Starmer definitely on the ballot, Guardian reporting.
Usdaw have nominated him.
I wonder whether this means that some CLPs may be more willing to vote for one of the others.
Marginally, yes. It looks as though Starmer and RLB are safe and will probably be joined by Nandy. So members could well feel "let's give someone else a chance too". But Phillips is really unpopular with a lot of members because of her perceived negativity. Thornberry isn't unpopular, but I'm not sure she springs to mind for most members. Probably the wish to express an opinion on Starmer/RLB will take precedence.
Do a thought experiment - suppose you lived in a safe seat for your preferred party. Would you vote for a different party so as to give them some encouragement? For most of us, probably not?
It's a lot more open in the ballot paper for deputy, where I think the left will try hard to get Burgon on the ballot with a decent number of nominations, and Butler may have a shot too. Rayner is streets ahead for the actual result, though, and seems not to be experiencing serious challenge as the generally acceptable candidate.
Burgon is a complete clown who should be nowhere near the ballot Nick. Do you agree?
Doubt it matters. Rayner will totally storm this, or I'll eat a baseball cap.
Before everyone piles on Biden in Iowa (this is the third poll in a row to show him with a six point lead), it's worth remembering that his voters are less politically engaged, he is less a beneficiary of second choices than other moderates, and his organisation is weaker than Sanders.
On Betfair, Biden is second favourite at 3s. That looks about right, or possibly a bit generous.
Sanders, however, looks way too short at 2.7. Warren is too long at 6.4. Buttigieg is probably right at 5.3. Klobuchar might be worth a small flutter at 15s. While Yang should be 400, not 40.
Is Biden less of a home for 2nd choices? That Rural America poll says not, unless I am misreading.
So... Monmouth did an Iowa poll with all the candidates first, and then just the top four. Here's the second poll, with the changes from the first:
Now there are a couple of really interesting things here. Firstly, the "left track" gains seven points, while the moderate track gains twelve. This tells you that the majority of former on the left of the party.
Cruz beat Trump on second choices in 2016 amongst Republicans, look how that turned out
And Le Pen won the French Presidential election, we know.
No, just pointing out that Cruz was the second choice for Rubio, Carson, Bush and Christie voters in January 2016 but Trump still beat him as he gained momentum and won more primaries
That's not what that poll says.
That poll asks all Republican voters who their second choice is. So it therefore includes all Trump supporters. If Trump was winning the Primary race, he'd struggle win the second choice race, because all his voters have to choose someone else.
This will of course come as a surprise to the PB who keep assuring us that the London housing market is overdue a ‘correction’ *
* this has been forecast on PB every year for the past 12 years
The housing market is overdue a correction - and has been since 2000 or so. In the long run, betting that a small three bedroom terrace is worth more than £1m does not seem historically wise.
There are plenty of ways the party could end.
A friend was recently offered by his bank the following*: London money in Manchester....
Before everyone piles on Biden in Iowa (this is the third poll in a row to show him with a six point lead), it's worth remembering that his voters are less politically engaged, he is less a beneficiary of second choices than other moderates, and his organisation is weaker than Sanders.
On Betfair, Biden is second favourite at 3s. That looks about right, or possibly a bit generous.
Sanders, however, looks way too short at 2.7. Warren is too long at 6.4. Buttigieg is probably right at 5.3. Klobuchar might be worth a small flutter at 15s. While Yang should be 400, not 40.
Is Biden less of a home for 2nd choices? That Rural America poll says not, unless I am misreading.
So... Monmouth did an Iowa poll with all the candidates first, and then just the top four. Here's the second poll, with the changes from the first:
Now there are a couple of really interesting things here. Firstly, the "left track" gains seven points, while the moderate track gains twelve. This tells you that the majority of former on the left of the party.
Cruz beat Trump on second choices in 2016 amongst Republicans, look how that turned out
And Le Pen won the French Presidential election, we know.
No, just pointing out that Cruz was the second choice for Rubio, Carson, Bush and Christie voters in January 2016 but Trump still beat him as he gained momentum and won more primaries
That's not what that poll says.
That poll asks all Republican voters who their second choice is. So it therefore includes all Trump supporters. If Trump was winning the Primary race, he'd struggle win the second choice race, because all his voters have to choose someone else.
So... imagine there were just two candidates: Trump and Rubio. If Trump was on 70% and Rubio on 30% for first preferences, then Trump could not win the second choice vote.
I would very much agree - the clever move was using the dash for gas to cut emissions, while allowing renewable technology to mature. Once offshore wind reached competitiveness, allowing onshore would have just been lazy. I've even encountered those who are upset that offshore schemes have sailed through so rapidly - there are a number of individuals who seem to live to object to anything.
One of the most farcical aspects of Green politics is the nearly absolute ignorance among greens as to the advances that have occurred in the last decade. We are on course to:
- Have no coal sourced electricity generation by the end of this parliament (its practically dead already). Gas is much more efficient in terms of carbon emissions than coal. - Replace 12% of existing grid capacity with more offshore wind by the end of the parliament. - End sales of non-ICE cars by 2030. - Go carbon neutral before 2050.
Yes there's a very good story to tell in terms of power generation - not quite so good a story in terms of air quality and recycling. It's slightly typical of Conservatives to cherry pick an area where they have admittedly a good story to tell but "green" means so much more and in many other areas progress remains sluggish.
The question of air quality especially in urban areas is one few seem willing or able to address but it's a huge issue given rising rates of asthma and people with respiratory problems.
Have a look at recycling rates - I have to confess Newham's is, I believe, the worst.
Before everyone piles on Biden in Iowa (this is the third poll in a row to show him with a six point lead), it's worth remembering that his voters are less politically engaged, he is less a beneficiary of second choices than other moderates, and his organisation is weaker than Sanders.
On Betfair, Biden is second favourite at 3s. That looks about right, or possibly a bit generous.
Sanders, however, looks way too short at 2.7. Warren is too long at 6.4. Buttigieg is probably right at 5.3. Klobuchar might be worth a small flutter at 15s. While Yang should be 400, not 40.
Is Biden less of a home for 2nd choices? That Rural America poll says not, unless I am misreading.
So... Monmouth did an Iowa poll with all the candidates first, and then just the top four. Here's the second poll, with the changes from the first:
Now there are a couple of really interesting things here. Firstly, the "left track" gains seven points, while the moderate track gains twelve. This tells you that the majority of former on the left of the party.
Cruz beat Trump on second choices in 2016 amongst Republicans, look how that turned out
And Le Pen won the French Presidential election, we know.
No, just pointing out that Cruz was the second choice for Rubio, Carson, Bush and Christie voters in January 2016 but Trump still beat him as he gained momentum and won more primaries
That's not what that poll says.
That poll asks all Republican voters who their second choice is. So it therefore includes all Trump supporters. If Trump was winning the Primary race, he'd struggle win the second choice race, because all his voters have to choose someone else.
It was taken in December 2015 and January 2016 ie at the equivalent stage of the Republican race to the Democratic race now, every other candidates voters had Cruz as their second preference, even ignoring Trump voters.
Trump of course won the Republican nomination with only 45% of the vote but winning 41 out of 56 primaries and caucuses
The main problem is that although in Europe almost everyone buys into this stuff in principle, if it comes to major decisions then people peel off rapidly. For instance, it appears from a whole series of UN and other reports that we need to reduce meat consumption significantly because of the climate change impact (not just methane etc. but also the forest clearances to produce more and more animal feed), but even Caroline Lucas is wary of doing more than suggesting that a meat tax might be discussed.
That isn't a problem, it's a blessing. The messiness of humans prevents a vast flood of pernicious rubbish that seems to the powerful like the right thing to do at the time from becoming a reality.
Meat is among the best sources of absorbable nutrients for humans, second only to eggs. No vegetarian culture (and we do have them to study) has ever been renowned for longevity. A meat tax is a repulsive idea for that reason. It's a rejection of our own health and an apology for being human.
“Of all tyrannies, a tyranny exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It may be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron’s cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end for they do so with the approval of their own conscience.
They may be more likely to go to Heaven yet at the same time likelier to make a Hell of earth. Their very kindness stings with intolerable insult. To be ‘cured’ against one’s will and cured of states which we may not regard as disease is to be put on a level of those who have not yet reached the age of reason or those who never will; to be classed with infants, imbeciles, and domestic animals.”
"The urge to save humanity is almost always a false front for the urge to rule."
This will of course come as a surprise to the PB who keep assuring us that the London housing market is overdue a ‘correction’ *
* this has been forecast on PB every year for the past 12 years
The housing market is overdue a correction - and has been since 2000 or so. In the long run, betting that a small three bedroom terrace is worth more than £1m does not seem historically wise.
There are plenty of ways the party could end.
A friend was recently offered by his bank the following*: London money in Manchester....
Yep - it's common in IT, if you want the really good people you offer London rates as someone else will and just flag them as Home Office.
And London rates are next to nothing compared to West Coast USA as I'm sure RCS can confirm.
Sky News has been told by palace sources they are continuing to review how the Duke and Duchess of Sussex will be referred to in the future.
It comes after it appeared Meghan was given the style or title of a divorced woman.
On Saturday, it was said the couple would be referred to as Harry, Duke of Sussex and Meghan, Duchess of Sussex now that they will no longer use the rank of His or Her Royal Highness.
But the problem relates to the comma, because in the past only divorced women in the family have been styled that way, - for example Diana, Princess of Wales and Sarah, Duchess of York.
Interesting article, thanks Cyclefree. Essentially I think the environment is politically neutral (because we all have an interest in living in satisfactory surroundings, though we may vary in non-political ways in how we define that), but because it impinges on corporate practices it tempts the left to regulate and the right to resist.
