Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Now the last SIX Scottish referendum polls have NO in the lead – politicalbetting.com

SystemSystem Posts: 8,489
edited March 11 in General
imageNow the last SIX Scottish referendum polls have NO in the lead – politicalbetting.com

Read the full story here

«134

Comments

  • FloaterFloater Posts: 13,280
    first
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 40,359
    Looks like Salmond-Sturgeon have blown it.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 64,758
    edited March 11

    Looks like Salmond-Sturgeon have blown it.

    Er, I may be pessimistic on this issue but 'blown it' might be just slightly premature. Encouraging though.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 64,758
    edited March 11
    Scott_xP said:
    The government doesn't step in in such things unless it wants to take a decision contrary to the existing one, or to cause a big delay for some other reason. Either way, it's a signal of the government cocking about, no matter what they say about not making a decision for or against.
  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 40,661
    kle4 said:

    Scott_xP said:
    The government doesn't step in in such things unless it wants to take a decision contrary to the existing one, or to cause a big delay for some other reason. Either way, it's a signal of the government cocking about, no matter what they say about not making a decision for or against.
    They need to introduce the manufacture of wind turbines into the same area

    Double win
  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 27,539

    kle4 said:

    Scott_xP said:
    The government doesn't step in in such things unless it wants to take a decision contrary to the existing one, or to cause a big delay for some other reason. Either way, it's a signal of the government cocking about, no matter what they say about not making a decision for or against.
    Aren't they just going to delay a decision until the COP meeting we are hosting is over?
    Yes, that's probably it.
  • BluestBlueBluestBlue Posts: 4,305
    edited March 11

    kle4 said:

    Scott_xP said:
    The government doesn't step in in such things unless it wants to take a decision contrary to the existing one, or to cause a big delay for some other reason. Either way, it's a signal of the government cocking about, no matter what they say about not making a decision for or against.
    Aren't they just going to delay a decision until the COP meeting we are hosting is over?
    And we have a winner. Smile and shake hands with Joe, then give the green light after Air Force One leaves to spread some CO2 over the Atlantic...
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 40,359
    edited March 11
    26 mins into BBC News before they get to the signing of the $1.9 trillion US relief bill.

    Yet it will have more impact on our lives than anything else they have feature in the previous 26 minutes.
  • eekeek Posts: 12,247

    kle4 said:

    Scott_xP said:
    The government doesn't step in in such things unless it wants to take a decision contrary to the existing one, or to cause a big delay for some other reason. Either way, it's a signal of the government cocking about, no matter what they say about not making a decision for or against.
    They need to introduce the manufacture of wind turbines into the same area

    Double win
    So you missed the GE announcement earlier today of 750 jobs on teesside
  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 40,661
    eek said:

    kle4 said:

    Scott_xP said:
    The government doesn't step in in such things unless it wants to take a decision contrary to the existing one, or to cause a big delay for some other reason. Either way, it's a signal of the government cocking about, no matter what they say about not making a decision for or against.
    They need to introduce the manufacture of wind turbines into the same area

    Double win
    So you missed the GE announcement earlier today of 750 jobs on teesside
    Yes I did so very good news for Teesside

    And further innovative manufacturing in the green economy for Cumbria and elsewhere would be ideal
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 64,758
    edited March 11
    Scott_xP said:
    Probably innocently meant, but how would it look? "Nice going with your little assemblies, now let the big boys show you how it's done".

    Also it's the Welsh Parliament now, not Assembly, I believe
  • Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 53,946

    kle4 said:

    Scott_xP said:
    The government doesn't step in in such things unless it wants to take a decision contrary to the existing one, or to cause a big delay for some other reason. Either way, it's a signal of the government cocking about, no matter what they say about not making a decision for or against.
    They need to introduce the manufacture of wind turbines into the same area

    Double win
    No, they need to start the West Cumbria Tidal Lagoon.
    I think that ship has sailed.

    The future is wind + other but wind + tidal just don't work together.

    When the wind pressure is wrong and the tide is wrong what do you do to make electricity?
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 84,092
    edited March 11
    Only 1 pollster, Panelbase, now has Yes above the 45% it got in 2014 including don't knows in those last 6 polls and then by only 1%.

    So much for Brexit being a 'material change in circumstances'
  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 40,661

    kle4 said:

    Scott_xP said:
    The government doesn't step in in such things unless it wants to take a decision contrary to the existing one, or to cause a big delay for some other reason. Either way, it's a signal of the government cocking about, no matter what they say about not making a decision for or against.
    They need to introduce the manufacture of wind turbines into the same area

    Double win
    No, they need to start the West Cumbria Tidal Lagoon.
    That would be perfect with two in Wales
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 23,143

    kle4 said:

    Scott_xP said:
    The government doesn't step in in such things unless it wants to take a decision contrary to the existing one, or to cause a big delay for some other reason. Either way, it's a signal of the government cocking about, no matter what they say about not making a decision for or against.
    Aren't they just going to delay a decision until the COP meeting we are hosting is over?
    Nah, Carrie has spoken.
  • BarnesianBarnesian Posts: 6,878

    kle4 said:

    Scott_xP said:
    The government doesn't step in in such things unless it wants to take a decision contrary to the existing one, or to cause a big delay for some other reason. Either way, it's a signal of the government cocking about, no matter what they say about not making a decision for or against.
    They need to introduce the manufacture of wind turbines into the same area

    Double win
    No, they need to start the West Cumbria Tidal Lagoon.
    I think that ship has sailed.

    The future is wind + other but wind + tidal just don't work together.

    When the wind pressure is wrong and the tide is wrong what do you do to make electricity?
    Wind and tide are uncorrelated and lagoons are capacitors.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 40,116

    kle4 said:

    Scott_xP said:
    The government doesn't step in in such things unless it wants to take a decision contrary to the existing one, or to cause a big delay for some other reason. Either way, it's a signal of the government cocking about, no matter what they say about not making a decision for or against.
    They need to introduce the manufacture of wind turbines into the same area

    Double win
    No, they need to start the West Cumbria Tidal Lagoon.
    I think that ship has sailed.

    The future is wind + other but wind + tidal just don't work together.

    When the wind pressure is wrong and the tide is wrong what do you do to make electricity?
    A series of tidal lagoons and because of the different high tides around the coast, you always have power. They each generate power for 14 hours a day. Irrespective of the wind.

    They can recharge the nation's fleet of electric vehicles overnight.
  • Being told I lecture when every CasinoRoyale post is lecturing somebody about how they are wrong is peak PB to be honest, there is nobody more condescending here than CR. It's a shame as they can post good stuff, it's just undone almost completely by the utter nonsensical rubbish they post at other times.

    I will wear this badge with pride.
  • Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 53,946
    edited March 11
    Barnesian said:

    kle4 said:

    Scott_xP said:
    The government doesn't step in in such things unless it wants to take a decision contrary to the existing one, or to cause a big delay for some other reason. Either way, it's a signal of the government cocking about, no matter what they say about not making a decision for or against.
    They need to introduce the manufacture of wind turbines into the same area

    Double win
    No, they need to start the West Cumbria Tidal Lagoon.
    I think that ship has sailed.

    The future is wind + other but wind + tidal just don't work together.

    When the wind pressure is wrong and the tide is wrong what do you do to make electricity?
    Wind and tide are uncorrelated and lagoons are capacitors.
    The lagoons aren't big enough capacitors to profitably work on demand to make up for when the wind pressure is wrong.

    It doesn't matter that they're uncorrelated. Uncorrelated inconsistent things can be at a minimum both at the same time. The tide is predictable which is great if the alternative power supply can be used on-demand, but is not much use when its not. Its entirely possible for wind pressure and tidal pressure to be wrong in which case what do you?

    Wind + on demand works.
    Tide + on demand works
    Wind + tide . . . how does that work?

    We need something on demand. Currently that's gas, in the future we need a clean alternative to gas.
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 40,359
    kle4 said:

    Scott_xP said:
    Probably innocently meant, but how would it look? "Nice going with your little assemblies, now let the big boys show you how it's done".

    Also it's the Welsh Parliament now, not Assembly, I believe
    Another bloody silly idea. Imagine Mogg's reaction if (before we had left) it had been proposed by EU that the EU Parliament sits in Westminster for two weeks every September.

  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 26,712
    kle4 said:

    Scott_xP said:
    Probably innocently meant, but how would it look? "Nice going with your little assemblies, now let the big boys show you how it's done".

    Also it's the Welsh Parliament now, not Assembly, I believe
    ‘Probably innocently meant’

    I salute your optimism about human nature.

    Has Mogg clarified how they’d fit 650 mps in a chamber designed for 129?
  • Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 53,946
    edited March 11

    kle4 said:

    Scott_xP said:
    The government doesn't step in in such things unless it wants to take a decision contrary to the existing one, or to cause a big delay for some other reason. Either way, it's a signal of the government cocking about, no matter what they say about not making a decision for or against.
    They need to introduce the manufacture of wind turbines into the same area

    Double win
    No, they need to start the West Cumbria Tidal Lagoon.
    I think that ship has sailed.

    The future is wind + other but wind + tidal just don't work together.

    When the wind pressure is wrong and the tide is wrong what do you do to make electricity?
    A series of tidal lagoons and because of the different high tides around the coast, you always have power. They each generate power for 14 hours a day. Irrespective of the wind.

    They can recharge the nation's fleet of electric vehicles overnight.
    But we don't need something "irrespective" of the wind, because we have invested a fortune and are continuing to do so. Unless we're going to scrap the wind turbines, but we're not. We need something that generates with respect to wind - complementing wind by powering up more when wind goes down, then going down when wind goes up.

    So either the wind doesn't work but the tide does and we have enough, in which case what are we doing with the wind? Or the wind and tide both work and we have far too much in which case what are we doing?

    We need something to supplement the wind on-demand.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 36,846

    This mine must be allowed. It is the worst type of tokenism that this should be mired in delay whilst we import coal, and people could be earning money.

    Labour's comments on this are particularly shameful and reprehensible.
    I have to say that the news on the coal mine is some of the best news I have heard for ages.

    We have to stop digging carbon up and putting it in the atmosphere. We will only get really serious about finding alternatives when we make the status quo more difficult.

    No new mine, concentrate on the technology to make steel without coking coal.
    In 2019, China approved 17 new coal mines. In 2019, the UK imported 6.5 million metric tonnes of coal because we NEED it. Clearly you find it more acceptable to import coal (burning a great deal of fuel in the process) from other countries, rather than getting it out of the ground in this country. It's pathetic flimsy hypocrisy.
    China is still a net closer of coal mines, mind. It's also essentially impossible to open a new coal fired power station there, and they're moving towards natural gas like everyone else.

    But the big issue is a simpler one: coal mining declined in the UK because it's cheaper to get coal from big open pit mines in Australia, South Africa, the USA or Colombia than from deep mines in the UK.

