|
Although this thread does not function under the same strict guidelines as the USPMT, it is still a general practice on TL to provide a source with an explanation on why it is relevant and what purpose it adds to the discussion. Failure to do so will result in a mod action. |
On May 03 2022 05:19 LegalLord wrote:Show nested quote +On May 02 2022 21:52 Artisreal wrote:
The gist of your posting amounts to: it`s easier to keep using fossil fuels and too expensive to switch. That’s not what I’m saying at all. What I’m saying is that, while we need to make a transition to a more sustainable source of energy for our economy: 1. Fossil fuels are damn good at what they do, and it’s important to understand how and why. 2. Renewables aren’t an upgrade, functionally speaking, because they have some key weaknesses that make them not cheaper in the cases they’re actually used. Issues like “wind for jet fuel” may sound silly at first glance, but these are actual problems you have to address if you want to stop using fossil fuels entirely. 3. Just because we “have to make renewables work” doesn’t mean we should jump off the economic cliff for lack of an actual viable plan. And in light of all that, it’s best to drop some of these feel-good stories about how “renewables are cheaper” or “we can get energy independence by just going renewable” when the reality is a much messier story. See it for what it actually is: a major economic headwind that’s necessary because of the colossal long-term adverse impact of climate change. As for “this or that organization published a paper that solves all these problems” - no they don’t. Sure, a lot of these studies make a couple good points and highlight approaches that might be viable (i.e. the science works but the engineering might not), but they simplify and tend heavily towards either being unrealistically optimistic or suggesting to subsidize the sponsors of the study. Yes, we have to move forward, but don’t burn the fossil fuel bridge behind you if you want to have an economy before you can make a viable transition work out.
two things:
a) show, don't tell. (i.e. what are fossil fuels good at and how they are essential for the process it's used in? what exactly do you think poses a threat to the economy?)
b) you don't read what I write and that makes it tiring to engage.
You do nothing but write talking points and it's a bit boring if I'm honest, doesn't feel like you actually want to discuss.
Also what the fuck with the strawman of burning brides or trying to frame what I say as a simple solution when I've shown you what I consider major hurdles to be overcome. I'm a bit baffledI how you can read my posts and come to think that this is what I think.
And fuck yes, renewables are the cheapest energy source there is. Because it's like comparatively zero running costs. You can't really compete with that if you're burning fossil fuels at a rate of 82€/ton of CO2.
That we cannot run any economy on that is not something anyone is disputing. And if you read my previous posts, you can see how the problem is tackled from various angles.
We cannot wait until we have tinkered out a solution that is copy blueprint paste and go.
This time, the engineering is there but the science is robust at best and the solution is trial and error.
In sum, what is holding back progress is slow regulatory improvements and lack of additional kWpeak or windpower.
What do you think happens with the money? It goes into the economy, it's like a massive infrastructure undertaking. How that crashes the economy is beyond my understanding.
Waiting now just fucks up the planet even more. We're lucky in fortress USA and fortress Europe.
|
One of the best way individual Europeans can help is by simply installing solar panels on their roofs. Every kwh produced by those means less gas/coal being burned in the power plants. Which is good both, for the environment and for starving the war.
Too bad people can easily find 15k for a car, but start complaining about lack of money when it comes to investing 5-10k in a solar system.
|
United States43214 Posts
On May 03 2022 08:46 arbiter_md wrote:
One of the best way individual Europeans can help is by simply installing solar panels on their roofs. Every kwh produced by those means less gas/coal being burned in the power plants. Which is good both, for the environment and for starving the war.
Too bad people can easily find 15k for a car, but start complaining about lack of money when it comes to investing 5-10k in a solar system.
Much more efficient for Germans to pay Australians to install solar than to install solar in Germany. More coal plants and more sunlight. It’s not like Australian emissions stay in Australia.
|
Zurich15355 Posts
On May 03 2022 09:01 KwarK wrote:Show nested quote +On May 03 2022 08:46 arbiter_md wrote:
One of the best way individual Europeans can help is by simply installing solar panels on their roofs. Every kwh produced by those means less gas/coal being burned in the power plants. Which is good both, for the environment and for starving the war.
Too bad people can easily find 15k for a car, but start complaining about lack of money when it comes to investing 5-10k in a solar system. Much more efficient for Germans to pay Australians to install solar than to install solar in Germany. More coal plants and more sunlight. It’s not like Australian emissions stay in Australia.
