By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions. We in turn value your personal details in accordance with our Privacy Policy.
Please log in or register. Registered visitors get fewer ads.
If there were a general election tomorrow, for whom would you vote? on 10:42 - Sep 3 by tractordownsouth
It's not the only solution but it's part of the solution, and if it hadn't been opposed by the coalition government then the issues now would be easier to mitigate. Part of the reason France has been able to cap energy bills is because they have higher nuclear capacity.
And yes I'd be happy to have a nuclear power plant nearby. NIMBYism and short-termist government policy is why the UK's infrastructure is crumbling and if the Greens were in power they would exacerbate the problems rather than solving them.
Or we can just invest more in solar and wind on a national and individual level and not risk regional nuclear disasters.
If there were a general election tomorrow, for whom would you vote? on 10:42 - Sep 3 by tractordownsouth
It's not the only solution but it's part of the solution, and if it hadn't been opposed by the coalition government then the issues now would be easier to mitigate. Part of the reason France has been able to cap energy bills is because they have higher nuclear capacity.
And yes I'd be happy to have a nuclear power plant nearby. NIMBYism and short-termist government policy is why the UK's infrastructure is crumbling and if the Greens were in power they would exacerbate the problems rather than solving them.
Ninety percent of Scotland's domestic energy consumption comes from renewables now.
There really is no need for nuclear power if the correct infrastructure is in place, nor fossil fuels either.
It also makes me laugh that folk will complain wind farms and solar panels are an eyesore, as if towering grey flutes over towns are modern art.
We should be getting actual affordable grants to insulate homes and install solar on an individual basis, but when a load of people partook in civil disobedience before the energy companies started abusing us further they all stanned for the corporations and billionaires instead.
There really is no need for nuclear power if the correct infrastructure is in place, nor fossil fuels either.
electricity rather than energy.
And so as the loose-bowelled pigeon of time swoops low over the unsuspecting tourist of destiny, and the flatulent skunk of fate wanders into the air-conditioning system of eternity, I notice it's the end of the show
0
If there were a general election tomorrow, for whom would you vote? on 10:54 - Sep 3 with 829 views
There really is no need for nuclear power if the correct infrastructure is in place, nor fossil fuels either.
That literally says electricity not energy.
In the spirit of reconciliation and happiness at the end of the Banter Era (RIP) and as a result of promotion I have cleared out my ignore list. Look forwards to reading your posts!
If there were a general election tomorrow, for whom would you vote? on 10:12 - Sep 3 by buoyant
No it doesn't
Apathy will mean we just get more of the same. You're moaning and its been lest than two decades for you, some of us have had it for near double that.
The only way to effect change is to vote for anyone other than blue and red and a large number of the dyed in the wool blues are have one foot in the grave. So it is the youth that can and should make a difference. Sadly they can't be arsed.
Or revolution... can't be arsed with that either sadly.
4 decades for me too and unless there is a NOTA option I won't be voting either. I have no intention of consenting to rule by the vacuous.
"They break our legs and tell us to be grateful when they offer us crutches."
If there were a general election tomorrow, for whom would you vote? on 10:58 - Sep 3 by WeWereZombies
Are you suggesting that we carry on using gas after the latest pipeline debacle ?
no i'm saying you have misrepresented the link and you have confused energy with electricity. energy is the broad term including oil for transport and gas for domestic heating etc. it's electricity that in scotland comes from 90% renewables (a lot of it hydro). scotalnd is nowhere near 90% renewable for energy as you stated. it's not complex.
And so as the loose-bowelled pigeon of time swoops low over the unsuspecting tourist of destiny, and the flatulent skunk of fate wanders into the air-conditioning system of eternity, I notice it's the end of the show
0
If there were a general election tomorrow, for whom would you vote? on 11:11 - Sep 3 with 727 views
If there were a general election tomorrow, for whom would you vote? on 11:02 - Sep 3 by lowhouseblue
no i'm saying you have misrepresented the link and you have confused energy with electricity. energy is the broad term including oil for transport and gas for domestic heating etc. it's electricity that in scotland comes from 90% renewables (a lot of it hydro). scotalnd is nowhere near 90% renewable for energy as you stated. it's not complex.