    The spot price for Powder River Basin Coal (which admittedly is not high enough BTU to be used for coking coal) is around $11/tonne.

    I doubt there's a single deep mine in the world that can produce coal for less than $100/tonne.

    Now you can probably almost make the numbers work for coking coal in small quantities. But if you own a steel mill, and the price of Appalachian coal drops to $60 and you're paying $120 for coal from Cumbria, then you (the steel mill) are out of business.

    So, is the right option to force British steel producers to pay uneconomic prices for coal? Or is it to let the market decide? Which, in all probability, will mean we have marginal levels of coal production in the UK.
  • Luckyguy1983Luckyguy1983 Posts: 14,708

    kle4 said:

    Scott_xP said:
    The government doesn't step in in such things unless it wants to take a decision contrary to the existing one, or to cause a big delay for some other reason. Either way, it's a signal of the government cocking about, no matter what they say about not making a decision for or against.
    They need to introduce the manufacture of wind turbines into the same area

    Double win
    No, they need to start the West Cumbria Tidal Lagoon.
    I think that ship has sailed.

    The future is wind + other but wind + tidal just don't work together.

    When the wind pressure is wrong and the tide is wrong what do you do to make electricity?
    When does the tide go wrong?
  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 26,712
    HYUFD said:

    Only 1 pollster, Panelbase, now has Yes above the 45% it got in 2014 including don't knows in those last 6 polls and then by only 1%.

    So much for Brexit being a 'material change in circumstances'

    How many pollsters have No below the 55% it got in 2014?
  • LennonLennon Posts: 1,552

    kle4 said:

    Scott_xP said:
    The government doesn't step in in such things unless it wants to take a decision contrary to the existing one, or to cause a big delay for some other reason. Either way, it's a signal of the government cocking about, no matter what they say about not making a decision for or against.
    They need to introduce the manufacture of wind turbines into the same area

    Double win
    No, they need to start the West Cumbria Tidal Lagoon.
    I think that ship has sailed.

    The future is wind + other but wind + tidal just don't work together.

    When the wind pressure is wrong and the tide is wrong what do you do to make electricity?
    A series of tidal lagoons and because of the different high tides around the coast, you always have power. They each generate power for 14 hours a day. Irrespective of the wind.

    They can recharge the nation's fleet of electric vehicles overnight.
    But we don't need something "irrespective" of the wind, because we have invested a fortune and are continuing to do so. Unless we're going to scrap the wind turbines, but we're not. We need something that generates with respect to wind - complementing wind by powering up more when wind goes down, then going down when wind goes up.

    So either the wind doesn't work but the tide does and we have enough, in which case what are we doing with the wind? Or the wind and tide both work and we have far too much in which case what are we doing?

    We need something to supplement the wind on-demand.
    Isn't the point of Tesla GigaBattery technology which they are currently building in Texas but will no doubt be coming (or something similar) in due course.
  • Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 53,946

    kle4 said:

    Scott_xP said:
    The government doesn't step in in such things unless it wants to take a decision contrary to the existing one, or to cause a big delay for some other reason. Either way, it's a signal of the government cocking about, no matter what they say about not making a decision for or against.
    They need to introduce the manufacture of wind turbines into the same area

    Double win
    No, they need to start the West Cumbria Tidal Lagoon.
    I think that ship has sailed.

    The future is wind + other but wind + tidal just don't work together.

    When the wind pressure is wrong and the tide is wrong what do you do to make electricity?
    When does the tide go wrong?
    Power generation isn't consistent 24/7 (and even if it was that wouldn't assist low wind pressure on demand requirements).

    Power generation cycles predictably with the tides. Predictability is great if your alternative power sources like gas are able to work on demand. Not so much when you want to use it to replace on demand like gas.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 64,758

    kle4 said:

    Scott_xP said:
    Probably innocently meant, but how would it look? "Nice going with your little assemblies, now let the big boys show you how it's done".

    Also it's the Welsh Parliament now, not Assembly, I believe
    ‘Probably innocently meant’

    I salute your optimism about human nature.

    Has Mogg clarified how they’d fit 650 mps in a chamber designed for 129?
    Well they could leave the Scottish MPs outside, that'd mean you only need to squeeze in under 600.
  • LennonLennon Posts: 1,552

    Looks like Salmond-Sturgeon have blown it.

    Looking at the chart above - Anas Sarwar is having an impressive immediate impact... ;)
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 64,758

    kle4 said:

    Scott_xP said:
    Probably innocently meant, but how would it look? "Nice going with your little assemblies, now let the big boys show you how it's done".

    Also it's the Welsh Parliament now, not Assembly, I believe
    Another bloody silly idea. Imagine Mogg's reaction if (before we had left) it had been proposed by EU that the EU Parliament sits in Westminster for two weeks every September.

    Has a bit of a Strasbourg vibe to it too.
  • Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 53,946
    I know it's Twitter much more than TikTok that gets shared here but have a look at this, I think a few people here might appreciate it ...

    https://vm.tiktok.com/ZMeh384Ky/

    (You don't need an account or anything to watch the video, I don't have one my wife sent me the link)
  • Luckyguy1983Luckyguy1983 Posts: 14,708
    rcs1000 said:

    This mine must be allowed. It is the worst type of tokenism that this should be mired in delay whilst we import coal, and people could be earning money.

    Labour's comments on this are particularly shameful and reprehensible.
    I have to say that the news on the coal mine is some of the best news I have heard for ages.

    We have to stop digging carbon up and putting it in the atmosphere. We will only get really serious about finding alternatives when we make the status quo more difficult.

    No new mine, concentrate on the technology to make steel without coking coal.
    In 2019, China approved 17 new coal mines. In 2019, the UK imported 6.5 million metric tonnes of coal because we NEED it. Clearly you find it more acceptable to import coal (burning a great deal of fuel in the process) from other countries, rather than getting it out of the ground in this country. It's pathetic flimsy hypocrisy.
    China is still a net closer of coal mines, mind. It's also essentially impossible to open a new coal fired power station there, and they're moving towards natural gas like everyone else.

    But the big issue is a simpler one: coal mining declined in the UK because it's cheaper to get coal from big open pit mines in Australia, South Africa, the USA or Colombia than from deep mines in the UK.

    The spot price for Powder River Basin Coal (which admittedly is not high enough BTU to be used for coking coal) is around $11/tonne.

    I doubt there's a single deep mine in the world that can produce coal for less than $100/tonne.

    Now you can probably almost make the numbers work for coking coal in small quantities. But if you own a steel mill, and the price of Appalachian coal drops to $60 and you're paying $120 for coal from Cumbria, then you (the steel mill) are out of business.

    So, is the right option to force British steel producers to pay uneconomic prices for coal? Or is it to let the market decide? Which, in all probability, will mean we have marginal levels of coal production in the UK.
    I appreciate your insight in these matters - really. I remember the above information from when we spoke before and I believe you 100%. However, this is not relevant to the controversy surrounding the current site. This is a private company wanting to use private resources to get coal out of the ground, and who have obviously calculated that they can make a profit in so doing. The pit has been approved, and it should not be stopped by lobbyists.

    One of these activist companies I looked into recently had over half its annual income from the DFID - some hundreds of thousands. I deeply dis-appreciate my money being spent on employing these little herberts, so they can agitate to stop actual *productive* economic activity.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 36,846

    rcs1000 said:

    This mine must be allowed. It is the worst type of tokenism that this should be mired in delay whilst we import coal, and people could be earning money.

    Labour's comments on this are particularly shameful and reprehensible.
    I have to say that the news on the coal mine is some of the best news I have heard for ages.

    We have to stop digging carbon up and putting it in the atmosphere. We will only get really serious about finding alternatives when we make the status quo more difficult.

    No new mine, concentrate on the technology to make steel without coking coal.
    In 2019, China approved 17 new coal mines. In 2019, the UK imported 6.5 million metric tonnes of coal because we NEED it. Clearly you find it more acceptable to import coal (burning a great deal of fuel in the process) from other countries, rather than getting it out of the ground in this country. It's pathetic flimsy hypocrisy.
    China is still a net closer of coal mines, mind. It's also essentially impossible to open a new coal fired power station there, and they're moving towards natural gas like everyone else.

    But the big issue is a simpler one: coal mining declined in the UK because it's cheaper to get coal from big open pit mines in Australia, South Africa, the USA or Colombia than from deep mines in the UK.

    The spot price for Powder River Basin Coal (which admittedly is not high enough BTU to be used for coking coal) is around $11/tonne.

    I doubt there's a single deep mine in the world that can produce coal for less than $100/tonne.

    Now you can probably almost make the numbers work for coking coal in small quantities. But if you own a steel mill, and the price of Appalachian coal drops to $60 and you're paying $120 for coal from Cumbria, then you (the steel mill) are out of business.

    So, is the right option to force British steel producers to pay uneconomic prices for coal? Or is it to let the market decide? Which, in all probability, will mean we have marginal levels of coal production in the UK.
    I appreciate your insight in these matters - really. I remember the above information from when we spoke before and I believe you 100%. However, this is not relevant to the controversy surrounding the current site. This is a private company wanting to use private resources to get coal out of the ground, and who have obviously calculated that they can make a profit in so doing. The pit has been approved, and it should not be stopped by lobbyists.

    One of these activist companies I looked into recently had over half its annual income from the DFID - some hundreds of thousands. I deeply dis-appreciate my money being spent on employing these little herberts, so they can agitate to stop actual *productive* economic activity.
    And I agree that they should be free to build their mine, so long as they're not using government money to do so.
  • Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 53,946
    Lennon said:

    kle4 said:

    Scott_xP said:
    The government doesn't step in in such things unless it wants to take a decision contrary to the existing one, or to cause a big delay for some other reason. Either way, it's a signal of the government cocking about, no matter what they say about not making a decision for or against.
    They need to introduce the manufacture of wind turbines into the same area

    Double win
    No, they need to start the West Cumbria Tidal Lagoon.
    I think that ship has sailed.

    The future is wind + other but wind + tidal just don't work together.

    When the wind pressure is wrong and the tide is wrong what do you do to make electricity?
    A series of tidal lagoons and because of the different high tides around the coast, you always have power. They each generate power for 14 hours a day. Irrespective of the wind.

    They can recharge the nation's fleet of electric vehicles overnight.
    But we don't need something "irrespective" of the wind, because we have invested a fortune and are continuing to do so. Unless we're going to scrap the wind turbines, but we're not. We need something that generates with respect to wind - complementing wind by powering up more when wind goes down, then going down when wind goes up.

    So either the wind doesn't work but the tide does and we have enough, in which case what are we doing with the wind? Or the wind and tide both work and we have far too much in which case what are we doing?

    We need something to supplement the wind on-demand.
    Isn't the point of Tesla GigaBattery technology which they are currently building in Texas but will no doubt be coming (or something similar) in due course.
    Absolutely.

