O/T Green energy UK

[Trickytreesreds]

So the UK is now the only country in the G7 to not use coal in its energy creation.
Yet it pays the highest costs in industrial power, in the developed world. Folks wonder why our manufacturing has all but vanished?

So much for cheap energy for all and MIlliband is probably tugging himself off on this.
Yet China is responsible for 95% of new coal stations opened, to keep their industrial muscles growing.

https://news.sky.com/story/uk-become...power-13225107

[MadAmster]

It makes you wonder if this is merely part of some master plan. While countries like the UK and NL are doing their utmost to reduce emissions and help "the climate", the growing economies like Brazil, China and others are ramping up their emissions. Are we merely cutting off our nose to spite our face?

At what point do we realise that we can't keep crippling ourselves which aids the Chinese etc and hope to remain competitive in the world markets?

Temu is flooding the world market with ridiculously cheap goods. Is it their aim to price Western companies out of existence and then to send prices skyward?

[ramAnag]

I do wish Tricky that you’d make your point in as sensible a manner as MA. This is an issue that transcends party politics and yet you continually seem to snipe at, first Lammy, and now Milliband who are just expressing their concern at what is, ultimately, the potential destruction of the planet.
MA, imo, is absolute correct in identifying what difference can the little old UK and Netherlands make, other perhaps than set an example, when the USA, China, Brazil, Australia etc seem to be avoiding their responsibilities…and it’s both a fair and depressing question.
You in particular may however be more concerned with what the future holds if, as I believe to be the case, you begin to understand that your beloved Thailand is said to be 9th in line amongst the countries most vulnerable to the consequences of climate change.

[Andy_Faber]

At what point do we realise that we can't keep crippling ourselves which aids the Chinese etc and hope to remain competitive in the world markets?

Regretably 'we' (politicians and the 'its the right thing to do' brigade) won't realise. We're sleepwalking into modern slavery/subservience to less 'progressive' countries

[Trickytreesreds]

I do wish Tricky that you’d make your point in as sensible a manner as MA. This is an issue that transcends party politics and yet you continually seem to snipe at, first Lammy, and now Milliband who are just expressing their concern at what is, ultimately, the potential destruction of the planet.
MA, imo, is absolute correct in identifying what difference can the little old UK and Netherlands make, other perhaps than set an example, when the USA, China, Brazil, Australia etc seem to be avoiding their responsibilities…and it’s both a fair and depressing question.
You in particular may however be more concerned with what the future holds if, as I believe to be the case, you begin to understand that your beloved Thailand is said to be 9th in line amongst the countries most vulnerable to the consequences of climate change.

Rubbish.
My point is, the current government is more short sighted than the last one, with its green energy suicide.
You cannot hack off your nose and expect everything the function correctly.
It is about balance. Milliband isn't doing this for the planet,He is carving out a job for himself.
Lammy, got involved, saying climate is his top priority? WTF is he on about?

You can not run a country on solar and wind alone, THAT IS FACT.
Where is our back up? Where is nuclear on the plan sheet?
Meanwhile, the rest of the G7 are ploughing on, making sure their economies are fine.
WE PAY THE MOST FOR OUR POWER, let that sink in.

So cry me a river with your destruction of the planet tears, until the whole world decides to follow suit, I'll be buggered if I'm sitting back and saying nothing with these plebs in charge.
PS, the Maldives were supposed to be underwater 25 years ago.

[Trickytreesreds]

Quick re cap of the impending doom, that was imminent.
https://cei.org/blog/wrong-again-50-...c-predictions/


NB, I aint against clean energy, if it is better for the envionment. But to claim burning a cigar is spelling doom is just garbage.
There is a drive being pushed with this rhetoric and in the end it is all about money.
The science doesn't add up and every doom merchant, is counter manded by an opposite scientist.
EV cars are a classic example of this. Oh look my electric car produces zero emissions, aren't I a green hero?
errrrm, no you are not.
The material mining, building, disposal of these things are just as damaging to the eco system, as any other form of transport.
Even the power they run on, comes from fossil derived energy as well.

