It goes all the way back to 1974, which is good, in order to compare with multiple elections. So you are not the only one ignoring the Voting Intention numbers.
"Why can't we declare open seasons on Tories? I'd be the first one out there with a gun, and I know who would be the first target. Bloody Osborne."
This followed someone discussing badgers being culled, so clearly tensions were high, but curious that Osborne was listed as first target even so, what is that issue to do with him?
It's the kind of rhetoric many left-wingers use on Twitter about the Tories generally - mostly about bitterness, envy and that classic British lefty hatred of all things British. I think anyone who can even write anything like that is deeply troubled. But to be fair it's not so far removed from some of the earlier comments on this thread.
Right wingers are not immune to awful slurs on opponents of course, though I would clarify this comment was spoken to me. The same person once opined that they supported human rights, just not for muslims, though I think that was just inelegantly expressing the view they wanted to be able to kick out people like Abu Hamza easier. Oh, and circulated a petition to me calling on the queen to remove Cameron as PM shortly after the GE, for reasons too stupid for me to remember but something to do with lack of support.
Ah, family Xmas time, cannot beat it.
Can you reference any 'let's shoot a socialist' quotes? I've never heard anything like that.
Not that specifically - right wing abuse of left wingers tend to be more dismissively derogatory than violent in tone in my experience.
Two men in the public eye have died today after suffering Alzheimer's for a number of years. I fear one is going to dominant the more deserving of recognition....
Sun correspondent Charles Rae is quick off the mark : 'Lord Janner has died and so have his secrets. Justice is the loser'
I thought justice required the accused to be able to defend themselves.
The BBC report states even though he was found unfit to stand trial, there was going to be a "trial of the facts" scheduled take to place next April, when a jury was due to decide whether he had committed the abuse, with no finding of guilt or conviction.
Sun correspondent Charles Rae is quick off the mark : 'Lord Janner has died and so have his secrets. Justice is the loser'
I thought justice required the accused to be able to defend themselves.
Indeed, that is why a senior judge at the Old Bailey said Lord Janner’s dementia was so severe that he could not defend himself in court. - There was talk of a trial based on the facts (whatever that means) by which a trial can take place with the defendant in absentia.
Sun correspondent Charles Rae is quick off the mark : 'Lord Janner has died and so have his secrets. Justice is the loser'
I thought justice required the accused to be able to defend themselves.
Indeed, that is why a senior judge at the Old Bailey said Lord Janner’s dementia was so severe that he could not defend himself in court. - There was talk of a trial based on the facts (whatever that means) by which a trial can take place with the defendant in absentia.
All moot now of course, RIP.
A trial of the facts is used for those who are incapax so that it can be determined what sort of a risk they pose and whether a compulsory period of detention in hospital is appropriate. It is indeed now moot.
Another brewing scandal is that many new-build homes are not exactly meeting the required insulation and other standards ...
(Note, IANAE. But I believe the above is right).
Talking of which, what is this rumour I hear in the distance (ie. from my mother) about gas cookers and/or heating being phased out over the next 15 years. Seems bit odd to build a load of power stations to burn gas, so we can provide electricity to people, so they don't have to burn gas...
Not heard anything about that. I suppose it might be as North Sea gas runs out? In which case will we reopen the coal mines and go back to the good old days of town gas, with British Gas visiting every house to fit new burners?
If I'm right about the reason, couldn't the gas distribution network be supplied with LNG supplies once North Sea gas runs out?
I had a look around, apparently its Paris to blame, also indicates why people are not rushing out to build new gas power stations.
The property world looks set to be facing an enormous upheaval following the climate change deal in Paris which could see the end of cooking and heating with gas in the UK.
Gas hobs, cookers, fires and boilers could all be phased out within 15 years, with households dumping appliances.
All gas-fired power stations must also close by the mid-2030s, unless they manage to remove CO2 from their emissions.
Sounds like a vote winner.
Who said that the Paris deal is going to be implemented? Thankfully it's not going to, it's just window dressing for the press who expected something meaningful. By the mid-2030's people would have forgotten that the Paris deal ever existed and the people involved in it would have long retired from politics.
If you compare the leader satisfaction ratings to the actual vote shares it seems like its not so much that it's more accurate than the VI, as that it was lucky enough to get its two major "errors" the right way - by satisfaction Callahan/Thatcher should have been virtually a tie, but Thatcher won comfortably, and similarly Major/Kinnock should actually have been a much more comfortable victory than it actually was.
The L&N model covers this. Basically, the longer a party keeps winning, the larger the satisfaction required in the PM for them to win again...
The autoregressive component of the model suggests a periodicity of two or three terms before the pendulum naturally swings to the Opposition. A particularly popular/unpopular PM may displace this regularity.
Which is why it's so baffling that people are projecting an Osborne-led Tory party to win a landslide when he has such terrible personal ratings.
Corbyn vs Osborne = Alien vs Predator.
I'm puzzled by the hostility to Osborne - always seen him as part of a very successful double act with Cameron.
"I do not like you, Dr. Fell".
As so often, Alistair Meeks hits the nail on the head, when he says Osbourne gives the impression he enjoys pulling wings off flies.
Still not seeing it - sounds just like rather nasty prejudice to say things like that about pretty much anyone. I agree his polling is poor and I doubt if he will become PM but he seems to me to be niehter more or less unpleasant than most folk.
Unworthy of Meeks if he said it. Osborne is not going to give away our nuclear deterrent or had back masses of power to left wing trade unions. No tory would of course. And thats for starters, before you discount insane economic policies. Just where do leadership ratings start to cut in?
Was going to watch the third Formula E race, which is today, but as I started the programme (6pm) it was revealed the start time was 7pm. An hour long build-up is ridiculous for Formula 1. It's bloody daft for Formula E.
Which is why it's so baffling that people are projecting an Osborne-led Tory party to win a landslide when he has such terrible personal ratings.
Corbyn vs Osborne = Alien vs Predator.
I'm puzzled by the hostility to Osborne - always seen him as part of a very successful double act with Cameron.
"I do not like you, Dr. Fell".
As so often, Alistair Meeks hits the nail on the head, when he says Osbourne gives the impression he enjoys pulling wings off flies.
I'm hostile to him because as a Chancellor he's been a total failure. I'm not particularly bothered about fly pulling habits or Oxford dining clubs, unless they are pertinent to his lack of progress as a Chancellor.
Total failure? Not even socialists say that. Kipper speak? Can't abide some success?
Sun correspondent Charles Rae is quick off the mark : 'Lord Janner has died and so have his secrets. Justice is the loser'
I thought justice required the accused to be able to defend themselves.
Indeed, that is why a senior judge at the Old Bailey said Lord Janner’s dementia was so severe that he could not defend himself in court. - There was talk of a trial based on the facts (whatever that means) by which a trial can take place with the defendant in absentia.
All moot now of course, RIP.
A trial of the facts is used for those who are incapax so that it can be determined what sort of a risk they pose and whether a compulsory period of detention in hospital is appropriate. It is indeed now moot.
Evening DavidL - I now recall you mentioning 'incapax' before. Not a term I'm familiar with down south and wondered if it was used primarily in Scottish courts?
What on earth is going on with Leicester, I keep saying the bubble will burst soon.
The overall quality of the Premier league this season is very poor, or rather the gap between the big teams and the rest isn't there.
There is some stat I saw that said no team who was top at Christmas has ever finished outside of the top 4. Leicester in Champions League next season....
Yes I saw that, they're showing no sign of faltering although the Vardy bubble has burst
That has to be the biggest fear for Leicester fans, if Vardy or Mahrez gets injured, there is no depth to their squad e.g. Ulloa is at best a good Championship player, definitely not a top Premier League striker.
Plenty of depth to the squad. Okazaki scored and won the penalty today. Ulloa scored a decent number of goals last year. With Schlupp and Dyer we have further tricky wingers. We have the Swiss captain benchwarming and Was stood in well for Huth today. We are not playing in Europe. Not this season anyway! Our owners are loaded and the Transfer window opens in a week. Coming for a top of the table team and Champions League football is much more appealing than a relegation scrap.
