Stephen Bush of the Staggers's daily email has been commenting on the contrast re Mrs T and Mr J - an extract:
"If you want to actually tackle the climate crisis, you have to be willing to do big and radical things that upset people, and that do, in the short term at least, create some losers [...]
Our Prime Minister is very far from being willing to level with the public about that (to 'tell the truth', as Extinction Rebellion puts it) and further still from being willing to tell the public that this might involve some difficult or radical changes to how we live. Again, that is very far from how Margaret Thatcher approached any issue, including climate change.
But the biggest problem we face, and the one our politicians should be angriest about, isn't that Boris Johnson makes jokes about British mining. It's that it is frankly impossible to imagine him doing something as big or as significant in the fight to tackle the climate crisis today."
But its not true.
We don't need radical change in how we live. We need radical change in our technologies we use.
We need to switch from petrol cars to electric cars; we do not need to abandon driving. We need to switch from dirty electricity to clean electricity; we do not need to stop using electricity. We need to switch from jet oil to clean jet zero aircraft; we do not need to stop flying.
The hairshirt environmentalists are wrong. Science and technology are the solution, not economic vandalism. Something that both Thatcher and Johnson could both equally grasp.
He precedes that with
"All too often, Johnson's climate change strategy is essentially 'everyone should have their own electric car': a solution that is neither possible (there aren't enough rare earth materials in the world to replace every car currently in use in the UK..."
That assumes the requirement for rare earth materials can't massively be reduced, which it can.
The first thing to know about rare earths is that they aren't rare The second thing to know about rare earths is that they aren't earths The third thing to know about rare earths is that lithium isn't a rare earth. And it isn't rare either.
The "there aren't enough rare earths in the world to do X" is a bullshit argument, 999 out of 1000.
Rare earth availability can be a severe constraint - they might not be particularly rare, but they're often expensive and difficult to produce in large quantities, especially if you need to ramp up production significantly. Lithium (again, other than the cost of producing it) isn't a problem at all. And there are, of course, other possible chemistries using much cheaper materials.
The main issue with rare earths is actual in permanent magnets for *some* electric motors. Not the batteries....
The other issue is that there are plenty of rare earth deposits - and the number of mines is steadily ramping up.
Permanent magnet motors are, I think, in around 75% of current EV production, as they tend to be more efficient. As we're likely to increase EV production at by least on order of magnitude, producing that much at an acceptable cost isn't trivial. Same thing with lithium, which is why there are several efforts ongoing to greatly improve the economics of extraction methods.
Where there is a demand, a supply is quite likely to be found, as you say.
British coal was replaced by South African, Polish and Colombian coal.
Which was then replaced by Qatari and Russian gas.
Which is currently being replaced by Danish wind turbines and Chinese photovoltaics.
But there's now a fecking great big TK Maxx warehouse in Pontefract.
Let's hope that the 'green industrial revolution' starts to develop a home grown supply chain from the outset. All this investment in carbon capture, hydrogen, etc. in the next decade should mean lots of jobs. Hopefully British jobs for British workers, as someone once said.
Stephen Bush of the Staggers's daily email has been commenting on the contrast re Mrs T and Mr J - an extract:
"If you want to actually tackle the climate crisis, you have to be willing to do big and radical things that upset people, and that do, in the short term at least, create some losers [...]
Our Prime Minister is very far from being willing to level with the public about that (to 'tell the truth', as Extinction Rebellion puts it) and further still from being willing to tell the public that this might involve some difficult or radical changes to how we live. Again, that is very far from how Margaret Thatcher approached any issue, including climate change.
But the biggest problem we face, and the one our politicians should be angriest about, isn't that Boris Johnson makes jokes about British mining. It's that it is frankly impossible to imagine him doing something as big or as significant in the fight to tackle the climate crisis today."
But its not true.
We don't need radical change in how we live. We need radical change in our technologies we use.
We need to switch from petrol cars to electric cars; we do not need to abandon driving. We need to switch from dirty electricity to clean electricity; we do not need to stop using electricity. We need to switch from jet oil to clean jet zero aircraft; we do not need to stop flying.
The hairshirt environmentalists are wrong. Science and technology are the solution, not economic vandalism. Something that both Thatcher and Johnson could both equally grasp.
He precedes that with
"All too often, Johnson's climate change strategy is essentially 'everyone should have their own electric car': a solution that is neither possible (there aren't enough rare earth materials in the world to replace every car currently in use in the UK..."
That assumes the requirement for rare earth materials can't massively be reduced, which it can.
The first thing to know about rare earths is that they aren't rare The second thing to know about rare earths is that they aren't earths The third thing to know about rare earths is that lithium isn't a rare earth. And it isn't rare either.
The "there aren't enough rare earths in the world to do X" is a bullshit argument, 999 out of 1000.
Rare earth availability can be a severe constraint - they might not be particularly rare, but they're often expensive and difficult to produce in large quantities, especially if you need to ramp up production significantly. Lithium (again, other than the cost of producing it) isn't a problem at all. And there are, of course, other possible chemistries using much cheaper materials.
The main issue with rare earths is actual in permanent magnets for *some* electric motors. Not the batteries....
The other issue is that there are plenty of rare earth deposits - and the number of mines is steadily ramping up.
Permanent magnet motors are, I think, in around 75% of current EV production, as they tend to be more efficient. As we're likely to increase EV production at by least on order of magnitude, producing that much at an acceptable cost isn't trivial. Same thing with lithium, which is why there are several efforts ongoing to greatly improve the economics of extraction methods.
Where there is a demand, a supply is quite likely to be found, as you say.
More efficient for some things - hence the mix in the all wheel drive Teslas....
Love the modern pentathlon - gut punch for the competitors though.
Drama in the modern pentathlon - German Annika Schleu who had a massive lead going into the riding has a horse that is just refusing to jump and is out! Poor poor woman in absolute floods.
Stephen Bush of the Staggers's daily email has been commenting on the contrast re Mrs T and Mr J - an extract:
"If you want to actually tackle the climate crisis, you have to be willing to do big and radical things that upset people, and that do, in the short term at least, create some losers [...]
Our Prime Minister is very far from being willing to level with the public about that (to 'tell the truth', as Extinction Rebellion puts it) and further still from being willing to tell the public that this might involve some difficult or radical changes to how we live. Again, that is very far from how Margaret Thatcher approached any issue, including climate change.
But the biggest problem we face, and the one our politicians should be angriest about, isn't that Boris Johnson makes jokes about British mining. It's that it is frankly impossible to imagine him doing something as big or as significant in the fight to tackle the climate crisis today."
But its not true.
We don't need radical change in how we live. We need radical change in our technologies we use.
We need to switch from petrol cars to electric cars; we do not need to abandon driving. We need to switch from dirty electricity to clean electricity; we do not need to stop using electricity. We need to switch from jet oil to clean jet zero aircraft; we do not need to stop flying.
The hairshirt environmentalists are wrong. Science and technology are the solution, not economic vandalism. Something that both Thatcher and Johnson could both equally grasp.
He precedes that with
"All too often, Johnson's climate change strategy is essentially 'everyone should have their own electric car': a solution that is neither possible (there aren't enough rare earth materials in the world to replace every car currently in use in the UK..."
That assumes the requirement for rare earth materials can't massively be reduced, which it can.
The first thing to know about rare earths is that they aren't rare The second thing to know about rare earths is that they aren't earths The third thing to know about rare earths is that lithium isn't a rare earth. And it isn't rare either.
The "there aren't enough rare earths in the world to do X" is a bullshit argument, 999 out of 1000.
Rare earth availability can be a severe constraint - they might not be particularly rare, but they're often expensive and difficult to produce in large quantities, especially if you need to ramp up production significantly. Lithium (again, other than the cost of producing it) isn't a problem at all. And there are, of course, other possible chemistries using much cheaper materials.
The main issue with rare earths is actual in permanent magnets for *some* electric motors. Not the batteries....
The other issue is that there are plenty of rare earth deposits - and the number of mines is steadily ramping up.
Mr. kle4, that seems horrendously unfair on Schleu.
Randomly assigning horses just seems wrong.
But it's part of the whole point of the sport, I'd assume. Maybe giving them the day before hand to acquaint with the horse would be better?
It is based on grabbing hold of a random horse on the battlefield and having to ride it.
Yes indeed. I think given the potential risk to a rider giving them a little more time, still with a random horse, would be a fair compromise without jeopardising the spirit of the event though. I don't know how easy it is to assess a horse's temperament, but they presumably are't just putting in any old mad or stringy nag, so it's already not totally random.
Marshal Ney would have been great at the event, I believe he had four horses killed under him at Waterloo.
Stephen Bush of the Staggers's daily email has been commenting on the contrast re Mrs T and Mr J - an extract:
"If you want to actually tackle the climate crisis, you have to be willing to do big and radical things that upset people, and that do, in the short term at least, create some losers [...]
Our Prime Minister is very far from being willing to level with the public about that (to 'tell the truth', as Extinction Rebellion puts it) and further still from being willing to tell the public that this might involve some difficult or radical changes to how we live. Again, that is very far from how Margaret Thatcher approached any issue, including climate change.
But the biggest problem we face, and the one our politicians should be angriest about, isn't that Boris Johnson makes jokes about British mining. It's that it is frankly impossible to imagine him doing something as big or as significant in the fight to tackle the climate crisis today."
But its not true.
We don't need radical change in how we live. We need radical change in our technologies we use.
We need to switch from petrol cars to electric cars; we do not need to abandon driving. We need to switch from dirty electricity to clean electricity; we do not need to stop using electricity. We need to switch from jet oil to clean jet zero aircraft; we do not need to stop flying.
The hairshirt environmentalists are wrong. Science and technology are the solution, not economic vandalism. Something that both Thatcher and Johnson could both equally grasp.
Thatcher's government could have done more to promote tide/wave power instead of nuclear though.
The problem was getting a tide/wave system that could survive in the sea.
There have been prototypes of various systems since the 70s. Which generally ended up being destroyed by wave action.
The problem with that kind of system is the enormous capital cost and the limits on locations where it can work.
This is why I back the systems that are somewhat like wind turbines, but deployed completely underwater.
- By being out of the wave action, they can be lower cost and more reliable. - There are many more locations where they can be deployed. - They can be scaled from a single turbine to an array. So the initial cost can be low.
The main issue with them is how to access them for maintenance.
British coal was replaced by South African, Polish and Colombian coal.
Which was then replaced by Qatari and Russian gas.
Which is currently being replaced by Danish wind turbines and Chinese photovoltaics.
But there's now a fecking great big TK Maxx warehouse in Pontefract.
Let's hope that the 'green industrial revolution' starts to develop a home grown supply chain from the outset. All this investment in carbon capture, hydrogen, etc. in the next decade should mean lots of jobs. Hopefully British jobs for British workers, as someone once said.
You missed wood pellets from North America.
Biomass which we buy en masse.
Allegedly net contributors when shipping costs are factored in. Not all from N America, a lot from Eastern Europe (there was a shortgage 2 or 3 winters ago because it had rained so much there they couldn't get the machinery in to extract the timber).
British coal was replaced by South African, Polish and Colombian coal.
Which was then replaced by Qatari and Russian gas.
