|
|
Post by Red Rackham on Mar 10, 2024 22:16:05 GMT
Dan, the reality is population growth will kill humanity. Every day 80 million people people are added to the global population and they all need food, water, power, resources. Rare earth mineral mining is in it's infancy but to satisfy demand for electric car batteries large areas of Africa and South America have already been devastated and mining companies are about to start exploiting deposits in pristine rainforests in the Philippines. Where are the activists, where are the oh so virtuous demonstrators who apparently care about mother earth? Out of sight out of mind I guess. Attenborough quite rightly said the most dangerous threat to humankind is population growth. And everyone knows that, yet there isn't a single politician or organisation in the world who will openly suggest population controls. What should these activists demand? A cull? Instead what they are trying to do is make it possible for the planet to support so many humans while the growth stabilises. But if you think a cull is better feel free to step up. As for South America and Africa being devastated. Where were you when they mined Copper and Cobalt long before electric cars. A cull ! ZG, you may be a lefty but you're not normally dim so ffs be a good chap and buck your ideas up. Globally we are less than 5% into the electric car boom, I guarantee we wont get anywhere near 50% because by then the devastation caused by the scramble for rare earth minerals or 'net zero' will be more than apparent. Years ago Attenborough called for population controls because he could see what uncontrolled population growth meant for the future of humanity. It's pretty obvious he is right but lets not mention it. It's easier to blame Range Rover drivers, in-fact it's what Al Gore might call, an uncomfortable truth. |
|
|
|
Post by zanygame on Mar 10, 2024 22:32:42 GMT
What should these activists demand? A cull? Instead what they are trying to do is make it possible for the planet to support so many humans while the growth stabilises. But if you think a cull is better feel free to step up. As for South America and Africa being devastated. Where were you when they mined Copper and Cobalt long before electric cars. A cull ! ZG, you may be a lefty but you're not normally dim so ffs be a good chap and buck your ideas up. Globally we are less than 5% into the electric car boom, I guarantee we wont get anywhere near 50% because by then the devastation caused by the scramble for rare earth minerals or 'net zero' will be more than apparent. Years ago Attenborough called for population controls because he could see what uncontrolled population growth meant for the future of humanity. It's pretty obvious he is right but lets not mention it. It's easier to blame Range Rover drivers, in-fact it's what Al Gore might call, an uncomfortable truth. Not quite sure what you're saying. Is it we shouldn't try to mitigate climate change because were doomed. Or that we should forcibly control population in other countries. |
|
|
|
Post by Pacifico on Mar 10, 2024 22:44:51 GMT
Yes - and now we have done our bit. We are miles below many other countries in CO2 emissions per capita - way below USA, China, Germany, Holland, Canada, Australia, Russia and Japan. We are only slightly worse than France who get 70% of their electricity from Nuclear. This is not a race - we do not get a prize for coming first. All we get is provide entertainment for other countries who laugh at us bankrupting ourselves for no reason. Yes but it is a race to save the planet where everyone should do whatever they can.
Even if it makes no difference?. What is the logic of bankrupting the UK whilst failing to have any effect on climate change? |
|
|
|
Post by Red Rackham on Mar 10, 2024 22:46:36 GMT
A cull ! ZG, you may be a lefty but you're not normally dim so ffs be a good chap and buck your ideas up. Globally we are less than 5% into the electric car boom, I guarantee we wont get anywhere near 50% because by then the devastation caused by the scramble for rare earth minerals or 'net zero' will be more than apparent. Years ago Attenborough called for population controls because he could see what uncontrolled population growth meant for the future of humanity. It's pretty obvious he is right but lets not mention it. It's easier to blame Range Rover drivers, in-fact it's what Al Gore might call, an uncomfortable truth. Not quite sure what you're saying. Is it we shouldn't try to mitigate climate change because were doomed. Or that we should forcibly control population in other countries. What I'm saying is quite simple, if humanity is to survive governments must impose population quotas. |
|
|
|
Post by Baron von Lotsov on Mar 11, 2024 0:48:44 GMT
Yes but it is a race to save the planet where everyone should do whatever they can.
