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
18678688708728731067

Comments

  • Registered Users Posts: 5,723 ✭✭✭creedp


    What is the purpose of fuel duty? Just another smash and grab or in reality a carbon tax in old money



  • Registered Users Posts: 698 ✭✭✭TedBundysDriver


    People replacing their old cars with brand new ones especially electric every few years are a disgrace.



  • Registered Users Posts: 22,420 ✭✭✭✭Akrasia


    The Daily Mail, as usual, are blaming 'green energy' for the pollution caused by traditional industry. (From their own article)

    It's also worth noting that most of the Cobalt currently mined, is not used to produce Batteries for electric cars, some of it is used for processing fossil fuels for example. It's also important to say that the next generation of lithium Ion batteries do not use any cobalt, and that this technology is advancing rapidly, mostly because of the opportunities to make money as people are being pushed to develop electric car technology rather than just rely on old polluting ICE vehicles.



  • Registered Users Posts: 22,420 ✭✭✭✭Akrasia


    Congratulations on being in the tiny percentage of people who use this as your main form of central heating.

    But don't get too congratulatory, solid fuel stoves and convection driven back burners are very inefficient and waste most of the heat while producing toxic pollution that will do more harm to you and your neighbours than you would suffer from having to wear a few extra layers on the rare occasion there's a power cut and a cold spell at the same time in Ireland



  • Registered Users Posts: 22,420 ✭✭✭✭Akrasia


    An unnamed 'government rep' not being able to answer a specific technical question on the fly in a live interview does not mean that the government are making taxation policy without considering the impacts.



  • Advertisement
  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    The EU CBAM comes into effect from Sunday. this will see a carbon levy applied to carbon heavy imports (steels, iron, fertilizers etc) that originate outside the EU. This is a good move by the EU as it both encourages those industries to transition to greener production methods both inside and outside the EU.




  • Registered Users Posts: 5,723 ✭✭✭creedp


    If he didnt know the answer so be it. However he did know it was inconsequential. Not sure how he'd know the latter without knowing the former. Maybe just a simple misunderstanding



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


    No, what it encourages is for the EU to be more self-reliant for its raw materials and chemicals, as can be seen with German and Belgian intensification of mining certain important minerals, for example.

    You can't build without steel, you can't feed 500 million people without fertiliser, we must make it locally, is all.



  • Registered Users Posts: 1,656 ✭✭✭greenpilot


    Tiny percentage? Nearly every house in rural ireland runs a back boiler from a stove. I was in a DIY store in Co.Longford this week and they were EXPANDING their solid fuel stove section in the shop, such is the demand. One would wonder how accurate statistics are in this regard.

    You should see the tonnage of turf being purchased across the western seaboard this time of year. Why? Because it boils down to cost. With electricity prices doubled in most homes and kerosene prices rocketing, stove sales are increasing and by extension, the demand for turf and solid fuel. Go take a look out in the yards of every Co-op in the country and count the pallets of kiln-dried wood for sale.

    Whether one agrees or disagrees with the Green policies, they are drastically out of touch with reality. At the end of the day, putting food on the table and heating a home for your family comes first, and people outside the m50 bubble couldn't care less about being green when it becomes a real struggle , due to enormous costs, to provide both of those basic needs.

    With The green parties' push to force people to live in towns and cities, their ignorance of life outside these areas, and their dire neglect of rural communities, one thing is absolutely certain. There will be no green party members anywhere near government at the next election.



  • Registered Users Posts: 698 ✭✭✭TedBundysDriver


    Loads of people use that system to heat their house. What are you on about?



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 698 ✭✭✭TedBundysDriver


    I think the "M50 bubble" is an unfair comment. Plenty of Dubs don't want the garbage the Greens are offering .The Green's core base is well off south Dublin residents who spend 60k on a brand new electric car and think they are doing the environment a favour.



  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    11% of households use solid fuels to heat their homes, how many of those would use a back boiler which doesn't require electricity, I'd wager it's not much of that 11%




  • Registered Users Posts: 22,420 ✭✭✭✭Akrasia


    I lived in a house for years with an open fire and a back burner. The back burner barely warmed the radiators. I know several people who installed stoves in the past few years, none of them had them connected to the central heating, they used oil or gas to heat their radiators.



  • Registered Users Posts: 11,205 ✭✭✭✭Furze99


    You're just guessing though. There are I believe about 2 million dwellings in the Republic, so that 11% represents 200,000 dwellings and likely over half a million citizens.

    And you seem to think solid fuel heating is for luddites?



  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    My guess is no more wrong than your own 🤷‍♂️



  • Registered Users Posts: 22,420 ✭✭✭✭Akrasia


    Here's the breakdown. It's almost all the older houses that use turf or coal to heat their houses (central heating) and way less than 10% of occupied houses (7.1% combined for wood and coal central heating)

    Post edited by Akrasia on


  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    You have to admire these folks for standing up and not taking the easy way out

    This follows on from the likes of Chris Packham and Gibbons asking if its time to break the law




  • Registered Users Posts: 5,042 ✭✭✭Shoog


    Fuel duty pays for your water, it's in the legislation.

    Literally the only objection I ever had to water charges was that they weren't going to reduce the fuel duty they already took for it. It was real double taxation and undermined the legitimacy of the very necessary water charges.



  • Registered Users Posts: 5,042 ✭✭✭Shoog


    A tiny percentage of the population live in rural areas so your point is ?



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



    Obviously if people are at risk of freezing to death and the electricity grid has failed, then they should burn something to stay warm...

    My point is, deadly cold is survivable without electricity, people can burn fuel to stay warm

    Deadly heatwaves are already happening at about 1c of warming and for many, are not survivable without electricity and without access to expensive air conditioning systems (that lot of the world's most vulnerable population do not have access to) as the body cannot cool down by putting on more clothes or sheltering in the shade or moving out of danger....