    Wind (inconsistent, unpredictable) + Storage work as a combination.
    Tidal (inconsistent, predictable) + Storage work as a combination.

    Wind + Tidal simply don't work as a combo. Tidal is an alternative to Wind, not a complement to it.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 36,846
    Novavax trials have completed, and it is 96% effective in original strain CV19 (better than Pfizer, etc). However, Novavax's efficacy drops off rather sharply against South African CV19, dropping to just 55%.
  • IshmaelZIshmaelZ Posts: 5,812

    Lennon said:

    kle4 said:

    Scott_xP said:
    The government doesn't step in in such things unless it wants to take a decision contrary to the existing one, or to cause a big delay for some other reason. Either way, it's a signal of the government cocking about, no matter what they say about not making a decision for or against.
    They need to introduce the manufacture of wind turbines into the same area

    Double win
    No, they need to start the West Cumbria Tidal Lagoon.
    I think that ship has sailed.

    The future is wind + other but wind + tidal just don't work together.

    When the wind pressure is wrong and the tide is wrong what do you do to make electricity?
    A series of tidal lagoons and because of the different high tides around the coast, you always have power. They each generate power for 14 hours a day. Irrespective of the wind.

    They can recharge the nation's fleet of electric vehicles overnight.
    But we don't need something "irrespective" of the wind, because we have invested a fortune and are continuing to do so. Unless we're going to scrap the wind turbines, but we're not. We need something that generates with respect to wind - complementing wind by powering up more when wind goes down, then going down when wind goes up.

    So either the wind doesn't work but the tide does and we have enough, in which case what are we doing with the wind? Or the wind and tide both work and we have far too much in which case what are we doing?

    We need something to supplement the wind on-demand.
    Isn't the point of Tesla GigaBattery technology which they are currently building in Texas but will no doubt be coming (or something similar) in due course.
    Absolutely.

    Wind (inconsistent, unpredictable) + Storage work as a combination.
    Tidal (inconsistent, predictable) + Storage work as a combination.

    Wind + Tidal simply don't work as a combo. Tidal is an alternative to Wind, not a complement to it.
    I do not think you understand how tides work.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 36,846
    Lennon said:

    kle4 said:

    Scott_xP said:
    The government doesn't step in in such things unless it wants to take a decision contrary to the existing one, or to cause a big delay for some other reason. Either way, it's a signal of the government cocking about, no matter what they say about not making a decision for or against.
    They need to introduce the manufacture of wind turbines into the same area

    Double win
    No, they need to start the West Cumbria Tidal Lagoon.
    I think that ship has sailed.

    The future is wind + other but wind + tidal just don't work together.

    When the wind pressure is wrong and the tide is wrong what do you do to make electricity?
    A series of tidal lagoons and because of the different high tides around the coast, you always have power. They each generate power for 14 hours a day. Irrespective of the wind.

    They can recharge the nation's fleet of electric vehicles overnight.
    But we don't need something "irrespective" of the wind, because we have invested a fortune and are continuing to do so. Unless we're going to scrap the wind turbines, but we're not. We need something that generates with respect to wind - complementing wind by powering up more when wind goes down, then going down when wind goes up.

    So either the wind doesn't work but the tide does and we have enough, in which case what are we doing with the wind? Or the wind and tide both work and we have far too much in which case what are we doing?

    We need something to supplement the wind on-demand.
    Isn't the point of Tesla GigaBattery technology which they are currently building in Texas but will no doubt be coming (or something similar) in due course.
    Worth noting that the combined capacity of all the Tesla Gigabatteries - installed and under construction - in the world, is only about a fifth of the capacity of the Dinorwig pumped storage plant in Wales.
  • another_richardanother_richard Posts: 19,780
    rcs1000 said:

    This mine must be allowed. It is the worst type of tokenism that this should be mired in delay whilst we import coal, and people could be earning money.

    Labour's comments on this are particularly shameful and reprehensible.
    I have to say that the news on the coal mine is some of the best news I have heard for ages.

    We have to stop digging carbon up and putting it in the atmosphere. We will only get really serious about finding alternatives when we make the status quo more difficult.

    No new mine, concentrate on the technology to make steel without coking coal.
    In 2019, China approved 17 new coal mines. In 2019, the UK imported 6.5 million metric tonnes of coal because we NEED it. Clearly you find it more acceptable to import coal (burning a great deal of fuel in the process) from other countries, rather than getting it out of the ground in this country. It's pathetic flimsy hypocrisy.
    China is still a net closer of coal mines, mind. It's also essentially impossible to open a new coal fired power station there, and they're moving towards natural gas like everyone else.

    But the big issue is a simpler one: coal mining declined in the UK because it's cheaper to get coal from big open pit mines in Australia, South Africa, the USA or Colombia than from deep mines in the UK.

    The spot price for Powder River Basin Coal (which admittedly is not high enough BTU to be used for coking coal) is around $11/tonne.

    I doubt there's a single deep mine in the world that can produce coal for less than $100/tonne.

    Now you can probably almost make the numbers work for coking coal in small quantities. But if you own a steel mill, and the price of Appalachian coal drops to $60 and you're paying $120 for coal from Cumbria, then you (the steel mill) are out of business.

    So, is the right option to force British steel producers to pay uneconomic prices for coal? Or is it to let the market decide? Which, in all probability, will mean we have marginal levels of coal production in the UK.
    The UK was a net closer of coal mines from about 1900 onwards.

    And I doubt China will need to open any coal fired power stations given the number they've built in recent years:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_coal-fired_power_stations

    Notice that there are 40 Chinese coal fired power station between 3,000MW and 6,720 MW in size.

    The old UK coal power stations were only 2,000MW.
  • Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 53,946
    IshmaelZ said:

    Lennon said:

    kle4 said:

    Scott_xP said:
    The government doesn't step in in such things unless it wants to take a decision contrary to the existing one, or to cause a big delay for some other reason. Either way, it's a signal of the government cocking about, no matter what they say about not making a decision for or against.
    They need to introduce the manufacture of wind turbines into the same area

    Double win
    No, they need to start the West Cumbria Tidal Lagoon.
    I think that ship has sailed.

    The future is wind + other but wind + tidal just don't work together.

    When the wind pressure is wrong and the tide is wrong what do you do to make electricity?
    A series of tidal lagoons and because of the different high tides around the coast, you always have power. They each generate power for 14 hours a day. Irrespective of the wind.

    They can recharge the nation's fleet of electric vehicles overnight.
    But we don't need something "irrespective" of the wind, because we have invested a fortune and are continuing to do so. Unless we're going to scrap the wind turbines, but we're not. We need something that generates with respect to wind - complementing wind by powering up more when wind goes down, then going down when wind goes up.

    So either the wind doesn't work but the tide does and we have enough, in which case what are we doing with the wind? Or the wind and tide both work and we have far too much in which case what are we doing?

    We need something to supplement the wind on-demand.
    Isn't the point of Tesla GigaBattery technology which they are currently building in Texas but will no doubt be coming (or something similar) in due course.
    Absolutely.

    Wind (inconsistent, unpredictable) + Storage work as a combination.
    Tidal (inconsistent, predictable) + Storage work as a combination.

    Wind + Tidal simply don't work as a combo. Tidal is an alternative to Wind, not a complement to it.
    I do not think you understand how tides work.
    I do. The output is predictable based on high tide and low tide etc that is perfectly predictable even years into advance.

    Low pressure systems affecting the wind don't cycle neatly with the tide. So when low pressure means our wind turbines aren't generating as much we currently burn gas to make up the difference. How do we on demand increase tidal generation during a low pressure system?
  • sarissasarissa Posts: 1,206
    kle4 said:

    kle4 said:

    Scott_xP said:
    Probably innocently meant, but how would it look? "Nice going with your little assemblies, now let the big boys show you how it's done".

    Also it's the Welsh Parliament now, not Assembly, I believe
    ‘Probably innocently meant’

    I salute your optimism about human nature.

    Has Mogg clarified how they’d fit 650 mps in a chamber designed for 129?
    Well they could leave the Scottish MPs outside, that'd mean you only need to squeeze in under 600.
    That won’t happen - Holyrood has a modern instant voting system. The old fashioned MPs would probably end up milling around the corridors looking for tellers.
  • Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 53,946
    rcs1000 said:

    Lennon said:

    kle4 said:

    Scott_xP said:
    The government doesn't step in in such things unless it wants to take a decision contrary to the existing one, or to cause a big delay for some other reason. Either way, it's a signal of the government cocking about, no matter what they say about not making a decision for or against.
    They need to introduce the manufacture of wind turbines into the same area

    Double win
    No, they need to start the West Cumbria Tidal Lagoon.
    I think that ship has sailed.

    The future is wind + other but wind + tidal just don't work together.

    When the wind pressure is wrong and the tide is wrong what do you do to make electricity?
    A series of tidal lagoons and because of the different high tides around the coast, you always have power. They each generate power for 14 hours a day. Irrespective of the wind.

    They can recharge the nation's fleet of electric vehicles overnight.
    But we don't need something "irrespective" of the wind, because we have invested a fortune and are continuing to do so. Unless we're going to scrap the wind turbines, but we're not. We need something that generates with respect to wind - complementing wind by powering up more when wind goes down, then going down when wind goes up.

    So either the wind doesn't work but the tide does and we have enough, in which case what are we doing with the wind? Or the wind and tide both work and we have far too much in which case what are we doing?

    We need something to supplement the wind on-demand.
    Isn't the point of Tesla GigaBattery technology which they are currently building in Texas but will no doubt be coming (or something similar) in due course.
    Worth noting that the combined capacity of all the Tesla Gigabatteries - installed and under construction - in the world, is only about a fifth of the capacity of the Dinorwig pumped storage plant in Wales.
    Pumped storage plants are a good idea. 👍

    The whole point I'm trying to make is we need storage. If the lagoon is to be used as storage then that's great, that works. If its to work predictably with the tides instead, answers the wrong question.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 23,143
    edited March 11

    Looks like Salmond-Sturgeon have blown it.

    Though I do wonder if the wind has changed on that. The discussions of misogyny and harassment of women taking place don't look favourable to Salmond. His behaviour was judged non criminal, but was certainly sleazy.

    I reckon Sturgeon's instincts, if not her methods, are in tune with the times.
  • RobDRobD Posts: 53,279

    IshmaelZ said:

    Lennon said:

    kle4 said:

    Scott_xP said:
    The government doesn't step in in such things unless it wants to take a decision contrary to the existing one, or to cause a big delay for some other reason. Either way, it's a signal of the government cocking about, no matter what they say about not making a decision for or against.
    They need to introduce the manufacture of wind turbines into the same area

    Double win
    No, they need to start the West Cumbria Tidal Lagoon.
    I think that ship has sailed.