Even if it makes no difference?. What is the logic of bankrupting the UK whilst failing to have any effect on climate change? Well the thing is we went through various phases. First it was coal, then it was nuclear and then North Sea gas. The coal plants were the oldest and were extremely costly to run. The nuclear was using a process that created plutonium for bombs, was extremely radioactive, gave little energy output and cost us much more than it produced, especially the huge clean-up costs. Coal has all but run out in the UK anyway, and we are down t our last 5-10% of North Sea gas which we are currently extracting with the new licences. This is not a lot of energy, but it all helps. Meanwhile back on the nuclear, we finally go for the standard EPR reactor using the third generation technology, bring the Chinese in with a China state firm who invest £4bn and because of our idiot government and fanatical concerns with safety the project and its delays and alterations finally ended up as the most expensive power station in the world and we pissed off the Chinese government by chucking them out of the project when they were the only people to have successfully built a third generation reactor, and at a fraction of the cost we were paying.
So you see that has been how we got here. I can see the logic of bringing in the windmills because they are now giving us a fair chunk of our energy supply and at a very cheap cost compared to nuclear or coal. They can be constructed much faster, but one point is the cost per MWh has tumbled down in the last 10 years, so what looked bad has in fact seen a result. It only remains to be asked what the hell is Noway doing supplying all of this when we could have done it ourselves and made the savings. I thought we were a world leading green tech nation. It turned out the only things we were leading in was bullshit and incompetence.
|
|
|
|
Post by Red Rackham on Mar 11, 2024 3:45:23 GMT
Incorrect, lol, what a load of bullshit ffs BvL are you on the herbal tea?
Coal power stations were not extremely costly to run, they were extremely efficient and much cheaper than wind, of course the true costs of wind power are well hidden. You claim coal has 'all but run out', honestly where are you getting this from? You are talking nonsense. Oh for Christs sake, I didn't think it would be long before you mentioned the Chinese, who incidentally have 1,182 large 5 & 6 MW coal fired power stations and have 'promised' not to build more than two more a month, until 2030. You can take you Chinese worship and shove it where the sun don't shine.
SMR's (small modular reactors) may be the future but if you knew anything about wind energy you would know that it's fabulously expensive. Wind energy is happening because of massive subsidies paid for by you & me. Did you know that although Sunak refused to allow fracking in this country, he signed a deal with Biden to import billions of cubic metres of, guess what? Yes indeed, fracked shale gas. It seems it doesn't matter what we burn as long as we don't produce it ourselves.
Btw, according to the BGS (British Geological Survey) we have a minimum of 30 years supply of our own shale gas in the Bowland Hodder reserve. But to exploit it would annoy thick delusional lefties. So we burn US shale gas. You couldn't make it up.
|
|
|
|
Post by Pacifico on Mar 11, 2024 7:39:55 GMT
Even if it makes no difference?. What is the logic of bankrupting the UK whilst failing to have any effect on climate change? Well the thing is we went through various phases. First it was coal, then it was nuclear and then North Sea gas. The coal plants were the oldest and were extremely costly to run. The nuclear was using a process that created plutonium for bombs, was extremely radioactive, gave little energy output and cost us much more than it produced, especially the huge clean-up costs. Coal has all but run out in the UK anyway, and we are down t our last 5-10% of North Sea gas which we are currently extracting with the new licences. This is not a lot of energy, but it all helps. Meanwhile back on the nuclear, we finally go for the standard EPR reactor using the third generation technology, bring the Chinese in with a China state firm who invest £4bn and because of our idiot government and fanatical concerns with safety the project and its delays and alterations finally ended up as the most expensive power station in the world and we pissed off the Chinese government by chucking them out of the project when they were the only people to have successfully built a third generation reactor, and at a fraction of the cost we were paying.
So you see that has been how we got here. I can see the logic of bringing in the windmills because they are now giving us a fair chunk of our energy supply and at a very cheap cost compared to nuclear or coal. They can be constructed much faster, but one point is the cost per MWh has tumbled down in the last 10 years, so what looked bad has in fact seen a result. It only remains to be asked what the hell is Noway doing supplying all of this when we could have done it ourselves and made the savings. I thought we were a world leading green tech nation. It turned out the only things we were leading in was bullshit and incompetence.
