Heat pump latest government offers

[Adsibob]

12 minutes ago, oldkettle said:

Any sane person knows that the Earth will be fine should the temperature rise another 2 degrees (which it may not do). And so will the humanity. Nothing to fear but the fear itself. 

Honestly, you are speaking utter nonsense. Why don’t you pay a visit to the people of Vanuatu and see what they think of your senseless and ignorant opinions. Go and see the devastation that climate change is countless other islands. 

[ragg987]

23 minutes ago, oldkettle said:

By the way, Judith Curry is a better scientist than you ever were. Somehow she and quite a few others are very clear on what we don't need to worry about. 

Any sane person knows that the Earth will be fine should the temperature rise another 2 degrees (which it may not do). And so will the humanity. Nothing to fear but the fear itself. 

Isn't she the one who is labelled as a denier? From what I gather she is not saying it WILL be fine, only that it probably will.

 

And herein lies the rub. We have no way of knowing what will happen and when. Yes systems have resilience and can absorb changes, however there will be a tipping point. Many species have perished in the past, why would we survive?

 

It seems to me that as population grows, we have to change our behaviours and reduce waste and the consequences of that.

[ToughButterCup]

I'm glad I am no longer a Mod.

I'd have shut this thread down long ago. Whats the matter with some of you ... ?   Expletives and childish insults all over  the place. 

[ragg987]

Just now, ToughButterCup said:

Expletives and childish insults all over  the place

(Expletive deleted) agree.

[oldkettle]

19 minutes ago, Adsibob said:

Honestly, you are speaking utter nonsense. Why don’t you pay a visit to the people of Vanuatu and see what they think of your senseless and ignorant opinions. Go and see the devastation that climate change is countless other islands. 

I am slightly tired if your highly aggressive opinionated messages. I understand that you are a lawyer... don't pretend to be more than that. 

[Adsibob]

3 minutes ago, oldkettle said:

I am slightly tired if your highly aggressive opinionated messages.

Are you talking to yourself?

[Adsibob]

3 minutes ago, oldkettle said:

I understand that you are a lawyer.

Nope. Just well informed about certain things.

[oldkettle]

36 minutes ago, ragg987 said:

Isn't she the one who is labelled as a denier? From what I gather she is not saying it WILL be fine, only that it probably will.

 

And herein lies the rub. We have no way of knowing what will happen and when. Yes systems have resilience and can absorb changes, however there will be a tipping point. Many species have perished in the past, why would we survive?

 

It seems to me that as population grows, we have to change our behaviours and reduce waste and the consequences of that.

You know, nowadays being labelled a denier (by whom?) is a rather positive sign. 

With regard to what we know and what we don't: if we don't know whether we are going to be OK then we certainly don't know what will happen with the climate. I posted a link to IPCC report, there's enough there to make a very clear conclusion: if their projections are correct, then the consequences are nothing to be afraid of. Aware of - yes, prepare to - certainly.

And with regard to the population growth... India, Nigeria, Indonesia, not much we can do about their population. This terrible notion (for some) - economic growth - is the only chance because usually the wealthier the people are, the fewer children they have on average. 

With regard to the endangered species,I certainly don't have an answer. But I do know that Nature abhors a vacuum. Wherever something disappears, something else will come. Such is life. 

Edited October 30, 2021 by oldkettle

[oldkettle]

14 minutes ago, Adsibob said:

Are you talking to yourself?

My posts are often opinionated, but care to show where I was aggressive? And don't reference my reply to @SteamyTea - it won't do. 

[Adsibob]

18 minutes ago, oldkettle said:

My posts are often opinionated, but care to show where I was aggressive? And don't reference my reply to @SteamyTea - it won't do. 

I have no problem with you being opinionated. Everyone has an opinion and sharing it in a passionate manner makes that person opinionated.

The problem I have is your opinion. It is not based on any science, and at this late stage, when the scientific literature has long established that the danger is real and iminent, your opinion just serves to promote the myth that climate change is not a problem. This is all the more troubling and - quite frankly offensive to anyone who cares about the future of the planet - when one considers that climate change is the biggest problem humankind has ever faced, probably because its solution requires selflessness, something that humans are not very good at because over the last 100,000 to 300,000 years we have been evolving on the basis of survival of the fittest and survival instinct (until now) requires selflishness. But now we face a challenge much bigger than any one person and so we must go against our evolutionary instincts and pool together to stop climate change.