    The future is wind + other but wind + tidal just don't work together.

    When the wind pressure is wrong and the tide is wrong what do you do to make electricity?
    A series of tidal lagoons and because of the different high tides around the coast, you always have power. They each generate power for 14 hours a day. Irrespective of the wind.

    They can recharge the nation's fleet of electric vehicles overnight.
    But we don't need something "irrespective" of the wind, because we have invested a fortune and are continuing to do so. Unless we're going to scrap the wind turbines, but we're not. We need something that generates with respect to wind - complementing wind by powering up more when wind goes down, then going down when wind goes up.

    So either the wind doesn't work but the tide does and we have enough, in which case what are we doing with the wind? Or the wind and tide both work and we have far too much in which case what are we doing?

    We need something to supplement the wind on-demand.
    Isn't the point of Tesla GigaBattery technology which they are currently building in Texas but will no doubt be coming (or something similar) in due course.
    Absolutely.

    Wind (inconsistent, unpredictable) + Storage work as a combination.
    Tidal (inconsistent, predictable) + Storage work as a combination.

    Wind + Tidal simply don't work as a combo. Tidal is an alternative to Wind, not a complement to it.
    I do not think you understand how tides work.
    I do. The output is predictable based on high tide and low tide etc that is perfectly predictable even years into advance.

    Low pressure systems affecting the wind don't cycle neatly with the tide. So when low pressure means our wind turbines aren't generating as much we currently burn gas to make up the difference. How do we on demand increase tidal generation during a low pressure system?
    But isn't tidal pretty much consistent and predictable? It always comes in and out, at the same speed.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 65,452
    edited March 11
    rcs1000 said:

    Novavax trials have completed, and it is 96% effective in original strain CV19 (better than Pfizer, etc). However, Novavax's efficacy drops off rather sharply against South African CV19, dropping to just 55%.

    https://twitter.com/florian_krammer/status/1369668488500019209
  • Luckyguy1983Luckyguy1983 Posts: 14,708

    kle4 said:

    Scott_xP said:
    Probably innocently meant, but how would it look? "Nice going with your little assemblies, now let the big boys show you how it's done".

    Also it's the Welsh Parliament now, not Assembly, I believe
    ‘Probably innocently meant’

    I salute your optimism about human nature.

    Has Mogg clarified how they’d fit 650 mps in a chamber designed for 129?
    Not tell Ian Blackford and Nicholas Soames where they're going?
  • Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 53,946
    edited March 11
    RobD said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    Lennon said:

    kle4 said:

    Scott_xP said:
    The government doesn't step in in such things unless it wants to take a decision contrary to the existing one, or to cause a big delay for some other reason. Either way, it's a signal of the government cocking about, no matter what they say about not making a decision for or against.
    They need to introduce the manufacture of wind turbines into the same area

    Double win
    No, they need to start the West Cumbria Tidal Lagoon.
    I think that ship has sailed.

    The future is wind + other but wind + tidal just don't work together.

    When the wind pressure is wrong and the tide is wrong what do you do to make electricity?
    A series of tidal lagoons and because of the different high tides around the coast, you always have power. They each generate power for 14 hours a day. Irrespective of the wind.

    They can recharge the nation's fleet of electric vehicles overnight.
    But we don't need something "irrespective" of the wind, because we have invested a fortune and are continuing to do so. Unless we're going to scrap the wind turbines, but we're not. We need something that generates with respect to wind - complementing wind by powering up more when wind goes down, then going down when wind goes up.

    So either the wind doesn't work but the tide does and we have enough, in which case what are we doing with the wind? Or the wind and tide both work and we have far too much in which case what are we doing?

    We need something to supplement the wind on-demand.
    Isn't the point of Tesla GigaBattery technology which they are currently building in Texas but will no doubt be coming (or something similar) in due course.
    Absolutely.

    Wind (inconsistent, unpredictable) + Storage work as a combination.
    Tidal (inconsistent, predictable) + Storage work as a combination.

    Wind + Tidal simply don't work as a combo. Tidal is an alternative to Wind, not a complement to it.
    I do not think you understand how tides work.
    I do. The output is predictable based on high tide and low tide etc that is perfectly predictable even years into advance.

    Low pressure systems affecting the wind don't cycle neatly with the tide. So when low pressure means our wind turbines aren't generating as much we currently burn gas to make up the difference. How do we on demand increase tidal generation during a low pressure system?
    But isn't tidal pretty much consistent and predictable? It always comes in and out, at the same speed.
    I believe it cycles but either way that's my point.

    Predictability is a strength if working with something like gas, you can get a great synergy between tidal and gas because when you have a surge in demand or lower tidal output you can burn more gas.

    You get a great synergy between tidal and storage because when you have a surge in demand or lower tidal output you can release some storage.

    The same with wind+storage or wind+gas, when there is a surge in demand, or a lack of wind we can burn more gas or release some storage.

    But what synergy is there between tidal and wind? When the wind pressure is down or there is a surge in demand we can burn more gas, or use more storage, but we can't make the tidal pressures change. Tidal storage works, but not tidal generation.
  • Luckyguy1983Luckyguy1983 Posts: 14,708

    kle4 said:

    Scott_xP said:
    The government doesn't step in in such things unless it wants to take a decision contrary to the existing one, or to cause a big delay for some other reason. Either way, it's a signal of the government cocking about, no matter what they say about not making a decision for or against.
    They need to introduce the manufacture of wind turbines into the same area

    Double win
    No, they need to start the West Cumbria Tidal Lagoon.
    I think that ship has sailed.

    The future is wind + other but wind + tidal just don't work together.

    When the wind pressure is wrong and the tide is wrong what do you do to make electricity?
    A series of tidal lagoons and because of the different high tides around the coast, you always have power. They each generate power for 14 hours a day. Irrespective of the wind.

    They can recharge the nation's fleet of electric vehicles overnight.
    But we don't need something "irrespective" of the wind, because we have invested a fortune and are continuing to do so. Unless we're going to scrap the wind turbines, but we're not. We need something that generates with respect to wind - complementing wind by powering up more when wind goes down, then going down when wind goes up.

    So either the wind doesn't work but the tide does and we have enough, in which case what are we doing with the wind? Or the wind and tide both work and we have far too much in which case what are we doing?

    We need something to supplement the wind on-demand.
    I see what you're saying, however, we generate power because we need power, not to make our current power choices look OK. If tidal is more reliable and cheaper than wind, let it supersede wind. There's no point throwing good money after bad.

    Overall I do agree that we need storage.
  • LostPasswordLostPassword Posts: 3,331
    PB Tories are hilarious.

    I voted Green at the 2005GE, and was posting here before then, and since then I've often been in arguments with the PB Tories on Green issues.

    I supported wind turbines back then and the PB Tories said they couldn't work. Now we generate loads of electricity from wind turbines - and the PB Tories say it proves that technology will stop climate change and the Greens were wrong.

    I was at the climate camp protests against coal power stations in 2008 and the PB Tories said wind wouldn't work and we needed to burn coal. Since then coal use for electricity has plummeted to be replaced by wind. But according to the PB Tories this proves that the Greens were wrong.

    I predict that in the future we will be able to stop using coking coal to make steel. Maybe it will be the hydrogen method being trialled in Sweden. Maybe another technology. I'm certain that when it happens the PB Tories who opposed any measure to help it happen sooner will claim they supported it all along.

    The PB Tories are always wrong and the PB Tories never learn.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 23,143
    HYUFD said:
    Not an SNP majority, but with the Greens a majority for an Indyref.
  • RobDRobD Posts: 53,279

    RobD said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    Lennon said:

    kle4 said:

    Scott_xP said:
    The government doesn't step in in such things unless it wants to take a decision contrary to the existing one, or to cause a big delay for some other reason. Either way, it's a signal of the government cocking about, no matter what they say about not making a decision for or against.
    They need to introduce the manufacture of wind turbines into the same area

    Double win
    No, they need to start the West Cumbria Tidal Lagoon.
    I think that ship has sailed.

    The future is wind + other but wind + tidal just don't work together.

    When the wind pressure is wrong and the tide is wrong what do you do to make electricity?
    A series of tidal lagoons and because of the different high tides around the coast, you always have power. They each generate power for 14 hours a day. Irrespective of the wind.

    They can recharge the nation's fleet of electric vehicles overnight.
    But we don't need something "irrespective" of the wind, because we have invested a fortune and are continuing to do so. Unless we're going to scrap the wind turbines, but we're not. We need something that generates with respect to wind - complementing wind by powering up more when wind goes down, then going down when wind goes up.

    So either the wind doesn't work but the tide does and we have enough, in which case what are we doing with the wind? Or the wind and tide both work and we have far too much in which case what are we doing?

    We need something to supplement the wind on-demand.
    Isn't the point of Tesla GigaBattery technology which they are currently building in Texas but will no doubt be coming (or something similar) in due course.
    Absolutely.

    Wind (inconsistent, unpredictable) + Storage work as a combination.
    Tidal (inconsistent, predictable) + Storage work as a combination.

    Wind + Tidal simply don't work as a combo. Tidal is an alternative to Wind, not a complement to it.
    I do not think you understand how tides work.
    I do. The output is predictable based on high tide and low tide etc that is perfectly predictable even years into advance.

    Low pressure systems affecting the wind don't cycle neatly with the tide. So when low pressure means our wind turbines aren't generating as much we currently burn gas to make up the difference. How do we on demand increase tidal generation during a low pressure system?
    But isn't tidal pretty much consistent and predictable? It always comes in and out, at the same speed.
    I believe it cycles but either way that's my point.

    Predictability is a strength if working with something like gas, you can get a great synergy between tidal and gas because when you have a surge in demand or lower tidal output you can burn more gas.

    You get a great synergy between tidal and storage because when you have a surge in demand or lower tidal output you can release some storage.

    The same with wind+storage or wind+gas, when there is a surge in demand, or a lack of wind we can burn more gas or release some storage.

    But what synergy is there between tidal and wind? When the wind pressure is down we can burn more gas, or use more storage, but we can't make the tidal pressures change. Tidal storage works, but not tidal generation.
    I think I see your point, that you can increase/decrease gas as tidal goes in the other direction. Storage would also be an alternative, but not viable at the moment.
  • RobDRobD Posts: 53,279

    PB Tories are hilarious.

    I voted Green at the 2005GE, and was posting here before then, and since then I've often been in arguments with the PB Tories on Green issues.

    I supported wind turbines back then and the PB Tories said they couldn't work. Now we generate loads of electricity from wind turbines - and the PB Tories say it proves that technology will stop climate change and the Greens were wrong.

    I was at the climate camp protests against coal power stations in 2008 and the PB Tories said wind wouldn't work and we needed to burn coal. Since then coal use for electricity has plummeted to be replaced by wind. But according to the PB Tories this proves that the Greens were wrong.