Much less efficient in reducing German imports from Russia though.
|
On May 03 2022 09:01 KwarK wrote:Show nested quote +On May 03 2022 08:46 arbiter_md wrote:
One of the best way individual Europeans can help is by simply installing solar panels on their roofs. Every kwh produced by those means less gas/coal being burned in the power plants. Which is good both, for the environment and for starving the war.
Too bad people can easily find 15k for a car, but start complaining about lack of money when it comes to investing 5-10k in a solar system. Much more efficient for Germans to pay Australians to install solar than to install solar in Germany. More coal plants and more sunlight. It’s not like Australian emissions stay in Australia.
Australia has the world’s highest penetration of rooftop solar, and it’s mostly because of the subsidies.
When people figure they can make their money back in around five years by installing rooftop solar, plus the secondary benefits like helping the planet and insurance against power cuts, it really becomes a no brainier. Especially if all your neighbours are doing it too.
We’re now at a stage where there is too much rooftop solar for the existing power supply infrastructure to handle and people are now being encouraged to install batteries to store their excess electricity instead of exporting it to the grid.
Also, apparently if you install a solar panel right above your front door, you get to have a large porch while going around planning restrictions.
|
Unintended but completely expected outcome of Brexit is that we might actually see Irish unification soon
|
I doubt that. There's no majority for unification in Northern Ireland and the UK isn't going to approve a referendum until there is.
|
On May 05 2022 14:52 RvB wrote:
I doubt that. There's no majority for unification in Northern Ireland and the UK isn't going to approve a referendum until there is.
Would the UK even approve one if there was? I want to say there was a non-binding referendum for Scottish independence within the last few years, but I can't remember
|
On May 05 2022 15:28 plasmidghost wrote:Show nested quote +On May 05 2022 14:52 RvB wrote:
I doubt that. There's no majority for unification in Northern Ireland and the UK isn't going to approve a referendum until there is. Would the UK even approve one if there was? I want to say there was a non-binding referendum for Scottish independence within the last few years, but I can't remember
The Scottish referendum in 2014 was a real one and they voted to stay in the UK.
A referendum in Northern Ireland was part of the good friday agreements so there'd be one if they wanted it.
From wikipedia:
Section 1. Status of Northern Ireland.
It is hereby declared that Northern Ireland in its entirety remains part of the United Kingdom and shall not cease to be so without the consent of a majority of the people of Northern Ireland voting in a poll held for the purposes of this section in accordance with Schedule 1.
But if the wish expressed by a majority in such a poll is that Northern Ireland should cease to be part of the United Kingdom and form part of a united Ireland, the Secretary of State shall lay before Parliament such proposals to give effect to that wish as may be agreed between Her Majesty's Government in the United Kingdom and the Government of Ireland.
[...]
Schedule 1
The Secretary of State may by order direct the holding of a poll for the purposes of section 1 on a date specified in the order.
Subject to paragraph 3, the Secretary of State shall exercise the power under paragraph 1 if at any time it appears likely to him that a majority of those voting would express a wish that Northern Ireland should cease to be part of the United Kingdom and form part of a united Ireland.
The Secretary of State shall not make an order under paragraph 1 earlier than seven years after the holding of a previous poll under this Schedule.[18]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Ireland#Good_Friday_Agreement
|
From my perspective there is no UK Government. England just doing what it wants as it has a supermajority in the UK goverment anyway. (super abridged and oversimplified)
2014 Scotland decided against independence. Some voices say because of the UK being in the EU and all its advantages of being a member state.
2016 England decided that Brexit will happen, hence the argument for a second referendum albeit it being called a once in a generation referendum in 2014. (Though some voices say they (Scottish National Party, the ruling party for many many years) are just trying their best to be a nation state and the ends justify every means (mostly socialist policy).)
|
I could have sworn that someone had posted about this already but I couldn't find the post again, sorry to that person if it's the case. All of the left and center left parties of France entered an alliance together for the upcoming legislative elections, and it's going much better than I expected. This has the potential to be a true hindrance for Macron's plans, and it might create a different Overton window for the next five years. While the Socialist Party was destroyed in the last two presidential elections, it still retained decent results in the last legislatives and therefore this alliance represents a real political force.
We're likely not yet fighting for a good future; in the sense that I don't expect the PS to participate in passing anything worthwhile. But this would give us a decent shot against the rightward descent of french politics, and for that alone it's worth following.
