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
14134144164184191062

Comments

  • Registered Users Posts: 10,375 ✭✭✭✭tom1ie


    So we have now moved to a consensus that there is a real possibility of blackouts due to government policy.

    At least we are making progress on this thread.



  • Registered Users Posts: 10,375 ✭✭✭✭tom1ie


    Higher than previous years due to government policy.

    No one can long term forecast the weather for winter so how can a % risk be arrived at?



  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    Now now, play the ball, not the man. We've managed to move on from petty insults to more interesting discussions



  • Registered Users Posts: 10,375 ✭✭✭✭tom1ie


    I just said you had your head buried in the sand with the energy minister.

    Didn't mean offence just an observation.



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


    There is a fight against fascism happening right now. Russia v Ukraine. That's what is causing the threat to Ireland's energy security this winter.

    If the gas pipeline stays flowing Ireland's energy security is fine. The only plausible reason the gas won't flow is if Putin shuts off supply and causes a crunch



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


    Government policy was to have Russia invade Ukraine and threaten to shut off Europe's gas supply?



  • Registered Users Posts: 10,375 ✭✭✭✭tom1ie


    If we had CNG tanks we’d be fine for a month or so.

    But we don't which is a direct result of government dereliction of duty.



  • Registered Users Posts: 3,569 ✭✭✭Pa ElGrande


    Essentially we are depending on a mild Winter to skirt by. A 1962-63 scenario (extended cold) and electricity is going out in places where people are unaccustomed to more that an hours outage for local maintenance. Gas supply will be a serious problem. Some of us in the PAYE sector may be looking at having to earn between €5,000-€8000 (Gross, before tax income) this year to pay electricity and heating, plus there are transport/food/clothing/shelter to think of.

    Net Zero means we are paying for the destruction of our economy and society in pursuit of an unachievable and pointless policy.



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


    Previous years the risk of blackouts were very very low (apart from local outages due to storms)

    What is the % risk of blackouts this winter that has you all foaming at the mouth about the greens?



  • Registered Users Posts: 10,375 ✭✭✭✭tom1ie


    How can I calculate that without a long term forecast?

    The idea is to plan for the worst and hope for the best.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 20,047 ✭✭✭✭cnocbui


    You paint such a lovely fuzzy warm feelings picture there of the climate 'scientists' (no more science than economics is) genuinely trying to find weakness in their own work.

    God that's funny.

    " [D]on’t leave stuff lying around on ftp sites — you never know who is trawling them. The two MMs have been after the CRU station data for years. If they ever hear there is a Freedom of Information Act now in the UK, I think I’ll delete the file rather than send to anyone. Does your similar act in the US force you to respond to enquiries within 20 days? - our does! […] Tom Wigley has sent me a worried email when he heard about it—thought people could ask him for his model code. He has retired officially from UEA so he can hide behind that.21/2/2005: I’m getting hassled by a couple of people to release the CRU station temperature data. Don’t any of you three tell anybody that the UK has a Freedom of Information Act!

    27/4/2005: I got this email from McIntyre a few days ago. As far as I’m concerned he has the data — sent ages ago. I’ll tell him this, but that’s all — no code. If I can find it, it is likely to be hundreds of lines of uncommented fortran ! I recall the program did a lot more than just average the series. I know why he can’t replicate the results early on — it is because there was a variance correction for fewer series.

    29/5/2008: Can you delete any emails you may have had with Keith re AR4? Keith will do likewise. […] Can you email Gene and get him to do the same? […] We will be getting Caspar to do likewise."

    The file, as I understand it, is the raw surface station temperature data, which would show how they went about increasing the temperatures of many stations via adjustments, to more clearly show the warming trend.

    My wife is a scientist who teaches at a university, does research, supervises Phd students, authors papers, peer reviews papers and is more than slightly competent in mathmatics, physics, statistics and chemistry. She. like @ps200306, read a lot of the papers published by M. Mann and co, and like him/her, found the standard of those papers to be questionable, with grave suspicions about the adjustments made to surface temperature data. Then lo and behold, the climategate email dump did nothing to aleviate suspicions that said data manipulations were suspect.