Which is currently being replaced by Danish wind turbines and Chinese photovoltaics.
But there's now a fecking great big TK Maxx warehouse in Pontefract.
Let's hope that the 'green industrial revolution' starts to develop a home grown supply chain from the outset. All this investment in carbon capture, hydrogen, etc. in the next decade should mean lots of jobs. Hopefully British jobs for British workers, as someone once said.
You missed wood pellets from North America.
Ah, yes. All that CO2 coming out of Drax - doesn't exist, honest.
The trees spent decades removing it from the atmosphere and it is being put back in one big belch, just when we need it least.
British coal was replaced by South African, Polish and Colombian coal.
Which was then replaced by Qatari and Russian gas.
Which is currently being replaced by Danish wind turbines and Chinese photovoltaics.
But there's now a fecking great big TK Maxx warehouse in Pontefract.
Let's hope that the 'green industrial revolution' starts to develop a home grown supply chain from the outset. All this investment in carbon capture, hydrogen, etc. in the next decade should mean lots of jobs. Hopefully British jobs for British workers, as someone once said.
You missed wood pellets from North America.
Ah, yes. All that CO2 coming out of Drax - doesn't exist, honest.
The trees spent decades removing it from the atmosphere and it is being put back in one big belch, just when we need it least.
That is the point though. It’s CO2 extracted from the atmosphere, not locked up in the earth for aeons.
But, of course, shipping it in bulk carriers is a rather polluting process that, er, uses CO2 locked up in the earth for aeons.
Love the modern pentathlon - gut punch for the competitors though.
Drama in the modern pentathlon - German Annika Schleu who had a massive lead going into the riding has a horse that is just refusing to jump and is out! Poor poor woman in absolute floods.
Mr. kle4, that seems horrendously unfair on Schleu.
Randomly assigning horses just seems wrong.
But it's part of the whole point of the sport, I'd assume. Maybe giving them the day before hand to acquaint with the horse would be better?
It is based on grabbing hold of a random horse on the battlefield and having to ride it.
Yes indeed. I think given the potential risk to a rider giving them a little more time, still with a random horse, would be a fair compromise without jeopardising the spirit of the event though. I don't know how easy it is to assess a horse's temperament, but they presumably are't just putting in any old mad or stringy nag, so it's already not totally random.
Marshal Ney would have been great at the event, I believe he had four horses killed under him at Waterloo.
Haven't seen the footage of the show jumping but google showed me one from 2008 Olympics where the rider is sitting like a sack of spuds on the horse.
Seems that it might be they skip practicing for the discipline (if my 20-second clip is anything to go by).
British coal was replaced by South African, Polish and Colombian coal.
Which was then replaced by Qatari and Russian gas.
Which is currently being replaced by Danish wind turbines and Chinese photovoltaics.
But there's now a fecking great big TK Maxx warehouse in Pontefract.
Let's hope that the 'green industrial revolution' starts to develop a home grown supply chain from the outset. All this investment in carbon capture, hydrogen, etc. in the next decade should mean lots of jobs. Hopefully British jobs for British workers, as someone once said.
You missed wood pellets from North America.
Ah, yes. All that CO2 coming out of Drax - doesn't exist, honest.
The trees spent decades removing it from the atmosphere and it is being put back in one big belch, just when we need it least.
That is the point though. It’s CO2 extracted from the atmosphere, not locked up in the earth for aeons.
But, of course, shipping it in bulk carriers is a rather polluting process that, er, uses CO2 locked up in the earth for aeons.
Though to be fair I do believe the CO2 emissions of bulk carriers is actually pretty miniscule in contrast to what they're carrying.
Hence the myth of "green miles" with food. Its more environmentally friendly for CO2 to ship out of season vegetables from New Zealand to the UK, than it is to grow them in the UK using heaters.
Similarly it can be more environmentally friendly to eat British meat overseas due to the way its been produced, rather than locally produced stuff that has been produced in a less green manner.
Mr. kle4, that seems horrendously unfair on Schleu.
Randomly assigning horses just seems wrong.
But it's part of the whole point of the sport, I'd assume. Maybe giving them the day before hand to acquaint with the horse would be better?
It is based on grabbing hold of a random horse on the battlefield and having to ride it.
Yes indeed. I think given the potential risk to a rider giving them a little more time, still with a random horse, would be a fair compromise without jeopardising the spirit of the event though. I don't know how easy it is to assess a horse's temperament, but they presumably are't just putting in any old mad or stringy nag, so it's already not totally random.
Marshal Ney would have been great at the event, I believe he had four horses killed under him at Waterloo.
There are at least a couple of competitors who'd happily have despatched their mounts...
Mr. kle4, that seems horrendously unfair on Schleu.
Randomly assigning horses just seems wrong.
But it's part of the whole point of the sport, I'd assume. Maybe giving them the day before hand to acquaint with the horse would be better?
It is based on grabbing hold of a random horse on the battlefield and having to ride it.
Yes indeed. I think given the potential risk to a rider giving them a little more time, still with a random horse, would be a fair compromise without jeopardising the spirit of the event though. I don't know how easy it is to assess a horse's temperament, but they presumably are't just putting in any old mad or stringy nag, so it's already not totally random.
Marshal Ney would have been great at the event, I believe he had four horses killed under him at Waterloo.
It's one of those "this has never happened to me before" things. There is of course a first time for everything, but 99/100 times the owner of that horse will know whether or not the horse is liable to do that, given a reasonably bold and competent rider. If you don't know the horse, the only way to find out it's liable to do it, is because it actually does it.
British coal was replaced by South African, Polish and Colombian coal.
Which was then replaced by Qatari and Russian gas.
Which is currently being replaced by Danish wind turbines and Chinese photovoltaics.
But there's now a fecking great big TK Maxx warehouse in Pontefract.
Let's hope that the 'green industrial revolution' starts to develop a home grown supply chain from the outset. All this investment in carbon capture, hydrogen, etc. in the next decade should mean lots of jobs. Hopefully British jobs for British workers, as someone once said.
You missed wood pellets from North America.
Ah, yes. All that CO2 coming out of Drax - doesn't exist, honest.
The trees spent decades removing it from the atmosphere and it is being put back in one big belch, just when we need it least.
That is the point though. It’s CO2 extracted from the atmosphere, not locked up in the earth for aeons.
But, of course, shipping it in bulk carriers is a rather polluting process that, er, uses CO2 locked up in the earth for aeons.
I also understood they were cutting down primary forests to feed it but 'replanting' afterwards so that's all fine and sustainable.
Terrible run out opportunity missed. Awful play by batting and fielding team. The batsman at completely the wrong end but the fielder throws at the stumps and misses instead of throwing to the keeper next to the stumps who could have easily taken the bails off.
Mr. kle4, that seems horrendously unfair on Schleu.
Randomly assigning horses just seems wrong.
But it's part of the whole point of the sport, I'd assume. Maybe giving them the day before hand to acquaint with the horse would be better?
It is based on grabbing hold of a random horse on the battlefield and having to ride it.
Yes indeed. I think given the potential risk to a rider giving them a little more time, still with a random horse, would be a fair compromise without jeopardising the spirit of the event though. I don't know how easy it is to assess a horse's temperament, but they presumably are't just putting in any old mad or stringy nag, so it's already not totally random.
Marshal Ney would have been great at the event, I believe he had four horses killed under him at Waterloo.
There are at least a couple of competitors who'd happily have despatched their mounts...
I thought Schleu was very rough with the horse to be honest. She'd have been thrown out of a proper equestrian event for treating it like that.
She should have given up earlier.
The event is a bit daft though. Replace horses with mountain bikes?
British coal was replaced by South African, Polish and Colombian coal.
Which was then replaced by Qatari and Russian gas.
Which is currently being replaced by Danish wind turbines and Chinese photovoltaics.
But there's now a fecking great big TK Maxx warehouse in Pontefract.
Let's hope that the 'green industrial revolution' starts to develop a home grown supply chain from the outset. All this investment in carbon capture, hydrogen, etc. in the next decade should mean lots of jobs. Hopefully British jobs for British workers, as someone once said.
You missed wood pellets from North America.
Ah, yes. All that CO2 coming out of Drax - doesn't exist, honest.
The trees spent decades removing it from the atmosphere and it is being put back in one big belch, just when we need it least.
That is the point though. It’s CO2 extracted from the atmosphere, not locked up in the earth for aeons.
But, of course, shipping it in bulk carriers is a rather polluting process that, er, uses CO2 locked up in the earth for aeons.
The rise in atmospheric CO2 over the past (say) 40 years has been partly mitigated by the slow take up of CO2 by the trees as they grew. Dumping all of that CO2 into the atmosphere undoes all of the good work. Planting replacement trees is great, but they will take another 40 years to remove that CO2 from the atmosphere again.
In the meantime, we have higher levels of atmospheric CO2 over the critical decades where the climate is at greatest risk of being completely screwed over.
That's why I think burning timber is a bad idea.
Short cycle crops are a different story. Straw, willow, bagasse, etc.
British coal was replaced by South African, Polish and Colombian coal.
Which was then replaced by Qatari and Russian gas.
Which is currently being replaced by Danish wind turbines and Chinese photovoltaics.
But there's now a fecking great big TK Maxx warehouse in Pontefract.
Let's hope that the 'green industrial revolution' starts to develop a home grown supply chain from the outset. All this investment in carbon capture, hydrogen, etc. in the next decade should mean lots of jobs. Hopefully British jobs for British workers, as someone once said.
You missed wood pellets from North America.
Ah, yes. All that CO2 coming out of Drax - doesn't exist, honest.
The trees spent decades removing it from the atmosphere and it is being put back in one big belch, just when we need it least.
That is the point though. It’s CO2 extracted from the atmosphere, not locked up in the earth for aeons.
But, of course, shipping it in bulk carriers is a rather polluting process that, er, uses CO2 locked up in the earth for aeons.
I also understood they were cutting down primary forests to feed it but 'replanting' afterwards so that's all fine and sustainable.
The atmosphere can't tell one sort of CO2 from another. It laughs at isotopes. Replanting is fine and dandy but even really really fast growing species are gonna take decades to gobble up an appreciable amount, and we don't seem to have many decades in hand.
British coal was replaced by South African, Polish and Colombian coal.
Which was then replaced by Qatari and Russian gas.
Which is currently being replaced by Danish wind turbines and Chinese photovoltaics.
But there's now a fecking great big TK Maxx warehouse in Pontefract.
Let's hope that the 'green industrial revolution' starts to develop a home grown supply chain from the outset. All this investment in carbon capture, hydrogen, etc. in the next decade should mean lots of jobs. Hopefully British jobs for British workers, as someone once said.
You missed wood pellets from North America.
Ah, yes. All that CO2 coming out of Drax - doesn't exist, honest.
The trees spent decades removing it from the atmosphere and it is being put back in one big belch, just when we need it least.
That is the point though. It’s CO2 extracted from the atmosphere, not locked up in the earth for aeons.
But, of course, shipping it in bulk carriers is a rather polluting process that, er, uses CO2 locked up in the earth for aeons.
I also understood they were cutting down primary forests to feed it but 'replanting' afterwards so that's all fine and sustainable.
