"Green" policies are destroying this country

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118935074#Comment_118935074

I've demonstrated that I'm able to read what you write. I've countered every point you've made. You just stopped making points after your first reply and instead started waffling while feverishly consulting a thesaurus to make up for the fact that you don't actually have a counter-argument to make.

Here is what DaCor wrote:

The ban relates to the selling of turf, not the cutting of it for private use where turbary rights exist.

Here is your reply:

You've omitted that under this proposed "ban" - for anyone harvesting their own turf, it would be illegal to even give it to friends, family or neighbours

I provided proof that selling turf cut harvested via turbary rights was always illegal. I even eventually provided 7 different links, from 3 different newspaper, 3 different solicitors, and the PRAI all confirming that this was already illegal. All these links were from the last several years.

I immediately proved that your claim was factually incorrect.

All you could offer was:

>Posting by reply about the existence of an irirrelevant archaic and equally unworkable restriction on turbary rights arising from the days of Landlordism and offered in defence of said green party policy would also be a "riduclously stupid" position

'posting by reply'

'posting by reply' what other way would I reply?

'irirrelevant'

How is it 'irirrelevant' if newspapers, solicitors, and parliamentary questions all continue to contain reference to it or write entire articles on it? How is it 'irirrelevant' if the people harvesting the turf are only able to do so because they have and use these rights? The reason I can't go to a random bog and cut turf for my own usage is because I don't have turbary rights. The reason the people we are discussing can do so, is because they (or rather, their dwelling) has. Axiomatically, turbary rights can not be 'irirrelevant'.

archaic

Much, if not the majority of our legislation is old. Even the most recent Road Traffic Act will make reference to legislation almost a century old You're just outing yourself as not knowing even the basics of our common law legal system while pontificating on it.

equally unworkable

You never explained how it's unworkable to ban the sale of a good. Probably because you can't, given we ban (or limit) the sale of many goods.

arising from the days of Landlordism

Again, outing yourself as knowing nothing about our legal system.

You then posted four or five different times stating that I was backpedalling and refusing to truthfully answer anything, all while spattering your comments with words you were using incorrectly after having clearly looked them up in a thesaurus - even though I had proved, with many external references, that your comment was factually incorrect.

You never offered up anything to support your position. Not a single thing. Yet here you are, feverishly replying each time, mistaking acting arrogant and condescending as a replacement for actually having an intelligent, rational, well-argued position.

charlie14

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118935576#Comment_118935576

Somebody should take Hazel aside and explain to her that the 2 year health crisis was due to a virus, not our air quality which is up there with the best in the world. They could also tell her to cut out the scare tactics as well. It`s just nasty attempting to link turf with Covid.

If Hazel really wants to make herself useful she could answer the question on how the greens propose to differentiate legally between someone selling a few bags of turf to a neighbour and someone who is a bulk supplier.

I`m looking forward to how they intend wording that legislation with an estimated 100,000 tonne of coal coming into this state every year from Northern Ireland, some of it of questionable sulphur content with no carbon tax or V.A.T. being paid into state coffers either, and they seem unable or unwilling to do anything about it.

Mecanudo

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118936077#Comment_118936077

Whats with the feigned outrage? A couple of hours ago you were giving out stink that posters were "reposting the same content". And when someone posts something new you go off the deep end. What gives?

I posted a linked tweet as another example of the type of tabloid coverage the greens have descended to in an effort to garner support. And that point stands.

The only "bulls**t" (to use your phrase) is your own reply going off the deep end for some bizzzare reason and yet another example of the woeful 'standard' of replies and attempt to shut down discussion.

One thing for sure I certainly don't get the constant policing of the thread. Afaik posters can detail information, tweets etc in their comments. If you don't like a comment - then report it. Otherwise thats just whinging.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118935202#Comment_118935202

Why are you laughing out loud while outing yourself as, once again, not understanding the words you pepper your posts with?

I've pointed out that you're lying. I've proved you wrong via external links and screenshots. I've pointed out multiple times that you're using words incorrectly, including linking to a dictionary. Yet you live in a fantasy land where a screenshot somehow doesn't state what it says it does and a dictionary definition doesn't mean what it says it means.

