Green Party wish list.

Calhoun

Tell me how wrote: »

In relation to the first bolded point.
There are no longer term impact greater than that of a destroyed environment.

What better way have we to set examples to other countries other than adhering to our commitments to an international agreement, which they have also signed up to?

Surely if we do so, we and others can point to the agreement and ask them to show their work?

If you want to live in poverty all power to you, there are allot in Ireland who haven't had a good time of it and the thought that they may never be able to improve their lot is not something i think they will take very well.

I don't care about international agreements like most who will be voting when true economic uncertainty comes to bite.

You really think China will give a crap about international agreements? China cares about China, same as the US cares about itself and the wealth it has coming in.

If being the goodboy puts us into a position where people suffers then to hell with it all.

If you want to do something that can improve our lot while also being green then sure people will be open to that but as i said this green party has to spell it out fairly clearly that this is what they plan to do. Right now all i see is the party of more taxes.

Ohio9

Shefwedfan wrote: »

Ok, quickly, ireland is on the Paris agreement, we are going to get hit with serious fines very soon, maybe not this year due to virus but next

Instead of spending millions on fines which is useless we invest the money this year into the economy, so start installing solar on mass to houses, insulation into houses, grants etc, if people are out of jobs offer them jobs if possible working in these companies

Then we go above our target and we can sell our CO2 credits to the hugest bidder next year and pump that money back into the economy

Let Ireland be the “green” capital of the world and then start to export our knowledge, we already have companies who are the world leaders. Mainstream been one

I got solar panels installed, I bought off company with Irish address, it was a team from north who installed and The expert set up guy flew in from the UK to do it, he was over for week

Now why can’t we do that ourselves and then export to Europe when they try to catch up?

This is ridiculous. Why would you install solar panels in a country with almost the least amount of sunshine anywhere. If we take europe. We are only above Iceland in terms of sunshine. Beyond pathetic.

Now if we would be talking about california or new Mexico then that would be a different story.

BarryD2

Calhoun wrote: »

Once the bite from economic uncertainty kicks in we will see where peoples true convictions are.

That's always the bottom line and it applies just as much to the average Green. Squeeze them, cut their standard of living, make them work harder for less, make them do with less than they are accustomed to and you'll soon hear squeals of protest! It's all grand as long as others are carrying the cost.

Which is why we'll end up with some muddled policies that'll please nobody.

Eric Cartman

Ohio9 wrote: »

This is ridiculous. Why would you install solar panels in a country with almost the least amount of sunshine anywhere. If we take europe. We are only above Iceland in terms of sunshine. Beyond pathetic.

Now if we would be talking about california or new Mexico then that would be a different story.

This is where pylons and interconnectors would actually be a good thing. We could solar the south of France, nuclear Scotland , off shore wind turbine the west of Ireland etc.. and share power all over the shop. But ofcouse the greens have no interest.

Shefwedfan

Ohio9 wrote: »

This is ridiculous. Why would you install solar panels in a country with almost the least amount of sunshine anywhere. If we take europe. We are only above Iceland in terms of sunshine. Beyond pathetic.

Now if we would be talking about california or new Mexico then that would be a different story.

Thats what you picked out of the post....:P:P:P:P:P

Calhoun

Shefwedfan wrote: »

Ok, quickly, ireland is on the Paris agreement, we are going to get hit with serious fines very soon, maybe not this year due to virus but next

Instead of spending millions on fines which is useless we invest the money this year into the economy, so start installing solar on mass to houses, insulation into houses, grants etc, if people are out of jobs offer them jobs if possible working in these companies

Then we go above our target and we can sell our CO2 credits to the hugest bidder next year and pump that money back into the economy

Let Ireland be the “green” capital of the world and then start to export our knowledge, we already have companies who are the world leaders. Mainstream been one

I got solar panels installed, I bought off company with Irish address, it was a team from north who installed and The expert set up guy flew in from the UK to do it, he was over for week

Now why can’t we do that ourselves and then export to Europe when they try to catch up?

How are we planning on paying all of that? We doing it out of existing exchequer or are we going to increase taxes to fund it?

How are we going to stop companies charging extra on top of what they know the grants to be? Will it be a case of free install for anyone who needs it in an older house ect?

I looked at converting my oil boiler into a heat recovery system and the prices for it are unreal. I have a near passive house, external insulation and was still quoted around 15-20K.

I have pv cells on my roof, not only do we not have way to sell back to the market but getting a grant for any of this type of item right now is very dodgy. We would really have to make sure that we had the right type of teams in place to make sure the work got done with no cost to the taxpayer.

My point is that all of these items sound great but we have to pay for it somehow, its quite expensive and we need to overhaul the grant system so it can be gotten easily.

