Guest 725- Registered: 7 Oct 2011
- Posts: 1,418
That's right Howard. No need to ponder, stew just boil at the lunacy of it all. Although we have to obey EU rules which is a jumble of pseudoclimatebabble and self serving vested interests by big green and outright fraudsters we are committing hari kari by closing down coal fired power stations and not rebuilding new ones. Drax, who serves the needs of five million people are going from coal to burning wood exported from the USA because it's " environmentally friendly". Germany are set to build over twenty coal plants partly because they wet themselves following the Japanese tsunami.
Cameron, Clegg and Milliband are responsible for this mess which borders on the treasonous. If I were to find my way into a coal fired power station and stop the turbines working I'd face years in jail - the government are doing this and get away Scott free.
Add to that simple-minded folk who fall for the conventional view (Oh yes those free thinking types who take a balanced view on these matters) who think that solar and wind are the answer and we have a recipe for disaster.
I've brought this issue to peoples attention for some time now, it being the most important issue we face, and hopefully people will sake up from their intellectual slumber and realise how serious things are.
Remember this all stems from the naive fantasy that carbon dioxide is a pollutant and will cause the death of the Earth.
It's a death cult and its followers are all around us.
Guest 716- Registered: 9 Jun 2011
- Posts: 4,010
East Kent has 100 years of Coal................
Germany To Open Six More Coal Power Stations In 2013
Germany's dash for coal continues apace. Following on the opening of two new coal power
stations in 2012, six more are due to open this year, with a combined capacity of 5800MW,
enough to provide 7% of Germany's electricity needs.
Including the plants coming on stream this year, there are 12 coal fired stations due to open
by 2020. Along with the two opened last year in Neurath and Boxberg, they will be capable
of supplying 19% of the country's power.
In addition, 27 gas fired stations are due on line, which should contribute a further 17% of
Germany's total electricity generation. (Based on 2011 statistics, total generation was 575 TwH).
It is worth noting that none of these coal or gas plants will be built with Carbon Capture &
Storage (CCS), which is a legal requirement for coal generators in the UK, despite the fact
that the technology does not yet exist on a commercial scale.
The UK government is so desperate to get out of the corner it has boxed itself into, that it wants
to hand out huge sums to subsidise the cost of developing CCS technology. According to their
"Overarching National Policy Statement for Energy" (Page 31), they want to support the cost
of four commercial scale CCS projects.
But since the report was written in 2011, nothing much has happened, other than the
announcement of two preferred bidders for the £1bn programme. One of these, the White
Rose project at Drax, won't be submitting a planning application until next year, and a final
government investment decision won't be made until 2015.
In the meantime, UK energy policy is allowed to drift. No company would abandon a successful,
proven and efficient method of operating, without an alternative, better way having already
been thoroughly tried and tested. So why does the UK government think it knows better?
Guest 725- Registered: 7 Oct 2011
- Posts: 1,418
The quest for carbon capture and storage is a fruitless one. Actually it's an impossibility. It is very telling that the government have put forward a £1 billion prize for anyone who can do it.
If, and it's the biggest if since the word if was invented, someone could invent a solution it would mean using the same amount of fuel again to achieve this pointless aim.
Secondly, and it's a giant secondly, to all those opposed to fracking remember that the principle of carbon capture and storage is to sequestrate the carbon dioxide from the burning process and inject it into the rock under, say the nearest seabed.
So all those bedwetting themselves because of the fear of monstrous earth tremors due to fracking remember it's the same engineering principle but with two barn door holes in its inception.
The first being that with fracking for shale gas at least we gain energy for our needs.
The other being that CCS earns you nothing but brownie points from greenies if that's possible.
Utterly pointless, expensive and think of the planet if, wooooooooooo, some of that evil CO2 leaks out from the seabed.
We'd all be doomed I tell yer, doomed.
Guest 716- Registered: 9 Jun 2011
- Posts: 4,010
Courtesy The Times..........................................
Pay firms to turn off power so lights stay on in homes - regulator warns of blackouts
Energy suppliers increased prices last year amid the cold weather
Shops and factories might have to close early to avoid nationwide power blackouts, the energy
regulator warned yesterday.Household energy bills will have to rise, Ofgem added, to
compensate companies for rationing electricity in winter.
The regulator said that the risk of blackouts had doubled in less than a year because not
enough new power stations were being built to replace old coal and gas plants.
Keith Sansum1
- Location: london
- Registered: 25 Aug 2010
- Posts: 23,942
Energy resources has always been/will always be a problem, as NO govt addresses this problem
ALL POSTS ARE MY OWN PERSONAL VIEWS
Guest 716- Registered: 9 Jun 2011
- Posts: 4,010
Courtesy Guardian..........