 

[oldkettle]

2 minutes ago, Adsibob said:

I have no problem with you being opinionated. Everyone has an opinion and sharing it in a passionate manner makes that person opinionated.

The problem I have is your opinion. It is not based on any science, and at this late stage, when the scientific literature has long established that the danger is real and iminent, your opinion just serves to promote the myth that climate change is not a problem. This is all the more troubling and - quite frankly offensive to anyone who cares about the future of the planet - when one considers that climate change is the biggest problem humankind has ever faced, probably because its solution requires selflessness, something that humans are not very good at because over the last 100,000 to 300,000 years we have been evolving on the basis of survival of the fittest and survival instinct (until now) requires selflishness. But now we face a challenge much bigger than any one person and so we must go against our evolutionary instincts and pool together to stop climate change.

 

So - nothing about me being aggressive, right? I thought so.

But you are incensed, offended that my opinion doesn't conform? Grow up. People have the right to have opinions that you dislike. I understand it's difficult but this is the only way. Repeating BS about the biggest problem humanity has ever faced - FCOL, I grew up being afraid of the nuclear war, climate change is really nothing in comparison. 

And the self-righteousness, oh, you know, selfishness, all that. You know nothing about me. You have no idea how much stuff I buy, how often I fly etc. You may be greener than I am or not - I could not care less. I buy stuff with the money I earn, I don't steal. Until such time it is illegal to do so I will continue doing what I believe is best for my family and myself - like most normal people do in reality. 

 

Humility, you really need to learn what that is. 

[SteamyTea]

3 hours ago, oldkettle said:

Judith Curry

Only because you like her views that we don't have to change anything.

She is rather on the fringes of climate science and was more a specialist in weather and modeling satellite data.

I am more than happy to take the consensus view, but think that the Earth Sensitivity number is on the lower side. 

Just having an overall rise  everywhere, of 2⁰C would not be so bad, that could be managed.

Trouble is, the climate does not work evenly like that. There are wild swings, which we are seeing already. They are currently not greatly affecting the developed world, but the are certainly affecting parts of the development world.

It is the rate of change that is the problem, it is way too fast for humans to adapt to. By adapt, I really mean move and rebuild agriculture, dwellings, and national infrastructure.

 

Changing to a zero carbon economy is the cheapest option.

 

[Adsibob]

4 hours ago, oldkettle said:

Until such time it is illegal to do so I will continue doing what I believe is best for my family and myself - like most normal people do in reality. 

I do not disagree with this. I was disagreeing with your stance on climate change, which was effectively denying or underplaying its seriousness. Of course every individual human needs to do what’s best for them. But at the climate change conference I hope leaders take a socially responsible stance and agree international laws that will curb greenhouse gasses significantly. 
 

[Adsibob]

2 hours ago, SteamyTea said:

They are currently not greatly affecting the developed world, but the are certainly affecting parts of the development world.

I have friends in Buenos Aires. They are currently going through a heat wave in October, achieving temperatures that normally aren’t seen until Jan or Feb. That is like us having a heatwave in April. 

[markc]

The climate conference …. Let’s burn thousands of tons of fuel to meet up, live it up and discuss getting others to burn less fuel. ?

[oldkettle]

1 hour ago, Adsibob said:

I do not disagree with this. I was disagreeing with your stance on climate change, which was effectively denying or underplaying its seriousness. Of course every individual human needs to do what’s best for them. But at the climate change conference I hope leaders take a socially responsible stance and agree international laws that will curb greenhouse gasses significantly. 
 

Gas is already 40% more expensive than last year and electricity is up as well, then there is a good chance both will move even higher in a few months when the government accepts the inevitable and lifts the cap. So I guess for you it's OK, nothing to worry about, an extra 50 or even a 100 a month won't make much difference, right? Yet I am sure you know there are many who can't afford such a rise. 

We do not live in a world of unlimited resources. There are better ways of spending our money. 

[George]

Back to heat pumps, I do wonder why gas powered heat pumps (on the same basis of gas powered fridges) aren't more commonly discussed. 

 

While they have the obvious drawback of still producing carbon dioxide, the efficiency gained brings them below conventional gas boiler on running cost and closer to the carbon intensity of electric heat pumps. 