Look at the table. Leicester are not fading, the results have been getting better. The bookies are still underpricing Leicester. We are top at Christmas by at least 2 points, 9 points clear of 4th place and still better than evens for top 4, 12/1 to win on Betfair.
This is not a lucky run. It is a very good football team.
Which is why it's so baffling that people are projecting an Osborne-led Tory party to win a landslide when he has such terrible personal ratings.
Corbyn vs Osborne = Alien vs Predator.
I'm puzzled by the hostility to Osborne - always seen him as part of a very successful double act with Cameron.
"I do not like you, Dr. Fell".
As so often, Alistair Meeks hits the nail on the head, when he says Osbourne gives the impression he enjoys pulling wings off flies.
Osborne just looks and sounds like he's walked out of an audition for the next Bond villain.
The thing is that Cameron is frustratingly effective at convincing people who are suspicious of Tories that his heart is in the right place. When he's trying to convince about various austerity measures, he's good at putting on the sorrowful-serious face and essentially saying "I don't like doing these things, I really wish I didn't have to, but it's necessary for the country". (I get the sense Theresa May would be quite good at it too, in a "strict but ultimately fair teacher" kind of way.)
On the other hand, the public perception of Osborne is that he positively enjoys giving poor people a kicking and taking money out of public services. He is nowhere near as good as Cameron at the whole "I'm doing this to be responsible in the national interest" thing. The public (again, frustratingly for me) are willing to put up with Tory medicine if they are persuaded that it's being done as a necessary evil by someone with his heart in the right place, but the typical swing voter isn't spiteful enough to go along with it if they perceive it's being done by a nasty person like Osborne who actually wants to do it and takes a sadistic pleasure in it.
What on earth is going on with Leicester, I keep saying the bubble will burst soon.
The overall quality of the Premier league this season is very poor, or rather the gap between the big teams and the rest isn't there.
There is some stat I saw that said no team who was top at Christmas has ever finished outside of the top 4. Leicester in Champions League next season....
Yes I saw that, they're showing no sign of faltering although the Vardy bubble has burst
That has to be the biggest fear for Leicester fans, if Vardy or Mahrez gets injured, there is no depth to their squad e.g. Ulloa is at best a good Championship player, definitely not a top Premier League striker.
Plenty of depth to the squad. Okazaki scored and won the penalty today. Ulloa scored a decent number of goals last year. With Schlupp and Dyer we have further tricky wingers. We have the Swiss captain benchwarming and Was stood in well for Huth today. We are not playing in Europe. Not this season anyway! Our owners are loaded and the Transfer window opens in a week. Coming for a top of the table team and Champions League football is much more appealing than a relegation scrap.
Look at the table. Leicester are not fading, the results have been getting better. The bookies are still underpricing Leicester. We are top at Christmas by at least 2 points, 9 points clear of 4th place and still better than evens for top 4, 12/1 to win on Betfair.
This is not a lucky run. It is a very good football team.
The better than evens for top four looks cracking value.
What on earth is going on with Leicester, I keep saying the bubble will burst soon.
The overall quality of the Premier league this season is very poor, or rather the gap between the big teams and the rest isn't there.
There is some stat I saw that said no team who was top at Christmas has ever finished outside of the top 4. Leicester in Champions League next season....
Yes I saw that, they're showing no sign of faltering although the Vardy bubble has burst
That has to be the biggest fear for Leicester fans, if Vardy or Mahrez gets injured, there is no depth to their squad e.g. Ulloa is at best a good Championship player, definitely not a top Premier League striker.
Plenty of depth to the squad. Okazaki scored and won the penalty today. Ulloa scored a decent number of goals last year. With Schlupp and Dyer we have further tricky wingers. We have the Swiss captain benchwarming and Was stood in well for Huth today. We are not playing in Europe. Not this season anyway! Our owners are loaded and the Transfer window opens in a week. Coming for a top of the table team and Champions League football is much more appealing than a relegation scrap.
Look at the table. Leicester are not fading, the results have been getting better. The bookies are still underpricing Leicester. We are top at Christmas by at least 2 points, 9 points clear of 4th place and still better than evens for top 4, 12/1 to win on Betfair.
This is not a lucky run. It is a very good football team.
Eurosport are linking to a fan who backed Leicester at 1000/1 to be top at Xmas with a fiver. Well done to them.
Dr Fox, that's a very impressive win at Everton today. All the talk is about other clubs coming in for Vardy and Mahrez, yet you quite rightly point out that Leicester can probably attract some decent players too.
The bookies are still underpricing Leicester. We are top at Christmas by at least 2 points, 9 points clear of 4th place and still better than evens for top 4, 12/1 to win on Betfair.
Don't dispute this. The top 4 price is very good, especially given the stat I mentioned below and that my belief in the overall quality of the Premiership this season is very poor.
However, I wouldn't want to see Leicester having to play 20 games with Ulloa and Kramarić upfront. For Leicester's sake let hope that isn't the case.
Puts an end to that sorry saga with the trial of the facts.
Oh dear no doubt there'll be some fairly nasty smearing now from all and sundry.
Yes. How long before someone claims they were brutalized by him and Ted Heath in a Barnes lodging house?
Of course normally Tom Watson would be quick off the mark but of course Janner wasn't actually a Tory.
I'm afraid the evidence against Janner doesn't look good (from his point of view).
Evidence is necessary but not sufficient for a conviction. There also has to be a trial.
If I may bang on for a moment, justice is simple. Law, evidence, trial, verdict, sentence, punishment, release. We worked it out years ago, it's simple and it works every time. But every time people insist that some part is unnecessary, we all know he's guilty, let's just proceed to the kicking, blah-di-blah. Damn...
If you compare the leader satisfaction ratings to the actual vote shares it seems like its not so much that it's more accurate than the VI, as that it was lucky enough to get its two major "errors" the right way - by satisfaction Callahan/Thatcher should have been virtually a tie, but Thatcher won comfortably, and similarly Major/Kinnock should actually have been a much more comfortable victory than it actually was.
The L&N model covers this. Basically, the longer a party keeps winning, the larger the satisfaction required in the PM for them to win again...
The autoregressive component of the model suggests a periodicity of two or three terms before the pendulum naturally swings to the Opposition. A particularly popular/unpopular PM may displace this regularity.
Wilson was certainly more popular than Heath in 1970.
Dr Fox, that's a very impressive win at Everton today. All the talk is about other clubs coming in for Vardy and Mahrez, yet you quite rightly point out that Leicester can probably attract some decent players too.
Both Vardy and Mahrez have said they are staying, and our Club is not short of money. Both are on long contracts. Ranieri has said that he will not sell.
Vardy has a bit of a groin strain that he picked up against Man U, so his yellow card gives him a week off.
There was an unusually intelligent article in Sports Illustrated on why Leicester is doing so well. Far better than most UK football writing:
Sun correspondent Charles Rae is quick off the mark : 'Lord Janner has died and so have his secrets. Justice is the loser'
Some people are lucky !
AS I get older I really loathe people prejudging things.. except of course in the case of Gordon Brown, who was bonkers. Mr Rae talking bollocks again.. Justice isn't the loser at all. No one knows whether he was guilty of anything, and the jury never tested the facts. He will now have to face a much higher court.
How many foreign coaches would be willing to change their team's whole system (Slowly pass the ball sideways or back until the eight defenders die of boredom) to play to Vardy's strengths?
Sun correspondent Charles Rae is quick off the mark : 'Lord Janner has died and so have his secrets. Justice is the loser'
Some people are lucky !
AS I get older I really loathe people prejudging things.. except of course in the case of Gordon Brown, who was bonkers. Mr Rae talking bollocks again.. Justice isn't the loser at all. No one knows whether he was guilty of anything, and the jury never tested the facts. He will now have to face a much higher court.
+1
Particularly given recent incidents and cases where the evidence has proved to be less than reliable. Can you imagine the slur that would have rested on Lord McAlpine's name if he had died before the BBC broadcast?