    I predict that in the future we will be able to stop using coking coal to make steel. Maybe it will be the hydrogen method being trialled in Sweden. Maybe another technology. I'm certain that when it happens the PB Tories who opposed any measure to help it happen sooner will claim they supported it all along.

    The PB Tories are always wrong and the PB Tories never learn.

    No. I am pretty sure PB Tories are always right, and never have to learn.
  • Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 53,946

    kle4 said:

    Scott_xP said:
    The government doesn't step in in such things unless it wants to take a decision contrary to the existing one, or to cause a big delay for some other reason. Either way, it's a signal of the government cocking about, no matter what they say about not making a decision for or against.
    They need to introduce the manufacture of wind turbines into the same area

    Double win
    No, they need to start the West Cumbria Tidal Lagoon.
    I think that ship has sailed.

    The future is wind + other but wind + tidal just don't work together.

    When the wind pressure is wrong and the tide is wrong what do you do to make electricity?
    A series of tidal lagoons and because of the different high tides around the coast, you always have power. They each generate power for 14 hours a day. Irrespective of the wind.

    They can recharge the nation's fleet of electric vehicles overnight.
    But we don't need something "irrespective" of the wind, because we have invested a fortune and are continuing to do so. Unless we're going to scrap the wind turbines, but we're not. We need something that generates with respect to wind - complementing wind by powering up more when wind goes down, then going down when wind goes up.

    So either the wind doesn't work but the tide does and we have enough, in which case what are we doing with the wind? Or the wind and tide both work and we have far too much in which case what are we doing?

    We need something to supplement the wind on-demand.
    I see what you're saying, however, we generate power because we need power, not to make our current power choices look OK. If tidal is more reliable and cheaper than wind, let it supersede wind. There's no point throwing good money after bad.

    Overall I do agree that we need storage.
    Its not cheaper though. Wind is cheaper. Wind is much, much cheaper. We just need something that supplements wind on demand because wind isn't reliable or on-demand.

    Worth remembering demand isn't reliable either. Its inconsistent throughout the day and with things like a TV Pickup so on-demand will always be needed.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 36,846
    Why is no one talking about the libdem SURGE in Scotland?
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 65,452
    edited March 11
    I'm not 100% on precisely how tidal works but can't the lagoon be engineered so as to produce power broadly when it is needed ?
  • https://twitter.com/JolyonRubs/status/1370090901121478662

    Piers Morgan is a creep who was dumped for being a creep and is now pissed off and has a bee in his bonnet because he was dumped
  • Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 53,946
    edited March 11
    RobD said:

    RobD said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    Lennon said:

    kle4 said:

    Scott_xP said:
    The government doesn't step in in such things unless it wants to take a decision contrary to the existing one, or to cause a big delay for some other reason. Either way, it's a signal of the government cocking about, no matter what they say about not making a decision for or against.
    They need to introduce the manufacture of wind turbines into the same area

    Double win
    No, they need to start the West Cumbria Tidal Lagoon.
    I think that ship has sailed.

    The future is wind + other but wind + tidal just don't work together.

    When the wind pressure is wrong and the tide is wrong what do you do to make electricity?
    A series of tidal lagoons and because of the different high tides around the coast, you always have power. They each generate power for 14 hours a day. Irrespective of the wind.

    They can recharge the nation's fleet of electric vehicles overnight.
    But we don't need something "irrespective" of the wind, because we have invested a fortune and are continuing to do so. Unless we're going to scrap the wind turbines, but we're not. We need something that generates with respect to wind - complementing wind by powering up more when wind goes down, then going down when wind goes up.

    So either the wind doesn't work but the tide does and we have enough, in which case what are we doing with the wind? Or the wind and tide both work and we have far too much in which case what are we doing?

    We need something to supplement the wind on-demand.
    Isn't the point of Tesla GigaBattery technology which they are currently building in Texas but will no doubt be coming (or something similar) in due course.
    Absolutely.

    Wind (inconsistent, unpredictable) + Storage work as a combination.
    Tidal (inconsistent, predictable) + Storage work as a combination.

    Wind + Tidal simply don't work as a combo. Tidal is an alternative to Wind, not a complement to it.
    I do not think you understand how tides work.
    I do. The output is predictable based on high tide and low tide etc that is perfectly predictable even years into advance.

    Low pressure systems affecting the wind don't cycle neatly with the tide. So when low pressure means our wind turbines aren't generating as much we currently burn gas to make up the difference. How do we on demand increase tidal generation during a low pressure system?
    But isn't tidal pretty much consistent and predictable? It always comes in and out, at the same speed.
    I believe it cycles but either way that's my point.

    Predictability is a strength if working with something like gas, you can get a great synergy between tidal and gas because when you have a surge in demand or lower tidal output you can burn more gas.

    You get a great synergy between tidal and storage because when you have a surge in demand or lower tidal output you can release some storage.

    The same with wind+storage or wind+gas, when there is a surge in demand, or a lack of wind we can burn more gas or release some storage.

    But what synergy is there between tidal and wind? When the wind pressure is down we can burn more gas, or use more storage, but we can't make the tidal pressures change. Tidal storage works, but not tidal generation.
    I think I see your point, that you can increase/decrease gas as tidal goes in the other direction. Storage would also be an alternative, but not viable at the moment.
    Exactly!

    Tidal is an excellent alternative to wind, but more predictable and more expensive.

    It is not an excellent supplement to wind.

    If wind wasn't much cheaper we 100% should be building tidal. But we need a system that supplements each other, otherwise we haven't solved the reliability problems.

    Tidal isn't an answer for storage and once storage is a viable alternative then what answer does tidal serve, since wind is cheaper?
  • CookieCookie Posts: 2,711
    Foxy said:

    Looks like Salmond-Sturgeon have blown it.

    Though I do wonder if the wind has changed on that. The discussions of misogyny and harassment of women taking place don't look favourable to Salmond. His behaviour was judged non criminal, but was certainly sleazy.

    I reckon Sturgeon's instincts, if not her methods, are in tune with the times.
    Who knows really what went on?
    But on the basis of evidence which fell far short of convincing, she was trying, for matters of political expediency, to get him convicted as a sex offender. This would have made his life seriously unpleasant for years and seen him reputationally ruined forever.
    Do you not find this a wee bit frightening?
  • Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 53,946
    Pulpstar said:

    I'm not 100% on precisely how tidal works but can't the lagoon be engineered so as to produce power broadly when it is needed ?

    Storage lagoons do exist and are a great idea, but if its just being used as storage its much less economical.

    If a way can be found to have economical storage lagoons that would produce power on demand instead of predictably then that would be absolutely perfect.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 84,092
    Foxy said:

    HYUFD said:
    Not an SNP majority, but with the Greens a majority for an Indyref.
    Oh absolutely not, there is already an SNP and Green majority at Holyrood, so the failure of the SNP to win a majority despite Brexit as they did before indyref 2014 in 2011 will confirm the UK government to be absolutely right when it refuses a legal indyref2 as it will.

    That will also accord with the views of Scots as a whole

    https://twitter.com/JohnRentoul/status/1369925156383117312?s=20
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 65,452

    Pulpstar said:

    I'm not 100% on precisely how tidal works but can't the lagoon be engineered so as to produce power broadly when it is needed ?

    Storage lagoons do exist and are a great idea, but if its just being used as storage its much less economical.

    If a way can be found to have economical storage lagoons that would produce power on demand instead of predictably then that would be absolutely perfect.
    Wait till you find out how much the long term costs of Hinkley C are.
  • SeaShantyIrish2SeaShantyIrish2 Posts: 4,291
    FPT - what do they call "scotch tape" in Scotland? "Scots tape" or is it just "tape" like with whisky?

    AND what do the English call it (the tape, that is, not the whisky). Or the Welsh, Irish, Cornish, Manx, Jerseys, Guernseys, etc., etc.?

    BTW, what's the deal with butter scotch?
  • PB Tories are hilarious.

    I voted Green at the 2005GE, and was posting here before then, and since then I've often been in arguments with the PB Tories on Green issues.

    I supported wind turbines back then and the PB Tories said they couldn't work. Now we generate loads of electricity from wind turbines - and the PB Tories say it proves that technology will stop climate change and the Greens were wrong.

    I was at the climate camp protests against coal power stations in 2008 and the PB Tories said wind wouldn't work and we needed to burn coal. Since then coal use for electricity has plummeted to be replaced by wind. But according to the PB Tories this proves that the Greens were wrong.

    I predict that in the future we will be able to stop using coking coal to make steel. Maybe it will be the hydrogen method being trialled in Sweden. Maybe another technology. I'm certain that when it happens the PB Tories who opposed any measure to help it happen sooner will claim they supported it all along.

    The PB Tories are always wrong and the PB Tories never learn.

    Tories don't care about climate change or pollution, unless it is a means to winning elections.

    See their entirely contradictory manifesto promises and the climate for examples.

    I will make a guess that the majority of Tory voters do not see climate change as extinction, it is at best a nice to have
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 36,846
    Pulpstar said:

    I'm not 100% on precisely how tidal works but can't the lagoon be engineered so as to produce power broadly when it is needed ?

    Well, if we attached enough rockets to the moon, we could shift its position so it moved the tides to exactly when peak power demand is.

    Of course, some Greens will say that attaching millions of rockets to the moon to manipulate gravity on earth is "stupid". But don't listen to them.
  • Luckyguy1983Luckyguy1983 Posts: 14,708
    Just one more thing on this and then I'll shut up. How dare John Kerry come here and lecture us about not opening a coal mine? America's CO2 emissions are 16 metric tonnes per person, ours are 5.3. Should he not have come to us asking for lessons on how to perform this environmental miracle, rather than intervening in matters that don't concern him? What an utter, utter prick.
  • Just one more thing on this and then I'll shut up. How dare John Kerry come here and lecture us about not opening a coal mine? America's CO2 emissions are 16 metric tonnes per person, ours are 5.3. Should he not have come to us asking for lessons on how to perform this environmental miracle, rather than intervening in matters that don't concern him? What an utter, utter prick.

    Just wondering if you opposed Trump getting involved in UK affairs, or is it only when they do something you disagree with
  • Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 53,946
    HYUFD said:

    Foxy said:

    HYUFD said:
    Not an SNP majority, but with the Greens a majority for an Indyref.
    Oh absolutely not, there is already an SNP and Green majority at Holyrood, so the failure of the SNP to win a majority despite Brexit as they did before indyref 2014 in 2011 will confirm the UK government to be absolutely right when it refuses a legal indyref2 as it will.

    That will also accord with the views of Scots as a whole

    https://twitter.com/JohnRentoul/status/1369925156383117312?s=20
    That there's already a majority for a referendum is not an argument against a referendum.

    The only valid current argument against the current MSPs demanding one is they weren't explicit enough to get a mandate for it at the last election, the pledge on having one was vague and conditional.

