Scottish Referendum / Independence - Vol 7

[r11co]

Edinburger said:

r11co said:

Ridgemont said:

Edinburger said:

Got a source for these boundary reviews?

http://www.bcomm-scotland.independent.gov.uk/2018_westminster/index.asp

-6 seats.

Burger shoots, Burger misses (again).

Eh? Don't think so. Jeez.

I've lost count now of the number of times you have made a bold assertion or doubted someone else's statement, only to have the contrary evidence dumped in your lap by return.

Edited by r11co on Friday 9th September 15:59

[bigkeeko]

Edinburger said:

Err... yes it did.

Why did we use coal before nuclear power stations? Because we discovered coal first.

Simples.

Hang on a minute Alexander the only thing `simples` was the question I asked you which you still haven't grasped so I'll break it down.

You said, and I quote, "Scotland's tidal energy resources are calculated to be able to supply 1/3 of Europe's power consumption" Yet we're still insistent on turning our country into a wind farm dump. I asked why is this the case when it doesn't need to be like this, if, what you claimed is correct. Just a scenery ruining stop gap?

So Scotland can supply one third of Europe' s power? Another dubious claim that seems highly optimistic to me and I'm being charitable at that.

[jimmyjimjim]

I was curious about the Orkney tidal claim, so did a little research.

The problem with claims like '75%' are that they are usually based around supplying the needs of a small population. (O/T, I typed 'neds' first of all, which seemed both apt, and unkind).

In this case, Orkney has a population of 21,000. Being in the arse end of no-where, with correspondingly low industrial use also reduces their power needs, making it easier to supply than perhaps a Northern industrial town.

I found this to be interesting:

http://www.engineering.com/ElectronicsDesign/Elect...

With this quote:

Reaching Orkney’s electric percentage of total power consumption by installing new renewable sources would be expensive:

Scotland would have to invest $4.3 trillion (17 times 2013 GDP)
The UK would need to spend $102 trillion (38 times their 2013 GDP)
The US would need to spend $1.1 quadrillion (69 times 2013 GDP, but only 52 times the current national debt)
Canada would need to spend $116 trillion (63 times 2013 GDP)

[r11co]

jimmyjimjim said:

With this quote:

Reaching Orkney’s electric percentage of total power consumption by installing new renewable sources would be expensive:

Scotland would have to invest $4.3 trillion (17 times 2013 GDP)
The UK would need to spend $102 trillion (38 times their 2013 GDP)
The US would need to spend $1.1 quadrillion (69 times 2013 GDP, but only 52 times the current national debt)
Canada would need to spend $116 trillion (63 times 2013 GDP)

You forgot to add the summary....

"These numbers would be impossible to achieve without bankrupting the countries involved."

(Anyone with a basic grasp of arithmetic would be able to surmise that from the figures, but best just to spell it for simple-minded SNats).

So, GoneAnon's grievance agenda over the removal of renewals subsidies is moot, unless perhaps he wants to fund the project from his own personal wealth instead....?!

[Edinburger]

Is anyone watching 'Scotland and the Battle for Britain' on BBC2?

[Welshbeef]

Edinburger said:

Is anyone watching 'Scotland and the Battle for Britain' on BBC2?

Yes.

Camellian SNP. (Left middle right wing anything to get support)
Taking advantage of the oil finds and ignoring history

[technodup]

Obviously not.

[wc98]

jimmyjimjim said:

I was curious about the Orkney tidal claim, so did a little research.

The problem with claims like '75%' are that they are usually based around supplying the needs of a small population. (O/T, I typed 'neds' first of all, which seemed both apt, and unkind).

In this case, Orkney has a population of 21,000. Being in the arse end of no-where, with correspondingly low industrial use also reduces their power needs, making it easier to supply than perhaps a Northern industrial town.

I found this to be interesting:

http://www.engineering.com/ElectronicsDesign/Elect...

With this quote:

Reaching Orkney’s electric percentage of total power consumption by installing new renewable sources would be expensive:

Scotland would have to invest $4.3 trillion (17 times 2013 GDP)
The UK would need to spend $102 trillion (38 times their 2013 GDP)
The US would need to spend $1.1 quadrillion (69 times 2013 GDP, but only 52 times the current national debt)
Canada would need to spend $116 trillion (63 times 2013 GDP)

even worse ,while extracting inert substances from below the ground and burning them is deemed bad due to the production of co2 that appears to have done absolutely fk all nasty, despite the worlds greatest "climate science" minds (read that last bit with an intentional derisory sneering tone)proclamations, there appears to be little to no thought as to what removing large amounts of energy from air and ocean currents will do to the environment .

[A.J.M]

On the wind turbines note.

We had a man come to work 4 years ago, checking local areas for suitability for turbines.

If we got a small turbine on the land, we would get £16,000 every year for 25 years.
If we got a large turbine on the land, we would get £25,000 every year for 25 years.
We would then get a cut of any electricity profits made, which could be up to a further £30,000 a year.

All at the time were backed up by the Scottish government. That isn't sustainable.
It's pouring vast amounts of public money into the pockets of fortunate land owners.

So every time you drive down the M8 at Harthill, look at all the lovely turbines, and be glad they are getting the above figures into their banks every year.

Madness.

[Alpacaman]

https://www.buzzfeed.com/jamieross/pro-independenc...

Oh dear what a shame, never mind.

The rev has been suspended from Twitter.