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2022/may/04/french-socialist-party-agrees-alliance-with-far-left-for-june-elections
|
I would rate the chance of an irish unification pretty low even if Sinn Fein can head a stable coalition. Either way the choice is up to both Ireland and Northern Ireland, it's hardly a concern for the rest of the UK in comparison to say Scotland or Wales. Either way, I am hard pressed to care at least till voices on either side become too obnoxious..
|
Northern Ireland26027 Posts
Uh-oh…
It’s the way the wind is blowing, eventually. My worry would be Sinn Fein would pull the trigger on a border poll extremely prematurely, and things will get rather unstable here. Well, even more unstable.
There are considerable hurdles to be overcome, and I fear a certain complacency in how large and easy to clear those are.
I’m a small u Unionist, most of my cultural references come from the U.K., who’s open to the idea at some stage, but it needs some care. I’d have personally been fucked under the Irish healthcare regime as opposed to ours to just pick one practical example.
Away off to vote now!
|
On May 05 2022 15:49 RvB wrote:Show nested quote +On May 05 2022 15:28 plasmidghost wrote:On May 05 2022 14:52 RvB wrote:
I doubt that. There's no majority for unification in Northern Ireland and the UK isn't going to approve a referendum until there is. Would the UK even approve one if there was? I want to say there was a non-binding referendum for Scottish independence within the last few years, but I can't remember The Scottish referendum in 2014 was a real one and they voted to stay in the UK. A referendum in Northern Ireland was part of the good friday agreements so there'd be one if they wanted it. From wikipedia: Show nested quote + Section 1. Status of Northern Ireland.
It is hereby declared that Northern Ireland in its entirety remains part of the United Kingdom and shall not cease to be so without the consent of a majority of the people of Northern Ireland voting in a poll held for the purposes of this section in accordance with Schedule 1.
But if the wish expressed by a majority in such a poll is that Northern Ireland should cease to be part of the United Kingdom and form part of a united Ireland, the Secretary of State shall lay before Parliament such proposals to give effect to that wish as may be agreed between Her Majesty's Government in the United Kingdom and the Government of Ireland.
[...]
Schedule 1
The Secretary of State may by order direct the holding of a poll for the purposes of section 1 on a date specified in the order.
Subject to paragraph 3, the Secretary of State shall exercise the power under paragraph 1 if at any time it appears likely to him that a majority of those voting would express a wish that Northern Ireland should cease to be part of the United Kingdom and form part of a united Ireland.
The Secretary of State shall not make an order under paragraph 1 earlier than seven years after the holding of a previous poll under this Schedule.[18] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Ireland#Good_Friday_Agreement
Thank you! I'm going to keep an eye on the election today
|
On May 06 2022 01:32 WombaT wrote:Uh-oh… It’s the way the wind is blowing, eventually. My worry would be Sinn Fein would pull the trigger on a border poll extremely prematurely, and things will get rather unstable here. Well, even more unstable. There are considerable hurdles to be overcome, and I fear a certain complacency in how large and easy to clear those are. I’m a small u Unionist, most of my cultural references come from the U.K., who’s open to the idea at some stage, but it needs some care. I’d have personally been fucked under the Irish healthcare regime as opposed to ours to just pick one practical example. Away off to vote now!
Interesting, can you say a bit more about the differences between the two healthcare systems?
|
|
|
I don't think you quite understand the Brazilian position if you think that Lula is somehow in Putin's pocket. I personally have not much love for Lula, but I do understand the non-western country's studiously neutral position, especially for developing economies. A major part of Brazil's economy is the flourishing agriculture and that is driven primarily by one thing: fertilizer. Who happens to be the largest exporter of fertilizer (particularly nitrates)? You guessed it. Brazil's dependence on Russian fertilizer is probably greater than Germany's dependence on Russian gas, if only because Brazil's economy is, in general, a lot less stable than Germany's.
Furthermore, Brazil's agriculture is exploitative and has devastated unfathomably vast areas of Cerrado savannah (and Amazon rain forest where they can get away with it). For obvious reasons, "the west" has unceasing criticism of Brazil's treatment of its nature, and being lectured by "the west" means siding too far with these critics is politically dangerous, especially for a populist like Lula (it's equally dangerous for a demagogue like Bolsonaro).
Finally, Eastern Europe is just really far away. We ooh and ahh about wars in Africa (or South Asia), but unless genocide-level horrific atrocities are committed, a stern word about how this is a deplorable situation and the leaders should try diplomacy is about the best we can manage. Brazil is much the same, but whereas for us there's suddenly war in our back yard (and the US traditionally gets dragged into that mess), for Brazil a war in Eastern Europe is about as relevant as a war in Africa.