    This is how climate scientists behave and respond to sceptics:

    "climate scientist Tom Wigley of the University Corporation for Academic Research writes: “If you think that [Yale professor James] Saiers is in the greenhouse skeptics camp, then, if we can find documentary evidence of this, we could go through official AGU channels to get him ousted.”

    Since then, multiple sceptical scientists around the world have been 'outed' and have lost their jobs at academic institutions.

    This is the reality behind your much beloved climate science, it's founded on questionable practices, a clique of self promoting and backing authors who all talk on email back chanels and promote each others works - so much for 'peer review' - and run around like scared rabbits mass deleting compromising emails which contain evidence of them slandering and obstructing their critics; using activism to get them fired, where possible.

    Climate 'science' is filthy to the core. It's no wonder scptics are a bit thin on the ground when so many lose their jobs or are warned off by the institutions that employ them.

    Oh; look, now that we have managed to get all of our critics and sceptics fired, there's globabl unanimity in support of AGW among the scientists who still have jobs.

    Post edited by cnocbui on


  • Registered Users Posts: 15,068 ✭✭✭✭charlie14


    In truth few if any can get the future right and these declarations always suggest possibilities and include may, could or might. Those words do not refer to facts.

    Exactly the same could be said for a lot of the predictions on climate change could they not, as well as the latest plan that if we throw enough wind turbines at the problem using magic money tree money that maybe one day the stars will align and we may, could or might get it right ?

    It does not take a lot of sniffing from the media to see where the problem is. If anything the media should be ashamed of being so enthralled to green policy for not pointing it out a long way back. As many here did and elsewhere did. Even our own regulator pointed it out and the media still ignored it.

    The problem is simple as is the reason for it. Greens have forcefully striped away so many conventional power sources in favour of wind that when wind drops there is not enough capacity in the system to compensate. The greens further added to the problem banning exploration,refusing to grant permits and attempting to ban LNG. Now they are scrambling to build extra gas fired plants, the most insecure of all our previous conventional energy sources at a time of European shortages of gas. The complete madness of where their agenda now has us, if it wasn`t so potentially ruinous for our economy and well-being, would be laughable.



  • Registered Users Posts: 32,136 ✭✭✭✭is_that_so


    I think you're talking yourself into a state of mind. Our gas partners are reliable unlike the Russians. There are also campaigns in place to encourage reduced gas usage in EU countries and we should eventually follow suit in some form. Nobody can say whether we will have rolling cuts. TBH they are absolutely no big deal at all and we will get plenty of warning to get stocked up.



  • Registered Users Posts: 32,136 ✭✭✭✭is_that_so


    The climate scenario is supported by a whole pile of studies, however you view them, and it's a probabilistic projection based on those. There's a fair level of sense in it anyway, moving away from fossil fuels, heading for EV alternatives and more efficient houses are some examples.



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


    No we wouldn't. CNG storage would buy some time but only a few days How many CNG tanks would we need to guarantee supply if the pipelines are shut off for weeks. How much would that cost?

    The kinsale gas storage facility was allowed to close under FG administration nothing to do with the greens. Why didn't you protest when that facility closed (for economic reasons)?



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


    Lol. But when a scientific study published in one of the best journals in science (PNAS) says that a plausible worst case scenario from climate change is human extinction, you hand wave it away.

    https://www.pnas.org/doi/full/10.1073/pnas.2108146119




  • Registered Users Posts: 10,375 ✭✭✭✭tom1ie


    If Russia cuts of the gas, the country’s that depend on that gas will look for gas elsewhere which puts pressure on our own supply from our reliable sources.



  • Registered Users Posts: 10,375 ✭✭✭✭tom1ie


    Sorry but I haven’t hand waved anything away- please point to where I have?

    I’ve said multiple times before I’m not a climate change denier I am merely pointing out the facts of our energy crisis in Ireland.

    please don’t misrepresent me again.



  • Registered Users Posts: 10,375 ✭✭✭✭tom1ie


    It’s the energy minister who is responsible for Irelands energy security.