[MikeSharp01]

11 hours ago, SteamyTea said:

They are currently not greatly affecting the developed world,

The effects will get to us by a roundabout route when parts of the world become very difficult to inhabit and the people there start to migrate to more temperate zones.

[SteamyTea]

1 hour ago, George said:

Back to heat pumps, I do wonder why gas powered heat pumps (on the same basis of gas powered fridges) aren't more commonly discussed. 

 

While they have the obvious drawback of still producing carbon dioxide, the efficiency gained brings them below conventional gas boiler on running cost and closer to the carbon intensity of electric heat pumps. 

Basically down to the poor efficiencies. You will put in more energy than you get out.

 

[SteamyTea]

15 hours ago, ragg987 said:

(Expletive deleted) agree.

Me to.

 

I am just down the road from you at the moment.

[Ferdinand]

11 hours ago, markc said:

The climate conference …. Let’s burn thousands of tons of fuel to meet up, live it up and discuss getting others to burn less fuel. ?

 

To reflect on that.

 

Much has been, and is being achieved. The fringe people such as Insulate Britain (on whom I've been forthright before), the E/W Green Party, and Greta, spend their rime shouting that nothing has been achieved unless we XYZ impossibilism this week, such as ripping out all gas boilers by 2025 and so on, have made themselves irrelevant to the practical debate, as well as being entirely fictional. To have a position of "more ! more !! more !!!" with no useful comment is both misleading and stupid. 

 

One of the current pernicious ones is  IB's claim that nothing has been done about insulation, which is and remains untrue. We'd all like more, but we're starting from here - which is part of  the way on then journey.

 

If I'm being persnickety, is not Scotland's electricity now around zero-net carbon? I believe Scot Gov claimed 97% green for last year. Plus it's November in the fair city of Glasgae, so it is probably making a carbon-profit from all the howling gales. As opposed to the Howling Gaels celebrating their large rugby win yesterday.

 

This is a comment from Dave Keating, a writer at the Politico.eu who basically functions as an amateur PR Man for the European Commission, and who spends his time scraping barrels to find anti-UK narratives to put into the ether, or the anti-UK aspects of any story as a mirror of an obsessively pro-EU Commission stance. These days he's trying to explain why Poland must be punished for breaking EU law, when none of the others who broke it (Germany, France etc) were. (If anyone doubts that, go and follow DK's twitter feed for a month.)

 

This one is a fair observation:

 

 

My view on where the UK needs to be is that we are making very rapid progress, as we all know - due to hit the improved -55% EU target if they've agreed it yet by around 2024 Q1/2, and that we should refocus our overseas aid budget to helping stable developing countries (eg Ghana not Libya) move towards low carbon development by helping in those areas where we have practical expertise, and helping them develop their own green economies to build low-carbon-intensive wealth. Wealth is necessary for fertility to plummet, and self-dependence is necessary for real development. I think the UK is unusual (some Scandis are the same) in not having used aid as a tool for creating dependence. 

 

Ferdinand

 

[Onoff]

1 hour ago, MikeSharp01 said:

when parts of the world become very difficult to inhabit

 

Like Kent? ?

[Onoff]

3 minutes ago, Ferdinand said:

The fringe people

 

I like that term! ?

 

It wasn't that long ago that a large number of members here would have fallen into that category. Any alternative to fossil fuels was seen as the domain of hippies on a commune. There were of course massive issues of vested interests to overcome. 

[Ferdinand]

1 minute ago, Onoff said:

 

I like that term! ?

 

It wasn't that long ago that a large number of members here would have fallen into that category. Any alternative to fossil fuels was seen as the domain of hippies on a commune. There were of course massive issues of vested interests to overcome. 

 

My view (and let's get back to Heat Pumps) is that greenery is now mainstream, that the main political parties have now eaten about 90% of the Green Party's lunch in the UK, and that the GP and similar groups now need to either a) Become realos more like the German GP,  b) Make better arguments for types of a Green future that the mainstream does not do, or c) Shade into irrelevance.

 

There's an argument to be made on the other side, around currently somewhat elevated Voting Intention in the polls, but it's a tricky argument to make claiming it is a prominence of Green values.

 

The evidence free, context free arguments made in the Sewage Overflow debate this week don't bode well. Jenny Jones' speech in the Lords said nothing about water bills perhaps having to double for a generation to pay for it. When they start doing that, imo they can be taken more seriously. 

[SteamyTea]