    If the Greens and the SNP both put an unconditional pledge on having one now and get a majority on those pledges then that is fair enough.
  • Luckyguy1983Luckyguy1983 Posts: 14,708
    edited March 11

    FPT - what do they call "scotch tape" in Scotland? "Scots tape" or is it just "tape" like with whisky?

    AND what do the English call it (the tape, that is, not the whisky). Or the Welsh, Irish, Cornish, Manx, Jerseys, Guernseys, etc., etc.?

    BTW, what's the deal with butter scotch?

    The brand isn't as ubiquitous here as it is in the US, though you do see it. Most Scots aren't aware of the implied insult though. :lol:
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 36,846
    Cookie said:

    Foxy said:

    Looks like Salmond-Sturgeon have blown it.

    Though I do wonder if the wind has changed on that. The discussions of misogyny and harassment of women taking place don't look favourable to Salmond. His behaviour was judged non criminal, but was certainly sleazy.

    I reckon Sturgeon's instincts, if not her methods, are in tune with the times.
    Who knows really what went on?
    But on the basis of evidence which fell far short of convincing, she was trying, for matters of political expediency, to get him convicted as a sex offender. This would have made his life seriously unpleasant for years and seen him reputationally ruined forever.
    Do you not find this a wee bit frightening?
    Surely most of us have - at one point or another - attempted to fit up a colleague by dint of a malicious prosecution.
  • Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 53,946
    Pulpstar said:

    Pulpstar said:

    I'm not 100% on precisely how tidal works but can't the lagoon be engineered so as to produce power broadly when it is needed ?

    Storage lagoons do exist and are a great idea, but if its just being used as storage its much less economical.

    If a way can be found to have economical storage lagoons that would produce power on demand instead of predictably then that would be absolutely perfect.
    Wait till you find out how much the long term costs of Hinkley C are.
    Hinckley C is an absurd white elephant that should have been cancelled years ago.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 64,758

    PB Tories are hilarious.

    I voted Green at the 2005GE, and was posting here before then, and since then I've often been in arguments with the PB Tories on Green issues.

    I supported wind turbines back then and the PB Tories said they couldn't work. Now we generate loads of electricity from wind turbines - and the PB Tories say it proves that technology will stop climate change and the Greens were wrong.

    I was at the climate camp protests against coal power stations in 2008 and the PB Tories said wind wouldn't work and we needed to burn coal. Since then coal use for electricity has plummeted to be replaced by wind. But according to the PB Tories this proves that the Greens were wrong.

    I predict that in the future we will be able to stop using coking coal to make steel. Maybe it will be the hydrogen method being trialled in Sweden. Maybe another technology. I'm certain that when it happens the PB Tories who opposed any measure to help it happen sooner will claim they supported it all along.

    The PB Tories are always wrong and the PB Tories never learn.

    Tories don't care about climate change or pollution, unless it is a means to winning elections.
    It seems to work. After all, they've won every election since 1979, even if part of it was under the New Labour brand.
  • kle4 said:

    PB Tories are hilarious.

    I voted Green at the 2005GE, and was posting here before then, and since then I've often been in arguments with the PB Tories on Green issues.

    I supported wind turbines back then and the PB Tories said they couldn't work. Now we generate loads of electricity from wind turbines - and the PB Tories say it proves that technology will stop climate change and the Greens were wrong.

    I was at the climate camp protests against coal power stations in 2008 and the PB Tories said wind wouldn't work and we needed to burn coal. Since then coal use for electricity has plummeted to be replaced by wind. But according to the PB Tories this proves that the Greens were wrong.

    I predict that in the future we will be able to stop using coking coal to make steel. Maybe it will be the hydrogen method being trialled in Sweden. Maybe another technology. I'm certain that when it happens the PB Tories who opposed any measure to help it happen sooner will claim they supported it all along.

    The PB Tories are always wrong and the PB Tories never learn.

    Tories don't care about climate change or pollution, unless it is a means to winning elections.
    It seems to work. After all, they've won every election since 1979, even if part of it was under the New Labour brand.
    Correct - just my point is that anyone voting Tory for climate reasons is clearly not as their first reason.

    See Johnson's about-turn on green issues
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 64,758

    FPT - what do they call "scotch tape" in Scotland? "Scots tape" or is it just "tape" like with whisky?

    AND what do the English call it (the tape, that is, not the whisky). Or the Welsh, Irish, Cornish, Manx, Jerseys, Guernseys, etc., etc.?

    BTW, what's the deal with butter scotch?

    Duct/Duck Tape?
  • Luckyguy1983Luckyguy1983 Posts: 14,708

    Just one more thing on this and then I'll shut up. How dare John Kerry come here and lecture us about not opening a coal mine? America's CO2 emissions are 16 metric tonnes per person, ours are 5.3. Should he not have come to us asking for lessons on how to perform this environmental miracle, rather than intervening in matters that don't concern him? What an utter, utter prick.

    Just wondering if you opposed Trump getting involved in UK affairs, or is it only when they do something you disagree with

    Just one more thing on this and then I'll shut up. How dare John Kerry come here and lecture us about not opening a coal mine? America's CO2 emissions are 16 metric tonnes per person, ours are 5.3. Should he not have come to us asking for lessons on how to perform this environmental miracle, rather than intervening in matters that don't concern him? What an utter, utter prick.

    Just wondering if you opposed Trump getting involved in UK affairs, or is it only when they do something you disagree with

    Just one more thing on this and then I'll shut up. How dare John Kerry come here and lecture us about not opening a coal mine? America's CO2 emissions are 16 metric tonnes per person, ours are 5.3. Should he not have come to us asking for lessons on how to perform this environmental miracle, rather than intervening in matters that don't concern him? What an utter, utter prick.

    Just wondering if you opposed Trump getting involved in UK affairs, or is it only when they do something you disagree with
    If you can point me to an incidence of him intervening, I'll happily opine.

    Oh, saying that, he did try to intervene to stop windfarms, but as a private citizen, not (afaik) coming here and throwing his Presidential weight around.
  • SeaShantyIrish2SeaShantyIrish2 Posts: 4,291
    kle4 said:

    FPT - what do they call "scotch tape" in Scotland? "Scots tape" or is it just "tape" like with whisky?

    AND what do the English call it (the tape, that is, not the whisky). Or the Welsh, Irish, Cornish, Manx, Jerseys, Guernseys, etc., etc.?

    BTW, what's the deal with butter scotch?

    Duct/Duck Tape?
    Totally different kind of tape. Unless Scots are WAY hardier than even I believe.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 36,846

    Pulpstar said:

    Pulpstar said:

    I'm not 100% on precisely how tidal works but can't the lagoon be engineered so as to produce power broadly when it is needed ?

    Storage lagoons do exist and are a great idea, but if its just being used as storage its much less economical.

    If a way can be found to have economical storage lagoons that would produce power on demand instead of predictably then that would be absolutely perfect.
    Wait till you find out how much the long term costs of Hinkley C are.
    Hinckley C is an absurd white elephant that should have been cancelled years ago.
    It's probably worse than that. If it follows the pattern of other nuclear plants, it will have masses of unscheduled downtime, meaning we'll still need to build backup natural gas to deal with times when it's offline.
  • SeaShantyIrish2SeaShantyIrish2 Posts: 4,291

    FPT - what do they call "scotch tape" in Scotland? "Scots tape" or is it just "tape" like with whisky?

    AND what do the English call it (the tape, that is, not the whisky). Or the Welsh, Irish, Cornish, Manx, Jerseys, Guernseys, etc., etc.?

    BTW, what's the deal with butter scotch?

    The brand isn't as ubiquitous here as it is in the US, though you do see it. Most Scots aren't aware of the implied insult though. :lol:
    Same goes for most Americans, but I get yer drift!
  • Just one more thing on this and then I'll shut up. How dare John Kerry come here and lecture us about not opening a coal mine? America's CO2 emissions are 16 metric tonnes per person, ours are 5.3. Should he not have come to us asking for lessons on how to perform this environmental miracle, rather than intervening in matters that don't concern him? What an utter, utter prick.

    Just wondering if you opposed Trump getting involved in UK affairs, or is it only when they do something you disagree with

    Just one more thing on this and then I'll shut up. How dare John Kerry come here and lecture us about not opening a coal mine? America's CO2 emissions are 16 metric tonnes per person, ours are 5.3. Should he not have come to us asking for lessons on how to perform this environmental miracle, rather than intervening in matters that don't concern him? What an utter, utter prick.

    Just wondering if you opposed Trump getting involved in UK affairs, or is it only when they do something you disagree with

    Just one more thing on this and then I'll shut up. How dare John Kerry come here and lecture us about not opening a coal mine? America's CO2 emissions are 16 metric tonnes per person, ours are 5.3. Should he not have come to us asking for lessons on how to perform this environmental miracle, rather than intervening in matters that don't concern him? What an utter, utter prick.

    Just wondering if you opposed Trump getting involved in UK affairs, or is it only when they do something you disagree with
    If you can point me to an incidence of him intervening, I'll happily opine.

    Oh, saying that, he did try to intervene to stop windfarms, but as a private citizen, not (afaik) coming here and throwing his Presidential weight around.
    Brexit...
  • FloaterFloater Posts: 13,280
    edited March 11
    Foxy said:

    Looks like Salmond-Sturgeon have blown it.

    Though I do wonder if the wind has changed on that. The discussions of misogyny and harassment of women taking place don't look favourable to Salmond. His behaviour was judged non criminal, but was certainly sleazy.

    I reckon Sturgeon's instincts, if not her methods, are in tune with the times.
    So we forgive the lies and the cover up and "lost" / missing records?

    The lack of separation of State and the government of the time is ok?

    Salmond might or might not be a toe rag but the actions of the SNP in this and other matters stinks.
  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 26,712
    Cookie said:

    Foxy said:

    Looks like Salmond-Sturgeon have blown it.

    Though I do wonder if the wind has changed on that. The discussions of misogyny and harassment of women taking place don't look favourable to Salmond. His behaviour was judged non criminal, but was certainly sleazy.

    I reckon Sturgeon's instincts, if not her methods, are in tune with the times.
    Who knows really what went on?
    But on the basis of evidence which fell far short of convincing, she was trying, for matters of political expediency, to get him convicted as a sex offender. This would have made his life seriously unpleasant for years and seen him reputationally ruined forever.
    Do you not find this a wee bit frightening?
    You don’t ‘know’ what really went on with Salmond and women employed by him as FM but you ‘know’ that Sturgeon tried to get him convicted as a sex offender for reasons of political expediency?

    Ok.
  • Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 53,946

    https://twitter.com/JolyonRubs/status/1370090901121478662

    Piers Morgan is a creep who was dumped for being a creep and is now pissed off and has a bee in his bonnet because he was dumped

    Really creepy.

