Home › Forums › Discussion Forum › New World Shifting to the Indo-Pacific new nuclear powered submarines › Reply To: New World Shifting to the Indo-Pacific new nuclear powered submarines
Michael, I should have explained; I had not read this thread recently. When I returned and reviewed it, I was shocked at some of your ideas that I found here.
On the climate thread you have repeatedly suggested that people should get by with less stuff. But one of the most costly and energy-hungry things that humans do are the military activities and conflict.
The EU was not responsible for the UK’s deindustrialisation; that was caused by keeping the pound “strong” in comparison to the Euro. Imports into the UK became cheap because one pound bought 1.60 Euros, but conversely UK goods became expensive in Europe, because one Euro bought only 62p. This worked to the advantage of finance in the UK, but against manufacturing. The UK’s “strong” currency also encouraged immigration.
How is the UK to cope without guaranteed energy-sharing with Europe? For renewables to work their net has to be cast as widely as possible. UK gas is depleted, coal is irresponsible and you don’t like nuclear.
– – – – –
Apologies to moderators and to Pigeon English; these thoughts would be more appropriate on the climate thread, but the comments that led to them are here. These matters are inextricably linked, because one of the main things that governments fight over is energy.