Join us FREE, we're FREE to use
Web's largest swingers site since 2006.
Already registered?
Login here
Join us FREE, we're FREE to use
Web's largest swingers site since 2006.
Already registered?
Login here
 | Back to forum list |
| Back to Politics |
| Jump to newest |  |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"It was a contractor fiasco but that’s not entirely true. It depends on what type of fuel it uses. Only worse if it uses LNG." 'The carbon footprint of a long-delayed new "green" ferry will be far larger than the 31-year-old diesel ship that usually serves the route between the Scottish mainland and the island of Arran. An emissions analysis by CalMac has calculated MV Glen Sannox will emit 10,391 equivalent tonnes of CO2 a year compared with 7,732 for MV Caledonian Isles.' | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"It's emerged that the much delayed and hugely expensive car ferry commissioned by the SNP for the Isles of Arran will emit much more C02 than its diesel fed predecessor. Is this a sign of things to come ? Politicians with no understanding of energy use and production signing off on headline grabbing green policies which end in costly disaster." This will be rolling out on 34 million cars as the ZEM gathers pace. Useable reliable older cars will be heavily taxed and/or not mot’able due to age | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"There was a guardian article a few years back, that a docked up liner had kept the engines running to power the ships lighting, and doing so for several days, the emissions were equivalent to 688 diesel lorry’s " One of the big issues with 'Net Zero' will be politicians promoting 'green' policies with no understanding of the science or engineering issues. Look at the disaster of Germany closing its nuclear power and now dependent on imported gas and coal.🤦♂️ | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"It was a contractor fiasco but that’s not entirely true. It depends on what type of fuel it uses. Only worse if it uses LNG. 'The carbon footprint of a long-delayed new "green" ferry will be far larger than the 31-year-old diesel ship that usually serves the route between the Scottish mainland and the island of Arran. An emissions analysis by CalMac has calculated MV Glen Sannox will emit 10,391 equivalent tonnes of CO2 a year compared with 7,732 for MV Caledonian Isles.' " The Emissions are worse but the ship is also larger. If it sails the same number of times as the Caledonian then it will polute more. If, because it is bigger, it sails less often, then it may be better. I think they should have put a sail on it. Plenty of wind in the Scottish isles. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"It's emerged that the much delayed and hugely expensive car ferry commissioned by the SNP for the Isles of Arran will emit much more C02 than its diesel fed predecessor. Is this a sign of things to come ? Politicians with no understanding of energy use and production signing off on headline grabbing green policies which end in costly disaster. This will be rolling out on 34 million cars as the ZEM gathers pace. Useable reliable older cars will be heavily taxed and/or not mot’able due to age " The true cost of EV production and especially sourcing lithium for batteries is hardly ever discussed. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"It's emerged that the much delayed and hugely expensive car ferry commissioned by the SNP for the Isles of Arran will emit much more C02 than its diesel fed predecessor. Is this a sign of things to come ? Politicians with no understanding of energy use and production signing off on headline grabbing green policies which end in costly disaster. This will be rolling out on 34 million cars as the ZEM gathers pace. Useable reliable older cars will be heavily taxed and/or not mot’able due to age The true cost of EV production and especially sourcing lithium for batteries is hardly ever discussed." Add the mass scrapping / recycling cost I wish I’d kept the link; in a construction journal a few years back analysts claimed the carbon footprint to demolish and waste transfer a four bedroom house is equivalent to recycling one million tin cans. I read 25% of landfill is construction waste. Huge environmental damage and landfill, an article couple days ago criticising uk govt/councils for ordering construction of 40 new incinerators. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Rayners new home building will also make a significant carbon footprint. 72kg of carbon per tonne concrete. Someone else can do the maths on this for 1.5 million new homes, transporting on and building new roads and infastructure. Climate action really is a lost cause " Re-use, recycle, restore ! | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"There was a guardian article a few years back, that a docked up liner had kept the engines running to power the ships lighting, and doing so for several days, the emissions were equivalent to 688 diesel lorry’s One of the big issues with 'Net Zero' will be politicians promoting 'green' policies with no understanding of the science or engineering issues. Look at the disaster of Germany closing its nuclear power and now dependent on imported gas and coal.