Climate change - the POLITICAL debate.

[Blib]

I'm not in the least bit surprised. He's a second rate politician who follows, rather than leads.

[LongQ]

PRTVR said:

The last line of the article was the best ,
On Tuesday night Mr Paterson described shale gas as a god given windfall that would help Britain solve its energy problems.
It really does look like we might be starting to head in the right direction with our energy needs.

Although British Gas seem to disagree ....

http://www.thisismoney.co.uk/money/news/article-22...

[XM5ER]

LongQ said:

Although British Gas seem to disagree ....

http://www.thisismoney.co.uk/money/news/article-22...

The fact that he hs gone on the record with this indicates that he is worried about his businss model (of liquifying African and Qatari natural gas and importing it here).


But Chapman said: ‘Whether it’s economic, whether it changes the cost of gas to consumers, that’s difficult to say.’

He also pointed out that the US - which has been held up as an example of shale’s benefits in a report by the Institute of Directors – is a different market.

‘It has a large and growing gas demand with consuming industries close to the resource base, and it has considerable existing gas infrastructure to get gas to the customers at low cost’

Because Britain doesnt have giant gas pipelines that run from Aberdeen to Ellesmere Port via Lancashire at all, no of course not. And Britain never invested in its natuaral gas transport infrastructure to replace coal gas works in the 1960s and 70s. Why do journalists never challenge such obvious bst.

[powerstroke]

LongQ said:

PRTVR said:

The last line of the article was the best ,
On Tuesday night Mr Paterson described shale gas as a god given windfall that would help Britain solve its energy problems.
It really does look like we might be starting to head in the right direction with our energy needs.

Although British Gas seem to disagree ....

http://www.thisismoney.co.uk/money/news/article-22...

I wonder if BG is finding itself a little bit out of the loop and or their vested interests at risk

[London424]

XM5ER said:

LongQ said:

Although British Gas seem to disagree ....

http://www.thisismoney.co.uk/money/news/article-22...

The fact that he hs gone on the record with this indicates that he is worried about his businss model (of liquifying African and Qatari natural gas and importing it here).


But Chapman said: ‘Whether it’s economic, whether it changes the cost of gas to consumers, that’s difficult to say.’

He also pointed out that the US - which has been held up as an example of shale’s benefits in a report by the Institute of Directors – is a different market.

‘It has a large and growing gas demand with consuming industries close to the resource base, and it has considerable existing gas infrastructure to get gas to the customers at low cost’

Because Britain doesnt have giant gas pipelines that run from Aberdeen to Ellesmere Port via Lancashire at all, no of course not. And Britain never invested in its natuaral gas transport infrastructure to replace coal gas works in the 1960s and 70s. Why do journalists never challenge such obvious bst.

Journalists don't challenge such things because they probably haven't done any research on the topic and are just chucking out copy to fill space. It seems that less and less "research based" journalism gets produced nowadays, it is more about filling 24 hours news outlets with soundbites etc.

[London424]

Wouldn't this be a vote winner overall? If Cameron and the Conservatives really pushed this through and it has a similar effect on gas prices as in the US wouldn't this be seen as a good thing?

Yes they would annoy the eco-warriors but they probably already vote for the Green Party anyway. So you'd appeal to those households where you'd be knocking hundreds off fuel bills.

There would be additional jobs created, less importing of gas from other countries etc etc...am I completely off the mark here?

[Blib]

London424 said:

Journalists don't challenge such things because they probably haven't done any research on the topic and are just chucking out copy to fill space. It seems that less and less "research based" journalism gets produced nowadays, it is more about filling 24 hours news outlets with soundbites etc.

There are few proper investigative journalists left nowadays. The printed press have been under immense financial pressure for a decade or more. They just can't afford the staff and so journos are working overtime to keep a semblance of reportage going.

For instance. One of Mrs Blib's oldest friends has been features editor of a major London based newspaper for the past ten years. In that time, their income has stayed almost the same while their workload has increased two fold and more. It is not unusual for this person to work sixteen hour days and seven day weeks. They had their first proper holiday in years a couple of weeks ago. And returned worried that their position would be undermined by their absence.

