- This topic is empty.
-
Posts
-
“…. but four million to do up a two hundred year old hospital?”
Hospital beds per 1,000 population:
🇯🇵 Japan 12.6
🇩🇪 Germany 7.8
🇵🇱 Poland 6.3
🇫🇷 France 5.7
🇨🇭 Switzerland 4.4
🇦🇺 Australia 3.8
🇳🇴 Norway 3.4
🇮🇹 Italy 3.1
🇪🇸 Spain 3.0
🇺🇸 USA 2.8
🇨🇦 Canada 2.6
🇬🇧 UK 2.4I am thinking the governments want their populace kept in ignorance and fear as well as subservience.
You had the First World War, Spanish Flu, Communism, Fascism, the Great Depression, the Second World War, the Cold War, the Korean War, the Vietnam War, the Falklands War, the first Gulf War, the Second Gulf War, the War on Drugs, the War on Terror, the Great Recession of 2008, the Covid Pandemic of 2019, the Syrian War, now the Palestine War and the Ukraine War. The Fear of Global Warming, followed by Electrification and the eventual, complete capture of your every movement/transaction/freedom denial.
Now Sir Keir Starmer, the most despised Prime minister – ever, wants to bring on World War Three with the U.K. taking on Russia.
I expect I have missed some wars out.I have the feeling they are frightened of the people, no longer wanting to put up with their shit
but they just keep moving the goal posts.
Big Brother is watching you.I see that Fiona Hill is front page in the Guardian.
How does she know this?
Has Russia declared war using a private email to her, or have we all had one and mine just hasn’t arrived yet?
At least it gives the green light for secret agencies to conduct false flag events in the UK, which can then be blamed on Putin.
I really don’t think politicians ought to descend that low.
@ Fat Jon,
I doubt there is anything that would stop Sir K. R. Starmer from sinking even lower in the estimation of the voters.
Carbon Capture = 22 billion pounds
new buses = 15 billion pounds
more weapons = 15 billion pounds
just those three pledges amount to 52 billion pounds,
yet he still goes on, every week, during Prime ministers Questions about the 22 billion Black Hole left by the last government.
I wonder what sized Black Hole Sir Keir Rodney Starmer, will leave after he has been shown the door by the voters.Trouble in Ed Milliband’s head.
Minister of State in the Department for Energy Security and Net Zero
Two gone in less than a month
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philip_Hunt,_Baron_Hunt_of_Kings_Heath = 9 July 2024 – 22 May 2025
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Margaret_Curran = 22 May 2025 – 6 June 2025I wonder what they know but they are not telling us?
“I wonder what they know but they are not telling us?”
That information would fill a number of floors at the British Library, I suspect.
And already fills a very large country house at Hanslope Park. Around 1.5 million files at the last count, and many of those files extend to thousands of pages. And protected by razor wire fences and numerous CCTV cameras.
They seem determined to tell us as little as possible.
Now 86 billion ear marked by our government for science and tech.
So, in last few days they have claimed15 billion pounds for nuclear submarines and nuclear missiles
15 billion for buses
22 billion for carbon capture
86 billion for science and tech
That doles out as 138 billionI wonder how they will get enough electricity for the extra one and a half million new homes.
The electricity grid will need to be very substantially built up.
We don’t want Heathrow going Dark, what with the new concrete runway & increase air flights by more than fifty percent.Carbon Capture
Department of Energy Security and Net Zero
Published
24 April 2025
https://www.gov.uk/government/news/major-carbon-capture-project-to-deliver-jobs-and-growth“Thousands of jobs created as major Carbon Capture and storage network is ready for construction – boosting energy security and the government’s Plan for Change.
LA LA LAND“British families and businesses will be more energy secure as a major carbon capture and storage network is now ready for construction – supporting 2,000 jobs through the Plan for Change.
Launching this new industry for Britain provides a major boost for heavy industry – part of the government’s commitment to backing British manufacturing.”
Many oil and gas fields need to use gas and/or liquids injected into the deposit collections to help pressuring the oil or gas out. It’s a financial and energy sink to have to do this. Using captured CO2, at government expense to fulfill this role saves big oil money, energy they don’t have to pay for and makes them appear to be doing something about CO2 thus improving PR. I bet they’ll charge rent for storage too.
Carbon capture schemes are an abomination designed to funnel more government money to big oil.@ ET essentially this is Fantasia.
£22,000,000,000
on Carbon Capture, an unproved technology.
This money could be spent on new Reservoirs or on our National Grid System or on building a few more Hinkley Point C plants.