Soliloquy:

Are we characters in a play? No

Am I speaking my thoughts out loud? No

Am I speaking my thoughts out loud regardless of any hearers? Considering I'm replying to your posts point-by-point... No.

A soliloquy can never refer to someone's written thoughts, it is definitionally about spoken words or dialogue if in text.

See the above? That's me once again proving something about your posts. What have you not once done? Prove anything about my posts.

SlowBlowin

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118936131#Comment_118936131

OK, find an advert for peat briquettes sold by volume and put the link up, and clam down, you like everyone else is not perfect.

Oil emissions are measure with TOE:

Energy unit types

• Joule (J): Joule is the international unit of energy
• Kilowatt hour (kWh): This is the conventional unit of energy that electricity is measured by and charged for commercially.
• Tonne of oil equivalent (toe): This is a conventional standardised unit of energy (41.868 GJ), and is defined on the basis of a tonne of typical oil having a net calorific value of 41,868 kJ/kg. A related unit is the kilogram of oil equivalent (kgoe), where 1,000 kgoe = 1 toe.

The GP don't use volume, the seai don't use volume, I have never seen volume uses comparing solid fuel emissions, other than your post. I am sure some do exist but that are in a tiny minority, fuels are compared by weight, you might not like that but its how its done.

But I do agree with you 600% does sound much better than 75%.

If you want to argue the point, first do it with the SEAI and GP not me.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118936215#Comment_118936215

OK, find an advert for peat briquettes sold by volume and put the link up,

We're talking about turf, not peat briquettes. If your very first sentence is you disingenuously changing the goalposts, that doesn't bode well...

Oil emissions are measure with TOE:

But I never mentioned emissions, I mentioned heat output. Your second sentence is also disingenuously changing the goalposts.

Don't accuse others of sensationalism, immaturity or bad science when you argue dishonestly.

P.S.

https://www.donedeal.ie/heating-for-sale/turf/30708240

https://www.donedeal.ie/heating-for-sale/cheap-turf/30926468

https://www.donedeal.ie/heating-for-sale/turf/29883067

or indeed https://www.donedeal.ie/heating?area=Leinster&words=turf

They are selling based on volume, just like I said.

This is me backing my arguments up. Feel free to apologise for being wrong.

Mecanudo

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118936191#Comment_118936191

Jaysus christy. You don't have belabour a point lol.

OK I'll stop you right there. This is from your comment above

Here is what DaCor wrote:

The ban relates to the selling of turf, not the cutting of it for private use where turbary rights exist.

Here is (my) reply:

You've omitted that under this proposed "ban" - for anyone harvesting their own turf, it would be illegal to even give it to friends, family or neighbours

You do understand the difference between selling and giving ... to friends, family  or neighbours ?

Please please tell me you do?

Eitherway your claim that my comment was somehow "factually incorrect" according to you, is bs . DaCor did indeed omit that as reported re the proposed green ban that "it would be illegal to even give (cut turf) to friends, family or neighbours"

I'm really sorry but I'm not going to engage in the rest of the waffle and deconstruction you've engaged in by way of trying to start yet another argument.

Goodbye

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118936248#Comment_118936248

Those links point out that turbary rights only allowed the turf harvested to be used as fuel in one's own home. Therefore they couldn't be sold, given away, or even used to heat an outbuilding.

I already stated that. The links you claimed you had read, stated that.

That has been known to you since the beginning. Yet still you argued on, using your thesaurus, rather than simply admitting you were wrong.

Mecanudo

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118936209#Comment_118936209

Look wetasanotter. Not to be rude, but I'm not going to engage with your continued and ridiculous pedanty. I've already called this out in your previous comment.

Goodbye.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118936263#Comment_118936263

'Replying to me point by point is ridiculous pedantry. How dare you point out my inconsistencies, my mistakes and my failings and expect me to acknowledge them. Don't you know who I am? Haven't you gazed upon the splendour of my thesaurus-laced posts? KNEEL BEFORE YOUR THESAURUS GOD"

SlowBlowin

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118936240#Comment_118936240

So are you saying briquettes are better than turf because you get more heat from a bag ?

