More Rip Off Britain - this time it's gas..
25 November 2005, 06:13 PM
#31
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Notts, UK
Posts: 4,935
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by ^Qwerty^
It's the result of a very short sighted energy policy started by the Tories and continued to this day by Labour.
Although it looks like somebody finally realised this week that we might actually need to do something - the answer put forward, to build the next generation of nukes.
All well and good you might say, as it will cut down on CO2 emissions etc. but we are but one tiny island on a big planet.
I'm not a big fan of exporting nuclear technology to those countries that don't currently have it, or are want for a better description, unstable. Give them nuclear power stations and you also give them the ability to make bombs from the resulting waste.
China so I read, is currently in the process of commissioning a new coal powered generation station every week. Other countries will follow. CO2 emissions will go through the roof. We have no means of stopping this, because it's cheap to do. So we need to clean them up.
IMO we need to:
a) Develop and deploy clean burn technology for coal (carbon capture) and make it available to anybody who wants it in the world at cost. This takes care of the immediate short term problem and will allow countries to develop without pumping billions of tonnes of CO2 into the atmosphere.
b) Look at the long term problem of what to replace Coal with.
c) Introduce policies that encourage people to save energy (rather than just produce more to meet demand). Such policies would include solar panals on all new house builds. Even if they just heat up water, over 300,000 new houses, that would save a hell of a lot of gas burn.
As it is, another two coal mines are due to close early next year in Yorkshire and we become even more reliant on imports for our energy.
Seems simple to me, but then I bet the figures don't stack up (well not yet anyway)
Although it looks like somebody finally realised this week that we might actually need to do something - the answer put forward, to build the next generation of nukes.
All well and good you might say, as it will cut down on CO2 emissions etc. but we are but one tiny island on a big planet.
I'm not a big fan of exporting nuclear technology to those countries that don't currently have it, or are want for a better description, unstable. Give them nuclear power stations and you also give them the ability to make bombs from the resulting waste.
China so I read, is currently in the process of commissioning a new coal powered generation station every week. Other countries will follow. CO2 emissions will go through the roof. We have no means of stopping this, because it's cheap to do. So we need to clean them up.
IMO we need to:
a) Develop and deploy clean burn technology for coal (carbon capture) and make it available to anybody who wants it in the world at cost. This takes care of the immediate short term problem and will allow countries to develop without pumping billions of tonnes of CO2 into the atmosphere.
b) Look at the long term problem of what to replace Coal with.
c) Introduce policies that encourage people to save energy (rather than just produce more to meet demand). Such policies would include solar panals on all new house builds. Even if they just heat up water, over 300,000 new houses, that would save a hell of a lot of gas burn.
As it is, another two coal mines are due to close early next year in Yorkshire and we become even more reliant on imports for our energy.
Seems simple to me, but then I bet the figures don't stack up (well not yet anyway)
Cheers
Lee
25 November 2005, 06:29 PM
#32
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: www.tiovicente.com
Posts: 2,006
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by ^Qwerty^
Although it looks like somebody finally realised this week that we might actually need to do something - the answer put forward, to build the next generation of nukes.
All well and good you might say, as it will cut down on CO2 emissions etc. but we are but one tiny island on a big planet.
All well and good you might say, as it will cut down on CO2 emissions etc. but we are but one tiny island on a big planet.
The UK is the fourth or fifth largest economy in the world depending on how you measure it and as such has a responsibility to set an example on many levels, not least of which is environmental responsibility so its no use trying to use the geographical size of the UK as an excuse not to do anything.
Originally Posted by ^Qwerty^
China so I read, is currently in the process of commissioning a new coal powered generation station every week. Other countries will follow. CO2 emissions will go through the roof. We have no means of stopping this, because it's cheap to do. So we need to clean them up.
Originally Posted by ^Qwerty^
a) Develop and deploy clean burn technology for coal (carbon capture) and make it available to anybody who wants it in the world at cost. This takes care of the immediate short term problem and will allow countries to develop without pumping billions of tonnes of CO2 into the atmosphere.
b) Look at the long term problem of what to replace Coal with.
c) Introduce policies that encourage people to save energy (rather than just produce more to meet demand). Such policies would include solar panals on all new house builds. Even if they just heat up water, over 300,000 new houses, that would save a hell of a lot of gas burn.
b) Look at the long term problem of what to replace Coal with.
c) Introduce policies that encourage people to save energy (rather than just produce more to meet demand). Such policies would include solar panals on all new house builds. Even if they just heat up water, over 300,000 new houses, that would save a hell of a lot of gas burn.
