"Green" policies are destroying this country

Sinn Fein hoovered up all the protest votes which is also an artifact of PRSTV. And they still couldn't get a majority, but they were still delighted because having FF and FG in coalition together was their pre-election wet dream knowing that the next election, they are very likely to get all of the disaffected votes as there is no other credible opposition party.

Absolute nonsense.

The Green Party is in government because they agreed a Programme for Government with Fianna Fail and Fine Gael. There is no mention of 30% cuts for agriculture, which the Green Party chairperson was suggesting they should bring down the government on, if they didn`t get their way. That`s not politics. That is political suicide. Their chances were slim anyway of any party looking to have them in a coalition government before that, but after that no one will touch them.

Parties in government have a tough enough time minding their backs from the opposition without the petulance of a party they are in government with threatening to stab them in the back

You're literally posting in defence of a thread title ''green' policies are destroying the country' where the OP says it's any green policy, not just aimed at the green party, and you object to being described as anti-green?

The 'Green Policies' are in place as a direct result of the blatant corruption of the political process that the fossil fuel industry have been coordinating for Decades.

They are doing it deliberately and lying about it, and most of the talking points you are repeating were dreamt up in the mind of one of their highly paid PR consultants and implanted into your consciousness through repetition and deliberate disinformation campaigns, as well as dirty tricks political shenanigans such as bribing people to run as candidates in elections with similar names to take votes away from an opponent, creating fake political parties with names like the '<insert state> Green Party' (and cheating in the processes required to register new parties) because they know that having a Green Party candidate will cost their real opponents (democrat party) x percent of votes, enough to swing an election

They're trying that again for 2023 btw

Globally, we should be 20 years ahead of where we are now in our rollout of renewable infrastructure. These people delayed it and continue to advocate for more Fossil fuels and Nuclear. Who Benefits? The worst people in the world. GOP, Fossil Fuel Companies, Vlad Putin, the Saudis...

Who suffers?

Everyone else

Lol.

😯

Oh sh1t, you weren't joking

Jaysus you really do know nothing about politics, and just to clarify up until now I have never voted SF at any level.

When a government is painting themselves into a corner, you do not attract attention from voters seeing that by getting into a tat for tat. You leave them at it. When they have finally boxed themselves and are surrounded by wet paint you stand back, point at them and ask "Why the Hell did they do that, the shower of eejits"

That is politics.

.

I know plenty about FF and FG politics.

I don't think the 20% are coming from SF, I think anyone who is 'prepared' to vote SF have probably moved into their camp. The 20% independent voters are mostly lapsed FF/FG voters looking for somewhere to go. Where they end up, is likely to be a distribution of all of the main parties plus a sprinkling of independents but there is no way of knowing that distribution this far out from an election that hasn't even been called yet.

My point is that 'the greens are doomed' comments are totally premature and anyone who thinks they can call an election result now is talking shite

I think I know this song, but can you hum a few more bars?

Or in terms of an answer, we use gas.

Oh, there is no gas? Well thank **** we have renewables because without them we'd be screwed even when the wind is blowing and/or the sun is shining (the majority of the time)

I heard green hydrogen as an answer down one of your green loyalists today.

But not viable until at least 2035.

B.S. of the first order.

If they had been given a commitment of 30% at the cabinet table then there would have been no discussion to agree on the level of cuts. The only commitments that justified what the chairperson of the greens was calling for are in the Programme for Government which they signed up to and there is no mention of either 22% 30% or any other % in that programme.

I imagine there are many in the other two parties now see this as you do. "They`re just putting it on the record that they consider these commitments to be the revised program for government" as they have been calling for this but it was a no no from the greens. So you reckon it`s now open season on the 2020 program ? Good to know as these eejits will be gone by Autumn.

What, they are either SF voters jumping ship,based on a poll you posted yourself a few hours ago showing SF up 3%, or it is an increase in voters intending to vote independent that haven`t voted for anybody up until now ? It`s absolutely bonkers as any form of reasoning, but does fit with Irish Green Party thinking.

Green`s are polling within the margin of error. Same as the Labour Party. Do you see a bright future for the Labour Party as well ?

The IPSOS poll had no 'Don't know' option so I'm treating IND as a proxy for that, given that no election has been called, so there are no Independent candidates other than existing independent TDs who are all in opposition and got way less than 20% at the last election

Basically, as of last week's poll no party has anywhere near a majority, and there are 20% 1st preferences up for grabs, and with PRSTV, that makes predicting an outcome almost impossible

Green hydrogen has its uses, and will be part of the mix in the medium term. but its not mature yet and nothing we discuss now, will be in place by this winter. You should be glad the transition to renewables has already begun. We're still vulnerable, but not AS vulnerable as we would be without the green policies this thread is opposed to.

I agree, but I think much of that 'large scale energy storage' can be distributed to millions of small domestic/commercial scale storage installations which can reduce the need for 'baseload' capacity.

We don't need feed in tariffs, just smart metres and batteries that can draw in off peak power, and use stored energy when prices are high, and recharge the batteries when prices are low.

It is possible to have an even smarter feed in tariff structure, but as I posted today, vested interests will combat this tooth and nail. We don't need feed in capacity, we need smart draw down from the grid first, and this can be done with modest storage distributed across millions of premises across the grid.

For things greens dream about 2035 is tomorrow. For anything anyone else mentions ten years has to be added.

It`s because of parallel universes or different dimensions as far as I can make out. Could even be something to do with time travel but I doubt that as it`s theoretically related to speed and following Eamon`s edict on speed would rule it out.