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
16997007027047051067

Comments

  • Registered Users Posts: 12,993 ✭✭✭✭JRant


    It's hilarious when you point this out to people and they come back with "but but but per Capita".

    "Well, yeah, you know, that's just, like, your opinion, man"



  • Registered Users Posts: 9,787 ✭✭✭antoinolachtnai


    Do you think it is important for small countries (as well as large ones) to abide by their international commitments?



  • Registered Users Posts: 12,993 ✭✭✭✭JRant


    That's an interesting question. I'd would say it's more important for a government to do what's best for its citizens, rather than some arbitrary international agreements that get decided behind closed doors away from scrutiny.

    This fascination with all things international is a strange one if I'm being honest. I think we should look to make the lives of the people who live on this island as good as possible. This includes cleaning up waterways, improving air quality (especially in cities), cleaning up the environment, etc, etc.

    Where I see a huge problem is having "international" policies that actively penalize citizens for something so far outside of their control it's not even funny. I also fundamentally disagree with the current approach of net zero at all costs. I think it's short sighted, irresponsible, and is going to cause a lot of problems. We don't currently have the tech to achieve it. There are possible alternatives being developed but they are years away from being used at the scale required.

    I personally think we should look to where we get the most bang for our buck first and then worry about the long tail, as it will take a long time to solve those issues. A perfect example is banning natural gas, which Eamo is gung-ho on. It's daft and creates more problems than it solves. We could have replaced the oil and coal plants here within the last 10 years but there's a myopic view that wind will solve everything, it won't. We may get there with wind but until we solve hydrogen storage, distribution, and the tech to use it we are fighting a battle we can never win.

    "Well, yeah, you know, that's just, like, your opinion, man"



  • Registered Users Posts: 9,787 ✭✭✭antoinolachtnai


    So the answer is no, you don’t think we should abide by our international commitments.

    Paris took the guts of two decades to conclude but you don’t think there was enough scrutiny.

    You don’t see any reason why climate change has to be addressed on an international basis.

    Any other views here?



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 5,554 ✭✭✭roosterman71


    Climate chaneg has to be addressed internationally. If everyone isn't on board then no one is. We in Ireland can make all the changes possible (both real and imaginary) and be net zero or even better, but if everyone else isn't at that too it is near enough pointless. We'll look good, get a pat on the back, feel a bit better about ourselves but the world will still get warmer, the problems will still be there and we here will in the same boat as the rest of the world. It's not as if we here do everything and the world goes to shite that we'll all be sound here on our llittle island. We're screwed too.

    None of that is to say we shouldn't try do better and do things that can make a difference. Lead the way and be pioneers. We have great wind resources and if we could marry that to other renewables for when the wind isn't blowing to reduce gaas/coal/etc then do it and show it can be done. Won't make much difference in the grand scheme but it would prove it's possible.

    Insulating homes in 12 or 50 years will make no difference. No harm in trying to do it in the shortest time but the current approach is not working unless the government are footing the entire bill. Middle income earners simply cannot afford retrofits.



  • Registered Users Posts: 12,993 ✭✭✭✭JRant


    Well, if you're not bothered reading what I actually wrote then what's the point in discussing anything with you?

    The Paris agreement is nothing more than window dressing. They all stand around for a photo op and give themselves a big pat on the back, while the real meat and bones of the issue gets ignored. Ireland pushing hard for net zero while China is building more new coal plants that will emit more emissions than the entire EU is laughable. We are looking at a bill in the 10's, if not 100's of billions, for this country alone and for what? To reduce our carbon footprint while the major global polluters continue to ramp up their own carbon emissions.

    It's like all those Green party broadcasts we get here from the resident party member. They look great but fall over at the slightest bit of scrutiny.

    "Well, yeah, you know, that's just, like, your opinion, man"



  • Registered Users Posts: 3,453 ✭✭✭BlueSkyDreams


    As others have said, we should work towards our targets, yes.

    But we should not strive to hit them at all costs. If people cant afford retrofitting, they shouldnt be penalised for not doing it and if we still need to rely on natural gas for a period of time, then we should do that also.

    Ultimatley, whether Ireland hits its climate targets or not is not going to make any difference to global climate change & most importantly, the direct impacts of global climate change will still be felt by Ireland, whether we hit our targets or not.

    More focus should be placed on influencing the big hitting countries in terms of emissions.

    It is only those large emmitters that have the power to actually impact the direction of travel in terms of climate change.

    We seem obsessed with rearranging the deck chairs on the titanic and trying to power through a set of changes in Ireland that ultimatley wont stop the climate change clock from ticking.

    Even if we hit all our goals.

    Down the line people will see this and confidence in green policy will be further eroded.

    "But mister, we did what you asked us to do and it cost us more money and was hard work and its made no difference to climate change here in Ireland, or globally. I dont support your changes anymore"

    That is the danger, in my opinion.



  • Registered Users Posts: 9,787 ✭✭✭antoinolachtnai


    So we should give our notice to withdraw from the Paris Agreement (like President Trump did for the United States)?



  • Registered Users Posts: 3,213 ✭✭✭Mic 1972


    I think we should


    I couldn't care less about Trump



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 3,213 ✭✭✭Mic 1972


    My 2 cents here, I'm hardly home these days, heating if off most of the times. Why do I have to invest so much money in upgrading my house when my emissions are going to be low regardless?



  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    Who said you did?

