 |
| Click through the above to reach the Facebook campaign page |
There’s not an awful lot that can be added to what has been written by the campaigners on the Facebook page I’m linking to. I hope that we are entering a period of sensible thinking, and that the British will lead the way in fighting back against this bizarre climate change / global warming religion, just as it tends to lead the way in fighting back against all ridiculous and dangerous religions.
For further reading, I’d highly recommend the excellent ClimateRealists.com which gives links to all sorts of articles, including those from the people who want us to believe in their bizarre Climate Change religion. Make up your own mind by examining the actual science and not the spin and unsupported conjecture, I say.
England's England 
Go along with some of this but consider the building of offshore wind farms and other sources of energy essential. One day fossil fuels will run out and we will be all stuffed. I am a climate sceptic but I'm not burying my head on the sand
Apart from that I go along with most of the arguments but they should not become an extreme loony bunch of people else they risk alienating themselves from the normal populace as much as the rabid greens do.
LikeLike
I'm not against offshore wind farms (despite how much money their existence raises for the Monarchy), nor am I against local projects like community river dams or even a program of solar panels on roofs. They should be encouraged.
However, none of it appears to be as efficient and cheap as large generation plants, especially those based on nuclear energy.
There's thought that fossil fuels are not necessarily 'fossil' and so therefore finite but are a renewing resource. This is an interesting concept that needs investigating further of course, but it could mean that the resources will not become as extinct as we assume.
I think that on both sides of any argument you get the extremists, and agree that the sceptics need to remain rational and calm in the face of all the screaming and shouting from the 'warmists'. Generally speaking they are, and if you read sceptical literature it is usually calm and talking about the science. If you read 'warmist' literature it is normally very aggressive towards those who are sceptical and tends to be about the sceptics rather than the science.
LikeLike
Alternative Energy is a massive subject, I could discuss it forever.
I spend time on the Essex coast and looking out to sea observe a forest of wind turbines. If I could see as far as Whitstable on the Kent coast I would see many more. Driving down the A13 road there are two of these tall structures dominating the Ford factory.
On the face of it, they turn in the wind and produce free energy with no pollution. Great.
My questions though go more or less as follows.
What does each one cost.
How much energy is used and pollution caused during the manufacturing, assembling, transporting and installation of these machines.
Further, are they made in UK factories and are all the specialist vessels needed to plant them on the sea bed UK vessels. Or, in short, do they benefit the UK economy during construction.
Next, what do they cost to maintain ?
How long do they last before having to be replaced.
What is the cost of having back up generating capacity on land for the time when the wind has dropped but everyone has got up to put the kettle on during the ad break in the footie.
What sort of subsidy makes this form of power generation appear to be viable and who pays for it.
Remember, when nuclear power was being sold to the UK population, the slogan was ' Too Cheap To Meter '. The impression was that it would be so cheap that there would be no point in charging for it. Everyone liked that of course especially when mixed with the slogan ' Electricty = Clean simplicity '.
No more smelly gas or dirty coal. In went the electric cookers and radiators and night storage heaters. Years later, in the case of the last two, out they came again, being too costly to switch on.
Believe nothing you are told.
Don't even get me talking about coal mining or railways, or wave power, or solar power etc etc.
Peter Moore
LikeLike
I go along with a lot of what Peter and Christopher have written. However, I cannot support this campaign as it stands with the line that states the aim of removing wind farms and not developing any further ones. This will alienate many people who would otherwise totally support the cause but do not want to put their name to such an extreme point of view. If they delete that line they'll have many more supporters.
As to the specific points about fossil fuel running out, I remember being lied to about North Sea Gas running out in 30 years…. 40 years ago. And there still seems to be plenty of that and oil and coal reserves. However, they did take millions of years to be laid down and they have only been used for about 150 years or so. I doubt whether there's any way that they'll be renewed as fast as they're going. So one day they will be gone. It may be 50 years, 100 years or 1000 years but they will be gone. So man does have to look at alternatives. In times of austerity, such as we are being told we are in the midst of now, no need to make massive investments in new expensive technology or the nonsense of 'limiting carbon'. But bear in mind the need to develop new technologies and when things get better financially step it up so that we are prepared once reserves are low. It's this I worry about for my descendants, not so much the carbon emissions thing, but the inability to be able to power anything in the mid or long term future.
And don't get me started on our dependance for oil on, well, not so friendly regimes.
LikeLike
Peter said: “How much energy is used and pollution caused during the manufacturing, assembling, transporting and installation of these machines.”
I've often wondered about the cost in the same terms of all this 'recycling' we have to do. Four trucks instead of just one, plus all the other infrastructure costs and wear and tear caused by the extra work involved compared to the old days of a single truck on its weekly collection of everything.
Even the costs incurred by a single 'do-gooder' taking his/her stuff to a recycling tip/bank with all the extra fuel burnt to get there surely outweighs any 'good' that comes of the whole process.
But it's all part of the training of people to comply without question, that is part of the bigger picture.
LikeLike
Yeah !
We recycle since someone in Europe says we must. The UK and the various Councils within the UK are controlled by an EU directive that we have no choice but to comply with.
When Britain joined the Common Market it was sold as a simple trading club, with the considerable advantage that membership would probably prevent the member states ever going to war with each other again. Memory of the two world wars was still in the forefront of most minds, so the avoidance of a third war was a major factor.
Nobody said at the time, that the eventual result would be the imposition of endless regulations.
But it is impossible for politicians to say that they have been lumbered with the need to recycle and, good or bad, pointless or not, they have no choice in the matter.
So, they have to sell it as a great idea and further, that anyone not going along with it is an eco criminal, who needs to be watched, fined and penalised.
I'm not opposed to recycling in principle, it makes sense to use a thing more than once or to turn it in to something else, but as Chris says, when you end up with four bins ( all made of evil plastic by the way and probably imported from China ) in which to put different things, to be taken away by multiple lorries, to be sorted and put in to containers, to be put on more lorries and taken to depots or even exported, is there actually any eco saving at all.
What is the point of not digging a hole and burying stuff here, if you just containerise it and ship it to a place where they have no rules, where they dig a hole and bury it.
The answer is that an EU Directive has been complied with and that, I fear, is what it is all about.
Now, about coal !
Peter Moore.
LikeLike