At present, Conservatives in Britain seem to me to be making a reasonably serious effort to get to grips with the issue, since they see a Blue/Green partnership as a useful extension to their core vote which won't lead them into unacceptable compromises. The German CDU certainly sees the Greens as acceptable partners. Among authoritarian regimes, China is showing a fair amount of awareness in the abrupt way that such regimes act (they're about to suddenly make plastics bags illegal), though Russia appears oblivious The main standout seems to be in the US, where as Cyclefree says there are lots of free marketeers who see it all as a commie plot. Having a lot of space makes the discussion harder - it's at least feasible to have a lot more landfill in Siberia, not so much in Bedfordshire.
The main problem is that although in Europe almost everyone buys into this stuff in principle, if it comes to major decisions then people peel off rapidly. For instance, it appears from a whole series of UN and other reports that we need to reduce meat consumption significantly because of the climate change impact (not just methane etc. but also the forest clearances to produce more and more animal feed), but even Caroline Lucas is wary of doing more than suggesting that a meat tax might be discussed.
Two major difficulties in practice rather than principle: Personal green change is like tax. Much agreement that it is necessary, but in each individual's case it is always possible to argue to yourself that someone else should bear this or that bit of the extra burden and not me.
Secondly, the doomsters. A lot of people have spotted that if the bad case scenario is true then we are in fact already stuffed. 2019 (probably) and 2018 show an increase not decrease in carbon output - both record years. The 'we only have X years' stuff has already gone on over X plus Y years. So what's the point?
“Of all tyrannies, a tyranny exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It may be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron’s cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end for they do so with the approval of their own conscience.
They may be more likely to go to Heaven yet at the same time likelier to make a Hell of earth. Their very kindness stings with intolerable insult. To be ‘cured’ against one’s will and cured of states which we may not regard as disease is to be put on a level of those who have not yet reached the age of reason or those who never will; to be classed with infants, imbeciles, and domestic animals.”
"The urge to save humanity is almost always a false front for the urge to rule."
I would very much agree - the clever move was using the dash for gas to cut emissions, while allowing renewable technology to mature. Once offshore wind reached competitiveness, allowing onshore would have just been lazy. I've even encountered those who are upset that offshore schemes have sailed through so rapidly - there are a number of individuals who seem to live to object to anything.
One of the most farcical aspects of Green politics is the nearly absolute ignorance among greens as to the advances that have occurred in the last decade. We are on course to:
- Have no coal sourced electricity generation by the end of this parliament (its practically dead already). Gas is much more efficient in terms of carbon emissions than coal. - Replace 12% of existing grid capacity with more offshore wind by the end of the parliament. - End sales of non-ICE cars by 2030. - Go carbon neutral before 2050.
Yes there's a very good story to tell in terms of power generation - not quite so good a story in terms of air quality and recycling. It's slightly typical of Conservatives to cherry pick an area where they have admittedly a good story to tell but "green" means so much more and in many other areas progress remains sluggish.
The question of air quality especially in urban areas is one few seem willing or able to address but it's a huge issue given rising rates of asthma and people with respiratory problems.
Have a look at recycling rates - I have to confess Newham's is, I believe, the worst.
Air quality in urban areas strongly correlates to diesel usage and aviation. Hmmm.. hybrid buses and opposing new runways???
Sky News has been told by palace sources they are continuing to review how the Duke and Duchess of Sussex will be referred to in the future.
It comes after it appeared Meghan was given the style or title of a divorced woman.
On Saturday, it was said the couple would be referred to as Harry, Duke of Sussex and Meghan, Duchess of Sussex now that they will no longer use the rank of His or Her Royal Highness.
But the problem relates to the comma, because in the past only divorced women in the family have been styled that way, - for example Diana, Princess of Wales and Sarah, Duchess of York.
Sky News has been told by palace sources they are continuing to review how the Duke and Duchess of Sussex will be referred to in the future.
It comes after it appeared Meghan was given the style or title of a divorced woman.
On Saturday, it was said the couple would be referred to as Harry, Duke of Sussex and Meghan, Duchess of Sussex now that they will no longer use the rank of His or Her Royal Highness.
But the problem relates to the comma, because in the past only divorced women in the family have been styled that way, - for example Diana, Princess of Wales and Sarah, Duchess of York.
This will of course come as a surprise to the PB who keep assuring us that the London housing market is overdue a ‘correction’ *
* this has been forecast on PB every year for the past 12 years
The housing market is overdue a correction - and has been since 2000 or so. In the long run, betting that a small three bedroom terrace is worth more than £1m does not seem historically wise.
There are plenty of ways the party could end.
A friend was recently offered by his bank the following*: London money in Manchester....
Yep - it's common in IT, if you want the really good people you offer London rates as someone else will and just flag them as Home Office.
And London rates are next to nothing compared to West Coast USA as I'm sure RCS can confirm.
Not IT - and this was about moving whole departments. Interestingly he is genuinely customer facing. The idea is that he would come to London one day a week to do client meetings etc...
The main problem is that although in Europe almost everyone buys into this stuff in principle, if it comes to major decisions then people peel off rapidly. For instance, it appears from a whole series of UN and other reports that we need to reduce meat consumption significantly because of the climate change impact (not just methane etc. but also the forest clearances to produce more and more animal feed), but even Caroline Lucas is wary of doing more than suggesting that a meat tax might be discussed.
That isn't a problem, it's a blessing. The messiness of humans prevents a vast flood of pernicious rubbish that seems to the powerful like the right thing to do at the time from becoming a reality.
Meat is among the best sources of absorbable nutrients for humans, second only to eggs. No vegetarian culture (and we do have them to study) has ever been renowned for longevity. A meat tax is a repulsive idea for that reason. It's a rejection of our own health and an apology for being human.
Yep, Hinduism, Jainism and Buddhism have all been a bit of a flash in the pan.
“Of all tyrannies, a tyranny exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It may be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron’s cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end for they do so with the approval of their own conscience.
They may be more likely to go to Heaven yet at the same time likelier to make a Hell of earth. Their very kindness stings with intolerable insult. To be ‘cured’ against one’s will and cured of states which we may not regard as disease is to be put on a level of those who have not yet reached the age of reason or those who never will; to be classed with infants, imbeciles, and domestic animals.”
"The urge to save humanity is almost always a false front for the urge to rule."
CS Lewis
The first 2 paras are C S Lewis, but the last aphorism is H L Mencken, no?
Air quality in urban areas strongly correlates to diesel usage and aviation. Hmmm.. hybrid buses and opposing new runways???
I'm not sure it's just diesels and aircraft. The volume of cars (albeit on an individual basis much cleaner) is an issue. Slow moving or static traffic generates exhaust and pollution - the Nitrogen Dioxide readings in some parts of London can be well above WHO safe numbers.
Cleaner air should be a goal to which all Governments should strive. The notion of vehicle taxation on miles driven rather than just car ownership is an interesting thought (not without its flaws obviously but a good starting point for further thought).
If the government cancels HS2 despite more than a decade of cross party scrutiny, an apparent political consensus to invest heavily in infrastructure, a fresh report saying on balance it should proceed and diggers already being on site, one has to conclude the UK won’t do much in the way of difficult long term infrastructure ever again.
Any promises about Northern Powerhouse Rail will rightly ring hollow to northern voters. There is a zero probability the enabling legislation could be passed by the next election and even if it was, the HS2 experience means no one could have any confidence that post election it wouldn’t be cancelled anyway.
Don’t listen to the Treasury bean counters Boris, let’s actually see something tangible being built for the £3-4trillion you’re going to spend this term. All evidence indicates the growth of digital technology INCREASES the demand for both business and leisure travel, given it allows the maintenance of more varied and distant relationships. And simple physics means the most land and energy efficient way of providing this is with trains (small front surface area for air resistance, long body, electric).
Bite the bullet and get phase 1 underway. And then spend this Parliament overhauling the planning, design, approval and procurement processes so that things can get done quicker and cheaper in the future.
That poll has Trump tieing Buttigieg in Florida but Sanders beating him, though most Florida polls have Trump ahead
I think Trump will win Florida comfortably; it's a state that has moved meaningfully rightwards since 2008/2012.
Certainly outside Miami Dade, Palm Beach and Broward counties
Will no one think of the hanging chads?
Biden has been ahead of Trump in every Florida poll published from October onwards.
In addition, although Florida has failed to deliver for the Democrats by the finest of margins in past elections, since January 2019 some 23% of black residents are no longer disenfranchised on account of having a spent conviction.
The black voters point is an excellent one. And it really doesn't take much to push it from R to D.
One (recent) facet of this is the crusade against meat. In fact, it’s where the meat is from and how it’s reared that’s the issue (meat isn’t intrinsically bad, or good for the environment) but it’s become a target due to assiduous campaigning by pressure groups and because reducing meat consumption is an action most people can choose to take who feel impotent to do anything else.
Ruminates are actually remarkably efficient converters of cellulose (which we can’t eat) into protein (which we can). In the UK they usually graze on grass uplands that’d be pretty useless for anything else, such as crop growing. If we replace meat with soy or palm oil based ‘vegan’ derivatives that require importing from areas around the world that have suffered forest or land clearance to produce them then we are going precisely nowhere. In fact, we’re making it worse. So policy here should be focused on origin and how the meat is reared and produced. As always, nothing is black or white, and the embryonic social phenomena of ‘meat shaming’ needs to stop. It’s part of a healthy balanced diet.
An even bigger contribution the Government could make to reducing CO2 emissions (like, right now) would be to encourage domestic switching from gas central heating to air/ground heat pumps ASAP with huge grants and subsidies but they seem remarkably timid about this.
So instead we’re left with declaring emergencies, talking about how much we’re cutting back on flying (we’re not and we can’t, most people do it anyway and just “offset”) and pretending to change our diets to the latest fad; a fabulously British obsession.
It’s all rather silly really but the tragedy is it’s almost entirely cosmetic.