I do - small flat in a modern well-insulated block (built ca. 2010), only need it on if the temperature outside drops to near freezing. Suspect it's not that uncommon in London where having a gas boiler eats space. A sensible solution mnght be block central heating but the block may not be big enough (4 floors) to make that pay off.
If you compare the leader satisfaction ratings to the actual vote shares it seems like its not so much that it's more accurate than the VI, as that it was lucky enough to get its two major "errors" the right way - by satisfaction Callahan/Thatcher should have been virtually a tie, but Thatcher won comfortably, and similarly Major/Kinnock should actually have been a much more comfortable victory than it actually was.
The L&N model covers this. Basically, the longer a party keeps winning, the larger the satisfaction required in the PM for them to win again...
The autoregressive component of the model suggests a periodicity of two or three terms before the pendulum naturally swings to the Opposition. A particularly popular/unpopular PM may displace this regularity.
Wilson was certainly more popular than Heath in 1970.
The model is parsimonious, and ignores LOTO satisfaction.
In 1970, Wilson was forecast to lose, despite his popularity (although the Tories did in the event do slightly better than forecast).
It does indeed, Mr. Felix, but such stupidity is not beyond the reach of our politicians - see the Climate Change Act as a starter for ten. So who knows they may yet go for it, after all I keep reading that insulating my home will reduce the amount of electricity I use.
Given that I heat the place with gas and the only electricity involved is in running the pump for a few hours each day for a couple of months each year, I have to wonder about the intellectual capacity of the people who come out with such guff.
Heating with gas is incredibly efficient. It's a much better idea than using a power station to produce electricity, then sending the electricity over wires, and then passing the electricity through something to generate heat through electrical resistance.
But that's just my view.
When doing carbon footprint analysis, aren't you supposed to do it for the full energy/product cycle from extraction/manufacture through delivery, use and disposal? On that basis, surely gas has about the lowest carbon footprint of any of the hydrocarbon sources.
Dr Fox, that's a very impressive win at Everton today. All the talk is about other clubs coming in for Vardy and Mahrez, yet you quite rightly point out that Leicester can probably attract some decent players too.
Both Vardy and Mahrez have said they are staying, and our Club is not short of money. Both are on long contracts. Ranieri has said that he will not sell.
Vardy has a bit of a groin strain that he picked up against Man U, so his yellow card gives him a week off.
There was an unusually intelligent article in Sports Illustrated on why Leicester is doing so well. Far better than most UK football writing:
Very much agree with your view about UK football journalism - Jonathan Wilson excepted. This bit stood out for me:
"Leicester’s only loss showed what could be coming. The Foxes defended lethargically in the second half against Arsenal, conceding three goals in a heavy loss, and couldn’t stop the Gunners from building out of the back or through midfield."
A common theme of Arsenal games is "can Arsenal weather the storm in the first half to come through and win in the second half?" Leicester nearly got 2-0 up and it's a long way back from there, but Arsenal did just enough and had a little bit of luck with some refereeing decisions.
What I think Ranieri is doing is getting Leicester into the mentality of playing like a top team. Being a top team is a mindset. I respect the likes of Tony Pulis, and his teams do get results against big teams quite regularly. But if you aspire to make it to the top you have to be proactive and although Leicester don't dominate possession, they're prepared to squeeze the opposition in the middle of the pitch and commit players forward when they get the chance.
EDIT: Just to add, what Leicester don't want is for teams to start showing them lots of respect and defending deep.
A common theme of Arsenal games is "can Arsenal weather the storm in the first half to come through and win in the second half?" Leicester nearly got 2-0 up and it's a long way back from there, but Arsenal did just enough and had a little bit of luck with some refereeing decisions.
I wouldn't necessarily put it like that, but I wouldn't disagree. Arsenal react poorly to going a goal down, that's all. As to scoring, sometimes they can put on goals in the first half, sometimes the second.
As an aside, all the Paris climate change stuff is a complete irrelevancy.
All assumptions about transport assume that we will continue to burn oil to get around. But we won't. By 2030, irrespective of government policies, the market for petrol and diesel powered cars is going to be tiny.
Simply, electric cars are becoming cheaper faster than petrol cars. They are flash memory against hard disk drives. One day, a Tesla will be cheaper than an equivalent petrol powered car. And that day will be sooner than you think: perhaps 2021 or 2022. Certainly no later than 2025.
It does indeed, Mr. Felix, but such stupidity is not beyond the reach of our politicians - see the Climate Change Act as a starter for ten. So who knows they may yet go for it, after all I keep reading that insulating my home will reduce the amount of electricity I use.
Given that I heat the place with gas and the only electricity involved is in running the pump for a few hours each day for a couple of months each year, I have to wonder about the intellectual capacity of the people who come out with such guff.
Heating with gas is incredibly efficient. It's a much better idea than using a power station to produce electricity, then sending the electricity over wires, and then passing the electricity through something to generate heat through electrical resistance.
But that's just my view.
When doing carbon footprint analysis, aren't you supposed to do it for the full energy/product cycle from extraction/manufacture through delivery, use and disposal? On that basis, surely gas has about the lowest carbon footprint of any of the hydrocarbon sources.
Yes, absolutely. However you cut it, gas is by far the cleanest, by far the most efficient, and by far the most abundant and cheap hydrocarbon.
The next two decades will be dominated by solar and natural gas.
Which is why it's so baffling that people are projecting an Osborne-led Tory party to win a landslide when he has such terrible personal ratings.
Corbyn vs Osborne = Alien vs Predator.
I'm puzzled by the hostility to Osborne - always seen him as part of a very successful double act with Cameron.
"I do not like you, Dr. Fell".
As so often, Alistair Meeks hits the nail on the head, when he says Osbourne gives the impression he enjoys pulling wings off flies.
I'm hostile to him because as a Chancellor he's been a total failure. I'm not particularly bothered about fly pulling habits or Oxford dining clubs, unless they are pertinent to his lack of progress as a Chancellor.
Total failure? Not even socialists say that. Kipper speak? Can't abide some success?
If you call bobbing along on economic trends whilst the underlying structural problems of the country persist and worsen 'success' then you must be ecstatic.
Which is why it's so baffling that people are projecting an Osborne-led Tory party to win a landslide when he has such terrible personal ratings.
Corbyn vs Osborne = Alien vs Predator.
I'm puzzled by the hostility to Osborne - always seen him as part of a very successful double act with Cameron.
"I do not like you, Dr. Fell".
As so often, Alistair Meeks hits the nail on the head, when he says Osbourne gives the impression he enjoys pulling wings off flies.
I'm hostile to him because as a Chancellor he's been a total failure. I'm not particularly bothered about fly pulling habits or Oxford dining clubs, unless they are pertinent to his lack of progress as a Chancellor.
Total failure? Not even socialists say that. Kipper speak? Can't abide some success?
If you call bobbing along on economic trends whilst the underlying structural problems of the country persist and worsen 'success' then you must be ecstatic.
It does indeed, Mr. Felix, but such stupidity is not beyond the reach of our politicians - see the Climate Change Act as a starter for ten. So who knows they may yet go for it, after all I keep reading that insulating my home will reduce the amount of electricity I use.
Given that I heat the place with gas and the only electricity involved is in running the pump for a few hours each day for a couple of months each year, I have to wonder about the intellectual capacity of the people who come out with such guff.
Heating with gas is incredibly efficient. It's a much better idea than using a power station to produce electricity, then sending the electricity over wires, and then passing the electricity through something to generate heat through electrical resistance.
But that's just my view.
When doing carbon footprint analysis, aren't you supposed to do it for the full energy/product cycle from extraction/manufacture through delivery, use and disposal? On that basis, surely gas has about the lowest carbon footprint of any of the hydrocarbon sources.
Yes, absolutely. However you cut it, gas is by far the cleanest, by far the most efficient, and by far the most abundant and cheap hydrocarbon.
The next two decades will be dominated by solar and natural gas.
