It’s Now Easy Bein’ Green – politicalbetting.com

Second!

Yet Greens seem to be making little impression in Canada

rcs1000 said:

Yesterday someone suggested making the Yotam Ottolenghi baked rice dish.

My god. Whoever made that suggestion, you are a genius. I made https://www.finecooking.com/recipe/baked-rice-with-confit-tomatoes-and-garlic

And it was (a) really easy, and (b) staggeringly good. My daughter (13) had thirds. And she thinks eating is something that old people do.

Baked rice. Who knew?

But cilantro. Yuck.
Will try with a substitute.

IshmaelZ said:

The greens will have their clothes stolen by the main parties while they witter about gendered toilets.

It’s possible, but equally possible they steal voters from the main parties.
Their policies, unlike their philosophy, are not immutable.

Alanbrooke said:

Nigelb said:

rcs1000 said:

Yesterday someone suggested making the Yotam Ottolenghi baked rice dish.

My god. Whoever made that suggestion, you are a genius. I made https://www.finecooking.com/recipe/baked-rice-with-confit-tomatoes-and-garlic

And it was (a) really easy, and (b) staggeringly good. My daughter (13) had thirds. And she thinks eating is something that old people do.

Baked rice. Who knew?

But cilantro. Yuck.
Will try with a substitute.

coriander is the new Marmite

Some people genetically find coriander disgusting, tastes like soap to them.

I feel so sad for them

Casino_Royale said:

"Green" issues will simply be absorbed into the political mainstream with the dividing line being technological capitalists versus luddite ecosocialism.

Its already happened.

The British Tory government has already pledged to cut CO2 emissions by more, and faster, than the German Greens have supported.

Yet I won't hold my breath for anyone "Green" to be grateful to the Tories, or to criticise the German Greens, and if the German Greens do well I expect to see many breathless reports about what it means for the Greens here as opposed to pointing out the fact that our government is already more green.

Nigelb said:

rcs1000 said:

Yesterday someone suggested making the Yotam Ottolenghi baked rice dish.

My god. Whoever made that suggestion, you are a genius. I made https://www.finecooking.com/recipe/baked-rice-with-confit-tomatoes-and-garlic

And it was (a) really easy, and (b) staggeringly good. My daughter (13) had thirds. And she thinks eating is something that old people do.

Baked rice. Who knew?

But cilantro. Yuck.
Will try with a substitute.

I just chopped up the herbs that were going brown at the bottom of my fridge: I'm pretty sure it was parsley, but who knows for sure.

I also used an old red onion roughly chopped, as I had no shallots, and chucked a couple of cardamom pods in there, because why not.

Alistair said:

Alanbrooke said:

Nigelb said:

rcs1000 said:

Yesterday someone suggested making the Yotam Ottolenghi baked rice dish.

My god. Whoever made that suggestion, you are a genius. I made https://www.finecooking.com/recipe/baked-rice-with-confit-tomatoes-and-garlic

And it was (a) really easy, and (b) staggeringly good. My daughter (13) had thirds. And she thinks eating is something that old people do.

Baked rice. Who knew?

But cilantro. Yuck.
Will try with a substitute.

coriander is the new Marmite

Some people genetically find coriander disgusting, tastes like soap to them.

I feel so sad for them

They should try cilantro instead.

Good morning, everyone.

Mr. Brooke, UK governments are less concerned with realism and impact of green policies as getting some nice headlines.

Alanbrooke said:

Philip_Thompson said:

Casino_Royale said:

"Green" issues will simply be absorbed into the political mainstream with the dividing line being technological capitalists versus luddite ecosocialism.

Its already happened.

The British Tory government has already pledged to cut CO2 emissions by more, and faster, than the German Greens have supported.

Yet I won't hold my breath for anyone "Green" to be grateful to the Tories, or to criticise the German Greens, and if the German Greens do well I expect to see many breathless reports about what it means for the Greens here as opposed to pointing out the fact that our government is already more green.

It remains to be seen if HMG can do it, given government management of large projects I doubt it.

That's true, but its also true to say of the German Green opposition and others.

What's also true is that again the British have already cut emissions by more and faster than the Germans and others.

In the past decade coal power has been all but eliminated in the UK, whereas the Germans have prioritised eliminating zero-emission nuclear power instead and get 35-40% of their power from coal still.

Philip_Thompson said:

Alanbrooke said:

Philip_Thompson said:

Casino_Royale said:

"Green" issues will simply be absorbed into the political mainstream with the dividing line being technological capitalists versus luddite ecosocialism.

Its already happened.

The British Tory government has already pledged to cut CO2 emissions by more, and faster, than the German Greens have supported.

Yet I won't hold my breath for anyone "Green" to be grateful to the Tories, or to criticise the German Greens, and if the German Greens do well I expect to see many breathless reports about what it means for the Greens here as opposed to pointing out the fact that our government is already more green.

It remains to be seen if HMG can do it, given government management of large projects I doubt it.

That's true, but its also true to say of the German Green opposition and others.

What's also true is that again the British have already cut emissions by more and faster than the Germans and others.

In the past decade coal power has been all but eliminated in the UK, whereas the Germans have prioritised eliminating zero-emission nuclear power instead and get 35-40% of their power from coal still.

German "greenery" is just a myth, amazingly people fall for it.

https://www.statista.com/chart/17582/megatonnes-of-co2-equivalent-in-the-eu/

It's all garbage.

StuartDickson said:

I concur that the future is looking bright for Green politics and parties, in stark contrast to species and habitat diversity, invasive species damage, climate change etc.

I can understand the impulse to be rude about all things Jock, but the success of the Green movement in Scotland deserves a little deeper analysis than the Veganism jibe. For a start, ask yourself (or, better yet, ask the Scottish Green Party) *why* they support independence?