So it's a combination of geopolitical distance, economic opportunism and maybe even a poltical choice to be non-aligned that makes Brazilians neutral (for that matter, the same argument works for South Africa, India, and to a lesser extent China).
|
Northern Ireland26027 Posts
On May 06 2022 05:38 farvacola wrote:Show nested quote +On May 06 2022 01:32 WombaT wrote:Uh-oh… It’s the way the wind is blowing, eventually. My worry would be Sinn Fein would pull the trigger on a border poll extremely prematurely, and things will get rather unstable here. Well, even more unstable. There are considerable hurdles to be overcome, and I fear a certain complacency in how large and easy to clear those are. I’m a small u Unionist, most of my cultural references come from the U.K., who’s open to the idea at some stage, but it needs some care. I’d have personally been fucked under the Irish healthcare regime as opposed to ours to just pick one practical example. Away off to vote now! Interesting, can you say a bit more about the differences between the two healthcare systems?
Very brief overview
It’s not a bad system as healthcare systems go, but it’s a different system from the NHS and it being entirely free at the point of use. Bit of full state coverage, bit of insurance, bit of additional bureaucratic hoops to a plug gaps
I’m not super au fait with it or anything, but it’s a pretty important question to resolve.
I’m quite an edge case with specific health/circumstantial issues, so not especially representative. I’d be royally, royally fucked under the US system, slightly buggered/mildly inconvenienced under the Irish, not inconvenienced at all under the U.K. structures, at least in terms of healthcare burden.
Education is structured quite differently too, although in ways it’s structured better IMO.
I mean these aren’t irresolvable issues, but there’s pretty big structural questions to be resolved.
Notwithstanding tricky cultural issues, and I’m not talking purely those of national identity and whatnot.
There’s a whole cohort of people who’ve been brought up under certain systems, are used to those structures and whose main point of reference is the U.K. etc in media and cultural terms.
I’m actually pretty ignorant of most things Irish, and I’m certainly not alone here. I’d be considerably more knowledgable about the politics, culture, geography etc of the States than Ireland.
With all that said I’m still amenable to a United Ireland, just there’s some pretty large kinks to be ironed out
|
|
|
On May 06 2022 06:30 WombaT wrote:Show nested quote +On May 06 2022 05:38 farvacola wrote:On May 06 2022 01:32 WombaT wrote:Uh-oh… It’s the way the wind is blowing, eventually. My worry would be Sinn Fein would pull the trigger on a border poll extremely prematurely, and things will get rather unstable here. Well, even more unstable. There are considerable hurdles to be overcome, and I fear a certain complacency in how large and easy to clear those are. I’m a small u Unionist, most of my cultural references come from the U.K., who’s open to the idea at some stage, but it needs some care. I’d have personally been fucked under the Irish healthcare regime as opposed to ours to just pick one practical example. Away off to vote now! Interesting, can you say a bit more about the differences between the two healthcare systems? Very brief overviewIt’s not a bad system as healthcare systems go, but it’s a different system from the NHS and it being entirely free at the point of use. Bit of full state coverage, bit of insurance, bit of additional bureaucratic hoops to a plug gaps I’m not super au fait with it or anything, but it’s a pretty important question to resolve. I’m quite an edge case with specific health/circumstantial issues, so not especially representative. I’d be royally, royally fucked under the US system, slightly buggered/mildly inconvenienced under the Irish, not inconvenienced at all under the U.K. structures, at least in terms of healthcare burden. Education is structured quite differently too, although in ways it’s structured better IMO. I mean these aren’t irresolvable issues, but there’s pretty big structural questions to be resolved. Notwithstanding tricky cultural issues, and I’m not talking purely those of national identity and whatnot. There’s a whole cohort of people who’ve been brought up under certain systems, are used to those structures and whose main point of reference is the U.K. etc in media and cultural terms. I’m actually pretty ignorant of most things Irish, and I’m certainly not alone here. I’d be considerably more knowledgable about the politics, culture, geography etc of the States than Ireland. With all that said I’m still amenable to a United Ireland, just there’s some pretty large kinks to be ironed out
Thanks for that, it would otherwise be difficult for me to access such information and I’m always interested in how other countries manage social programs and stuff like access to healthcare.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