Air quality in urban areas strongly correlates to diesel usage and aviation. Hmmm.. hybrid buses and opposing new runways???
I'm not sure it's just diesels and aircraft. The volume of cars (albeit on an individual basis much cleaner) is an issue. Slow moving or static traffic generates exhaust and pollution - the Nitrogen Dioxide readings in some parts of London can be well above WHO safe numbers.
Cleaner air should be a goal to which all Governments should strive. The notion of vehicle taxation on miles driven rather than just car ownership is an interesting thought (not without its flaws obviously but a good starting point for further thought).
The Boris Bus was largely driven by the requirement to do something about the appalling levels of particulate and NO2 pollution from diesel buses.
The increased capacity for the third runway at Heathrow will also kick up the NO2 numbers.
In general cars are getting more efficient - big upticks in hybrids. Its the commercial vehicles and buses that are big offenders here.
Sky News has been told by palace sources they are continuing to review how the Duke and Duchess of Sussex will be referred to in the future.
It comes after it appeared Meghan was given the style or title of a divorced woman.
On Saturday, it was said the couple would be referred to as Harry, Duke of Sussex and Meghan, Duchess of Sussex now that they will no longer use the rank of His or Her Royal Highness.
But the problem relates to the comma, because in the past only divorced women in the family have been styled that way, - for example Diana, Princess of Wales and Sarah, Duchess of York.
The main problem is that although in Europe almost everyone buys into this stuff in principle, if it comes to major decisions then people peel off rapidly. For instance, it appears from a whole series of UN and other reports that we need to reduce meat consumption significantly because of the climate change impact (not just methane etc. but also the forest clearances to produce more and more animal feed), but even Caroline Lucas is wary of doing more than suggesting that a meat tax might be discussed.
That isn't a problem, it's a blessing. The messiness of humans prevents a vast flood of pernicious rubbish that seems to the powerful like the right thing to do at the time from becoming a reality.
Meat is among the best sources of absorbable nutrients for humans, second only to eggs. No vegetarian culture (and we do have them to study) has ever been renowned for longevity. A meat tax is a repulsive idea for that reason. It's a rejection of our own health and an apology for being human.
Isn't love expectancy better in South India, which is vegetarian, than in North, which is not?
The main problem is that although in Europe almost everyone buys into this stuff in principle, if it comes to major decisions then people peel off rapidly. For instance, it appears from a whole series of UN and other reports that we need to reduce meat consumption significantly because of the climate change impact (not just methane etc. but also the forest clearances to produce more and more animal feed), but even Caroline Lucas is wary of doing more than suggesting that a meat tax might be discussed.
That isn't a problem, it's a blessing. The messiness of humans prevents a vast flood of pernicious rubbish that seems to the powerful like the right thing to do at the time from becoming a reality.
Meat is among the best sources of absorbable nutrients for humans, second only to eggs. No vegetarian culture (and we do have them to study) has ever been renowned for longevity. A meat tax is a repulsive idea for that reason. It's a rejection of our own health and an apology for being human.
Isn't love expectancy better in South India, which is vegetarian, than in North, which is not?
This will of course come as a surprise to the PB who keep assuring us that the London housing market is overdue a ‘correction’ *
* this has been forecast on PB every year for the past 12 years
The housing market is overdue a correction - and has been since 2000 or so. In the long run, betting that a small three bedroom terrace is worth more than £1m does not seem historically wise.
There are plenty of ways the party could end.
A friend was recently offered by his bank the following*: London money in Manchester....
Yep - it's common in IT, if you want the really good people you offer London rates as someone else will and just flag them as Home Office.
And London rates are next to nothing compared to West Coast USA as I'm sure RCS can confirm.
We use lawyers in LA and Arizona. The Arizona ones are less than half the price of the LA ones.
@Casino_Royale It isn’t so simple to just retrofit air source or ground source heat pumps.
For proper efficiency, you need fantastic insulation and underfloor heating. Ignoring that, you need much bigger radiators than you would for a gas boiler as the flow temperature in the system should be much lower.
Gas boilers push 60-80 deg C through the radiators. In an ideal world with a heat pump you’d be in the range of 35-45 deg C. You therefore need much bigger radiators to get the “heat into the room”.
Running a heat pump with radiators sized for a gas boiler will produce an efficiency not much better than using direct electricity to heat the water in the system. Not worth it.
Burgon is a complete clown who should be nowhere near the ballot Nick. Do you agree?
Haven't seen enough of him to judge fairly, tbh. What I've seen wasn't as bad as that, but I'm not planning to vote for him. I'll probably go Rayner like most people.
The main problem is that although in Europe almost everyone buys into this stuff in principle, if it comes to major decisions then people peel off rapidly. For instance, it appears from a whole series of UN and other reports that we need to reduce meat consumption significantly because of the climate change impact (not just methane etc. but also the forest clearances to produce more and more animal feed), but even Caroline Lucas is wary of doing more than suggesting that a meat tax might be discussed.
That isn't a problem, it's a blessing. The messiness of humans prevents a vast flood of pernicious rubbish that seems to the powerful like the right thing to do at the time from becoming a reality.
Meat is among the best sources of absorbable nutrients for humans, second only to eggs. No vegetarian culture (and we do have them to study) has ever been renowned for longevity. A meat tax is a repulsive idea for that reason. It's a rejection of our own health and an apology for being human.
Burgon is a complete clown who should be nowhere near the ballot Nick. Do you agree?
Haven't seen enough of him to judge fairly, tbh. What I've seen wasn't as bad as that, but I'm not planning to vote for him. I'll probably go Rayner like most people.
The main problem is that although in Europe almost everyone buys into this stuff in principle, if it comes to major decisions then people peel off rapidly. For instance, it appears from a whole series of UN and other reports that we need to reduce meat consumption significantly because of the climate change impact (not just methane etc. but also the forest clearances to produce more and more animal feed), but even Caroline Lucas is wary of doing more than suggesting that a meat tax might be discussed.
That isn't a problem, it's a blessing. The messiness of humans prevents a vast flood of pernicious rubbish that seems to the powerful like the right thing to do at the time from becoming a reality.
Meat is among the best sources of absorbable nutrients for humans, second only to eggs. No vegetarian culture (and we do have them to study) has ever been renowned for longevity. A meat tax is a repulsive idea for that reason. It's a rejection of our own health and an apology for being human.
Isn't love expectancy better in South India, which is vegetarian, than in North, which is not?
“Of all tyrannies, a tyranny exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It may be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron’s cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end for they do so with the approval of their own conscience.
They may be more likely to go to Heaven yet at the same time likelier to make a Hell of earth. Their very kindness stings with intolerable insult. To be ‘cured’ against one’s will and cured of states which we may not regard as disease is to be put on a level of those who have not yet reached the age of reason or those who never will; to be classed with infants, imbeciles, and domestic animals.”
"The urge to save humanity is almost always a false front for the urge to rule."
CS Lewis
Indeed. I will flagrantly steal that...
All that from someone whose life's mission was to cure the likes of me, for my own good, of the disease of atheism. I love all his fiction, despite the sledgehammer religious messages, but, god, he was a sanctimonious twit.
@Casino_Royale It isn’t so simple to just retrofit air source or ground source heat pumps.
For proper efficiency, you need fantastic insulation and underfloor heating. Ignoring that, you need much bigger radiators than you would for a gas boiler as the flow temperature in the system should be much lower.
Gas boilers push 60-80 deg C through the radiators. In an ideal world with a heat pump you’d be in the range of 35-45 deg C. You therefore need much bigger radiators to get the “heat into the room”.
Running a heat pump with radiators sized for a gas boiler will produce an efficiency not much better than using direct electricity to heat the water in the system. Not worth it.
Mainly agree, though boilers have moved ahead.
Modern gas boilers happily work at flow temperatures of 35-40C or less, and are fine for ufh running at sensible temperatures.
Get the rad sizing right, or the under floor insulation, and it can be swapped out for an ASHP later.
It comes down to whether your house fabric is of decent enough quality to work with a lower flow temp setup. Mine struggles somewhere as it is not superinsulated enough.
You start off with a thermal model of your house, then upgrade the fabric.
@Casino_Royale It isn’t so simple to just retrofit air source or ground source heat pumps.
For proper efficiency, you need fantastic insulation and underfloor heating. Ignoring that, you need much bigger radiators than you would for a gas boiler as the flow temperature in the system should be much lower.
Gas boilers push 60-80 deg C through the radiators. In an ideal world with a heat pump you’d be in the range of 35-45 deg C. You therefore need much bigger radiators to get the “heat into the room”.
Running a heat pump with radiators sized for a gas boiler will produce an efficiency not much better than using direct electricity to heat the water in the system. Not worth it.
To elaborate on this, let’s look at the Mitsubishi Ecodan as an example.
The literature quotes a coefficient of performance (COP) of 2.9. Sounds good. You get 2.9 kWh of heat out of 1 kWh of electricity. Fantastic!
But wait... That performance is at an air temperature of -3 and a water temperature of 35 degC.
You’d need a house with perfect insulation and underfloor heating everywhere (downstairs and upstairs) to run a heating system with a flow temperature of 35 deg C.
Your air temperature is lower than -3 deg C? expect that coefficient to drop dramatically.
Your heating system needs a flow temperature of 60 deg C? expect that coefficient to drop dramatically.
@Casino_Royale It isn’t so simple to just retrofit air source or ground source heat pumps.
For proper efficiency, you need fantastic insulation and underfloor heating. Ignoring that, you need much bigger radiators than you would for a gas boiler as the flow temperature in the system should be much lower.
Gas boilers push 60-80 deg C through the radiators. In an ideal world with a heat pump you’d be in the range of 35-45 deg C. You therefore need much bigger radiators to get the “heat into the room”.