About a decade ago I worked on a systematic review looking at life cycle analyses of wood as a electricity generation fuel. Numbers varied widely, but it was clearly much better than coal - which is what it replaces at Drax - but much worse than many other alternatives. There are other issues than CO2, too - water use, fertiliser use (if used, they're quite high emissions), land use (if new plantations) and habitat loss (if turning natural woodland into plantations).
British coal was replaced by South African, Polish and Colombian coal.
Which was then replaced by Qatari and Russian gas.
Which is currently being replaced by Danish wind turbines and Chinese photovoltaics.
But there's now a fecking great big TK Maxx warehouse in Pontefract.
Let's hope that the 'green industrial revolution' starts to develop a home grown supply chain from the outset. All this investment in carbon capture, hydrogen, etc. in the next decade should mean lots of jobs. Hopefully British jobs for British workers, as someone once said.
You missed wood pellets from North America.
Ah, yes. All that CO2 coming out of Drax - doesn't exist, honest.
The trees spent decades removing it from the atmosphere and it is being put back in one big belch, just when we need it least.
That is the point though. It’s CO2 extracted from the atmosphere, not locked up in the earth for aeons.
But, of course, shipping it in bulk carriers is a rather polluting process that, er, uses CO2 locked up in the earth for aeons.
I also understood they were cutting down primary forests to feed it but 'replanting' afterwards so that's all fine and sustainable.
The atmosphere can't tell one sort of CO2 from another. It laughs at isotopes. Replanting is fine and dandy but even really really fast growing species are gonna take decades to gobble up an appreciable amount, and we don't seem to have many decades in hand.
Sorry, that was meant to be a sarcastic dig. You cannot replace ancient woodland by planting new trees.
When it comes to extinctions, habitat loss is even more of a problem than climate change.
British coal was replaced by South African, Polish and Colombian coal.
Which was then replaced by Qatari and Russian gas.
Which is currently being replaced by Danish wind turbines and Chinese photovoltaics.
But there's now a fecking great big TK Maxx warehouse in Pontefract.
Let's hope that the 'green industrial revolution' starts to develop a home grown supply chain from the outset. All this investment in carbon capture, hydrogen, etc. in the next decade should mean lots of jobs. Hopefully British jobs for British workers, as someone once said.
You missed wood pellets from North America.
Ah, yes. All that CO2 coming out of Drax - doesn't exist, honest.
The trees spent decades removing it from the atmosphere and it is being put back in one big belch, just when we need it least.
That is the point though. It’s CO2 extracted from the atmosphere, not locked up in the earth for aeons.
But, of course, shipping it in bulk carriers is a rather polluting process that, er, uses CO2 locked up in the earth for aeons.
I also understood they were cutting down primary forests to feed it but 'replanting' afterwards so that's all fine and sustainable.
The atmosphere can't tell one sort of CO2 from another. It laughs at isotopes. Replanting is fine and dandy but even really really fast growing species are gonna take decades to gobble up an appreciable amount, and we don't seem to have many decades in hand.
Sorry, that was meant to be a sarcastic dig. You cannot replace ancient woodland by planting new trees.
When it comes to extinctions, habitat loss is even more of a problem than climate change.
Mr. kle4, that seems horrendously unfair on Schleu.
Randomly assigning horses just seems wrong.
But it's part of the whole point of the sport, I'd assume. Maybe giving them the day before hand to acquaint with the horse would be better?
It is based on grabbing hold of a random horse on the battlefield and having to ride it.
Yes indeed. I think given the potential risk to a rider giving them a little more time, still with a random horse, would be a fair compromise without jeopardising the spirit of the event though. I don't know how easy it is to assess a horse's temperament, but they presumably are't just putting in any old mad or stringy nag, so it's already not totally random.
Marshal Ney would have been great at the event, I believe he had four horses killed under him at Waterloo.
There are at least a couple of competitors who'd happily have despatched their mounts...
I thought Schleu was very rough with the horse to be honest. She'd have been thrown out of a proper equestrian event for treating it like that.
She should have given up earlier.
The event is a bit daft though. Replace horses with mountain bikes?
I think any event where so much is dependent upon a randomly chosen horse is inherently unfair. It has worked to our advantage today but I believe in 2012 we lost out because of something similar.
I think it would be quite a shake-up in modern pentathlon to get rid of the horse element. I imagine that most people who get into it probably start off on the horse and then add in the other events. I can't imagine there are many swimmers or runners who decide to transition to pentathlon!
Given that the event was meant to be about what was needed to do well in an army then one might well argue the horse out to be replaced by driving tanks over an obstacle course. Mountain biking would be an interesting alternative!
On coal and climate change, while production isn't irrelevant on a "we have to leave it in the ground" principle, consumption is more important. Taking some key dates from the statistics we can see that: | Year | Consumption (million tonnes) | Change from last year cited |
| 1956 | 221 | Peak |
| 1979 | 129 | -42% |
| 1990 | 108 | -16% |
| 1997 | 63 | -42% |
| 2010 | 51 | -19% |
| 2020 | 7 | -86% |
Conclusions. 1. Large decline in coal consumption before Thatcher. 2. Modest decline in consumption during Thatcher period - no evidence of Green credentials here. 3. Major's "dash for gas" makes a big difference. 4. Modest decline during the Labour years, possibly flattered by the great financial crash, as coal use rebounds after 2010 before strongly declining later. 5. The "green crap" pays dividends with another strong decline in coal consumption as offshore wind replaces it for electricity generation.
Mr. kle4, that seems horrendously unfair on Schleu.
Randomly assigning horses just seems wrong.
But it's part of the whole point of the sport, I'd assume. Maybe giving them the day before hand to acquaint with the horse would be better?
It is based on grabbing hold of a random horse on the battlefield and having to ride it.
Yes indeed. I think given the potential risk to a rider giving them a little more time, still with a random horse, would be a fair compromise without jeopardising the spirit of the event though. I don't know how easy it is to assess a horse's temperament, but they presumably are't just putting in any old mad or stringy nag, so it's already not totally random.
Marshal Ney would have been great at the event, I believe he had four horses killed under him at Waterloo.
There are at least a couple of competitors who'd happily have despatched their mounts...
I thought Schleu was very rough with the horse to be honest. She'd have been thrown out of a proper equestrian event for treating it like that.
She should have given up earlier.
The event is a bit daft though. Replace horses with mountain bikes?
Modern cavalry use either tanks or helicopters: either of those would be much more in the spirit of the original.
Mr. kle4, that seems horrendously unfair on Schleu.
Randomly assigning horses just seems wrong.
But it's part of the whole point of the sport, I'd assume. Maybe giving them the day before hand to acquaint with the horse would be better?
It is based on grabbing hold of a random horse on the battlefield and having to ride it.
Yes indeed. I think given the potential risk to a rider giving them a little more time, still with a random horse, would be a fair compromise without jeopardising the spirit of the event though. I don't know how easy it is to assess a horse's temperament, but they presumably are't just putting in any old mad or stringy nag, so it's already not totally random.
Marshal Ney would have been great at the event, I believe he had four horses killed under him at Waterloo.
There are at least a couple of competitors who'd happily have despatched their mounts...
I thought Schleu was very rough with the horse to be honest. She'd have been thrown out of a proper equestrian event for treating it like that.
She should have given up earlier.
The event is a bit daft though. Replace horses with mountain bikes?
I think any event where so much is dependent upon a randomly chosen horse is inherently unfair. It has worked to our advantage today but I believe in 2012 we lost out because of something similar.
I think it would be quite a shake-up in modern pentathlon to get rid of the horse element. I imagine that most people who get into it probably start off on the horse and then add in the other events. I can't imagine there are many swimmers or runners who decide to transition to pentathlon!
Given that the event was meant to be about what was needed to do well in an army then one might well argue the horse out to be replaced by driving tanks over an obstacle course. Mountain biking would be an interesting alternative!
We have had two silvers in my neck of the woods this millennium, both as you say pony clubbers who extended their interests from there.
btw I fence judge once a year at the relevant PC's pentathlon, so I feel very much part of the national collective effort. The OBE must surely be on its way.
Mr. kle4, that seems horrendously unfair on Schleu.
Randomly assigning horses just seems wrong.
But it's part of the whole point of the sport, I'd assume. Maybe giving them the day before hand to acquaint with the horse would be better?
It is based on grabbing hold of a random horse on the battlefield and having to ride it.
Yes indeed. I think given the potential risk to a rider giving them a little more time, still with a random horse, would be a fair compromise without jeopardising the spirit of the event though. I don't know how easy it is to assess a horse's temperament, but they presumably are't just putting in any old mad or stringy nag, so it's already not totally random.
Marshal Ney would have been great at the event, I believe he had four horses killed under him at Waterloo.
There are at least a couple of competitors who'd happily have despatched their mounts...
I thought Schleu was very rough with the horse to be honest. She'd have been thrown out of a proper equestrian event for treating it like that.
She should have given up earlier.
The event is a bit daft though. Replace horses with mountain bikes?
Modern cavalry use either tanks or helicopters: either of those would be much more in the spirit of the original.
Depends what you mean by modern. I was staggered to learn Hitler sent 400,000 horses into Poland in 1939, and that one of the intractable problems with Operation Sealion was the need to get as many or more, across the channel.
Edit though transport of course, rather than cavalry. Presumably.
Mr. kle4, that seems horrendously unfair on Schleu.
Randomly assigning horses just seems wrong.
But it's part of the whole point of the sport, I'd assume. Maybe giving them the day before hand to acquaint with the horse would be better?
It is based on grabbing hold of a random horse on the battlefield and having to ride it.
Yes indeed. I think given the potential risk to a rider giving them a little more time, still with a random horse, would be a fair compromise without jeopardising the spirit of the event though. I don't know how easy it is to assess a horse's temperament, but they presumably are't just putting in any old mad or stringy nag, so it's already not totally random.
Marshal Ney would have been great at the event, I believe he had four horses killed under him at Waterloo.
There are at least a couple of competitors who'd happily have despatched their mounts...
I thought Schleu was very rough with the horse to be honest. She'd have been thrown out of a proper equestrian event for treating it like that.
She should have given up earlier.
The event is a bit daft though. Replace horses with mountain bikes?
I think any event where so much is dependent upon a randomly chosen horse is inherently unfair. It has worked to our advantage today but I believe in 2012 we lost out because of something similar.
I think it would be quite a shake-up in modern pentathlon to get rid of the horse element. I imagine that most people who get into it probably start off on the horse and then add in the other events. I can't imagine there are many swimmers or runners who decide to transition to pentathlon!
Given that the event was meant to be about what was needed to do well in an army then one might well argue the horse out to be replaced by driving tanks over an obstacle course. Mountain biking would be an interesting alternative!
Get somebody to pilot a UAV. Not sure how athletic that is though.
Mr. kle4, that seems horrendously unfair on Schleu.
Randomly assigning horses just seems wrong.
But it's part of the whole point of the sport, I'd assume. Maybe giving them the day before hand to acquaint with the horse would be better?
It is based on grabbing hold of a random horse on the battlefield and having to ride it.
Yes indeed. I think given the potential risk to a rider giving them a little more time, still with a random horse, would be a fair compromise without jeopardising the spirit of the event though. I don't know how easy it is to assess a horse's temperament, but they presumably are't just putting in any old mad or stringy nag, so it's already not totally random.