    And apparently they only met the once in a bar? And she left the bar he was in that night and went to another party without him and he's had this "ghosted" vendetta against someone who met him once then moved on without him?

    Creepy. Creepy. Creepy.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 84,092

    HYUFD said:

    Foxy said:

    HYUFD said:
    Not an SNP majority, but with the Greens a majority for an Indyref.
    Oh absolutely not, there is already an SNP and Green majority at Holyrood, so the failure of the SNP to win a majority despite Brexit as they did before indyref 2014 in 2011 will confirm the UK government to be absolutely right when it refuses a legal indyref2 as it will.

    That will also accord with the views of Scots as a whole

    https://twitter.com/JohnRentoul/status/1369925156383117312?s=20
    That there's already a majority for a referendum is not an argument against a referendum.

    The only valid current argument against the current MSPs demanding one is they weren't explicit enough to get a mandate for it at the last election, the pledge on having one was vague and conditional.

    If the Greens and the SNP both put an unconditional pledge on having one now and get a majority on those pledges then that is fair enough.
    No it is not, the only reason Westminster even considered allowing indyref1 in 2014 was the outright SNP majority in 2011.

    If the SNP cannot even match that despite Brexit then clearly there is no such mandate and the UK government will correctly refuse to allow an indyref2 to take place.

    That also accords with the views of most Scots whatever SNP appeasers such as you may want

    https://twitter.com/JohnRentoul/status/1369925156383117312?s=20
  • Luckyguy1983Luckyguy1983 Posts: 14,708

    Just one more thing on this and then I'll shut up. How dare John Kerry come here and lecture us about not opening a coal mine? America's CO2 emissions are 16 metric tonnes per person, ours are 5.3. Should he not have come to us asking for lessons on how to perform this environmental miracle, rather than intervening in matters that don't concern him? What an utter, utter prick.

    Just wondering if you opposed Trump getting involved in UK affairs, or is it only when they do something you disagree with

    Just one more thing on this and then I'll shut up. How dare John Kerry come here and lecture us about not opening a coal mine? America's CO2 emissions are 16 metric tonnes per person, ours are 5.3. Should he not have come to us asking for lessons on how to perform this environmental miracle, rather than intervening in matters that don't concern him? What an utter, utter prick.

    Just wondering if you opposed Trump getting involved in UK affairs, or is it only when they do something you disagree with

    Just one more thing on this and then I'll shut up. How dare John Kerry come here and lecture us about not opening a coal mine? America's CO2 emissions are 16 metric tonnes per person, ours are 5.3. Should he not have come to us asking for lessons on how to perform this environmental miracle, rather than intervening in matters that don't concern him? What an utter, utter prick.

    Just wondering if you opposed Trump getting involved in UK affairs, or is it only when they do something you disagree with
    If you can point me to an incidence of him intervening, I'll happily opine.

    Oh, saying that, he did try to intervene to stop windfarms, but as a private citizen, not (afaik) coming here and throwing his Presidential weight around.
    Brexit...

    Just one more thing on this and then I'll shut up. How dare John Kerry come here and lecture us about not opening a coal mine? America's CO2 emissions are 16 metric tonnes per person, ours are 5.3. Should he not have come to us asking for lessons on how to perform this environmental miracle, rather than intervening in matters that don't concern him? What an utter, utter prick.

    Just wondering if you opposed Trump getting involved in UK affairs, or is it only when they do something you disagree with

    Just one more thing on this and then I'll shut up. How dare John Kerry come here and lecture us about not opening a coal mine? America's CO2 emissions are 16 metric tonnes per person, ours are 5.3. Should he not have come to us asking for lessons on how to perform this environmental miracle, rather than intervening in matters that don't concern him? What an utter, utter prick.

    Just wondering if you opposed Trump getting involved in UK affairs, or is it only when they do something you disagree with

    Just one more thing on this and then I'll shut up. How dare John Kerry come here and lecture us about not opening a coal mine? America's CO2 emissions are 16 metric tonnes per person, ours are 5.3. Should he not have come to us asking for lessons on how to perform this environmental miracle, rather than intervening in matters that don't concern him? What an utter, utter prick.

    Just wondering if you opposed Trump getting involved in UK affairs, or is it only when they do something you disagree with
    If you can point me to an incidence of him intervening, I'll happily opine.

    Oh, saying that, he did try to intervene to stop windfarms, but as a private citizen, not (afaik) coming here and throwing his Presidential weight around.
    Brexit...
    Trump wasn't President when we voted for Brexit. Obama was, he did intervene, and I was strongly critical. That's not what you were asking though. :lol:
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 30,538
    Lennon said:

    kle4 said:

    Scott_xP said:
    The government doesn't step in in such things unless it wants to take a decision contrary to the existing one, or to cause a big delay for some other reason. Either way, it's a signal of the government cocking about, no matter what they say about not making a decision for or against.
    They need to introduce the manufacture of wind turbines into the same area

    Double win
    No, they need to start the West Cumbria Tidal Lagoon.
    I think that ship has sailed.

    The future is wind + other but wind + tidal just don't work together.

    When the wind pressure is wrong and the tide is wrong what do you do to make electricity?
    A series of tidal lagoons and because of the different high tides around the coast, you always have power. They each generate power for 14 hours a day. Irrespective of the wind.

    They can recharge the nation's fleet of electric vehicles overnight.
    But we don't need something "irrespective" of the wind, because we have invested a fortune and are continuing to do so. Unless we're going to scrap the wind turbines, but we're not. We need something that generates with respect to wind - complementing wind by powering up more when wind goes down, then going down when wind goes up.

    So either the wind doesn't work but the tide does and we have enough, in which case what are we doing with the wind? Or the wind and tide both work and we have far too much in which case what are we doing?

    We need something to supplement the wind on-demand.
    Isn't the point of Tesla GigaBattery technology which they are currently building in Texas but will no doubt be coming (or something similar) in due course.
    Amongst other things, yes.
    Though the real game changer for utility scale electrical storage will quite possibly be ultra low cost flow batteries.

  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 36,846
    Great news from Israel: it appears that the asymptomatic infection rates are even lower than previously estimated.

    https://www.cnbc.com/2021/03/11/pfizer-covid-vaccine-blocks-94percent-of-asymptomatic-infections-and-97percent-of-symptomatic-cases-in-israeli-study.html
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 23,143
    Cookie said:

    Foxy said:

    Looks like Salmond-Sturgeon have blown it.

    Though I do wonder if the wind has changed on that. The discussions of misogyny and harassment of women taking place don't look favourable to Salmond. His behaviour was judged non criminal, but was certainly sleazy.

    I reckon Sturgeon's instincts, if not her methods, are in tune with the times.
    Who knows really what went on?
    But on the basis of evidence which fell far short of convincing, she was trying, for matters of political expediency, to get him convicted as a sex offender. This would have made his life seriously unpleasant for years and seen him reputationally ruined forever.
    Do you not find this a wee bit frightening?
    Was it political expediency? He was a political has-been selling his soul to Russia Today.

    I think she believed the women, for reasons we can only speculate.

    Rape prosecutions have a notoriously low conviction rate, and victims often aren't willing to testify because of the way they are pilloried. If there is evidence of collusion or even perjury, that needs to be prosecuted.
  • Just one more thing on this and then I'll shut up. How dare John Kerry come here and lecture us about not opening a coal mine? America's CO2 emissions are 16 metric tonnes per person, ours are 5.3. Should he not have come to us asking for lessons on how to perform this environmental miracle, rather than intervening in matters that don't concern him? What an utter, utter prick.

    Just wondering if you opposed Trump getting involved in UK affairs, or is it only when they do something you disagree with

    Just one more thing on this and then I'll shut up. How dare John Kerry come here and lecture us about not opening a coal mine? America's CO2 emissions are 16 metric tonnes per person, ours are 5.3. Should he not have come to us asking for lessons on how to perform this environmental miracle, rather than intervening in matters that don't concern him? What an utter, utter prick.

    Just wondering if you opposed Trump getting involved in UK affairs, or is it only when they do something you disagree with

    Just one more thing on this and then I'll shut up. How dare John Kerry come here and lecture us about not opening a coal mine? America's CO2 emissions are 16 metric tonnes per person, ours are 5.3. Should he not have come to us asking for lessons on how to perform this environmental miracle, rather than intervening in matters that don't concern him? What an utter, utter prick.

    Just wondering if you opposed Trump getting involved in UK affairs, or is it only when they do something you disagree with
    If you can point me to an incidence of him intervening, I'll happily opine.

    Oh, saying that, he did try to intervene to stop windfarms, but as a private citizen, not (afaik) coming here and throwing his Presidential weight around.
    Brexit...

    Just one more thing on this and then I'll shut up. How dare John Kerry come here and lecture us about not opening a coal mine? America's CO2 emissions are 16 metric tonnes per person, ours are 5.3. Should he not have come to us asking for lessons on how to perform this environmental miracle, rather than intervening in matters that don't concern him? What an utter, utter prick.

    Just wondering if you opposed Trump getting involved in UK affairs, or is it only when they do something you disagree with

    Just one more thing on this and then I'll shut up. How dare John Kerry come here and lecture us about not opening a coal mine? America's CO2 emissions are 16 metric tonnes per person, ours are 5.3. Should he not have come to us asking for lessons on how to perform this environmental miracle, rather than intervening in matters that don't concern him? What an utter, utter prick.

    Just wondering if you opposed Trump getting involved in UK affairs, or is it only when they do something you disagree with

    Just one more thing on this and then I'll shut up. How dare John Kerry come here and lecture us about not opening a coal mine? America's CO2 emissions are 16 metric tonnes per person, ours are 5.3. Should he not have come to us asking for lessons on how to perform this environmental miracle, rather than intervening in matters that don't concern him? What an utter, utter prick.

    Just wondering if you opposed Trump getting involved in UK affairs, or is it only when they do something you disagree with
    If you can point me to an incidence of him intervening, I'll happily opine.

    Oh, saying that, he did try to intervene to stop windfarms, but as a private citizen, not (afaik) coming here and throwing his Presidential weight around.
    Brexit...
    Trump wasn't President when we voted for Brexit. Obama was, he did intervene, and I was strongly critical. That's not what you were asking though. :lol:
    Trump during the Brexit process told us what we should do, i.e. sue the EU amongst other things.

    So yes, as I suspected it's only when the US does something you disagree with that you call outrage. I'm not surprised in the least.

    I praise Kerry for having the balls to stand up to our utterly morally bankrupt Government, who don't give a toss about climate change. Not really.

    Tories virtue signal on climate change, end of story
  • SeaShantyIrish2SeaShantyIrish2 Posts: 4,291

    https://twitter.com/JolyonRubs/status/1370090901121478662

    Piers Morgan is a creep who was dumped for being a creep and is now pissed off and has a bee in his bonnet because he was dumped

    Really creepy.