Some suggestions:
- ejecting nuclear weapons from our country is only possible with sovereignty
- control of our waters (the largest and richest in the UK) would allow us to pursue greener marine policies
- fairness and popular sovereignty: green politics (everywhere, not just in Scotland) is driven from the bottom up, and - crucially - by young people. Young Scots are very green, and also very pro-independence. It chimes with their core voters.

I think there’s a tendency for onlookers to think of the list regional vote for Holyrood as a second vote and therefore taken less seriously by voters. As I pointed out out during the last Holyrood election I know plenty of folk who saw their list Green vote as their primary one with their constituency vote complimentary to that. I don’t think there are many young Scots looking at SLab or (lol) SCons and thinking ‘gosh, a vote for them will also be great for the planet’.

Of course the combination of a party committed to the environment & Indy and now in government has made some people’s heads explode and therefore incapable of objective analysis.

Philip_Thompson said:

Casino_Royale said:

"Green" issues will simply be absorbed into the political mainstream with the dividing line being technological capitalists versus luddite ecosocialism.

Its already happened.

The British Tory government has already pledged to cut CO2 emissions by more, and faster, than the German Greens have supported.

Yet I won't hold my breath for anyone "Green" to be grateful to the Tories, or to criticise the German Greens, and if the German Greens do well I expect to see many breathless reports about what it means for the Greens here as opposed to pointing out the fact that our government is already more green.

There is more to this government than her indoors

Although maybe not that much more?

StuartDickson said:

I concur that the future is looking bright for Green politics and parties, in stark contrast to species and habitat diversity, invasive species damage, climate change etc.

I can understand the impulse to be rude about all things Jock, but the success of the Green movement in Scotland deserves a little deeper analysis than the Veganism jibe. For a start, ask yourself (or, better yet, ask the Scottish Green Party) *why* they support independence?

Some suggestions:
- ejecting nuclear weapons from our country is only possible with sovereignty
- control of our waters (the largest and richest in the UK) would allow us to pursue greener marine policies
- fairness and popular sovereignty: green politics (everywhere, not just in Scotland) is driven from the bottom up, and - crucially - by young people. Young Scots are very green, and also very pro-independence. It chimes with their core voters.

This all sounds great, but:

The policy of the green party on defence, as I read it, is that the government should do the minimum to provide adequate security, and nothing more.

The whole green party edifice is built on a profound misunderstanding of history.

DavidL said:

rcs1000 said:

Yesterday someone suggested making the Yotam Ottolenghi baked rice dish.

My god. Whoever made that suggestion, you are a genius. I made https://www.finecooking.com/recipe/baked-rice-with-confit-tomatoes-and-garlic

And it was (a) really easy, and (b) staggeringly good. My daughter (13) had thirds. And she thinks eating is something that old people do.

Baked rice. Who knew?

FPT could Texans not sue the courts/judiciary charged with granting the damages awards and stop them from doing so?

For a baked rice dish?

Seems an overreaction but I do love Tex Mex.

Alanbrooke said:

Philip_Thompson said:

Alanbrooke said:

Philip_Thompson said:

Casino_Royale said:

"Green" issues will simply be absorbed into the political mainstream with the dividing line being technological capitalists versus luddite ecosocialism.

Its already happened.

The British Tory government has already pledged to cut CO2 emissions by more, and faster, than the German Greens have supported.

Yet I won't hold my breath for anyone "Green" to be grateful to the Tories, or to criticise the German Greens, and if the German Greens do well I expect to see many breathless reports about what it means for the Greens here as opposed to pointing out the fact that our government is already more green.

It remains to be seen if HMG can do it, given government management of large projects I doubt it.

That's true, but its also true to say of the German Green opposition and others.

What's also true is that again the British have already cut emissions by more and faster than the Germans and others.

In the past decade coal power has been all but eliminated in the UK, whereas the Germans have prioritised eliminating zero-emission nuclear power instead and get 35-40% of their power from coal still.

German "greenery" is just a myth, amazingly people fall for it.

https://www.statista.com/chart/17582/megatonnes-of-co2-equivalent-in-the-eu/

It's all garbage.

It's staggering that Germany is still burning so much coal. We have virtually stopped in comparison.

DavidL said:

Alanbrooke said:

Philip_Thompson said:

Alanbrooke said:

Philip_Thompson said:

Casino_Royale said:

"Green" issues will simply be absorbed into the political mainstream with the dividing line being technological capitalists versus luddite ecosocialism.

Its already happened.

The British Tory government has already pledged to cut CO2 emissions by more, and faster, than the German Greens have supported.

Yet I won't hold my breath for anyone "Green" to be grateful to the Tories, or to criticise the German Greens, and if the German Greens do well I expect to see many breathless reports about what it means for the Greens here as opposed to pointing out the fact that our government is already more green.

It remains to be seen if HMG can do it, given government management of large projects I doubt it.

That's true, but its also true to say of the German Green opposition and others.

What's also true is that again the British have already cut emissions by more and faster than the Germans and others.

In the past decade coal power has been all but eliminated in the UK, whereas the Germans have prioritised eliminating zero-emission nuclear power instead and get 35-40% of their power from coal still.

German "greenery" is just a myth, amazingly people fall for it.

https://www.statista.com/chart/17582/megatonnes-of-co2-equivalent-in-the-eu/

It's all garbage.

It's staggering that Germany is still burning so much coal. We have virtually stopped in comparison.

Germany still has heavy industry.

Scott_xP said:

New greener petrol will be introduced to service stations across Britain from today despite fears that hundreds of thousands of drivers still do not know whether their car can use it without being damaged.

More than 8,000 petrol stations will start selling E10 fuel, which is designed to cut greenhouse gas emissions from combustion engines, throughout September. The petrol is blended with 10 per cent bioethanol, which is made from materials such as grains, sugars and waste wood.

E5 petrol, which is sold throughout the UK at present, has 5 per cent bioethanol.

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/who-can-use-the-new-greener-e10-petrol-gfkz63ghm

I filled up with E10 in France yesterday. So far, so good.

