Climate change - the POLITICAL debate. Vol 2
Discussion
turbobloke said:
Is it now unlawful to fit anything other than a condensing boiler? Is there no other type allowed? It will be good to know for when a present non-condensing boiler, 14 years in action, finally expires. We were told at one point that it had the 'right' size fittings for a 'modern' replacement so I was living in hope of avoiding the expensive and short-lived condensers.
I believe you do have to have a condensing boiler now. Your old one should live nearly for ever if it has a cast iron heat exchanger. A few years back I had a big old house with a huge 1970's boiler in the basement. British Gas said it was obsolete and wouldn't service it as 'parts aren't available'. The local elderly gas fitter laughed at that and procured generic parts that fitted. Although 'inefficient' the heat that came from the boiler kept the basement warm and dry and of course then went up through the rest of the house and the flue gas went up a chimney four floors through the centre of the building thus giving up much of its heat. So in the real world little heat was wasted but it'd score badly on an energy survey. Progress!US Republicans Denounce US-China Climate 'Deal'
Any hope for Congress to reconvene with a sense of bipartisanship was quickly erased Wednesday morning as Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) and House Speaker John A. Boehner (R-Ohio) sharply criticized the announcement of a new climate deal between the United States and China.
Ed O'Keefe, David Nakamura & Steven Mufson, Washington Post, 13 November 2014
“I was particularly distressed by the deal he’s reached with the Chinese on his current trip, which, as I read the agreement, requires the Chinese to do nothing at all for 16 years, while these carbon emission regulations are creating havoc in my state and other states across the country,” said Mitch McConnell, who is in line to become the new Senate majority leader in January.
Ed O'Keefe, David Nakamura & Steven Mufson, Washington Post, 13 November 2014
Chinese Media Warn Against High Expectations, East Is Not As Daft As West
Chinese newspapers welcomed the US and China's pledges on tackling greenhouse gases, but warn against expecting dramatic cuts from Beijing. China did not set a specific target, but said emissions would peak by 2030. Noting that this is the first time both countries have reached an agreement on a world issue, the Chinese edition of the Global Times praises the "existence of a China-US joint leadership". However, the papers subtly hints that China will not make any dramatic cuts despite pressures from the US and Europe.
BBC News, 13 November 2014
The Chinese no doubt saw how much the President wanted an agreement and that he would accept nearly anything that could pass as one. Mr. Xi must have been delighted to see a US President agree to make America less economically competitive in return for rhetorical bows to doing something someday about climate change
Editorial, The Wall Street Journal, 13 November 2014
that ^ tells it as it is
India Rejects Posturing Obama Style Non-Deals
A member of the reconstituted [Indian] Prime Minister’s Council on Climate Change said this expectation [copying China/US] if it does arise, would be totally unfounded. “All that China has done is to acknowledge that it has reached a level of development from where it can take emission cuts. The Chinese per capita income is already comparable with the rich world. And it still has 16 years to let its emissions grow. By that time, it would be meaningless for China to let its emissions grow. Economically and technologically, it would make much more sense to start cutting emissions. Nothing of that is true for India. To expect India to do something similar to China is not sensible,” he said.
Amitabh Sinha, The Indian Express, 13 November 2014
Any hope for Congress to reconvene with a sense of bipartisanship was quickly erased Wednesday morning as Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) and House Speaker John A. Boehner (R-Ohio) sharply criticized the announcement of a new climate deal between the United States and China.
Ed O'Keefe, David Nakamura & Steven Mufson, Washington Post, 13 November 2014
“I was particularly distressed by the deal he’s reached with the Chinese on his current trip, which, as I read the agreement, requires the Chinese to do nothing at all for 16 years, while these carbon emission regulations are creating havoc in my state and other states across the country,” said Mitch McConnell, who is in line to become the new Senate majority leader in January.