Well my solar panels were so poor this week they wouldn't have made a cup of tea. On thursday they produced nil. Mind you from Spring to Autumn they were reasonable but unfortunately you need electricity 24/7 x 365 days pa
A common theme of Arsenal games is "can Arsenal weather the storm in the first half to come through and win in the second half?" Leicester nearly got 2-0 up and it's a long way back from there, but Arsenal did just enough and had a little bit of luck with some refereeing decisions.
I wouldn't necessarily put it like that, but I wouldn't disagree. Arsenal react poorly to going a goal down, that's all. As to scoring, sometimes they can put on goals in the first half, sometimes the second.
It doesn't always hold true. Norwich had the better of the second half against us and looked the more likely winner. And I very much agree that Arsenal are quite sensitive to the score. A good example was Swansea away this season; once we went 1-0 up we were comfortable. It's what worries me about them; teams that win the league tend to be able to block out the score and carry on. Arsenal tend to go into panic mode when they're losing - the game with West Ham on the opening day of the season was a good example.
It does indeed, Mr. Felix, but such stupidity is not beyond the reach of our politicians - see the Climate Change Act as a starter for ten. So who knows they may yet go for it, after all I keep reading that insulating my home will reduce the amount of electricity I use.
Given that I heat the place with gas and the only electricity involved is in running the pump for a few hours each day for a couple of months each year, I have to wonder about the intellectual capacity of the people who come out with such guff.
Heating with gas is incredibly efficient. It's a much better idea than using a power station to produce electricity, then sending the electricity over wires, and then passing the electricity through something to generate heat through electrical resistance.
But that's just my view.
When doing carbon footprint analysis, aren't you supposed to do it for the full energy/product cycle from extraction/manufacture through delivery, use and disposal? On that basis, surely gas has about the lowest carbon footprint of any of the hydrocarbon sources.
Yes, absolutely. However you cut it, gas is by far the cleanest, by far the most efficient, and by far the most abundant and cheap hydrocarbon.
The next two decades will be dominated by solar and natural gas.
Well my solar panels were so poor this week they wouldn't have made a cup of tea. On thursday they produced nil. Mind you from Spring to Autumn they were reasonable but unfortunately you need electricity 24/7 x 365 days pa
That's why I said solar and gas.
The price of solar panels has fallen - on a per watt basis - at 22% a year for the last 40 years. There is every reason to expect that will continue for at least the next eight or nine years.
I have a house in America (Long Island), and I recently got contacted by a solar company. The pitch was this:
"You currently spend around $100 per month on electricity. Let us put panels on your roof - at no cost to you! - and we'll guarantee you just $90 per month for your electricity for 20 years. No upfront cost, just pay us less, and the same amount for 20 years!"
Now, I'm not going to take this. (I doubt I'll own it for 20 years, and I'm not there often enough to run up $1,200 of electricity bills in a year.) But you know what: at some point it'll make financial sense.
At a certain price, everyone will have panels on their roof.
A common theme of Arsenal games is "can Arsenal weather the storm in the first half to come through and win in the second half?" Leicester nearly got 2-0 up and it's a long way back from there, but Arsenal did just enough and had a little bit of luck with some refereeing decisions.
I wouldn't necessarily put it like that, but I wouldn't disagree. Arsenal react poorly to going a goal down, that's all. As to scoring, sometimes they can put on goals in the first half, sometimes the second.
It doesn't always hold true. Norwich had the better of the second half against us and looked the more likely winner. And I very much agree that Arsenal are quite sensitive to the score. A good example was Swansea away this season; once we went 1-0 up we were comfortable. It's what worries me about them; teams that win the league tend to be able to block out the score and carry on. Arsenal tend to go into panic mode when they're losing - the game with West Ham on the opening day of the season was a good example.
Leicester are obviously the headline-makers but both Watford and Palace are doing very well. I think each of these could make the top 6. Stoke are impressive too.
In part it is Man U and Chelsea under-performing, but the new TV deal makes it much easier for teams outside the traditional big 4 to hold onto key players, or to make signings from abroad.
A common theme of Arsenal games is "can Arsenal weather the storm in the first half to come through and win in the second half?" Leicester nearly got 2-0 up and it's a long way back from there, but Arsenal did just enough and had a little bit of luck with some refereeing decisions.
I wouldn't necessarily put it like that, but I wouldn't disagree. Arsenal react poorly to going a goal down, that's all. As to scoring, sometimes they can put on goals in the first half, sometimes the second.
It doesn't always hold true. Norwich had the better of the second half against us and looked the more likely winner. And I very much agree that Arsenal are quite sensitive to the score. A good example was Swansea away this season; once we went 1-0 up we were comfortable. It's what worries me about them; teams that win the league tend to be able to block out the score and carry on. Arsenal tend to go into panic mode when they're losing - the game with West Ham on the opening day of the season was a good example.
Been thinking about the Leicester phenomenon and have a theory. Back in the day the gate receipts used to be split between both teams, I think the away team got 25% but not certain. Anyway it meant that really small teams could go to Old Trafford for example and get thrashed but enjoy a really good payday.
That ended on the insistence of the greedy big clubs, but the massive TV money now means that the so called smaller clubs no longer have to sell their best players, for example I know some really arrogant Chelsea fans who could not believe Everton would not sell John Stones to us for £35m, Leicester do not have to sell Vardy or Mahrez unless they want to. Similarly Palace were able to sign a top player like Cabaye
I'm hoping we are returning to the days when a well run club with a good scouting system and a good manager can win the League, such as Villa, Forest and Derby in the Eighties.
Well my solar panels were so poor this week they wouldn't have made a cup of tea. On thursday they produced nil. Mind you from Spring to Autumn they were reasonable but unfortunately you need electricity 24/7 x 365 days pa
That's why I said solar and gas.
The price of solar panels has fallen - on a per watt basis - at 22% a year for the last 40 years. There is every reason to expect that will continue for at least the next eight or nine years.
I have a house in America (Long Island), and I recently got contacted by a solar company. The pitch was this:
"You currently spend around $100 per month on electricity. Let us put panels on your roof - at no cost to you! - and we'll guarantee you just $90 per month for your electricity for 20 years. No upfront cost, just pay us less, and the same amount for 20 years!"
Now, I'm not going to take this. (I doubt I'll own it for 20 years, and I'm not there often enough to run up $1,200 of electricity bills in a year.) But you know what: at some point it'll make financial sense.
At a certain price, everyone will have panels on their roof.
But they wont produce enough domestic energy in the Winter in our climate. However I would say that they are a good investment even with the new tariff due in 2016 due to the big drop in price and ever increasing efficiency. The subsidy I am getting is great but unjustifiable hence the drop in 2016
But they wont produce enough domestic energy in the Winter in our climate. However I would say that they are a good investment even with the new tariff due in 2016 due to the big drop in price and ever increasing efficiency. The subsidy I am getting is great but unjustifiable hence the drop in 2016
I agree completely.
And that's why I said solar and gas.
Gas power stations are inexpensive to build, require little maintenance, and are designed to come on line very quickly. (A modern Open Cycle Gas Turbine can reach peak power in less than 90 seconds from cold. CCGTs are slower but more efficient.)
Natural gas is cheap, non-polluting and efficient.
@dhothersall: Striking piece from a young Yes voter's experience of criticising SNP: "Let's be honest: this is a climate of fear." https://t.co/APjv6LWFYU
But they wont produce enough domestic energy in the Winter in our climate. However I would say that they are a good investment even with the new tariff due in 2016 due to the big drop in price and ever increasing efficiency. The subsidy I am getting is great but unjustifiable hence the drop in 2016
I agree completely.
And that's why I said solar and gas.
Gas power stations are inexpensive to build, require little maintenance, and are designed to come on line very quickly. (A modern Open Cycle Gas Turbine can reach peak power in less than 90 seconds from cold. CCGTs are slower but more efficient.)
Natural gas is cheap, non-polluting and efficient.
But they wont produce enough domestic energy in the Winter in our climate. However I would say that they are a good investment even with the new tariff due in 2016 due to the big drop in price and ever increasing efficiency. The subsidy I am getting is great but unjustifiable hence the drop in 2016
I agree completely.