We need base load, if we are phasing out Coal/Oil/Natural Gas. Carbon Capture, will produce no Electricity but this palpable nonsense will consume much energy.I don’t think you will get many Hinkley Points for £22billion Michael.
At crecent estimations, the one they are building is going to end up costing £50billion. And aren’t they supposed to be building another one at Sizewell? Those two together will generate around 6.4GW of electricity, which is about 15% of current demand.
What they really need to do is build the Severn Barrage between Newport and Weston Super Mare. That could generate around 8GW, and would ease the traffic chaos around Bristol, as most Welsh holiday traffic to SW England would take the short cut if a motorway was built above it.
@ Fat Jon, last time I heard, the double at Hinkley Point C would cost 44-47 billion pounds, so you are correct not many for 22 billion pounds. The single at Flamanville probably cost about fifteen billion Euros, multiple times estimate cost.
https://www.powermag.com/flamanville-3-reactor-online-in-france-after-12-year-delay/The story that is being spun, is that if several are constructed, quickly, they should come down a bit in cost, as the staff will know what they are doing, as long as the design stays pretty well the same.
Yes, I agree about the barrage across the estuary, between Somerset and South Wales. I think it has the third greatest tidal range in the world.
It seems the BBC are now being unkind to Net Zero.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cdedjnw8e85o
The BBC think electricity bills will keep rising, the more windfarms we clip into the National Grid.
Oh Dear.Maybe instead of wasting money on carbon capture scams they could invest in improving the grid. And some storage 😎
One day much of the Hydrocarbon bonanza will have been used up.
I know Ed Milliband thinks everything can be done with batteries/wind/nuclear/solar/hydro but how will he replace the solar farms if there is no more Hydrocarbons?
How will trade happen between continents if there is no more Oil/Coal/Natural Gas.
Diesel is used to power the earth moving machines.
methane is used in the processing of these minerals.
Fuel Oil is used to power the water craft.
How can you mine and process Uranium, if you cannot use Methane or Oil?
I can’t see how the trick of keeping the plates spinning can be carried on without Hydrocarbon resources?https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mPJYeW53XfM
This is interesting.
Apparently Reform UK want to re-open Port Talbot steel making business but using South Wales Coal, also a Coal plant to make electricity.
As Electricity is so expensive in the United Kingdom, the thinking is go back to the tried and tested ways of using local produce, like local Limestone, local rainwater, local Iron and local Coal and local Welsh labour.The easiest way to power ships, and industrial plant in remote locations, under a net zero regime, Michael, is to use biodiesel. It’s easy to dramatically increase yields of oil-seed rape etc and, unlike the case with Drax burning wood pellets from US forests, all the carbon emissions are absorbed by next year’s crop.
Here you go
Quote BBC
“The government announces a total investment of £14.2bn to build the Sizewell C nuclear power station in SuffolkThe plant – which will take at least a decade to complete – will generate enough electricity for six million homes, the government says”
bit short on the money?
£14.2bn might get the foundations done, but then I suppose Starmer’s successor will have to go cap in hand to some dodgy state – Saudi Arabia? in order to finance the rest.
I see Farage hasn’t said who is going to pay for two new blast furnaces at Port Talbot. Maybe he reckons the Welsh will not mind a 40% lower tax band to finance this. He seems to be continuing his 5 year electioneering policy by making the headlines on a daily basis with ideas which he believes will appear to voters.
What intrigues me, is that we have been led to believe that a majority of the electorate now believe Brexit was a mistake, and that we need to renegotiate our membership. And yet, a vote for Farage is the last thing people need to think about if they are anti Brexit. His UKIP foghorn was the reason Cameron called the referendum in the first place.
If we more or less stop building wind farms and more or less stop building solar farms and ditch the 22 billion carbon capture twaddle, perhaps there could be enough money to finance the whole of Sizewell C.
In my view, we have almost enough wind and solar farms, now.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/ce848g8l8vro
What is needed, in my view, is an upgraded National Grid, and Base-Load.
With these two new doubles and our present Nuclear Power Stations, we “might” have enough Base-Load, to take over from Coal/Gas/Oil?The new Labour Government are on a spending spree.
Soon, they will have to stop going on about the twenty two billion pound Black Hole they inherited from Liz truss, who they claim, crashed the U.K. Economy.
Quote BBC
“The government has pledged £426m of investment towards works at a Sheffield steel producer in a move it said would protect 700 skilled jobs”
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cz70d73ejnno
WAR WAR WAR
The Ministry of Defence (MoD) bought Sheffield Forgemasters in 2021 and will use the site, near Meadowhall, to support manufacturing for defence programmes.Earlier this year, plans to build a new plant at the facility, which will be operational by 2028, were approved.