Marshal Ney would have been great at the event, I believe he had four horses killed under him at Waterloo.
There are at least a couple of competitors who'd happily have despatched their mounts...
I thought Schleu was very rough with the horse to be honest. She'd have been thrown out of a proper equestrian event for treating it like that.
She should have given up earlier.
The event is a bit daft though. Replace horses with mountain bikes?
I think any event where so much is dependent upon a randomly chosen horse is inherently unfair. It has worked to our advantage today but I believe in 2012 we lost out because of something similar.
I think it would be quite a shake-up in modern pentathlon to get rid of the horse element. I imagine that most people who get into it probably start off on the horse and then add in the other events. I can't imagine there are many swimmers or runners who decide to transition to pentathlon!
Given that the event was meant to be about what was needed to do well in an army then one might well argue the horse out to be replaced by driving tanks over an obstacle course. Mountain biking would be an interesting alternative!
Get somebody to pilot a UAV. Not sure how athletic that is though.
Mr. kle4, that seems horrendously unfair on Schleu.
Randomly assigning horses just seems wrong.
But it's part of the whole point of the sport, I'd assume. Maybe giving them the day before hand to acquaint with the horse would be better?
It is based on grabbing hold of a random horse on the battlefield and having to ride it.
Yes indeed. I think given the potential risk to a rider giving them a little more time, still with a random horse, would be a fair compromise without jeopardising the spirit of the event though. I don't know how easy it is to assess a horse's temperament, but they presumably are't just putting in any old mad or stringy nag, so it's already not totally random.
Marshal Ney would have been great at the event, I believe he had four horses killed under him at Waterloo.
There are at least a couple of competitors who'd happily have despatched their mounts...
I thought Schleu was very rough with the horse to be honest. She'd have been thrown out of a proper equestrian event for treating it like that.
She should have given up earlier.
The event is a bit daft though. Replace horses with mountain bikes?
Modern cavalry use either tanks or helicopters: either of those would be much more in the spirit of the original.
Depends what you mean by modern. I was staggered to learn Hitler sent 400,000 horses into Poland in 1939, and that one of the intractable problems with Operation Sealion was the need to get as many or more, across the channel.
Edit though transport of course, rather than cavalry. Presumably.
The British Expeditionary Force in 1940 was the worlds first completely mechanised army - no horses, just trucks etc.
IIRC the Germans never managed to completely mechanise even their Panzer divisions....
Mr. kle4, that seems horrendously unfair on Schleu.
Randomly assigning horses just seems wrong.
But it's part of the whole point of the sport, I'd assume. Maybe giving them the day before hand to acquaint with the horse would be better?
It is based on grabbing hold of a random horse on the battlefield and having to ride it.
Yes indeed. I think given the potential risk to a rider giving them a little more time, still with a random horse, would be a fair compromise without jeopardising the spirit of the event though. I don't know how easy it is to assess a horse's temperament, but they presumably are't just putting in any old mad or stringy nag, so it's already not totally random.
Marshal Ney would have been great at the event, I believe he had four horses killed under him at Waterloo.
There are at least a couple of competitors who'd happily have despatched their mounts...
I thought Schleu was very rough with the horse to be honest. She'd have been thrown out of a proper equestrian event for treating it like that.
She should have given up earlier.
The event is a bit daft though. Replace horses with mountain bikes?
I think any event where so much is dependent upon a randomly chosen horse is inherently unfair. It has worked to our advantage today but I believe in 2012 we lost out because of something similar.
I think it would be quite a shake-up in modern pentathlon to get rid of the horse element. I imagine that most people who get into it probably start off on the horse and then add in the other events. I can't imagine there are many swimmers or runners who decide to transition to pentathlon!
Given that the event was meant to be about what was needed to do well in an army then one might well argue the horse out to be replaced by driving tanks over an obstacle course. Mountain biking would be an interesting alternative!
Get somebody to pilot a UAV. Not sure how athletic that is though.
Not all sports are about athleticism. Some are about precision. The biathlon has a shooting element. Archery is in Games too. Why not drone operations?
BTW, when will Darts get its own set of medals? 501, 301, Killer; individual, pairs, team; male, female, mixed. Think of how many more medals Team GB might pick up.
Mr. kle4, that seems horrendously unfair on Schleu.
Randomly assigning horses just seems wrong.
But it's part of the whole point of the sport, I'd assume. Maybe giving them the day before hand to acquaint with the horse would be better?
It is based on grabbing hold of a random horse on the battlefield and having to ride it.
Yes indeed. I think given the potential risk to a rider giving them a little more time, still with a random horse, would be a fair compromise without jeopardising the spirit of the event though. I don't know how easy it is to assess a horse's temperament, but they presumably are't just putting in any old mad or stringy nag, so it's already not totally random.
Marshal Ney would have been great at the event, I believe he had four horses killed under him at Waterloo.
There are at least a couple of competitors who'd happily have despatched their mounts...
I thought Schleu was very rough with the horse to be honest. She'd have been thrown out of a proper equestrian event for treating it like that.
She should have given up earlier.
The event is a bit daft though. Replace horses with mountain bikes?
Modern cavalry use either tanks or helicopters: either of those would be much more in the spirit of the original.
Depends what you mean by modern. I was staggered to learn Hitler sent 400,000 horses into Poland in 1939, and that one of the intractable problems with Operation Sealion was the need to get as many or more, across the channel.
Edit though transport of course, rather than cavalry. Presumably.
The British Expeditionary Force in 1940 was the worlds first completely mechanised army - no horses, just trucks etc.
IIRC the Germans never managed to completely mechanise even their Panzer divisions....
Well, they did manage I believe with some of them - for instance the 15th and the 21st in Africa (though one was technically a Light Division).
Love the modern pentathlon - gut punch for the competitors though.
Drama in the modern pentathlon - German Annika Schleu who had a massive lead going into the riding has a horse that is just refusing to jump and is out! Poor poor woman in absolute floods.
Mr. kle4, that seems horrendously unfair on Schleu.
Randomly assigning horses just seems wrong.
But it's part of the whole point of the sport, I'd assume. Maybe giving them the day before hand to acquaint with the horse would be better?
It is based on grabbing hold of a random horse on the battlefield and having to ride it.
Yes indeed. I think given the potential risk to a rider giving them a little more time, still with a random horse, would be a fair compromise without jeopardising the spirit of the event though. I don't know how easy it is to assess a horse's temperament, but they presumably are't just putting in any old mad or stringy nag, so it's already not totally random.
Marshal Ney would have been great at the event, I believe he had four horses killed under him at Waterloo.
There are at least a couple of competitors who'd happily have despatched their mounts...
I thought Schleu was very rough with the horse to be honest. She'd have been thrown out of a proper equestrian event for treating it like that.
She should have given up earlier.
The event is a bit daft though. Replace horses with mountain bikes?
I think any event where so much is dependent upon a randomly chosen horse is inherently unfair. It has worked to our advantage today but I believe in 2012 we lost out because of something similar.
I think it would be quite a shake-up in modern pentathlon to get rid of the horse element. I imagine that most people who get into it probably start off on the horse and then add in the other events. I can't imagine there are many swimmers or runners who decide to transition to pentathlon!
Given that the event was meant to be about what was needed to do well in an army then one might well argue the horse out to be replaced by driving tanks over an obstacle course. Mountain biking would be an interesting alternative!
Get somebody to pilot a UAV. Not sure how athletic that is though.
Not all sports are about athleticism. Some are about precision. The biathlon has a shooting element. Archery is in Games too. Why not drone operations?
BTW, when will Darts get its own set of medals? 501, 301, Killer; individual, pairs, team; male, female, mixed. Think of how many more medals Team GB might pick up.
What other events could be added to the Olympics that Team GB would be uniquely good at? What about that thing where crazy people roll down hills after a cheese? Personally I'd love to see Olympic dodgeball.
On coal and climate change, while production isn't irrelevant on a "we have to leave it in the ground" principle, consumption is more important. Taking some key dates from the statistics we can see that: | Year | Consumption (million tonnes) | Change from last year cited |
| 1956 | 221 | Peak |
| 1979 | 129 | -42% |
| 1990 | 108 | -16% |
| 1997 | 63 | -42% |
| 2010 | 51 | -19% |
| 2020 | 7 | -86% |
Conclusions. 1. Large decline in coal consumption before Thatcher. 2. Modest decline in consumption during Thatcher period - no evidence of Green credentials here. 3. Major's "dash for gas" makes a big difference. 4. Modest decline during the Labour years, possibly flattered by the great financial crash, as coal use rebounds after 2010 before strongly declining later. 5. The "green crap" pays dividends with another strong decline in coal consumption as offshore wind replaces it for electricity generation.
Edit: Formatting looks different to preview.
The small issue you are forgetting is ground work to change over. You don't build/shutdown power stations in an afternoon.
The "dash for gas" became policy under Thatcher. It was steadily implemented though her last years, Major and Blair.
Similarly, there was considerable investment and preparation before the massive surge in wind capacity actually started to be built and come on line.
The lesson from this is that Global Warming (and Acid Rain and the Ozone Hole) became policy issues under Thatcher. Turning the ship of state around took alot of effort. At the records office at Kew there are zillions of memos from mandarins decrying her "tree hugging" and deprecating it's effects on policy.
Once they became an official policy matter, and the solutions became targets, it again took time to get the action going. What we see today is the result of a continuous policy theme bridging multiple governments, since the late 80s.
Mr. kle4, that seems horrendously unfair on Schleu.
Randomly assigning horses just seems wrong.
But it's part of the whole point of the sport, I'd assume. Maybe giving them the day before hand to acquaint with the horse would be better?
It is based on grabbing hold of a random horse on the battlefield and having to ride it.
Yes indeed. I think given the potential risk to a rider giving them a little more time, still with a random horse, would be a fair compromise without jeopardising the spirit of the event though. I don't know how easy it is to assess a horse's temperament, but they presumably are't just putting in any old mad or stringy nag, so it's already not totally random.
Marshal Ney would have been great at the event, I believe he had four horses killed under him at Waterloo.
There are at least a couple of competitors who'd happily have despatched their mounts...
I thought Schleu was very rough with the horse to be honest. She'd have been thrown out of a proper equestrian event for treating it like that.
She should have given up earlier.
The event is a bit daft though. Replace horses with mountain bikes?
Modern cavalry use either tanks or helicopters: either of those would be much more in the spirit of the original.
Though the British Army has, or recently had, twice as many horses as tanks, and in addition see also thos:
Mr. kle4, that seems horrendously unfair on Schleu.
Randomly assigning horses just seems wrong.
But it's part of the whole point of the sport, I'd assume. Maybe giving them the day before hand to acquaint with the horse would be better?
It is based on grabbing hold of a random horse on the battlefield and having to ride it.
Yes indeed. I think given the potential risk to a rider giving them a little more time, still with a random horse, would be a fair compromise without jeopardising the spirit of the event though. I don't know how easy it is to assess a horse's temperament, but they presumably are't just putting in any old mad or stringy nag, so it's already not totally random.
Marshal Ney would have been great at the event, I believe he had four horses killed under him at Waterloo.