And that's why I said solar and gas.
Gas power stations are inexpensive to build, require little maintenance, and are designed to come on line very quickly. (A modern Open Cycle Gas Turbine can reach peak power in less than 90 seconds from cold. CCGTs are slower but more efficient.)
Natural gas is cheap, non-polluting and efficient.
Solar + Gas is the future.
Shale gas ??
Natural gas has had two big revolutions in the last decade, and is on the verge of a third:
First is shale (and tight gas): the use of hydraulic fracturing and horizontal drilling to open up areas which have always had plentiful gas, but where it was too expensive historically to extract.
Second is LNG: this has opened up stranded gas (i.e. large fields a long way from people who might need it); so, massive gas fields are being exploited off the coast of Australia (the North West Shelf) and offshore Qatar. These fields are off the charts in size. There are new finds offshore Tanzania and Mozambique which are probably the biggest ever discovered.
Thirdly is "floating LNG". Ships that can go in and exploit gas in places where it would otherwise be flared, or in places where the local government is... less than entirely trustworthy. (If they change the terms, you can sail the ship away).
Reserves of exploitable gas have certainly trebled in the last 15 years, and may have increased 5- or 10- fold.
Which is why it's so baffling that people are projecting an Osborne-led Tory party to win a landslide when he has such terrible personal ratings.
Corbyn vs Osborne = Alien vs Predator.
I'm puzzled by the hostility to Osborne - always seen him as part of a very successful double act with Cameron.
"I do not like you, Dr. Fell".
As so often, Alistair Meeks hits the nail on the head, when he says Osbourne gives the impression he enjoys pulling wings off flies.
I'm hostile to him because as a Chancellor he's been a total failure. I'm not particularly bothered about fly pulling habits or Oxford dining clubs, unless they are pertinent to his lack of progress as a Chancellor.
Total failure? Not even socialists say that. Kipper speak? Can't abide some success?
If you call bobbing along on economic trends whilst the underlying structural problems of the country persist and worsen 'success' then you must be ecstatic.
If only we were in Russia, eh?
Wow, what an utterly low standard of post from you.
Which is why it's so baffling that people are projecting an Osborne-led Tory party to win a landslide when he has such terrible personal ratings.
Corbyn vs Osborne = Alien vs Predator.
I'm puzzled by the hostility to Osborne - always seen him as part of a very successful double act with Cameron.
"I do not like you, Dr. Fell".
As so often, Alistair Meeks hits the nail on the head, when he says Osbourne gives the impression he enjoys pulling wings off flies.
I'm hostile to him because as a Chancellor he's been a total failure. I'm not particularly bothered about fly pulling habits or Oxford dining clubs, unless they are pertinent to his lack of progress as a Chancellor.
Total failure? Not even socialists say that. Kipper speak? Can't abide some success?
If you call bobbing along on economic trends whilst the underlying structural problems of the country persist and worsen 'success' then you must be ecstatic.
If only we were in Russia, eh?
Wow, what an utterly low standard of post from you.
Which is why it's so baffling that people are projecting an Osborne-led Tory party to win a landslide when he has such terrible personal ratings.
Corbyn vs Osborne = Alien vs Predator.
I'm puzzled by the hostility to Osborne - always seen him as part of a very successful double act with Cameron.
"I do not like you, Dr. Fell".
As so often, Alistair Meeks hits the nail on the head, when he says Osbourne gives the impression he enjoys pulling wings off flies.
I'm hostile to him because as a Chancellor he's been a total failure. I'm not particularly bothered about fly pulling habits or Oxford dining clubs, unless they are pertinent to his lack of progress as a Chancellor.
Total failure? Not even socialists say that. Kipper speak? Can't abide some success?
If you call bobbing along on economic trends whilst the underlying structural problems of the country persist and worsen 'success' then you must be ecstatic.
If only we were in Russia, eh?
Wow, what an utterly low standard of post from you.
Yes, appalling low. I'm practically ashamed.
Ok, your choice, I'd just be embarrassed at the lazy brainfart.
But they wont produce enough domestic energy in the Winter in our climate. However I would say that they are a good investment even with the new tariff due in 2016 due to the big drop in price and ever increasing efficiency. The subsidy I am getting is great but unjustifiable hence the drop in 2016
I agree completely.
And that's why I said solar and gas.
Gas power stations are inexpensive to build, require little maintenance, and are designed to come on line very quickly. (A modern Open Cycle Gas Turbine can reach peak power in less than 90 seconds from cold. CCGTs are slower but more efficient.)
Natural gas is cheap, non-polluting and efficient.
Solar + Gas is the future.
Shale gas ??
Natural gas has had two big revolutions in the last decade, and is on the verge of a third:
First is shale (and tight gas): the use of hydraulic fracturing and horizontal drilling to open up areas which have always had plentiful gas, but where it was too expensive historically to extract.
Second is LNG: this has opened up stranded gas (i.e. large fields a long way from people who might need it); so, massive gas fields are being exploited off the coast of Australia (the North West Shelf) and offshore Qatar. These fields are off the charts in size. There are new finds offshore Tanzania and Mozambique which are probably the biggest ever discovered.
Thirdly is "floating LNG". Ships that can go in and exploit gas in places where it would otherwise be flared, or in places where the local government is... less than entirely trustworthy. (If they change the terms, you can sail the ship away).
Reserves of exploitable gas have certainly trebled in the last 15 years, and may have increased 5- or 10- fold.
Been thinking about the Leicester phenomenon and have a theory. Back in the day the gate receipts used to be split between both teams, I think the away team got 25% but not certain. Anyway it meant that really small teams could go to Old Trafford for example and get thrashed but enjoy a really good payday.
That ended on the insistence of the greedy big clubs, but the massive TV money now means that the so called smaller clubs no longer have to sell their best players, for example I know some really arrogant Chelsea fans who could not believe Everton would not sell John Stones to us for £35m, Leicester do not have to sell Vardy or Mahrez unless they want to. Similarly Palace were able to sign a top player like Cabaye
I'm hoping we are returning to the days when a well run club with a good scouting system and a good manager can win the League, such as Villa, Forest and Derby in the Eighties.
What strikes me about Leicester (and others) is that they play as a team. I've found following Arsenal a little unsatisfying recently because so much of the focus is on us signing 'big names'. Although Arsenal weren't winning trophies, I enjoyed following Arsenal between 2005-13. There was something satisfying about seeing Wenger build a team out of youngsters. If we had the side from 2007-08 playing today I reckon we'd win at a canter.
But Arsenal seem more interested in keeping fans happy by signing big names. I think Ozil and Sanchez are good players, but no way are they worth the money we paid for them - especially Ozil. It's as though Arsenal aspire to be Real Madrid. Somehow Wenger makes the best of it, but I think we could be so much more. Perhaps if teams like Leicester get in on the act the bigger teams will have to go back to playing as a team and stop obsessing about individuals.
Which is why it's so baffling that people are projecting an Osborne-led Tory party to win a landslide when he has such terrible personal ratings.
Corbyn vs Osborne = Alien vs Predator.
I'm puzzled by the hostility to Osborne - always seen him as part of a very successful double act with Cameron.
"I do not like you, Dr. Fell".
As so often, Alistair Meeks hits the nail on the head, when he says Osbourne gives the impression he enjoys pulling wings off flies.
I'm hostile to him because as a Chancellor he's been a total failure. I'm not particularly bothered about fly pulling habits or Oxford dining clubs, unless they are pertinent to his lack of progress as a Chancellor.
Total failure? Not even socialists say that. Kipper speak? Can't abide some success?
If you call bobbing along on economic trends whilst the underlying structural problems of the country persist and worsen 'success' then you must be ecstatic.
If only we were in Russia, eh?
Wow, what an utterly low standard of post from you.
Sun correspondent Charles Rae is quick off the mark : 'Lord Janner has died and so have his secrets. Justice is the loser'
I thought justice required the accused to be able to defend themselves.