🤦♂️" Taxing farmers out of business, local farm to plate. But no, the average food item travels 1,837 miles before it's eaten in the UK, according to foodmiles.com | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"It's emerged that the much delayed and hugely expensive car ferry commissioned by the SNP for the Isles of Arran will emit much more C02 than its diesel fed predecessor. Is this a sign of things to come ? Politicians with no understanding of energy use and production signing off on headline grabbing green policies which end in costly disaster. This will be rolling out on 34 million cars as the ZEM gathers pace. Useable reliable older cars will be heavily taxed and/or not mot’able due to age The true cost of EV production and especially sourcing lithium for batteries is hardly ever discussed." Is there any reliable research showing the embodied energy in products already manufactured and merits of keeping them going vs scrappage and replacement | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"It's emerged that the much delayed and hugely expensive car ferry commissioned by the SNP for the Isles of Arran will emit much more C02 than its diesel fed predecessor. Is this a sign of things to come ? Politicians with no understanding of energy use and production signing off on headline grabbing green policies which end in costly disaster." The story is here... https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cwy87e72yg3o I was going to start a similar thread op. It's what happens when you let primary school kids set policy on complex things. Still... Ticked a few boxes. Like those fucking stupid light bulbs and so called smart meters. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"It's emerged that the much delayed and hugely expensive car ferry commissioned by the SNP for the Isles of Arran will emit much more C02 than its diesel fed predecessor. Is this a sign of things to come ? Politicians with no understanding of energy use and production signing off on headline grabbing green policies which end in costly disaster." There will be a battery one along soon... Or maybe a pedal one... Or solar powered one... | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"It was a contractor fiasco but that’s not entirely true. It depends on what type of fuel it uses. Only worse if it uses LNG. 'The carbon footprint of a long-delayed new "green" ferry will be far larger than the 31-year-old diesel ship that usually serves the route between the Scottish mainland and the island of Arran. An emissions analysis by CalMac has calculated MV Glen Sannox will emit 10,391 equivalent tonnes of CO2 a year compared with 7,732 for MV Caledonian Isles.' The Emissions are worse but the ship is also larger. If it sails the same number of times as the Caledonian then it will polute more. If, because it is bigger, it sails less often, then it may be better. I think they should have put a sail on it. Plenty of wind in the Scottish isles." And it carries less foot passengers too so will have to sail more to carry the same foot passengers. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"It's emerged that the much delayed and hugely expensive car ferry commissioned by the SNP for the Isles of Arran will emit much more C02 than its diesel fed predecessor. Is this a sign of things to come ? Politicians with no understanding of energy use and production signing off on headline grabbing green policies which end in costly disaster. This will be rolling out on 34 million cars as the ZEM gathers pace. Useable reliable older cars will be heavily taxed and/or not mot’able due to age The true cost of EV production and especially sourcing lithium for batteries is hardly ever discussed. Is there any reliable research showing the embodied energy in products already manufactured and merits of keeping them going vs scrappage and replacement " That would be very useful research. Cars in particular are so much more reliable than in the past- properly looked after most modern cars could do 200k miles easily. And yet millions of those cars will be made obsolete or unaffordable by the EV laws. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Rayners new home building will also make a significant carbon footprint. 72kg of carbon per tonne concrete. Someone else can do the maths on this for 1.5 million new homes, transporting on and building new roads and infastructure. Climate action really is a lost cause " Whaaat you mean house building has consequences...?,! Fuck no way. It's almost as if nobody thought building 1.5 million lumos of concrete would make a difference to run off, road building, do you think they will build shops and trains and roads and schools and hospitals for the extras as well? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"It's emerged that the much delayed and hugely expensive car ferry commissioned by the SNP for the Isles of Arran will emit much more C02 than its diesel fed predecessor. Is this a sign of things to come ? Politicians with no understanding of energy use and production signing off on headline grabbing green policies which end in costly disaster. The story is here... https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cwy87e72yg3o I was going to start a similar thread op. It's what happens when you let primary school kids set policy on complex things. Still... Ticked a few boxes. Like those fucking stupid light bulbs and so called smart meters. " As soon as green issues became political rather than practical the trouble started. All the pressure is for short term box ticking and high publicity wins. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Rayners new home building will also make a significant carbon footprint. 