Climate change - the POLITICAL debate.

Climate change - the POLITICAL debate.

TOPIC CLOSED
TOPIC CLOSED
Author
Discussion

DieselGriff

5,160 posts

258 months

Wednesday 16th February 2011
quotequote all
LongQ said:
Thanks - saved nme the effort of posting the direct link. wink
Sorry paperbag I meant it more of a "great minds think alike" type comment.

LongQ

Original Poster:

13,864 posts

232 months

Wednesday 16th February 2011
quotequote all
DieselGriff said:
LongQ said:
Thanks - saved nme the effort of posting the direct link. wink
Sorry paperbag I meant it more of a "great minds think alike" type comment.
No no - I had intended to add the direct link anyway so you genuinely saved me the effort! The smilie should have been a thumbup but I can never remember the string for the thing on the fly and was in a hurry so went for an alternative!

Oakey

27,504 posts

215 months

Wednesday 16th February 2011
quotequote all
As I said in the previous thread, you have to admire the 'convenience' of it all;

Apparently the world is doomed.

But don't worry, apparently we can save it.

Not only that, but as a bonus, doing so will create a trillion dollar industry.

Furthermore, as an added extra bonus, all of this should happen to follow the collapse of the housing market and worldwide recession.

Anyone who doubts the inentions of politicians should look at what they're saying.

In response to another posters email, he was told by his MP what a wonderful opportunity it would be for employment and the economy. That shouldn't even matter, really, should it, as surely we're concerned with saving the world?


NoNeed

15,137 posts

199 months

Thursday 17th February 2011
quotequote all
powerstroke said:
NoNeed said:
I have often wondered what the driving force is behind this, as we in our little country would have little effect, even as a continent as large as europe the effect would be minimal. I don't believe it to be taxation nor do I believe it to be a world domination thing. My conclusion (well the best I have come up with so far) is that it is to reverse "globalisation" by making prices reflect the carbon footprint of the product, thereby making cheap imports from China, India and the USA an impossibility. This would mean it is far more attractive to business to produce locally and consumers to buy local.
Well if you're right most people are going to have to accept much lower wages and a
falling standard of living.. But I think its deeper than that, its more about peoples lust for power and imposing rule!!! just look at the direction the EU is going!!!.. ...
What power are they achieving? And why are they imposing levies that on the face of it will make us even more uncompeteive. With a few of the most powerfull nations on this planet seemingly cold on the idea and not buying into it in the way britain has, by that I mean America,china,india and russia. What is britain or even europe hoping to achieve as using AGW to rule us will make our standing in the world even less significant than it is now.

The only thing I can think of is what I typed above, as every goverment allready has power over its citizens there must be some greater thinking.

JMGS4

8,729 posts

269 months

Thursday 17th February 2011
quotequote all
Le TVR said:
There have been several ICBM accidents where the nuclear warhead was 'lost'. ISTR they were the old Thor missiles in the 60s. I dont think there were ever any containment issues.
BUT the lost warheads of all types were never switched to tactical, they mostly fell overboard or were lost from planes or in plane crashes. AFAIK (and sincerely hope) that none were actually tactically launched i.e could have gone "live"

Le TVR

3,092 posts

250 months

Thursday 17th February 2011
quotequote all
JMGS4 said:
Le TVR said:
There have been several ICBM accidents where the nuclear warhead was 'lost'. ISTR they were the old Thor missiles in the 60s. I dont think there were ever any containment issues.
BUT the lost warheads of all types were never switched to tactical, they mostly fell overboard or were lost from planes or in plane crashes. AFAIK (and sincerely hope) that none were actually tactically launched i.e could have gone "live"
These were the high altitude nuclear tests, the missiles were launched 'live'. Some stage failures meant that the missile was destructed down range and in some cases there was minor contamination of islands. I discounted accidents where the device was jettisoned etc.

JMGS4

8,729 posts

269 months

Thursday 17th February 2011
quotequote all
Le TVR said:
These were the high altitude nuclear tests, the missiles were launched 'live'. Some stage failures meant that the missile was destructed down range and in some cases there was minor contamination of islands. I discounted accidents where the device was jettisoned etc.
Thanks for that, didn't realise that they'd done this type of "test"....

turbobloke

103,631 posts

259 months

Thursday 17th February 2011
quotequote all
Emergency Statement from the Environment Secretary at 1300 hrs.