Indeed, that is why a senior judge at the Old Bailey said Lord Janner’s dementia was so severe that he could not defend himself in court. - There was talk of a trial based on the facts (whatever that means) by which a trial can take place with the defendant in absentia.
All moot now of course, RIP.
A trial of the facts is used for those who are incapax so that it can be determined what sort of a risk they pose and whether a compulsory period of detention in hospital is appropriate. It is indeed now moot.
Evening DavidL - I now recall you mentioning 'incapax' before. Not a term I'm familiar with down south and wondered if it was used primarily in Scottish courts?
Maybe although I thought not. It simply means someone who is so lacking in mental capacity as to have no legal status. Insane, in other words.
Presumably those who complained about him not being fit to prosecute will be apologising?
Why exactly?
Because he was clearly terminally ill facing imminent death and it wasn't some absurd conspiracy.
Nonsense. No one was alleging 'an absurd conspiracy' (is that the standard attack line used on anyone who criticises an establishment figure these days? 'I accuse you of tawdry arse-covering; you accuse me of an absurd conspiracy')? Janner's camp were stating he was unfit to stand trial, which was clearly the best legal recourse they had - others had entirely justifiable arguments to the contrary, not least of which (in my recollection) was Janner's own ability and stated wish to remain an active member of the House of Lords. People die. His death hasn't changed my opinion that he should have stood trial one iota, and frankly people using it to wag the finger at people they've had arguments with is as tasteless as those using it to allege an establishment cover up.
Which is why it's so baffling that people are projecting an Osborne-led Tory party to win a landslide when he has such terrible personal ratings.
Corbyn vs Osborne = Alien vs Predator.
I'm puzzled by the hostility to Osborne - always seen him as part of a very successful double act with Cameron.
"I do not like you, Dr. Fell".
As so often, Alistair Meeks hits the nail on the head, when he says Osbourne gives the impression he enjoys pulling wings off flies.
I'm hostile to him because as a Chancellor he's been a total failure. I'm not particularly bothered about fly pulling habits or Oxford dining clubs, unless they are pertinent to his lack of progress as a Chancellor.
Total failure? Not even socialists say that. Kipper speak? Can't abide some success?
If you call bobbing along on economic trends whilst the underlying structural problems of the country persist and worsen 'success' then you must be ecstatic.
If only we were in Russia, eh?
Wow, what an utterly low standard of post from you.
Spasibo, Vladimir Vlaimirovich.
Sadly I can't say it's an utterly low standard of post from you.
Which is why it's so baffling that people are projecting an Osborne-led Tory party to win a landslide when he has such terrible personal ratings.
Corbyn vs Osborne = Alien vs Predator.
I'm puzzled by the hostility to Osborne - always seen him as part of a very successful double act with Cameron.
"I do not like you, Dr. Fell".
As so often, Alistair Meeks hits the nail on the head, when he says Osbourne gives the impression he enjoys pulling wings off flies.
I'm hostile to him because as a Chancellor he's been a total failure. I'm not particularly bothered about fly pulling habits or Oxford dining clubs, unless they are pertinent to his lack of progress as a Chancellor.
Total failure? Not even socialists say that. Kipper speak? Can't abide some success?
If you call bobbing along on economic trends whilst the underlying structural problems of the country persist and worsen 'success' then you must be ecstatic.
If only we were in Russia, eh?
Wow, what an utterly low standard of post from you.
Spasibo, Vladimir Vlaimirovich.
Sadly I can't say it's an utterly low standard of post from you.
But they wont produce enough domestic energy in the Winter in our climate. However I would say that they are a good investment even with the new tariff due in 2016 due to the big drop in price and ever increasing efficiency. The subsidy I am getting is great but unjustifiable hence the drop in 2016
Even though I don't believe all the AGW garbage I would love to have solar panels on my property. I think small scale local generation backed up by an emergency national grid system is by far the best way to provide for the nation's energy needs.
Unfortunately I live in a listed building and most of my land is scheduled monument (not unfortunately of course I love it and chose to live there but there are practical implications).
So I am not allowed to have solar panels on my property and there is no where on my land to put freestanding versions either. Bloody annoying and I am still hoping for developments that will make it possible for me to use some form of solar energy in the future.
But they wont produce enough domestic energy in the Winter in our climate. However I would say that they are a good investment even with the new tariff due in 2016 due to the big drop in price and ever increasing efficiency. The subsidy I am getting is great but unjustifiable hence the drop in 2016
Even though I don't believe all the AGW garbage I would love to have solar panels on my property. I think small scale local generation backed up by an emergency national grid system is by far the best way to provide for the nation's energy needs.
Unfortunately I live in a listed building and most of my land is scheduled monument (not unfortunately of course I love it and chose to live there but there are practical implications).
So I am not allowed to have solar panels on my property and there is no where on my land to put freestanding versions either. Bloody annoying and I am still hoping for developments that will make it possible for me to use some form of solar energy in the future.
That's a shame as they are a good investment and in time will be self sufficient without any subsidy. My return on capital this year will be near 10% and being retired the capital cost of £6,500 would only return a pittance in interest in a building society. Indeed our installers said that the retired were their main customers when I installed them last February.
Isn't wind energy (well aware as I am of the manifold drawbacks) likely to yield more energy in the UK due to the greater prevalence of wind here? (If only there were rain energy)
It does indeed, Mr. Felix, but such stupidity is not beyond the reach of our politicians - see the Climate Change Act as a starter for ten. So who knows they may yet go for it, after all I keep reading that insulating my home will reduce the amount of electricity I use.
Given that I heat the place with gas and the only electricity involved is in running the pump for a few hours each day for a couple of months each year, I have to wonder about the intellectual capacity of the people who come out with such guff.
Heating with gas is incredibly efficient. It's a much better idea than using a power station to produce electricity, then sending the electricity over wires, and then passing the electricity through something to generate heat through electrical resistance.
But that's just my view.
When doing carbon footprint analysis, aren't you supposed to do it for the full energy/product cycle from extraction/manufacture through delivery, use and disposal? On that basis, surely gas has about the lowest carbon footprint of any of the hydrocarbon sources.
Yes, absolutely. However you cut it, gas is by far the cleanest, by far the most efficient, and by far the most abundant and cheap hydrocarbon.
The next two decades will be dominated by solar and natural gas.
Well my solar panels were so poor this week they wouldn't have made a cup of tea. On thursday they produced nil. Mind you from Spring to Autumn they were reasonable but unfortunately you need electricity 24/7 x 365 days pa
That's why I said solar and gas.
The price of solar panels has fallen - on a per watt basis - at 22% a year for the last 40 years. There is every reason to expect that will continue for at least the next eight or nine years.
I have a house in America (Long Island), and I recently got contacted by a solar company. The pitch was this:
"You currently spend around $100 per month on electricity. Let us put panels on your roof - at no cost to you! - and we'll guarantee you just $90 per month for your electricity for 20 years. No upfront cost, just pay us less, and the same amount for 20 years!"
Now, I'm not going to take this. (I doubt I'll own it for 20 years, and I'm not there often enough to run up $1,200 of electricity bills in a year.) But you know what: at some point it'll make financial sense.
At a certain price, everyone will have panels on their roof.
There have been interesting developments in battery technology. I believe some companies in California have been offering packages which include batteries with their solar panels.
The poll put the Conservatives on 38%, eight points ahead of Labour, which is on 30%. A month ago the gap was 7%. The UK Independence party (Ukip), on 16%, has dropped only one point since last month, despite rumblings over the leadership of Nigel Farage.
The SNP and the Liberal Democrats are unchanged since November on 6% and 5% respectively, while the Greens have risen two percentage points to 5% in a mont
Almost a third of Labour supporters do not think that Jeremy Corbyn will lead Labour into the next general election, according to a new Opinium/Observer poll to mark the Labour leader’s first 100 days in office.
A majority of likely voters (57%) – including 30% of Labour supporters – said they did not expect Corbyn to be in charge at the 2020 election.
