Net Zero

[udderlyoffroad]

15 minutes ago, 12gauge82 said:

I see this as sheer arrogance by societys elites.

They jet around the world causing more carbon release in a week than some will in their life. Then preach to the plebs about the sacrifices they need to make, all so they can virtue signal to their rich globe trotting mates.

They're ******* down our backs, while trying to convince us it's raining.

To a certain extent, it was ever thus.  Social media has at least made it easier to see these double standards, if not hold them to account.

What I can't understand is the well-to-do chattering classes who are supportive of net zero targets, somehow thinking they'll be exempt, or will be able to buy their way to carbon credits.  I've got bad news for them, they won't.

34 minutes ago, oowee said:

Of course it helps to stop the 7 recycling bins project, the tax on meat project whatever other non proposals that he spoke of. 

There's been a lot of debate online over this, for claim that 'this wasn't a thing' someone manages to find plans of (usually labour-run) councils to make it a thing.

40 minutes ago, Newbie to this said:

Let's just have a referendum on Net Zero.

Brilliant.  We can all get behind that one!  Shame it won't happen, unless you count the defacto referendum which is the next general election.

[islandgun]

Carbon tax, the poor can get a bike and eat turnips, the rich get to travel empty roads on the way to the butchers..😉

[oowee]

7 minutes ago, islandgun said:

Carbon tax, the poor can get a bike and eat turnips, the rich get to travel empty roads on the way to the butchers..😉

🤣 If we cared about the less well off why did we pursue Brexit?

A recent report showed that British households have paid £7bn since Brexit to cover the extra cost of trade barriers on food imports from the EU.

Researchers at the London School of Economics (LSE) estimated the impact of leaving the bloc on UK food prices and found that trade barriers consistently hampered imports, pushing up bills by an average of £250.

The UK has the highest food inflation rate in the industrialised world, according to recent data. The LSE researchers calculated the cost of food in the UK had rocketed by 25% since 2019, but this would have been only 17% without post-Brexit trade restrictions, nearly a third lower.

 

[Mungler]

1 hour ago, 12gauge82 said:

I see this as sheer arrogance by societys elites.

They jet around the world causing more carbon release in a week than some will in their life. Then preach to the plebs about the sacrifices they need to make, all so they can virtue signal to their rich globe trotting mates.

They're ******* down our backs, while trying to convince us it's raining.

Agreed.

It’s the whole Emma Thompson syndrome. 

All virtue signalling - I am a member of an elite and enlightened morally superior group. But I do love business class flights all over the world and a spin on my mates super yacht. 
 

1 hour ago, Newbie to this said:

Let's just have a referendum on Net Zero.

I know it will never happen, because they know they will not get the result they want.

Can't have the people deciding their future.

That's democracy for you.

No one I know is falling for the net zero BS and as you say, that’s why we’ll never get a referendum.

The UK is at 1/2% of whatever global problem there is (or isn’t) and what we do or don’t do will have absolutely no influence on the likes of China, India and Russia. Anyone who thinks otherwise is nuts or deluded.

We are pointlessly cutting our throats.

.

Edited September 22, 2023 by Mungler

[Vince Green]

26 minutes ago, oowee said:

🤣 If we cared about the less well off why did we pursue Brexit?

A recent report showed that British households have paid £7bn since Brexit to cover the extra cost of trade barriers on food imports from the EU.

Researchers at the London School of Economics (LSE) estimated the impact of leaving the bloc on UK food prices and found that trade barriers consistently hampered imports, pushing up bills by an average of £250.

The UK has the highest food inflation rate in the industrialised world, according to recent data. The LSE researchers calculated the cost of food in the UK had rocketed by 25% since 2019, but this would have been only 17% without post-Brexit trade restrictions, nearly a third lower.

 

There is always a survey or a report to say or "prove' any point you want to try and make. That doesn't mean it's true.

That's the nature of the Internet today.

Leaving the EU was without doubt the best thing we could have done. It had become toxic.

[oowee]

3 minutes ago, Vince Green said:

There is always a survey or a report to say or "prove' any point you want to try and make. That doesn't mean it's true.

That's the nature of the Internet today.

Leaving the EU was without doubt the best thing we could have done. It had become toxic.