72kg of carbon per tonne concrete. Someone else can do the maths on this for 1.5 million new homes, transporting on and building new roads and infastructure. Climate action really is a lost cause Whaaat you mean house building has consequences...?,! Fuck no way. It's almost as if nobody thought building 1.5 million lumos of concrete would make a difference to run off, road building, do you think they will build shops and trains and roads and schools and hospitals for the extras as well? " This is the point exactly. Global population +25% in next 50 years. Two billion more people In the meantime must get led bulbs, electric car etc to save the planet. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"It was a contractor fiasco but that’s not entirely true. It depends on what type of fuel it uses. Only worse if it uses LNG. 'The carbon footprint of a long-delayed new "green" ferry will be far larger than the 31-year-old diesel ship that usually serves the route between the Scottish mainland and the island of Arran. An emissions analysis by CalMac has calculated MV Glen Sannox will emit 10,391 equivalent tonnes of CO2 a year compared with 7,732 for MV Caledonian Isles.' The Emissions are worse but the ship is also larger. If it sails the same number of times as the Caledonian then it will polute more. If, because it is bigger, it sails less often, then it may be better. I think they should have put a sail on it. Plenty of wind in the Scottish isles. And it carries less foot passengers too so will have to sail more to carry the same foot passengers. " There was never a need for that many foot passengers on those crossings so despite the apparent fiasco, this is only a mute point. The vessel was aligned to the ongoing demand in the vehicle and foot passenger profile. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"It's emerged that the much delayed and hugely expensive car ferry commissioned by the SNP for the Isles of Arran will emit much more C02 than its diesel fed predecessor. Is this a sign of things to come ? Politicians with no understanding of energy use and production signing off on headline grabbing green policies which end in costly disaster. There will be a battery one along soon... Or maybe a pedal one... Or solar powered one... " The Romans and Phoenicians had it right, albeit 2000 years ago. What about a galley?....sail powered by the wind and oars powered by those guilty of various misdemeanours or captives, sadly in the wrong place at the wrong time. At least it would be green but also unethical.  | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"It was a contractor fiasco but that’s not entirely true. It depends on what type of fuel it uses. Only worse if it uses LNG. 'The carbon footprint of a long-delayed new "green" ferry will be far larger than the 31-year-old diesel ship that usually serves the route between the Scottish mainland and the island of Arran. An emissions analysis by CalMac has calculated MV Glen Sannox will emit 10,391 equivalent tonnes of CO2 a year compared with 7,732 for MV Caledonian Isles.' The Emissions are worse but the ship is also larger. If it sails the same number of times as the Caledonian then it will polute more. If, because it is bigger, it sails less often, then it may be better. I think they should have put a sail on it. Plenty of wind in the Scottish isles. And it carries less foot passengers too so will have to sail more to carry the same foot passengers. There was never a need for that many foot passengers on those crossings so despite the apparent fiasco, this is only a mute point. The vessel was aligned to the ongoing demand in the vehicle and foot passenger profile." They just ignored the fact it's draught is suitable and the ship yards couldn't cope with lng propulsion. But if they did actually match foot passenger capabilities to demand that's a good thing. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"It's emerged that the much delayed and hugely expensive car ferry commissioned by the SNP for the Isles of Arran will emit much more C02 than its diesel fed predecessor. Is this a sign of things to come ? Politicians with no understanding of energy use and production signing off on headline grabbing green policies which end in costly disaster. There will be a battery one along soon... Or maybe a pedal one... Or solar powered one... The Romans and Phoenicians had it right, albeit 2000 years ago. What about a galley?....sail powered by the wind and oars powered by those guilty of various misdemeanours or captives, sadly in the wrong place at the wrong time. At least it would be green but also unethical. "There's the paradox isn't it? I want to be able to go anywhere do anything eat food and products from all over the world, migrate entire populations to different parts of the world and build shops and houses and airports but I want do it all instantly and do it without any consequences please. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"There's the paradox isn't it? I want to be able to go anywhere do anything eat food and products from all over the world, migrate entire populations to different parts of the world and build shops and houses and airports but I want do it all instantly and do it without any consequences please. " I can see what you are getting at, but I don't think anyone would be under the impression that there are no consequences. Of course there are. Whether people are cognisant (or even care) is another matter entirely however. . This is a field (no pun intended) where highly advanced quantum computing (coupled with AI) could provide meaningful data, which could be used to modify social behaviour, which in turn could reduce CO2. (Yes, I know there are lot of "coulds". These can be encouraged or discouraged with credits / fines). . Eg, Weekly Home Shopping Delivery. Each item when picked has a QR code / NFC tag. Links to a database showing tons of info on product. What it cost to produce, who made it, where it was made, yada yada yada. Hundreds of data points, including CO2 / NOX / Etc. You'd get a receipt showing your Carbon Footprint for that week's shopping, with a QR Code. You could use the code to drill down to the items that had the most impact. Then you can decide if you want to buy them again. Or click a link for an "alternative" with a lower impact. Companies would see sales drop if their products are being avoided. This in turn drives them to greater efficiency. Everything is interconnected. The possibilities are far-reaching. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"There's the paradox isn't it? I want to be able to go anywhere do anything eat food and products from all over the world, migrate entire populations to different parts of the world and build shops and houses and airports but I want do it all instantly and do it without any consequences please. I can see what you are getting at, but I don't think anyone would be under the impression that there are no consequences. Of course there are. Whether people are cognisant (or even care) is another matter entirely however. . This is a field (no pun intended) where highly advanced quantum computing (coupled with AI) could provide meaningful data, which could be used to modify social behaviour, which in turn could reduce CO2. (Yes, I know there are lot of "coulds". These can be encouraged or discouraged with credits / fines). . Eg, Weekly Home Shopping Delivery. Each item when picked has a QR code / NFC tag. Links to a database showing tons of info on product. What it cost to produce, who made it, where it was made, yada yada yada. Hundreds of data points, including CO2 / NOX / Etc. You'd get a receipt showing your Carbon Footprint for that week's shopping, with a QR Code. You could use the code to drill down to the items that had the most impact. Then you can decide if you want to buy them again. Or click a link for an "alternative" with a lower impact. Companies would see sales drop if their products are being avoided. This in turn drives them to greater efficiency. Everything is interconnected. The possibilities are far-reaching. " That's the thing though. We don't need quantum computing or any other tech. In fact server farms contrubute a huge amount to the problem. We know already what causes the pollution and problems. We just choose not to do anything effective about it because it would mean less cars less travel less stuff less freedom more effort more inconvenience more time... So for now let's pretend we give a shit | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"It was a contractor fiasco but that’s not entirely true. It depends on what type of fuel it uses. Only worse if it uses LNG. 'The carbon footprint of a long-delayed new "green" ferry will be far larger than the 31-year-old diesel ship that usually serves the route between the Scottish mainland and the island of Arran. An emissions analysis by CalMac has calculated MV Glen Sannox will emit 10,391 equivalent tonnes of CO2 a year compared with 7,732 for MV Caledonian Isles.' The Emissions are worse but the ship is also larger. If it sails the same number of times as the Caledonian then it will polute more. If, because it is bigger, it sails less often, then it may be better. I think they should have put a sail on it. Plenty of wind in the Scottish isles." Ferries tend to have a timetable for sailings and sail at those particular times. I doubt that they wait until the ship is full before deciding to set sail. The only way for it to sail less is to change the timetable to reduce the amount of trips which is easy enough but obviously impacts on the customers in a negative way. If it turns out to be the type of service that waits until it is full then it may work out less polluting by doing less trips though even then it could be a very small gain at the expense of the customers. I would have hoped this was investigated before placing the order, or was it a case that someone just saw the word green and thought that must be good | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"There was a guardian article a few years back, that a docked up liner had kept the engines running to power the ships lighting, and doing so for several days, the emissions were equivalent to 688 diesel lorry’s One of the big issues with 'Net Zero' will be politicians promoting 'green' policies with no understanding of the science or engineering issues. Look at the disaster of Germany closing its nuclear power and now dependent on imported gas and coal.🤦♂️" An old friend of mine had a saying when talking about politicians. "Turn 'em round 3 times and they wouldn't find their way home"  | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"It was a contractor fiasco but that’s not entirely true. It depends on what type of fuel it uses. Only worse if it uses LNG. 