StuartDickson said:

Theuniondivvie said:

StuartDickson said:

I concur that the future is looking bright for Green politics and parties, in stark contrast to species and habitat diversity, invasive species damage, climate change etc.

I can understand the impulse to be rude about all things Jock, but the success of the Green movement in Scotland deserves a little deeper analysis than the Veganism jibe. For a start, ask yourself (or, better yet, ask the Scottish Green Party) *why* they support independence?

Some suggestions:
- ejecting nuclear weapons from our country is only possible with sovereignty
- control of our waters (the largest and richest in the UK) would allow us to pursue greener marine policies
- fairness and popular sovereignty: green politics (everywhere, not just in Scotland) is driven from the bottom up, and - crucially - by young people. Young Scots are very green, and also very pro-independence. It chimes with their core voters.

I think there’s a tendency for onlookers to think of the list regional vote for Holyrood as a second vote and therefore taken less seriously by voters. As I pointed out out during the last Holyrood election I know plenty of folk who saw their list Green vote as their primary one with their constituency vote complimentary to that. I don’t think there are many young Scots looking at SLab or (lol) SCons and thinking ‘gosh, a vote for them will also be great for the planet’.

Of course the combination of a party committed to the environment & Indy and now in government has made some people’s heads explode and therefore incapable of objective analysis.

Those exploding heads are mostly bald, wrinkly, Tory and/or not on the Scottish electoral register. They’ve had their day. The kidz are in town.

I’m sure the wrinkly heads are ripe for a bounce back with exciting ideas such as sooking up the oil from the Cambo field then storing it for some indefinite period, or that not drilling Cambo would be a disaster for the environment. Am also looking forward to the torchlit parades to celebrate the opening of COP26.

DavidL said:

Is it not about 10-15p a litre more expensive? Undoes all those years of cancelling the fuel escalator at a stroke.

oh yes.

DavidL said:

Scott_xP said:

New greener petrol will be introduced to service stations across Britain from today despite fears that hundreds of thousands of drivers still do not know whether their car can use it without being damaged.

More than 8,000 petrol stations will start selling E10 fuel, which is designed to cut greenhouse gas emissions from combustion engines, throughout September. The petrol is blended with 10 per cent bioethanol, which is made from materials such as grains, sugars and waste wood.

E5 petrol, which is sold throughout the UK at present, has 5 per cent bioethanol.

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/who-can-use-the-new-greener-e10-petrol-gfkz63ghm

Is it not about 10-15p a litre more expensive? Undoes all those years of cancelling the fuel escalator at a stroke.

Is it? Is there a source for that?

I filled up yesterday with E10 and it was the same price I paid for E5 a few weeks ago. 🤷‍♂️

Though petrol prices have risen so much recently people might associate the increase in cost with that but its driven by oil prices recovering post-pandemic isn't it?

rcs1000 said:

Yesterday someone suggested making the Yotam Ottolenghi baked rice dish.

My god. Whoever made that suggestion, you are a genius. I made https://www.finecooking.com/recipe/baked-rice-with-confit-tomatoes-and-garlic

And it was (a) really easy, and (b) staggeringly good. My daughter (13) had thirds. And she thinks eating is something that old people do.

Baked rice. Who knew?

Strawberry or raspberry jam?

Sainsbury's sitrep midday yesterday. For the first time, there are many (though still a minority, say 20 per cent of) customers not wearing masks. Some shelves are still bare.

Theuniondivvie said:

StuartDickson said:

Theuniondivvie said:

StuartDickson said:

I concur that the future is looking bright for Green politics and parties, in stark contrast to species and habitat diversity, invasive species damage, climate change etc.

I can understand the impulse to be rude about all things Jock, but the success of the Green movement in Scotland deserves a little deeper analysis than the Veganism jibe. For a start, ask yourself (or, better yet, ask the Scottish Green Party) *why* they support independence?

Some suggestions:
- ejecting nuclear weapons from our country is only possible with sovereignty
- control of our waters (the largest and richest in the UK) would allow us to pursue greener marine policies
- fairness and popular sovereignty: green politics (everywhere, not just in Scotland) is driven from the bottom up, and - crucially - by young people. Young Scots are very green, and also very pro-independence. It chimes with their core voters.

I think there’s a tendency for onlookers to think of the list regional vote for Holyrood as a second vote and therefore taken less seriously by voters. As I pointed out out during the last Holyrood election I know plenty of folk who saw their list Green vote as their primary one with their constituency vote complimentary to that. I don’t think there are many young Scots looking at SLab or (lol) SCons and thinking ‘gosh, a vote for them will also be great for the planet’.

Of course the combination of a party committed to the environment & Indy and now in government has made some people’s heads explode and therefore incapable of objective analysis.

Those exploding heads are mostly bald, wrinkly, Tory and/or not on the Scottish electoral register. They’ve had their day. The kidz are in town.

I’m sure the wrinkly heads are ripe for a bounce back with exciting ideas such as sooking up the oil from the Cambo field then storing it for some indefinite period, or that not drilling Cambo would be a disaster for the environment. Am also looking forward to the torchlit parades to celebrate the opening of COP26.

Are you really opposed to developing Cambo?

I was at a dinner party on Monday and one of the guests was of that view. He thought as a G7 nation we should be showing a lead, that the quantity of oil already available should be sufficient to transition our economy from hydrocarbons to renewables and that we would lose all moral authority to express a view on these matters if we could not resist the temptation of another oil field. Basically he was arguing that the world couldn't really afford to burn the oil we already had and did not need more.

I was quite startled to be honest but it was thought provoking.

DavidL said:

Theuniondivvie said:

StuartDickson said:

Theuniondivvie said:

StuartDickson said:

I concur that the future is looking bright for Green politics and parties, in stark contrast to species and habitat diversity, invasive species damage, climate change etc.

I can understand the impulse to be rude about all things Jock, but the success of the Green movement in Scotland deserves a little deeper analysis than the Veganism jibe. For a start, ask yourself (or, better yet, ask the Scottish Green Party) *why* they support independence?