There are at least a couple of competitors who'd happily have despatched their mounts...
I thought Schleu was very rough with the horse to be honest. She'd have been thrown out of a proper equestrian event for treating it like that.
She should have given up earlier.
The event is a bit daft though. Replace horses with mountain bikes?
Modern cavalry use either tanks or helicopters: either of those would be much more in the spirit of the original.
Depends what you mean by modern. I was staggered to learn Hitler sent 400,000 horses into Poland in 1939, and that one of the intractable problems with Operation Sealion was the need to get as many or more, across the channel.
Edit though transport of course, rather than cavalry. Presumably.
The British Expeditionary Force in 1940 was the worlds first completely mechanised army - no horses, just trucks etc.
IIRC the Germans never managed to completely mechanise even their Panzer divisions....
When the Germans invaded Russia they took a six figure number of horses with them, few of which returned.
Mr. kle4, that seems horrendously unfair on Schleu.
Randomly assigning horses just seems wrong.
But it's part of the whole point of the sport, I'd assume. Maybe giving them the day before hand to acquaint with the horse would be better?
It is based on grabbing hold of a random horse on the battlefield and having to ride it.
Yes indeed. I think given the potential risk to a rider giving them a little more time, still with a random horse, would be a fair compromise without jeopardising the spirit of the event though. I don't know how easy it is to assess a horse's temperament, but they presumably are't just putting in any old mad or stringy nag, so it's already not totally random.
Marshal Ney would have been great at the event, I believe he had four horses killed under him at Waterloo.
There are at least a couple of competitors who'd happily have despatched their mounts...
I thought Schleu was very rough with the horse to be honest. She'd have been thrown out of a proper equestrian event for treating it like that.
She should have given up earlier.
The event is a bit daft though. Replace horses with mountain bikes?
Modern cavalry use either tanks or helicopters: either of those would be much more in the spirit of the original.
Depends what you mean by modern. I was staggered to learn Hitler sent 400,000 horses into Poland in 1939, and that one of the intractable problems with Operation Sealion was the need to get as many or more, across the channel.
Edit though transport of course, rather than cavalry. Presumably.
A German (Unmotorized) infantry division of 1940 had 5,000 horses in it, pulling artillery needed a lot of hoses, as did pulling supplies, but most of the recognisance units of infantry divisions where also on horse. this was considered boring at the time so little was recorded and therefor little footage to show in documentary films now.
Operation Sealion, the never attempted invasion of the UK mainland, plan was constantly evolving, but the most sited and last fully detailed plan, had 13 divisions, (2 airborne and 11 infantry) but had much of the equipment, including medium and heavy artillery striped from them to make them easer to ship and land, but was still going to bring a total of 15,000 houses with it in the first wave.
Mr. kle4, that seems horrendously unfair on Schleu.
Randomly assigning horses just seems wrong.
But it's part of the whole point of the sport, I'd assume. Maybe giving them the day before hand to acquaint with the horse would be better?
It is based on grabbing hold of a random horse on the battlefield and having to ride it.
Yes indeed. I think given the potential risk to a rider giving them a little more time, still with a random horse, would be a fair compromise without jeopardising the spirit of the event though. I don't know how easy it is to assess a horse's temperament, but they presumably are't just putting in any old mad or stringy nag, so it's already not totally random.
Marshal Ney would have been great at the event, I believe he had four horses killed under him at Waterloo.
There are at least a couple of competitors who'd happily have despatched their mounts...
I thought Schleu was very rough with the horse to be honest. She'd have been thrown out of a proper equestrian event for treating it like that.
She should have given up earlier.
The event is a bit daft though. Replace horses with mountain bikes?
Modern cavalry use either tanks or helicopters: either of those would be much more in the spirit of the original.
Depends what you mean by modern. I was staggered to learn Hitler sent 400,000 horses into Poland in 1939, and that one of the intractable problems with Operation Sealion was the need to get as many or more, across the channel.
Edit though transport of course, rather than cavalry. Presumably.
The British Expeditionary Force in 1940 was the worlds first completely mechanised army - no horses, just trucks etc.
IIRC the Germans never managed to completely mechanise even their Panzer divisions....
Well, they did manage I believe with some of them - for instance the 15th and the 21st in Africa (though one was technically a Light Division).
Yes IIRC some Panzer formations were completely mechanised but the bulk of the Army relied on horses, for artillery, etc, right through to the end of the war.
It’s never seen because for propaganda purposes the German newsreels never filmed it, so we only see the tanks advancing remorselessly in the surviving footage. So the myth of a mechanised Wehrmacht persists.
Mr. kle4, that seems horrendously unfair on Schleu.
Randomly assigning horses just seems wrong.
But it's part of the whole point of the sport, I'd assume. Maybe giving them the day before hand to acquaint with the horse would be better?
It is based on grabbing hold of a random horse on the battlefield and having to ride it.
Yes indeed. I think given the potential risk to a rider giving them a little more time, still with a random horse, would be a fair compromise without jeopardising the spirit of the event though. I don't know how easy it is to assess a horse's temperament, but they presumably are't just putting in any old mad or stringy nag, so it's already not totally random.
Marshal Ney would have been great at the event, I believe he had four horses killed under him at Waterloo.
There are at least a couple of competitors who'd happily have despatched their mounts...
I thought Schleu was very rough with the horse to be honest. She'd have been thrown out of a proper equestrian event for treating it like that.
She should have given up earlier.
The event is a bit daft though. Replace horses with mountain bikes?
I think any event where so much is dependent upon a randomly chosen horse is inherently unfair. It has worked to our advantage today but I believe in 2012 we lost out because of something similar.
I think it would be quite a shake-up in modern pentathlon to get rid of the horse element. I imagine that most people who get into it probably start off on the horse and then add in the other events. I can't imagine there are many swimmers or runners who decide to transition to pentathlon!
Given that the event was meant to be about what was needed to do well in an army then one might well argue the horse out to be replaced by driving tanks over an obstacle course. Mountain biking would be an interesting alternative!
Get somebody to pilot a UAV. Not sure how athletic that is though.
Not all sports are about athleticism. Some are about precision. The biathlon has a shooting element. Archery is in Games too. Why not drone operations?
BTW, when will Darts get its own set of medals? 501, 301, Killer; individual, pairs, team; male, female, mixed. Think of how many more medals Team GB might pick up.
What other events could be added to the Olympics that Team GB would be uniquely good at? What about that thing where crazy people roll down hills after a cheese? Personally I'd love to see Olympic dodgeball.
- Morris Dancing - Queuing - Tin bath racing - Snail racing - Bog snorkelling - Conkers
Mr. kle4, that seems horrendously unfair on Schleu.
Randomly assigning horses just seems wrong.
But it's part of the whole point of the sport, I'd assume. Maybe giving them the day before hand to acquaint with the horse would be better?
It is based on grabbing hold of a random horse on the battlefield and having to ride it.
Yes indeed. I think given the potential risk to a rider giving them a little more time, still with a random horse, would be a fair compromise without jeopardising the spirit of the event though. I don't know how easy it is to assess a horse's temperament, but they presumably are't just putting in any old mad or stringy nag, so it's already not totally random.
Marshal Ney would have been great at the event, I believe he had four horses killed under him at Waterloo.
There are at least a couple of competitors who'd happily have despatched their mounts...
I thought Schleu was very rough with the horse to be honest. She'd have been thrown out of a proper equestrian event for treating it like that.
She should have given up earlier.
The event is a bit daft though. Replace horses with mountain bikes?
I think any event where so much is dependent upon a randomly chosen horse is inherently unfair. It has worked to our advantage today but I believe in 2012 we lost out because of something similar.
I think it would be quite a shake-up in modern pentathlon to get rid of the horse element. I imagine that most people who get into it probably start off on the horse and then add in the other events. I can't imagine there are many swimmers or runners who decide to transition to pentathlon!
Given that the event was meant to be about what was needed to do well in an army then one might well argue the horse out to be replaced by driving tanks over an obstacle course. Mountain biking would be an interesting alternative!
Get somebody to pilot a UAV. Not sure how athletic that is though.
Not all sports are about athleticism. Some are about precision. The biathlon has a shooting element. Archery is in Games too. Why not drone operations?
BTW, when will Darts get its own set of medals? 501, 301, Killer; individual, pairs, team; male, female, mixed. Think of how many more medals Team GB might pick up.
What other events could be added to the Olympics that Team GB would be uniquely good at? What about that thing where crazy people roll down hills after a cheese? Personally I'd love to see Olympic dodgeball.
- Morris Dancing - Queuing - Tin bath racing - Snail racing - Bog snorkelling - Conkers
Mr. kle4, that seems horrendously unfair on Schleu.
Randomly assigning horses just seems wrong.
But it's part of the whole point of the sport, I'd assume. Maybe giving them the day before hand to acquaint with the horse would be better?
It is based on grabbing hold of a random horse on the battlefield and having to ride it.
Yes indeed. I think given the potential risk to a rider giving them a little more time, still with a random horse, would be a fair compromise without jeopardising the spirit of the event though. I don't know how easy it is to assess a horse's temperament, but they presumably are't just putting in any old mad or stringy nag, so it's already not totally random.
Marshal Ney would have been great at the event, I believe he had four horses killed under him at Waterloo.
There are at least a couple of competitors who'd happily have despatched their mounts...
I thought Schleu was very rough with the horse to be honest. She'd have been thrown out of a proper equestrian event for treating it like that.
She should have given up earlier.
The event is a bit daft though. Replace horses with mountain bikes?
Modern cavalry use either tanks or helicopters: either of those would be much more in the spirit of the original.
Depends what you mean by modern. I was staggered to learn Hitler sent 400,000 horses into Poland in 1939, and that one of the intractable problems with Operation Sealion was the need to get as many or more, across the channel.
Edit though transport of course, rather than cavalry. Presumably.
The British Expeditionary Force in 1940 was the worlds first completely mechanised army - no horses, just trucks etc.
IIRC the Germans never managed to completely mechanise even their Panzer divisions....
Well, they did manage I believe with some of them - for instance the 15th and the 21st in Africa (though one was technically a Light Division).
Yes IIRC some Panzer formations were completely mechanised but the bulk of the Army relied on horses, for artillery, etc, right through to the end of the war.
It’s never seen because for propaganda purposes the German newsreels never filmed it, so we only see the tanks advancing remorselessly in the surviving footage. So the myth of a mechanised Wehrmacht persists.
The Home Front in Germany also relied heavily on horses fro motive power due to the shortage of oil, although there were some vehicles converted to run on wood gas.
Mr. kle4, that seems horrendously unfair on Schleu.
Randomly assigning horses just seems wrong.
But it's part of the whole point of the sport, I'd assume. Maybe giving them the day before hand to acquaint with the horse would be better?
It is based on grabbing hold of a random horse on the battlefield and having to ride it.
Yes indeed. I think given the potential risk to a rider giving them a little more time, still with a random horse, would be a fair compromise without jeopardising the spirit of the event though. I don't know how easy it is to assess a horse's temperament, but they presumably are't just putting in any old mad or stringy nag, so it's already not totally random.
Marshal Ney would have been great at the event, I believe he had four horses killed under him at Waterloo.