On Tuesday, the government announced it would plough extra funding into the site in a move it claimed would also create 900 construction jobs.
Defence Secretary John Healey said the investment was important at a time when “global threats are rising”.
I would like to ask a question.
Two possibilities.
Possibility One = we use up all or almost of of the fossil resources, leaving us reliant on renewable energy.
Possibility Two, we make a choice to leave the fossil resources in the ground, leaving us reliant on renewable energy.Then what.
Quickly we will come to understand, that these tools are not really renewable but they must be replaced.
In the U.K. a solar farm ( presently) has a life of fifteen years. Now this is partially to do with planning.
But the solar panels become etched, bird filth, wind blown grit, hail, micro organisms, lichen and so on, make them function less well. They are only at 22% efficiency, when they are brand new. When you take these panels out of service, you run over them with a steam roller to crush them, the aluminium alloy frames can be melted down again but of course that will take a lot of energy, your steam roller will require energy.
The glass cells will be tipped in pits, that will require energy.
Or, more likely the old solar panels will be just stored in a field, removing that land from agricultural use or just thrown into landfill, removing that land from agriculture.
Wind farms on land. These might have a life span of twenty to thirty years.
When the turbines are taken down, the blades are not economically recyclable. Some could be reused as cycle sheds or windshields/fences on the coast or reused as groins. Most will be left in fields or dumped in landfill.Getting new minerals.
When we stop using fossil fuels, how will we open cast mine for minerals.
We will have to keep doing this forever, what will be the energy source?
It is not likely to be electricity.
It is not likely to be hydrogen.
It will have to be a fluid.
Such as gas or oil but where will this fluid come from?
The other option will be for everyone to accept they will be very short of energy.Michael:
– Two possibilities.– Possibility One = we use up all or almost of of the fossil resources, leaving us reliant on renewable energy.
– Possibility Two, we make a choice to leave the fossil resources in the ground, leaving us reliant on renewable energy.– Then what.
– Quickly we will come to understand, that these tools are not really renewable but they must be replaced.
Yes. This, precisely, is the fundamental problem. Modern industrial living is inevitably a flash in the pan. It looks normal to us because a few recent generations have lived through its heyday, causing us to imagine some kind of unlimited industrially supported “progress”. The “elite”, with their effectively unlimited wealth derived from this same industrial system, are hugely more enthralled by this delusion than ordinary people who routinely have to make ends meet. And this same elite make the decisions that lock the vast majority into a tragic population crash some time, by the look of things, this century.There are solutions, but they involve a complete change in the way the wealthier half of the global population live.
I cannot see how party politics or considerations of money can address this problem. The ‘right’ says burn fossil fuels faster, the ‘left’ says burn them a bit slower, but they will continue to deplete either way. ‘Right’ and ‘left’ both say that “economic growth” will create enough money to solve the problem, but shortage of money was never the problem in the first place.
We need to live a life more aligned with natural systems, like the less wealthy half of the global human population do, and like every species except humans and their pets and livestock do.
“I cannot see how party politics or considerations of money can address this problem. The ‘right’ says burn fossil fuels faster, the ‘left’ says burn them a bit slower, but they will continue to deplete either way. ‘Right’ and ‘left’ both say that “economic growth” will create enough money to solve the problem, but shortage of money was never the problem in the first place.“
Indeed. This is the perverse issue that most people don’t understand. One of the unspoken drivers for Brexit was to preserve the independence and autonomy of the UK finance sector including the central bank – the BoE. The UK operates a fiat currency and can issue, inject cash into the system to pay for all government expenditure in Sterling. It has done so for decades – to maintain the liquidity of banks during the GFC in 2008; for warfare in Iraq and Afghanistan – and of course for the pandemic costs. Taxes do not pay for government spending.
Politicians and commentators sometimes call it ‘quantitive easing’ or ‘extending the fiscal capacity’ – and it has great potential for assisting the population towards a low growth, environmentally friendly economy, but the failure to do so is predicated by a paltry imagination within the political landscape – and greed and corruption. Why do we operate the principal offshore banking system other than an effort to hide and obscure these funds immorally gained by the elite?
Stop burning fossil fuels & stop producing any material that damages and endangers the environment are for starters. How to reduce the global population to the planet’s natural carrying capacity by the ned of this century is the crux.
Battery Tech comes at a cost
Yet another ship carrying cars goes into meltdown.
Only some of the cars are battery cars.But the point of this chat, was that almost all the materials we use in the modern world, have quite dirty methods of production.
Almost nothing is clean, including clean energy.
