying to bring the country to a standstill by protesting for that very same reason, where I come from you call them hypocrites, and they'll be the first to start whinging and whining if the Courts withdraw their passports, the courts would then need to ask them "Why would you need your passports, you want to 'just stop oil, doesn't that include planes'? Fuckin hypocrites. I agree, but I would point out that Charles is not an Eco Warier. |
|
|
|
Post by see2 on Apr 2, 2023 18:14:13 GMT
That particular claim has been made a few times on TV. But here is a report that makes a claim. Onshore wind is cheaper than coal, gas or nuclear energy when the costs of ‘external’ factors like air quality, human toxicity and climate change are taken into account, according to an EU analysis. The report says that for every megawatt hour (MW/h) of electricity generated, onshore wind costs roughly €105 (£83) per MW/h, compared to gas and coal which can cost up to around €164 and €233 per MW/h, respectively.
Nuclear power, offshore wind and solar energy are all comparably inexpensive generators, at roughly €125 per MW/h.
“This report highlights the true cost of Europe’s dependence on fossil fuels,” said Justin Wilkes, the deputy CEO of the European Wind Energy Association (EWEA). “Renewables are regularly denigrated for being too expensive and a drain on the taxpayer. Not only does the commission’s report show the alarming cost of coal but it also presents onshore wind as both cheaper and more environmentally-friendly.” www.theguardian.com/environment/2014/oct/13/wind-power-is-cheapest-energy-unpublished-eu-analysis-findsSo despite your Googling you can't explain why gas is 12p per kWh and electricity is 50p per kWh in my house. STOP PRESS Gas 16p, Electricity 45.5p day rate from 1st April. I never suggested it was. My post is correct. |
|