Many of the survey’s findings will make grim reading for Labour MPs and supporters, three and a half months after Corbyn won an extraordinary mandate from party supporters in the leadership election to succeed Ed Miliband.
He reaches the 100th day of what has been a turbulent start to his leadership on Monday.
When asked who they believed would make the best prime minister, 41% of all questioned named Cameron, compared with just 20% who chose Corbyn. Only 54% of Labour voters thought Corbyn would be the best PM, whereas 91% of Tory voters selected Cameron.
The poll put the Conservatives on 38%, eight points ahead of Labour, which is on 30%. A month ago the gap was 7%.
The UK Independence party (Ukip), on 16%, has dropped only one point since last month, despite rumblings over the leadership of Nigel Farage.
The SNP and the Liberal Democrats are unchanged since November on 6% and 5% respectively, while the Greens have risen two percentage points to 5% in a month. An Opinium poll on 17 December 2010, at almost the same stage of Ed Miliband’s leadership, showed Labour and the Conservatives tied on 37%.
The poll also asked voters to choose who they thought would be the better prime minister out of Jeremy Corbyn and three plausible Conservative successors to David Cameron, who has made clear that he will stand down at the next general election.
Of the three, Boris Johnson fared best. In a Corbyn contest between the Mayor of London and Corbyn, 34% of voters favoured Johnson against 23% for Corbyn. When Corbyn was pitted against Theresa May, 29% said the current Home Secretary would be the better PM against 23% who named Corbyn. George Osborne, the chancellor, fared worst, with just 24% of voters judging him the best prime minister against 21% for Corbyn.
George Osborne, the chancellor, fared worst, with just 24% of voters judging him the best prime minister against 21% for Corbyn.
This points to a very hung parliament if 2020 is Osborne vs Corbyn - as the thread header reminds us, leader match-ups are a more reliable guide than voting intentions.
George Osborne, the chancellor, fared worst, with just 24% of voters judging him the best prime minister against 21% for Corbyn.
This points to a very hung parliament if 2020 is Osborne vs Corbyn - as the thread header reminds us, leader match-ups are a more reliable guide than voting intentions.
Tories would be extremely stupid to elect Osborne.
George Osborne, the chancellor, fared worst, with just 24% of voters judging him the best prime minister against 21% for Corbyn.
This points to a very hung parliament if 2020 is Osborne vs Corbyn - as the thread header reminds us, leader match-ups are a more reliable guide than voting intentions.
Tories would be extremely stupid to elect Osborne.
Quite. Theresa May still looks very well-placed to me.
George Osborne, the chancellor, fared worst, with just 24% of voters judging him the best prime minister against 21% for Corbyn.
This points to a very hung parliament if 2020 is Osborne vs Corbyn - as the thread header reminds us, leader match-ups are a more reliable guide than voting intentions.
Tories would be extremely stupid to elect Osborne.
Quite. Theresa May still looks very well-placed to me.
"She might not look like much, but she's got it where it counts, kid. I made a lot of special modifications myself!"
Just got home from a great day at St Mary's (despite our crappy loss to Spurs), I was sat next to Lawrie McMenemy and his son, and if Lawrie's forthcoming biography is called 'Articulated Lawrie' then I just named it!
Isn't wind energy (well aware as I am of the manifold drawbacks) likely to yield more energy in the UK due to the greater prevalence of wind here? (If only there were rain energy)
Isn't hydroelectricity effectively rain energy in UK
That would be the first challenge he has ever had.
Just praying Chelsea don't go for Simeone.
The reports are that is what Guardiola wants. I think he has a big task to turn Man City around, they have far too many poor and / or aging players on huge wages.
So what are we thinking...
Guardiola to Man City, Mourinho to Man Utd, and Chelski go for...?
Wishful thinking. A majority of existing members supported Corbyn, presumably with plenty of crossover from those who had supported pre-Corbyn leaderships, so they clearly have no issue switching back and forth. So if Corbyn is proven a disaster, they will, I assume, switch back in numbers to the other strands of Labour thinking, without having needed to split.
Comments
I prefer the UK consumer confidence index, I noticed that everytime it's above -10, governments win:
http://www.tradingeconomics.com/united-kingdom/consumer-confidence
Or in this metric above 101:
https://data.oecd.org/leadind/consumer-confidence-index-cci.htm
It goes all the way back to 1974, which is good, in order to compare with multiple elections.
So you are not the only one ignoring the Voting Intention numbers.
It's taken 7 years, but better late than never. (^_-)
Well done.
I presume with his death this wont go ahead.
It is far easier to obtain that kind of justice, and no need for a trial to determine any actual guilt either. Much more convenient.
All moot now of course, RIP.
Who said that the Paris deal is going to be implemented?
Thankfully it's not going to, it's just window dressing for the press who expected something meaningful.
By the mid-2030's people would have forgotten that the Paris deal ever existed and the people involved in it would have long retired from politics.
The autoregressive component of the model suggests a periodicity of two or three terms before the pendulum naturally swings to the Opposition. A particularly popular/unpopular PM may displace this regularity.
Osborne is not going to give away our nuclear deterrent or had back masses of power to left wing trade unions. No tory would of course.
And thats for starters, before you discount insane economic policies. Just where do leadership ratings start to cut in?
I am OpenLabour
No one’s quite sure what that means but you have a strange attraction for Ed Miliband
!!
Well, I did think he would win and be an ok PM.
Was going to watch the third Formula E race, which is today, but as I started the programme (6pm) it was revealed the start time was 7pm. An hour long build-up is ridiculous for Formula 1. It's bloody daft for Formula E.
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2015/12/18/in_new_hampshire_anything_goes_129075.html
What is Global Entry - an opportunity for Momentum to enter the Democratic selection and swing it for Bernie?
Look at the table. Leicester are not fading, the results have been getting better. The bookies are still underpricing Leicester. We are top at Christmas by at least 2 points, 9 points clear of 4th place and still better than evens for top 4, 12/1 to win on Betfair.
This is not a lucky run. It is a very good football team.
The thing is that Cameron is frustratingly effective at convincing people who are suspicious of Tories that his heart is in the right place. When he's trying to convince about various austerity measures, he's good at putting on the sorrowful-serious face and essentially saying "I don't like doing these things, I really wish I didn't have to, but it's necessary for the country". (I get the sense Theresa May would be quite good at it too, in a "strict but ultimately fair teacher" kind of way.)
On the other hand, the public perception of Osborne is that he positively enjoys giving poor people a kicking and taking money out of public services. He is nowhere near as good as Cameron at the whole "I'm doing this to be responsible in the national interest" thing. The public (again, frustratingly for me) are willing to put up with Tory medicine if they are persuaded that it's being done as a necessary evil by someone with his heart in the right place, but the typical swing voter isn't spiteful enough to go along with it if they perceive it's being done by a nasty person like Osborne who actually wants to do it and takes a sadistic pleasure in it.
Thanks!
However, I wouldn't want to see Leicester having to play 20 games with Ulloa and Kramarić upfront. For Leicester's sake let hope that isn't the case.
If I may bang on for a moment, justice is simple. Law, evidence, trial, verdict, sentence, punishment, release. We worked it out years ago, it's simple and it works every time. But every time people insist that some part is unnecessary, we all know he's guilty, let's just proceed to the kicking, blah-di-blah. Damn...
Vardy has a bit of a groin strain that he picked up against Man U, so his yellow card gives him a week off.
There was an unusually intelligent article in Sports Illustrated on why Leicester is doing so well. Far better than most UK football writing:
http://www.si.com/planet-futbol/2015/12/15/leicester-city-premier-league-ranieri-vardy-mahrez-tactics-epl
Particularly given recent incidents and cases where the evidence has proved to be less than reliable. Can you imagine the slur that would have rested on Lord McAlpine's name if he had died before the BBC broadcast?
In 1970, Wilson was forecast to lose, despite his popularity (although the Tories did in the event do slightly better than forecast).
"Leicester’s only loss showed what could be coming. The Foxes defended lethargically in the second half against Arsenal, conceding three goals in a heavy loss, and couldn’t stop the Gunners from building out of the back or through midfield."
