"Green" policies are destroying this country

That must be why onshore wind generation in the UK was down 44% yoy in Q2

Wrong compassion. Bus Eireann is nowhere close to a $3.5 trillion global industry. On the other hand oil and gas industry products ($2.1 trillion) are just the raw material used for value add products that the climate change™ industry depends on. Wind and solar on the electricity grid are entirely dependent on gas, the reverse is not the case.

The climate conversation is a vehicle of convenience for several disparate groups to push their agendas forward. You can color them on a spectrum of green from the dark green followers of Malthus, the dollar green vested interests chasing profit, the avocado's - green on the outside and brown on the inside, the water melons - green on the outside and red on the inside i.e. eco-socialism, even Osama Bin Laden was an environmentalist. Bankers, politicians, religious leaders on the whole are not scientists, most don't care what scientists have to say, they have a narrative to follow. Scientists who disagree with the narrative get labelled with pejoratives such as denier, their funding is cut and it becomes difficult for them to get papers published. The past 50 years are littered with the failed predictions of scientists with regard to the climate, these are not infallible people. Scientists can't even agree on sensitivity of CO2 (Equilibrium Climate Sensitivity), when they can't get that right among themselves, we must put low confidence in their projections of future climate states.

But that is not how a company tenders a price for a contract.

It tenders based on the capital cost, the operational cost, and their expected profit over the length of time of the contract. In our case for offshore 15 years. They do not tender on the basis that they can refit and get a subsequent contract at the same price.

If they do, then they are in bonus territory. Price their original tender on that basis and fail, then they will have lost money over the length of the contract which will not go down well with shareholders to put it mildly.

I though we were rewetting all the peatland to reduce CO2 emissions (while simultaneously increasing methane)

Orsted and Iberdrola pulled out of US offshore projects this week

They were drained to harvest peat. That was policy at the time and in my view, should still be allowed in some cases. No benefit to stopping peat harvesting here and then import peat from eastern Europe by the ship load. BTW, do you know if those eastern Europe countries have the same rewetting plans as us?

I do. Which backs up my point. Why are we bothering to import any when we have plenty here already

Another question! Wasn't there a big hooha about installing solar on all public roofs or something? What ever happened that? Should they be targeting that for local microgeneration instead of building on bogs?

Indeed. Well said.

I'm employed in the Asset Management industry, which is currently in the middle of an "ESG" drive to make investing "Green" (The E, or Environmental part of ESG). Everyone in the industry now knows that it this mainly a marketing ploy at this stage, much to the dismay of the original financial regulators, as it was intended as a regulatory "label" or guarantee to ensure ESG funds/products were really ESG and holding qualifying securities - funds labeled as Article 8 and Article 9 being ESG funds to varying degrees.

The marketing is succeeding as people invest in these products thinking they are contributing to the Climate Change project. The reality is a lot different. Trying to stop firms using ESG as a marketing tool, the regulators narrowed the criteria for the Article 9 funds, the strictest category being “a Fund that has sustainable investment as its objective or a reduction in carbon emissions as its objective.”  Nearly all asset managers restated their article 9 funds as article 8 subsequent to this, a less stringent category.

We are obligated to undergo "ESG training" and attend ESG forums, in order to prove that the firm and employees are collectively committed to the agenda. However, it's all BS - that's very obvious when you do the training or attend the various courses - there's no room for debate. The majority of people know this but do it anyway as they need a job and an income.

It really is a religion at this stage.