They are forever looking over their shoulder and dare not complain as there are dozens of hungry journalists out there desperate for a job.

There's no time for deliberation and research.

The trade is dying.

[LongQ]

Blib said:

London424 said:

Journalists don't challenge such things because they probably haven't done any research on the topic and are just chucking out copy to fill space. It seems that less and less "research based" journalism gets produced nowadays, it is more about filling 24 hours news outlets with soundbites etc.

There are few proper investigative journalists left nowadays. The printed press have been under immense financial pressure for a decade or more. They just can't afford the staff and so journos are working overtime to keep a semblance of reportage going.

For instance. One of Mrs Blib's oldest friends has been features editor of a major London based newspaper for the past ten years. In that time, their income has stayed almost the same while their workload has increased two fold and more. It is not unusual for this person to work sixteen hour days and seven day weeks. They had their first proper holiday in years a couple of weeks ago. And returned worried that their position would be undermined by their absence.

They are forever looking over their shoulder and dare not complain as there are dozens of hungry journalists out there desperate for a job.

There's no time for deliberation and research.

The trade is dying.

If one was to be very cynical one might conclude that "the State" was quite keen for the newspaper industry to pass, as it seems to have done already in temrs of local newspapers. Once that situation has been leveraged (or should that be Leversonaged?) they can concentrate on the internet where the potential for free speech, and therefore the control of it, seems far greater. Why else would they want to subsidise rural broadband?

[LongQ]

Sooooo ... our wonderful government spots that energy is getting a tad pricey and worries that some energy intensive businesses may be forced to move abroad. Not happy with that notion they start to talk to them about subsidies ...

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2012/10/10/energy_sub...


It would be nice if someone knocked on my door and started to offer me energy subsidies. Perhaps I should suggest it to my MP?

Still, it is at least an admission that they have a serious problem in the area of prices. It may also be a tacit admission that they may have a serious problem with supply and they are trying to bribe energy critical businesses to commit to a UK future rather than head abroad for both price and energy security reasons.

The simpler answer might be to allow the main users to have their own small nuclear plants. Like submarines and other ships have. Rolls Royce are pretty good at those.

[LongQ]

Hmm.

Smart meters anyone?

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2012/10/10/carbon_emi...

[nelly1]

LongQ said:

Hmm.

Smart meters everyone!

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2012/10/10/carbon_emi...

EFA

[jurbie]

Interesting story on the front page of todays Times. In response to British Gas upping their tariffs Ed Davey is apparently looking to set up a loophole in our CO2 legislation so we can build loads of gas powered power stations and dodge the targets set for cutting CO2 emissions.

There is also a suggestion of cutting subsidies to disturbines in order to lower energy bills.

I wonder if this is more to do with the fact that we have no hope of hitting our CO2 targets (20% cut by 2020 would mean building 12 disturbines everyday until 2020) and rather than admit defeat they'll just blame rising prices. Either is good as far I'm concerned but whether anything will happen is a different story considering Davey's belief in renewables. I had to do a double take after reading it as I was expecting stuff like this from Owen Patterson and not Ed Davey.

Story is here (paywalled but you get the gist)
http://www.thetimes.co.uk/tto/business/industries/...

plus

http://www.thetimes.co.uk/tto/environment/article3...

Edited by jurbie on Friday 12th October 13:29

Edited by jurbie on Friday 12th October 13:30

[Pointman]

Blib said:

There are few proper investigative journalists left nowadays. The printed press have been under immense financial pressure for a decade or more. They just can't afford the staff and so journos are working overtime to keep a semblance of reportage going.

For instance. One of Mrs Blib's oldest friends has been features editor of a major London based newspaper for the past ten years. In that time, their income has stayed almost the same while their workload has increased two fold and more. It is not unusual for this person to work sixteen hour days and seven day weeks. They had their first proper holiday in years a couple of weeks ago. And returned worried that their position would be undermined by their absence.

They are forever looking over their shoulder and dare not complain as there are dozens of hungry journalists out there desperate for a job.

There's no time for deliberation and research.

The trade is dying.