Shefwedfan

Eric Cartman wrote: »

This is where pylons and interconnectors would actually be a good thing. We could solar the south of France, nuclear Scotland , off shore wind turbine the west of Ireland etc.. and share power all over the shop. But ofcouse the greens have no interest.

We dont know, I havent seen the details of the 7% yet

BarryD2

Calhoun wrote: »

My point is that all of these items sound great but we have to pay for it somehow, its quite expensive and we need to overhaul the grant system so it can be gotten easily.

I think the general run of it will likely be that those who can afford to upgrade their houses will get the benefit of any grants. Whilst those living closer to the line won't and will end up paying for the privilege of being poor. The virtuous will slap their neighbours backs whilst the Shinners sidle in, feed off the discontent and take over. What then though - out the frying pan and into the fire.

Fann Linn

Shefwedfan wrote: »

We dont know, I havent seen the details of the 7% yet

I hope the results are a bit better than the retrofit programme.

'52% of homes which were energy retrofitted did not benefit according to EU auditors', from an article in today's Indo.

Eric Cartman

Shefwedfan wrote: »

We dont know, I havent seen the details of the 7% yet

the Green Party are anti farming, anti rural, anti car and pro tax, their solutions to get there will not be the most efficient or the most productive for long term environmental stability. They are cash grab politicians who just want to stuff the coffers penalising the workers and rural Ireland in the hope of achieving a reduction they won't achieve.

Tell me how

Calhoun wrote: »

If you want to live in poverty all power to you, there are allot in Ireland who haven't had a good time of it and the thought that they may never be able to improve their lot is not something i think they will take very well.

I don't care about international agreements like most who will be voting when true economic uncertainty comes to bite.

You really think China will give a crap about international agreements? China cares about China, same as the US cares about itself and the wealth it has coming in.

If being the goodboy puts us into a position where people suffers then to hell with it all.

If you want to do something that can improve our lot while also being green then sure people will be open to that but as i said this green party has to spell it out fairly clearly that this is what they plan to do. Right now all i see is the party of more taxes.

You are simply trying to ignore the reality and put it on other people to fix it without impacting on you.

You might not care about international agreements, thankfully, most do.

None of this is about wanting anything, it is about what we need to do.

Calhoun

BarryD2 wrote: »

I think the general run of it will likely be that those who can afford to upgrade their houses will get the benefit of any grants. Whilst those living closer to the line won't and will end up paying for the privilege of being poor. The virtuous will slap their neighbours backs whilst the Shinners sidle in, feed off the discontent and take over. What then though - out the frying pan and into the fire.

I wouldn't be so sure of that unless they really overhaul the grant system. There was a case last year where they ran out of money and i know from building my own house and having a relation who is in the trade that the grant bodies basically tell you its impossible to get.

Maybe they will change it and make it easier.

You are right though the poorer will find it the toughest, sometimes the poorer aren't so obvious. My inlaws would fall into this poorer part, they live in house that was designed back before insulation or anything was a big deal, both retired and some major work would need to go into the house to bring it up to code.

Not to mention the knock on effect of the cost to building new housing stock ect with all this in mind. I had to build my house to near passive standard because that was the law at the time, which was removed by FG because of the cost to builders.

So what it will mean is the housing problem will get a hell of allot worse. This is just one of the rabbit holes you can go down when your policy focuses on only one attribute of society.

Calhoun

Tell me how wrote: »

You are simply trying to ignore the reality and put it on other people to fix it without impacting on you.

You might not care about international agreements, thankfully, most do.

None of this is about wanting anything, it is about what we need to do.

No i am pretty sure i am looking at the reality of who we really are in Ireland and what will come when **** goes bad.

I don't live in a bubble, and just because i am comfortable doesn't mean that i don't see how poorly thought out policy could negatively impact people.

Saying we need to do it regardless of how we do it and the cost on society is just language of zealotry and is why greens are not well liked. People understand something has to be done but its how we do it that matters.

Water John

To quote JFK, 'Ask not what has been done and why but what has not been done and why not'?
Certainly the plan announced previously by Richard Bruton had little ambition. Yet it was to achieve a 3% annual reduction. We had Denis Naughton pouring cold water on a higher ambition, yet as the Minister he did SFA to roll out PV energy generation. BTW we have a similar irridation as southern Germany.
Their is a need for much more research on the agricultural side. It's an area of science that's revealing hopeful options. Here FF/FG look for it to be assessed seperately.
https://www.agriland.ie/farming-news/fine-gael-and-fianna-fail-agree-different-target-needed-for-biogenic-methane/

Tell me how

Calhoun wrote: »

No i am pretty sure i am looking at the reality of who we really are in Ireland and what will come when **** goes bad.