'The carbon footprint of a long-delayed new "green" ferry will be far larger than the 31-year-old diesel ship that usually serves the route between the Scottish mainland and the island of Arran. An emissions analysis by CalMac has calculated MV Glen Sannox will emit 10,391 equivalent tonnes of CO2 a year compared with 7,732 for MV Caledonian Isles.' The Emissions are worse but the ship is also larger. If it sails the same number of times as the Caledonian then it will polute more. If, because it is bigger, it sails less often, then it may be better. I think they should have put a sail on it. Plenty of wind in the Scottish isles. Ferries tend to have a timetable for sailings and sail at those particular times. I doubt that they wait until the ship is full before deciding to set sail. The only way for it to sail less is to change the timetable to reduce the amount of trips which is easy enough but obviously impacts on the customers in a negative way. If it turns out to be the type of service that waits until it is full then it may work out less polluting by doing less trips though even then it could be a very small gain at the expense of the customers. I would have hoped this was investigated before placing the order, or was it a case that someone just saw the word green and thought that must be good" Just imagine if they put AI in the name somewhere too... They'd be racing to spunk money away on it | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"It was a contractor fiasco but that’s not entirely true. It depends on what type of fuel it uses. Only worse if it uses LNG. 'The carbon footprint of a long-delayed new "green" ferry will be far larger than the 31-year-old diesel ship that usually serves the route between the Scottish mainland and the island of Arran. An emissions analysis by CalMac has calculated MV Glen Sannox will emit 10,391 equivalent tonnes of CO2 a year compared with 7,732 for MV Caledonian Isles.' " Now, be a good chap and show your workings out with regard to the increased capacity of the ferry (it can handle more passengers and more vehicles), which makes the kind of lazy like for like comparison you've cited rather childish. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"It was a contractor fiasco but that’s not entirely true. It depends on what type of fuel it uses. Only worse if it uses LNG. 'The carbon footprint of a long-delayed new "green" ferry will be far larger than the 31-year-old diesel ship that usually serves the route between the Scottish mainland and the island of Arran. An emissions analysis by CalMac has calculated MV Glen Sannox will emit 10,391 equivalent tonnes of CO2 a year compared with 7,732 for MV Caledonian Isles.' Now, be a good chap and show your workings out with regard to the increased capacity of the ferry (it can handle more passengers and more vehicles), which makes the kind of lazy like for like comparison you've cited rather childish." 🤦♂️ | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
 | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Better give that ferry some Bovaer to sort out those methane issues " | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"There was a guardian article a few years back, that a docked up liner had kept the engines running to power the ships lighting, and doing so for several days, the emissions were equivalent to 688 diesel lorry’s One of the big issues with 'Net Zero' will be politicians promoting 'green' policies with no understanding of the science or engineering issues. Look at the disaster of Germany closing its nuclear power and now dependent on imported gas and coal.🤦♂️" | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Rayners new home building will also make a significant carbon footprint. 72kg of carbon per tonne concrete. Someone else can do the maths on this for 1.5 million new homes, transporting on and building new roads and infastructure. Climate action really is a lost cause " And the alternative? Homes and infrastructure are needed. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"It's emerged that the much delayed and hugely expensive car ferry commissioned by the SNP for the Isles of Arran will emit much more C02 than its diesel fed predecessor. Is this a sign of things to come ? Politicians with no understanding of energy use and production signing off on headline grabbing green policies which end in costly disaster. There will be a battery one along soon... Or maybe a pedal one... Or solar powered one... The Romans and Phoenicians had it right, albeit 2000 years ago. What about a galley?....sail powered by the wind and oars powered by those guilty of various misdemeanours or captives, sadly in the wrong place at the wrong time. At least it would be green but also unethical. "Job opportunities  | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"It was a contractor fiasco but that’s not entirely true. It depends on what type of fuel it uses. Only worse if it uses LNG. 'The carbon footprint of a long-delayed new "green" ferry will be far larger than the 31-year-old diesel ship that usually serves the route between the Scottish mainland and the island of Arran. An emissions analysis by CalMac has calculated MV Glen Sannox will emit 10,391 equivalent tonnes of CO2 a year compared with 7,732 for MV Caledonian Isles.' " | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Incorrect statement, the vessels are not the same , new one is bigger Do some research first It was a contractor fiasco but that’s not entirely true. It depends on what type of fuel it uses. Only worse if it uses LNG. 'The carbon footprint of a long-delayed new "green" ferry will be far larger than the 31-year-old diesel ship that usually serves the route between the Scottish mainland and the island of Arran. An emissions analysis by CalMac has calculated MV Glen Sannox will emit 10,391 equivalent tonnes of CO2 a year compared with 7,732 for MV Caledonian Isles.' " The ferry is bigger but so is the carbon footprint. When it was commissioned it was supposed to lower the carbon footprint. Do some research! | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Rayners new home building will also make a significant carbon footprint. 