Climate change poses grave threat to security, says UK envoy
Rear Admiral Neil Morisetti, special representative to foreign secretary, says governments can't
afford to wait for 100% certainty
Climate change poses as grave a threat to the UK's security and economic resilience as terrorism
and cyber-attacks, according to a senior military commander who was appointed as William
Hague's climate envoy this year.
In his first interview since taking up the post, Rear Admiral Neil Morisetti said climate change
was "one of the greatest risks we face in the 21st century", particularly because it presented
a global threat. "By virtue of our interdependencies around the world, it will affect all of us," he said.
He argued that climate change was a potent threat multiplier at choke points in the global trade
network, such as the Straits of Hormuz, through which much of the world's traded oil and gas is shipped.
Guest 725- Registered: 7 Oct 2011
- Posts: 1,418
Reg you have surpassed yourself. Pasting opinions from Popeye just won't cut it. It just won't.
Methinks this gentleman spends too much time on board HMS Ug ug ug hellos Olive.
Next time try to at least use a more credible witness for the defence of the indefencable.
Give it time and he'll be subsidising his highly overpaid status playing captain birds eye.
They're the ones me hearty.
Keith Sansum1- Location: london
- Registered: 25 Aug 2010
- Posts: 23,942
Maybe Philip you say that because he doesn't share your view
ALL POSTS ARE MY OWN PERSONAL VIEWS
howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
it's ok for the rear admiral to spout forth on climate change but he doesn't say what can be done to slow it down - i bet he gets a decent wedge for it too.
Guest 716- Registered: 9 Jun 2011
- Posts: 4,010
# 87............``Next time try to at least use a more credible witness ``..........enlighten us....why are you
PhilipP a credible witness ?...........
Keith Sansum1- Location: london
- Registered: 25 Aug 2010
- Posts: 23,942
of course Philip is
hes the expert, isn't he????
ALL POSTS ARE MY OWN PERSONAL VIEWS
Guest 725- Registered: 7 Oct 2011
- Posts: 1,418
I suspect that I know much more about the subject than those lazy enough to merely paste copy from outlets like the Guardian. It strikes me that once again you are fooled into believing this mans words because he is an "important person". It's as if you scour the entrails of the Guardian environmental section searching for this piffle and say to yourself "hey there's more proof of globall warming - even a jolly sailor says so".
That's not debate. That's just plain silly.
It's what is known as an appeal to authority which is why they make traffic wardens wear a uniform and peaked cap and security guards at supermarkets wear crypto-military attire. So a jolly sailor, by no means an expert in the subject, gives us all the benefit of considered ideas on climate change and we are expected to believe what he says to be the last word?
Blimey I'd better get myself a popeye outfit and do the same. Hell I could give my views on all sorts of issues and the world will see that I am right.
Keith Sansum1- Location: london
- Registered: 25 Aug 2010
- Posts: 23,942
Iv not said anyone to be correct or otherwise
but if we get it wrong because of greed and unwilling to change it could well be costly in so many ways to future generations
ALL POSTS ARE MY OWN PERSONAL VIEWS
Guest 725- Registered: 7 Oct 2011
- Posts: 1,418
So why post up all those links and statements from people who should know better? Don't you have a view on the subject?
Keith Sansum1- Location: london
- Registered: 25 Aug 2010
- Posts: 23,942
You won't find any from me
usually Reg
Yes I have a view, with the many differing views on climate change, Although big business in such as a China USA are slow in wanting to do owt about the pollution they cause, there has to be concerns that maybe Philip even you have got it wrong?
ALL POSTS ARE MY OWN PERSONAL VIEWS
Guest 725- Registered: 7 Oct 2011
- Posts: 1,418
The last I heard Carbon dioxide wasn't considered a pollutant. Without it life on Earth ceases to exist.
Guest 716- Registered: 9 Jun 2011
- Posts: 4,010
# 92...# 94...# 96......?
The question was...?.......***.enlighten us....why are you PhilipP a credible witness ?***........... -
please tell us what are your credentials on this subject ?......tell us why we should take you serious...
then we can decide if it`s worth our effort to challenge / answer your opinion......
Guest 725- Registered: 7 Oct 2011
- Posts: 1,418
Well before I do tell you do a little research and find out the credentials of every "environmental" journalist from the Guardian to the BBC. Find out the credentials of those who push this nonsense in the media. Discover the credentials of those on the department of energy and climate change.
Tell me what scientific credentials of all those leading £green£ energy companies.
Do that and I'll let you know of my scientific credentials.
To save you some work I'll give you a clue regarding the scientific qualifications of all those above.
Around 0.5%.
Guest 716- Registered: 9 Jun 2011
- Posts: 4,010
..............the question was...?
Keith Sansum1- Location: london
- Registered: 25 Aug 2010
- Posts: 23,942
So then Philip your a self proclaimed expert
everyone that doesn't share your view is wrong
ALL POSTS ARE MY OWN PERSONAL VIEWS