Some suggestions:
- ejecting nuclear weapons from our country is only possible with sovereignty
- control of our waters (the largest and richest in the UK) would allow us to pursue greener marine policies
- fairness and popular sovereignty: green politics (everywhere, not just in Scotland) is driven from the bottom up, and - crucially - by young people. Young Scots are very green, and also very pro-independence. It chimes with their core voters.

I think there’s a tendency for onlookers to think of the list regional vote for Holyrood as a second vote and therefore taken less seriously by voters. As I pointed out out during the last Holyrood election I know plenty of folk who saw their list Green vote as their primary one with their constituency vote complimentary to that. I don’t think there are many young Scots looking at SLab or (lol) SCons and thinking ‘gosh, a vote for them will also be great for the planet’.

Of course the combination of a party committed to the environment & Indy and now in government has made some people’s heads explode and therefore incapable of objective analysis.

Those exploding heads are mostly bald, wrinkly, Tory and/or not on the Scottish electoral register. They’ve had their day. The kidz are in town.

I’m sure the wrinkly heads are ripe for a bounce back with exciting ideas such as sooking up the oil from the Cambo field then storing it for some indefinite period, or that not drilling Cambo would be a disaster for the environment. Am also looking forward to the torchlit parades to celebrate the opening of COP26.

Are you really opposed to developing Cambo?

I was at a dinner party on Monday and one of the guests was of that view. He thought as a G7 nation we should be showing a lead, that the quantity of oil already available should be sufficient to transition our economy from hydrocarbons to renewables and that we would lose all moral authority to express a view on these matters if we could not resist the temptation of another oil field. Basically he was arguing that the world couldn't really afford to burn the oil we already had and did not need more.

I was quite startled to be honest but it was thought provoking.

Its pure unscientific, unenvironmental, uneconomic hogwash.

All it would do is mean we import more fuel, or export less. It will damage our balance of trade and won't impact the environment whatsoever, that's all.

Our and the world's transition away from oil will be due to technological and economic progress, like the already-set 2030 deadline to stop selling oil consuming cars, not whether or not we have a domestic oil field or import from the Middle East.

Now this is my sort of challenge:
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-58400061

Except I'm too wimpy to attempt it.

Ethanol rots certain types of rubber and absorbs water. Classic car owners need to check and renew fuel lines, fuel pumps. Also leaving e10 fuel sitting for a while can increase the likelihood of rust due to that water absorption.

DavidL said:

Theuniondivvie said:

StuartDickson said:

Theuniondivvie said:

StuartDickson said:

I concur that the future is looking bright for Green politics and parties, in stark contrast to species and habitat diversity, invasive species damage, climate change etc.

I can understand the impulse to be rude about all things Jock, but the success of the Green movement in Scotland deserves a little deeper analysis than the Veganism jibe. For a start, ask yourself (or, better yet, ask the Scottish Green Party) *why* they support independence?

Some suggestions:
- ejecting nuclear weapons from our country is only possible with sovereignty
- control of our waters (the largest and richest in the UK) would allow us to pursue greener marine policies
- fairness and popular sovereignty: green politics (everywhere, not just in Scotland) is driven from the bottom up, and - crucially - by young people. Young Scots are very green, and also very pro-independence. It chimes with their core voters.

I think there’s a tendency for onlookers to think of the list regional vote for Holyrood as a second vote and therefore taken less seriously by voters. As I pointed out out during the last Holyrood election I know plenty of folk who saw their list Green vote as their primary one with their constituency vote complimentary to that. I don’t think there are many young Scots looking at SLab or (lol) SCons and thinking ‘gosh, a vote for them will also be great for the planet’.

Of course the combination of a party committed to the environment & Indy and now in government has made some people’s heads explode and therefore incapable of objective analysis.

Those exploding heads are mostly bald, wrinkly, Tory and/or not on the Scottish electoral register. They’ve had their day. The kidz are in town.

I’m sure the wrinkly heads are ripe for a bounce back with exciting ideas such as sooking up the oil from the Cambo field then storing it for some indefinite period, or that not drilling Cambo would be a disaster for the environment. Am also looking forward to the torchlit parades to celebrate the opening of COP26.

Are you really opposed to developing Cambo?

I was at a dinner party on Monday and one of the guests was of that view. He thought as a G7 nation we should be showing a lead, that the quantity of oil already available should be sufficient to transition our economy from hydrocarbons to renewables and that we would lose all moral authority to express a view on these matters if we could not resist the temptation of another oil field. Basically he was arguing that the world couldn't really afford to burn the oil we already had and did not need more.

I was quite startled to be honest but it was thought provoking.

Your fellow guest certainly has a point. I’m against gung-ho short termism, and I’m definitely against the party that oversees the licensing of new oil fields taking brib..sorry, contributions from companies that want to exploit new oil fields.

I understand it was stated on BBC Scotland that the emissions from the oil produced from Cambo is the equivalent of running 18 coal fired power stations (for how long I don’t know).

JosiasJessop said:

Now this is my sort of challenge:
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-58400061

Except I'm too wimpy to attempt it.

It's Scotland. Leave it to the McDonalds.

Greens may be here to stay, but there are caveats. Aeons ago CND were a major force, and the threat to humanity was nuclear weapons (especially western ones.)

The threat is exactly as great as or greater than it was in the 60's, but it is registering nowhere much on the talking head agenda. (NB IMHO we have never needed them more than right now)

Fashions change.

And green stuff may not survive actual contact with financial reality or the reality of China or no cheap flights to Venice.

While on the subject of unpopular opinions, the BBC etc are full of terrified liberal Afghans regretting western departure. I don't blame them. But their army and people faced a 1940 moment in August and ducked it. Why are the Taliban prepared to fight for their beliefs but liberals not?