Ed O'Keefe, David Nakamura & Steven Mufson, Washington Post, 13 November 2014
Chinese Media Warn Against High Expectations, East Is Not As Daft As West
Chinese newspapers welcomed the US and China's pledges on tackling greenhouse gases, but warn against expecting dramatic cuts from Beijing. China did not set a specific target, but said emissions would peak by 2030. Noting that this is the first time both countries have reached an agreement on a world issue, the Chinese edition of the Global Times praises the "existence of a China-US joint leadership". However, the papers subtly hints that China will not make any dramatic cuts despite pressures from the US and Europe.
BBC News, 13 November 2014
The Chinese no doubt saw how much the President wanted an agreement and that he would accept nearly anything that could pass as one. Mr. Xi must have been delighted to see a US President agree to make America less economically competitive in return for rhetorical bows to doing something someday about climate change
Editorial, The Wall Street Journal, 13 November 2014
that ^ tells it as it is
India Rejects Posturing Obama Style Non-Deals
A member of the reconstituted [Indian] Prime Minister’s Council on Climate Change said this expectation [copying China/US] if it does arise, would be totally unfounded. “All that China has done is to acknowledge that it has reached a level of development from where it can take emission cuts. The Chinese per capita income is already comparable with the rich world. And it still has 16 years to let its emissions grow. By that time, it would be meaningless for China to let its emissions grow. Economically and technologically, it would make much more sense to start cutting emissions. Nothing of that is true for India. To expect India to do something similar to China is not sensible,” he said.
Amitabh Sinha, The Indian Express, 13 November 2014
rovermorris999 said:
Meanwhile we cripple our economy with daft policies which make diddly-squat difference as the UK is so small. Madness.
Well we do manage to kill 20,000 plus old people thereby reducing the pension fund... And freeing up bungalows too. I think our Govt has this all thought out... 
Jasandjules said:
rovermorris999 said:
Meanwhile we cripple our economy with daft policies which make diddly-squat difference as the UK is so small. Madness.
Well we do manage to kill 
The BBC just spake of 'puffs of greenhouse gases', bush fires, brimstone, treacle and increased lightning strikes in a 'warming world'. Apparently temps will be 4 degrees higher by the end of the century.
If BBC 'news' were a newspaper, one would be quite within one's rights to wipe one's arse with it.
ETA: the link to the wet dream: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-3002...
If BBC 'news' were a newspaper, one would be quite within one's rights to wipe one's arse with it.
ETA: the link to the wet dream: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-3002...
Edited by Diderot on Friday 14th November 07:09
Linking excess winter deaths to renewable energy policy is rather difficult.
http://www.ons.gov.uk/ons/dcp171778_337459.pdf
The report says its sort of related to temperature but not directly. So high bills are not causing the deaths. If that were the case is would be hard to explain that over the period in which bills have risen, the death rate has come down. Page 3 shows how it peaked at 40,000 in the late 1990s, just before the endless price rises started to come.
Could be that several million properties getting insulated helped, or that NHS has better methods of dealing with flu?
One stat I can't figure... why does death rate from dementia and alzheimers go up in winter? I'm wondering if they forget to turn on the heating or to turn up for flu jabs? That's not a joke... ex-wife's nan had it and she kept forgetting to cook, or would cook and then forget to turn off the cooker.
http://www.ons.gov.uk/ons/dcp171778_337459.pdf
The report says its sort of related to temperature but not directly. So high bills are not causing the deaths. If that were the case is would be hard to explain that over the period in which bills have risen, the death rate has come down. Page 3 shows how it peaked at 40,000 in the late 1990s, just before the endless price rises started to come.
Could be that several million properties getting insulated helped, or that NHS has better methods of dealing with flu?
One stat I can't figure... why does death rate from dementia and alzheimers go up in winter? I'm wondering if they forget to turn on the heating or to turn up for flu jabs? That's not a joke... ex-wife's nan had it and she kept forgetting to cook, or would cook and then forget to turn off the cooker.