Well you know that is nonsense - the claim that wind power is cheaper than fossil fuels has been demolished over the past couple of years. Wind power is only sustainable. with massive taxpayer subsidies. |
|
|
|
Post by zanygame on Mar 11, 2024 8:03:48 GMT
Yes but it is a race to save the planet where everyone should do whatever they can.
Even if it makes no difference?. What is the logic of bankrupting the UK whilst failing to have any effect on climate change? None, but it wont bankrupt Britain. |
|
|
|
Post by zanygame on Mar 11, 2024 8:08:59 GMT
Not quite sure what you're saying. Is it we shouldn't try to mitigate climate change because were doomed. Or that we should forcibly control population in other countries. What I'm saying is quite simple, if humanity is to survive governments must impose population quotas. Well that is very clear. Thank you. I agree we need to curb population growth, I'm not sure big government is the way to do it. |
|
|
|
Post by Pacifico on Mar 11, 2024 8:10:15 GMT
Even if it makes no difference?. What is the logic of bankrupting the UK whilst failing to have any effect on climate change? None, but it wont bankrupt Britain. where is the money coming from? - the cost of this exercise is expected to be £60 Billion a year, and we all know how costs for Government directed projects actually balloon out of control over their lifetime. |
|
|
|
Post by zanygame on Mar 11, 2024 8:13:48 GMT
None, but it wont bankrupt Britain. where is the money coming from? - the cost of this exercise is expected to be £50 Billion a year, and we all know how costs for Government directed projects actually balloon out of control over their lifetime. Nice round number, what's expected to cost £50bn a year? |
|
|
|
Post by jonksy on Mar 11, 2024 8:19:03 GMT
where is the money coming from? - the cost of this exercise is expected to be £50 Billion a year, and we all know how costs for Government directed projects actually balloon out of control over their lifetime. Nice round number, what's expected to cost £50bn a year? Stupidity... |
|
|
|
Post by steppenwolf on Mar 11, 2024 8:27:31 GMT
Just another of the regular bullshit predictions about a wonder battery.....LOL A 35kWh battery has a range of 100 miles at best. It would still need a 350kW charger (or better) to charger to charge it in 6 minutes. How many of those are there in the UK? And the National Grid can't supply that rate of charge without a massive upgrade - which would take decades and cost tens of billions. |
|
|
|
Post by Pacifico on Mar 11, 2024 8:35:58 GMT
where is the money coming from? - the cost of this exercise is expected to be £50 Billion a year, and we all know how costs for Government directed projects actually balloon out of control over their lifetime. Nice round number, what's expected to cost £50bn a year? The Climate Change Committee estimates the total cost of Net Zero each year...  |
|
|
|
Post by zanygame on Mar 11, 2024 8:54:15 GMT
Things to be solved. Why is the wind industry facing problems? Soaring inflation, supply chain disruption, high interest rates and lengthy waiting times for permits and grid connections are creating a perfect storm for wind project developers. In recent years, investors have been drawn to the wind industry by falling project costs and the prospect of new wind farms generating an abundance of cheap, clean energy. But that was before Russia’s invasion of Ukraine sent energy markets into turmoil and inflationary pressures hit many parts of the global economy hard, straining project supply chains and increasing raw material and labour costs. Alongside these disruptions, the wind industry’s race for scale is placing added pressure on turbine manufacturers to produce ever-bigger rotor blades. Larger turbine blades harvest more energy, which has helped reduce the cost of wind power by 60% in the decade to 2021, according to the International Energy Agency. For vessel makers, investing in new vehicles capable of carrying the latest turbines runs the risk of them quickly becoming redundant as even bigger turbines appear on the market. Other parts of the supply chain are also under strain, as large-scale turbines require bigger ports, reinforced quaysides to carry additional weight and other new logistical challenges. www.weforum.org/agenda/2023/11/why-offshore-wind-cost-pressures-rising/The world economic forum. |
|