Can you explain why energy density is important to you/relevant with regard to emissions or deaths ?

Why use it , when everyone else uses weight if not to sensationalise you post ?

Keep going you are digging a bigger hole than Bord Na Mona.

SlowBlowin

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118936275#Comment_118936275

Actually the energy density thing is not worth bothering with either, if you don't understand the common sense of comparing various fuels by weight then its not worth bothering with, its basic science.

brokenangel

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118936124#Comment_118936124

Shocking isn’t it 😂

Mecanudo

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118918749#Comment_118918749

You're not wrong lol.

SlowBlowin

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118936327#Comment_118936327

I think I have the answer, we just need to compress the peat to twice the density of coal then everything is OK.

Mecanudo

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118936337#Comment_118936337

Ah yes I think that's what's known in the industry as IDT aka Incredibly Dense Turf. Could be just the thing all right

charlie14

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118936124#Comment_118936124

Not overly surprised that an Irish Green party representative would attempt to link air quality to Covid. Cheap and nasty.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118936391#Comment_118936391

Once more I'll repeat, while pretty much every GP member is an environmentalist, not all environmentalists are GP members.

charlie14

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118936400#Comment_118936400

What is that supposed to be, some kind of a riddle wrapped in a mystery inside an enigma ?

Hazel is a Green party member and politician is she not ?

Mecanudo

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118936457#Comment_118936457

Someone a while back gave a very good definition of a "green".

Can't seem to find it, but it was very good and pretty much covers this odd thing of denialism that seems to crop up repeatedly.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118936291#Comment_118936291

So you're not backing up your points? You're not acknowledging being disingenuous and incorrect? You're not apologising for wrongly claiming I was being sensationalist, immature and engaging in bad science?

I claimed that a bag of coal produces 600% the heat output of a bag of turf. Coal, and turf, are both generally sold by the same volume bag, albeit with differing weights. I proved that turf is generally sold via volume (and via coal bags).

Coal producing 600% more heat for the same volume is relevant to talking about the 'poor people down the country not being able to afford to heat their homes' because it shows that you need 6 bags of turf to produce the same heat output as 1 bag of coal. I never mentioned emissions, my point wasn't about emissions, and no-one had ever mentioned briquettes.

You then started maundering on about briquettes for no reason, started talking about emissions for no reason, refused to back up your points or actually counter mine, and when I pointed out you were talking nonsense and being dishonest while doing so, you then changed the goalposts yet again.

Here was my original sentence:

but everyone zeroed in on how it targeted poor Jimmy harvesting turf and selling it to his even poorer old neighbour who would literally die if she had to buy a tank of oil or a bag of coal instead of Jimmy's turf - even though the same volume bag of coal as turf provides 600% the heat output.

How are briquettes, or emissions, relevant to my statement being "sensationalist, immature and bad science"? When you need 6 bags of turf to produce the same equivalent heat output of 1 bag of coal, it shows the falseness in peoples claims that banning the sale of turf will doom people to fuel poverty. I didn't make any claim about emissions, I never mentioned briquettes. You brought them up when I pointed out you were being nonsensical.

Do I need to point out the irony that those 3 claims are instead correct in describing your posts, and that I've conclusively proved such already?

You don't understand the difference between volume and weight. You don't understand that different fuels use different measurements. You don't understand the difference between briquettes and turf (!), and you don't understand that a point about the financial cost of purchasing turf vs coal is different than a point about the emissions both would emit for the same amount of heat output (and btw, 6 bags of turf will emit more emissions than 1 bag of coal as per https://www.seai.ie/data-and-insights/seai-statistics/conversion-factors/ )

Pa ElGrande

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118936124#Comment_118936124

On the flip side, the word "believer" is extremely revealing, as in, do you believe climate change is real? You have confirmed for all to see that your cause is a religion by your use of the word "denier" showing you have you have taken an ideological position.  Even if people accept all the basic tenets of the physics involved they can still conclude based on evidence that the threat of a dangerously large warming is so improbable as to be negligible, while the threat of real harm from the proposed mitigation policies is already so high as to be worrying, if you will that the cure is proving far worse than the disease is ever likely to be.

