JamesPa Posted February 25 Author Share Posted February 25 (edited) 23 minutes ago, Dillsue said: Stop doing all the things we shouldnt in the next 5 years, job done with recovery over the next decades. Like I said gonna be very painful and expensive. Particularly in the first world, we don't have the appetite for it as most people aren't capable of assessing and appreciating the risk to them and their offspring and don't give a monkeys about the billions they aren't acquainted with. Exactly. 'Cant fix it' and 'Can't afford it' are simply excuses from rich (or ignorant or mislead) people who want to stay rich, at the expense of poor people who won't have a choice. It's totally unconscionable. Edited February 25 by JamesPa Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kelvin Posted February 25 Share Posted February 25 Sure but then there’s the reality of getting it done. Look at the difficulty in England to get planning permission for wind turbines or the transmission problems the National Grid has largely caused by delays in decision making at Ofgem etc etc. There are lots of things we could do but it needs political will and collaboration to achieve it. I know Roger doesn’t want to talk politics but unfortunately the two things are deeply connected. If Trump wins the presidency in November, and there’s every chance he might, what then for climate policy in the US for example. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SteamyTea Posted February 25 Share Posted February 25 25 minutes ago, JamesPa said: Exactly Exactly, the best a lot of people do is tiny stuff of no consequence at best that makes then think they are saving the world. Thankfully I think industry and commerce are slowing getting behind climate change regardless of governments' policies. Gone to take a long time and a lot of pain for some countries, and the ones that can afford it will have no choice but to pay for it, one way or another. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FuerteStu Posted February 25 Share Posted February 25 6 minutes ago, SteamyTea said: Exactly, the best a lot of people do is tiny stuff of no consequence at best that makes then think they are saving the world. Thankfully I think industry and commerce are slowing getting behind climate change regardless of governments' policies. Gone to take a long time and a lot of pain for some countries, and the ones that can afford it will have no choice but to pay for it, one way or another. So you'd rather let industry and commerce change your consumption habits, that admittedly will take far too long and do even more damage the planet... Than change your consumption habits that will force industry and commerce to change faster. That's a very selfish and dangerous game of chicken.. What if industry profits its way to destroying the whole human race? What if economics forces everyone into labour camps to feed the rich (more so than it is already)? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roger440 Posted February 25 Share Posted February 25 15 minutes ago, Kelvin said: Sure but then there’s the reality of getting it done. Look at the difficulty in England to get planning permission for wind turbines or the transmission problems the National Grid has largely caused by delays in decision making at Ofgem etc etc. There are lots of things we could do but it needs political will and collaboration to achieve it. I know Roger doesn’t want to talk politics but unfortunately the two things are deeply connected. If Trump wins the presidency in November, and there’s every chance he might, what then for climate policy in the US for example. I dont think the politics will make much difference regardless of who is in the chair at any given moment. In this country. They all say much the same thing. And then dont do it. The next election wont change that. So in that context, it doesnt really have much bearing on the discussion. All discussing politics will do is cause it to descend to the point it will get the thread shut down. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FuerteStu Posted February 25 Share Posted February 25 20 minutes ago, Kelvin said: Sure but then there’s the reality of getting it done. Look at the difficulty in England to get planning permission for wind turbines or the transmission problems the National Grid has largely caused by delays in decision making at Ofgem etc etc. There are lots of things we could do but it needs political will and collaboration to achieve it. I know Roger doesn’t want to talk politics but unfortunately the two things are deeply connected. If Trump wins the presidency in November, and there’s every chance he might, what then for climate policy in the US for example. There is too much 'not in my back yard' accepted in things like turbines. I'd rather see a 50 in one area, and compulsory purchase any houses where people object. If that means a few people upset rather than facing another energy crisis, so be it. As for trump, fingers crossed he'll be in prison before he's elected. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roger440 Posted February 25 Share Posted February 25 13 minutes ago, SteamyTea said: Exactly, the best a lot of people do is tiny stuff of no consequence at best that makes then think they are saving the world. Thankfully I think industry and commerce are slowing getting behind climate change regardless of governments' policies. Gone to take a long time and a lot of pain for some countries, and the ones that can afford it will have no choice but to pay for it, one way or another. Industry says its getting behind it. Most of course dont. Just PR. Nothing more. So long as they are seen to say the right thing, then its another tick in the box. Just choose the right buzz words. Just dig under the surface with any of them, large or small. Its invariably total bollocks. Industry is about making a profit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roger440 Posted February 25 Share Posted February 25 2 minutes ago, FuerteStu said: There is too much 'not in my back yard' accepted in things like turbines. I'd rather see a 50 in one area, and compulsory purchase any houses where people object. If that means a few people upset rather than facing another energy crisis, so be it. As for trump, fingers crossed he'll be in prison before he's elected. Easy to say until someone wants to plant a pylon 200ft from your back door. Ask me how i know. They could buy it. That wouldnt be so bad. Highly disruptive, but i could live with athat. They intend to simply do it. Rendering my house worthless. So i cant move now either. Awesome. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FuerteStu Posted February 25 Share Posted February 25 22 minutes ago, Roger440 said: Easy to say until someone wants to plant a pylon 200ft from your back door. Ask me how i know. They could buy it. That wouldnt be so bad. Highly disruptive, but i could live with athat. They intend to simply do it. Rendering my house worthless. So i cant move now either. Awesome. There are bloody good reasons for not wanting to live somewhere which is a very good position for a turbine. It's usually ugly land that is windy! Lol Pylons are a necessary evil. At the minute.. Its why we need more localised generation, rather than national distributions Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roger440 Posted February 25 Share Posted February 25 (edited) 8 minutes ago, FuerteStu said: There are bloody good reasons for not wanting to live somewhere which is a very good position for a turbine. It's usually ugly land that is windy! Lol Pylons are a necessary evil. At the minute.. Its why we need more localised generation, rather than national distributions Im not living near a wind turbine. The latest propsed location are certainly not ugly as you put it. Some of the most beuatiful countryside we have. Are you trying to convince yourself? Pylons are not necessary at all. Bury it. Job done. Which is policy, but is going to be ignored, so that a private enterprise can make more money. Well, as you can probably expect, i will, and have objected. Ive worked all my life to buy a house, only to have it rendered worthless, such that i cant move if i want to. Bitter doesnt start to cover it. I dont have another spare 30 years to do it all again. Just to add insult, its my own field they are going to use. Edited February 25 by Roger440 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SteamyTea Posted February 25 Share Posted February 25 11 minutes ago, Roger440 said: Just dig under the surface with any of them, large or small. Its invariably total bollocks. So the decadal global increases in RE generation was just a figment of an accountants imagination then. Nothing to do with business and commerce supplying the expertise and finance 1990 2880 TWh 2000 2864 TWh 2010 4189 TWh 2020 7510 TWh https://ourworldindata.org/renewable-energy Last year, the Chinese people purchased 8 million EVs, that is more than the EU has purchased in the previous 7 years, and there is a lot of government restriction on car ownership in China. Now I know you are going to say that all Chinese manufacturers are state owned, state controlled is probably a better term, but the big German and Japanese manufacturers are there, as are Tesla, so business and commerce again. https://www.iea.org/data-and-statistics/charts/electric-car-sales-2016-2023 Lets have a look at primary food loss percentage The World average in 2016 was 13%, 2020, 13.3% and 2021 13% Northern Europe was 9.8%, 9.9% and 11.69% North America 13.3%, 14.5%, 11.72% Central and Southern Asia 13.8%, 13.6%, 12.62% The Northern Europe is not doing too well, but you will blame that on CAP not inefficient privately owned farms. Data here Now there is 3 useful links you can use to search several database, Up to you if you want to. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SteamyTea Posted February 25 Share Posted February 25 (edited) 12 minutes ago, Roger440 said: Well, as you can probably expect, i will, and have objected. Ive worked all my life to buy a house, only to have it rendered worthless, such that i cant move if i want to I am a bit confused, you saying that they are going to build a turbine on your land? The best place for a turbine is on top of the highest hill. Edited February 25 by SteamyTea Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roger440 Posted February 25 Share Posted February 25 9 minutes ago, SteamyTea said: I am a bit confused, you saying that they are going to build a turbine on your land? The best place for a turbine is on top of the highest hill. No. They are going to plant a pylon in my field directly outside my back door. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roger440 Posted February 25 Share Posted February 25 13 minutes ago, SteamyTea said: So the decadal global increases in RE generation was just a figment of an accountants imagination then. Nothing to do with business and commerce supplying the expertise and finance 1990 2880 TWh 2000 2864 TWh 2010 4189 TWh 2020 7510 TWh https://ourworldindata.org/renewable-energy Last year, the Chinese people purchased 8 million EVs, that is more than the EU has purchased in the previous 7 years, and there is a lot of government restriction on car ownership in China. Now I know you are going to say that all Chinese manufacturers are state owned, state controlled is probably a better term, but the big German and Japanese manufacturers are there, as are Tesla, so business and commerce again. https://www.iea.org/data-and-statistics/charts/electric-car-sales-2016-2023 Lets have a look at primary food loss percentage The World average in 2016 was 13%, 2020, 13.3% and 2021 13% Northern Europe was 9.8%, 9.9% and 11.69% North America 13.3%, 14.5%, 11.72% Central and Southern Asia 13.8%, 13.6%, 12.62% The Northern Europe is not doing too well, but you will blame that on CAP not inefficient privately owned farms. Data here Now there is 3 useful links you can use to search several database, Up to you if you want to. I think we are talking cross purposes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FuerteStu Posted February 25 Share Posted February 25 43 minutes ago, SteamyTea said: big German and Japanese manufacturers are there, as are Tesla, so business and commerce again. https://www.iea.org/data-and-statistics/charts/electric-car-sales-2016-2023 This is exactly what I'm saying though. People are choosing to buy something that is better for the environment (yes I know there are arguments that they aren't better at the moment, but they will be. These are the first steps in the industry and infrastructure) Educated people are changing industry and commerce. Not waiting for it to change. That's how we will change the world, buy buying ethical, but considering the implications of our purchases. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SteamyTea Posted February 26 Share Posted February 26 8 hours ago, Roger440 said: No. They are going to plant a pylon in my field directly outside my back door. Right. Thought it was strange as no one has offered to build new onshore windturbines since the moratorium was partially lifted. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roger440 Posted February 26 Share Posted February 26 2 hours ago, SteamyTea said: Right. Thought it was strange as no one has offered to build new onshore windturbines since the moratorium was partially lifted. Bute energy are currently planning 10 onshore farms in wales. They appear to be a vehicle to progress planning on said projects. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SteamyTea Posted February 26 Share Posted February 26 35 minutes ago, Roger440 said: currently planning 10 onshore farms in wales They did not bid in the last round of licenses, but that may have been for England only. I have a relatively small (about 500 kW) turbine near me. Most of my neighbours do not know it exists and it is only 0.7 miles away. They often mention the wind farm at Chiverton, which must now be 30 years old and all the turbines could be replaced with just one larger one now (they are ancient 100 kW ones). Back to the overhead power lines. If the line is part of a windfarm delivery network, technically, overhead cables are better as when the windspeed is high, more power is delivered, but the cables get cooled more, so can be smaller. That cannot happen with underground cables, so they have to be larger. I also heard some farmer (on Farming Today) saying that the underground cables meant that he could not farm 50 metres wither side of the path they follow. He did not specify if that was only during construction, or was a permanent bad. He also did not talk about the rental he would get, that would have ruined his narrative. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roger440 Posted February 26 Share Posted February 26 (edited) 16 minutes ago, SteamyTea said: They did not bid in the last round of licenses, but that may have been for England only. I have a relatively small (about 500 kW) turbine near me. Most of my neighbours do not know it exists and it is only 0.7 miles away. They often mention the wind farm at Chiverton, which must now be 30 years old and all the turbines could be replaced with just one larger one now (they are ancient 100 kW ones). Back to the overhead power lines. If the line is part of a windfarm delivery network, technically, overhead cables are better as when the windspeed is high, more power is delivered, but the cables get cooled more, so can be smaller. That cannot happen with underground cables, so they have to be larger. I also heard some farmer (on Farming Today) saying that the underground cables meant that he could not farm 50 metres wither side of the path they follow. He did not specify if that was only during construction, or was a permanent bad. He also did not talk about the rental he would get, that would have ruined his narrative. Yes, a buiried cable will need to be a bit bigger. Yes, it will be more expensive. Odd, given that we seem, to be able to spend billions on other stuff that will have no useful benefit to anyone. My "rental" is a one off payment of £1 or £2k, cant rember eactly. Plus the annual payment which is some minimal figure of about £3.50 a year. Not much recompense to offset the £x 100 k loss of value, inability to move and having a pylon literally outside you back window. If it follows the other proposed route across the road, it will actually be nearer still, but as its not my land, ill get nothing. With all the same negatives. His rental will be jack all in the scheme of things. This isnt being run like HS2 where those affected did at least get something worthwhile. Certainly, if you were in the affected area, the government were only to willing to buy your house from you. Edited February 26 by Roger440 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
joe90 Posted February 26 Share Posted February 26 (edited) That is really shit and I feel for you. I would be pissed off too. Edited February 26 by joe90 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dillsue Posted February 26 Share Posted February 26 23 hours ago, FuerteStu said: There is too much 'not in my back yard' accepted in things like turbines. I'd rather see a 50 in one area, and compulsory purchase any houses where people object. If that means a few people upset rather than facing another energy crisis, so be it. Compulsory purchase is going to add to the £ burden. Those that object to essential infrastructure, which benefits them and wider society, pay a NIMBY tax which is applied as a credit to the energy bills of those that live with ugly infrastructure:) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FuerteStu Posted February 26 Share Posted February 26 9 minutes ago, Dillsue said: Compulsory purchase is going to add to the £ burden. Those that object to essential infrastructure, which benefits them and wider society, pay a NIMBY tax which is applied as a credit to the energy bills of those that live with ugly infrastructure:) Delay adds bigger burden. If there was a blanket policy that you couldn't argue or protest against,, things would be very speedy. Making up for a large portion of the cost. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dillsue Posted February 26 Share Posted February 26 23 hours ago, Kelvin said: Sure but then there’s the reality of getting it done. Look at the difficulty in England to get planning permission for wind turbines or the transmission problems the National Grid has largely caused by delays in decision making at Ofgem etc etc. Restrictions like these need to change rapidly. If the IPCC are correct then the bulk of planning considerations need to be dispensed with for essential infrastructure. I beleive current planning can limit the duration of a turbines presence so they can be "temporary", renewed periodically whilst we're in a climate emergency. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SteamyTea Posted February 26 Share Posted February 26 Just now, Dillsue said: I beleive current planning can limit the duration of a turbines presence so they can be "temporary", renewed periodically whilst we're in a climate emergency. I agree. Going to be a long time before we stabilise the atmospheric CO2, then we can start tackling ocean acidification. Since I moved back to the coast, my local sea level has been rising at 6mm/year. Don't sound much, but with higher atmospheric temperatures comes, conversely, greater low pressures weather systems. These are what causes the serious coastal flooding. As for pylons. There used to me a coal fired power station at Hayle, there was talk of building a nuclear plant there, but the story goes that the Cornwall has too high a background radiation level. Some of the infrastructure was put in, these include several different overhead power lines that crisscross the towand (dunes) and the A30. We don't notice them these days, they are just part of the scenery. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JamesPa Posted February 26 Author Share Posted February 26 30 minutes ago, FuerteStu said: If there was a blanket policy that you couldn't argue or protest against That's a step too far, once you start on this road dictatorship isn't far away. However I would support accelerated planning for climate infrastructure projects. People can still protest, it doesn't have to hold things up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now