Fortunately the future PM will not lower UK standards so hopefully trade can at least not get any worse. 

[islandgun]

34 minutes ago, oowee said:

🤣 If we cared about the less well off why did we pursue Brexit?

A recent report showed that British households have paid £7bn since Brexit to cover the extra cost of trade barriers on food imports from the EU.

Researchers at the London School of Economics (LSE) estimated the impact of leaving the bloc on UK food prices and found that trade barriers consistently hampered imports, pushing up bills by an average of £250.

The UK has the highest food inflation rate in the industrialised world, according to recent data. The LSE researchers calculated the cost of food in the UK had rocketed by 25% since 2019, but this would have been only 17% without post-Brexit trade restrictions, nearly a third lower.

 

So compound the error and go net zero, we will be lucky to get turnips..😄

[TIGHTCHOKE]

3 minutes ago, oowee said:

Fortunately the future PM will not lower UK standards so hopefully trade can at least not get any worse. 

So who will that be then?

NOT Starmer!  

[discobob]

1 hour ago, udderlyoffroad said:

unless you count the defacto referendum which is the next general election.

Do you mean the one which will give you a choice of being screwed by Net Zero - or to be royally screwed by Net Zero.

I heard somewhere "but it was in our manifestor" to which the response was "it was in every parties manifesto" - ergo Hobsons Choice

[udderlyoffroad]

20 minutes ago, discobob said:

Do you mean the one which will give you a choice of being screwed by Net Zero - or to be royally screwed by Net Zero.

There are parties standing for election who do not have slavish adherence to Net Zero as part of their manifestos, such as Reform.

Yes, I know that will just end up with a Labour-coalition hellscape, but at least it might, possibly, register in Starmers' Islington-centric mind that he does not have the consent of all the electorate to commit economic seppuku on our behalf.

I can't bring myself to vote for either of the two main parties, and the Lib Dems deserve to rot in electoral obscurity for at least generation for pledging to ignore the Brexit referendum. 

Small, unelectable party it is then, or a spoiled ballot paper, depending on who's standing.

 

[Rewulf]

4 hours ago, oowee said:

Within the biospheric carbon cycle, bioenergy can be carbon neutral because the carbon that is released during combustion has previously been sequestered from the atmosphere and will be sequestered again as the plants regrow, i.e. if sustainably produced.

You truly believe that plants grow, and simply turn themselves into bio fuel, with no carbon heavy industrial processes along the way ?
Why are the compulsory bio fuel elements added to petrol and diesel taxed at a higher rate than fossil elements ?

ALL plant life, as it decomposes, releases CO2 , this is a major component of ALL CO2 emissions on this planet, and has been for 100s of millions of years.
But no one seems to talk about this, or want to pursue low or no carbon propulsion systems like hydrogen/hydrogen fuel cell, let alone air capture of CO2.
Ask yourself why.

[old man]

9 hours ago, Scully said:

Any idea how they’re re-charged? Plug in to the grid or diesel generator running all day and night? 
I’m assuming the latter is how Formula E cars are charged? 🤷‍♂️

No idea, not disclosed.

Saw a programme weeks ago, the chassis and battery combined made in China and shipped UK for fitting out. 

[old man]

5 hours ago, udderlyoffroad said:

There are parties standing for election who do not have slavish adherence to Net Zero as part of their manifestos, such as Reform.

Yes, I know that will just end up with a Labour-coalition hellscape, but at least it might, possibly, register in Starmers' Islington-centric mind that he does not have the consent of all the electorate to commit economic seppuku on our behalf.

I can't bring myself to vote for either of the two main parties, and the Lib Dems deserve to rot in electoral obscurity for at least generation for pledging to ignore the Brexit referendum. 

Small, unelectable party it is then, or a spoiled ballot paper, depending on who's standing.

 

Sadly, my own thought too. I will not continue to directly support the cretins currently operating the ping pong scenario.

[McSpredder]

22 hours ago, oowee said:

The average daily car journey is 24 miles. 

19 hours ago, oowee said:

In a past life i helped develop the UK investment strategy for ev's in partnership with motor manufacturers.