Running a heat pump with radiators sized for a gas boiler will produce an efficiency not much better than using direct electricity to heat the water in the system. Not worth it.
Some what out of date.#
Modern gass boilers happily work at flow temperatures of 35-40C or less, and are fine for ufh running at sensible temperatures.
Get the rad sizing right, or the under floor insulation, and it can be swapped out for an ASHP later.
It comes down to whether your house fabric is of decent enough quality to work with a lower flow temp setup. Mine struggles somewhere as it is not superinsulated enough.
I don’t mean to say that modern gas boilers don’t work at lower temperatures. I’m merely saying that most peoples houses have heating systems designed for higher flow temperatures. Even new builds.
“Of all tyrannies, a tyranny exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It may be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron’s cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end for they do so with the approval of their own conscience.
They may be more likely to go to Heaven yet at the same time likelier to make a Hell of earth. Their very kindness stings with intolerable insult. To be ‘cured’ against one’s will and cured of states which we may not regard as disease is to be put on a level of those who have not yet reached the age of reason or those who never will; to be classed with infants, imbeciles, and domestic animals.”
"The urge to save humanity is almost always a false front for the urge to rule."
CS Lewis
The first 2 paras are C S Lewis, but the last aphorism is H L Mencken, no?
Starmer definitely on the ballot, Guardian reporting.
Usdaw have nominated him.
I wonder whether this means that some CLPs may be more willing to vote for one of the others.
Marginally, yes. It looks as though Starmer and RLB are safe and will probably be joined by Nandy. So members could well feel "let's give someone else a chance too". But Phillips is really unpopular with a lot of members because of her perceived negativity. Thornberry isn't unpopular, but I'm not sure she springs to mind for most members. Probably the wish to express an opinion on Starmer/RLB will take precedence.
Do a thought experiment - suppose you lived in a safe seat for your preferred party. Would you vote for a different party so as to give them some encouragement? For most of us, probably not?
It's a lot more open in the ballot paper for deputy, where I think the left will try hard to get Burgon on the ballot with a decent number of nominations, and Butler may have a shot too. Rayner is streets ahead for the actual result, though, and seems not to be experiencing serious challenge as the generally acceptable candidate.
I am not as convinced as you that Nandy will get on the ballot without some assistance. Starmer getting on early will help her though, because the (non far left) members I have spoken to are fairly agnostic between the two. Personally I will probably put Starmer 1st on the ballot but will put Nandy 1st for the CLP nomination if there is a clear move by others to get her on.
I agree with you on Phillips, she is no more capable of bringing the party back together than is Long-Bailey. Thornberry is defined by that flag incident and her persona and ultra-Remain outlook seems to me to reinforce the image it conjured up.
The main problem is that although in Europe almost everyone buys into this stuff in principle, if it comes to major decisions then people peel off rapidly. For instance, it appears from a whole series of UN and other reports that we need to reduce meat consumption significantly because of the climate change impact (not just methane etc. but also the forest clearances to produce more and more animal feed), but even Caroline Lucas is wary of doing more than suggesting that a meat tax might be discussed.
That isn't a problem, it's a blessing. The messiness of humans prevents a vast flood of pernicious rubbish that seems to the powerful like the right thing to do at the time from becoming a reality.
Meat is among the best sources of absorbable nutrients for humans, second only to eggs. No vegetarian culture (and we do have them to study) has ever been renowned for longevity. A meat tax is a repulsive idea for that reason. It's a rejection of our own health and an apology for being human.
An even bigger contribution the Government could make to reducing CO2 emissions (like, right now) would be to encourage domestic switching from gas central heating to air/ground heat pumps ASAP with huge grants and subsidies but they seem remarkably timid about this.
So instead we’re left with declaring emergencies, talking about how much we’re cutting back on flying (we’re not and we can’t, most people do it anyway and just “offset”) and pretending to change our diets to the latest fad; a fabulously British obsession.
It’s all rather silly really but the tragedy is it’s almost entirely cosmetic.
Excellent comment.
That's true. However ASHP (GSHP are a technogimmick now) are a tail-pipe answer.
Rather than generating heat more efficiently we need to reduce demand first ... that is everything from insulate roof / walls / floor to 2G to draughtprooofing, then we only need a smaller ASHP.
Get the whole stock to EPC Level B first - totally doable.
The huge issue with newbuild is quality ... it is totally normal for huge hunks of insulation just to be left out.
@MattW and people don’t seem to like big triple panel radiators in their houses! Good to have a technical discussion on here for a change though.
So higher quality fabric required :-). I find that decent size double radiators will do it - now fitted to inside walls no longer under windows as would have been 20 years ago.
Or retrofit ufh - as I am sure you know various floating floor systems are available.
On my next reno I will use one of these with an ashp provided I can get the floor down to lower than 0.15 or do so u-value.
Tenants love it, cos it halves all the bills.
The chap who put ufh in my home unfortunately skimped on the underfloor insulation slightly.
If the government cancels HS2 despite more than a decade of cross party scrutiny, an apparent political consensus to invest heavily in infrastructure, a fresh report saying on balance it should proceed and diggers already being on site, one has to conclude the UK won’t do much in the way of difficult long term infrastructure ever again.
Any promises about Northern Powerhouse Rail will rightly ring hollow to northern voters. There is a zero probability the enabling legislation could be passed by the next election and even if it was, the HS2 experience means no one could have any confidence that post election it wouldn’t be cancelled anyway.
Don’t listen to the Treasury bean counters Boris, let’s actually see something tangible being built for the £3-4trillion you’re going to spend this term. All evidence indicates the growth of digital technology INCREASES the demand for both business and leisure travel, given it allows the maintenance of more varied and distant relationships. And simple physics means the most land and energy efficient way of providing this is with trains (small front surface area for air resistance, long body, electric).
Bite the bullet and get phase 1 underway. And then spend this Parliament overhauling the planning, design, approval and procurement processes so that things can get done quicker and cheaper in the future.
Sorry but this is rubbish from start to finish.
The reason there has been political consensus is because no one has had the courage to be the one to pull the plug. It is the Emperors New Clothes in engineering form.
There is no evidence that HS2 will help the Northern Powerhouse. When the EU commissioned a study into high speed rail across Europe a couple of decades ago they found that, far from helping the regions, it simply sucked more investment and money into the centre. Making it quicker and easier to get from Marseille or Lyon to Paris did not result in an increase in investment in those regional cities. It just made it easier and more attractive for people to do their business in Paris.
If you really wanted to help the Northern Powerhouse you would improve transport links and infrastructure within the North and Midlands rather than making it easier to get to and from London. Stop trying to turn the whole country into London commuter belt.
The main problem is that although in Europe almost everyone buys into this stuff in principle, if it comes to major decisions then people peel off rapidly. For instance, it appears from a whole series of UN and other reports that we need to reduce meat consumption significantly because of the climate change impact (not just methane etc. but also the forest clearances to produce more and more animal feed), but even Caroline Lucas is wary of doing more than suggesting that a meat tax might be discussed.
That isn't a problem, it's a blessing. The messiness of humans prevents a vast flood of pernicious rubbish that seems to the powerful like the right thing to do at the time from becoming a reality.
Meat is among the best sources of absorbable nutrients for humans, second only to eggs. No vegetarian culture (and we do have them to study) has ever been renowned for longevity. A meat tax is a repulsive idea for that reason. It's a rejection of our own health and an apology for being human.
Isn't love expectancy better in South India, which is vegetarian, than in North, which is not?
If the government cancels HS2 despite more than a decade of cross party scrutiny, an apparent political consensus to invest heavily in infrastructure, a fresh report saying on balance it should proceed and diggers already being on site, one has to conclude the UK won’t do much in the way of difficult long term infrastructure ever again.
Any promises about Northern Powerhouse Rail will rightly ring hollow to northern voters. There is a zero probability the enabling legislation could be passed by the next election and even if it was, the HS2 experience means no one could have any confidence that post election it wouldn’t be cancelled anyway.
Don’t listen to the Treasury bean counters Boris, let’s actually see something tangible being built for the £3-4trillion you’re going to spend this term. All evidence indicates the growth of digital technology INCREASES the demand for both business and leisure travel, given it allows the maintenance of more varied and distant relationships. And simple physics means the most land and energy efficient way of providing this is with trains (small front surface area for air resistance, long body, electric).
Bite the bullet and get phase 1 underway. And then spend this Parliament overhauling the planning, design, approval and procurement processes so that things can get done quicker and cheaper in the future.
Sorry but this is rubbish from start to finish.
The reason there has been political consensus is because no one has had the courage to be the one to pull the plug. It is the Emperors New Clothes in engineering form.
There is no evidence that HS2 will help the Northern Powerhouse. When the EU commissioned a study into high speed rail across Europe a couple of decades ago they found that, far from helping the regions, it simply sucked more investment and money into the centre. Making it quicker and easier to get from Marseille or Lyon to Paris did not result in an increase in investment in those regional cities. It just made it easier and more attractive for people to do their business in Paris.
If you really wanted to help the Northern Powerhouse you would improve transport links and infrastructure within the North and Midlands rather than making it easier to get to and from London. Stop trying to turn the whole country into London commuter belt.
By your logic we could improve the productivity of the north by shutting the M1 and West Coast Mainline.
The main problem is that although in Europe almost everyone buys into this stuff in principle, if it comes to major decisions then people peel off rapidly. For instance, it appears from a whole series of UN and other reports that we need to reduce meat consumption significantly because of the climate change impact (not just methane etc. but also the forest clearances to produce more and more animal feed), but even Caroline Lucas is wary of doing more than suggesting that a meat tax might be discussed.
That isn't a problem, it's a blessing. The messiness of humans prevents a vast flood of pernicious rubbish that seems to the powerful like the right thing to do at the time from becoming a reality.