TransverseTight said:
Linking excess winter deaths to renewable energy policy is rather difficult.
http://www.ons.gov.uk/ons/dcp171778_337459.pdf
Not really. To me at least, it is as clear as day. http://www.ons.gov.uk/ons/dcp171778_337459.pdf
Fuel bills have risen for everyone because of the subsidised renewables which, by and large, are either not very good or at worst, an outright scam.
If you are poor, or worse, old and poor, every Penny matters - so it's a bit galling to know that these poorest and most vulnerable, like everyone else, have to pay for this green crap. The rich recipients get even richer! This seems fine and dandy for the left, who hated the poll tax, because it fits their ideology!
From a human perspective, not political, the whole thing stinks.
Like the ancient priests who told their populace to pay them lest they get struck down by their gods. Same song - different tune.
Diderot said:
The BBC just spake of 'puffs of greenhouse gases', bush fires, brimstone, treacle and increased lightning strikes in a 'warming world'. Apparently temps will be 4 degrees higher by the end of the century...
Just heard this at 07:00 am - intensity of lightening strikes in the USA iirc (so what is the urgency to put it in UK headline news?).Have they linked the Great War to AGW yet - expect to see irrefutable evidence anytime now...
LongQ said:
Your example of condensing boilers is interesting. Back in the day the old boilers would often last for decades. Not all of them of course - some were badly made or badly fitted lemons - but they were designed to last a long time if properly manufactured.
Our first condensing boiler struggled to make a decade despite expensive regular maintenance. The second had expensive failures after 18 months (having taken the best part of a year to get it running anything like correctly) and more after 3 years. I gave up having in serviced on the basis that it always seemed to fail shortly afterwards.
We bought a house in 1999 that had the original Potterton boiler fitted in 1974. Gas man condemned it (leaking combustion chamber) and we had a Baxi condenser fitted. Replaced combustion chamber after three months - poor ally casting lead to whistling noise through the flutes - but it halved our gas consumption.Our first condensing boiler struggled to make a decade despite expensive regular maintenance. The second had expensive failures after 18 months (having taken the best part of a year to get it running anything like correctly) and more after 3 years. I gave up having in serviced on the basis that it always seemed to fail shortly afterwards.
AIUI the europeans have used them for a decade or two longer, so the tech should be sound...but BAXI rushed into the market with a product which we (and possibly hundreds of others) fine tuned for them. New IC boards were switched in and out etc (luckily we knew the fitting company and they loaned us kit).
As for TT this nugget amused me;
TransverseTight said:
... The other ways to reduce it are keeping lids on saucepands and keeping kitchen and bathroom doors shut...
- the lid securing device being in need of invention and marketing, leading to untold riches (or some tasty claims as and when physics takes over). Although in general the reduction of draughts and improvement in insulation are common sense, lifestyles mitigate against it too often (see under living with pets and children).chris watton said:
TransverseTight said:
Linking excess winter deaths to renewable energy policy is rather difficult.
http://www.ons.gov.uk/ons/dcp171778_337459.pdf
Not really. To me at least, it is as clear as day. http://www.ons.gov.uk/ons/dcp171778_337459.pdf
Fuel bills have risen for everyone because of the subsidised renewables which, by and large, are either not very good or at worst, an outright scam.
If you are poor, or worse, old and poor, every Penny matters - so it's a bit galling to know that these poorest and most vulnerable, like everyone else, have to pay for this green crap. The rich recipients get even richer! This seems fine and dandy for the left, who hated the poll tax, because it fits their ideology!
From a human perspective, not political, the whole thing stinks.
Like the ancient priests who told their populace to pay them lest they get struck down by their gods. Same song - different tune.
Briefing Paper from W R Keatinge PhD FRCP said:
Approximately half of excess winter deaths are due to coronary
thrombosis. These peak about two days after the peak of a cold
spell. Approximately half the remaining winter deaths are caused by
respiratory disease, and these peak about 12 days after peak cold.
The rapid coronary deaths are due mainly to haemoconcentration
resulting from fluid shifts during cold exposure; some later coronary
deaths are secondary to respiratory disease.