A common theme of Arsenal games is "can Arsenal weather the storm in the first half to come through and win in the second half?" Leicester nearly got 2-0 up and it's a long way back from there, but Arsenal did just enough and had a little bit of luck with some refereeing decisions.
What I think Ranieri is doing is getting Leicester into the mentality of playing like a top team. Being a top team is a mindset. I respect the likes of Tony Pulis, and his teams do get results against big teams quite regularly. But if you aspire to make it to the top you have to be proactive and although Leicester don't dominate possession, they're prepared to squeeze the opposition in the middle of the pitch and commit players forward when they get the chance.
EDIT: Just to add, what Leicester don't want is for teams to start showing them lots of respect and defending deep.
All assumptions about transport assume that we will continue to burn oil to get around. But we won't. By 2030, irrespective of government policies, the market for petrol and diesel powered cars is going to be tiny.
Simply, electric cars are becoming cheaper faster than petrol cars. They are flash memory against hard disk drives. One day, a Tesla will be cheaper than an equivalent petrol powered car. And that day will be sooner than you think: perhaps 2021 or 2022. Certainly no later than 2025.
The next two decades will be dominated by solar and natural gas.
The price of solar panels has fallen - on a per watt basis - at 22% a year for the last 40 years. There is every reason to expect that will continue for at least the next eight or nine years.
I have a house in America (Long Island), and I recently got contacted by a solar company. The pitch was this:
"You currently spend around $100 per month on electricity. Let us put panels on your roof - at no cost to you! - and we'll guarantee you just $90 per month for your electricity for 20 years. No upfront cost, just pay us less, and the same amount for 20 years!"
Now, I'm not going to take this. (I doubt I'll own it for 20 years, and I'm not there often enough to run up $1,200 of electricity bills in a year.) But you know what: at some point it'll make financial sense.
At a certain price, everyone will have panels on their roof.
In part it is Man U and Chelsea under-performing, but the new TV deal makes it much easier for teams outside the traditional big 4 to hold onto key players, or to make signings from abroad.
That ended on the insistence of the greedy big clubs, but the massive TV money now means that the so called smaller clubs no longer have to sell their best players, for example I know some really arrogant Chelsea fans who could not believe Everton would not sell John Stones to us for £35m, Leicester do not have to sell Vardy or Mahrez unless they want to. Similarly Palace were able to sign a top player like Cabaye
I'm hoping we are returning to the days when a well run club with a good scouting system and a good manager can win the League, such as Villa, Forest and Derby in the Eighties.
Well my solar panels were so poor this week they wouldn't have made a cup of tea. On thursday they produced nil. Mind you from Spring to Autumn they were reasonable but unfortunately you need electricity 24/7 x 365 days pa
That's why I said solar and gas.
The price of solar panels has fallen - on a per watt basis - at 22% a year for the last 40 years. There is every reason to expect that will continue for at least the next eight or nine years.
I have a house in America (Long Island), and I recently got contacted by a solar company. The pitch was this:
"You currently spend around $100 per month on electricity. Let us put panels on your roof - at no cost to you! - and we'll guarantee you just $90 per month for your electricity for 20 years. No upfront cost, just pay us less, and the same amount for 20 years!"
Now, I'm not going to take this. (I doubt I'll own it for 20 years, and I'm not there often enough to run up $1,200 of electricity bills in a year.) But you know what: at some point it'll make financial sense.
At a certain price, everyone will have panels on their roof.
But they wont produce enough domestic energy in the Winter in our climate. However I would say that they are a good investment even with the new tariff due in 2016 due to the big drop in price and ever increasing efficiency. The subsidy I am getting is great but unjustifiable hence the drop in 2016
And that's why I said solar and gas.
Gas power stations are inexpensive to build, require little maintenance, and are designed to come on line very quickly. (A modern Open Cycle Gas Turbine can reach peak power in less than 90 seconds from cold. CCGTs are slower but more efficient.)
Natural gas is cheap, non-polluting and efficient.
Solar + Gas is the future.
"Let's be honest: this is a climate of fear."
https://t.co/APjv6LWFYU
First is shale (and tight gas): the use of hydraulic fracturing and horizontal drilling to open up areas which have always had plentiful gas, but where it was too expensive historically to extract.
Second is LNG: this has opened up stranded gas (i.e. large fields a long way from people who might need it); so, massive gas fields are being exploited off the coast of Australia (the North West Shelf) and offshore Qatar. These fields are off the charts in size. There are new finds offshore Tanzania and Mozambique which are probably the biggest ever discovered.
Thirdly is "floating LNG". Ships that can go in and exploit gas in places where it would otherwise be flared, or in places where the local government is... less than entirely trustworthy. (If they change the terms, you can sail the ship away).
Reserves of exploitable gas have certainly trebled in the last 15 years, and may have increased 5- or 10- fold.
Astonishing.
But Arsenal seem more interested in keeping fans happy by signing big names. I think Ozil and Sanchez are good players, but no way are they worth the money we paid for them - especially Ozil. It's as though Arsenal aspire to be Real Madrid. Somehow Wenger makes the best of it, but I think we could be so much more. Perhaps if teams like Leicester get in on the act the bigger teams will have to go back to playing as a team and stop obsessing about individuals.
He's 49 v 38 against Clinton for the general election.
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2015/12/19/fox-news-poll-trump-jumps-cruz-climbs-carson-sinks-in-gop-race.html?intcmp=hpbt1
I doubt he'll be much below 4/1 for POTUS even if he gets the nomination.
Unfortunately I live in a listed building and most of my land is scheduled monument (not unfortunately of course I love it and chose to live there but there are practical implications).
So I am not allowed to have solar panels on my property and there is no where on my land to put freestanding versions either. Bloody annoying and I am still hoping for developments that will make it possible for me to use some form of solar energy in the future.
The SNP and the Liberal Democrats are unchanged since November on 6% and 5% respectively, while the Greens have risen two percentage points to 5% in a mont
-------------
Corbynism sweeping the nation (CSTN) ...
A majority of likely voters (57%) – including 30% of Labour supporters – said they did not expect Corbyn to be in charge at the 2020 election.
Many of the survey’s findings will make grim reading for Labour MPs and supporters, three and a half months after Corbyn won an extraordinary mandate from party supporters in the leadership election to succeed Ed Miliband.
He reaches the 100th day of what has been a turbulent start to his leadership on Monday.
When asked who they believed would make the best prime minister, 41% of all questioned named Cameron, compared with just 20% who chose Corbyn. Only 54% of Labour voters thought Corbyn would be the best PM, whereas 91% of Tory voters selected Cameron.
The poll put the Conservatives on 38%, eight points ahead of Labour, which is on 30%. A month ago the gap was 7%.
The UK Independence party (Ukip), on 16%, has dropped only one point since last month, despite rumblings over the leadership of Nigel Farage.
The SNP and the Liberal Democrats are unchanged since November on 6% and 5% respectively, while the Greens have risen two percentage points to 5% in a month. An Opinium poll on 17 December 2010, at almost the same stage of Ed Miliband’s leadership, showed Labour and the Conservatives tied on 37%.
http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2015/dec/19/30-per-cent-labour-supporters-jeremy-corbyn-not-leader-election
Of the three, Boris Johnson fared best. In a Corbyn contest between the Mayor of London and Corbyn, 34% of voters favoured Johnson against 23% for Corbyn. When Corbyn was pitted against Theresa May, 29% said the current Home Secretary would be the better PM against 23% who named Corbyn. George Osborne, the chancellor, fared worst, with just 24% of voters judging him the best prime minister against 21% for Corbyn.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/football/teams/manchester-city/12059982/Pep-Guardiola-will-join-Manchester-City-at-end-of-the-season-claims-German-TV-station.html
Just praying Chelsea don't go for Simeone.
So what are we thinking...
Guardiola to Man City, Mourinho to Man Utd, and Chelski go for...?
https://twitter.com/J_Bloodworth/status/678328176829988865