72kg of carbon per tonne concrete. Someone else can do the maths on this for 1.5 million new homes, transporting on and building new roads and infastructure. Climate action really is a lost cause And the alternative? Homes and infrastructure are needed." 800,000 empty homes apparently, including 10,000 owned by the MOD costing the tax payer £25M annually to maintain. I’d accept many reasons for them being empty; divorce, relocation, probate etc. but 800,000 is still a bigger number and half of Rayners unachievable target. So what policies can there be to get these homes back into use quickly. Six months backlog at HM probate is not helping | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Rayners new home building will also make a significant carbon footprint. 72kg of carbon per tonne concrete. Someone else can do the maths on this for 1.5 million new homes, transporting on and building new roads and infastructure. Climate action really is a lost cause And the alternative? Homes and infrastructure are needed. 800,000 empty homes apparently, including 10,000 owned by the MOD costing the tax payer £25M annually to maintain. I’d accept many reasons for them being empty; divorce, relocation, probate etc. but 800,000 is still a bigger number and half of Rayners unachievable target. So what policies can there be to get these homes back into use quickly. Six months backlog at HM probate is not helping " 600,000 of those are privately owned. The only step is to try and buy them, but I'd guess 90% wouldn't be achievable. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Rayners new home building will also make a significant carbon footprint. 72kg of carbon per tonne concrete. Someone else can do the maths on this for 1.5 million new homes, transporting on and building new roads and infastructure. Climate action really is a lost cause And the alternative? Homes and infrastructure are needed. 800,000 empty homes apparently, including 10,000 owned by the MOD costing the tax payer £25M annually to maintain. I’d accept many reasons for them being empty; divorce, relocation, probate etc. but 800,000 is still a bigger number and half of Rayners unachievable target. So what policies can there be to get these homes back into use quickly. Six months backlog at HM probate is not helping 600,000 of those are privately owned. The only step is to try and buy them, but I'd guess 90% wouldn't be achievable. " Empty homes, 6 months probate delay, two year registration backlog at HM land registry, problematic mortgages (affordability), budget has delivered slower interest rate falls, renter reform bill and 5% stamp duty deterring private rental sector investment, developers asked to cough up for 50% affordable homes, Biodiversity net gain contributions, section 24 on buy to let rentals, self catering tax system ending in April. 2.4 million affordable homes sold off at discounts on right to buy. 60% of uk homes with poor Epc and green deal schemes ended to improve them All these problems start and end at Westminster. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Rayners new home building will also make a significant carbon footprint. 72kg of carbon per tonne concrete. Someone else can do the maths on this for 1.5 million new homes, transporting on and building new roads and infastructure. Climate action really is a lost cause And the alternative? Homes and infrastructure are needed. 800,000 empty homes apparently, including 10,000 owned by the MOD costing the tax payer £25M annually to maintain. I’d accept many reasons for them being empty; divorce, relocation, probate etc. but 800,000 is still a bigger number and half of Rayners unachievable target. So what policies can there be to get these homes back into use quickly. Six months backlog at HM probate is not helping " I bet this issue is older than 5 months old. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The ferry has been built as a dual fuel ferry as many ships are right now. This is a design to take advantage of using both E and Bio methanol as it becomes more and more available. It could possible use ammonia but I doubt it will for safety reasons. Once it changes to the newer fuels it’s carbon footprint will drop dramatically. Billions is being spent on adapting to these new fuels by companies such as Maersk. Just saying.
"So Jam tomorrow...sounds about right for the SNP ! | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The ferry has been built as a dual fuel ferry as many ships are right now. This is a design to take advantage of using both E and Bio methanol as it becomes more and more available. It could possible use ammonia but I doubt it will for safety reasons. Once it changes to the newer fuels it’s carbon footprint will drop dramatically. Billions is being spent on adapting to these new fuels by companies such as Maersk. Just saying.
So Jam tomorrow...sounds about right for the SNP ! "Not their fault The demand for new greener fuels far outstrips supply for now. At least they planned with a view to a future positive. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The ferry has been built as a dual fuel ferry as many ships are right now. This is a design to take advantage of using both E and Bio methanol as it becomes more and more available. It could possible use ammonia but I doubt it will for safety reasons. Once it changes to the newer fuels it’s carbon footprint will drop dramatically. Billions is being spent on adapting to these new fuels by companies such as Maersk. Just saying.
So Jam tomorrow...sounds about right for the SNP ! "As I understand from a few articles this new ship uses LNG (for now at least). Apparently the emissions from LNG are quite bad for the environment, some say worse than normal diesel. The other thing mentioned is that the LNG comes from Qatar to Kent which creates pollution and then driven by diesel truck to its final destination, creating further pollution. Not sure if those figures are included or not. The new ship will have to make fewer trips to be better than the old ship, at least until a better fuel can be supplied | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The ferry has been built as a dual fuel ferry as many ships are right now. This is a design to take advantage of using both E and Bio methanol as it becomes more and more available. It could possible use ammonia but I doubt it will for safety reasons. Once it changes to the newer fuels it’s carbon footprint will drop dramatically. Billions is being spent on adapting to these new fuels by companies such as Maersk. Just saying.
So Jam tomorrow...sounds about right for the SNP !
As I understand from a few articles this new ship uses LNG (for now at least). Apparently the emissions from LNG are quite bad for the environment, some say worse than normal diesel. The other thing mentioned is that the LNG comes from Qatar to Kent which creates pollution and then driven by diesel truck to its final destination, creating further pollution. Not sure if those figures are included or not. The new ship will have to make fewer trips to be better than the old ship, at least until a better fuel can be supplied"Yes that's all right and why the carbon footprint is so high. The idea the ferry can run on biomass is just pie in the SNP sky at this point as there is no reliable and adequate supply. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The ferry has been built as a dual fuel ferry as many ships are right now. This is a design to take advantage of using both E and Bio methanol as it becomes more and more available. It could possible use ammonia but I doubt it will for safety reasons. Once it changes to the newer fuels it’s carbon footprint will drop dramatically. Billions is being spent on adapting to these new fuels by companies such as Maersk. Just saying.
So Jam tomorrow...sounds about right for the SNP !
As I understand from a few articles this new ship uses LNG (for now at least). Apparently the emissions from LNG are quite bad for the environment, some say worse than normal diesel. The other thing mentioned is that the LNG comes from Qatar to Kent which creates pollution and then driven by diesel truck to its final destination, creating further pollution. Not sure if those figures are included or not. The new ship will have to make fewer trips to be better than the old ship, at least until a better fuel can be supplied
Yes that's all right and why the carbon footprint is so high. The idea the ferry can run on biomass is just pie in the SNP sky at this point as there is no reliable and adequate supply."Some times you need to plan for the future. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" Yes that's all right and why the carbon footprint is so high. The idea the ferry can run on biomass is just pie in the SNP sky at this point as there is no reliable and adequate supply. Some times you need to plan for the future." That's not what's happened here. The ferry was always designed to run on LNG which it was claimed (including by Nicola Sturgeon) was much more environmentally friendly. Now it turns out that claim was simply false or at best exaggerated, and when you include the carbon footprint of importing LNG it's even worse. Prof Tristan Smith, from University College London's Energy Institute, said: "In a best case scenario there's a negligible benefit of using LNG, and at worst there would be a deterioration." The claim the ferry could run on biomass has only been made since the truth about LNG was revealed. This was never the plan in advance. Most diesel vehicles 'could' run on biomass but very few do because of supply issues, especially for a huge ferry with a very large fuel capacity. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"LNG is cleaner than heavy oil which the previous ship used. So it’s not a fair comparison, scrubbers may have been fitted to capture the dirty emissions but I doubt it. The shippers calculate their emissions from well to wake as they describe it. I’m not sure where the ferry operator article producer gets theirs so can’t comment specifically . E and Bio methanol ships have been built and are are being ordered in bigger numbers as we speak. Dual fuel is the gap filler due to capacity of fuel and build times. There’s a few Hydrogen ones in the pipeline too. Keels laid. Contracts to supply millions of tons of both E and Bio methanol are being signed again as we speak. The trucks used are also moving within the next five years from diesel to electric and Hydrogen So no it’s not pie in the sky . It’s the future and it’s around the corner. Not sure why so many people are cynical or against progress. " The SNP has ordered four more new ferries, all to run on MGO. No biomass ferries in sight but hopefully by the next century.