Meat is among the best sources of absorbable nutrients for humans, second only to eggs. No vegetarian culture (and we do have them to study) has ever been renowned for longevity. A meat tax is a repulsive idea for that reason. It's a rejection of our own health and an apology for being human.
The main problem is that although in Europe almost everyone buys into this stuff in principle, if it comes to major decisions then people peel off rapidly. For instance, it appears from a whole series of UN and other reports that we need to reduce meat consumption significantly because of the climate change impact (not just methane etc. but also the forest clearances to produce more and more animal feed), but even Caroline Lucas is wary of doing more than suggesting that a meat tax might be discussed.
That isn't a problem, it's a blessing. The messiness of humans prevents a vast flood of pernicious rubbish that seems to the powerful like the right thing to do at the time from becoming a reality.
Meat is among the best sources of absorbable nutrients for humans, second only to eggs. No vegetarian culture (and we do have them to study) has ever been renowned for longevity. A meat tax is a repulsive idea for that reason. It's a rejection of our own health and an apology for being human.
Isn't love expectancy better in South India, which is vegetarian, than in North, which is not?
I thought that was down to the Communist government. Along with the higher levels of literacy and lower levels of poverty.
And I'm not sure that Goan fish curry is strictly vegetarian.
By your logic we could improve the productivity of the north by shutting the M1 and West Coast Mainline.
Nope. Stupid logic by you. It is not a question of reducing the existing links but of not wasting money on new links that will bring no benefit. And the money we don't waste on the vast white elephant could be used on schemes that do actually improve productivity in the North, like having a functioning rail system that actually connects the different parts of the north, or expanding the airports in the North so they don't have to rely on the South East for their international connections. .
By your logic we could improve the productivity of the north by shutting the M1 and West Coast Mainline.
Nope. Stupid logic by you. It is not a question of reducing the existing links but of not wasting money on new links that will bring no benefit. And the money we don't waste on the vast white elephant could be used on schemes that do actually improve productivity in the North, like having a functioning rail system that actually connects the different parts of the north, or expanding the airports in the North so they don't have to rely on the South East for their international connections. .
So - just to be clear - building a railway line that will far more than double capacity in the Midlands and around Manchester and Leeds will not help create ‘a functioning rail system that actually connects different parts of the north?’
If the government cancels HS2 despite more than a decade of cross party scrutiny, an apparent political consensus to invest heavily in infrastructure, a fresh report saying on balance it should proceed and diggers already being on site, one has to conclude the UK won’t do much in the way of difficult long term infrastructure ever again.
Any promises about Northern Powerhouse Rail will rightly ring hollow to northern voters. There is a zero probability the enabling legislation could be passed by the next election and even if it was, the HS2 experience means no one could have any confidence that post election it wouldn’t be cancelled anyway.
Don’t listen to the Treasury bean counters Boris, let’s actually see something tangible being built for the £3-4trillion you’re going to spend this term. All evidence indicates the growth of digital technology INCREASES the demand for both business and leisure travel, given it allows the maintenance of more varied and distant relationships. And simple physics means the most land and energy efficient way of providing this is with trains (small front surface area for air resistance, long body, electric).
Bite the bullet and get phase 1 underway. And then spend this Parliament overhauling the planning, design, approval and procurement processes so that things can get done quicker and cheaper in the future.
Sorry but this is rubbish from start to finish.
The reason there has been political consensus is because no one has had the courage to be the one to pull the plug. It is the Emperors New Clothes in engineering form.
There is no evidence that HS2 will help the Northern Powerhouse. When the EU commissioned a study into high speed rail across Europe a couple of decades ago they found that, far from helping the regions, it simply sucked more investment and money into the centre. Making it quicker and easier to get from Marseille or Lyon to Paris did not result in an increase in investment in those regional cities. It just made it easier and more attractive for people to do their business in Paris.
If you really wanted to help the Northern Powerhouse you would improve transport links and infrastructure within the North and Midlands rather than making it easier to get to and from London. Stop trying to turn the whole country into London commuter belt.
By your logic we could improve the productivity of the north by shutting the M1 and West Coast Mainline.
The WCML is as near as bugger it shut off already due to the vast number of non Stop expresses that thunder up and down it.
The main problem is that although in Europe almost everyone buys into this stuff in principle, if it comes to major decisions then people peel off rapidly. For instance, it appears from a whole series of UN and other reports that we need to reduce meat consumption significantly because of the climate change impact (not just methane etc. but also the forest clearances to produce more and more animal feed), but even Caroline Lucas is wary of doing more than suggesting that a meat tax might be discussed.
That isn't a problem, it's a blessing. The messiness of humans prevents a vast flood of pernicious rubbish that seems to the powerful like the right thing to do at the time from becoming a reality.
Meat is among the best sources of absorbable nutrients for humans, second only to eggs. No vegetarian culture (and we do have them to study) has ever been renowned for longevity. A meat tax is a repulsive idea for that reason. It's a rejection of our own health and an apology for being human.
Isn't love expectancy better in South India, which is vegetarian, than in North, which is not?
I thought that was down to the Communist government. Along with the higher levels of literacy and lower levels of poverty.
And I'm not sure that Goan fish curry is strictly vegetarian.
Not sure why you and rcs think the South is more vegatarian the North of India!
By your logic we could improve the productivity of the north by shutting the M1 and West Coast Mainline.
Nope. Stupid logic by you. It is not a question of reducing the existing links but of not wasting money on new links that will bring no benefit. And the money we don't waste on the vast white elephant could be used on schemes that do actually improve productivity in the North, like having a functioning rail system that actually connects the different parts of the north, or expanding the airports in the North so they don't have to rely on the South East for their international connections. .
You make a good point. What about a scheme that takes the UK’s second city as it’s centre point rather than London as per usual? And has fast dedicated direct links to Manchester, the East Midlands and Leeds, with rolloff services to Liverpool, Sheffield, York, Newcastle and Scotland? And that has stations serving both Manchester and Birmingham Airports? And that has an operating schedule specifically designed to free up railway paths on existing northern freight and commuter lines?
By your logic we could improve the productivity of the north by shutting the M1 and West Coast Mainline.
Nope. Stupid logic by you. It is not a question of reducing the existing links but of not wasting money on new links that will bring no benefit. And the money we don't waste on the vast white elephant could be used on schemes that do actually improve productivity in the North, like having a functioning rail system that actually connects the different parts of the north, or expanding the airports in the North so they don't have to rely on the South East for their international connections. .
You make a good point. What about a scheme that takes the UK’s second city as it’s centre point rather than London as per usual? And has fast dedicated direct links to Manchester, the East Midlands and Leeds, with rolloff services to Liverpool, Sheffield, York, Newcastle and Scotland? And that has stations serving both Manchester and Birmingham Airports? And that has an operating schedule specifically designed to free up railway paths on existing northern freight and commuter lines?
You are beyond parody.
Except it doesn't. fanatics like you ignore the fact that it does not link in to the existing infrastructure - it will not link directly to local services in Birmingham, to the main airport in the East Midlands or to local services in most other cities. It is designed and sold first and foremost as a means to connect the North with London. Which is pointless. and all for a snip at £106 billion.
There is no parody here, just rampant stupidity on the part of HS2 supporters.
By your logic we could improve the productivity of the north by shutting the M1 and West Coast Mainline.
Nope. Stupid logic by you. It is not a question of reducing the existing links but of not wasting money on new links that will bring no benefit. And the money we don't waste on the vast white elephant could be used on schemes that do actually improve productivity in the North, like having a functioning rail system that actually connects the different parts of the north, or expanding the airports in the North so they don't have to rely on the South East for their international connections. .
You make a good point. What about a scheme that takes the UK’s second city as it’s centre point rather than London as per usual? And has fast dedicated direct links to Manchester, the East Midlands and Leeds, with rolloff services to Liverpool, Sheffield, York, Newcastle and Scotland? And that has stations serving both Manchester and Birmingham Airports? And that has an operating schedule specifically designed to free up railway paths on existing northern freight and commuter lines?
You are beyond parody.
You forgot the premium fares. See HS1 in Kent for comparison.
By your logic we could improve the productivity of the north by shutting the M1 and West Coast Mainline.
Nope. Stupid logic by you. It is not a question of reducing the existing links but of not wasting money on new links that will bring no benefit. And the money we don't waste on the vast white elephant could be used on schemes that do actually improve productivity in the North, like having a functioning rail system that actually connects the different parts of the north, or expanding the airports in the North so they don't have to rely on the South East for their international connections. .
So - just to be clear - building a railway line that will far more than double capacity in the Midlands and around Manchester and Leeds will not help create ‘a functioning rail system that actually connects different parts of the north?’
And good that the environmental crimes of communism were mentioned.
Its noticeable that the way the 1980s 'greens' looked the other way at the damage the Soviets were doing to the environment is now repeated with the ERs etc ignoring the environmental damage China is doing.
By your logic we could improve the productivity of the north by shutting the M1 and West Coast Mainline.
Nope. Stupid logic by you. It is not a question of reducing the existing links but of not wasting money on new links that will bring no benefit. And the money we don't waste on the vast white elephant could be used on schemes that do actually improve productivity in the North, like having a functioning rail system that actually connects the different parts of the north, or expanding the airports in the North so they don't have to rely on the South East for their international connections. .
You make a good point. What about a scheme that takes the UK’s second city as it’s centre point rather than London as per usual? And has fast dedicated direct links to Manchester, the East Midlands and Leeds, with rolloff services to Liverpool, Sheffield, York, Newcastle and Scotland? And that has stations serving both Manchester and Birmingham Airports? And that has an operating schedule specifically designed to free up railway paths on existing northern freight and commuter lines?
You are beyond parody.
Except it doesn't. fanatics like you ignore the fact that it does not link in to the existing infrastructure - it will not link directly to local services in Birmingham, to the main airport in the East Midlands or to local services in most other cities. It is designed and sold first and foremost as a means to connect the North with London. Which is pointless. and all for a snip at £106 billion.