There are at least a couple of competitors who'd happily have despatched their mounts...
I thought Schleu was very rough with the horse to be honest. She'd have been thrown out of a proper equestrian event for treating it like that.
She should have given up earlier.
The event is a bit daft though. Replace horses with mountain bikes?
Modern cavalry use either tanks or helicopters: either of those would be much more in the spirit of the original.
Depends what you mean by modern. I was staggered to learn Hitler sent 400,000 horses into Poland in 1939, and that one of the intractable problems with Operation Sealion was the need to get as many or more, across the channel.
Edit though transport of course, rather than cavalry. Presumably.
The British Expeditionary Force in 1940 was the worlds first completely mechanised army - no horses, just trucks etc.
IIRC the Germans never managed to completely mechanise even their Panzer divisions....
Well, they did manage I believe with some of them - for instance the 15th and the 21st in Africa (though one was technically a Light Division).
Yes IIRC some Panzer formations were completely mechanised but the bulk of the Army relied on horses, for artillery, etc, right through to the end of the war.
It’s never seen because for propaganda purposes the German newsreels never filmed it, so we only see the tanks advancing remorselessly in the surviving footage. So the myth of a mechanised Wehrmacht persists.
The Home Front in Germany also relied heavily on horses fro motive power due to the shortage of oil, although there were some vehicles converted to run on wood gas.
Indeed, though coal gas was an alternative - some photos of gassed up training Panzers here
Mr. kle4, that seems horrendously unfair on Schleu.
Randomly assigning horses just seems wrong.
But it's part of the whole point of the sport, I'd assume. Maybe giving them the day before hand to acquaint with the horse would be better?
It is based on grabbing hold of a random horse on the battlefield and having to ride it.
Yes indeed. I think given the potential risk to a rider giving them a little more time, still with a random horse, would be a fair compromise without jeopardising the spirit of the event though. I don't know how easy it is to assess a horse's temperament, but they presumably are't just putting in any old mad or stringy nag, so it's already not totally random.
Marshal Ney would have been great at the event, I believe he had four horses killed under him at Waterloo.
There are at least a couple of competitors who'd happily have despatched their mounts...
I thought Schleu was very rough with the horse to be honest. She'd have been thrown out of a proper equestrian event for treating it like that.
She should have given up earlier.
The event is a bit daft though. Replace horses with mountain bikes?
I think any event where so much is dependent upon a randomly chosen horse is inherently unfair. It has worked to our advantage today but I believe in 2012 we lost out because of something similar.
I think it would be quite a shake-up in modern pentathlon to get rid of the horse element. I imagine that most people who get into it probably start off on the horse and then add in the other events. I can't imagine there are many swimmers or runners who decide to transition to pentathlon!
Given that the event was meant to be about what was needed to do well in an army then one might well argue the horse out to be replaced by driving tanks over an obstacle course. Mountain biking would be an interesting alternative!
Get somebody to pilot a UAV. Not sure how athletic that is though.
Not all sports are about athleticism. Some are about precision. The biathlon has a shooting element. Archery is in Games too. Why not drone operations?
BTW, when will Darts get its own set of medals? 501, 301, Killer; individual, pairs, team; male, female, mixed. Think of how many more medals Team GB might pick up.
What other events could be added to the Olympics that Team GB would be uniquely good at? What about that thing where crazy people roll down hills after a cheese? Personally I'd love to see Olympic dodgeball.
- Morris Dancing - Queuing - Tin bath racing - Snail racing - Bog snorkelling - Conkers
I seem to remember a 2 or 3 storey brick stable for railway horses near one of the big London termini - it had ramps betyween levels, like a steampunk multistorey car park.
Yes IIRC some Panzer formations were completely mechanised but the bulk of the Army relied on horses, for artillery, etc, right through to the end of the war.
It’s never seen because for propaganda purposes the German newsreels never filmed it, so we only see the tanks advancing remorselessly in the surviving footage. So the myth of a mechanised Wehrmacht persists.
There was an article I read many years ago the propaganda during WWII on all sides.
Papers unearthed by the BBC reveal that British and American commanders ensured that the liberation of Paris on 25 August 1944 was seen as a "whites only" victory.
Mr. kle4, that seems horrendously unfair on Schleu.
Randomly assigning horses just seems wrong.
But it's part of the whole point of the sport, I'd assume. Maybe giving them the day before hand to acquaint with the horse would be better?
It is based on grabbing hold of a random horse on the battlefield and having to ride it.
Yes indeed. I think given the potential risk to a rider giving them a little more time, still with a random horse, would be a fair compromise without jeopardising the spirit of the event though. I don't know how easy it is to assess a horse's temperament, but they presumably are't just putting in any old mad or stringy nag, so it's already not totally random.
Marshal Ney would have been great at the event, I believe he had four horses killed under him at Waterloo.
There are at least a couple of competitors who'd happily have despatched their mounts...
I thought Schleu was very rough with the horse to be honest. She'd have been thrown out of a proper equestrian event for treating it like that.
She should have given up earlier.
The event is a bit daft though. Replace horses with mountain bikes?
I think any event where so much is dependent upon a randomly chosen horse is inherently unfair. It has worked to our advantage today but I believe in 2012 we lost out because of something similar.
I think it would be quite a shake-up in modern pentathlon to get rid of the horse element. I imagine that most people who get into it probably start off on the horse and then add in the other events. I can't imagine there are many swimmers or runners who decide to transition to pentathlon!
Given that the event was meant to be about what was needed to do well in an army then one might well argue the horse out to be replaced by driving tanks over an obstacle course. Mountain biking would be an interesting alternative!
Get somebody to pilot a UAV. Not sure how athletic that is though.
Not all sports are about athleticism. Some are about precision. The biathlon has a shooting element. Archery is in Games too. Why not drone operations?
BTW, when will Darts get its own set of medals? 501, 301, Killer; individual, pairs, team; male, female, mixed. Think of how many more medals Team GB might pick up.
What other events could be added to the Olympics that Team GB would be uniquely good at? What about that thing where crazy people roll down hills after a cheese? Personally I'd love to see Olympic dodgeball.
- Morris Dancing - Queuing - Tin bath racing - Snail racing - Bog snorkelling - Conkers
Mr. kle4, that seems horrendously unfair on Schleu.
Randomly assigning horses just seems wrong.
But it's part of the whole point of the sport, I'd assume. Maybe giving them the day before hand to acquaint with the horse would be better?
It is based on grabbing hold of a random horse on the battlefield and having to ride it.
Yes indeed. I think given the potential risk to a rider giving them a little more time, still with a random horse, would be a fair compromise without jeopardising the spirit of the event though. I don't know how easy it is to assess a horse's temperament, but they presumably are't just putting in any old mad or stringy nag, so it's already not totally random.
Marshal Ney would have been great at the event, I believe he had four horses killed under him at Waterloo.
There are at least a couple of competitors who'd happily have despatched their mounts...
I thought Schleu was very rough with the horse to be honest. She'd have been thrown out of a proper equestrian event for treating it like that.
She should have given up earlier.
The event is a bit daft though. Replace horses with mountain bikes?
Modern cavalry use either tanks or helicopters: either of those would be much more in the spirit of the original.
I think once the first tank has gone over the jumps it might be just a little easier for the rest. I wonder what the penalty is for smashing it to bits.
Mr. kle4, that seems horrendously unfair on Schleu.
Randomly assigning horses just seems wrong.
But it's part of the whole point of the sport, I'd assume. Maybe giving them the day before hand to acquaint with the horse would be better?
It is based on grabbing hold of a random horse on the battlefield and having to ride it.
Yes indeed. I think given the potential risk to a rider giving them a little more time, still with a random horse, would be a fair compromise without jeopardising the spirit of the event though. I don't know how easy it is to assess a horse's temperament, but they presumably are't just putting in any old mad or stringy nag, so it's already not totally random.
Marshal Ney would have been great at the event, I believe he had four horses killed under him at Waterloo.
There are at least a couple of competitors who'd happily have despatched their mounts...
I thought Schleu was very rough with the horse to be honest. She'd have been thrown out of a proper equestrian event for treating it like that.
She should have given up earlier.
The event is a bit daft though. Replace horses with mountain bikes?
I think any event where so much is dependent upon a randomly chosen horse is inherently unfair. It has worked to our advantage today but I believe in 2012 we lost out because of something similar.
I think it would be quite a shake-up in modern pentathlon to get rid of the horse element. I imagine that most people who get into it probably start off on the horse and then add in the other events. I can't imagine there are many swimmers or runners who decide to transition to pentathlon!
Given that the event was meant to be about what was needed to do well in an army then one might well argue the horse out to be replaced by driving tanks over an obstacle course. Mountain biking would be an interesting alternative!
Get somebody to pilot a UAV. Not sure how athletic that is though.
Not all sports are about athleticism. Some are about precision. The biathlon has a shooting element. Archery is in Games too. Why not drone operations?
BTW, when will Darts get its own set of medals? 501, 301, Killer; individual, pairs, team; male, female, mixed. Think of how many more medals Team GB might pick up.
What other events could be added to the Olympics that Team GB would be uniquely good at? What about that thing where crazy people roll down hills after a cheese? Personally I'd love to see Olympic dodgeball.
- Morris Dancing - Queuing - Tin bath racing - Snail racing - Bog snorkelling - Conkers
Yes IIRC some Panzer formations were completely mechanised but the bulk of the Army relied on horses, for artillery, etc, right through to the end of the war.
It’s never seen because for propaganda purposes the German newsreels never filmed it, so we only see the tanks advancing remorselessly in the surviving footage. So the myth of a mechanised Wehrmacht persists.
There was an article I read many years ago the propaganda during WWII on all sides.
Papers unearthed by the BBC reveal that British and American commanders ensured that the liberation of Paris on 25 August 1944 was seen as a "whites only" victory.
Pushing it a bit to blame the British. The French wanted French and the Americans wanted White. From the linked article, we did not appear to feel very strongly about who got to march into Paris once all the fighting had been done.
Mr. kle4, that seems horrendously unfair on Schleu.
Randomly assigning horses just seems wrong.
But it's part of the whole point of the sport, I'd assume. Maybe giving them the day before hand to acquaint with the horse would be better?
It is based on grabbing hold of a random horse on the battlefield and having to ride it.
Yes indeed. I think given the potential risk to a rider giving them a little more time, still with a random horse, would be a fair compromise without jeopardising the spirit of the event though. I don't know how easy it is to assess a horse's temperament, but they presumably are't just putting in any old mad or stringy nag, so it's already not totally random.
Marshal Ney would have been great at the event, I believe he had four horses killed under him at Waterloo.
There are at least a couple of competitors who'd happily have despatched their mounts...
I thought Schleu was very rough with the horse to be honest. She'd have been thrown out of a proper equestrian event for treating it like that.
She should have given up earlier.
The event is a bit daft though. Replace horses with mountain bikes?
Modern cavalry use either tanks or helicopters: either of those would be much more in the spirit of the original.
I think once the first tank has gone over the jumps it might be just a little easier for the rest. I wonder what the penalty is for smashing it to bits.
Mr. kle4, that seems horrendously unfair on Schleu.
Randomly assigning horses just seems wrong.