SlowBlowin

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118936541#Comment_118936541

Look again - I never said you were incorrect, your emotions are running away with you, I said its irrelevant and it is.

I am not prepared to pollute this thread further trying to explain basic science to you. I have already stated everyone compares solid fuel thermal output/emissions by the weight of the fuel and you disagree. If want to argue against that it wont be with me, do it with the GP/SEAI, or go back to taking the rubbers of the end of your pencils..

gladvimpaker

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118935089#Comment_118935089

Absolutely spot on. Actually we have regular southwesterly winds filtering out the so called bad air. A lot of people who are in their 40's and 50's etc can remember all the climate scares. Acid rain and the fear went on for a few years I remember that.

A lot of the damage to the environment is sanctioned by the same people who are peddling carbon taxes. Look at the way materials are extracted for electric car batteries, you won't get any threads about that here. Because it's against the narrative. Are people unable to think for themselves, do people is high places think we have the retention of goldfish ?

They're taxing us for their fault 's and inequities,as for wind turbines and the damage they do to migration of birds, mammals etc especially whale's and dolphins near the coast lines, their echolocation is being tormented. Bats are getting slaughtered by wind turbines...

tom1ie

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118934861#Comment_118934861

I take it this is alluding to me.

Let me set the record straight here.

Not once have you actually answered my questions, instead you have replied with stock answers of “read the policy” or “contact your TD”.

you have dragged this thread into absolute nonsense that goes around around in circles without you actually contributing anything.

I can only infer from your lack of clarity on “answering” any of the questions posed by me and others on this thread, that you are happy to depend on the UK for our gas supply post 2025 once corrib runs out, which flies in the face of what the CRU has said and what the chairperson of the climate council said on PT on Thursday plus what the majority of sane posters are trying to tell you on here.

For what it’s worth I am not an FFG voter nor am I affiliated with any political party although I must admit I voted for the GP at the last election as I am pro Enviromental action, which is why I want to see off shore wind farms, a green hydrogen industry and trees planted.

However I am realistic and I realise we need gas as a transition fuel. I also realise depending on the UK post 2025 is a bad idea and Eamon Ryan seems to be trying his best to put us in that space.

So please stop your pontificating and provide some answers for posters on this thread and maybe less of the caustic replies when your called out on something you’ve got wrong-again.

RandomViewer

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118936541#Comment_118936541

It's not about heat intensity, bag of coal on its own won't keep the fire on for 2 days, you might be boiled out of it at that stage but then what? All the turf has to do is heat the rooms to 16-20 degrees, it does that cheaply, this is about cost not heat efficiency, I sometimes wonder if the Green party understand the concept of money?

brokenangel

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118936764#Comment_118936764

Plenty of the same “people” have posted about the electric cars

I suggest you actually check into it, but rich to be shout about electric cars when they provide details on where batteries come from while laptop/mobile/all the battery good you have don’t and never will

A wind coming from the sea doesn’t bring in clean air by the way 🤦‍♂️

All the plastic shite been dumped into the sea is the problem whales and dolphins….

The old goldfish around here is…..

brokenangel

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118936877#Comment_118936877

Coal will keep a fire going on it own perfectly fine.

Turf is spewing s**te into the air. That's the problem.

Everyone is aware of money, we are also aware of trying to leave some sort of planet for our children. What people seem to think is they are ok to leave the place in a pig sty just because they are too miserable to buy more sustainable fuel

P.S. I am sure you will come back with some post about the poor people not been able to afford anything but turf but none of the posters on here give a cr*p about anyone that might be struggling. They just fire it out

paddyisreal

You have to laugh, sums up the greens

https://fb.watch/cqU0XAtraW/

gladvimpaker

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118936895#Comment_118936895

No you're right, clean onshore winds comes from the Atlantic ocean. I assume you're living on the east coast where the easterly winds prevail.