    Should you choose to, there are supports there, depending on which upgrades you choose to make



  • Registered Users Posts: 2,639 ✭✭✭Nermal


    Why even bother doing so? Who will have the ability to enforce a penalty on us for simply ignoring it?



  • Registered Users Posts: 12,993 ✭✭✭✭JRant


    The "supports" for working families include the ability to get up to their oxters in debt during record inflation and rising interest rates. Seems like a legit strategy for a group who love nothing better than spending other people's money.

    "Well, yeah, you know, that's just, like, your opinion, man"



  • Registered Users Posts: 3,453 ✭✭✭BlueSkyDreams


    Doesnt really matter since the contributions are non binding legally.

    Thats not the main point anyway.

    I am saying we should do our bit for climate change, but we shouldnt cripple ourselves in the process in Ireland, since we make no tangible difference ultimatley.

    invest more resources in the aspects of climate change and pollution that do impact us domestically, cleaner air etc and most importantly, focus on holding the large country emmitters accountable to their targets, since they are the only ones that can influence the targets in a meaningful way.



  • Registered Users Posts: 1,607 ✭✭✭ps200306


    You're welcome. Let me know if you ever do come up with an answer.



  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    Please indicate your chosen grievance, 2 more added to the list based on some recent posts

    1. Grant size
      1. The grants are too small
      2. The grants are too big
    2. Scope of the grants
      1. There are not enough grants
      2. There are too many grants
    3. Free upgrades
      1. There should be no free upgrades
      2. There should only be free upgrades
    4. Exchequer funding
      1. The govt should cover all the costs
      2. No govt funding should be used to cover any costs
    5. New home builds
      1. Only new homes should have requirements for low energy consumption
      2. New homes should not have requirements for low energy consumption
    6. Optional upgrades
      1. Nobody should have to do upgrades
      2. Everybody should have to do upgrades




  • Registered Users Posts: 9,787 ✭✭✭antoinolachtnai


    The European Union? We are bound to meet certain targets by the Burden Sharing Directive and economically tied by the current and future ETS Directives from the EU.

    I think the debate has moved on to Europe’s future industrial policy and how it is financed.



  • Registered Users Posts: 2,746 ✭✭✭PommieBast


    Time for a little light relief.

    WARNING: Very NSFW..

    And yes, it is NSFW..



  • Registered Users Posts: 1,607 ✭✭✭ps200306


    At 1:55 "banning all new gas, coal and oil projects" ... she forgets to mention that everyone would die. And while the video is lighthearted, that's exactly what those of a darker green persuasion want. As I keep repeating, they are the biggest threat to humanity that exists today.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 1,607 ✭✭✭ps200306



    I added the most important grievance for you:

    0. The zeroth law of home insulation: it will have exactly zero impact on climate change.

    1. Grant size
      1. The grants are too small
      2. The grants are too big
    2. Scope of the grants
      1. There are not enough grants
      2. There are too many grants
    3. New home builds
    4. Exchequer funding
      1. The govt should cover all the costs
      2. No govt funding should be used to cover any costs
    5. Free upgrades
      1. There should be no free upgrades
      2. There should only be free upgrades
      3. Only new homes should have requirements for low energy consumption
      4. New homes should not have requirements for low energy consumption
    6. Optional upgrades
      1. Nobody should have to do upgrades
      2. Everybody should have to do upgrades




  • Registered Users Posts: 12,993 ✭✭✭✭JRant


    But, you see, if people die from the cold or starvation, that's just fine. As long as it's not caused by the climate "emergency" then it's winner winner chicken dinner time.

    "Well, yeah, you know, that's just, like, your opinion, man"



  • Registered Users Posts: 1,363 ✭✭✭kabakuyu


    The system is broken, grants go into installers pockets with no financial benefit for the householder.Less than 100 houses have been retrofitted.The Greens have failed miserably, VAT is still charged on renewable tech, the greens are a joke.


    https://www.irishexaminer.com/news/arid-40990973.html



  • Registered Users Posts: 3,055 ✭✭✭patnor1011


    Important for ideological or PR reasons, irrelevant for practical reasons (mainly because large countries do not give a fliuch).

    Your argument that violation can be enforced by the EU is moot since EU is primarily Germany and they are not in compliance and they are moving further away rather fast.



  • Registered Users Posts: 2,746 ✭✭✭PommieBast


    Well "get us all killed" was mentioned at 00:18 ..



  • Registered Users Posts: 9,787 ✭✭✭antoinolachtnai


    They are not in compliance with the ETS? Can you be a bit more specific? Or are you telling us the whole EU has actually fallen apart and the rest of it haven’t realized it yet?



  • Registered Users Posts: 1,670 ✭✭✭thinkabouit


    Government just handed over 100s of millions in bonuses to welfare recipient’s over the past few month’s.

    they could of used that money to clean up the roads, rivers towns etc but not one problem was solved for all that money spent & it’s now gone.



  • Registered Users Posts: 24,062 ✭✭✭✭Larbre34


    I'm sure if you received some of that money and it meant that you could both feed your household AND heat it for a while, then you might disagree strongly that no problem had been solved.



  • Registered Users Posts: 1,670 ✭✭✭thinkabouit


    Those people are still struggling anyway.


    that billion euro for example could of been used to hire people on short term well paid contracts to clean up road’s, city’s, towns rivers etc

    what value did the government get out of that money? Nothing, no problem solved.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 2,746 ✭✭✭PommieBast




Advertisement