I'm pointing the direction of travel, we have come a long way in a short time and still have a lot of potential (if that is not too confusing a term when thinking kinetically...) Also, I was careful to state that the ninety per cent was domestic consumption (21% overall if you bother to skim read the Wikipedia page). The inferred point, which is not difficult to grasp, is that solutions that do not involve production of waste for which there is currently no safe haven or make major contributions to global warming are available. The 'dash' for nuclear is misguided and shows a weakness of political will that plays into the hands of forces that are not necessarily beneficial to us.
If there were a general election tomorrow, for whom would you vote? on 10:46 - Sep 3 by monytowbray
Or we can just invest more in solar and wind on a national and individual level and not risk regional nuclear disasters.
You’ve swallowed too much anti-XR propaganda.
There are periods when solar and wind generate as low as 7-8pc of Englands electricity and much more gas has to be burned. Nuclear is a good base load for those days when the sun doesn’t shine and the wind doesn’t blow.
0
If there were a general election tomorrow, for whom would you vote? on 11:17 - Sep 3 with 716 views
If there were a general election tomorrow, for whom would you vote? on 11:14 - Sep 3 by SuperKieranMcKenna
There are periods when solar and wind generate as low as 7-8pc of Englands electricity and much more gas has to be burned. Nuclear is a good base load for those days when the sun doesn’t shine and the wind doesn’t blow.
Well lowhouse mentioned hydro power earlier in this thread so you had better add 'days when the rivers don't flow and the tides cease' as well...
If there were a general election tomorrow, for whom would you vote? on 11:14 - Sep 3 by SuperKieranMcKenna
There are periods when solar and wind generate as low as 7-8pc of Englands electricity and much more gas has to be burned. Nuclear is a good base load for those days when the sun doesn’t shine and the wind doesn’t blow.
No one is saying fossil fuels should be not used at all, just better we use them to some level of sustainability in line with how much we have and what the planet can handle.
At present the current political powers bow to the call of fossil fuel lobbyists.
If we had more solar/wind/hydro sources working when it can harvest energy to store/use, we’d then drill less. And we can’t have that affecting the bottom line of genocidal fuel corps.
If there were a general election tomorrow, for whom would you vote? on 10:46 - Sep 3 by monytowbray
Or we can just invest more in solar and wind on a national and individual level and not risk regional nuclear disasters.
You’ve swallowed too much anti-XR propaganda.
Where has this propaganda come from? The overwhelming view is that nuclear technology has developed to a point whereby it's safe. Solar and wind energy has a bigger part to play and there needs to be much more investment in that but opposing nuclear keeps us reliant on big oil and gas companies and makes people poorer.
If there were a general election tomorrow, for whom would you vote? on 11:26 - Sep 3 by tractordownsouth
Where has this propaganda come from? The overwhelming view is that nuclear technology has developed to a point whereby it's safe. Solar and wind energy has a bigger part to play and there needs to be much more investment in that but opposing nuclear keeps us reliant on big oil and gas companies and makes people poorer.
If there were a general election tomorrow, for whom would you vote? on 11:26 - Sep 3 by tractordownsouth
Where has this propaganda come from? The overwhelming view is that nuclear technology has developed to a point whereby it's safe. Solar and wind energy has a bigger part to play and there needs to be much more investment in that but opposing nuclear keeps us reliant on big oil and gas companies and makes people poorer.
As evidence increasingly suggests that as a species we are unable to look more than 6 months ahead, what is it about the half life of radioactive waste that makes you think we can adequately deal with it?
"They break our legs and tell us to be grateful when they offer us crutches."
If there were a general election tomorrow, for whom would you vote? on 11:40 - Sep 3 by BanksterDebtSlave
As evidence increasingly suggests that as a species we are unable to look more than 6 months ahead, what is it about the half life of radioactive waste that makes you think we can adequately deal with it?
But isn't opposition to new forms of energy short-termism in itself?