Theuniondivvie said:

Dura_Ace said:

Scott_xP said:

New greener petrol will be introduced to service stations across Britain from today despite fears that hundreds of thousands of drivers still do not know whether their car can use it without being damaged.

More than 8,000 petrol stations will start selling E10 fuel, which is designed to cut greenhouse gas emissions from combustion engines, throughout September. The petrol is blended with 10 per cent bioethanol, which is made from materials such as grains, sugars and waste wood.

E5 petrol, which is sold throughout the UK at present, has 5 per cent bioethanol.

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/who-can-use-the-new-greener-e10-petrol-gfkz63ghm

Turn up the boost your turbos, ethanol is 113 octane.

It does get past the oil control rings on the pistons and turn your engine oil into piss though.

Didn’t Ducati have problems with ethanol swelling up their tanks? Also not good for your fibreglass tank though I realise that’s pretty niche.

All this brings back memories of when I was working for an oil company.

Every now and again, someone from the US warbird racing community would ask if we could make a batch of the original 150 octane WII era stuff. Management would get all excited, until the chaps at the refineries spelt out the issues....

StuartDickson said:

I concur that the future is looking bright for Green politics and parties, in stark contrast to species and habitat diversity, invasive species damage, climate change etc.

I can understand the impulse to be rude about all things Jock, but the success of the Green movement in Scotland deserves a little deeper analysis than the Veganism jibe. For a start, ask yourself (or, better yet, ask the Scottish Green Party) *why* they support independence?

Some suggestions:
- ejecting nuclear weapons from our country is only possible with sovereignty
- control of our waters (the largest and richest in the UK) would allow us to pursue greener marine policies
- fairness and popular sovereignty: green politics (everywhere, not just in Scotland) is driven from the bottom up, and - crucially - by young people. Young Scots are very green, and also very pro-independence. It chimes with their core voters.

Greens in Scotland are a gaggle of useless half witted F*** wits ,

DavidL said:

Philip_Thompson said:

DavidL said:

Theuniondivvie said:

StuartDickson said:

Theuniondivvie said:

StuartDickson said:

I concur that the future is looking bright for Green politics and parties, in stark contrast to species and habitat diversity, invasive species damage, climate change etc.

I can understand the impulse to be rude about all things Jock, but the success of the Green movement in Scotland deserves a little deeper analysis than the Veganism jibe. For a start, ask yourself (or, better yet, ask the Scottish Green Party) *why* they support independence?

Some suggestions:
- ejecting nuclear weapons from our country is only possible with sovereignty
- control of our waters (the largest and richest in the UK) would allow us to pursue greener marine policies
- fairness and popular sovereignty: green politics (everywhere, not just in Scotland) is driven from the bottom up, and - crucially - by young people. Young Scots are very green, and also very pro-independence. It chimes with their core voters.

I think there’s a tendency for onlookers to think of the list regional vote for Holyrood as a second vote and therefore taken less seriously by voters. As I pointed out out during the last Holyrood election I know plenty of folk who saw their list Green vote as their primary one with their constituency vote complimentary to that. I don’t think there are many young Scots looking at SLab or (lol) SCons and thinking ‘gosh, a vote for them will also be great for the planet’.

Of course the combination of a party committed to the environment & Indy and now in government has made some people’s heads explode and therefore incapable of objective analysis.

Those exploding heads are mostly bald, wrinkly, Tory and/or not on the Scottish electoral register. They’ve had their day. The kidz are in town.

I’m sure the wrinkly heads are ripe for a bounce back with exciting ideas such as sooking up the oil from the Cambo field then storing it for some indefinite period, or that not drilling Cambo would be a disaster for the environment. Am also looking forward to the torchlit parades to celebrate the opening of COP26.

Are you really opposed to developing Cambo?

I was at a dinner party on Monday and one of the guests was of that view. He thought as a G7 nation we should be showing a lead, that the quantity of oil already available should be sufficient to transition our economy from hydrocarbons to renewables and that we would lose all moral authority to express a view on these matters if we could not resist the temptation of another oil field. Basically he was arguing that the world couldn't really afford to burn the oil we already had and did not need more.

I was quite startled to be honest but it was thought provoking.

Its pure unscientific, unenvironmental, uneconomic hogwash.

All it would do is mean we import more fuel, or export less. It will damage our balance of trade and won't impact the environment whatsoever, that's all.

Our and the world's transition away from oil will be due to technological and economic progress, like the already-set 2030 deadline to stop selling oil consuming cars, not whether or not we have a domestic oil field or import from the Middle East.

That was my view but the person concerned is a scientist and quite distinguished in his field. He asked, how do we persuade backward countries (like Germany) to give up their cheap coal powered power stations if we can't resist bringing out yet more oil?

I am not sure that I buy into this moral leadership stuff, we rather see how that ends in Afghanistan but there is no doubt that the urgency of reducing/eliminating the burning of fossil fuels is greater than we thought.

We persuade them to give up their coal powered power stations by giving them up ourselves. We've already done that! If that's not enough for them, then what else is going to change anything?

"Bringing out yet more oil" into a world awash with oil doesn't change the world one iota. Stopping the consumption of oil (or coal) via changing technologies does.

Whether we consume oil or coal we "brought out" ourselves is immaterial - imported fossil fuels just marginally increases the emissions it doesn't reduce them.

It is the elimination of coal consumption at power plants, or oil consumption via changing to electric vehicles, that will change the world.

StuartDickson said:

JosiasJessop said:

Now this is my sort of challenge:
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-58400061

Except I'm too wimpy to attempt it.

Nope. Purely for masochists. And completely pointless.

I wish we would approach the natural world from a holistic Gaia starting point. Straight lines, bird lists and other “square” ways of looking at our landscape, geology and nature sap the sheer joy out of the experience. Just pull up a picnic chair and sit there for an hour or two. Just absorb nature. You don’t need to *do* anything.