    And apparently they only met the once in a bar? And she left the bar he was in that night and went to another party without him and he's had this "ghosted" vendetta against someone who met him once then moved on without him?

    Creepy. Creepy. Creepy.
    Creepily contrived. OR contrivedly creepy. Take your pick.
  • Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 53,946
    rcs1000 said:

    Pulpstar said:

    Pulpstar said:

    I'm not 100% on precisely how tidal works but can't the lagoon be engineered so as to produce power broadly when it is needed ?

    Storage lagoons do exist and are a great idea, but if its just being used as storage its much less economical.

    If a way can be found to have economical storage lagoons that would produce power on demand instead of predictably then that would be absolutely perfect.
    Wait till you find out how much the long term costs of Hinkley C are.
    Hinckley C is an absurd white elephant that should have been cancelled years ago.
    It's probably worse than that. If it follows the pattern of other nuclear plants, it will have masses of unscheduled downtime, meaning we'll still need to build backup natural gas to deal with times when it's offline.
    Or we'll use the Storage we've build up as a solution to work with our massively cheaper wind power instead.

    Hinckley C is even more than tidal the wrong answer, to the wrong question.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 23,143
    edited March 11
    Floater said:

    Foxy said:

    Looks like Salmond-Sturgeon have blown it.

    Though I do wonder if the wind has changed on that. The discussions of misogyny and harassment of women taking place don't look favourable to Salmond. His behaviour was judged non criminal, but was certainly sleazy.

    I reckon Sturgeon's instincts, if not her methods, are in tune with the times.
    So we forgive the lies and the cover up and "lost" / missing records?

    The lack of separation of State and the government of the time is ok?

    Salmond might or might not be a toe rag but the actions of the SNP in this and other matters stinks.
    As I said "if not her methods".

    I do not approve of collusion or cover up, if those are shown to have happened.
  • Luckyguy1983Luckyguy1983 Posts: 14,708

    Just one more thing on this and then I'll shut up. How dare John Kerry come here and lecture us about not opening a coal mine? America's CO2 emissions are 16 metric tonnes per person, ours are 5.3. Should he not have come to us asking for lessons on how to perform this environmental miracle, rather than intervening in matters that don't concern him? What an utter, utter prick.

    Just wondering if you opposed Trump getting involved in UK affairs, or is it only when they do something you disagree with
    If you can point me to an incidence of him intervening, I'll happily opine.

    Oh, saying that, he did try to intervene to stop windfarms, but as a private citizen, not (afaik) coming here and throwing his Presidential weight around.

    Brexit...

    But to answer your question properly CHB, if the British Government had made a decision I disagreed with on a domestic matter, and a powerful foreign politician intervened in the matter and got the decision reversed, I would be against it. It would be hard to feel as angry about it of course, but in principle I would see it as unacceptable interference.
  • FairlieredFairliered Posts: 432

    kle4 said:

    FPT - what do they call "scotch tape" in Scotland? "Scots tape" or is it just "tape" like with whisky?

    AND what do the English call it (the tape, that is, not the whisky). Or the Welsh, Irish, Cornish, Manx, Jerseys, Guernseys, etc., etc.?

    BTW, what's the deal with butter scotch?

    Duct/Duck Tape?
    Totally different kind of tape. Unless Scots are WAY hardier than even I believe.
    The most common brand in the UK is Sellotape.
  • RobDRobD Posts: 53,279

    Just one more thing on this and then I'll shut up. How dare John Kerry come here and lecture us about not opening a coal mine? America's CO2 emissions are 16 metric tonnes per person, ours are 5.3. Should he not have come to us asking for lessons on how to perform this environmental miracle, rather than intervening in matters that don't concern him? What an utter, utter prick.

    Just wondering if you opposed Trump getting involved in UK affairs, or is it only when they do something you disagree with

    Just one more thing on this and then I'll shut up. How dare John Kerry come here and lecture us about not opening a coal mine? America's CO2 emissions are 16 metric tonnes per person, ours are 5.3. Should he not have come to us asking for lessons on how to perform this environmental miracle, rather than intervening in matters that don't concern him? What an utter, utter prick.

    Just wondering if you opposed Trump getting involved in UK affairs, or is it only when they do something you disagree with

    Just one more thing on this and then I'll shut up. How dare John Kerry come here and lecture us about not opening a coal mine? America's CO2 emissions are 16 metric tonnes per person, ours are 5.3. Should he not have come to us asking for lessons on how to perform this environmental miracle, rather than intervening in matters that don't concern him? What an utter, utter prick.

    Just wondering if you opposed Trump getting involved in UK affairs, or is it only when they do something you disagree with
    If you can point me to an incidence of him intervening, I'll happily opine.

    Oh, saying that, he did try to intervene to stop windfarms, but as a private citizen, not (afaik) coming here and throwing his Presidential weight around.
    Brexit...

    Just one more thing on this and then I'll shut up. How dare John Kerry come here and lecture us about not opening a coal mine? America's CO2 emissions are 16 metric tonnes per person, ours are 5.3. Should he not have come to us asking for lessons on how to perform this environmental miracle, rather than intervening in matters that don't concern him? What an utter, utter prick.

    Just wondering if you opposed Trump getting involved in UK affairs, or is it only when they do something you disagree with

    Just one more thing on this and then I'll shut up. How dare John Kerry come here and lecture us about not opening a coal mine? America's CO2 emissions are 16 metric tonnes per person, ours are 5.3. Should he not have come to us asking for lessons on how to perform this environmental miracle, rather than intervening in matters that don't concern him? What an utter, utter prick.

    Just wondering if you opposed Trump getting involved in UK affairs, or is it only when they do something you disagree with

    Just one more thing on this and then I'll shut up. How dare John Kerry come here and lecture us about not opening a coal mine? America's CO2 emissions are 16 metric tonnes per person, ours are 5.3. Should he not have come to us asking for lessons on how to perform this environmental miracle, rather than intervening in matters that don't concern him? What an utter, utter prick.

    Just wondering if you opposed Trump getting involved in UK affairs, or is it only when they do something you disagree with
    If you can point me to an incidence of him intervening, I'll happily opine.

    Oh, saying that, he did try to intervene to stop windfarms, but as a private citizen, not (afaik) coming here and throwing his Presidential weight around.
    Brexit...
    Trump wasn't President when we voted for Brexit. Obama was, he did intervene, and I was strongly critical. That's not what you were asking though. :lol:
    Trump during the Brexit process told us what we should do, i.e. sue the EU amongst other things.

    So yes, as I suspected it's only when the US does something you disagree with that you call outrage. I'm not surprised in the least.

    I praise Kerry for having the balls to stand up to our utterly morally bankrupt Government, who don't give a toss about climate change. Not really.

    Tories virtue signal on climate change, end of story
    Funny, for a government that doesn't care about climate change they've sure done a whole lot about it. Look at the sustained drop in emissions for one.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 84,092
    edited March 11

    Just one more thing on this and then I'll shut up. How dare John Kerry come here and lecture us about not opening a coal mine? America's CO2 emissions are 16 metric tonnes per person, ours are 5.3. Should he not have come to us asking for lessons on how to perform this environmental miracle, rather than intervening in matters that don't concern him? What an utter, utter prick.

    Just wondering if you opposed Trump getting involved in UK affairs, or is it only when they do something you disagree with

    Just one more thing on this and then I'll shut up. How dare John Kerry come here and lecture us about not opening a coal mine? America's CO2 emissions are 16 metric tonnes per person, ours are 5.3. Should he not have come to us asking for lessons on how to perform this environmental miracle, rather than intervening in matters that don't concern him? What an utter, utter prick.

    Just wondering if you opposed Trump getting involved in UK affairs, or is it only when they do something you disagree with

    Just one more thing on this and then I'll shut up. How dare John Kerry come here and lecture us about not opening a coal mine? America's CO2 emissions are 16 metric tonnes per person, ours are 5.3. Should he not have come to us asking for lessons on how to perform this environmental miracle, rather than intervening in matters that don't concern him? What an utter, utter prick.

    Just wondering if you opposed Trump getting involved in UK affairs, or is it only when they do something you disagree with
    If you can point me to an incidence of him intervening, I'll happily opine.

    Oh, saying that, he did try to intervene to stop windfarms, but as a private citizen, not (afaik) coming here and throwing his Presidential weight around.
    Brexit...

    Just one more thing on this and then I'll shut up. How dare John Kerry come here and lecture us about not opening a coal mine? America's CO2 emissions are 16 metric tonnes per person, ours are 5.3. Should he not have come to us asking for lessons on how to perform this environmental miracle, rather than intervening in matters that don't concern him? What an utter, utter prick.

    Just wondering if you opposed Trump getting involved in UK affairs, or is it only when they do something you disagree with

    Just one more thing on this and then I'll shut up. How dare John Kerry come here and lecture us about not opening a coal mine? America's CO2 emissions are 16 metric tonnes per person, ours are 5.3. Should he not have come to us asking for lessons on how to perform this environmental miracle, rather than intervening in matters that don't concern him? What an utter, utter prick.

    Just wondering if you opposed Trump getting involved in UK affairs, or is it only when they do something you disagree with

    Just one more thing on this and then I'll shut up. How dare John Kerry come here and lecture us about not opening a coal mine? America's CO2 emissions are 16 metric tonnes per person, ours are 5.3. Should he not have come to us asking for lessons on how to perform this environmental miracle, rather than intervening in matters that don't concern him? What an utter, utter prick.

    Just wondering if you opposed Trump getting involved in UK affairs, or is it only when they do something you disagree with
    If you can point me to an incidence of him intervening, I'll happily opine.

    Oh, saying that, he did try to intervene to stop windfarms, but as a private citizen, not (afaik) coming here and throwing his Presidential weight around.
    Brexit...
    Trump wasn't President when we voted for Brexit. Obama was, he did intervene, and I was strongly critical. That's not what you were asking though. :lol:
    Trump during the Brexit process told us what we should do, i.e. sue the EU amongst other things.

    So yes, as I suspected it's only when the US does something you disagree with that you call outrage. I'm not surprised in the least.

    I praise Kerry for having the balls to stand up to our utterly morally bankrupt Government, who don't give a toss about climate change. Not really.

    Tories virtue signal on climate change, end of story
    It is gross hypocrisy from Kerry and Biden.

    40% of UK energy is now provided by renewables but only 11% of US energy comes from renewables.

    Will Kerry and Biden be shutting coalmines in Pennsylvania? Certainly not
  • RobDRobD Posts: 53,279
    I see the Scottish government's daily briefing will go ahead during the election period, led by Sturgeon. I think the SNP would be (rightfully, for once) jumping up and down about this had it been Johnson leading daily briefings in the run up to a UK election.

    Actually, maybe they'd be silent given Johnson's numbers up there. :D
Sign In or Register to comment.