|
|
Post by steppenwolf on Jan 16, 2024 7:55:55 GMT
sure. This is debating forum , where we are supposed to be interested in each others opinions on various subjects , and debate them. Just remember though zany , come election time , you climate change cultists will be looking at people like me for votes , and I can categorically tell you I won't be voting for any political party that pushes punitive green taxation to allegedly solve some supposed impending climate doom. Debate with Jonsky and enjoy yourself. You want someone like me to give you answers you can ignore scoff at without debate. Well why not miss out the middle man and go straight to Jonsky he's more than happy with this level of conversation. I've had enough of this site. The trouble is, zany, that you don't know all the answers. You just parrot the current orthodoxy - i.e. that the current warming is predominantly caused by man-made CO2. I'm a bit surprised that you let Jonksy get away with saying that only 0.3% of CO2 is man-made, when I think the figure is more like 30%. It certainly would be very odd if that 0.3% of our CO2 had such a big effect. Your trouble is that you look at the stuff that the Climate change lobby come out with and you can't see that it's mainly nonsense. For example you're told that the 8 fold increase in the world's population (from about 1 billion to nearly 8 billion) between 1850 and now - and the repurposing of 70% of the land's surface area to support that population - has had no effect on the average temperature of the Earth. Yet we know for a fact that urban areas are significantly warmer than unspoilt areas, by several degrees in fact. And you disregard natural effects like El Nino (which are NOT related to CO2 as far as we know) which also cause the surface temperature of the oceans to rise by several degrees C, as irrelevant. Even scientific theories have got to pass the common sense test. |
|
|
|
Post by Dubdrifter on Jan 18, 2024 9:18:23 GMT
It’s a FACT that if Globalists and the Green Lobby … who intend to make ££$$$€€€€billions from Green Taxes/ULEZ/Scrapped boilers/Heat pumps/Nickel mining for batteries/ etc etc etc ….
…. just have to pay some arsonists in the Amazon, Mediterranean, Australia and every other semi-arid region … to burn burn burn …. Global Warming proofs are then CONCLUSIVE.
…. well almost … 99% of ocean warming is still down to tectonic plates and sub ocean currents … and increased volcanic activity will never be offset by Jemima driving her Tesla and charging her iPhone.
…. and when electric cars burst into flames and all these energy inefficient chargers generate heat … where is this factored into scientist’s dubious calculations??
Fossil fuel => Electricity conversion … is still the most efficient Green option out there … if the TRUTH be told. I love the new eco-friendly diesel engines.👍👍
These climate scientists are just prostitutes to the Globalist’s Green Agenda … they take the shekels and grant backhanders … openly and covertly … it’s disgusting to watch them wallow in the handouts.
Brand new ice-breaker ships are given to scientists so they can go and vandalise more super-sensitive Polar habitats🙄
…. penguins and polar bears must quake in their boots when David Attenborough and his film crews turn up … knowing full well that 5 years later - scientists-on-a-jolly … and ecotourists will soon invade in their thousands.
The kiss of death for their breeding programmes.
If Globalists and their ‘fake’ MSM want dead waterlogged penguins and polar bears - their ice-breaker/cruise ships will deliver … guaranteed.
|
|
|
|
Post by Vinny on Jan 18, 2024 10:06:50 GMT
Re-plant the rainforests and other forests.
Get a bit of biodiversity and make the planet healthier.
Encourage smaller families through education to reduce human population growth and the resultant pollution we all put out.
And build lots of nuclear power stations to cut electricity costs.
|
|
|
|
Post by thomas on Jan 18, 2024 10:29:24 GMT
Re-plant the rainforests and other forests. Get a bit of biodiversity and make the planet healthier. Encourage smaller families through education to reduce human population growth and the resultant pollution we all put out. And build lots of nuclear power stations to cut electricity costs. im not a big fan of nuclear , but on this wider point , it seems the French are having none of the green energy diktats...
France is leading a 11-country alliance against the EU’s renewables target for 2030, insisting that the choice of energy mix is a matter of national sovereignty under EU treaties as it looks to promote nuclear and ignore the EU’s renewables goals.www.euractiv.com/section/energy-environment/news/a-french-led-energy-insurrection/ |
|
|
|
Post by Montegriffo on Jan 18, 2024 11:08:45 GMT
Re-plant the rainforests and other forests. Get a bit of biodiversity and make the planet healthier. Encourage smaller families through education to reduce human population growth and the resultant pollution we all put out. And build lots of nuclear power stations to cut electricity costs. im not a big fan of nuclear , but on this wider point , it seems the French are having none of the green energy diktats...
France is leading a 11-country alliance against the EU’s renewables target for 2030, insisting that the choice of energy mix is a matter of national sovereignty under EU treaties as it looks to promote nuclear and ignore the EU’s renewables goals.www.euractiv.com/section/energy-environment/news/a-french-led-energy-insurrection/The main trouble with nuclear energy is that it is ruinously expensive. That and the problem of extremely toxic waste. It can't ever be more than a short term solution to CO2 output. Easily accessible uranium is running out as well. At current rates of consumption it will run out within 60 years, likely much sooner if more reactors are built. Then we have to start using plutonium which is even more hazardous. |
|
|
|
Post by Montegriffo on Jan 18, 2024 11:14:06 GMT
Re-plant the rainforests and other forests. Get a bit of biodiversity and make the planet healthier. Encourage smaller families through education to reduce human population growth and the resultant pollution we all put out. And build lots of nuclear power stations to cut electricity costs. Nuclear power is not cheap. Reactors are very expensive to build and decommission and they have high security costs. They are only cheap in terms of day to day running costs. |
|
|
|
Post by thomas on Jan 18, 2024 11:21:56 GMT
im not a big fan of nuclear , but on this wider point , it seems the French are having none of the green energy diktats...
France is leading a 11-country alliance against the EU’s renewables target for 2030, insisting that the choice of energy mix is a matter of national sovereignty under EU treaties as it looks to promote nuclear and ignore the EU’s renewables goals.www.euractiv.com/section/energy-environment/news/a-french-led-energy-insurrection/The main trouble with nuclear energy is that it is ruinously expensive. That and the problem of extremely toxic waste. It can't ever be more than a short term solution to CO2 output. Easily accessible uranium is running out as well. At current rates of consumption it will run out within 60 years, likely much sooner if more reactors are built. Then we have to start using plutonium which is even more hazardous. I know monte , but I wanted to hear something concrete from Vinny that isn't yet another silly soundbite or simplistic solution in between screaming kill the invaders. Regarding the French , Nuclear as you know is something they are used to , experts in , and way ahead of the uk. Scotland is doing well going green , in other countries such as France , the energy mix is important to them rather then following diktats from Brussels. Englands problem seems to be a complete policy void , and directionless energy solutions for years under both labour and tory. too small a country , (fit inside France five times over) with too big a population (similar to France) subject to nimbyism collosul costs ( hs2 ?) lacking in long term vision , while going around begging the world to build nuclear stations for them. The point is , the tories have been all over the place on energy in the uk for years. |
|
|
|
Post by thomas on Jan 18, 2024 11:23:45 GMT
Re-plant the rainforests and other forests. Get a bit of biodiversity and make the planet healthier. Encourage smaller families through education to reduce human population growth and the resultant pollution we all put out. And build lots of nuclear power stations to cut electricity costs. Nuclear power is not cheap. Reactors are very expensive to build and decommission and they have high security costs. They are only cheap in terms of day to day running costs. I thought nuclear energy is still not viable worldwide without massive government subsidy? |
|
|
|
Post by Pacifico on Jan 18, 2024 11:28:52 GMT
If you want a Zero Carbon future than widespread adoption of Nuclear is the only feasible current option as Renewables are simply too expensive.
A single day of battery storage for the UK would cost £300 billion. 1 single day.