🤞 | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" Yes that's all right and why the carbon footprint is so high. The idea the ferry can run on biomass is just pie in the SNP sky at this point as there is no reliable and adequate supply. Some times you need to plan for the future. That's not what's happened here. The ferry was always designed to run on LNG which it was claimed (including by Nicola Sturgeon) was much more environmentally friendly. Now it turns out that claim was simply false or at best exaggerated, and when you include the carbon footprint of importing LNG it's even worse. Prof Tristan Smith, from University College London's Energy Institute, said: "In a best case scenario there's a negligible benefit of using LNG, and at worst there would be a deterioration." The claim the ferry could run on biomass has only been made since the truth about LNG was revealed. This was never the plan in advance. Most diesel vehicles 'could' run on biomass but very few do because of supply issues, especially for a huge ferry with a very large fuel capacity." I have no idea what was in the mind of the SNP and you make be right but the ship builder would have known dual fuel was the bonus that’s fact otherwise why bother. Perhaps like you, the SNP didn’t understand what biomass term implied was so just used the term LNG as they thought it was better than diesel . Other than a few trucks running on waste oils (which is classified as biomass) virtually no trucks or ferries run on biomass they run on the gas made from biomass. ( there is one test build bulk carrier running on wood waste). The operator deals in wood wastes so it would be financially efficient for them). Large cross channel ferries similar to the likes of DFDS will be able to run on methanol now and will be capable of running on purely electric in the short routes as new builds arrive. As I said the contracts to supply are being signed and new trucks are on order. Cummins have just achieved a 1800km range with a Hydrogen engined heavy truck. Merc, Man Scania all have hydrogen in build. Sone delivered. Electric trucks can’t carry the payload needed for the heavy end of trucking. Hence the Hydrogen builds. Conclusion the ferry is good for the future uptake in greener fuels which is a very good design bonus. Given its expected lifespan its CO2 emissions will be way below the previous ferry if they adopt the new fuels. That’s a good thing. And many more trucks and ferries will be running in greener fuels by 2030. The result surely overrides political ignorance. The builders knew what they were doing, | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"LNG is cleaner than heavy oil which the previous ship used. So it’s not a fair comparison, scrubbers may have been fitted to capture the dirty emissions but I doubt it. The shippers calculate their emissions from well to wake as they describe it. I’m not sure where the ferry operator article producer gets theirs so can’t comment specifically . E and Bio methanol ships have been built and are are being ordered in bigger numbers as we speak. Dual fuel is the gap filler due to capacity of fuel and build times. There’s a few Hydrogen ones in the pipeline too. Keels laid. Contracts to supply millions of tons of both E and Bio methanol are being signed again as we speak. The trucks used are also moving within the next five years from diesel to electric and Hydrogen So no it’s not pie in the sky . It’s the future and it’s around the corner. Not sure why so many people are cynical or against progress. The SNP has ordered four more new ferries, all to run on MGO. No biomass ferries in sight but hopefully by the next century.🤞" So they can all run on biomass generated gas then . Excellent news . | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"LNG is cleaner than heavy oil which the previous ship used. So it’s not a fair comparison, scrubbers may have been fitted to capture the dirty emissions but I doubt it. The shippers calculate their emissions from well to wake as they describe it. I’m not sure where the ferry operator article producer gets theirs so can’t comment specifically . E and Bio methanol ships have been built and are are being ordered in bigger numbers as we speak. Dual fuel is the gap filler due to capacity of fuel and build times. There’s a few Hydrogen ones in the pipeline too. Keels laid. Contracts to supply millions of tons of both E and Bio methanol are being signed again as we speak. The trucks used are also moving within the next five years from diesel to electric and Hydrogen So no it’s not pie in the sky . It’s the future and it’s around the corner. Not sure why so many people are cynical or against progress. The SNP has ordered four more new ferries, all to run on MGO. No biomass ferries in sight but hopefully by the next century.🤞 So they can all run on biomass generated gas then . Excellent news . " As an added bonus that gas can be generated in Scotland with the right supplier . | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"BBC: The dual-fuel ferry has more car capacity but requires larger engines which also emit methane, a greenhouse gas with a far greater global warming effect than CO2." More people, more cars, bigger ferries, more food production, more houses, more white goods, more pollution of all types. More of everything The UN says the global population will increase by 2 billion ( 25%) by 2080. And that 50% more food production is required by 2050. Meat production is 60% or global agricultural emissions There are few solutions, the problem will just get incrementally worse. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| Post new Message to Thread |
| back to top |  |
