Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

"Green" policies are destroying this country

Options
12542552572592601062

Comments

  • Registered Users Posts: 1,279 ✭✭✭paddyisreal


    Its Guaranteed the greens will move on the smoky coal ban, they will have to otherwise risk bringing down the government . There are more people getting sick from fuel poverty than air pollution in irlenad no matter what gibbons,ryan tell people.

    Heres an idea for the greens....

    If they want people off smoky coal, bruquettes, turf well then why dont they subsidiise the eco fuels and make them as cheap as possible so people will burn them?



  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    "There are more people getting sick from fuel poverty than air pollution in irlenad no matter what gibbons,ryan tell people."

    If that's true, it should be possible for you to provide a source.

    Why don't you go do so?



  • Registered Users Posts: 4,242 ✭✭✭brokenangel


    Yes solar thermal to heat water to replace immersion but not to heat water for the heating system….



    from the website: Solar thermal systems transform energy from the sun into hot water for your home. They are designed to meet 50 - 60% of your annual hot water needs.

    This grant will help you install a solar thermal system to heat hot water for your home



  • Registered Users Posts: 6,191 ✭✭✭RandomViewer


    If it can heat the copper cylinder it can heat the radiators, for all the hot water most people use I can't see the point.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 2,049 ✭✭✭Mecanudo


    Please point exactly what you don't understand about what was posted viz.

    " 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"

    And yes that as an clearly unworkable policy would indeed be

    Yet another example of the ridiculous stupidity of the highest order and something truly worthy of the idiocy of green party policies.

    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

    Post edited by Mecanudo on


  • Registered Users Posts: 4,242 ✭✭✭brokenangel


    I’m not trying to sell it to you, just trying to explain what it does.

    plenty of people have invested in it over the years and very happy with it….I would love to add thermal to the PV panels



  • Registered Users Posts: 2,049 ✭✭✭Mecanudo


    DaCor considering the abject quality of much of the contrary contributions to the topic of "Green" policies are destroying the country, "logical contributions" have certainly not been a feature of that except with some minor exceptions imho.



  • Registered Users Posts: 1,279 ✭✭✭paddyisreal




  • Registered Users Posts: 6,191 ✭✭✭RandomViewer


    I can see an increase in the suicide rate in the next year, people are seriously struggling , anyone with any kind of borrowing must be dreading every bill.

    Government have to make it possible that all retrofits can be availed of by all with no up front payment and repayments spread over 20 years if necessary.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 4,242 ✭✭✭brokenangel




  • Registered Users Posts: 6,191 ✭✭✭RandomViewer


    Not if you are working,you'd have to borrow halfthe money and chances are your wages wouldn't be high enough,thered also be quite a number of people with no credit ratings,add to that lots of people would already be maxed on loans with mortgage etc. It would have to be a state loan system, not one from a financial institution, think of it like the old ESB shop where many houses got their first fridge and washing machine through their electric bill over a lengthy period. Payments could be deducted along with tax on wages and if you lose your job a reduced amount off SW.

    Remember the government figured €350 a week was enough to cover Covid so they know that real wages are quite small.



  • Registered Users Posts: 2,848 ✭✭✭?Cee?view


    I can’t read the article as it’s behind a paywall, but what do you think that legislation has to do with selling turf?



  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    Fyi, open the article in an incognito tab to read it

    From the article

    It is important to note that the extent of the right is limited to the fuel requirements of the dwelling house.

    It is not a right to cut and sell turf.

    Article is from "Karen Walsh, from a farming background, is a solicitor practicing in Walsh & Partners"



  • Registered Users Posts: 6,191 ✭✭✭RandomViewer


    Think Miriam O Callaghan asked to be sacked on Primetime just now. Twisted the SF man's answer to protect Eamon Ryan,



  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    I understand your comment perfectly well. Your comment was factually incorrect. The legislation and legal position on the ability to resell turf harvested via turbary rights are clear - the fact that they have not been enforced for some period of time is irrelevant. It has always been illegal to to sell or give turf harvested via turbary rights to friends, family or neighbours.