[Gecko1978]

Edinburger said:

Gecko1978 said:

Agree though we an others discussed this at length in run up to the indy vote. As I said Scotland could have its own currency and central bank but it would have economic concequences. Leaving the EU as part of the UK does not change that reality for an independent Scotland thus the case for amother vote is no more viable than it was before

Think you've missed the point again.

Not only have I not missed the point but also I am fully aware the economic argument for Independence has in fact got worse not better and the SNP have not used any new powers to change that.

You lost accept it move on focus on the good things in Scotland

[jshell]

Edinburger said:

jshell said:

jimmyjimjim said:

jshell said:

Edinburger said:

look at the work in Orkney on wave power - Scotland's tidal energy resources are calculated to be able to supply 1/3 of Europe's power consumption.

By la-la land lentil-knitters. The cost would be utterly and absolutely prohibitive.

And that's not even including the cost to distribute it to where it needed to go.

Absolutely. We had look at this stuff, and despite the oceans containing a lot of energy, actually converting that into a motive force and quickly enough to generate sufficient electricity is a very, very tough call indeed. A huge, slow lump of mass does not readily get turned into a fast spinning, cost effective gen-set.

But, the loonies lurve the idea!

With the inference being that I'm a "loony"? Lovely.

Tidal power will become a reality. Orkney is already generating significant proportions of its power requirements via tidal (over 75%) and it's still in concept.

You must know best though.

To be frank, I'm a Subsea engineer with experience of operating high voltage generation sets, so I'm not totally without a clue on this.

If you believe the hype, as our SNP masters have, then we're heading for power cuts and bankruptcy.

The phrase remains. 'Subsidy Farmers'.

[A.J.M]

But Burger will know better and you have missed the point.

Begone with you and your experience of working in the field, that means bugger all on the internet.

[Leithen]

A.J.M said:

But Burger will know better and you have missed the point.

Begone with you and your experience of working in the field, that means bugger all on the internet in the Scottish Government.

Fixed that for you.

[technodup]

Alpacaman said:

https://www.buzzfeed.com/jamieross/pro-independenc...

Oh dear what a shame, never mind.

The rev has been suspended from Twitter.

His response

Fake Reverend said:

...we understand if any readers feel alarm at how easily a mainstream media outlet can silence a major voice on one of the biggest social-media platforms in the world simply for pointing out when a newspaper has been telling lies.

Is he really claiming to be a big noise on Twitter?

With his single issue point scoring from one of the worlds smaller and less significant countries?

He needs his arse fking with a rusty screwdriver.

[r11co]

technodup said:

His response

Fake Reverend said:

...we understand if any readers feel alarm at how easily a mainstream media outlet can silence a major voice on one of the biggest social-media platforms in the world simply for pointing out when a newspaper has been telling lies.

Is he really claiming to be a big noise on Twitter?

He's also a sociopathic thug and a petty criminal, but we'll just gloss over that.

[A.J.M]

Leithen said:

A.J.M said:

But Burger will know better and you have missed the point.

Begone with you and your experience of working in the field, that means bugger all on the internet in the Scottish Government.

Fixed that for you.

very true.

On more concerning issues.

On Friday, I was walking my dog over the new flyover bridge at Chapelhall, something I do every day as Alfie loves his long walks.
I was talking to some of to workers digging up the pavement that was 5 months old as they had to install some stuff that should have been installed months ago...

I asked, where there were 4 massive cracks in the pavement, going the full width of the pavement and starting on the road.
3 at chapelhall side and 1 eurocentral side.

"Bridge has collapsed 75mm at one corner" was the answer, they weren't sure when or if it was going to get fixed as they had to deal with the Calderbank slip road as its subsided for the 3rd time. The roads aren't being rolled properly.

The Raith interchange underpass is months behind schedule as well.

The builders have a 25 year contract to maintain the new works so they have no care to build it properly as they can tear the arse out of the 25 years for money doing poor repairs.

Another glorious success to add to everything else our government does.

[technodup]

A.J.M said:

The Raith interchange underpass is months behind schedule as well.

I pity any fker who's got to use that every day. Or go anywhere near it.

[jshell]

A.J.M said:

But Burger will know better and you have missed the point.

Begone with you and your experience of working in the field, that means bugger all on the internet.

[hidetheelephants]

A.J.M said:

Leithen said:

A.J.M said:

But Burger will know better and you have missed the point.

Begone with you and your experience of working in the field, that means bugger all on the internet in the Scottish Government.

Fixed that for you.

very true.

On more concerning issues.

On Friday, I was walking my dog over the new flyover bridge at Chapelhall, something I do every day as Alfie loves his long walks.
I was talking to some of to workers digging up the pavement that was 5 months old as they had to install some stuff that should have been installed months ago...

I asked, where there were 4 massive cracks in the pavement, going the full width of the pavement and starting on the road.
3 at chapelhall side and 1 eurocentral side.

"Bridge has collapsed 75mm at one corner" was the answer, they weren't sure when or if it was going to get fixed as they had to deal with the Calderbank slip road as its subsided for the 3rd time. The roads aren't being rolled properly.

The Raith interchange underpass is months behind schedule as well.

The builders have a 25 year contract to maintain the new works so they have no care to build it properly as they can tear the arse out of the 25 years for money doing poor repairs.

Another glorious success to add to everything else our government does.

I know 2/3rds of bugger all about road building, but is that amount of subsidence not more likely to be poor foundations rather than poor quality black stuff laying? That region is like swiss cheese with old mine workings and doing any major construction must be a fking nightmare.