CityCyclingEdinburgh Forum » This site
Dealing with Climate Change & Justice
(1302 posts)- Started 2 years ago by chdot
- Latest reply from neddie
- This topic is
sticky
-
Posted 1 year ago #
-
“
Criticism in the US of the oil industry’s obfuscation over the climate crisis is intensifying after internal documents showed companies attempted to distance themselves from agreed climate goals, admitted “gaslighting” the public over purported efforts to go green, and even wished critical activists be infested by bedbugs.
…
The oil giants’ “climate pledges rely on unproven technology, accounting gimmicks and misleading language to hide the reality,” he added. “Big oil executives are laughing at the people trying to protect our planet while they knowingly work to destroy it.”
“
Posted 1 year ago # -
Adam Tomkins (ex Tory MSP) claims that the new King and the late Duke of Edinburgh are greater environmentalists than Patrick Harvie and the Scottish Greens. Obviously living in a parallel universe! Know some here have doubts about Greens but sharing pictures of royals on bicycles when UK was in rationing does not prove anything.
From National:
In 2005 Tomkins co-authored a pamphlet with Alasdair Gray arguing that the nations of the United Kingdom can only become truly democratic by axing the Queen and restoring power to the people and he has also previously spoken at republican rallies.
He went onto launch a wider attack on the Greens saying: “The truth is both the late Duke of Edinburgh and the new King Charles III are much more committed environmentalists than Patrick Harvie and the modern Green party in the Scottish Parliament isn’t very green.
“It’s a Bolshevik party, it is a communist party of the extreme hard left that hates wealth, hates privilege – hates a lot of things, it is full of hatred.
Posted 1 year ago # -
Maybe for other thread - good that Herald has too.
The myth is that the (first) Elizabethan era in Scotland was one of peace and stability.
Maybe for royals it was? In my lifetime people had to retrain as industries were sold out and technology replaced labour. Personally I think value for money criteria should be used.
Why has Tomkins gone pro-royal? Maybe he sees the new King as an ally against FM and that on his train tour of GB he will outgreen Harvie and Slater? Train won't be going to EUUK state in NI though as wrong gauge!Posted 1 year ago # -
“
UK fracking not viable, claims Edinburgh geologist
“
Posted 1 year ago # -
“
Easyjet to stop offsetting CO2 emissions from December
Airline unveils ‘roadmap to net zero’ strategy focusing on sustainable fuel and more efficient planes
“
Posted 1 year ago # -
In The Sun!!
“
In many cases, many of the items that were spilling out of on-street bins at the height of the bin strikes were single-use – items like coffee cups, drinks stirrers and takeaway food boxes. These containers are symbolic of our throwaway culture. They’re really damaging to the environment and wholly unnecessary as they could be easily swapped for reusable alternatives.
“
https://www.thescottishsun.co.uk/news/9537854/rethink-relationship-with-stuff-to-save-planet/
Posted 1 year ago # -
Posted 1 year ago #
-
“
Maybe it is the name that is the problem. Climate change. It doesn’t sound that bad. The word “change” resonates quite pleasantly in our restless world. No matter how fortunate we are, there is always room for the appealing possibility of improvement. Then there is the “climate” part. Again, it does not sound so bad. If you live in many of the high-emitting nations of the global north, the idea of a “changing climate” could well be interpreted as the very opposite of scary and dangerous. A changing world. A warming planet. What’s not to like?
…
The fact that 3 billion people use less energy, on an annual per capita basis, than a standard American refrigerator gives you an idea of how far away from global equity and climate justice we currently are.
“
Posted 1 year ago # -
Google seems to suggest that figure should perhaps be electricity rather than energy. It's still pretty starting though.
Posted 1 year ago # -
“that figure should perhaps be electricity rather than energy”
That makes sense.
Unfortunate that Greta makes such a mistake.
Common for discussion in UK to be about ‘percentage of energy from renewables’.
Posted 1 year ago # -
Farmers, environmentalists, free-marketeers and energy wonks all think the proposed ban on solar farms is a bad idea. It would simply keep bills higher, farmers poorer and our energy security and decarbonisation targets out of reach.
And 'Conservatism' would normally be favourable to allowing farmers to use the land 'as they like', to turn a profit. i.e. "No interference from the nanny-state"
Anyone would think the fossil fuel industry has some kind of control over the government policy...
Meanwhile "an administrative oversight" by Kwasi on his secret visits to Saudi oil firms:
Posted 1 year ago # -
“proposed ban on solar farms is a bad idea”
Not supporting Gov ‘policies’, but there are ‘issues’.
Visually, better/worse than acres of polytunnels?
Presume ‘all’ come from China?
Posted 1 year ago # -
There are some non Chinese made panels but they'll be more expensive and let's face it the UK is not known for spending more than it has to for anything.
I'm very sceptical about grid scale pv in the UK. Money would be better spent on micro generation at point of consumption, ie panels on people's roofs, this would cut distribution costs massively. Hell give people the panels cheap in lieu of rent and let them use the electricity they generate with any extra going into the grid with no FIT payment going to the home owner. Short of an expensive battery most people struggle to use more than a few kwh for any length of time so most of the power would still end up in the grid.
Posted 1 year ago # -
I suspect it's a lot cheaper and less time-consuming to cover a field with panels than it is to retrofit the roofs of a 1000 houses
Posted 1 year ago # -
Yeah it definitely will be but by the time you transmit that a hundred miles from the fields you will lose a lot of that saving even if the grid hides that for you.
But solar is unique in that it scales down to micro generation and can be used at point of consumption massively increasing its efficiency, we should be leaning into that and use field for something useful even a few larger turbines surrounded by poly tunnels since wind scales very badly and well no one wants strawberries grown on a city roof.
Posted 1 year ago # -
It isn't being transmitted "hundreds of miles" from the fields! It's being consumed locally by the nearest town, village or electrified railway, via the grid - of which you're never more than a few miles away in the UK for any conceivable field.
So there isn't any "massive increase" in efficiency by having it within a few metres of the point of consumption instead of a few miles.
What will give a massive increase in efficiency is locating the panels in sunny areas i.e. the South of England.
Not sure what you mean by "wind scales very badly", but this is also not true. Wind farms have scaled up hugely and are going to scale even further - we're currently at 21GW peak capacity of wind, predicted to scale to 60GW - what's not to like?
And solar is already capable of 10GW peak
For reference, the electricity demand for the entire UK fluctuates between 25GW and 45GW
Posted 1 year ago # -
Wind at micro generation isn't very efficient it scales down very badly, whilst solar works just as well at watt scale as Mw capacity.
You'll never be as efficient as being meters between the generator and consumption. A quick Google suggest 9% of UK capacity is lost to transmission, now add multiple conversions from low voltage dc to high voltage transmission to local lower voltage to 240v and you're losing another few percent. Its not like the south of England is otherwise flat calm.
Posted 1 year ago #
Reply »
You must log in to post.
posts