    You can survive deadly heat without electricity, and burn fuel to stay cool. Propane refrigeration has been around since the early 1800s. Sure, it's not as low-tech as just lighting a fire to stay warm. But then, lots of urban dwellers don't have that option either. Modern houses and apartments don't have fireplaces.

    The people who are affected by extreme cold and heat are poor people. I know you don't like to say that because it doesn't suit the narrative. The vast majority of migrants both now and in the future are economic migrants. The only thing that will solve the dilemma is massive amounts of new energy that poorer nations can afford.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 22,420 ✭✭✭✭Akrasia


    Its a bit mean to call them luddites, but since 1990, very few houses use coal or turf for central heating.

    That's an indication that those houses who still do so, do it because the owners haven't upgraded their heating systems, rather than they just happened upon a better heating system before Oil Gas and Electric heating became the norm.



  • Registered Users Posts: 22,420 ✭✭✭✭Akrasia


    I've heard it all now

    Your solution to deadly heatwaves for people without electricity is to jump into a 19th century propane powered fridge

    The heat won't kill them at least...


    And what's with that 'won't suit your narrative' BS? I know that the people most affected by climate change are the poorest. That, not only doesn't 'not suit my narrative' it's what I've been banging on about for years while the 'I'm alright jack' , 'But Ireland will be grand', 'We can't afford to reduce emissions' and 'We can pay money to adapt to climate change' posters on here are the ones who are perfectly happy to screw hundreds of millions of people over in order to save a few cents a litre on their diesel while driving back and forth between the coal merchants and the bog trying to save a few euros on carbon taxes whole muttering under their breath about the green party ruining their day.

    Giving 'Massive amounts of new energy' to poor people is actually a good idea, but all the 'new energy' n the world won't make their former homes any less uninhabitable if there are deadly heatwaves happening multiple times per year, killing people and the animals and the crops they depend on for food.



  • Registered Users Posts: 5,723 ✭✭✭creedp


    Semantics. I pay fuel duty for using fossil fuel in my car. No difference in paying carbon taxes on the same fuel. No interest in the politicians telling me its for a good cause. For the record it doesnt pay for supplying my water not that it matters. I alao pay a shite load of income tax and vat etc and Ive no knowlwdge as to how thats spent either



  • Registered Users Posts: 698 ✭✭✭TedBundysDriver


    When are joining the fight against "the climate crisis", or are you happy banging keys on Boards?



  • Registered Users Posts: 26 Auld Slapper


    I'm not disagreeing with you on this matter, this project is specifically for freight and the minister seems to be aware that freight transport on our island is not really a runner, passenger rail transport is a tremendous method if the critical mass is available, if we are to see future work habits being primarily from the home, and certainly the value of investing in commercial property and for that matter car parks is questionable at best it brings into question the cost benefit of rail transport.



  • Registered Users Posts: 23,710 ✭✭✭✭Kermit.de.frog


    Will probably be the last investment of this scale in Ireland given the undermining of our energy security




  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    How about I answer your question when you answer mine, seems fair



  • Registered Users Posts: 14,380 ✭✭✭✭ednwireland


    we have a refurbished stanley 8 which heats the hot water and gives us space heating no electricity required.



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



    As more and more variable renewable power comes on stream, this storage will serve as a valuable intermediary between demand and supply. We'll get away from 'Baseload' power vs Peak power, and we'll see renewable power being stored and sold as needed to meet demand. This will push Thermal plants completely out of the day to day grid operations but they will still play a role in long term backup, where they can be activated for the 10% or 5% of the time when storage is not enough. Eventually the demand and supply will balance out in the short term, and then large profits will be available for longer term storage until even long term energy storage becomes cheaper than keeping thermal plants on standby for the rarer and rarer times when they will be needed.

    This is pure handwaving. We've already had problems getting people to bid for thermal generation where they would only get to generate for a few percent of the time. But you think people are going to build vastly more expensive BESS to do the same job? Not going to happen. All it will do is push up the price of electricity to extraordinary levels or, more likely, result in a completely unreliable grid. You're extrapolating from an intraday load smoothing service where investment capital is automatically available because there is serious money to be made, to longer term storage where the market conditions don't favour even the cheaper fossil fuel options that are available today.

    Asking for raw figures in terms of how many MW we need, or MWh is not really useful because the numbers are absolutely enormous, and that makes it seem like a mammoth task, but the numbers are enormous no matter how you look at it. If you told someone 60 years ago a single thermal plant would have to burn 40 thousand tonnes of coal a day to provide 2gw of electricity, they might have told you that's too much and it can't be done... well, now we're trying to replace those impossible feats of engineering with a more sustainable model, instead of burning millions of tonnes of fuel a year, we need to install millions of tonnes worth of BESS facilities, and then use that infrastructure to provide grid services for decades to come.

    You are not talking about million of tonnes, you are talking about billions or even trillions. And these things don't last forever. Eventually you are talking about a steady state replacement rate that is completely infeasible. Not to mention that the energy minerals needed to create them don't exist in the required quantities. The moment you do even back-of-a-fag-packet estimates on this stuff is the moment you realise it's never going to happen. And then you have Greens completely mystified as to why their utopia isn't taking shape and emissions are continuing to rise -- it's because they are either innumerate or have their heads stuck firmly in the sand. We need vast amounts of new, reliable, low-carbon, baseload power. I wonder is there any technology available today that fits the bill?



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


    Oh are those few cents on a litre of fuel going directly to help those hundreds of millions?

    Because you do know that it's doing nothing for global emissions?

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



Advertisement