These are short-term effects exacerbated by not being able to, or choosing not to, maintain a body temperature needed to avoid the haemoconcentration and/or immunosuppression that results in 75% approximately of excess winter deaths. Pensioners are particularly vulnerable and when in the UK not underdeveloped eastern european states they are reported buying encyclopedias from second hand book stores for 50p to burn for heat, there is something badly wrong. Meanwhile wealthy land owners are raking in £100ks per annum for herding pointless white elephants on their soil. The idea of the government coming clean on this when they're still away with the fairies and the climate fairytales is risible. The government's nonsensical energy policy needs to change asafp.thrombosis. These peak about two days after the peak of a cold
spell. Approximately half the remaining winter deaths are caused by
respiratory disease, and these peak about 12 days after peak cold.
The rapid coronary deaths are due mainly to haemoconcentration
resulting from fluid shifts during cold exposure; some later coronary
deaths are secondary to respiratory disease.
Burning furniture to keep warm.
http://www.theguardian.com/uk/2010/jan/17/eating-h...
Burning books to keep warm.
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2010/01/05/shades-of-fa...
http://www.theguardian.com/uk/2010/jan/17/eating-h...
Burning books to keep warm.
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2010/01/05/shades-of-fa...
TransverseTight said:
Linking excess winter deaths to renewable energy policy is rather difficult.
.
No, it is quite easy actually. You see, it killed my grandfather. I have heard plenty of stories about others in similar situations. .
So those scum who propagate this s**e really do deserve all they get and I hope they get it sooner rather than later.
Before I offend anyone let me explain something. I'm not ignorant of excess winter deaths or energy policy. Before getting involved politically in energy policy, I was a director of a credit union. Although I see myself as comfortably well off, I think I've been bloody lucky in life and wish to help people who've been dealt a s
t hand in life. One of the things I came across was the common issue of people struggling to get by, whether that's running out of cash to pay the rent, or simply not having a house that in my opinion was fit for human habitation. reminds me of being a student when wall paper was falling off the walls covered in mold.
I've also volunteered as part of a community energy group, personally with a focus on getting people's bills down. What seemed a silly comment earlier about keeping lids on saucepans, was from a training course I paid for myself to go on a few years back run by NEA in Newcastle, who are a charity dedicated to eradicating fuel poverty. As well as cutting down moisture released into the home which then encourages mold growth, it's also more energy efficient (aka lower bills) to keep lids on. It might sound silly and obvious, but to some people (including my Mrs) it isn't.
I'm well aware of the link between cold spells and excess winter deaths, but at the same time when you read the research, you are just as likely to die in a warm and toasty retirement home as you are in an underheated home where you cant afford to pay the bills.
I would love to be convinced green energy policy is killing off pensioners, because believe me if that were the case I wouldn't be complaining about it on internet forums, I'm an active campaigning type.
If you ignore what the anti AGW blogs are telling you for a moment and put thinking caps on.. lets have a debate about what could be happening. I accept for some people this may be emotional subject and feel free to tell me off If I've missed some important research. Turbobloke... the summary you posted earlier was the sort of evidence I'm looking for, but couldn't find the actual paper. Do you have a link?
But here's my initial thought... it's cold outside in winter and if you dare to go out there with previous medical conditions, then it might just make your condition worse. I say that as someone who has infrequent Asthma, but one of the things that brings it on is cold weather. And living in big cities (Brum and London to be specific). Outside of big cities and winter I don't suffer. This is me at 42 years old. What if I was 82, living in central London and there's a cold snap? I'm pretty sure I don't want to end up in that situation and at that age would hopefully find myself indoors, in a smaller market town with low pollution levels. Ideally not in a retirement home with people passing on their germs.
Trying to link green energy policy to excess deaths seems unrealistic. If you reverse the figures you are saying, if we knocked £80 of the average energy bill, we would reduce excess winter deaths by 30,000?
