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
13613623643663671062

Comments

  • Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators Posts: 5,031 Mod ✭✭✭✭spacetweek


    Sourdough isn't out of fashion! In many of the places I eat/shop (Dublin) it has completely replaced every other type of bread.



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


    I know it is not relevant to commercial growing but Irish soil can produce a lot of stuff.

    Some ssoils are suitable. But you're correct, Small scale backyard growing doesn't equate to commercial horticultural production. There's also a big difference between growing field crops such as potatoes , onions and cabbages and salad type produce in growhouses. Two of the biggest problems in those areas which are suitable for horticultural production is the availability of sufficient labour and the reluctance of people to buy Irish produce when its not as cheap as the stuff imported from North Africa via the Netherlands.



  • Registered Users Posts: 10,377 ✭✭✭✭tom1ie


    I haven’t a clue! I think it’s poxy to be honest.

    Is there a technical reason for it?



  • Registered Users Posts: 1,600 ✭✭✭ps200306


    One table shows the futility of Irish efforts -- the top ten table of global emitters:

    The countries whose emissions are going down are the US, Japan, Germany and South Korea. Together they represent 7% of global population, 20% of global emissions, and their weighted decrease in emissions averages 1.3% per year over the last ten years. By far the biggest reduction in absolute terms is the USA and that is almost entirely down to the "Frackenstein monster" so hated by the Greens.

    Let's ignore Russia, Saudi Arabia and Iran ... all oil producers whose emissions tend to be skewed high but who don't make that much difference to the overall picture.

    The rest are developing countries: China, India and Indonesia representing 39% of global population and 40% of emissions. Their weighted increase in emissions is 2.9% annually for the past 10 years. Yes, they produce less emissions per capita than the developed world, but they are where almost all of the world's emissions increases are coming from and they have dominated emissions growth for fifty years.

    Back in 2019 each single month of Chinese increase in coal consumption (that's just China, just coal, just the increase compared to the previous month) offset all of Ireland's emissions reductions for the fifteen years since its first climate targets in 2005.

    Climate change does not care who is producing the emissions. The developing world will not forego its development aspirations because of Green handwringing in the West. That is why we will not solve the problem until we solve low-carbon baseload power. Contrary to Ryan, the only thing Ireland is going to lead the world in is demonstrating how not to do it.



  • Registered Users Posts: 4,935 ✭✭✭Shoog


    The policy to expand the national herd dates back to the first FG government. They already knew all the details about climate change and yet they still pushed ahead with the Harvest 2020 strategy which leaves us where we are today.

    The government will look at what the exchequer takes from agriculture and balance it against the fines it will face for doing the opposite of what is needed - and the consequence is that they will decide to buy out the farmers to solve their emissions problems. Simple economics will mean that the national herd will fall to below the 2000 levels and it will happen rapidly. There will be a lot of bleating from the countryside but the people of the country as a whole will ultimately demand it as they face the costs of doing nothing.


    Farmers have been consistently shielded from the consequences of their practices on the national budget for decades (at least the 1990's). It was well known by government that agriculture was the primary cause of falling water standards and they knew that they would face fines from the EU for not meeting their water standards obligations. The difference here is that the costs of ignoring internationally binding emissions targets will be significantly greater and impossible to simply brush under the carpet.


    Unfortunately the farmers have been played for fools by the fools they thought were their allies, now is the time to sort out the mess they walked into.

    Post edited by Shoog on


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 29,299 ✭✭✭✭Wanderer78




  • Registered Users Posts: 4,750 ✭✭✭jj880




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


    "There will be a lot of bleating from the countryside"

    Lol.

    Again the same green propaganda about the "national herd". The only ones "bleating" seem to the greens bleating about this mystical entity .

    There is no planned state expansion of the "national herd". The "national herd" ie the number of cattle - both beef and dairy cattle in the country and has not seen any significant increase since the 1990s. In the last couple of decades the numbers have gone up and down somewhat, but have not increased over previous max numbers. As numbers of beef cattle have reduced, there have been increases in the dairy sector with the total number of cattle remaining relatively static.

    And no agriculture again is not the only "cause of falling water standards". A major factor in water quality issues is massive increase in our population and housing both in urban and rural areas, with council waste treatment facilities not being fit for purpose and frequently discharging huge quantities of untreated raw sewage into both the sea (See Ringsend in Dublin for details) and river in places like Cork, Sligo etc. Agriculture is a factor for water quality but its hugely disingenuous to suggest that its the only issue

    The largest amount of ghg emissions in Ireland come from energy consumption which accounts for 59% of Ireland’s greenhouse gas emissions with agriculture at 34%. Looks like that is being brushed under the carpet in an effort to make agriculture the main scape goat here.

    I reckon you need to put down the little green book of misinformation especially when it can all easily be checked. The propaganda really doesn't wash.