But it's part of the whole point of the sport, I'd assume. Maybe giving them the day before hand to acquaint with the horse would be better?
It is based on grabbing hold of a random horse on the battlefield and having to ride it.
Yes indeed. I think given the potential risk to a rider giving them a little more time, still with a random horse, would be a fair compromise without jeopardising the spirit of the event though. I don't know how easy it is to assess a horse's temperament, but they presumably are't just putting in any old mad or stringy nag, so it's already not totally random.
Marshal Ney would have been great at the event, I believe he had four horses killed under him at Waterloo.
There are at least a couple of competitors who'd happily have despatched their mounts...
I thought Schleu was very rough with the horse to be honest. She'd have been thrown out of a proper equestrian event for treating it like that.
She should have given up earlier.
The event is a bit daft though. Replace horses with mountain bikes?
Modern cavalry use either tanks or helicopters: either of those would be much more in the spirit of the original.
I think once the first tank has gone over the jumps it might be just a little easier for the rest. I wonder what the penalty is for smashing it to bits.
Helicopter jumping might be a bit easy too, though I think I remember a race that Top Gear did between a helicopter and a car round the track.
On the island we have suffered 1938 rolling stock until this year, when we are now being treated to an upgrade of retired 1970-80s Metropolitan Line carriages…which has resulted in our railway being closed for all of this year so far
Mr. kle4, that seems horrendously unfair on Schleu.
Randomly assigning horses just seems wrong.
But it's part of the whole point of the sport, I'd assume. Maybe giving them the day before hand to acquaint with the horse would be better?
It is based on grabbing hold of a random horse on the battlefield and having to ride it.
Yes indeed. I think given the potential risk to a rider giving them a little more time, still with a random horse, would be a fair compromise without jeopardising the spirit of the event though. I don't know how easy it is to assess a horse's temperament, but they presumably are't just putting in any old mad or stringy nag, so it's already not totally random.
Marshal Ney would have been great at the event, I believe he had four horses killed under him at Waterloo.
There are at least a couple of competitors who'd happily have despatched their mounts...
I thought Schleu was very rough with the horse to be honest. She'd have been thrown out of a proper equestrian event for treating it like that.
She should have given up earlier.
The event is a bit daft though. Replace horses with mountain bikes?
Modern cavalry use either tanks or helicopters: either of those would be much more in the spirit of the original.
I think once the first tank has gone over the jumps it might be just a little easier for the rest. I wonder what the penalty is for smashing it to bits.
Stephen Bush of the Staggers's daily email has been commenting on the contrast re Mrs T and Mr J - an extract:
"If you want to actually tackle the climate crisis, you have to be willing to do big and radical things that upset people, and that do, in the short term at least, create some losers [...]
Our Prime Minister is very far from being willing to level with the public about that (to 'tell the truth', as Extinction Rebellion puts it) and further still from being willing to tell the public that this might involve some difficult or radical changes to how we live. Again, that is very far from how Margaret Thatcher approached any issue, including climate change.
But the biggest problem we face, and the one our politicians should be angriest about, isn't that Boris Johnson makes jokes about British mining. It's that it is frankly impossible to imagine him doing something as big or as significant in the fight to tackle the climate crisis today."
But its not true.
We don't need radical change in how we live. We need radical change in our technologies we use.
We need to switch from petrol cars to electric cars; we do not need to abandon driving. We need to switch from dirty electricity to clean electricity; we do not need to stop using electricity. We need to switch from jet oil to clean jet zero aircraft; we do not need to stop flying.
The hairshirt environmentalists are wrong. Science and technology are the solution, not economic vandalism. Something that both Thatcher and Johnson could both equally grasp.
He precedes that with
"All too often, Johnson's climate change strategy is essentially 'everyone should have their own electric car': a solution that is neither possible (there aren't enough rare earth materials in the world to replace every car currently in use in the UK) nor adequate (cars don't just produce emissions when they are driven, but also when they are constructed)."
What a ridiculous statement: it would be trivial for the UK (if it were only the UK) to replace all vehicles with electric ones by 2030. In a normal year, 2.3-2.4m cars are sold in the UK, compared to a global electric car market of around 3.5 million units (excluding PHEV) this year.
Not only that, but the number of EVs sold is increasing by 40+% per year. Now, sure, that might slow. But the share of the market that is EV/PHEV is going in exactly one direction. And by the early 2030s - irrespective of government action - the majority of cars sold are going to be EV/PHEV.
I saw this a couple of days ago. Makes some excellent points but is insufferably smug IMHO
Pandemic comedy usually is.
The fact is, that governments everywhere have had to deal with a situation completely unprecedented in modern times, and while it’s easy to throw barbs those actually in charge are genuinely doing their best.
Stephen Bush of the Staggers's daily email has been commenting on the contrast re Mrs T and Mr J - an extract:
"If you want to actually tackle the climate crisis, you have to be willing to do big and radical things that upset people, and that do, in the short term at least, create some losers [...]
Our Prime Minister is very far from being willing to level with the public about that (to 'tell the truth', as Extinction Rebellion puts it) and further still from being willing to tell the public that this might involve some difficult or radical changes to how we live. Again, that is very far from how Margaret Thatcher approached any issue, including climate change.
But the biggest problem we face, and the one our politicians should be angriest about, isn't that Boris Johnson makes jokes about British mining. It's that it is frankly impossible to imagine him doing something as big or as significant in the fight to tackle the climate crisis today."
But its not true.
We don't need radical change in how we live. We need radical change in our technologies we use.
We need to switch from petrol cars to electric cars; we do not need to abandon driving. We need to switch from dirty electricity to clean electricity; we do not need to stop using electricity. We need to switch from jet oil to clean jet zero aircraft; we do not need to stop flying.
The hairshirt environmentalists are wrong. Science and technology are the solution, not economic vandalism. Something that both Thatcher and Johnson could both equally grasp.
He precedes that with
"All too often, Johnson's climate change strategy is essentially 'everyone should have their own electric car': a solution that is neither possible (there aren't enough rare earth materials in the world to replace every car currently in use in the UK) nor adequate (cars don't just produce emissions when they are driven, but also when they are constructed)."
What a ridiculous statement: it would be trivial for the UK (if it were only the UK) to replace all vehicles with electric ones by 2030. In a normal year, 2.3-2.4m cars are sold in the UK, compared to a global electric car market of around 3.5 million units (excluding PHEV) this year.
Not only that, but the number of EVs sold is increasing by 40+% per year. Now, sure, that might slow. But the share of the market that is EV/PHEV is going in exactly one direction. And by the early 2030s - irrespective of government action - the majority of cars sold are going to be EV/PHEV.
You are forgetting that two groups don't want this - big oil (and their fan club) and the watermelon Greens
Stephen Bush of the Staggers's daily email has been commenting on the contrast re Mrs T and Mr J - an extract:
"If you want to actually tackle the climate crisis, you have to be willing to do big and radical things that upset people, and that do, in the short term at least, create some losers [...]
Our Prime Minister is very far from being willing to level with the public about that (to 'tell the truth', as Extinction Rebellion puts it) and further still from being willing to tell the public that this might involve some difficult or radical changes to how we live. Again, that is very far from how Margaret Thatcher approached any issue, including climate change.
But the biggest problem we face, and the one our politicians should be angriest about, isn't that Boris Johnson makes jokes about British mining. It's that it is frankly impossible to imagine him doing something as big or as significant in the fight to tackle the climate crisis today."
But its not true.
We don't need radical change in how we live. We need radical change in our technologies we use.
We need to switch from petrol cars to electric cars; we do not need to abandon driving. We need to switch from dirty electricity to clean electricity; we do not need to stop using electricity. We need to switch from jet oil to clean jet zero aircraft; we do not need to stop flying.
The hairshirt environmentalists are wrong. Science and technology are the solution, not economic vandalism. Something that both Thatcher and Johnson could both equally grasp.
He precedes that with
"All too often, Johnson's climate change strategy is essentially 'everyone should have their own electric car': a solution that is neither possible (there aren't enough rare earth materials in the world to replace every car currently in use in the UK) nor adequate (cars don't just produce emissions when they are driven, but also when they are constructed)."
What a ridiculous statement: it would be trivial for the UK (if it were only the UK) to replace all vehicles with electric ones by 2030. In a normal year, 2.3-2.4m cars are sold in the UK, compared to a global electric car market of around 3.5 million units (excluding PHEV) this year.
Not only that, but the number of EVs sold is increasing by 40+% per year. Now, sure, that might slow. But the share of the market that is EV/PHEV is going in exactly one direction. And by the early 2030s - irrespective of government action - the majority of cars sold are going to be EV/PHEV.
You are forgetting that two groups don't want this - big oil (and their fan club) and the watermelon Greens
Indeed, they have a massive aversion to the concept of private transport, whether it’s EV or IC powered.
Stephen Bush of the Staggers's daily email has been commenting on the contrast re Mrs T and Mr J - an extract:
"If you want to actually tackle the climate crisis, you have to be willing to do big and radical things that upset people, and that do, in the short term at least, create some losers [...]
Our Prime Minister is very far from being willing to level with the public about that (to 'tell the truth', as Extinction Rebellion puts it) and further still from being willing to tell the public that this might involve some difficult or radical changes to how we live. Again, that is very far from how Margaret Thatcher approached any issue, including climate change.
But the biggest problem we face, and the one our politicians should be angriest about, isn't that Boris Johnson makes jokes about British mining. It's that it is frankly impossible to imagine him doing something as big or as significant in the fight to tackle the climate crisis today."
But its not true.
We don't need radical change in how we live. We need radical change in our technologies we use.
We need to switch from petrol cars to electric cars; we do not need to abandon driving. We need to switch from dirty electricity to clean electricity; we do not need to stop using electricity. We need to switch from jet oil to clean jet zero aircraft; we do not need to stop flying.
The hairshirt environmentalists are wrong. Science and technology are the solution, not economic vandalism. Something that both Thatcher and Johnson could both equally grasp.
He precedes that with
"All too often, Johnson's climate change strategy is essentially 'everyone should have their own electric car': a solution that is neither possible (there aren't enough rare earth materials in the world to replace every car currently in use in the UK) nor adequate (cars don't just produce emissions when they are driven, but also when they are constructed)."
What a ridiculous statement: it would be trivial for the UK (if it were only the UK) to replace all vehicles with electric ones by 2030. In a normal year, 2.3-2.4m cars are sold in the UK, compared to a global electric car market of around 3.5 million units (excluding PHEV) this year.
Not only that, but the number of EVs sold is increasing by 40+% per year. Now, sure, that might slow. But the share of the market that is EV/PHEV is going in exactly one direction. And by the early 2030s - irrespective of government action - the majority of cars sold are going to be EV/PHEV.
You are forgetting that two groups don't want this - big oil (and their fan club) and the watermelon Greens
Indeed, they have a massive aversion to the concept of private transport, whether it’s EV or IC powered.
A traffic jam made up of EVs is still a traffic jam.
The crazy thing about Labour’s futile attempt to rename the Delta Variant as the ‘Johnson variant’ was it relied on huge swathes of the public getting ill or dying. Could there be a more negative angle to try to exploit? Luckily enough for them, it didn’t catch on anyway as they are now in the position of crying wolf, as the opening up seems to have gone pretty well
Every time Sir Keir tries to be funny it slaps him back in the face. Whilst I was banned from this site, I saw a PMQs where he looked confident & assured, then he started taking the mickey out of Boris being in isolation on freedom day, and laughing at his own jokes… then PING!!!