Then there are the natural aspects of CO2 emissions, that doom merchants tend to ignore.
From cows farting, to volcano's
https://principia-scientific.com/a-v...ity-why-worry/

Meanwhile, people like Camerons dad, Musk and Milliband rub their hands together with glee.

[Geoff Parkstone]

I do wish Tricky that you’d make your point in as sensible a manner as MA.

I think it's up to TTR to make his point in whatever way he wishes: he may add a slightly redundant political point together with his primary observation, but you of all people must be able to relate to this trait.

As regards a green future, there is no doubt that we (or even Western Europe combined) cannot get anywhere acting on our own in absence of the BRIC economies. The efforts we're making are laudable but a bit like pissing into the wind.

So do we persist in "doing the right thing' or just give up on future generations? The economic ambitions of in particular China are such that they will continue to press on come what may. The best solution is to stop buying cheap imported consumer durables from China. Cut off the demand and the supply will wither. Easy to say and there will always be someone to buy the products, so it does look insoluble and as always human greed (at both supply and demand level) will win out.

So which will get us as a planet first? Global warming or global conflict? It's all "resource wars' and I can't see any good outcomes.

[ramAnag]

I think it's up to TTR to make his point in whatever way he wishes: he may add a slightly redundant political point together with his primary observation, but you of all people must be able to relate to this trait.

As regards a green future, there is no doubt that we (or even Western Europe combined) cannot get anywhere acting on our own in absence of the BRIC economies. The efforts we're making are laudable but a bit like pissing into the wind.

So do we persist in "doing the right thing' or just give up on future generations? The economic ambitions of in particular China are such that they will continue to press on come what may. The best solution is to stop buying cheap imported consumer durables from China. Cut off the demand and the supply will wither. Easy to say and there will always be someone to buy the products, so it does look insoluble and as always human greed (at both supply and demand level) will win out.

So which will get us as a planet first? Global warming or global conflict? It's all "resource wars' and I can't see any good outcomes.

Of course it is…but the image of Milliband ‘tugging himself off’ is both unhelpful and unnecessary when MA, and indeed you too, make much the same point in a rather more mature manner.

I’m not sure what the rest of your first sentence refers to but there is surely enough evidence to suggest that climate change presents human kind with a huge existential problem and that it is an issue that goes beyond simple political Party loyalties.

I have no idea what the solution is, hopefully - as Tony Blair suggested years ago - science and technology will provide a solution and save, amongst many more important things, Tricky’s £55k. In the meantime I don’t think it helps to ridicule those drawing attention to the issue for the sake of party political gain.

[Trickytreesreds]

I think it's up to TTR to make his point in whatever way he wishes: he may add a slightly redundant political point together with his primary observation, but you of all people must be able to relate to this trait.

As regards a green future, there is no doubt that we (or even Western Europe combined) cannot get anywhere acting on our own in absence of the BRIC economies. The efforts we're making are laudable but a bit like pissing into the wind.

So do we persist in "doing the right thing' or just give up on future generations? The economic ambitions of in particular China are such that they will continue to press on come what may. The best solution is to stop buying cheap imported consumer durables from China. Cut off the demand and the supply will wither. Easy to say and there will always be someone to buy the products, so it does look insoluble and as always human greed (at both supply and demand level) will win out.

So which will get us as a planet first? Global warming or global conflict? It's all "resource wars' and I can't see any good outcomes.

GP, the irony is, China is makig great leaps with green energy. However, they aren't just suddenly stopping fossil fuel energy like we are.
They have a plan , that allows them to still grow.
China will be a world power number 1 the way they are going.

Meanwhile, our bills keep going up.

[Andy_Faber]

I'm appalled at Tricky's opening post. Surely Milliband would be tugging himself of OVER it, not ON it? Poor grammar, unless Tricky believes Ed has made a covert trip to that Nottinghamshire locale for relief