    Post edited by Mecanudo on


  • Registered Users Posts: 3,328 ✭✭✭Banana Republic 1


    Your own words cut the arse from under the argument you make.

    @ps200306 ”Climate change does not care who is producing the emissions. “



  • Registered Users Posts: 1,393 ✭✭✭nigeldaniel


    Well, yet another wind farm in North Kerry is at the mercy of Bord Pleanála, with more turbines than you can 'shake a stick at' but at least they [Bord Pleanála] seem to be showing signs of thinking sometimes enough is enough.


    In other news, the anti-LNG protest in Tarbert fizzled out into nothing. Thank heavens.

    Dan.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 644 ✭✭✭Darth Putin


    All details Actively discussed in this thread

    https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058094040/pv-feed-in-tariff/p19

    In short you have to install smart meter, smart meter packages are not great especially compared to classic night rate

    all for 8 to 14c feed in tariff dependent on provider

    My home system sent in 350kw back to grid last year, that’s a whopping 47 euro (if go with sse, 25 euro with energia 8c feedin), 2/3rds our usage is at night, losing night rate would add hundreds to bills

    anyone who thinks they get rich from home generation and export to grid needs to get their head examined



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


    Do you have any idea what the logic was for charging more for the standing charge for rural customers compared to urban customers?

    The standing charge for a day/night meter is €218.23 per year (urban), €274.59 per year (rural), about €60 more than the average annual standing charge. 

    https://www.electricireland.ie/news/article/all-you-need-to-know-about-the-nightsaver-meter



  • Registered Users Posts: 1,274 ✭✭✭EOQRTL


    Ryan will impoverish all of Ireland's middle and working classes to realise his silly ambitions whilst India, China, Brazil etc.. just keep on trucking.

    The man is a dangerous lunatic.



  • Registered Users Posts: 1,715 ✭✭✭ginger22


    Well I guess you could always go buy some land. You would get the best of it for 20000 Euros an acre and then you could show the rest of us how its done.



  • Registered Users Posts: 15,069 ✭✭✭✭charlie14


    Each to their own, but personally I cannot stand stuff. Even if i didn`t at the 5.20 a loaf that was quoted by a poster here I doubt I would be tempted.



  • Registered Users Posts: 22,408 ✭✭✭✭Akrasia




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




  • Registered Users Posts: 15,069 ✭✭✭✭charlie14


    If anything your understanding of economics is even more sketchy than your understanding of agriculture.

    A KPMG report shows that if this cull of 30% to our national herds the greens are looking for was implemented it would result in 4 Billion euro less exports and 56,400 people losing their employment. Significantly more than the lose of " a small proportion of exchequer takings" don`t you think!

    You`re understanding of cattle farming is equally as sketchy if you somehow believe that there is an "expansion of the beef herd"

    CSO statistics for beef cows December 2013(1,082,500), June 2021(940,300). A decline of 13.14%. For June 2020 to June 2021 alone there was a decline of 40,000 (4.4%)

    Like a lot of this green agenda, imagination rather than verifiable facts is pretty much the norm.




  • Registered Users Posts: 3,328 ✭✭✭Banana Republic 1


    You’re talking out of your udder end as per usual.

    @Mecanudo said “ The "national herd" ie the number of cattle - both beef and dairy cattle in the country and has not seen any significant increase since the 1990s”

    🤔 A link that discredits your statement.

    1 From agriland.ie in 2021




  • Registered Users Posts: 15,069 ✭✭✭✭charlie14


    I doubt I could live without it on my toast every morning 😁

    To each their own, but I`d sooner attempt eating the stone than the flesh. It`s not something that I have given a lot of thought to, but it does seem a bit crazy lugging a fruit half way around the world when the inedible seed weighs as much as the edible flesh, but then as I have said, each to their own. If they like it and can afford it good luck to them.



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


    @Banana Republic 1 said

    You’re talking out of your udder end as per usual.

    Why always the personal digs Banana? It's like you want to continously start a fight over just a discussion. You're on your there own boyo

    Anyway which bit "discredits" anything in my last comment exactly?

    That article you linked is about the number of dairy cattle the country not the "national herd" ie dairy plus beef cattle.

    My comment

    The "national herd" ie the number of cattle - both beef and dairy cattle in the country and has not seen any significant increase since the 1990s”

    Your article in agriland details changes in the numbers of dairy cows only

    According to the end of year CSO report - In 2021 there was a 2.4 per cent increase in the number of dairy cows but a 4.4% decrease in beef cattle. That means dairy cow numbers were up and beef cattle numbers were down in 2021!

    As detailed - the total figures have varied - but there has been no significant increase in the national herd since the 1990s. That stands.



  • Registered Users Posts: 15,069 ✭✭✭✭charlie14


    That particular data on capacity factor is from one wind farm in 2018 is it not that shows 65% ?