It’s all about Johnson, all the time. No publicity is bad publicity as they say. Makes me so angry!
One day his haters will work it out. They fall into the trap every time
Even Cummings is at it - every time he reveals something supposedly devastating Boris said off the record, it’s the kind of thing most normal people agree with him on
“I don’t want to lockdown for a disease that’s only killing 80 year olds”
It’s all about Johnson, all the time. No publicity is bad publicity as they say. Makes me so angry!
One day his haters will work it out. They fall into the trap every time
Even Cummings is at it - every time he reveals something supposedly devastating Boris said off the record, it’s the kind of thing most normal people agree with him on
“I don’t want to lockdown for a disease that’s only killing 80 year olds”
“My missus is doing my head in” etc etc
Many of his statements on Cummings are ones people agree with too. The one about him being a ‘useless, lying twat’* for starters.
*I don’t know if he did call him that, btw, but it seems like the sort of thing he might have said in recent weeks.
He probably didn't understand it - remember the embarrassing post a couple of days ago.
Sir Keir’s big speech in Sep should be a long, grovelling apology for trying to frighten people with his fearcasts #johnsonvariant 🙄
That would be good. Even better if followed immediately by a sincere apology (grovelling not essential) from Boris Johnson for being consistently off the pace; effectively winking at Covid-19 and telling it to "come on down and kill an awful lot of Britons".
Mr. kle4, that seems horrendously unfair on Schleu.
Randomly assigning horses just seems wrong.
But it's part of the whole point of the sport, I'd assume. Maybe giving them the day before hand to acquaint with the horse would be better?
It is based on grabbing hold of a random horse on the battlefield and having to ride it.
Yes indeed. I think given the potential risk to a rider giving them a little more time, still with a random horse, would be a fair compromise without jeopardising the spirit of the event though. I don't know how easy it is to assess a horse's temperament, but they presumably are't just putting in any old mad or stringy nag, so it's already not totally random.
Marshal Ney would have been great at the event, I believe he had four horses killed under him at Waterloo.
There are at least a couple of competitors who'd happily have despatched their mounts...
I thought Schleu was very rough with the horse to be honest. She'd have been thrown out of a proper equestrian event for treating it like that.
She should have given up earlier.
The event is a bit daft though. Replace horses with mountain bikes?
Modern cavalry use either tanks or helicopters: either of those would be much more in the spirit of the original.
Depends what you mean by modern. I was staggered to learn Hitler sent 400,000 horses into Poland in 1939, and that one of the intractable problems with Operation Sealion was the need to get as many or more, across the channel.
Edit though transport of course, rather than cavalry. Presumably.
The British Expeditionary Force in 1940 was the worlds first completely mechanised army - no horses, just trucks etc.
IIRC the Germans never managed to completely mechanise even their Panzer divisions....
When the Germans invaded Russia they took a six figure number of horses with them, few of which returned.
All lived happily ever after on collective farms I believe..
One of my questions in my dim and distant Higher history was could a German invasion of Britain have succeeded, I was very pleased with myself to pop out the Heer’s high dependency on horse flesh as evidence of them being a bit crap. Thinking on it now, horses, particularly in the east, might have been an advantage: mobile in challenging conditions, not as dependent as petrol vehicles on very stretched supply lines, can be eaten in extremis.
Striking for how long many armies had horses on the books. I saw an equine anti radiation suit and mask displayed in the military museum in Valencia.
Comments
As we're likely to increase EV production at by least on order of magnitude, producing that much at an acceptable cost isn't trivial. Same thing with lithium, which is why there are several efforts ongoing to greatly improve the economics of extraction methods.
Where there is a demand, a supply is quite likely to be found, as you say.
Having just said that, it then seems awful to add that Team GB has won another Gold - in Penthalon.
Marshal Ney would have been great at the event, I believe he had four horses killed under him at Waterloo.
You go online, pay your (real) money for your undetectable counterfeit money and documents.
Apparently nothing arrives.
You complain.
Vendor says they have indeed been sent and arrived, but - as advertised - they are undetectable.
This is why I back the systems that are somewhat like wind turbines, but deployed completely underwater.
- By being out of the wave action, they can be lower cost and more reliable.
- There are many more locations where they can be deployed.
- They can be scaled from a single turbine to an array. So the initial cost can be low.
The main issue with them is how to access them for maintenance.
The trees spent decades removing it from the atmosphere and it is being put back in one big belch, just when we need it least.
But, of course, shipping it in bulk carriers is a rather polluting process that, er, uses CO2 locked up in the earth for aeons.
Seems that it might be they skip practicing for the discipline (if my 20-second clip is anything to go by).
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D6o_cjldpyY
Would be interested to see this one if anyone has a link.
Hence the myth of "green miles" with food. Its more environmentally friendly for CO2 to ship out of season vegetables from New Zealand to the UK, than it is to grow them in the UK using heaters.
Similarly it can be more environmentally friendly to eat British meat overseas due to the way its been produced, rather than locally produced stuff that has been produced in a less green manner.
She should have given up earlier.
The event is a bit daft though. Replace horses with mountain bikes?
In the meantime, we have higher levels of atmospheric CO2 over the critical decades where the climate is at greatest risk of being completely screwed over.
That's why I think burning timber is a bad idea.
Short cycle crops are a different story. Straw, willow, bagasse, etc.
When it comes to extinctions, habitat loss is even more of a problem than climate change.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-58112125
https://twitter.com/AndyNetherwood/status/1421740602430050312
I think it would be quite a shake-up in modern pentathlon to get rid of the horse element. I imagine that most people who get into it probably start off on the horse and then add in the other events. I can't imagine there are many swimmers or runners who decide to transition to pentathlon!
Given that the event was meant to be about what was needed to do well in an army then one might well argue the horse out to be replaced by driving tanks over an obstacle course. Mountain biking would be an interesting alternative!
| Year | Consumption (million tonnes) | Change from last year cited | | 1956 | 221 | Peak | | 1979 | 129 | -42% | | 1990 | 108 | -16% | | 1997 | 63 | -42% | | 2010 | 51 | -19% | | 2020 | 7 | -86% |Conclusions.
1. Large decline in coal consumption before Thatcher.
2. Modest decline in consumption during Thatcher period - no evidence of Green credentials here.
3. Major's "dash for gas" makes a big difference.
4. Modest decline during the Labour years, possibly flattered by the great financial crash, as coal use rebounds after 2010 before strongly declining later.
5. The "green crap" pays dividends with another strong decline in coal consumption as offshore wind replaces it for electricity generation.
Edit: Formatting looks different to preview.
btw I fence judge once a year at the relevant PC's pentathlon, so I feel very much part of the national collective effort. The OBE must surely be on its way.
Edit though transport of course, rather than cavalry. Presumably.
https://faidroneworld.aero/where-when
IIRC the Germans never managed to completely mechanise even their Panzer divisions....
BTW, when will Darts get its own set of medals? 501, 301, Killer; individual, pairs, team; male, female, mixed. Think of how many more medals Team GB might pick up.
The "dash for gas" became policy under Thatcher. It was steadily implemented though her last years, Major and Blair.
Similarly, there was considerable investment and preparation before the massive surge in wind capacity actually started to be built and come on line.
The lesson from this is that Global Warming (and Acid Rain and the Ozone Hole) became policy issues under Thatcher. Turning the ship of state around took alot of effort. At the records office at Kew there are zillions of memos from mandarins decrying her "tree hugging" and deprecating it's effects on policy.
Once they became an official policy matter, and the solutions became targets, it again took time to get the action going. What we see today is the result of a continuous policy theme bridging multiple governments, since the late 80s.
https://collection.nam.ac.uk/detail.php?acc=2018-01-70-21
Operation Sealion, the never attempted invasion of the UK mainland, plan was constantly evolving, but the most sited and last fully detailed plan, had 13 divisions, (2 airborne and 11 infantry) but had much of the equipment, including medium and heavy artillery striped from them to make them easer to ship and land, but was still going to bring a total of 15,000 houses with it in the first wave.
It’s never seen because for propaganda purposes the German newsreels never filmed it, so we only see the tanks advancing remorselessly in the surviving footage. So the myth of a mechanised Wehrmacht persists.
- Queuing
- Tin bath racing
- Snail racing
- Bog snorkelling
- Conkers
The possibilities are endless…
https://tanks-encyclopedia.com/ww2/nazi_germany/gas-powered-fahrschulwanne-tanks.php
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kQ9DrerydpM
Papers unearthed by the BBC reveal that British and American commanders ensured that the liberation of Paris on 25 August 1944 was seen as a "whites only" victory.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/7984436.stm
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tF8NIGc0fAE
https://youtube.com/watch?v=X_0zFEtPbiA
Drop him.
To get the PB pedants off my back, ‘one year before the end of steam traction on standard gauge railways in the UK.’
Not only that, but the number of EVs sold is increasing by 40+% per year. Now, sure, that might slow. But the share of the market that is EV/PHEV is going in exactly one direction. And by the early 2030s - irrespective of government action - the majority of cars sold are going to be EV/PHEV.
The fact is, that governments everywhere have had to deal with a situation completely unprecedented in modern times, and while it’s easy to throw barbs those actually in charge are genuinely doing their best.
Still funny though!
A mad safr and a bunch of redneck welders, plus rocket scientists have just stacked the largest rocket in human history, in a Texas swamp
https://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=52398.msg2273430;topicseen#new
In other space news, the former richest man in the world can't make one flight ready rocket engine
https://arstechnica.com/science/2021/08/blue-origins-powerful-be-4-engine-is-more-than-four-years-late-heres-why/
It would have looked genuine if it came from a Nigerian Prince.
Every time Sir Keir tries to be funny it slaps him back in the face. Whilst I was banned from this site, I saw a PMQs where he looked confident & assured, then he started taking the mickey out of Boris being in isolation on freedom day, and laughing at his own jokes… then PING!!!
Even Cummings is at it - every time he reveals something supposedly devastating Boris said off the record, it’s the kind of thing most normal people agree with him on
“I don’t want to lockdown for a disease that’s only killing 80 year olds”
“My missus is doing my head in” etc etc
*I don’t know if he did call him that, btw, but it seems like the sort of thing he might have said in recent weeks.
One of my questions in my dim and distant Higher history was could a German invasion of Britain have succeeded, I was very pleased with myself to pop out the Heer’s high dependency on horse flesh as evidence of them being a bit crap. Thinking on it now, horses, particularly in the east, might have been an advantage: mobile in challenging conditions, not as dependent as petrol vehicles on very stretched supply lines, can be eaten in extremis.
Striking for how long many armies had horses on the books. I saw an equine anti radiation suit and mask displayed in the military museum in Valencia.
Modern CCGT plant has an electrical efficiency of around 60%, whereas an OCGT peaking plant is more like 40%.
Adding carbon capture to a CCGT knocks maybe five percentage points off the efficiency but reduces the carbon intensity by around 90%.
I'm meant to be having a day off work today!