    That you were ignorant of this does not change that fact, it just makes it a fact that you were offering an ignorant & factually incorrect opinion.


    Speaking of incorrect, you also used 'viz' incorrectly.


    Better luck trying to appear smart next time!



  • Registered Users Posts: 4,242 ✭✭✭brokenangel



    On another thread from a SF supporter they seemed to be impressed with the question

    So bit confused now on what happened



  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    No it doesn't. That alone.ie article references this https://www.publichealth.ie/sites/default/files/documents/files/FuelPoverty_0.pdf report from 2007

    This report states 'Ireland and Northern Ireland have among the highest levels of excess winter mortality in Europe, with an estimated 2,800 excess deaths on the island over the winter months.', using a paper from 2003 as it's only reference.

    The 2003 paper used data from 1988-1997 for its statistics on calculating excess winter mortality rates.

    So, your claim that more people are 'dying now' from fuel poverty is based on data from 25-34 years ago.

    Strike 1

    The report just measures excess winter mortality compared to non-winter periods. That means it's just calculating how many extra people die in Winter. Excess mortality in winter is mainly due to respiratory causes (e.g. pneumonia, influenza etc) & cardiovascular causes. Not all of these deaths are related to fuel poverty. There's no way to even link such. All it says is that between 1988-1997, about ~2,800 extra people died during the winter months than non-winter months **NI & Ireland**. That's not in any way supportive of a claim that '3000' people die each year in Ireland due to fuel poverty right now.


    Strike 2

    The actual report does say that they calculate that 652 deaths per year in Ireland in the period 1988-1997 can be considered to have been contributed by poor housing standards. Their reference for this is another paper the authors had previously published (https://jech.bmj.com/content/54/9/719) , that correlated cardiovascular and respiratory death rates between Norway & Ireland throughout summer & winter months and linked the difference in Winter to primarily being housing standards, rather than any other factors - which is point blank bad science.

    The report also says that improvement of housing standards in Northern Ireland seemed to have contributed to a decline in excess mortality linked to housing standards.

    Lastly, housing standards are not exactly the same as fuel poverty and conflating one with the other is disingenuous.

    Strike 3



  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    The individuals cutting turf on the 'common' bogs are generally cutting this turf via turbary rights attached to the house they own. Without these rights, they couldn't cut it. These same rights have always stated (and they used to be enforced) that they also can't sell or gift or use it any way other than to heat the home which has the turbary rights attached.

    Many such sold the turf anyway when it stopped being enforced - even though this was illegal.

    The proposed ban on selling turf means that there is the prospect of people who were breaking the law by selling turf harvested using their turbary rights, finally facing curtailment of these illegal activities.

    Again, what they were doing was always illegal - it just stopped being enforced.

    Commenters everywhere who are completely ignorant on the topic started maundering on and offering their 'learned' opinions on how this was a travesty and yet another example of 'Green policies destroying this country' even though it is simply the enforcement of existing legislation. The only new part of the legislation is that it bans commercial harvesters from selling turf, 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.



  • Registered Users Posts: 1,279 ✭✭✭paddyisreal


    Strike 1,2,3 altogether : You do know that alone deal with vulnerable older people all the time and i doubt the ceo would just state what he did below in late 2021 or are you saying he is telling porky pies?

    Also you do know the

    CEO of ALONE Seán Moynihan commented: “Older people are one of the highest at risk groups of fuel poverty, with many relying on the State Pension as their main source of income, which is below the poverty line. Nearly 3,000 deaths are related to fuel poverty on the island of Ireland over the winter months, the highest in Europe[2], older people make up the bulk of these deaths.