    Cnocbui`s link is from June 2022 that shows the 12 month average at 42.2%. Looking through the capacity factor figures for those various off shore wind farms over that 12 month period they seem as hit and miss as on shore.

    Only a very rough calculation, but seeing as we know that for extended periods last Winter and this Spring with wind generation having dropped to 6% and lower which meant had we 16X the number of on shore turbines wind would not have provided 100% of our requirements, does that not mean going on those 12 month figures from cnocbui that we would still need at least twice as many wind turbines off shore comparable to those we now have on shore to make up for that 6% and lower figure. Possible even as much as three or four times more seeing as that 42.2% is the average and wind cannot be depended on for averages.



  • Registered Users Posts: 644 ✭✭✭Darth Putin


    yet another example of rural dwellers paying more for services



  • Registered Users Posts: 644 ✭✭✭Darth Putin


    Wind capacity factors across Europe shown here daily

    Irish onshore wind is aboutish 25-30% (nuclear is 90%)


    Here is last month for the 6000mw of wind on this island, truly pathetic




  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    How do you come to that conclusion when all they've done is defer the decision until Oct?



  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    This is one PR campaign where the evidence of its success is evident from the many posts in this thread

    Thirty years ago, a bold plan was cooked up to spread doubt and persuade the public that climate change was not a problem. The little-known meeting - between some of America's biggest industrial players and a PR genius - forged a devastatingly successful strategy that endured for years, and the consequences of which are all around us.


    On an early autumn day in 1992, E Bruce Harrison, a man widely acknowledged as the father of environmental PR, stood up in a room full of business leaders and delivered a pitch like no other.


    At stake was a contract worth half a million dollars a year - about £850,000 in today's money. The prospective client, the Global Climate Coalition (GCC) - which represented the oil, coal, auto, utilities, steel, and rail industries - was looking for a communications partner to change the narrative on climate change.


    "The Global Climate Coalition is seeding doubt everywhere, fogging the air… And environmentalists really don't know what's hitting them," environmental campaigner John Passacantando remembers.


    "What the geniuses of the PR firms who work for these big fossil fuel companies know is that truth has nothing to do with who wins the argument. If you say something enough times, people will begin to believe it."




  • Registered Users Posts: 4,750 ✭✭✭jj880


    No. Its the disproportionate amount of pain the Irish government is piling on its citizens compared to other countries. That's the problem for most people. Keep trying to make out its ALL climate change deniers in this thread or in society in general all you want. No-one is buying it.



  • Registered Users Posts: 1,600 ✭✭✭ps200306


    Don't know what argument you thought I was trying to make, but I can't even guess what your point is.



  • Registered Users Posts: 1,600 ✭✭✭ps200306


    That's exactly right. It's quite possible to agree that climate change is a significant concern without agreeing that Green policies are an effective solution. The problem definition and the policy response are two different things. It's even possible to agree with rapid rollout of renewables without agreeing with the Green's single-track focus and obsessive dismissal of diversity and security of supply issues. The suggestion that all dissent is climate change denial is both condescending and doctrinaire.

    The Irish Greens are committing us to a path of spending €125 billion to save 50% of 0.1% of global emissions in eight years. And that 50% is the low hanging fruit! We are allowed to express concerns about the cost. Ok, they claim that some of this expenditure is cost neutral. Again, we are allowed to ask them to prove it. Show us the numbers.

    But there's an additional aspect. Reliable energy is the basis of all functioning economies. Right now, intermittent renewables require 100% backup from other sources. Those power sources are being degraded by underinvestment in infrastructure and lack of supply diversification. The Greens offer nothing but "hopium" about non-existent grid-scale storage and green hydrogen. Eamon Ryan's sole argument against importation of LNG and development of indigenous resources is that he doesn't want us to get a taste for further fossil fuels. It's an insane sleepwalk into supply disruption and energy poverty.

    And, of course it isn't just a bunch of randomers on boards.ie making these points. It's industry power users, it's the Irish Academy of Engineers, it's the Commission for Regulation of Utilities, it's the ESRI, and others. Here is a balanced summary of the issues:




  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 4,750 ✭✭✭jj880


    "Hopium" - must remember that - plenty of areas that can be applied to at the moment.

    I've had a few stouts but I'm going to say what I've believed for a long time now. Ireland, it's people and it's politicians can't handle money as a country. It corrupts us completely. Our spineless political classes are so eager to please they are perfectly willing to throw their countrymen under the bus. That's the problem here. It goes back 100s of years. A hangover from being colonised. It was the Brits now it's the EU. Throw an Irish politician a brown envelope and they'll screw everyone over no problem. They won't be happy until coal is 100 euro a bag, 500 litres of kerosene is 2000 euro and still no realistic alternative. Haughey lives on. Lost country lost people.



Advertisement