"Green" policies are destroying this country

I gave you the stats from Ember, I showed you the study from The Natural Resource Defence Council, I showed you the article from The Guardian that backed up its claim with link to studies from Sweden, Finland, France, Denmark and Australia where each found that burning wood was not carbon neutral. None of these studies were from anti greens. They were all from green advocacy groups or think tanks. If you wish to ignore what they had to say on wood burning by attempting to shoot the messengar then that is up tp you.

The facts are simple, If you are burning wood in whatever form, be it in a wood pellet stove or in a power plant, then you are emiting CO2 and there is no such thing as being a little bit pregnant.

I really do not care what you burn to provide heat. In fact to me it make perfect sense. Even more so than economic reasons to do so rather than being totally dependent on electricity for everything. At least during power cuts or outages you will have heat. Something that for the elderly is even more important.

I was not pointing the finger at you saying I believed you were wrong to burn wood. More at some here who tell us the only energy we should be using is that provided by carbon neutral renewables, but then are happy to burn wood themselves. Even encouraging others to do the same. To me, other than finding it a bit amusing, I found it self contradictory.

Yet here we are again after the last two COP beanfeasts back on the merry-go-round throwing more billions in the same direction this time on climate change and somehow expecting a different outcome.

Albert Einstein had an opinion on that. Short version. Insanity.

If size is your logic, surely a pedestrian being hit by a bus is far worse than an SUV so why not ban them too? Plus, not all SUVs are particularly large.

Given the generally superior visibility from an SUV, you'd imagine there'd be fewer collisions too, than with a low sitting saloon or a bulky bus.

Plus, a lot of road deaths appear to be vehicle passengers rather than pedestrians. What gives a pedestrian's safety the priority over the safety of a passenger's general safety for other accident types (eg vehicle to vehicle or vehicle to object collision). Surely this class of frame hasn't just developed because it looks pretty and consumers are buying based on practical advantages such as their own safety in an accident?

Not sure what that means, I made a comment on the video which is the usual noise to get a few clicks with nothing behind it.

Sound. Thanks. I hope we're not setting policy or taxation based on US road accident statistics. SUVs in Ireland are not equal to the monstrosities over there.

There's a lot of haulage companies on HVO. And some agri users. I seen a video of a lad in the UK drove a combine from John o' Groats to Land's End in the summer to raise money for charity. Certa sponsored the fuel and it was all HVO. Seems like a no brainer to be promoting that, especially if it's a drop in replacement for diesel. Instant emission reduction* and no major cost. Carbon tax should be cheaper too on it I'd guess

* assuming the input to make the HVO isn't palm oil or other such stuff shipped across the world

You jumped in on behalf of a poster I was having a discussion with on wood pellets who has been on here time after time telling us that carbon neutral renewable energy was the only energy source we should be using who posted he/she was using a wood pellet burner for heat. I was pointing out that wood pellets are not carbon neutral, a fact that you at least have now accept.

I don`t have any particular obsession with the Green Party or there supporter here other than I find much of what they are favoring hypocritical as well as dangerous for the economic well-being of the country. I also find both very much biased against anything rural. If that offends your or anyone elses sensibilites then so be it.

You're seriously confused here.

• "Kilowatts per hour" is meaningless. If it meant anything it would mean "kilowatts divided by hours".
• A kWh is a kilowatt-hour, i.e. kilowatt multiplied by hour.
• A watt is not a unit of energy. It's a unit of power. Power is energy divided by time.
• A joule is a unit of energy. A watt (unit of power) is one joule per second (i.e. energy divided by time).
• If power is energy divided by time, then power multiplied by time is energy. That's why the kWh is a unit of energy.

The speaker is a lecturer at UCD's Smurfit School of Business, and teaches finance at the Irish Management Institute and Chartered Accountants Ireland. Unless you think the video is an AI deep-fake, the whinge about the source is just an excuse not to engage.

Uh, it did fix it. It lifted a billion people out of extreme poverty between 1990 and 2010, five years ahead of schedule. There's still a lot more to do. What does littering the Irish landscape with windmills and solar panels contribute to it?

It's true there has always been inefficiency and corruption in the dissemination of development aid. But you ain't seen nuthin' yet once Eamon Ryan gets his way. First we tax the bejesus out of the citizenry to pay for vastly less efficient forms of energy. Then we tax the bejesus out of them some more to pay reparations for our sins against the environment to other countries.

Then the reparations money is tied to sustainability goals for those countries too, so that they get screwed like us with inefficient energy production. Meanwhile the opportunites for corruption in this madcap reparations scheme will be immense. The whole thing is shaping up to be an economic disaster.

Gript like a lot of dodgy media sources will cut and edit videos to suit their own narrative. The video is a snippet I expect of a longer interview and has very little substance to it.

In terms of World hunger as I pointed out Ireland provides a significant amount of money every year towards this already. We need to make sure we invest in Ireland as well. This includes trying to get a as close to self reliant power system and public transport system to meet the requirements of a growing population.

In terms of the question what does windmills and solar panels provide, I guess you already know the answer to this.

You could, of course, spend five seconds Googling to see if Lucey's "politics of narcissism" comments in the video match his actual views expressed elsewhere. You would find this on his own blog from last Sunday, also published in the Sunday Times:

Only people in thrall to the Green cult could possibly believe that Eamon Ryan's barmy "Energy Security Report" is about energy security. It is an ideologically preconditioned response that is going to screw the country.

I sure do, but I doubt it's the same answer as yours.

You do realise dont you`what that the title of this thread is ?

I have told you how I view the Green Party and their supporters on issues I find hypocritical and dangerous to the economic with both imo having a major bias when it comes to anything rural.I have also post here on how I see the E.U. on green issues. All very much in keeping with the title of this thread as far as I`m concerned. If you or other here have a problem with that I could not care less if I tried.

I still have no idea what you are saying when it comes to the 3rd world. From an earlier comment you appear to believe that the billions sent there for variou programmes food related were a waste, but now it would appear that you believe sending further billions for climate change programmes would have a different outcome but no matter.

On the subject though I think @ps200306 made some very good points.

"Green" policies is not the Green Party. Every political party has green policies. In all probability the Green party will not be part of the next government and the current strategy won't change. You do realise this?

The other poster has made no points, just pointed to someone else's and seems to think everyone should accept them because the guy works in UCD.

Nail on the head, carbon taxes are a brilliant swizz allowing increases in taxation on the back of saving rhe planet. I mean you'd have to be morally bankrupt not to support them and to clearly demonstrate your green credentials actively cheer lead for further extortionate increases

The Irish Green party are not short on policies that I believe have been hypocratical, dangerous for the economy and biased against rural communities and are a government tail of a dog party polling within the margin of error at half the level they recieved in the last GE. So it certainly does not look as if there is any great support for their policies.

They have used their tail of the dog position to push those policies, even going as far as to threaten to collapse the government if they didn`t get their way. Will any of that change if the Greens are not part of the next government, who knows, but I would see much more liklihood of it without them being there.

@ps200306 points I refered to were in relation to money to the 3rd world