Mojocvh

16,837 posts

261 months

Thursday 17th February 2011
quotequote all
turbobloke said:
Emergency Statement from the Environment Secretary at 1300 hrs.
Along the lines of "more tax will save us all" scratchchin

turbobloke

103,631 posts

259 months

Thursday 17th February 2011
quotequote all
Mojocvh said:
turbobloke said:
Emergency Statement from the Environment Secretary at 1300 hrs.
Along the lines of "more tax will save us all" scratchchin
I'm going for an each-way bet on our 'binding' ecoclaptrap targets being vastly reduced or abandoned. Under the guise of cost but they have also smelt the coffee and looked at the thermometer. But that may be a triumph of hope over expectation and you could easily be right.

Having heard the pre-announcement on local radio, it could all be April 01 on February 17.

Mojocvh

16,837 posts

261 months

Thursday 17th February 2011
quotequote all
turbobloke said:
Mojocvh said:
turbobloke said:
Emergency Statement from the Environment Secretary at 1300 hrs.
Along the lines of "more tax will save us all" scratchchin
I'm going for an each-way bet on our 'binding' ecoclaptrap targets being vastly reduced or abandoned. Under the guise of cost but they have also smelt the coffee and looked at the thermometer. But that may be a triumph of hope over expectation and you could easily be right.

Having heard the pre-announcement on local radio, it could all be April 01 on February 17.
Bleeding tree huggers hehe

turbobloke

103,631 posts

259 months

Thursday 17th February 2011
quotequote all
Mojocvh said:
turbobloke said:
Mojocvh said:
turbobloke said:
Emergency Statement from the Environment Secretary at 1300 hrs.
Along the lines of "more tax will save us all" scratchchin
I'm going for an each-way bet on our 'binding' ecoclaptrap targets being vastly reduced or abandoned. Under the guise of cost but they have also smelt the coffee and looked at the thermometer. But that may be a triumph of hope over expectation and you could easily be right.

Having heard the pre-announcement on local radio, it could all be April 01 on February 17.
Bleeding tree huggers hehe
hehe

As expected it's probably not what was expected.

Checking on the Commons Live channel on cable at 1pm all there is to see is natter relating to some Forestry Statement. Very worthy no doubt but my local radio news team appears to be hyper today.

turbobloke

103,631 posts

259 months

Thursday 17th February 2011
quotequote all
Just wanted to post something recently in via Dr Benny Peiser (GWPF) to get the Beeb's pension fund peeps bricking it.



Uncertainty around climate policy is a significant source of portfolio risk for institutional investors to manage over the next 20 years. The economic cost of climate policy for the market to absorb is estimated to amount to as much as approximately $8 trillion cumulatively, by 2030.
Climate Change Scenarios - Implications for Strategic Asset Allocation, February 2011


The risk to financial portfolios in the Mercer report is entirely due to climate policies and not the effects of "the physical impact of changes to the climate." Of course, a news story that begins -- "Climate change policies could put trillions of investment dollars at risk" -- doesn't really have the same ring to it.
Roger Pielke Jr, 16 February 2011


The liabilities of a Green Investment Bank would have to go on the national balance sheet, Treasury officials argued, and so the UK would lose its triple AAA rating.
Allegra Stratton, The Guardian, 17 February 2011


Ingenious Investments, the UK private equity and alternative investment manager, is considering pulling its solar venture capital fund in response to the British government’s decision to review subsidies for solar and green energy projects. In a press briefing, Ingenious chief executive James Clayton said the regulatory uncertainty was forcing the firm to consider withdrawing the fund, which was launched in November last year.
Kiel Porter, Financial News, 17 February 2011


UK manufacturing industry has called for a re-think of potentially damaging proposals for a Carbon Price Floor. UK manufacturing industry is rapidly reaching a tipping point where companies who are internationally mobile will say enough is enough.
The Manufacturer, 15 February 2011


None of the Japanese government's 214 biomass promotion projects — with public funding coming to ¥6.55 trillion ($78 Billion) — over the past six years has produced effective results in the struggle against global warming, according to an official report released Tuesday.
Kyodo News, 15 February 2011

you have to like the tipping point dig from 'The Manufacturer'

LongQ

Original Poster:

13,864 posts

232 months

Thursday 17th February 2011
quotequote all
This may be a bit marginal to the topic .... but then anything that depends primarily on political policies to create a market seems to be reasonable game.

