Climate change - the POLITICAL debate (Vol 6)

[durbster]

stew-STR160 said:

zygalski said:

After several years following this now rather tedious topic on PH, one thing is apparent.
It's the same half dozen or so US Conservatives behind 90% of the denier crap quoted on here from all sources.

Troll posting troll comments. SOP.

How is that trolling? Surely you're not disputing that - it's obviously and demonstrably true.

[anonymous-user]

durbster said:

I have wondered about several posters in here before. It's happened a few times when somebody's on the ropes and suddenly there's an influx of accounts coming to protect them, who disappear just as quickly. Propaganda accounts are rife on social media but I'm not sure PH has the reach to make that worthwhile.

But ultimately, that's probably less harmful than the relentless misrepresenting of scientist's work.

They’re always the same, “I’ve been a long time lurker on PHs but I now feel compelled to suddenly join in and post loads about climate politics and support turbobloke”

Then this classic yesterday

“Posting style may be similar but thats probably because Ive read a lot of his posts”

[robinessex]

Climate case may upset Heathrow third runway plans

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-51649096

The Court of Appeal is set to make a ruling over Heathrow's expansion in a case described by green groups as massively significant.
Judges will decide whether Heathrow’s expansion plans took into account climate change commitments.
If the court rules against the environmentalists, it is likely Heathrow’s third runway will be built.
If it rules against the government, ministers could re-start the appraisal process.
This would involve making the highly contentious case that expansion is compatible with combating climate change.
Or the prime minister could also accept a negative verdict and allow the court to take the blame for scuppering the expansion proposal that he has long opposed.
The case has been brought by local residents, councils, the mayor of London, and environmental groups including Greenpeace...... continues

If the loony greens get away with this, that'll be the end of infrastructure progress and who knows what else in the UK. While the rest of the world will say bks, and carry on regardless.

[anonymous-user]

Heathrow (and Gatwick) expansion have been delayed with endless consultations by all the previous governments, largely due to politics associated with noise and the disruption caused by the expansion.

Heathrow with the approach paths being over London is especially unpopular with voters. Both Heathrow and Gatwick needed new runways ten years ago.

Although environmental concerns may be cited over delaying expansion yet again, I doubt it will mean other infrastructure plans would automatically suffer the same fate.

[robinessex]

Thin end of the wedge

[aeropilot]

El stovey said:

Although environmental concerns may be cited over delaying expansion yet again, I doubt it will mean other infrastructure plans would automatically suffer the same fate.

Oh it will, as the eco-Nazi's will have been given a legal precedent to make it easier to challenge everything, they have said as much already if they will this case.

[kerplunk]

Dont Panic said:

kerplunk said:

- are there any real sceptics on your side of the room or what?

One here.

Edited by Dont Panic on Wednesday 26th February 13:04

Reminds me of a poster you used to see around engineering workshops etc with a picture of a spotty youth and the caption "6 munths ago I cudn't even spell enjuneer - now I are one!"

Call yourself what you want but you don't get to be hailed a sceptic by me just be because you claim to be one.

[Silkyskills]

robinessex said:

Thin end of the wedge

Not really. HS2 is going ahead.

[LongQ]

Silkyskills said:

robinessex said:

Thin end of the wedge

Not really. HS2 is going ahead.

Maybe the plans will change and Heathrow's third runway will be built near Birmingham then use HS2 to get any travellers who are heading to London to their destination. Other travellers may be nearer to their ultimate destinations when they arrive.

Win win all round - assuming that the Eco concern win does not stop all developments including any airport expansion anywhere..

Edited by LongQ on Thursday 27th February 11:06

[Scotty2]

FFS they have "Won".

Mental.

[aeropilot]

Scotty2 said:

FFS they have "Won".

Mental.

Yep.

Proof the nutters have taken over the asylum.

I wonder if Johnson had had a quiet word in the Judges ear........as this get him off the hook nicely.

[robinessex]

Silkyskills said:

robinessex said:

Thin end of the wedge

Not really. HS2 is going ahead.

Because it was a) started ages ago, and b) much has been spent. Plus political embarrassment if it got the chop.

Edited by robinessex on Thursday 27th February 14:14

[zygalski]

Clearly the Court of Appeal need to spend more time on youtube & WUWT. Actually learn some facts

[anonymous-user]

I wonder what new big infrastructure projects the government will be pushing through? All of them will meet the same resistance.

The conservatives can’t be the party that’s serious about emissions targets and infrastructure project spending. There’s going to be conflict with these different pledges.

Boris talks about the U.K. becoming a leader in new environmental technology maybe that’s where these projects will be? Or maybe none of them will happen?

[LongQ]

zygalski said:

Clearly the Court of Appeal need to spend more time on youtube & WUWT. Actually learn some facts

No they are just grateful for an opportunity to make it more difficult for the great unwashed to travel by air. That way their own travel experiences can be improved.

Any chance they could persuade the Scottish courts to shut down Edinburgh, Glasgow and Prestwick by November.

[Silkyskills]

robinessex said:

Silkyskills said:

robinessex said:

Thin end of the wedge

Not really. HS2 is going ahead.

Because it was a.) started ages ago, and b) .much has been spent. Plus political embarrassment if it got the chop.

Or HS2 clears the hurdles that the Heathrow runway doesn't so there is no case to answer.

[aeropilot]

El stovey said:

I wonder what new big infrastructure projects the government will be pushing through? All of them will meet the same resistance.

The conservatives can’t be the party that’s serious about emissions targets and infrastructure project spending. There’s going to be conflict with these different pledges.

Exactly.

Not to mention that the Govt's IR35 rollout next month means that a lot of the experienced contract people currently working on HS2 will be leaving at the end of this month (well, all the ones I know that are working on it are) so that will add another interesting question to the project.

I suppose electrified rail is about the only infrastructure project that can go ahead in terms of emissions though?

Aviation is now dead in UK after this I would think.

Schipol owners will be laughing their heads off and rubbing their together this afternoon I would think, and at PCdG maybe.

[anonymous-user]

zygalski said:

Clearly the Court of Appeal need to spend more time on youtube & WUWT. Actually learn some facts

Is it an appeal about the science or just whether climate change policy was properly considered in the original decision?

The bbc said

“ The government's Heathrow's expansion decision was unlawful because it did not take climate commitments into account, the Court of Appeal said.”

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-51658693

“From now on, every infrastructure spending decision in the UK could face legal challenge if it doesn't comply with the Climate Change Act, which mandates virtually zero emissions by 2050.

It's not clear that's what MPs intended when they signed up to the 2050 target, but in today's court ruling, it's what they've got.”

[anonymous-user]

Silkyskills said:

Or HS2 clears the hurdles that the Heathrow runway doesn't so there is no case to answer.

It’s not a new spending project though.

I doubt many new projects will be compliant with achieving zero emissions by 2050.

The government won’t argue here as Boris wasn’t in support of the new runway and it hadn’t started yet.

It will be more interesting when the project is one that the government is in support of.

[Silkyskills]

El stovey said:

Silkyskills said:

Or HS2 clears the hurdles that the Heathrow runway doesn't so there is no case to answer.

It’s not a new spending project though.

I doubt many new projects will be compliant with achieving zero emissions by 2050.

The government won’t argue here as Boris wasn’t in support of the new runway and it hadn’t started yet.

It will be more interesting when the project is one that the government is in support of.

You may be right but I'm not sure that it has to be a NEW spending project for a case to be brought to halt works already underway if they are in breach of our current commitments. I suspect HS2 environmental groups and their lawyers will be studying this decision as we speak.