I don't live in a bubble, and just because i am comfortable doesn't mean that i don't see how poorly thought out policy could negatively impact people.

Saying we need to do it regardless of how we do it and the cost on society is just language of zealotry and is why greens are not well liked. People understand something has to be done but its how we do it that matters.

Ok, so this is progress, an agreement that something must be done.

So, what would you advocate for?

My big thing around the environment and Green party position is that people throw the whole lot out at the same time. I think it would be much more advantageous to us if people, who seem to agree there is an issue would suggest something that they think would help instead of saying No, No, No.

Blaze420

Blaze420 wrote: »

Another condescending eco warrior without a clue - if we are hitting 5% in a virus lockdown with minimal traffic/ air travel, where are you finding the extra 2% when things get back to some normality?

To go from 5% to 7% requires an extra 40% reduction/increase

Its obvious the greens have set an improbable target to collaspe governement at time of their choosing


Great political skulduggery

Shefwedfan

Eric Cartman wrote: »

the Green Party are anti farming, anti rural, anti car and pro tax, their solutions to get there will not be the most efficient or the most productive for long term environmental stability. They are cash grab politicians who just want to stuff the coffers penalising the workers and rural Ireland in the hope of achieving a reduction they won't achieve.

I haven’t seen anything to suggest that

Shefwedfan

Blaze420 wrote: »

Another condescending eco warrior without a clue - if we are hitting 5% in a virus lockdown with minimal traffic/ air travel, where are you finding the extra 2% when things get back to some normality?

You got a bit of a story and you couldn’t be bothered reading the rest

40% of Ireland CO2 Is caused by traffic, because of the lockdown this could see a 5% reduction in the CO2 total if it was 2018, the entire year. Just land traffic

We will probably be more in line with Europe at 9% total

Next time read the full article https://www.rte.ie/brainstorm/2020/0423/1134330-traffic-carbon-emissions-climate-change-ireland-coronavirus/

I did already post all this earlier on the thread

Yellow_Fern

Shefwedfan wrote: »

Originally Posted by Fann Linn View Post
I hope the results are a bit better than the retrofit programme.

'52% of homes which were energy retrofitted did not benefit according to EU auditors', from an article in today's Indo.

So idea, but my two houses I retrofitted certainly did....

This report is right. There myriad ways that retrofit schemes make a limited impact and the return on investment tends to be extremely low unless you DIY it or are surgically accurate on the best retrofit option.

Shefwedfan

Yellow_Fern wrote: »

This report is right. There myriad ways that retrofit schemes make a limited impact and the return on investment tends to be extremely low unless you DIY it or are surgically accurate on the best retrofit option.

Surgically accurate?

Rolling out some insulation in the attic alone will provide better insulation in a house and reduce heating cost

Calhoun

Tell me how wrote: »

Ok, so this is progress, an agreement that something must be done.

So, what would you advocate for?

My big thing around the environment and Green party position is that people throw the whole lot out at the same time. I think it would be much more advantageous to us if people, who seem to agree there is an issue would suggest something that they think would help instead of saying No, No, No.

I would advocate for mainstream parties to bring in green measures linked to social policy. Green measures on their own or in a vacuum is not ideal and just leads to bad situations.

The problem with the greens is they are carrying the stigma of the crash just like FF and their stigma is a party of tax everything. its further hindered by some of the faux pas that came out of the election cycle that people remember. You got to remember people aren't fighting this because they are ignorant for the most part they are just scared have families to look after and want to make sure its done in the right manner.

I would expect a fully thought out and well planned environmental plan that linked social policy, so that it takes into account the quality of life people has and protects it where it can.

As its a wide area, one example of what i mean is that i would make sure that all social housing stock was brought up to code in terms of insulation and getting to more sustainable fuel types. All future housing stock most comply to build regulations that are more sustainable and some form of capital investment put in place to make it happen and finally a well regulated grant system put in place in a way that it costs our vulnerable nothing but gets the job done.

Calhoun

Shefwedfan wrote: »

Surgically accurate?

Rolling out some insulation in the attic alone will provide better insulation in a house and reduce heating cost

By how much enough to off set the increase in price on fuel?

Sure it sound so simple i don't understand why the peasants are arguing. Just give every family in Ireland 5-10 rolls of insulation. Job done and people can stop complaining.

Shefwedfan

Calhoun wrote: »

By how much enough to off set the increase in price on fuel?

Sure it sound so simple i don't understand why the peasants are arguing. Just give every family in Ireland 5-10 rolls of insulation. Job done and people can stop complaining.

I don’t understand your point?