Each to their own but I do agree with you about some pointless masochism. Indeed, I've increasingly come to find a middle way here: eschewing the more ridiculous challenges which you're probably right to critique, but at the same time not simply sitting on my derriere. A friend of mine asked me recently to do the three peaks challenge in Yorkshire and I was pleased simply to say 'no'. Why would belting up and down three austere peaks in 24 hours be remotely sensible, enjoyable or getting close to nature?

Of course, a lot of people use extreme exercise to challenge themselves but also to escape from things: literally running away. It's probably better than hitting the bottle but not by much.

Walking is a magnificent form of exercise if you're able to put in a good couple of hours of it each time. It's part of my covid recalibration that this is exactly what I now do every day.

StuartDickson said:

JosiasJessop said:

Now this is my sort of challenge:
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-58400061

Except I'm too wimpy to attempt it.

Nope. Purely for masochists. And completely pointless.

I wish we would approach the natural world from a holistic Gaia starting point. Straight lines, bird lists and other “square” ways of looking at our landscape, geology and nature sap the sheer joy out of the experience. Just pull up a picnic chair and sit there for an hour or two. Just absorb nature. You don’t need to *do* anything.

Ah, so you're the sort of person who 'enjoys' nature within a few hundred metres of a car park. I'm glad there're people like you, as it means the wilds are a little emptier.

I'm currently doing a multi-year running project. During these runs, I've seen things and discovered stuff about my local area that no amount of sitting about in a chair would have taught me. From Roman burial mounds to communal bread ovens; village lock-ups to secret WW2 airbases. I've got to know and appreciate this little corner of Cambridgeshire and Bedfordshire so much more.

Besides, much of what we do in life is completely pointless. 99% of your posts on PB probably don't matter much (mine, as well). Yet we post.

DecrepiterJohnL said:

Sainsbury's sitrep midday yesterday. For the first time, there are many (though still a minority, say 20 per cent of) customers not wearing masks. Some shelves are still bare.

It's utter madness at the moment not to be wearing a mask in a confined indoor space. I had a go at M&S staff two days ago. All the customers were in masks and none of the staff. My other local shop had to shut because, surprise surprise, the anti-mask staff got struck down by covid.

We only need to look at Israel to see this ain't yet over. Where's Johnson on this? Nowhere. So a month or two from now we will start playing catch up.

Going green isn't just because of climate change or cleaner air or concerns about reliance on oil prices - we should do it because we can be good at it.

These islands are ready-made for exploitation of the weather for energy generation. We have a lot of wind, a lot of sunshine and a lot of tides. Yet instead of investing in leading edge green energy technology we seem happy to import it.

This has to reverse. I know that in this era of free market bankism investment is seen as communism, but we really need to spend now to both save later and sell later.

DavidL said:

Scott_xP said:

New greener petrol will be introduced to service stations across Britain from today despite fears that hundreds of thousands of drivers still do not know whether their car can use it without being damaged.

More than 8,000 petrol stations will start selling E10 fuel, which is designed to cut greenhouse gas emissions from combustion engines, throughout September. The petrol is blended with 10 per cent bioethanol, which is made from materials such as grains, sugars and waste wood.

E5 petrol, which is sold throughout the UK at present, has 5 per cent bioethanol.

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/who-can-use-the-new-greener-e10-petrol-gfkz63ghm

Is it not about 10-15p a litre more expensive? Undoes all those years of cancelling the fuel escalator at a stroke.

Not sure about that.

I think we have had 8-9 years of no +3% a year fuel escalator, which would have increased fuel prices by around 30%.

10-15p increase per litre is 10% of current prices.

Aside: looking at the data for a different debate, and cars are in total using the same amount of fuel they did in 2000.


https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/928350/2020_Energy_Consumption_in_the_UK__ECUK_.pdf

Heathener said:

StuartDickson said:

JosiasJessop said:

Now this is my sort of challenge:
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-58400061

Except I'm too wimpy to attempt it.

Nope. Purely for masochists. And completely pointless.

I wish we would approach the natural world from a holistic Gaia starting point. Straight lines, bird lists and other “square” ways of looking at our landscape, geology and nature sap the sheer joy out of the experience. Just pull up a picnic chair and sit there for an hour or two. Just absorb nature. You don’t need to *do* anything.

Each to their own but I do agree with you about some pointless masochism. Indeed, I've increasingly come to find a middle way here: eschewing the more ridiculous challenges which you're probably right to critique, but at the same time not simply sitting on my derriere. A friend of mine asked me recently to do the three peaks challenge in Yorkshire and I was pleased simply to say 'no'. Why would belting up and down three austere peaks in 24 hours be remotely sensible, enjoyable or getting close to nature?

Of course, a lot of people use extreme exercise to challenge themselves but also to escape from things: literally running away. It's probably better than hitting the bottle but not by much.

Walking is a magnificent form of exercise if you're able to put in a good couple of hours of it each time. It's part of my covid recalibration that this is exactly what I now do every day.

Setting yourself challenges can be very positive. You get to learn about yourself and your limits; it gives you something to focus on outside family life and work.

Yet there is also some truth in what you say. The Pennine Way is not as popular as it once was, but apparently in the seventies and eighties loads of people did it for charity. To be different, some did it walking backwards; others in a wheelbarrow. That does seem kind-of pointless.

Theuniondivvie said:

DavidL said:

Theuniondivvie said:

StuartDickson said:

Theuniondivvie said:

StuartDickson said:

I concur that the future is looking bright for Green politics and parties, in stark contrast to species and habitat diversity, invasive species damage, climate change etc.

I can understand the impulse to be rude about all things Jock, but the success of the Green movement in Scotland deserves a little deeper analysis than the Veganism jibe. For a start, ask yourself (or, better yet, ask the Scottish Green Party) *why* they support independence?

Some suggestions:
- ejecting nuclear weapons from our country is only possible with sovereignty
- control of our waters (the largest and richest in the UK) would allow us to pursue greener marine policies
- fairness and popular sovereignty: green politics (everywhere, not just in Scotland) is driven from the bottom up, and - crucially - by young people. Young Scots are very green, and also very pro-independence. It chimes with their core voters.

I think there’s a tendency for onlookers to think of the list regional vote for Holyrood as a second vote and therefore taken less seriously by voters. As I pointed out out during the last Holyrood election I know plenty of folk who saw their list Green vote as their primary one with their constituency vote complimentary to that. I don’t think there are many young Scots looking at SLab or (lol) SCons and thinking ‘gosh, a vote for them will also be great for the planet’.

Of course the combination of a party committed to the environment & Indy and now in government has made some people’s heads explode and therefore incapable of objective analysis.

Those exploding heads are mostly bald, wrinkly, Tory and/or not on the Scottish electoral register. They’ve had their day. The kidz are in town.

I’m sure the wrinkly heads are ripe for a bounce back with exciting ideas such as sooking up the oil from the Cambo field then storing it for some indefinite period, or that not drilling Cambo would be a disaster for the environment. Am also looking forward to the torchlit parades to celebrate the opening of COP26.

Are you really opposed to developing Cambo?

I was at a dinner party on Monday and one of the guests was of that view. He thought as a G7 nation we should be showing a lead, that the quantity of oil already available should be sufficient to transition our economy from hydrocarbons to renewables and that we would lose all moral authority to express a view on these matters if we could not resist the temptation of another oil field. Basically he was arguing that the world couldn't really afford to burn the oil we already had and did not need more.

I was quite startled to be honest but it was thought provoking.

Your fellow guest certainly has a point. I’m against gung-ho short termism, and I’m definitely against the party that oversees the licensing of new oil fields taking brib..sorry, contributions from companies that want to exploit new oil fields.

I understand it was stated on BBC Scotland that the emissions from the oil produced from Cambo is the equivalent of running 18 coal fired power stations (for how long I don’t know).

That's a bollocks comparison. You can't compare the supply of something that is needed and will be supplied either way, with the consumption of something that isn't needed and has been stopped already in this country.

We're going to consume the oil either way, the question is not whether our petrol cars drive on Cambo-fuelled oil or switch to green energy instead. The question is whether we drive our petrol cars on Cambo-fuelled oil or Saudi [or other] fuelled oil instead.

So what is the purpose in paying the Saudis [or others] for fuel instead of workers at Cambo?

Whereas running 18 coal fired power stations, which could instead be switched off and have nuclear or wind or hydro or other power plants running instead does add to CO2 emissions.

We've already shown switching off coal is possible, we've done it already. We've already got a date set for switching off oil sales, but we need oil until we get through this transition.

It isn't a choice of oil or no oil. Its Cambo oil or Saudi [or other] oil.

JosiasJessop said:

StuartDickson said:

JosiasJessop said:

Now this is my sort of challenge:
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-58400061

Except I'm too wimpy to attempt it.

Nope. Purely for masochists. And completely pointless.

I wish we would approach the natural world from a holistic Gaia starting point. Straight lines, bird lists and other “square” ways of looking at our landscape, geology and nature sap the sheer joy out of the experience. Just pull up a picnic chair and sit there for an hour or two. Just absorb nature. You don’t need to *do* anything.

Ah, so you're the sort of person who 'enjoys' nature within a few hundred metres of a car park. I'm glad there're people like you, as it means the wilds are a little emptier.

I'm currently doing a multi-year running project. During these runs, I've seen things and discovered stuff about my local area that no amount of sitting about in a chair would have taught me. From Roman burial mounds to communal bread ovens; village lock-ups to secret WW2 airbases. I've got to know and appreciate this little corner of Cambridgeshire and Bedfordshire so much more.

Besides, much of what we do in life is completely pointless. 99% of your posts on PB probably don't matter much (mine, as well). Yet we post.

Absurd. My posts on here are incredibly persuasive and change lots of opinions 😉

RochdalePioneers said:

DavidL said:

Scott_xP said:

New greener petrol will be introduced to service stations across Britain from today despite fears that hundreds of thousands of drivers still do not know whether their car can use it without being damaged.

More than 8,000 petrol stations will start selling E10 fuel, which is designed to cut greenhouse gas emissions from combustion engines, throughout September. The petrol is blended with 10 per cent bioethanol, which is made from materials such as grains, sugars and waste wood.

E5 petrol, which is sold throughout the UK at present, has 5 per cent bioethanol.

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/who-can-use-the-new-greener-e10-petrol-gfkz63ghm

Is it not about 10-15p a litre more expensive? Undoes all those years of cancelling the fuel escalator at a stroke.

Not so far. A straight swap of the sticker at the pump.

Certainly went up 5p -10p last week

Greens now in government in Scotland of course and looking set for government in Germany again.

The Greens also provided support for Gillard's minority Labor government in Australia in 2010 and for Ardern's Labour government in New Zealand in 2017.

As they only have 1 MP here the Tories and Unionists would only have to be 1 or 2 seats short of a combined majority for the Greens to make the difference to make Starmer PM but it is not completely impossible.

However they can also cost the main centre left party too eg Green candidate Ralph Nader cost Gore key votes in Florida which gave Bush the state and the EC and the Presidency in 2000

malcolmg said:

RochdalePioneers said:

DavidL said:

Scott_xP said:

New greener petrol will be introduced to service stations across Britain from today despite fears that hundreds of thousands of drivers still do not know whether their car can use it without being damaged.

More than 8,000 petrol stations will start selling E10 fuel, which is designed to cut greenhouse gas emissions from combustion engines, throughout September. The petrol is blended with 10 per cent bioethanol, which is made from materials such as grains, sugars and waste wood.

E5 petrol, which is sold throughout the UK at present, has 5 per cent bioethanol.

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/who-can-use-the-new-greener-e10-petrol-gfkz63ghm

Is it not about 10-15p a litre more expensive? Undoes all those years of cancelling the fuel escalator at a stroke.