Green jobs - how are the pay rates doing and are they satisfying?

http://www.guardian.co.uk/sustainable-business/blo...


LongQ

Original Poster:

13,864 posts

232 months

Thursday 17th February 2011
quotequote all
Meanwhile the gravy train has been up and running in corporationville for a number of years ...

This from almost 7 years ago.


http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2004/may/15/env...

Oakey

27,504 posts

215 months

Friday 18th February 2011
quotequote all
Interesting article here on which agencies in the US are asking for money to 'research' climate change, how much they want and what the US Gov will spend this year on CC ($4billion)

http://www.energytribune.com/articles.cfm/6250/Cli...

LongQ

Original Poster:

13,864 posts

232 months

Friday 18th February 2011
quotequote all
This is a little marginal for the thread as a pure politics item - at least on the surface.

However underneath the personal angle is a suggestion of political interference in schooling agendas to push the promotion of Climate Change fear stories.

Back at the personal level it's more about how Johnny Ball has spent the last 4 years suffering the attention of certain elements of green lobby - or so it seems.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1358139/Cl...

His positive comments near the end of the article about recent efficiency gains in electricity generation seem to fit with information published by DECC (Department of Energy and Climate Change).

LongQ

Original Poster:

13,864 posts

232 months

Friday 18th February 2011
quotequote all
Anyone at a loose end in London with a few quid to spare at the end of March might be interested in this - a Spectator magazine debate.

http://www.spectator.co.uk/shop/events/6699018/spe...



Edited by LongQ on Saturday 19th February 03:34

mybrainhurts

90,809 posts

254 months

Friday 18th February 2011
quotequote all
Windymills..

Talking to an insider today who's developing the next generation of generators.

Seems current ones run through a gearbox, gearing up the few rpm to 1500rpm, with lots of bearings.

The new ones will be direct drive, weigh six to ten tons each and run through one bearing, with a design life of twenty years. Ho hum...

The Chinese are getting greedy with their dominant position on magnetic material, so extraction in North America, Australia and Greenland or Iceland (??) is going to be viable again.

This is going to cost..

LongQ

Original Poster:

13,864 posts

232 months

Friday 18th February 2011
quotequote all
mybrainhurts said:
Windymills..

Talking to an insider today who's developing the next generation of generators.

Seems current ones run through a gearbox, gearing up the few rpm to 1500rpm, with lots of bearings.

The new ones will be direct drive, weigh six to ten tons each and run through one bearing, with a design life of twenty years. Ho hum...

The Chinese are getting greedy with their dominant position on magnetic material, so extraction in North America, Australia and Greenland or Iceland (??) is going to be viable again.

This is going to cost..
20 year design life when the numbers are, iirc, crunched on a 25 year expectation. Hmm.

Also, at 30,000 units installed to even get close to the intended output per annum - 60k units would be more likely to do that although still not solve the 'no wond' periods problems - the replacement rate would be 1,500 units a year. or 3,000 units at the highe number. About the same as the total number of units currently installed.

The market is unlikely to be stable either. I read yyesterday that prices are heading down at the moment due to manufacturing capacity excess and little investment spend. If things pick up and the price of the raw materials rises too the costs will obviously follow. So I agree. It will get expensive and it will still be unreliable.

It will probably be 30 to 40 years before any useful alternatives (Gen IV or Gen V nuclear perhaps) will be in wide use. So 2 cycles of Wind Turbines to go through. My kids may just about benefit from the new stuff by the time they hit retirement age. With luck I will be out of it before too much of the current generating capacity is kicked into touch and the worst of the wind years set in. People in between those age groups could be in for a rough time.
TOPIC CLOSED
TOPIC CLOSED