There is no parody here, just rampant stupidity on the part of HS2 supporters.
Leaving aside the minor detail that you are wrong, and it does link with existing infrastructure, has it occurred to you that the point is to free capacity up on existing lines? By reducing the mix of usage on the WCML, for example, it is anticipate that the number of trains per hour can increase from the current 16 to 27. That would be very beneficial for those who, like me, live on branches of it.
By your logic we could improve the productivity of the north by shutting the M1 and West Coast Mainline.
Nope. Stupid logic by you. It is not a question of reducing the existing links but of not wasting money on new links that will bring no benefit. And the money we don't waste on the vast white elephant could be used on schemes that do actually improve productivity in the North, like having a functioning rail system that actually connects the different parts of the north, or expanding the airports in the North so they don't have to rely on the South East for their international connections. .
You make a good point. What about a scheme that takes the UK’s second city as it’s centre point rather than London as per usual? And has fast dedicated direct links to Manchester, the East Midlands and Leeds, with rolloff services to Liverpool, Sheffield, York, Newcastle and Scotland? And that has stations serving both Manchester and Birmingham Airports? And that has an operating schedule specifically designed to free up railway paths on existing northern freight and commuter lines?
You are beyond parody.
Except it doesn't. fanatics like you ignore the fact that it does not link in to the existing infrastructure - it will not link directly to local services in Birmingham, to the main airport in the East Midlands or to local services in most other cities. It is designed and sold first and foremost as a means to connect the North with London. Which is pointless. and all for a snip at £106 billion.
There is no parody here, just rampant stupidity on the part of HS2 supporters.
A stupid fanatic. Lovely. I have to say you seem a charming person.
Gibraltar is not proposing independence unlike Scotland's government and borders another country unlike Scotland, so no problem with it getting a semi Northern Ireland type deal (Northern Ireland bordering Ireland as Gibraltar borders Spain). Gibraltar voted 98% to stay British in 2002, Scotland only voted 55% to stay British in 2014
By your logic we could improve the productivity of the north by shutting the M1 and West Coast Mainline.
Nope. Stupid logic by you. It is not a question of reducing the existing links but of not wasting money on new links that will bring no benefit. And the money we don't waste on the vast white elephant could be used on schemes that do actually improve productivity in the North, like having a functioning rail system that actually connects the different parts of the north, or expanding the airports in the North so they don't have to rely on the South East for their international connections. .
So - just to be clear - building a railway line that will far more than double capacity in the Midlands and around Manchester and Leeds will not help create ‘a functioning rail system that actually connects different parts of the north?’
Nope because it won't do that.
But it will. That is, the real world version of it, not the twisted parody that you, Gillan and that dribbling imbecile Cummings have got in your heads. If you had any reading at all other than by the drunken virtue signallers of STOP HS2, you would understand that capacity is the be all and end all of it. And that building a new high speed line is much the cheapest and quickest way to do it. It could take fourteen years and cost maybe £200 billion to add two lines to the WCML.
I think we will have to add HS2 to education as something you really, really don’t get.
Lord Adonis on Sky last week basically said he thought it was only half time in the battle over Brexit. I think his attitude is shared widely in the Lords.
By your logic we could improve the productivity of the north by shutting the M1 and West Coast Mainline.
Nope. Stupid logic by you. It is not a question of reducing the existing links but of not wasting money on new links that will bring no benefit. And the money we don't waste on the vast white elephant could be used on schemes that do actually improve productivity in the North, like having a functioning rail system that actually connects the different parts of the north, or expanding the airports in the North so they don't have to rely on the South East for their international connections. .
You make a good point. What about a scheme that takes the UK’s second city as it’s centre point rather than London as per usual? And has fast dedicated direct links to Manchester, the East Midlands and Leeds, with rolloff services to Liverpool, Sheffield, York, Newcastle and Scotland? And that has stations serving both Manchester and Birmingham Airports? And that has an operating schedule specifically designed to free up railway paths on existing northern freight and commuter lines?
You are beyond parody.
Except it doesn't. fanatics like you ignore the fact that it does not link in to the existing infrastructure - it will not link directly to local services in Birmingham, to the main airport in the East Midlands or to local services in most other cities. It is designed and sold first and foremost as a means to connect the North with London. Which is pointless. and all for a snip at £106 billion.
There is no parody here, just rampant stupidity on the part of HS2 supporters.
Leaving aside the minor detail that you are wrong, and it does link with existing infrastructure, has it occurred to you that the point is to free capacity up on existing lines? By reducing the mix of usage on the WCML, for example, it is anticipate that the number of trains per hour can increase from the current 16 to 27. That would be very beneficial for those who, like me, live on branches of it.
Indeed. It’s several years since I read the detailed docs but I seem to recall commuter seats from Milton Keynes to London would increase by c. 3x as a result of the paths freed by HS2.
By your logic we could improve the productivity of the north by shutting the M1 and West Coast Mainline.
Nope. Stupid logic by you. It is not a question of reducing the existing links but of not wasting money on new links that will bring no benefit. And the money we don't waste on the vast white elephant could be used on schemes that do actually improve productivity in the North, like having a functioning rail system that actually connects the different parts of the north, or expanding the airports in the North so they don't have to rely on the South East for their international connections. .
You make a good point. What about a scheme that takes the UK’s second city as it’s centre point rather than London as per usual? And has fast dedicated direct links to Manchester, the East Midlands and Leeds, with rolloff services to Liverpool, Sheffield, York, Newcastle and Scotland? And that has stations serving both Manchester and Birmingham Airports? And that has an operating schedule specifically designed to free up railway paths on existing northern freight and commuter lines?
You are beyond parody.
Except it doesn't. fanatics like you ignore the fact that it does not link in to the existing infrastructure - it will not link directly to local services in Birmingham, to the main airport in the East Midlands or to local services in most other cities. It is designed and sold first and foremost as a means to connect the North with London. Which is pointless. and all for a snip at £106 billion.
There is no parody here, just rampant stupidity on the part of HS2 supporters.
Leaving aside the minor detail that you are wrong, and it does link with existing infrastructure, has it occurred to you that the point is to free capacity up on existing lines? By reducing the mix of usage on the WCML, for example, it is anticipate that the number of trains per hour can increase from the current 16 to 27. That would be very beneficial for those who, like me, live on branches of it.
Indeed. It’s several years since I read the detailed docs but I seem to recall commuter seats from Milton Keynes to London would increase by c. 3x as a result of the paths freed by HS2.
By your logic we could improve the productivity of the north by shutting the M1 and West Coast Mainline.
Nope. Stupid logic by you. It is not a question of reducing the existing links but of not wasting money on new links that will bring no benefit. And the money we don't waste on the vast white elephant could be used on schemes that do actually improve productivity in the North, like having a functioning rail system that actually connects the different parts of the north, or expanding the airports in the North so they don't have to rely on the South East for their international connections. .
You make a good point. What about a scheme that takes the UK’s second city as it’s centre point rather than London as per usual? And has fast dedicated direct links to Manchester, the East Midlands and Leeds, with rolloff services to Liverpool, Sheffield, York, Newcastle and Scotland? And that has stations serving both Manchester and Birmingham Airports? And that has an operating schedule specifically designed to free up railway paths on existing northern freight and commuter lines?
You are beyond parody.
Except it doesn't. fanatics like you ignore the fact that it does not link in to the existing infrastructure - it will not link directly to local services in Birmingham, to the main airport in the East Midlands or to local services in most other cities. It is designed and sold first and foremost as a means to connect the North with London. Which is pointless. and all for a snip at £106 billion.
There is no parody here, just rampant stupidity on the part of HS2 supporters.
Leaving aside the minor detail that you are wrong, and it does link with existing infrastructure, has it occurred to you that the point is to free capacity up on existing lines? By reducing the mix of usage on the WCML, for example, it is anticipate that the number of trains per hour can increase from the current 16 to 27. That would be very beneficial for those who, like me, live on branches of it.
We've got there at last. The primary purpose of HS2 is to benefit commuters in the south east. Not those in Birmingham, Leeds or Manchester. Because it will make bugger all difference to most of the bottlenecks affecting those cities.
Norway's governing coalition collapses over ISIS repatriation
Norway's ruling coalition has disbanded after the populist Progress Party (FRP) left the government, partly due to the repatriation of a mother with suspected ISIS links from Syria.
Parasite got the SAG ensemble award, which has been a relatively good indicator (approx 50% ) for best picture. That anything to do with it ?
I'm looking forward to seeing Parasite. Loved 2017 though it is a simple plot. Loved Once Upon a Time in Hollywood even more - especially Brad Pitt. Hated Uncut Gems and walked out half way through. Unremitting noise and bedlam.
By your logic we could improve the productivity of the north by shutting the M1 and West Coast Mainline.
Nope. Stupid logic by you. It is not a question of reducing the existing links but of not wasting money on new links that will bring no benefit. And the money we don't waste on the vast white elephant could be used on schemes that do actually improve productivity in the North, like having a functioning rail system that actually connects the different parts of the north, or expanding the airports in the North so they don't have to rely on the South East for their international connections. .
You make a good point. What about a scheme that takes the UK’s second city as it’s centre point rather than London as per usual? And has fast dedicated direct links to Manchester, the East Midlands and Leeds, with rolloff services to Liverpool, Sheffield, York, Newcastle and Scotland? And that has stations serving both Manchester and Birmingham Airports? And that has an operating schedule specifically designed to free up railway paths on existing northern freight and commuter lines?
You are beyond parody.
Except it doesn't. fanatics like you ignore the fact that it does not link in to the existing infrastructure - it will not link directly to local services in Birmingham, to the main airport in the East Midlands or to local services in most other cities. It is designed and sold first and foremost as a means to connect the North with London. Which is pointless. and all for a snip at £106 billion.