Please explain

Calhoun

Shefwedfan wrote: »

I don’t understand your point?

Please explain

I was being sarcastic it sounded like you were essentially saying to bring buildings up to better standard we just needed attic insulation.

Rather than actually bringing the BER ratings up through actual investment which may require, replacement of all windows, attic insulation, wall insulation and so on.

Ideally as well if you are truly looking to make a change you would try and get as many as possible off fossil fuels and onto the likes of heat pump and recovery systems.

Tell me how

Calhoun wrote: »

I would advocate for mainstream parties to bring in green measures linked to social policy. Green measures on their own or in a vacuum is not ideal and just leads to bad situations.

The problem with the greens is they are carrying the stigma of the crash just like FF and their stigma is a party of tax everything. its further hindered by some of the faux pas that came out of the election cycle that people remember. You got to remember people aren't fighting this because they are ignorant for the most part they are just scared have families to look after and want to make sure its done in the right manner.

I would expect a fully thought out and well planned environmental plan that linked social policy, so that it takes into account the quality of life people has and protects it where it can.

As its a wide area, one example of what i mean is that i would make sure that all social housing stock was brought up to code in terms of insulation and getting to more sustainable fuel types. All future housing stock most comply to build regulations that are more sustainable and some form of capital investment put in place to make it happen and finally a well regulated grant system put in place in a way that it costs our vulnerable nothing but gets the job done.

I appreciate that there is consideration gone in to this post. I would suggest that people shouldn't ask that the Green Party be held to a higher standard than other parties. Have FF/FG been widely seen to have produced accurate, costed, manifestos which they then delivered on?

I do feel the Greens are in a difficult situation in that traditionally, weaker parties suffer when a government coalition is seen to have under delivered. I wouldn't see anything in your last paragraph that the greens would have a problem with.

I think people broadly need to fall in to 2 categories, those who either think action is needed on the climate and will make suggestions to this effect, or that they don't think action is needed and that they are open about that.

The greens are not blameless here, some of their vocal supporters would rather wait for an entirely new government and they have been reluctant to point to any efforts by the government in relation to Covid-19 as being positive. They speak of their concern that they will take the brunt at the next GE, which is understandable, but the alternative is to stay on the outside and complain that nothing is being done.

Yellow_Fern

Shefwedfan wrote: »

Surgically accurate?

Rolling out some insulation in the attic alone will provide better insulation in a house and reduce heating cost

Yes. Retrofit measures are often not tailored to optimal return on investment of a specific house. Ireland houses are very individual even one estate. Achieving emissions targets requires enormous upgrades many with very poor returns and may require many house demolitions.

Shefwedfan

Calhoun wrote: »

I was being sarcastic it sounded like you were essentially saying to bring buildings up to better standard we just needed attic insulation.

Rather than actually bringing the BER ratings up through actual investment which may require, replacement of all windows, attic insulation, wall insulation and so on.

Ideally as well if you are truly looking to make a change you would try and get as many as possible off fossil fuels and onto the likes of heat pump and recovery systems.

Plenty of small jobs can increase a ber rating without huge investment

Attic insulation is low cost but has a huge impact to a house as the roof is one of the major point heat gets out, heat rises and all that. You don’t need to increase your ber rating to reduce your heating bills....

Loads of houses in Dublin, all with new windows, doors etc and not correct attic insulation, similar all around Ireland. So yes a couple of rolls of attic insulation could have a huge saving on heating bills, if you reduced 100 ltr Oil per house with attic insulation you could remove the burning of over1 million ltr of oil

You think that would have affect on CO2?

Shefwedfan

Yellow_Fern wrote: »

Yes. Retrofit measures are often not tailored to optimal return on investment of a specific house. Ireland houses are very individual even one estate. Achieving emissions targets requires enormous upgrades many with very poor returns and may require many house demolitions.

I disagree

I have renovated house from top to bottom and everything in between, plus I don’t even work in that industry, just my own houses etc

Attic insulation
Replacement immersion tank
TRVs
Insulation on copper pipes
Even moving an oil boiler from a garage to a shed direct at house reduces heat loss while transferring the hot water into house

These are all small investments.....

Water John

The first tranche of houses that will be upgraded is, the social housing. This can be controlled and measureable from a Govn't POV.

McMurphy

Doesn't exactly sound like the greens are chomping at the bit to accept whatever was thrown to them by FF/G

https://m.independent.ie/irish-news/politics/huge-unrest-in-greens-grassroots-at-fffgs-reply-to-their-demands-39169425.html

A Green Party source said there was "huge unrest" among the party's grassroots and, as things stand, they did not believe party members would vote with the two-thirds majority required to enter government.