To me the whole point of green energy policy, is to come up with alternative to BAU. Frankly I don't like the phrase green energy policy and would prefer the term alternative energy, meaning anything that's an alternative to constant price rises which can keep bills low and pollution low. By pollutants I don't mean CO2 but all the other nasties which kill people in Europe now, not predicted people on other continents in future centuries.
And we need to get the debate away from how we generate electricity to how we keep our homes warm. There's no windturbine levy on gas bills and no feed in tarrif levy. However you used to pay £25 towards the Energy Company Obligation.. the scheme that funds insulation for vulnerable households. This has now been shifted to general taxation .
t hand in life. One of the things I came across was the common issue of people struggling to get by, whether that's running out of cash to pay the rent, or simply not having a house that in my opinion was fit for human habitation. reminds me of being a student when wall paper was falling off the walls covered in mold.I've also volunteered as part of a community energy group, personally with a focus on getting people's bills down. What seemed a silly comment earlier about keeping lids on saucepans, was from a training course I paid for myself to go on a few years back run by NEA in Newcastle, who are a charity dedicated to eradicating fuel poverty. As well as cutting down moisture released into the home which then encourages mold growth, it's also more energy efficient (aka lower bills) to keep lids on. It might sound silly and obvious, but to some people (including my Mrs) it isn't.
I'm well aware of the link between cold spells and excess winter deaths, but at the same time when you read the research, you are just as likely to die in a warm and toasty retirement home as you are in an underheated home where you cant afford to pay the bills.
I would love to be convinced green energy policy is killing off pensioners, because believe me if that were the case I wouldn't be complaining about it on internet forums, I'm an active campaigning type.
If you ignore what the anti AGW blogs are telling you for a moment and put thinking caps on.. lets have a debate about what could be happening. I accept for some people this may be emotional subject and feel free to tell me off If I've missed some important research. Turbobloke... the summary you posted earlier was the sort of evidence I'm looking for, but couldn't find the actual paper. Do you have a link?
But here's my initial thought... it's cold outside in winter and if you dare to go out there with previous medical conditions, then it might just make your condition worse. I say that as someone who has infrequent Asthma, but one of the things that brings it on is cold weather. And living in big cities (Brum and London to be specific). Outside of big cities and winter I don't suffer. This is me at 42 years old. What if I was 82, living in central London and there's a cold snap? I'm pretty sure I don't want to end up in that situation and at that age would hopefully find myself indoors, in a smaller market town with low pollution levels. Ideally not in a retirement home with people passing on their germs.
Trying to link green energy policy to excess deaths seems unrealistic. If you reverse the figures you are saying, if we knocked £80 of the average energy bill, we would reduce excess winter deaths by 30,000?
To me the whole point of green energy policy, is to come up with alternative to BAU. Frankly I don't like the phrase green energy policy and would prefer the term alternative energy, meaning anything that's an alternative to constant price rises which can keep bills low and pollution low. By pollutants I don't mean CO2 but all the other nasties which kill people in Europe now, not predicted people on other continents in future centuries.
And we need to get the debate away from how we generate electricity to how we keep our homes warm. There's no windturbine levy on gas bills and no feed in tarrif levy. However you used to pay £25 towards the Energy Company Obligation.. the scheme that funds insulation for vulnerable households. This has now been shifted to general taxation .
Edited by TransverseTight on Saturday 15th November 04:53
US-China Climate Fudge Already Facing Challenges
Experts (have) warned that it would require an overhaul of China's economy and Republicans in Congress (have) vowed to undermine the deal.
President Obama's ramped-up push on environmental issues set up a clash with GOP leaders, who blasted the far-reaching agreement with China as bad for business and promised to try to block the regulations necessary to meet its targets for curbing carbon emissions. Administration officials asserted that they would not be deterred.
The standoff was the clearest sign yet that Obama plans to prioritize his agenda — and his legacy — over hope of sowing goodwill with the incoming Republican-controlled Congress. Even as both parties promised to heed voters' calls to find common ground after last week's midterm election, the White House and Republican leaders have since drawn lines in the sand over immigration as well as environmental policy.
