Green, ethical, energy issues in the news

edited 12 July 2021 at 11:38AM in Green & Ethical MoneySaving
6.8K replies 443.8K views
1233234236238239685

Replies

  • michaelsmichaels Forumite
    26.2K Posts
    Part of the Furniture 10,000 Posts Photogenic Name Dropper
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    mmmmikey wrote: »
    On a different tack, interesting piece here about EVs etc.

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-48865702

    Although this is disappointing, I don't really find it surprising and suspect that all we've seen so far with EVs is an initial show of enthusiasm, and sales will plateau for along time before they become a truly viable proposition for the mainstream.

    I'd love be proved wrong on this - any EV owners like to comment, or is anyone like me and really wants one but just can't justify the cost?

    I found the comments 100% depressing, the lack of knowledge is frightening. I know what living with an EV is like, I have had one for 4.5 years.

    Typical are: most people might have to drive at least 300 miles once so all cars need to be able to do this without charging. WE need as many charge points as there are petrol stations etc etc.
    I think....
  • GreatApeGreatApe
    4.5K Posts
    ✭✭✭✭
    Piddles wrote: »
    It seems the rush to ever bigger batteries and longer range is unnecessary and an environmental error. Choose the battery size based on your real world journey requirements and save yourself a load of dosh and the planet a load of environmental impact from that lithium mining and refinement.


    Self drive robo fleets will allow the average EV to be close to average needs

    For instance a robo EV in London might do 10 trips of 6 miles average and then charge up at a supercharger in 15 mins and then do another 10 trips of 6 miles and supercharge to do another 10 trips of 6 miles. then go park and charge for the night to to then repeat the same the next day.

    Such a robo EV will be fine with a 100 mile range and will cycle its bat from 20-80% to keep at lowest degradation. 10 kWh battery would probably be fine (I am assuming a small 2-3 seater robo EV so half the size of a model 3 and getting 10 miles per kWH)

    Or even just a 5KWh battery and it does 5 taxi trips then super charges then does 5 taxi trips then super charges .... etc. A super charge in 15 mins would only require 12KW power for such a small bat robo taxi and you can find that sort of power pretty much anywhere. Even homes have 23kW lines

    Even with a 5KWh battery if it could be cycled 10,000 charges it would get 300,000 miles range out of those batteries before the batteries are replaced or the car is scrapped and replaced by a new one
  • silverwhistlesilverwhistle Forumite
    3.4K Posts
    Ninth Anniversary 1,000 Posts Name Dropper
    ✭✭✭✭
    JKenH wrote: »
    Are all views truly equal?

    Yes, I am afraid so in a democracy. We cannot deny the flat earther’s their vote.


    Maybe not, but if they want to personally drink the poisoned Kool Aid to achieve salvation, that's one thing. If they vote to poison the general water supply, that's another.


    At the moment I'm not particularly impressed by our democracy when two clowns are appealing to a very small and rather homogeneous constituency of voters to attain the highest political office in the land.



    There's plenty else in your posts I disagree with, but I'll stick to that one example.
  • silverwhistlesilverwhistle Forumite
    3.4K Posts
    Ninth Anniversary 1,000 Posts Name Dropper
    ✭✭✭✭
    Piddles wrote: »
    The Green Levy is a highly regressive tax isn't it?


    I see you're both in general agreement and as Martin has pointed out that's not an argument against RE.


    Reactions on here are due to the problem that in the past on this forum there have been posters who have argued against particular technologies by crocodile tear arguments on behalf of the poor, using subsidies as the lever.



    As was pointed out at the time mechanisms for encouraging RE, and balancing out the impact on the poor were and are available to the government. I wouldn't mind betting that those same people who claim to speak on behalf of the poor would be against tax rises, particularly on their capital! Our levels of inequality certainly need dealing with.


    How much will the poor be hit by the subsidies needed for Hinckley C whenever that comes on line...
  • JKenHJKenH Forumite
    3K Posts
    1,000 Posts Third Anniversary Name Dropper
    ✭✭✭✭


    At the moment I'm not particularly impressed by our democracy when two clowns are appealing to a very small and rather homogeneous constituency of voters to attain the highest political office in the land.

    Meanwhile in Europe the top jobs in the EU have been stitched up by Germany France and Belgium behind closed doors. EU democracy is so wonderfully transparent; we are really going to miss it.
    Northern Lincolnshire. 7.8 kWp system, (4.2 kw west facing panels , 3.6 kw east facing), Solis inverters, Solar IBoost water heater, Mitsubishi SRK35ZS-S and SRK20ZS-S Wall Mounted Inverter Heat Pumps, Nissan Leaf and Kia Picanto)
  • Martyn1981Martyn1981 Forumite
    13K Posts
    Part of the Furniture 10,000 Posts Name Dropper Photogenic
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    There are huge health benefits from breathing clean air, drinking clean water and eating less meat. If we are looking at a cost/benefit ratio we have to factor in the impact of reduced health care costs and greater productivity from a healthier population.

    It's not just about the cost of energy production in money, it's the cost in health.

    Thought you might like this short news piece about a book coming out looking at food production going forward into an AGW world.

    I assumed (always dangerous) that it would be a shallow puff piece, but to be fair to all, there was a huge amount of info packed into a few minutes, and it might even be a book you'd be interested in getting.

    [For clarity, I'm not onboard with your vegan (for all) position, though I do sorta agree (basically I'm admitting that I don't want to change too much, just being honest). But I totally agree that beef production does need massive change, certainly massive reduction. So for me the idea of good plant based replacements, or lab grown meat, or insect based meat are all a relief for my hypocrisy.]

    Enjoy:

    Examining Climate Change's Impact On Food | Morning Joe | MSNBC
    Mart. Cardiff. 5.58 kWp PV systems (3.58 ESE & 2.0 WNW)

    For general PV advice please see the PV FAQ thread on the Green & Ethical Board.
  • Martyn1981Martyn1981 Forumite
    13K Posts
    Part of the Furniture 10,000 Posts Name Dropper Photogenic
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    I'm sure I've posted about this some time back, with Indiana getting RE quotes that actually beat out gas, and their subsequent decision to change their generation plans going forward.

    Well here's a bit more:

    Conservative Indiana Chooses Renewables Over Gas As It Retires Coal Early
    Renewables are so cheap, said Mike Hooper, the senior vice president of the Northern Indiana Service Company (NIPSCO), that the utility can close its coal plants early and return $4 billion to its customers over the next 30 years.

    "It ends up being a really big number, somewhere in the neighborhood of $4 billion for our customers, and clearly a lot of that comes from the fact that there’s hundreds of millions of dollars in fuel every year from a marginal standpoint that you're not spending, that the customer gets the advantage of through the check they write us every month."
    Mart. Cardiff. 5.58 kWp PV systems (3.58 ESE & 2.0 WNW)

    For general PV advice please see the PV FAQ thread on the Green & Ethical Board.
  • edited 5 July 2019 at 7:38AM
    Martyn1981Martyn1981 Forumite
    13K Posts
    Part of the Furniture 10,000 Posts Name Dropper Photogenic
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited 5 July 2019 at 7:38AM
    JKenH wrote: »
    Lighten up Mart.

    I have expressed an opinion - you don’t agree. End of.

    No one is going to want to come on here if every discussion ends in you demanding evidence and citations even for arguments that have not been made. Just look how you have twisted the flat earth comment made to illustrate that over time our perception of the world changes. I have never said there was a a valid argument in support of such theories.

    For clarity for someone who has only recently picked up on this thread, this is what I originally said.


    Sorry Mart I don’t agree with that and I suspect that on reflection you will probably realise that wasn’t quite how you intended it to sound.

    It is important to maintain an open mind and consider alternative views in an open debate. The orthodox view cannot remain unchallenged. Reality changes as society progresses; it is not absolute. The world was once thought to be flat and heretics were burnt at the stake.

    Forty years ago green protestors would have been considered loud and negative voices and still are by some. The fact is for some societies and some people in our society there are more pressing realities than going green.

    Everyone is entitled to see the world from their own perspective and we cannot presume that our values are better than theirs.”

    You don’t agree. There we are. Let’s just leave it there. Continuing to labour a point is not becoming for either of us.

    Ken

    Sorry, but you are just twisting more.

    I like the bit about me twisting the flat earth part around, that was of course deliberate, I saw what you'd done - taken an opinion v's science argument and tried to use it against me, despite it supporting my argument of science over opinion. Hence why I flipped it back again and asked you to defend it .... which you declined. If you can't support it, then perhaps you could explain how defending a false argument against science would aid us, instead?

    Now you tell me to lighten up, why, I'm perfectly happy, I've stuck with facts to knock down claims that were entirely wrong. Whereas you have tried to defend the right of opinion over fact, and when asked to defend the argument, refused.

    So I'm content to conclude that you too don't agree with those three opinions, and can't defend them with facts, and are simply trying to argue against my right to opine.

    As I've said before, if you want to argue theoreticals, and the rights and wrongs of every opinion, then I believe that's for another board, or even forum. I thought the purpose here was to spread information, not FUD, and I'll continue to provide facts and evidence in response to accidental or deliberate FUD spread against green and ethical energy issues.

    Regarding what you said, I do recall it, it was in response to my saying that a quote (from someone loads of us have now had to block) was totally wrong. It was totally wrong, it remains totally wrong, and is simply another anti-RE claim that we have all grown to expect .... and now ignore.

    If you can't defend the claim, then you shouldn't waste your time arguing that I have to respect it, that's just a waste of a whole page on this thread and opens the door to anti-RE and anti-AGW comments, which this is not an appropriate place for.

    As I've said before "we are all entitled to our own opinions, but not to our own facts".

    So, can we go back to discussing green energy issues, news and facts/reality?


    Oh, and I should add, in case you didn't get my previous point, when you posted this:
    JKenH wrote: »
    As to facts I wasn’t postulating any but I would like to paraphrase an old adage - this decade’s facts are the next decade’s chip paper

    You've consistently argued that we have to show respect for all opinions, even empty ones that can't be defended, but then go on to show contempt for facts.

    For an opinion to have value it must have at least a basis in fact.

    If I point up and say 'the sky is light blue', whilst you feel it is medium blue, then we have a reasonable opinion, and can happily discuss clouds, colours, optics etc. But if I point up and say 'that's the ground' then little can be gained from you respecting, defending or humoring me, especially if, the future of mankind is borderline at risk.
    Mart. Cardiff. 5.58 kWp PV systems (3.58 ESE & 2.0 WNW)

    For general PV advice please see the PV FAQ thread on the Green & Ethical Board.
  • JKenHJKenH Forumite
    3K Posts
    1,000 Posts Third Anniversary Name Dropper
    ✭✭✭✭
    Maybe not, but if they want to personally drink the poisoned Kool Aid to achieve salvation, that's one thing.

    I’d not come across that expression before so had to look it up. Good to learn something new every day.:)
    Northern Lincolnshire. 7.8 kWp system, (4.2 kw west facing panels , 3.6 kw east facing), Solis inverters, Solar IBoost water heater, Mitsubishi SRK35ZS-S and SRK20ZS-S Wall Mounted Inverter Heat Pumps, Nissan Leaf and Kia Picanto)
  • 1961Nick1961Nick Forumite
    1.4K Posts
    Seventh Anniversary 1,000 Posts
    ✭✭✭
    I see you're both in general agreement and as Martin has pointed out that's not an argument against RE.


    Reactions on here are due to the problem that in the past on this forum there have been posters who have argued against particular technologies by crocodile tear arguments on behalf of the poor, using subsidies as the lever.



    As was pointed out at the time mechanisms for encouraging RE, and balancing out the impact on the poor were and are available to the government. I wouldn't mind betting that those same people who claim to speak on behalf of the poor would be against tax rises, particularly on their capital! Our levels of inequality certainly need dealing with.


    How much will the poor be hit by the subsidies needed for Hinckley C whenever that comes on line...

    We already have a (reasonably) progressive taxation system so why do politicians hide RE subsidies on energy bills? That is clearly a regressive tax as consumption doesn't generally rise in line with income. Why not put a 1% RE surcharge onto the basic rate of income tax....or a 3% surcharge on the higher rate of income tax if you're a JC supporter?
    4kWp (black/black) - Sofar Inverter - SSE(141°) - 30° pitch - North Lincs
    Installed June 2013 - PVGIS = 3400
    Sofar ME3000SP Inverter & 5 x Pylontech US2000B Plus & 2 x US2000C Batteries - 16.8kWh
Sign In or Register to comment.
Latest MSE News and Guides