All significant investigative journalism has moved onto the internet. eg McIntyre

Pointman

Edited by Pointman on Friday 12th October 13:46

[XM5ER]

jurbie said:

Interesting story on the front page of todays Times. In response to British Gas upping their tariffs Ed Davey is apparently looking to set up a loophole in our CO2 legislation so we can build loads of gas powered power stations and dodge the targets set for cutting CO2 emissions.

There is also a suggestion of cutting subsidies to disturbines in order to lower energy bills.

I wonder if this is more to do with the fact that we have no hope of hitting our CO2 targets (20% cut by 2020 would mean building 12 disturbines everyday until 2020) and rather than admit defeat they'll just blame rising prices. Either is good as far I'm concerned but whether anything will happen is a different story considering Davey's belief in renewables. I had to do a double take after reading it as I was expecting stuff like this from Owen Patterson and not Ed Davey.

Story is here (paywalled but you get the gist)
http://www.thetimes.co.uk/tto/business/industries/...

plus

http://www.thetimes.co.uk/tto/environment/article3...

Edited by jurbie on Friday 12th October 13:29

Edited by jurbie on Friday 12th October 13:30

Interesting.

The subject of hiked gas bills was done by John Humphries on Radio 4 this morning (worth a listen just for comedy value). He interviewed the MD of British Gas and no matter how many times Phil Bentley (i think) put up the opportunity for John to jump on the cost of renewables, it was carefully avoided. I dont know whether Mr Humphries simply hasn't a clue or if it was wilful avoidance, whatever the reason it was comical and on reflection damned annoying that the debate was avoided again.

[Apache]

And in other news

Scientists hope the first three-dimensional map of the sea ice in Antarctica will unlock the secrets of global warming.

http://news.sky.com/story/996393/3d-antarctic-ice-...

I can hardly wait, what secrets will emerge do you think? a hidden civilization? a giant spaceship?

[turbobloke]

Apache said:

And in other news

Scientists hope the first three-dimensional map of the sea ice in Antarctica will unlock the secrets of global warming.

http://news.sky.com/story/996393/3d-antarctic-ice-...

I can hardly wait, what secrets will emerge do you think? a hidden civilization? a giant spaceship?

They will find their missing energy in a jar under the missing sink hidden beneath the ice next to a shopping trolley and an inner tube.

[turbobloke]

Cool!

[The Don of Croy]

Guam said:

More Ice than previously thought

I can just hear Roger Harrabin (sic) at the BBC concocting the following sentance to cover this - "Even though there is an appearance of some more ice, the catastrophic loss of arctic ice through climate change meanwhile..."

[Lost_BMW]

Guam said:

From the US campaign stuff I have been following, the stupidity of throwing money at the green revolution If I was an American I would be going nuts at this!

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2012/10/11/chinese-billi...

Not just in the US though is it. I wonder if people realise how much money their local authority is having to spend on carbon permits, let alone all the on costs to mitigate energy use/carbon emissions through other routes?

At a time when authorities have to make significant savings in expenditure the average LA will be spending hundreds of thousands of pounds - of tax payers' money/ from funds available otherwise for spending on direct service provision - per year, @£12 per tonne, on carbon permits. My local authority for example has to pay c. £600,00 this year, £400,000 of that to pay for the assumed co2 emissions from the energy schools need to operate.

Not sure whether they will take this from an overall pot, a specific budget heading or directly from money that should have been spent on, e.g. schools. Either way I think it a scandal, and one very well hidden away from the public's gaze. How many front line staff could that pay for, how many services could it provide, or, alternatively, how much might it reduce the burden on tax payers?

Mine for example is about to embark on a programme of installing smart meters in council buildings/schools to encourage efficiency to reduce the cost, amongst other activities on top of that direct take. I expect the final cost could run to over a million, to pay for this public show of sanctity that will have absolutely no global impact or benefit at all.

[LongQ]

The USA seems to be a little unhappy with Chinese 'Renewable Energy" prodct producers.

Something to do with trade and subsidies it seems.

http://news.yahoo.com/u-sets-final-duties-chinese-...