For that money we could build 15 Sizewell size nuclear reactors or 150 of the Rolls-Royce SMR's.
|
|
|
|
Post by thomas on Jan 18, 2024 11:41:27 GMT
If you want a Zero Carbon future than widespread adoption of Nuclear is the only feasible current option as Renewables are simply too expensive. A single day of battery storage for the UK would cost £300 billion. 1 single day. For that money we could build 15 Sizewell size nuclear reactors or 150 of the Rolls-Royce SMR's. It's England that has the problem Pacifico. England is a net importer of electricity, from both Scotland and continental Europe. your government has let your country down repeatedly over the decades with your failing energy policy. There appears to be no long term vision that outlasts a parliamentary term . |
|
|
|
Post by Pacifico on Jan 18, 2024 11:54:22 GMT
If you want a Zero Carbon future than widespread adoption of Nuclear is the only feasible current option as Renewables are simply too expensive. A single day of battery storage for the UK would cost £300 billion. 1 single day. For that money we could build 15 Sizewell size nuclear reactors or 150 of the Rolls-Royce SMR's. It's England that has the problem Pacifico. England is a net importer of electricity, from both Scotland and continental Europe. your government has let your country down repeatedly over the decades with your failing energy policy. There appears to be no long term vision that outlasts a parliamentary term . England only has a problem if Scotland leave the Union - which they have been talking about for the past 100 years but never got anywhere near to doing. Also even if Scotland does leave you will need someone to sell your power to to keep your economy afloat - so for the foreseeable nothing is going to change. |
|
|
|
Post by thomas on Jan 18, 2024 12:02:18 GMT
It's England that has the problem Pacifico. England is a net importer of electricity, from both Scotland and continental Europe. your government has let your country down repeatedly over the decades with your failing energy policy. There appears to be no long term vision that outlasts a parliamentary term . England only has a problem if Scotland leave the Union - which they have been talking about for the past 100 years but never got anywhere near to doing. Also even if Scotland does leave you will need someone to sell your power to to keep your economy afloat - so for the foreseeable nothing is going to change. ok , that wasn't a jibe at you or your country , it was a statement of fact following on from my criticism of successive Westminster government going back to thatcher , regarding failed energy policy. Scotland produced enough renewable energy in 2021 to power our country three times over. you argued that nuclear is the way forward , and im pointing out clearly the energy issue is a major problem , and growing worse , in England. despite telling us Scots are subsidy junkies , here you tacitly admit what we already know that Scotland subsidises your country with energy?( among much else) No shit Sherlock. !!!We have Sunak dishing out North Sea drilling licences for Scotlands oil , and starmer telling the uk he is going to save England in terms of energy by using Scotlands energy resources. We know this. We are telling every man woman and child in Scotland this. My point to you , is what is your country going to do in political terms , who has the vision to chart a path forward for England in terms of energy without your usual colonial exploitation of other nations? If we leave , which isn't likely in the near future I will be the first to admit , you are in deep trouble , and that is a failure of your government over many years , no one else. |
|
|
|
Post by johnofgwent on Jan 18, 2024 12:03:00 GMT
It's England that has the problem Pacifico. England is a net importer of electricity, from both Scotland and continental Europe. your government has let your country down repeatedly over the decades with your failing energy policy. There appears to be no long term vision that outlasts a parliamentary term . England only has a problem if Scotland leave the Union - which they have been talking about for the past 100 years but never got anywhere near to doing. Also even if Scotland does leave you will need someone to sell your power to to keep your economy afloat - so for the foreseeable nothing is going to change. wales of course won’t have a problem. The welsh can just burn cottages to keep warm. And at the rate things are going no one will be here soon, apart from rubber raft immigrants. |
|
|
|
Post by thomas on Jan 18, 2024 12:05:45 GMT
England only has a problem if Scotland leave the Union - which they have been talking about for the past 100 years but never got anywhere near to doing. Also even if Scotland does leave you will need someone to sell your power to to keep your economy afloat - so for the foreseeable nothing is going to change. wales of course won’t have a problem. The welsh can just burn cottages to keep warm. And at the rate things are going no one will be here soon, apart from rubber raft immigrants. I think the welsh speciality for serving England is in water isn't it John? apart from second homes or holiday homes that is. |
|
|
|
Post by Montegriffo on Jan 18, 2024 12:18:45 GMT
Nuclear power is not cheap. Reactors are very expensive to build and decommission and they have high security costs. They are only cheap in terms of day to day running costs. I thought nuclear energy is still not viable worldwide without massive government subsidy? Well the last failed attempt to build a new reactor was going to rely on Chinese money to get it built. At £33 billion a pop our government didn't want to use money from our treasury. |
|