25 November 2005, 06:38 PM
#33
Scooby Regular
The UK is the fourth or fifth largest economy in the world depending on how you measure it and as such has a responsibility to set an example on many levels, not least of which is environmental responsibility so its no use trying to use the geographical size of the UK as an excuse not to do anything.
25 November 2005, 06:43 PM
#34
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: www.tiovicente.com
Posts: 2,006
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by ^Qwerty^
Yup, I'd agree. However it's no good us doing things in isolation, or indeed just worrying about our own CO2 targets.
Dang. I forgot, Tony Blair was involved in that one so it's bound to be crap and a complete non-starter.
25 November 2005, 06:55 PM
#35
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Notts, UK
Posts: 4,935
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Flatcapdriver
China has an abundance of cheap coal and other natural resources unlike the UK so it is far easier for them to develop new coal fired power stations especially when you take into account their incredibly cheap labour costs. We simply don't have the resources or the cheap labour to follow suit..
Sorry, back to gas prices.
Cheers
Lee
25 November 2005, 07:14 PM
#36
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Markyate.Imprezas owned:-wrx-sti5typeR-p1-uk22b-modded my00. Amongst others!
Posts: 8,541
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Amid the scaremongering, am I right in thinking that the UK market has one of the cheapest domestic prices in Europe for gas?
Unclebuck, you've been sussed out AGAIN!
Unclebuck, you've been sussed out AGAIN!
25 November 2005, 07:24 PM
#37
Scooby Regular
Thread Starter
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Talk to the hand....
Posts: 13,331
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Flatcapdriver
Doubtless, you'll dismiss this as more poor grade management excuse making
25 November 2005, 07:27 PM
#38
Scooby Regular
Thread Starter
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Talk to the hand....
Posts: 13,331
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by scoobynutta555
Amid the scaremongering, am I right in thinking that the UK market has one of the cheapest domestic prices in Europe for gas?
Unclebuck, you've been sussed out AGAIN!
Unclebuck, you've been sussed out AGAIN!
You won't be laughing when your bills treble and you realise that I was right.. I would love to be proved wrong, believe me, but I fear it's on the cards.
25 November 2005, 07:37 PM
#39
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Markyate.Imprezas owned:-wrx-sti5typeR-p1-uk22b-modded my00. Amongst others!
Posts: 8,541
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by unclebuck
You won't be laughing when your bills treble and you realise that I was right.. I would love to be proved wrong, believe me, but I fear it's on the cards.
27 November 2005, 01:29 PM
#40
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 39,877
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I still think the buck stops eventually with the government, and I agree with the forecast of gas price rises. I wonder why I saw it reported thay the UK had the highest gas prices in the world!
Les
Les
27 November 2005, 04:21 PM
#41
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: book price for my SCOOB = £1115
Posts: 11,645
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
corner
Britian rips every1 off...
No matter what you do/ or what you earn.
you will pay one way or another.
i think the BIG BOSSES in Parlimant DONT pay tax's thats why it keeps going up + up.
No matter what you do/ or what you earn.
you will pay one way or another.
i think the BIG BOSSES in Parlimant DONT pay tax's thats why it keeps going up + up.
27 November 2005, 05:55 PM
#44
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Feb 1999
Location: Cardiff. Wales
Posts: 11,758
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
sic Sic (=thus, so), invariably bracketed and usually set in italics, is used to indicate that a preceding word or phrase in a quoted passage is reproduced as it appeared in the original passage. Sic at its best is intended to aid readers who might be confused about whether the quoter or the quoted writer is responsible for the spelling or grammatical anomaly.
You should therefore position [sic] straight after the error to which it refers: if a misspelling, after the word concerned; otherwise after the phrase.
Chip
You should therefore position [sic] straight after the error to which it refers: if a misspelling, after the word concerned; otherwise after the phrase.
Chip
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post