There is no parody here, just rampant stupidity on the part of HS2 supporters.
Leaving aside the minor detail that you are wrong, and it does link with existing infrastructure, has it occurred to you that the point is to free capacity up on existing lines? By reducing the mix of usage on the WCML, for example, it is anticipate that the number of trains per hour can increase from the current 16 to 27. That would be very beneficial for those who, like me, live on branches of it.
We've got there at last. The primary purpose of HS2 is to benefit commuters in the south east. Not those in Birmingham, Leeds or Manchester. Because it will make bugger all difference to most of the bottlenecks affecting those cities.
It will make a huge difference to Cannock and Lichfield. I never realised that your county and mine was in the south east...
By your logic we could improve the productivity of the north by shutting the M1 and West Coast Mainline.
Nope. Stupid logic by you. It is not a question of reducing the existing links but of not wasting money on new links that will bring no benefit. And the money we don't waste on the vast white elephant could be used on schemes that do actually improve productivity in the North, like having a functioning rail system that actually connects the different parts of the north, or expanding the airports in the North so they don't have to rely on the South East for their international connections. .
So - just to be clear - building a railway line that will far more than double capacity in the Midlands and around Manchester and Leeds will not help create ‘a functioning rail system that actually connects different parts of the north?’
Nope because it won't do that.
But it will. That is, the real world version of it, not the twisted parody that you, Gillan and that dribbling imbecile Cummings have got in your heads. If you had any reading at all other than by the drunken virtue signallers of STOP HS2, you would understand that capacity is the be all and end all of it. And that building a new high speed line is much the cheapest and quickest way to do it. It could take fourteen years and cost maybe £200 billion to add two lines to the WCML.
I think we will have to add HS2 to education as something you really, really don’t get.
Fuckwits like you are not interested in facts only propaganda. Only 3% of commuters use rail to travel to work in Manchester compared with 38% in London. Building a shiny high speed intercity rail system will not help that. Build local services that actually have the capacity to carry large numbers of people over short distances at a reasonable price. HS2 will not do that.
The main problem is that although in Europe almost everyone buys into this stuff in principle, if it comes to major decisions then people peel off rapidly. For instance, it appears from a whole series of UN and other reports that we need to reduce meat consumption significantly because of the climate change impact (not just methane etc. but also the forest clearances to produce more and more animal feed), but even Caroline Lucas is wary of doing more than suggesting that a meat tax might be discussed.
That isn't a problem, it's a blessing. The messiness of humans prevents a vast flood of pernicious rubbish that seems to the powerful like the right thing to do at the time from becoming a reality.
Meat is among the best sources of absorbable nutrients for humans, second only to eggs. No vegetarian culture (and we do have them to study) has ever been renowned for longevity. A meat tax is a repulsive idea for that reason. It's a rejection of our own health and an apology for being human.
Isn't love expectancy better in South India, which is vegetarian, than in North, which is not?
I thought that was down to the Communist government. Along with the higher levels of literacy and lower levels of poverty.
And I'm not sure that Goan fish curry is strictly vegetarian.
Not sure why you and rcs think the South is more vegatarian the North of India!
The main problem is that although in Europe almost everyone buys into this stuff in principle, if it comes to major decisions then people peel off rapidly. For instance, it appears from a whole series of UN and other reports that we need to reduce meat consumption significantly because of the climate change impact (not just methane etc. but also the forest clearances to produce more and more animal feed), but even Caroline Lucas is wary of doing more than suggesting that a meat tax might be discussed.
That isn't a problem, it's a blessing. The messiness of humans prevents a vast flood of pernicious rubbish that seems to the powerful like the right thing to do at the time from becoming a reality.
Meat is among the best sources of absorbable nutrients for humans, second only to eggs. No vegetarian culture (and we do have them to study) has ever been renowned for longevity. A meat tax is a repulsive idea for that reason. It's a rejection of our own health and an apology for being human.
Isn't love expectancy better in South India, which is vegetarian, than in North, which is not?
I thought that was down to the Communist government. Along with the higher levels of literacy and lower levels of poverty.
And I'm not sure that Goan fish curry is strictly vegetarian.
Karnataka is one of the biggest states in southern India and has a BJP government
Lord Adonis on Sky last week basically said he thought it was only half time in the battle over Brexit. I think his attitude is shared widely in the Lords.
High time the whole lot of the troughers were sacked and replaced with something better.
Perhaps they should be a little more flexible if they want to keep their three hundred quid a day lunch money...
By your logic we could improve the productivity of the north by shutting the M1 and West Coast Mainline.
Nope. Stupid logic by you. It is not a question of reducing the existing links but of not wasting money on new links that will bring no benefit. And the money we don't waste on the vast white elephant could be used on schemes that do actually improve productivity in the North, like having a functioning rail system that actually connects the different parts of the north, or expanding the airports in the North so they don't have to rely on the South East for their international connections. .
So - just to be clear - building a railway line that will far more than double capacity in the Midlands and around Manchester and Leeds will not help create ‘a functioning rail system that actually connects different parts of the north?’
Nope because it won't do that.
But it will. That is, the real world version of it, not the twisted parody that you, Gillan and that dribbling imbecile Cummings have got in your heads. If you had any reading at all other than by the drunken virtue signallers of STOP HS2, you would understand that capacity is the be all and end all of it. And that building a new high speed line is much the cheapest and quickest way to do it. It could take fourteen years and cost maybe £200 billion to add two lines to the WCML.
I think we will have to add HS2 to education as something you really, really don’t get.
Fuckwits like you are not interested in facts only propaganda. Only 3% of commuters use rail to travel to work in Manchester compared with 38% in London. Building a shiny high speed intercity rail system will not help that. Build local services that actually have the capacity to carry large numbers of people over short distances at a reasonable price. HS2 will not do that.
It's very interesting to me that HS2 is one of the few policy issues which seems to cause as much rage, pro and against, as Brexit or socialism.
Gibraltar is not proposing independence unlike Scotland's government and borders another country unlike Scotland, so no problem with it getting a semi Northern Ireland type deal (Northern Ireland bordering Ireland as Gibraltar borders Spain). Gibraltar voted 98% to stay British in 2002, Scotland only voted 55% to stay British in 2014
Sighs of relief all round in Gib as the HYUFD Novios de la Muerte legion stands down.
By your logic we could improve the productivity of the north by shutting the M1 and West Coast Mainline.
Nope. Stupid logic by you. It is not a question of reducing the existing links but of not wasting money on new links that will bring no benefit. And the money we don't waste on the vast white elephant could be used on schemes that do actually improve productivity in the North, like having a functioning rail system that actually connects the different parts of the north, or expanding the airports in the North so they don't have to rely on the South East for their international connections. .
You make a good point. What about a scheme that takes the UK’s second city as it’s centre point rather than London as per usual? And has fast dedicated direct links to Manchester, the East Midlands and Leeds, with rolloff services to Liverpool, Sheffield, York, Newcastle and Scotland? And that has stations serving both Manchester and Birmingham Airports? And that has an operating schedule specifically designed to free up railway paths on existing northern freight and commuter lines?
You are beyond parody.
Except it doesn't. fanatics like you ignore the fact that it does not link in to the existing infrastructure - it will not link directly to local services in Birmingham, to the main airport in the East Midlands or to local services in most other cities. It is designed and sold first and foremost as a means to connect the North with London. Which is pointless. and all for a snip at £106 billion.
There is no parody here, just rampant stupidity on the part of HS2 supporters.
Leaving aside the minor detail that you are wrong, and it does link with existing infrastructure, has it occurred to you that the point is to free capacity up on existing lines? By reducing the mix of usage on the WCML, for example, it is anticipate that the number of trains per hour can increase from the current 16 to 27. That would be very beneficial for those who, like me, live on branches of it.
Indeed. It’s several years since I read the detailed docs but I seem to recall commuter seats from Milton Keynes to London would increase by c. 3x as a result of the paths freed by HS2.
Did you say Bradford to Leeds? Or was it Bolton to Manchester? Oh, no, MK to London.
Northern taxpayers' money being spent to benefit the south east.
The 2019 GE has often been mentioned as being the largest Conservative majority since 1987.
While the overall majority might be only 22 fewer there is a larger variation in seats per region:
North-East Con +5 Lab -5 LibD -1
North-West Con -5 Lab +2 LibD -2
Yorkshire Con +5 Lab -5
East Midlands Con +8 Lab -4
West Midlands Con +8 Lab -7
East Con +2 Lab +4 LibD +1
South-East Con -3 Lab +7 LibD +1 Green +1
South-West Con +4 Lab +5 LibD -2
London Con -37 Lab +26
Wales Con +6 Lab -1 LibD -3 Plaid +1
Scotland Con -4 Lab -49 LibD -5 SNP +45
The main changes there seem to be the Tories doing better in the Midlands and North and Wales and Labour doing far worse but in London and to a lesser extent the South East the reverse is true with Labour doing far better and the Tories doing worse.
Confirmation the Tories vote is more working class and the Labour vote more middle class thsn was the case 30 years ago
Parasite got the SAG ensemble award, which has been a relatively good indicator (approx 50% ) for best picture. That anything to do with it ?
I'm looking forward to seeing Parasite. Loved 2017 though it is a simple plot. Loved Once Upon a Time in Hollywood even more - especially Brad Pitt. Hated Uncut Gems and walked out half way through. Unremitting noise and bedlam.
Thoroughly enjoyed Parasite (I like black comedy). And it did have a terrific cast.
Comments
That poll asks all Republican voters who their second choice is. So it therefore includes all Trump supporters. If Trump was winning the Primary race, he'd struggle win the second choice race, because all his voters have to choose someone else.