    I rather believe the ceo of alone than yourself... They see it everyday but hey as i said maybe hes just a bullshitter

    If you dont believe alone then maybe an oireactas report 2022 might convince you


    Consequences of energy poverty

    of certain vulnerable people and households being unable to 

    afford to meet their energy needs. 

    It is well established that certain groups are more vulnerable to energy poverty and its 

    consequences. This may be because they are poorer and have limited capacity to meet their 

    energy costs, particularly in a fluctuating market reliant on imported fuels, or because they have 

    increased energy needs, or both of these factors combined. Groups that are most frequently s of energy poverty can be described as impacting on people in 

    three broad ways: 

    ▪ Health and wellbeing.

    ▪ Social inclusion and social cohesion; and 

    ▪ Housing tenure.

    These will now be explored briefly in turn. 

    Health and well being

    Energy poverty has been shown to be both a consequence and cause of poor health outcomes. 

    There is evidence of a link between being energy poor and ill health. According to Thomson et al

    (2017): 

    “The energy poor population is statistically more likely to report poor health and emotional 

    well-being than the non-energy poor population, with a higher incidence of bad and very 

    bad SRH [self-reported health], poor emotional well-being, and likely depression.”27

    In Ireland, and globally,28 there is evidence of cold-related deaths in the winters, and such deaths 

    are experienced in higher numbers by older people.29 Excess winter deaths are defined as those 

    which take place in winter in excess of the deaths in the preceding and following four-month 

    seasons. According to a WHO report, there are about a quarter of a million excess deaths each year in Europe

    Post edited by paddyisreal on


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 1,279 ✭✭✭paddyisreal


    Rubbiish, turbary rights have been handed down for generatioms and people cut for their neighbours all the time since the land commission took over from the old english landlorders.

    If you say the law was enforced it should be easy enough for you to provide evidence if this in the last 100 years?



  • Registered Users Posts: 4,242 ✭✭✭brokenangel


    Just an idea, instead of quoting teh CEO of alone on a thread, if you are concerned then why not go an help Alone?

    I personally have loads of elderly neighbours in the area and the whole community always makes sure that people visit etc, especially during covid it was great to see the community come together and those friendship have continued


    I see it all the time here, people fire out something and then move onto teh next shocking statement. Why not try and help alone instead of just using them for trying to win a point online?



  • Registered Users Posts: 2,049 ✭✭✭Mecanudo


    Lol trying to back peddle I see. And clearly won't truthfully answer the question asked.

    So again. Please point out as per your bizarre claim which part was "factually incorrect" in the comment posted in reply to another poster viz*

    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 own hysterical reply to that comment is irrelevant to the fact that information was indeed omitted and which I highlighted.

    You going off on a "ridiculously stupid" diatribe about archaic turbary restrictions was completely irrelevant to the above.

    That you additionaly proffered the same archaic turbary restriction as some type of bizarre justification for the green party's current policy, further highlights the fact that your reply was both ignorant and factually irrelevant

    But nothing like a load of passionate exaggeration and superfluous use of irrelevant information to attack another poster.

    To quote 'Maybe better luck with trying to look smart next time'.

    *I'm so sorry that my grammatical usage on boards is not up to your precise personal standards (there is a name for that afaik), but if you do not know that "viz" is also used in the sense of "namely" or "as follows.” where eg and ie are not applicable I really can't help that.

    Edit: meant to say you linked to the following SI where you stated that

    "It has always been illegal to to sell or give turf harvested via turbary rights to friends, family or neighbours."

    https://www.irishstatutebook.ie/eli/1951/si/40/made/en/print

    Except that SI contains no such restrictions. Perhaps you're confused again.

    What it does state with regard to turbary rights

    "means a right to cut and carry away turf from the bog-land and includes the right of preparing and storing on the bog-land any turf cut therefrom."

    It says nothing about the owner with said rights being prohibited from cutting turf and then giving any such turf to friends, neighbours or family.