Not so far. A straight swap of the sticker at the pump.

Certainly went up 5p -10p last week

Yes but to be honest I am not clear whether that was because the replacement fuel was more expensive or the international oil price.

JosiasJessop said:

StuartDickson said:

JosiasJessop said:

Now this is my sort of challenge:
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-58400061

Except I'm too wimpy to attempt it.

Nope. Purely for masochists. And completely pointless.

I wish we would approach the natural world from a holistic Gaia starting point. Straight lines, bird lists and other “square” ways of looking at our landscape, geology and nature sap the sheer joy out of the experience. Just pull up a picnic chair and sit there for an hour or two. Just absorb nature. You don’t need to *do* anything.

Ah, so you're the sort of person who 'enjoys' nature within a few hundred metres of a car park. I'm glad there're people like you, as it means the wilds are a little emptier.

I'm currently doing a multi-year running project. During these runs, I've seen things and discovered stuff about my local area that no amount of sitting about in a chair would have taught me. From Roman burial mounds to communal bread ovens; village lock-ups to secret WW2 airbases. I've got to know and appreciate this little corner of Cambridgeshire and Bedfordshire so much more.

Besides, much of what we do in life is completely pointless. 99% of your posts on PB probably don't matter much (mine, as well). Yet we post.

That's rather cruel.

Stu is gearing up for an assault on the eating-baked-beans-with-a-cocktail-stick record.

StuartDickson said:

Heathener said:

StuartDickson said:

JosiasJessop said:

Now this is my sort of challenge:
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-58400061

Except I'm too wimpy to attempt it.

Nope. Purely for masochists. And completely pointless.

I wish we would approach the natural world from a holistic Gaia starting point. Straight lines, bird lists and other “square” ways of looking at our landscape, geology and nature sap the sheer joy out of the experience. Just pull up a picnic chair and sit there for an hour or two. Just absorb nature. You don’t need to *do* anything.

Each to their own but I do agree with you about some pointless masochism. Indeed, I've increasingly come to find a middle way here: eschewing the more ridiculous challenges which you're probably right to critique, but at the same time not simply sitting on my derriere. A friend of mine asked me recently to do the three peaks challenge in Yorkshire and I was pleased simply to say 'no'. Why would belting up and down three austere peaks in 24 hours be remotely sensible, enjoyable or getting close to nature?

Of course, a lot of people use extreme exercise to challenge themselves but also to escape from things: literally running away. It's probably better than hitting the bottle but not by much.

Walking is a magnificent form of exercise if you're able to put in a good couple of hours of it each time. It's part of my covid recalibration that this is exactly what I now do every day.

Wise words. Saying ‘No’ to addicts is very important.

One of the aspects of modern Swedish society that bugs the shit out of me is the ubiquity of gyms. Can’t stand the fuckers. Get out in nature you pathetic twats. Proximity to nature is one of the greatest assets of the country. Donate the saved membership money to charity.

To each his own, but neither peak-climbing nor getting out into nature nor gyms appeal to me. At the risk of sounding like Contrarian, why shouldn't we all do what we like, although with an eye to keeping more or less fit one way or another?

The assumption that if you don't like what someone else likes you're a "pathetic twat" is fundamentally flawed. Applies to all kinds of stuff that people posture about - food, music, books, movies. I'll try something that someone recommends and if it doesn't appeal I'll do something else. Get over it!

Heathener said:

DecrepiterJohnL said:

Sainsbury's sitrep midday yesterday. For the first time, there are many (though still a minority, say 20 per cent of) customers not wearing masks. Some shelves are still bare.

It's utter madness at the moment not to be wearing a mask in a confined indoor space. I had a go at M&S staff two days ago. All the customers were in masks and none of the staff. My other local shop had to shut because, surprise surprise, the anti-mask staff got struck down by covid.

We only need to look at Israel to see this ain't yet over. Where's Johnson on this? Nowhere. So a month or two from now we will start playing catch up.

If you have been double vaccinated it should be personal choice if you want to wear a mask in shops.

Yes you might be slightly more likely to catch Covid but you are very unlikely to be hospitalised anyway.

If you have not been double vaccinated then getting jabbed would protect you from Covid far more than just wearing a mask would and almost everyone has been offered both jabs now

StuartDickson said:

CarlottaVance said:

This'll fix the deficit:

Scotland is to trial a four-day week, but without a loss of pay......

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-business-58403087

The whole planet is heading in this direction. I think we’re heading fast to three day weeks.

I personally work as few hours as I possibly can, typically about 30 hours a week, but sometimes fewer. I regard people who work more than 50 hours per week to be mentally retarded.

The habit of “presenteeism” is a tragedy. Folk hanging around doing fuck all. Twats. Either be productive or go home.

More complete BOLLOX

malcolmg said:

DavidL said:

malcolmg said:

RochdalePioneers said:

DavidL said:

Scott_xP said:

New greener petrol will be introduced to service stations across Britain from today despite fears that hundreds of thousands of drivers still do not know whether their car can use it without being damaged.

More than 8,000 petrol stations will start selling E10 fuel, which is designed to cut greenhouse gas emissions from combustion engines, throughout September. The petrol is blended with 10 per cent bioethanol, which is made from materials such as grains, sugars and waste wood.

E5 petrol, which is sold throughout the UK at present, has 5 per cent bioethanol.

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/who-can-use-the-new-greener-e10-petrol-gfkz63ghm

Is it not about 10-15p a litre more expensive? Undoes all those years of cancelling the fuel escalator at a stroke.

Not so far. A straight swap of the sticker at the pump.

Certainly went up 5p -10p last week

Yes but to be honest I am not clear whether that was because the replacement fuel was more expensive or the international oil price.

Seems to be up every time you pass a garage these days

The price of a barrel of Brent Crude has nearly doubled in the past twelve months.

But sure, we'll 'help the environment' by paying the Saudis to import more because others won't stop burning coal, that'll help. 🤦‍♂️