"Green" policies are destroying this country

Centralised public transport?

What are you talking about?

Public transport should be as locally focused as possible.

Once you start peeling back the grants the local charity industrial complex receives that are not funded by the Irish taxpayer, one bundling organisation in particular stands out, the European Climate Fund (ECF), this is funded by American billionaire families charitable funds such as Rockefeller Brothers Fund, Packard Foundation, Hewlett Foundation, Bullitt Foundation, Bloomberg Philanthropies (Michael Bloomberg). These environmentalists are very much in the green. (balance sheets) Greenpeace is a $400 million per annum business. There is also oil money behind the likes of extinction rebellion and just stop oil - Climate Emergency Fund (Aileen Getty).

In the UK there is the Grantham Foundation (Jeremy Grantham) that funds the people pushing weather attribution studies. The Children’s Investment Fund Foundation is Sir Chris Hohn, who used to be the current UK prime ministers Rishi Sunaks boss. One of the first things Sunak did as prime minister was reinstate the UK ban on fracking. Some leading climate barkers such as the Guardian are supported by billionaires otherwise their balance sheet would have sunk them years ago. All aiming to absue the taxpayers labour, The United States is loaded with them as well.

You want to hit them, take down their foundations (all of them)

The Charity-Industrial Complex

Behind the climate barkers is a wall of money, none of this is about changing the weather, it's about wealth redistribution to some very wealthy people.

One of the members of the Irish Climate Change Advisory Council quango is Ottmar Edenhofer who gave an interview to a Swiss media outfit years ago that "Climate policy has almost nothing to do anymore with environmental protection . . .". That wealth redistribution is going to wealthy urban dwellers see Measuring the equity impacts of government subsidies for electric vehicles.

Construction time means the same be it for a nuclear plants or offshore turbines, so what is your time line for 30 GW of offshore.

Less or greater than the mean construction time for the 441 nuclear plants built between 1976 and 2016 of 7.5 years?

There are very few organisations in the West standing up to the climate howlers. As I said there is a wall of money behind climate alarmism and none if has to do with changing the weather, despite the air time given by organisations such as RTE to the cause.

You really have to laugh at the doublespeak hypocrisy of Irish greens. When companies pulled out of Barryroe due to Ryan`s hand-sitting on regulations it nothing to do with the regulations, it`s because the project was unviable. When Shell and the E.S.B`s offshore partner Uquinor pull out of offshore here it was because of regulations.

If it has improved since 2021 then why did Shell up sticks just a few months ago ?

Uquinor doing the same in November 2021 looks nothing more than using the regulations excuse as a face saving exercise for their E.S.B ex-partners on their 30 GW economically unfeasible offshore plan. But perhaps you are clinging to the hope that with the change in regulations you expect them back any day now ?.

Look on the bright side. Losing Equinor to build their 30 GW saves ESB the trouble of dealing with Tony O'Reilly of dCarbonX for the equally uneconomical hydrogen component. That's the waster who failed to develop Barryroe in the eight years after drilling an appraisal well.

Another plus plus for Irish household and businesses who would ultimately be paying back that E.S.B.plan of €83 billion plus interest, running costs and profit margin over a recycling maximum of every 27 years, as the hydrogen component cost is not included in that €83 billion.

If you want to know why we are in a mess, World Energy Outlook 2022 (page 35), investment in fossil fuels has fallen by a third since 2015 in terms of GDP. Part of this was due to the collapse in oil and gas prices in 2014,normally these bounce back, undoubtedly the anti-fossil fuel agenda pursued across the West for climate reasons has had a major impact as well.

Why are the Irish government TDs going after the bogs? A net zero pledge for all greenhouse gas emissions does not necessarily mean that CO2 emissions from the energy sector need to reach net zero. A country’s net zero plans may envisage some remaining energy‐related emissions are offset by the absorption of emissions from the agriculture, forestry and other land use (AFOLU) sink.

Investment has remained steady in countries without a net zero pledge (page 36).

If we think the consequences of the Russian invasion are bad, we miss the very real concern that we are only seeing the early signs of much worse to come. When the cuts in fossil fuel investment really start to bite and existing oil and gas fields begin to dry up, there will be a catastrophic energy crisis. Shortages will be very real and prices will rise well above today’s levels, as demand stays high and we find that renewable energy simply cannot keep up with demand.

Corrib is estimated to go into decline in the next 2 years, After a Pyrrhic victory, one of British Prime minister Sunaks first acts has been to reimpose the ban on fracking. The plot against fracking How cheap energy was killed by Green lies and Russian propaganda

Nuclear is 20 years of a pure drain on resources before the plant gets switched on. Wind and solar are smaller projects that come on stream incrementally. Wind and solar and storage prices fall over time, nuclear prices balloon from the original budget

Don't you ever get tired of defending oil companies?

Of course they can't. But as the grid and industry decarbonises the marginal CO2 emissions should fall lower and lower.

LOL posting stuff from clintel.org, who recently published that list of 1200 "scientists" who declared there to be no climate emergency.

When looking closer at the list of signatories, there are precisely 1,107, including six people who are dead. Less than 1% of the names listed describe themselves as climatologists or climate scientists.

Eight of the signatories are former or current employees of the oil giant Shell, while many other names have links to mining companies. 

According to an independent 2019 count of the declaration's signatories, 21% were engineers, many linked to the fossil fuel industry. Others were lobbyists, and some even worked as fishermen or airline pilots.