"Green" policies are destroying this country

You have no problem stating that there should be more park and rides, bus lanes and public transport routes that would make things easier and more economical for the people in the large urban centers. You mentioned by creating a public transport system that made things more sustainable, economical and convenient for a person to take public transport instead of driving then it would work in taking more cars off the road, and be the correct approach - I agree and well said.

On the other hand you state that the farm subsidy payment should be linked to rewetting marginal poor quality bogland. The new carbon farming proposal from the EU would leave a farmer financially worse off if it is in acted in its current state. So I find it interesting that you can just hypocritically say that in order to incentivise public transport, people would have to see both the convenience and economical upside, but for someone on marginal peatland you don't seem to care if they don't get or see the financial incentive to rewet, we just try force them.

Ask any multinational company to drastically change their business model that would result in their net asset value (value of land in this case) being effectively worthless (as the value of carbon will not be attached to it), and their operating revenue being reduced by on average 30% - wonder what their answer would be.

All that amounts to bullying people out of their cars. From a man that doesn't drive. Eventually you have to stand up to a bully. Come election time that means getting rid of him. If he were to get his way it will result in more congestion and more fumes. Any that do use public transport now won't be happy either. The service can't cope with it's existing users how will it cope with more. His approach is all wrong. He could make it unnecessary to make as many trips in the car by allowing people to chose alternatives by making public transport better. He could make renting cars easier... Personally I'd never be without a car.

The Important figure that you like all greens refuse to provide is the cost of this ESB plan you favour.

So rather than, like another poster here, you running around the world looking for the most expensive example on nuclear you can find, why not just provide the cost of this plan that will have to be repeated twice within the lifetime of a nuclear plant and subtract the cost of, (shall we say four 1.1GW reactor for a cost of $5.2Bn each based on the Poland recent price which wasn`t even the cheapest), and tell us how much the difference is that could be used for clean-up.

Until you can do that then your argument is pointless.

Selfish bastards, trying to keep warm, they should open the oven like Eamo said.

https://www.trendsmap.com/twitter/tweet/1563126691303927809

I used to work in Dun Laoghaire but lived in town. I got the 46A at Leason Street. It was great in the summer but come September, it was full in mornings of UCD students so I couldn't get to work. I bought a car. That was in the 90s

Then in the 2000's I lived in Ballinteer, any time I went to get the bus into town in evening it never showed up. I was better off walking to the Luas.

Moved to the dart line, had kids. The lift at the local dart station is always out of order, I've only seen it working once in about 30 times. So any patent with a buggy or older person or wheelchair uses can't use the dart.

I can get the bus to work, that journey works very well but getting home, I get on at the edge of the edge for the city and by the time it gets to me it's full.

So my experience of public transport in Dublin is, the luas is good, the green line is safe, the green line probably needs security. The dart is good but the stations on terrible. The darts need security and stations need upkeep and security. For example I wouldn't use a park and ride at the edge of the city with my kids for I didn't feel safe.

The bus service isn't fit for purpose, security and quality of service simply isn't there.

Now if you want to achieve something on public transport,

Make all traffic flow. Imporeve security. Have load balancing so there are more busses into the city in the morning and more out in the evening on key routes. Make it a service people would want to use not one you have to force them to use.

Well I picked that up wrong you keep mentioning carrot and stick. Eamon Ryan comes across as somebody who will bully people over the his green ways weather they like it or not. That's causing huge resistance to green ideas.

Why is the EU carbon farming proposal so dismal then. If they made it financially viable and treated carbon like a comodity then I believe alot of farmers would change as it would be greatly beneficial, and the asset value of their land would not be rendered worthless as it would be linked to the carbon price.

But the EU proposal is such that it isn't a viable option in the slightest. You can see why farmers are angry over this and therefore why would they change.

The EU and alot of the greenbrigade are all sound bites and absolutely no desire to face the facts that big buisness in the EU accounts for most of the emissions but they get a free ride because they produce most of the GDP. So let's put the the spotlight on the everyday citizens and oppress them for their shameful wicked ways.

Big buissness in the EU get to take part in the offsetting European Emmisions Trading scheme, where the biggest populaters can use credits or certificate of emmisions reductions (CERs) from other sectors like agriculture and forestry to offset against their total emit. They get to write the rule book to suit themselves yet the normal citizen is the one that is always get the blame.

How do you expect any farmer to take Ryan rambling, or anyone that supports that rambling on emissions seriously ?

He, along with such supporters, are either living in their heads in their own little biosphere or attempting to convince farmers they are living in a make believe biosphere where they should cut their own throats to satisfy an ideology that when it comes to farming is being pushed by people who are beyond clueless.

You still never answered the second question instead you deflected, as it stands farmers cannot sell, offset sequestered or stored carbon, nor does the new EU carbon farming proposal allow for it. Yet a huge emitting company can use CO2 sequestered off my land for example and offset it against their company and they look great and are classed as carbon neutral, green and a great ESG score, Google and Microsoft comes mind.

How is this in anyway fair, please provide your thoughts.