    If we have a deficit of energy that falls on the head of the energy minister. Full stop.



  • Registered Users Posts: 15,068 ✭✭✭✭charlie14


    Probabilistic projections are nothing more than a fancy term for could, might or maybe which you quote as "Those words do not refer to facts".

    There is no doubt that moving away from fossil fuels is a good idea, and I do not see anyone disputing that here. What I do see is many, not just here, but in general, questioning the green agenda to doing so, plus all the extra add-ons to that agenda such as food production, food security, their opposition to transitional energy sources and the efforts to shut down any possibility of us exploring for fossil fuels that would give us a greater degree of energy security during the period of transmission.

    The looming problem in Ireland on possible blackouts, obviously as far as the Irish Green Party is concerned anyway, has nothing to do with the war in Ukraine. If they believe it has, then why build more gas fired plants attempting to make up for the shortfall from intermittent undependable renewables ?

    They real problem is the Irish Green Party, as the tail of a government dog, have used strong arm tactics to get their way. Even to the extent of threatening to bring down the government if they do not it, now having cut off their nose to spite their face by shutting down conventional energy plants are looking very foolish building more gas plants.

    Any fool could see, especially after last year where electrical demand grew by 4% while wind supply of electricity fell by 17%, pushing for more Evs and heat pumps was only heading in one direction. Headlong towards the great big hole in the agenda when it comes to supply fulfilling demand.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 1,609 ✭✭✭Tonesjones


    But that's Eamon Ryan. He is biased and only a tiny percentage of the population voted for him.

    In a time of energy crisis you couldn't pick a more unsuitable individual as minister for energy



  • Registered Users Posts: 10,375 ✭✭✭✭tom1ie


    Yep well unfortunately that’s who we have.

    He’s been in office for almost 3 years and has done nothing to prepare for a scenario that Eirgrid among others has been warning about for the last number of years.



  • Registered Users Posts: 32,136 ✭✭✭✭is_that_so


    Probabilistic projections are nothing more than a fancy term for could, might or maybe which you quote as "Those words do not refer to facts".

    Well, you insisted on dragging it in into the discussion and it does have a lot more data. How people feel about that conclusion is entirely up to them. There is a lot of belief in their forecasts. Someone claiming what will happen this winter is at best an alert.

    Not entirely sure why you imagine I need to be on the receiving end of another one of your anti-Green rants. Very much a cherry picker of their policies myself, some eminently sensible, but many are locked into their ideology and beyond me and others.

    As for the winter well we really don't know and you can call people fools, if you wish. We fools will deal with it but do make plans for yourself in anticipation. TBH this post looks like there is an "I told you fool so" coming this winter and feel free to do so but what would that say about you?!



  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    You can say the same for any TD, they are voted for in their constituency and not at a national level



  • Registered Users Posts: 1,609 ✭✭✭Tonesjones


    Not at all. Sure the green party recieved 7% of the vote nationally.

    93% didn't.

    And now the minister for energy during an energy crisis is from that party.



  • Moderators, Politics Moderators Posts: 39,586 Mod ✭✭✭✭Seth Brundle


    And now the minister for energy during an energy crisis is from that party.

    There is no Dept of Energy nor is there a Minister for Energy to lead it!



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




  • Registered Users Posts: 15,177 ✭✭✭✭ILoveYourVibes


    The statement that 'Green policies are destroying this country' is hyperbole.


    There are some supposedly green policies that have no basis in fact and are vote harvesters ..but the idea the country is crumbling because we have too much environmentalism is a dangerous take.


    Do we need to be more discerning and cynical towards any political ideology yes.


    But climate change is real folks.



  • Registered Users Posts: 1,609 ✭✭✭Tonesjones


    Line two of the ministers job description

    "To ensure security and reliability of energy supply"

    Sure you knew this but it's better to waste time .



  • Advertisement
  • Moderators, Politics Moderators Posts: 39,586 Mod ✭✭✭✭Seth Brundle


    ...and what? You made an incorrect statement which I corrected!



Advertisement