    Post edited by Mecanudo on


  • Registered Users Posts: 2,049 ✭✭✭Mecanudo


    ..



  • Registered Users Posts: 1,279 ✭✭✭paddyisreal


    Probably the most stupid comment i have seen on this thread. Even worse than your Brexit debacle. You claim to know on an anonymous forum what charities etc i am are arent involved in..... Bizarre



  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    I rather believe the ceo of alone than yourself... They see it everyday but hey as i said maybe hes just a bullshitter

    Ere, see that #2 in the quote you have from the CEO, that's a reference to the study that he is using for his 3,000 figure. He is referencing it incorrectly as @[Deleted User] showed. The study and its associated sources are all linked from that Alone statement so you can see for yourself that the CEO mins-interpreted the data



  • Registered Users Posts: 2,049 ✭✭✭Mecanudo


    Wetasanotter's comment was all over the place, especially considering the repeated and bizarre use of American baseball "strike" terminology amongst other oddities.

    The governments own National Energy and Climate Plan 2021-2030 appears to give the same findings quoted for deaths due to fuel poverty based on the same estimated annual figures.

    "Deprivation of heat in the home, often also referred to as fuel or energy poverty, is another area of deprivation that has received attention in recent times. A 2007 policy paper7 from the Institute for Public Health (IPH) entitled “Fuel Poverty and Health” highligh ted the sizeable direct and indirect effects on health of fuel poverty. Overall the IPH found that the levels of fuel poverty in Ireland remain “unacceptably high” and that they are responsible for “among the highest levels of excess winter mortality in Europe, with an estimated 2,800 excess deaths on the island over the winter months”. They also highlighted the strong links between low income, unemployment and fuel poverty with single person households and households headed by lone parents and pensioners found to be at highest risk. Similarly, the policy paper shows that older people are more likely to experience fuel poverty due to lower standards of housing coupled with lower income

    If you think the data the government is using in that report is wrong, best get in touch with them and tell them.

    https://assets.gov.ie/76068/e7891cd1-76ca-4de2-8353-eff39ea6223d.pdf&ved=2ahUKEwiSvaTE45T3AhWFilwKHSbtDzgQFnoECAoQAQ&usg=AOvVaw0ZAl7C18J3Yg-6uEVZ549i

    Post edited by Mecanudo on


  • Registered Users Posts: 4,242 ✭✭✭brokenangel




  • Registered Users Posts: 4,242 ✭✭✭brokenangel


    It seems the requirements for planning permission will be changed soon for Solar PV. Not that anyone adheres to them anymore after the case in Limerick. Should clean up the question for many buyers



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 2,049 ✭✭✭Mecanudo


    "It seems the requirements for planning permission will be changed soon for Solar PV. Not that anyone adheres to them anymore"

    Our current planning system lacks any transparancy or indeed consistency across the countrys multitude of unregulated county councils and there's a running joke with regard to planning to such things as housing and Solar PV. The case taken against limerick Councils planning department is a case in point.

    Interestingly the green party's own website seem to be suggesting that any abrogation of the current planning laws for Solar PV relates only to public building, schools and agricultural buildings?

    https://www.greenparty.ie/news/planning-exemptions-solar-panel-bills-soon-become-reality-greens-welcome-update-taoiseach

    Elsewhere I note the greens are actually blocking necessary reforms to our planning systems with predictable political fallout

    The Green Party are currently 'opposing the overhaul of planning laws being proposed by Minister of State Peter Burke, who has said housing delivery could be accelerated by a crackdown on what he labelled an “industry” of judicial reviews'

    The greens are arguing for maintaining the current planning system, which funnily enough sees a constant stream of legal challenges in the form of legal actions from various "green" interests holding up many housing and essential infrastructure projects.

    https://m.independent.ie/irish-news/politics/obrien-backs-fine-gael-plans-to-overhaul-planning-process-as-greens-oppose-it-41306838.html



Advertisement