|
|
Post by Bentley on Jun 25, 2023 11:28:11 GMT
I don’t think we will ever dump Green energy . That would be madness . The question is whether the target times are necessary and/ or achievable.
|
|
|
|
Post by thomas on Jun 25, 2023 11:28:20 GMT
Thought this was an interesting article.
Sweden Dumps Climate Agenda, Scraps Green Energy Targets
Sweden has just dealt a severe blow to the globalist climate agenda by scraping its green energy targets.
In a statement announcing the new policy in the Swedish Parliament, Finance Minister Elisabeth Svantesson warned that the Scandinavian nation needs “a stable energy system.”
Svantesson asserted that wind and solar power are too “unstable” to meet the nation’s energy requirements.
Instead, the Swedish Government is shifting back to nuclear power and has ditched its targets for a “100% renewable energy” supply.
The move is a major blow to unreliable and inefficient technology.
I wonder how many more countires are going to follow as the world economy implodes ?
So they haven't dumped Green Energy, they have just allowed themselves a longer period in which to achieve it. you arent clever enough for this poor attempt at sophistry see2.
Did you see the bit where it says they have dumped energy "targets"?
Scrapping the cut off time to achieve your green energy target is the very definition of dumping them. kicking the can further down the road to some vague date in the future that can in turn be further extended again is the very definition of dumping targets.
|
|
|
|
Post by thomas on Jun 25, 2023 11:31:00 GMT
I don’t think we will ever dump Green energy . That would be madness . The question is whether the target times are necessary and/ or achievable. quite obviously the swedes are saying they arent benny.
|
|
|
|
Post by zanygame on Jun 25, 2023 11:55:01 GMT
Been asked twice now. How did you vote in the poll. Are you ashamed to say? Why do yopu continue to ask the same question, the poll was anonymous. Anonymity was a choice, its not essential or even necessary. Why would Bentley want to hide his vote. |
|
|
|
Post by Bentley on Jun 25, 2023 12:04:36 GMT
Why do yopu continue to ask the same question, the poll was anonymous. Anonymity was a choice, its not essential or even necessary. Why would Bentley want to hide his vote. Imo the face of net zero should be a scientist who is capable of making a compelling argument for it. As cultist tend to do ZG is trying to make the fact that I didn’t vote on his poll to discredit my point . He is using a “ if you don’t do this then you must be that” fallacy on his own thread . He is trolling on his own thread that he put into the mind zone to stop trolling . Its laughable. |
|
|
|
Post by Bentley on Jun 25, 2023 12:05:33 GMT
I don’t think we will ever dump Green energy . That would be madness . The question is whether the target times are necessary and/ or achievable. quite obviously the swedes are saying they arent Bentley.
That’s why I didn’t claim that they did Thomas . |
|
|
|
Post by thomas on Jun 25, 2023 12:06:58 GMT
quite obviously the swedes are saying they arent Bentley.
That’s why I didn’t claim that they did Thomas . great benny so we are in agreement. |
|
|
|
Post by Bentley on Jun 25, 2023 12:10:10 GMT
So they haven't dumped Green Energy, they have just allowed themselves a longer period in which to achieve it. you arent clever enough for this poor attempt at sophistry see2.
Did you see the bit where it says they have dumped energy "targets"?
Scrapping the cut off time to achieve your green energy target is the very definition of dumping them. kicking the can further down the road to some vague date in the future that can in turn be further extended again is the very definition of dumping targets.
I think he did. That’s why his posts says it . Lol |
|
|
|
Post by Bentley on Jun 25, 2023 12:10:35 GMT
That’s why I didn’t claim that they did Thomas . great Bentley so we are in agreement. So is see2 |
|
|
|
Post by zanygame on Jun 25, 2023 12:15:01 GMT
Anonymity was a choice, its not essential or even necessary. Why would Bentley want to hide his vote. Imo the face of net zero should be a scientist who is capable of making a compelling argument for it. As cultist tend to do ZG is trying to make the fact that I didn’t vote on his poll to discredit my point . He is using a “ if you don’t do this then you must be that” fallacy on his own thread . He is trolling on his own thread that he put into the mind zone to stop trolling . Its laughable. How could I possibly know you didn't vote. Please apply some common sense to your opinions of what other people are. I asked you HOW you voted. Frankly now I don't believe your claim to support AGW. Nor do I sign up to your argument that you support AGW but are only concerned about how the facts are presented. |
|
|
|
Post by thomas on Jun 25, 2023 12:16:48 GMT
you arent clever enough for this poor attempt at sophistry see2.
Did you see the bit where it says they have dumped energy "targets"?
Scrapping the cut off time to achieve your green energy target is the very definition of dumping them. kicking the can further down the road to some vague date in the future that can in turn be further extended again is the very definition of dumping targets.
I think he did. That’s why his posts says it . Lol i will try and post slowly for you benny. Perhaps you havenae had your afternoon coffee.
see 2 said the swedes havent dumped green energy , and him and i agree on this. Where we disagree is his lame response "they have just allowed themselves longer to achieve them." Did you see the bit benny where i put commas around the word targets......deliberately highlighting it?
A target is usually a date you set in the future for enacting policy. By dumping those targets , you effectively make the policy meaningless in terms of it ever being implemented .Do you get me benny?
dearie me benny. fucking lol indeed.
Another one trying to make a lame point and falling over his webbed feet as he talks.
|
|
|
|
Post by thomas on Jun 25, 2023 12:17:02 GMT
great Bentley so we are in agreement. So is see2 where? |
|
|
|
Post by Bentley on Jun 25, 2023 12:19:44 GMT
Imo the face of net zero should be a scientist who is capable of making a compelling argument for it. As cultist tend to do ZG is trying to make the fact that I didn’t vote on his poll to discredit my point . He is using a “ if you don’t do this then you must be that” fallacy on his own thread . He is trolling on his own thread that he put into the mind zone to stop trolling . Its laughable. How could I possibly know you didn't vote. Please apply some common sense to your opinions of what other people are. I asked you HOW you voted. Frankly now I don't believe your claim to support AGW. Nor do I sign up to your argument that you support AGW but are only concerned about how the facts are presented. Yes the “ if you don’t do that then you must be this fallacy ‘ trolling on your own thread in the mind zone . I would say that it defies belief but unfortunately it doesn’t. |
|
|
|
Post by Bentley on Jun 25, 2023 12:21:25 GMT
See2 agreed with your post . See2..” So they haven't dumped Green Energy, they have just allowed themselves a longer period in which to achieve it. |
|
|
|
Post by thomas on Jun 25, 2023 12:24:14 GMT
See2 agreed with your post . See2..” So they haven't dumped Green Energy, they have just allowed themselves a longer period in which to achieve it. He didnt benny. I even took a minute of valuable time to helpfully explain to you the disagreement. |
|