If there were a general election tomorrow, for whom would you vote? on 11:20 - Sep 3 by monytowbray
No one is saying fossil fuels should be not used at all, just better we use them to some level of sustainability in line with how much we have and what the planet can handle.
At present the current political powers bow to the call of fossil fuel lobbyists.
If we had more solar/wind/hydro sources working when it can harvest energy to store/use, we’d then drill less. And we can’t have that affecting the bottom line of genocidal fuel corps.
[Post edited 3 Sep 2022 11:22]
On a related note - this project annoyed me the other day:
Running a subsea cable 3800km to import renewable energy doesn’t seem like long term investment. We should be aspiring to be not only self sufficient, but net exporters of energy.
1
If there were a general election tomorrow, for whom would you vote? on 12:27 - Sep 3 with 637 views
If there were a general election tomorrow, for whom would you vote? on 09:53 - Sep 3 by monytowbray
Until individual voting matters and FPTP is gone I won’t be bothering anymore. After 4 GEs in my adult lifetime all I see the current UK democracy as is a rigged waste of time.
I can vote for what I believe (Green) and waste my time, or I can vote for Red Tory Lite for the sake of a lesser evil that doesn’t align with much of what I believe.
Telling people who don’t vote they have no right to moan in that regard is patronising and misses the point, which ironically you did mention in your first sentence about voting for the least bad alternative. Do I vote for the party who want to mangle and torture our balls in a vice or the party that wants to occasionally kick us in the balls so we remain in mild discomfort at all times? Why can’t we have a party that says it’ll do all it can to ensure our balls remain happy, functional and comfortable?
That’s not a choice, it’s a compromise at the expense of the majority. The last bloke who offered an actual alternative was apparently a dangerous racist who’d take us back to the 1970s, yet look where we are. And still there are people on this board that cling to that Murdoch fantasy won’t admit they were a tool for Brexit fascism and the super rich.
[Post edited 3 Sep 2022 10:07]
POTD. 11 people here would vote tory. That is mind boggling.
If there were a general election tomorrow, for whom would you vote? on 10:21 - Sep 3 by lowhouseblue
the only way to be rid of the tories is for people to vote labour. in the red wall constituencies lots of people need to switch direct from tory to labour. the electoral maths at the next election is going to be really tough. people choosing between labour and the greens etc are really pretty irrelevant to the outcome - the whole story is about tory voters last time around jumping to labour, and on an unprecedented scale. it's the only thing that will change the national outcome
If there were a general election tomorrow, for whom would you vote? on 11:26 - Sep 3 by tractordownsouth
Where has this propaganda come from? The overwhelming view is that nuclear technology has developed to a point whereby it's safe. Solar and wind energy has a bigger part to play and there needs to be much more investment in that but opposing nuclear keeps us reliant on big oil and gas companies and makes people poorer.
It is 'safe' according to human calculation which is, by definition, error prone. It is 'safe' in UK, subject to human error, as long as conditions remain as they are currently.
Seven months ago the Ukrainian nuclear energy industry was, subject to human error, safe. Now it is clearly not safe. We don't know what conflagrations, natural or human-made, await us in the next 50 or 150 or 500 years
And such is the nature of nuclear waste that, if the human race continues for long enough, they will still be dealing with OUR nuclear waste in the year 1,002,022. But humanity will most likely have died out long before that, very likely in some way because of human miscalculation.
I note that two of the people who (perfectly justifiably) moan most about despicable tories/tory policies & creeping fascism, are two who say they won't be bothering to exercise their democratic right to vote in a tactical manner to GTTO, or work collaboratively to support options like Progressive Alliance.
Voting Labour or LibDem always has a positive use even in constituencies with huge tory majorities - the stats/figures will always be there, so that come the next elections, people wanting to vote anti-tory will be able to see which way the trend is going & have more heart that if they just stick to their beliefs, a sufficient number of others may well join them to push an alternative candidate over the line.
This is particularly important right now when there's a huge anti-Tory feeling in the UK, and some previously unthinkable overturns of Tory majorities could happen. In my constituency (Skipton & Ripon) it was very heartening in 2017 to see 16,439 other people joining me in voting Labour! (J. Smith, Con, won with 36,425).
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