LA Times, 12 September 2014
Experts (have) warned that it would require an overhaul of China's economy and Republicans in Congress (have) vowed to undermine the deal.
President Obama's ramped-up push on environmental issues set up a clash with GOP leaders, who blasted the far-reaching agreement with China as bad for business and promised to try to block the regulations necessary to meet its targets for curbing carbon emissions. Administration officials asserted that they would not be deterred.
The standoff was the clearest sign yet that Obama plans to prioritize his agenda — and his legacy — over hope of sowing goodwill with the incoming Republican-controlled Congress. Even as both parties promised to heed voters' calls to find common ground after last week's midterm election, the White House and Republican leaders have since drawn lines in the sand over immigration as well as environmental policy.
LA Times, 12 September 2014
The irony is strong.
Grauniad said:
G20: Australians bury heads in sand to mock government climate stance
Bondi Beach protest highlights Abbott administration’s perceived failure to put climate change on G20 summit agenda.
Bondi Beach protest highlights Abbott administration’s perceived failure to put climate change on G20 summit agenda.
hidetheelephants said:
The irony is strong.
Grauniad said:
G20: Australians bury heads in sand to mock government climate stance
Bondi Beach protest highlights Abbott administration’s perceived failure to put climate change on G20 summit agenda.
Bondi Beach protest highlights Abbott administration’s perceived failure to put climate change on G20 summit agenda.
True believers putting their heads in sand, the perfect example of a self-portrait.
Ironic symbolism and other forms of propaganda are all they have left.
TransverseTight said:
Trying to link green energy policy to excess deaths seems unrealistic. If you reverse the figures you are saying, if we knocked £80 of the average energy bill, we would reduce excess winter deaths by 30,000?
To me the whole point of green energy policy, is to come up with alternative to BAU. Frankly I don't like the phrase green energy policy and would prefer the term alternative energy, meaning anything that's an alternative to constant price rises which can keep bills low and pollution low. By pollutants I don't mean CO2 but all the other nasties which kill people in Europe now, not predicted people on other continents in future centuries.
And we need to get the debate away from how we generate electricity to how we keep our homes warm. There's no windturbine levy on gas bills and no feed in tarrif levy. However you used to pay £25 towards the Energy Company Obligation.. the scheme that funds insulation for vulnerable households. This has now been shifted to general taxation .
The reason energy bills are going up despite the wholesale price of gas going down is because it is government policy to drive up the cost of conventional fuels to make renewables more competitive. Go and look up George Osbornes carbon floor price. I live in Stoke on Trent which was once famous for it's pottery industry, an energy intensive business if ever there was one. The industry is a shadow of it's former self for many reasons however it has been allowed to claim back the cost of the carbon floor price in some vague gesture not to completely wipe it out. This clearly shows that the government is well aware that it's policies are driving up the cost of energy.To me the whole point of green energy policy, is to come up with alternative to BAU. Frankly I don't like the phrase green energy policy and would prefer the term alternative energy, meaning anything that's an alternative to constant price rises which can keep bills low and pollution low. By pollutants I don't mean CO2 but all the other nasties which kill people in Europe now, not predicted people on other continents in future centuries.
And we need to get the debate away from how we generate electricity to how we keep our homes warm. There's no windturbine levy on gas bills and no feed in tarrif levy. However you used to pay £25 towards the Energy Company Obligation.. the scheme that funds insulation for vulnerable households. This has now been shifted to general taxation .
If you look at energy costs in the EU we're not doing too badly and sit somewhere in the middle. At the bottom paying around 2 thirds less than us are Romania and Bulgaria who are dependant entirely on coal. At the top paying around 2 thirds more than us are Germany and Denmark who both have well developed renewable sectors. Do you see the connection? Green levys on bill make little difference, the cost comes from the guarantee we give renewable producers to pay 2 or 3 times the market price for their energy.
The debate we need to have is whether we as a nation want renewable energy or whether we want cheap energy, unfortunately we can't have both.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff