At this point where we are I am inclined to agree. However it does show how thick some people are that they can even be convinced about flat earth theories. Santa is real though. He drives a truck for Coca Cola. I've seen it on the tellybox On the climate thing then there is a big grey area where a lot of people are lumped into the "denier" category when they question the policies. The ones that deny are clearly a little bit crazy but I question a lot the reality of the motives behind a lot of the policies when they quite clearly are not concerned about shifting carbon footprints overseas and turning a blind eye! Not burning fossil fuel in the UK or burning wood pellets from trees chopped down in North America just moves the carbon footprint somewhere else! and then they count burning wood pellets here as carbon neutral? I was calling Drax out years before CH4s program this/last year that they made out was a "who knew" moment? Can't remember which platform that was on. Probably Spectator comments before they got their paywall to work properly. lol Must've been 2015/16? Sometime around there yet the BBC and CH4 this year "discovered" this controversy?
For anyone interested in my non denier stance on the green agenda. Using Drax as a specific example. I originally was brought onto this subject I think in the run up to Brexit where EU policy and other green agreements were "under threat from Brexit." There was probably an element of calling out the hipsters and metro lot about their use of wood burning stoves which are all the rage these days. It is not black and white, either/or that you either toe the line on the green agenda or you are a denier. You can believe in climate change and want something done about it while at the same time disputing all the BS that we are presented with as being necessary, viable or even truthful solutions; In 2016!! (it will be way more now) all of our bills had a joint 700m worth added to them in subsidies that were given to the coal>biomass transfer. Drax started converting from coal to Biomass in 2012. They quite proudly boast of being carbon neutral and enivronmentally friendly and under EU rules did not have to disclose their actual carbon output as Biomass was deemed carbon neutral because trees can be replanted and would soak up the CO2 created from burning the old trees. This of course is a ridiculous concept when trees take decades to mature and completely ignores the destruction of habitats etc. We'll not go into the whole aspect that nobody is replanting trees anyway. So when tests are done on the CO2 produced by coal and from the equivalent amount of biomass needed to produce the same energy..........yes of course Biomass produces 8% more yet because of EU guidelines Drax did/does not have to disclose any carbon data on it and it is classed as carbon neutral. Drax burns more wood per year than the whole of the UK wood production but yes of course we import our wood products from Poland or elsewhere. Let them take the hit on that one not us. So why do I question a lot of the green agenda? Drax is classed as carbon neutral despite it actually being the UKs largest single emitter of CO2! Because it is allowed to be classed as carbon neutral it helps the UK in its aims to reach net zero, despite it producing 8% more carbon than it did when it was a coal power station. For the above we get the privilege of subsidising them through levies on our energy bills. Forests and habitats in other parts of the world are destroyed, to make products for the green agenda, that are supposedly going to be replaced but aren't ignoring that trees and habitats can be destroyed in minutes but take decades to recover! So I am not a climate denier. I just question why we are paying a bootload of extra money in the name of net zero for these people to destroy the environment and actually put more CO2 into the air, as well as a lot of nasties in wood burning that are worse than the coal nasties? Does it not make you question motives? We are paying massive amounts of our energy bill for a multinational body to approve practices that pretend to reduce CO2 emissions yet actually increase them and get to destroy the environment while they call out other countries for destroying forests? How can our biggest CO2 polluter be classed as carbon Neutral and why are we paying so much extra for it to be so? Wonder where that extra money goes? How can this all be drawn into this 2030/2050 argument when it will take 100 years for new trees (if they planted them) to offset the carbon they are producing now from the trees they cut dowwn? I can't remember the original stuff I researched on but this is pretty close. Also turns out Ch4 forgot they "uncovered" this in 2017 and so they've now "uncovered" it twice now it seems. lol: https://theecologist.org/2017/apr/10/no-drax-theres-nothing-sustainable-about-big-biomass https://www.nrdc.org/stories/no-burning-wood-fuels-not-climate-friendly This is just one of the swindles of this age that will be the next Diesel scandal, that TPTB pushed us all to support.
Every single climate policy involved increasing taxes, increased government control or paying a small group of corporations large sums of money. What are the chances?
The first two are how it works though and I have no issue with. To stop people polluting and make them use greener energy, make it cheaper for them. To do the above we need some sort of regulation (you call that control, I see it as regulation) Your third point I can’t defend and is the problem of every government we have.
There's an increasing number of small scale local renewable energy initiatives. How about PV on flat roofs and carparks in city centres? No need to take land out of food production see Farmers weekly link https://energylocal.org.uk/ https://www.fwi.co.uk/business/dive...renewable-energy-systems-all-you-need-to-know Lots of info here with a large number of topics and options covered. There are opportunities for green entrepreneurs I'm tempted to come out of retirement, part time only, and put my experience in instrumentation and control systems to good use. https://www.innoenergy.com/discover-innovative-solutions/online-marketplace-for-energy-innovations/? It's not just producing power, reducing need by properly insulating homes and commercial properties should be a major priority along with transmission and storage research and something I've been involved with, waste heat recovery units on an industrial scale. Edit: The amount of energy used by data centres in big and growing with much that can be recovered particularly in district and block heating solutions https://essmag.co.uk/data-centres-and-the-future-of-low-carbon-heat-in-the-uk/ Scroll down a bit to see how you could replace radiators. Waste heat as a service "In France, a startup called Qarnot Computing has based its business model around this very idea. The company, started by computer engineer Paul Benoit, places small banks of computers in customers’ homes and buildings housed in a (rather stylish) casing that is designed to expel heat. The computers’ capacity is then sold to corporate clients. Customers set their thermostats to their desired temperature, and when more heat is needed, the computers spring into action. Because Qarnot is selling the computing power, it is able to offer its customers an unbeatable deal: free heat. And when the demand for heat outpaces the demand for computing power, Qarnot donates the latter to university labs." "Right now, the company is focusing on customers in corporate, multi-family, and commercial real estate, where it can deploy its system on a large scale. The minimum scale it can work on is a 20 unit apartment building. In the future, Benoit and his team hope to be able to offer their system on an individual, plug-and-play basis." https://www.aquicore.com/blog/data-centers-turning-waste-heat-asset.
To be honest it’s a scandal. Wealthy people use their private jets to fly their shopping or kids school bags 2 hours down the road. They probably cause more pollution in a single day than most people cause in a year. Yet it’s the working class that are being absolutely battered by taxes and a cost of living crisis. The day the wealthy stop using their yachts and private jets is the day I will believe climate change is real. In reality, the people with access to the most info and data are the ones that are the least concerned. I truly believe all of it is made up as a means to control the masses.
This is what's needed, well done Rachel Reeves implementing manifesto promises and more. U.K. joins Europe in targeting the super-rich with fresh crackdown on foreign wealth, capital gains, and private jets https://fortune.com/europe/2024/10/30/u-k-budget-rich-capital-gains-private-jets/
The first 2 are not the problem. The latter is the key one. Of course it would be nice if it were cheaper to do this stuff. Most people do want to get on board with this but accountability should surely mean that money is actually doing what they say it is doing and not being a funnel for money based on some false cooking of the books when the policy mentioned above has a lot of scientists saying it is actually more harmful than the coal option it replaced! And that is not even accounting for the carbon released from these newly logged areas soil, the effects of these pellet making plants on those that live around them in terms of "other" air pollution etc. Its the same as the NHS argument. Would we pay a little more for better healthcare = yes. Would we pay a little more for climate change policy that works = yes Why the backlash? Because on both counts the extra money does not actually go to improving things, it goes into jobs for the boys, deep pockets and there are no actual improvements made at all, they get worse.
So the issue is an unrestricted free market , capitalist greed and croneyism. Glad we are all on the same page! At some point in the near future carbon offsetting will be show a scam. And all those carbon hungry firms will have to actually cut their usage. I agree on this. There are plenty of genuine green energy initiatives going on too, though.
The problem with all that is it would actually mean the money going where it is supposed and not into someone's pockets or creating fake jobs for friends or.....
capitalist greed and croneyism all signed off and agreed upon by the EU the left and the right The entire lot agree with this stuff!
Well yes, the EU is a union of capitalist economies all dedicated to free market principles. But that’s another argument really. Any government - local, national, federal - which puts the interests of global corporations and wealthy lobbyists before the interests of it’s own people, is betraying it’s electorate. And the governing bodies of the EU have certainly been complicit in doing exactly that. Not a good enough reason for the U.K. to go it alone imo, but as I said, that’s another argument and one that’s been done to death by now.
It isn’t just global warming either. Governments need to act to protect the lives of its citizens. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c5yx6leg4nqo.amp
https://x.com/byapptto/status/1855718134684193231?s=46 And preferably stop filling hotels all around the country with undocumented fighting age males. Especially ones that receive free private health care, whilst tax paying citizens pick up the bill and tolerate exceptionally awful service from the NHS
Waste heat recovery seems to be such an obvious energy source (admittedly using the same fuels in the first place) but it must be less effective than I think to have not been utilised before now. The amount of heat pumped out of boiler flues alone could surely be recycled back into the system and reduce fuel costs for the householder? Industry even more so. Is it not a viable option, what do other countries do?
...Sigh.. If they are put in a hotel whilst they are processed, they are not undocumented. So any male aged 16-70 then (lol 'fighting age'). I think most males on here are therefore of fighting age, even though I haven't had a fight in years. Once again, your sensationalism totally detracts from your point to the extent that we just don't listen to you and shake our heads. Even if your are making a valid point (you are not here). That is your problem Os, you try to bring the sensationalism and BS of social media to a chat forum. Some points you make are actually quite valid, but the way you make them just turns everyone on here off.
He is Iago voicing the lurid concerns of the Venetians. His tabloid voice asking why we do nothing as an ‘old black ram is tupping your white ewe’. But now the sinister voice is not whispered but shouted.
If you're talking domestic gas or oil boilers economisers could be fitted, they are a device fitted to a boiler which saves energy by using the exhaust gases from the boiler to preheat the cold water used to fill it (the feed water). So far as I can find out it's a question of scale and temperatures. These boilers will become obsolete as new technology takes over sooner rather than later. It's in widespread use in process industries. I've been involved with waste heat recovery projects a number of times in my career it's a technology that requires investment and research. The capex needs to be justified as a cost plus, spend x get x plus. How that's calculated is complex and often short termism overcomes long term gain and wider aspects not in the equation. Accountants vs engineers, now days the money men win.