The question of air quality especially in urban areas is one few seem willing or able to address but it's a huge issue given rising rates of asthma and people with respiratory problems.
Have a look at recycling rates - I have to confess Newham's is, I believe, the worst.
race to the Democratic race now, every other candidates voters had Cruz as their second preference, even ignoring Trump voters.
Trump of course won the Republican nomination with only 45% of the vote but winning 41 out of 56 primaries and caucuses
https://mobile.twitter.com/CNET/status/1218931492669263873
https://twitter.com/june_mummery/status/1219267050574618626?s=20
All that holding to account lost.
'But the interview took a turn when Mr Farage linked the Norway option to the row over the common fisheries policy.
"All this talk of Norway, nobody's talked about fishing!" he said.
"We'd be Norway without the fish!"
'Iain interrupted, asking: "If you were so exercised by fishing, why have you only attended one out of 42 of these committee meetings?"'
https://tinyurl.com/wyqehtn
Meat is among the best sources of absorbable nutrients for humans, second only to eggs. No vegetarian culture (and we do have them to study) has ever been renowned for longevity. A meat tax is a repulsive idea for that reason. It's a rejection of our own health and an apology for being human.
“Of all tyrannies, a tyranny exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It may be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron’s cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end for they do so with the approval of their own conscience.
They may be more likely to go to Heaven yet at the same time likelier to make a Hell of earth. Their very kindness stings with intolerable insult. To be ‘cured’ against one’s will and cured of states which we may not regard as disease is to be put on a level of those who have not yet reached the age of reason or those who never will; to be classed with infants, imbeciles, and domestic animals.”
"The urge to save humanity is almost always a false front for the urge to rule."
CS Lewis
And London rates are next to nothing compared to West Coast USA as I'm sure RCS can confirm.
Sky News has been told by palace sources they are continuing to review how the Duke and Duchess of Sussex will be referred to in the future.
It comes after it appeared Meghan was given the style or title of a divorced woman.
On Saturday, it was said the couple would be referred to as Harry, Duke of Sussex and Meghan, Duchess of Sussex now that they will no longer use the rank of His or Her Royal Highness.
But the problem relates to the comma, because in the past only divorced women in the family have been styled that way, - for example Diana, Princess of Wales and Sarah, Duchess of York.
https://news.sky.com/story/royal-review-after-meghan-given-title-of-divorced-woman-11913741
Secondly, the doomsters. A lot of people have spotted that if the bad case scenario is true then we are in fact already stuffed. 2019 (probably) and 2018 show an increase not decrease in carbon output - both record years. The 'we only have X years' stuff has already gone on over X plus Y years. So what's the point?
https://news.yahoo.com/uk-house-prices-go-up-brexit-fall-after-sold-rightmove-index-price-084231336.html
Incorrect use of commas leads to anarchy.
Cleaner air should be a goal to which all Governments should strive. The notion of vehicle taxation on miles driven rather than just car ownership is an interesting thought (not without its flaws obviously but a good starting point for further thought).
If the government cancels HS2 despite more than a decade of cross party scrutiny, an apparent political consensus to invest heavily in infrastructure, a fresh report saying on balance it should proceed and diggers already being on site, one has to conclude the UK won’t do much in the way of difficult long term infrastructure ever again.
Any promises about Northern Powerhouse Rail will rightly ring hollow to northern voters. There is a zero probability the enabling legislation could be passed by the next election and even if it was, the HS2 experience means no one could have any confidence that post election it wouldn’t be cancelled anyway.
Don’t listen to the Treasury bean counters Boris, let’s actually see something tangible being built for the £3-4trillion you’re going to spend this term. All evidence indicates the growth of digital technology INCREASES the demand for both business and leisure travel, given it allows the maintenance of more varied and distant relationships. And simple physics means the most land and energy efficient way of providing this is with trains (small front surface area for air resistance, long body, electric).
Bite the bullet and get phase 1 underway. And then spend this Parliament overhauling the planning, design, approval and procurement processes so that things can get done quicker and cheaper in the future.
The increased capacity for the third runway at Heathrow will also kick up the NO2 numbers.
In general cars are getting more efficient - big upticks in hybrids. Its the commercial vehicles and buses that are big offenders here.
For proper efficiency, you need fantastic insulation and underfloor heating.
Ignoring that, you need much bigger radiators than you would for a gas boiler as the flow temperature in the system should be much lower.
Gas boilers push 60-80 deg C through the radiators. In an ideal world with a heat pump you’d be in the range of 35-45 deg C. You therefore need much bigger radiators to get the “heat into the room”.
Running a heat pump with radiators sized for a gas boiler will produce an efficiency not much better than using direct electricity to heat the water in the system. Not worth it.
https://www.nhs.uk/news/food-and-diet/vegetarian-diet-linked-to-longer-lifespan/
I am not vegetarian, but you are talking bollocks.
Modern gas boilers happily work at flow temperatures of 35-40C or less, and are fine for ufh running at sensible temperatures.
Get the rad sizing right, or the under floor insulation, and it can be swapped out for an ASHP later.
It comes down to whether your house fabric is of decent enough quality to work with a lower flow temp setup. Mine struggles somewhere as it is not superinsulated enough.
You start off with a thermal model of your house, then upgrade the fabric.
https://les.mitsubishielectric.co.uk/products/heating/domestic/outdoor/ecodan-puhz-ultra-quiet-monobloc-air-source-heat-pump
The literature quotes a coefficient of performance (COP) of 2.9.
Sounds good. You get 2.9 kWh of heat out of 1 kWh of electricity. Fantastic!
But wait... That performance is at an air temperature of -3 and a water temperature of 35 degC.
You’d need a house with perfect insulation and underfloor heating everywhere (downstairs and upstairs) to run a heating system with a flow temperature of 35 deg C.
Your air temperature is lower than -3 deg C? expect that coefficient to drop dramatically.
Your heating system needs a flow temperature of 60 deg C? expect that coefficient to drop dramatically.
Good to have a technical discussion on here for a change though.
I agree with you on Phillips, she is no more capable of bringing the party back together than is Long-Bailey. Thornberry is defined by that flag incident and her persona and ultra-Remain outlook seems to me to reinforce the image it conjured up.
Rather than generating heat more efficiently we need to reduce demand first ... that is everything from insulate roof / walls / floor to 2G to draughtprooofing, then we only need a smaller ASHP.
Get the whole stock to EPC Level B first - totally doable.
The huge issue with newbuild is quality ... it is totally normal for huge hunks of insulation just to be left out.
Or retrofit ufh - as I am sure you know various floating floor systems are available.
On my next reno I will use one of these with an ashp provided I can get the floor down to lower than 0.15 or do so u-value.
Tenants love it, cos it halves all the bills.
The chap who put ufh in my home unfortunately skimped on the underfloor insulation slightly.
The reason there has been political consensus is because no one has had the courage to be the one to pull the plug. It is the Emperors New Clothes in engineering form.
There is no evidence that HS2 will help the Northern Powerhouse. When the EU commissioned a study into high speed rail across Europe a couple of decades ago they found that, far from helping the regions, it simply sucked more investment and money into the centre. Making it quicker and easier to get from Marseille or Lyon to Paris did not result in an increase in investment in those regional cities. It just made it easier and more attractive for people to do their business in Paris.
If you really wanted to help the Northern Powerhouse you would improve transport links and infrastructure within the North and Midlands rather than making it easier to get to and from London. Stop trying to turn the whole country into London commuter belt.
I have ufh downstairs and rads upstairs off one boiler and ... yes ... it gets complicated.
Major move in the market.
Help is available.
And I'm not sure that Goan fish curry is strictly vegetarian.
Just Inverness to Aberdeen/Kyle/Thurso & Wick left to do the normal weekday National Rail network!
Did Runcorn to Frodsham last week BTW.
https://twitter.com/naebD/status/1219365231572529157?s=20
You are beyond parody.
The government has lost three votes in the Lords over its Brexit legislation - its first defeats since the election.
Peers supported calls for EU nationals to be given a physical document as proof they have the right to live in the UK after it leaves the bloc.
They also voted to remove ministers' power to decide which EU Court of Justice rulings can be disregarded or set aside by UK courts and tribunals.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-51184051
To Infinity and Beyond.
There is no parody here, just rampant stupidity on the part of HS2 supporters.
And good that the environmental crimes of communism were mentioned.
Its noticeable that the way the 1980s 'greens' looked the other way at the damage the Soviets were doing to the environment is now repeated with the ERs etc ignoring the environmental damage China is doing.
I think we will have to add HS2 to education as something you really, really don’t get.
While the overall majority might be only 22 fewer there is a larger variation in seats per region:
North-East
Con +5
Lab -5
LibD -1
North-West
Con -5
Lab +2
LibD -2
Yorkshire
Con +5
Lab -5
East Midlands
Con +8
Lab -4
West Midlands
Con +8
Lab -7
East
Con +2
Lab +4
LibD +1
South-East
Con -3
Lab +7
LibD +1
Green +1
South-West
Con +4
Lab +5
LibD -2
London
Con -37
Lab +26
Wales
Con +6
Lab -1
LibD -3
Plaid +1
Scotland
Con -4
Lab -49
LibD -5
SNP +45
https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/480647/annex-demand-and-capacity-pressures.pdf
Norway's ruling coalition has disbanded after the populist Progress Party (FRP) left the government, partly due to the repatriation of a mother with suspected ISIS links from Syria.
https://edition.cnn.com/2020/01/20/europe/norway-government-collapse-isis-intl/index.html
Plenty of daal and roti served up in the north.
Perhaps they should be a little more flexible if they want to keep their three hundred quid a day lunch money...
Northern taxpayers' money being spent to benefit the south east.
Confirmation the Tories vote is more working class and the Labour vote more middle class thsn was the case 30 years ago
I have family in Canada and would not wish a bunch of unelected has-beens on them