O/T The Gov, Not Fit for Fracking Purpose!!!

[animallittle3]

Pulling the drawbridge up and stuffing the generations to come is the only Tory show in town .

Social housing was another one of their gems , the youngsters today are paying that price and are at the mercy of slum landlords .

[KerrAvon]

Pulling the drawbridge up and stuffing the generations to come is the only Tory show in town .

Social housing was another one of their gems , the youngsters today are paying that price and are at the mercy of slum landlords .

Stuffing the generations to come? That's a bit rich coming from a supporter of Corbyn - a man whose sole economic policy seems to be borrow, borrow, borrow and let future generations pick up the tab.

As for social housing, which is more than a bit off-topic, is your ambition for the working man that he should always live in rented accommodation to which he has no right to buy? A nineteenth century Tory would have been proud of you.

[zouch]

OK Thanks everyone for the wide range of views and its nice to read these debates without insults and dis-respecting a different point of view.

The original post quite rightly questioned fracking. The point i wish to make is that;
Fracking cannot be the answer to the energy security conundrum.
It is unlikely that is causes the same kind of environmental damage that evidence suggest happens in the USA. So on environmental grounds the arguments are week, however the moral position is a different.
Renewable energy is clearly the answer, however, without energy storage we aren't there yet,

What saddens me is the shot term arguments being used to promote or deny any particular choice.
We simply to have to ween ourselves off energy sources which create Co2 and carbon. The effects of any carbon production is catastrophic for mankind! We have to search for technology solutions that can get round the deficiencies of renewable energy production. So, if we put our resources into this then our reliance on fracking (water course disruption, and carbon) coal (negative carbon and health impacts) nuclear (its not safe) will be at best a short term fix to our very wasteful energy use, ill come back to this point.

Renewable energy is now being produced at a cost similar to fracking so the economic arguments no longer stack up but this argument is still being used by government as a reason to invest in outdated carbon intensive energy production. Governments addiction to energy creates the same behaviours as a individuals addiction to heroin) Hence the dash for fracking. There is no long term solution being sought instead there is the short term fix of fracking and nuclear. A serious failing of successive governments, and our obligations to Paris agreements have no chance of being met unless there is a longer term plan.

Amanda - you asked what you can do. Im not sure on what question you are asking but we all have the potential to use less energy and make more efficient energy choices (this is not about abstaining from doing anything that you currently do - its about doing it more efficiently. EG traveling to see RUFC in Norwich can be done using less energy using public transport or with a full car. ( I have written to RUFCs commercial team on how to run a more responsible commercial agenda without compromise to any of its commercial objectives I got no reply! (bearing in mind that business creates 80% of all carbon. We need businesses to make more responsible choices and in doing so they will save money and can earn new profit sources. EG easier access to transport will mean more tickets sold.

One last point - i have never been down a mine or suffered as a result of the demise of the mining industry - but energy solutions go hand in hand with social impacts. after all whats the point in being energy conscious - or cost effective when our own well being is reduced.

[KerrAvon]

Renewable energy is clearly the answer, however, without energy storage we aren't there yet.

Well at least you recognise the problem with renewables. Solar produces a reasonable amount of energy on long summer days - when energy demand is at its lowest. Wind only produces energy when its windy (and not too windy). In other words, renewables are fine until you get a series of dull still days in the middle of winter, at which point we are either going to have to get the candles out or have a bank of fossil fuel using powers stations ticking over at great expense whilst waiting to be booted up.

Nobody has come up with any viable proposal for energy storage on the scale that would be required to make renewables a realistic option as the main source of energy generation. And just how much storage capacity would there have to be to deal with the renewable nightmare - a high pressure sitting over the UK in December bringing freezing fog and lack of wind for several days.

[millmoormagic]

Stuffing the generations to come? That's a bit rich coming from a supporter of Corbyn - a man whose sole economic policy seems to be borrow, borrow, borrow and let future generations pick up the tab.

As for social housing, which is more than a bit off-topic, is your ambition for the working man that he should always live in rented accommodation to which he has no right to buy? A nineteenth century Tory would have been proud of you.

Corbyn's sole economic policy is to borrow? i think you should take a look at how much the current shower have borrowed, the supposed party of sound economics, don't make me laugh, they screwed everyone over with no benefit for anyone, or the country, apart from their friends only interested in profiteering and treating people like shyte.

[KerrAvon]

Corbyn's sole economic policy is to borrow? i think you should take a look at how much the current shower have borrowed, the supposed party of sound economics, don't make me laugh, they screwed everyone over with no benefit for anyone, or the country, apart from their friends only interested in profiteering and treating people like shyte.

Are you saying that Corbyn has another economic policy? Is he going to plant money trees? The Tories have borrowed plenty, but far more than the Left wanted.

[Amanda_Hugg_n_Kiss]

'tree hugger' 'loony lefty' 'terrorist sympathizer' 'conspiracy theorist' and many more.

[animallittle3]

Stuffing the generations to come? That's a bit rich coming from a supporter of Corbyn - a man whose sole economic policy seems to be borrow, borrow, borrow and let future generations pick up the tab.

As for social housing, which is more than a bit off-topic, is your ambition for the working man that he should always live in rented accommodation to which he has no right to buy? A nineteenth century Tory would have been proud of you.

It's the only thing the Tories know , steal the country's assets , sell them to their rich friends in the city and disappear like a thief in the night with the lolly .

There's nothing wrong in offering social housing for sale to long term tenents it's the bit where none of that money is reinvested to replenish social housing stock and ensure future generations have the opportunity to gain affordable housing .

But then again it all makes perfect logical sense now , destroy communities , split , divide , conquer call it what you will .

Profit v Need , a debate the blue nose thieves never understand , why ? because they've robbed off the poor every day they've ever existed .

[KerrAvon]

It's the only thing the Tories know , steal the country's assets , sell them to their rich friends in the city and disappear like a thief in the night with the lolly .

There's nothing wrong in offering social housing for sale to long term tenents it's the bit where none of that money is reinvested to replenish social housing stock and ensure future generations have the opportunity to gain affordable housing .

But then again it all makes perfect logical sense now , destroy communities , split , divide , conquer call it what you will .

Profit v Need , a debate the blue nose thieves never understand , why ? because they've robbed off the poor every day they've ever existed .

Go on then, which assets are you saying that the Tories have stolen? Much of the social housing stock was sold at knock down prices to the occupants of those properties - A chance to be a home owner. What the purchasers chose to do with them later was down to them, but I don't think the city was that interested in buying them.

[animallittle3]

Are you saying that Corbyn has another economic policy? Is he going to plant money trees? The Tories have borrowed plenty, but far more than the Left wanted.

Only two Labour Governments have ever left office accumulating more debt than they inherited .

Ramsay Macdonald's government faced the Wall Street crash of 1931 and Blair and Brown in 2008 and the great banking swindle .

Every other Labour government reduced the debt they inherited , even a cheeky 4% in the late 70's under Callaghan .

Do crack on Kerr .