An average of 24 miles per day is totally irrelevant to the potential purchaser of a vehicle.   It would be equally true (and equally useless) to point out that a car’s average speed over the course of a day is therefore only one mile per hour.

A much more important consideration is how far a person might need to travel at short notice.   An EV plugged in at home overnight could travel quite a long way next morning, but that is not much comfort if somebody needs to be rushed to a hospital 50 miles away in the early evening, before the battery has been recharged.

There are already lots of people who are very happy with their EVs.   If development of batteries and charging infrastructure make an EV the obvious choice for the majority, that is what they will buy, without any need for legislation.   If a tiny percentage living in sparsely populated rural areas find IC engines more suitable for their needs, those will make negligible difference to the country’s overall environmental impact, so why stop them?

Why do politicians want to ban the sale of petrol and diesel cars?   Virtue signalling?   A desire to exercise ever greater control over the population?   Pressure from a group who helped develop the UK investment strategy for ev's in partnership with motor manufacturers?

What I do notice is that EV owners often seem enamoured by rapid acceleration.   I suspect concern for the environment was not their top priority.

[12gauge82]

10 hours ago, oowee said:

🤣 If we cared about the less well off why did we pursue Brexit?

A recent report showed that British households have paid £7bn since Brexit to cover the extra cost of trade barriers on food imports from the EU.

Researchers at the London School of Economics (LSE) estimated the impact of leaving the bloc on UK food prices and found that trade barriers consistently hampered imports, pushing up bills by an average of £250.

The UK has the highest food inflation rate in the industrialised world, according to recent data. The LSE researchers calculated the cost of food in the UK had rocketed by 25% since 2019, but this would have been only 17% without post-Brexit trade restrictions, nearly a third lower.

 

Brexit as voted for has never been delivered, as a country we've never even attempted to benift from leaving due to all the remainers in parliament, instead of Singapore on thames, we've clung to EU regulation. That said I find your figures hard to believe, I'm sure the ultra rich have lost out but the average person not so much and any loss if any would certainly pale compared to the affects of corona lock downs, inflation, rises due to the Ukraine war, paying green taxes and paying for economic migrants.

Even if brexit has cost us and I don't think it will long term, the freedom is worth every penny.

Edited September 22, 2023 by 12gauge82

[armsid]

Back in 1961 the Road Research Laboratory had 3  electric cars running up and down the new stretch of the m4 between Reading and Newbury using induction from a cable sunk under the road. They were also driverless and went the 9 mile distance a few times as they were tested and  guess what? The then Transport Minister sat in the back of one and declared it would not take on the project one wonders why Just apoint if you have a heart pacemaker electric vehicles can affect the device just like airport scanners

Edited September 22, 2023 by armsid

[udderlyoffroad]

3 hours ago, McSpredder said:

A much more important consideration is how far a person might need to travel at short notice.   An EV plugged in at home overnight could travel quite a long way next morning, but that is not much comfort if somebody needs to be rushed to a hospital 50 miles away in the early evening, before the battery has been recharged.

Whilst I agree with the sentiments of your post, viz. letting the market decide at what point mass EV adoption should happen....The example you cite isn't particularly realistic either; Nobody with the ability to charge an EV at home is going to let the range to drop to less than 50miles, especially with a daily commute, before plugging in.

I could quite easily switch to an EV tomorrow and it would cover 99% of the journeys I make, with plenty of range left to cover those emergency dashes to hospitals/airports.

The issue is I'm not going to spend/finance north of £50k to replace a thus far perfectly servicable 2015 pickup with....what exactly?

This is why 2035 is a much better cut off date, if we must have one at all.  By then the economics and technology will look much different to today. 2030 is cutting it too fine.

[serrac]

On 22/09/2023 at 22:08, udderlyoffroad said:

Nobody with the ability to charge an EV at home is going to let the range to drop to less than 50miles, especially with a daily commute, before plugging in.

That's assuming vehicle-to-grid technology isn't making the decision for them.

[armsid]

And those with smart meters and no EV can have their power cut to supply the demand for those with EV charging points

[Rewulf]

1 hour ago, armsid said:

And those with smart meters and no EV can have their power cut to supply the demand for those with EV charging points

This, and the fact that the dwindling supply of lithium, slowly makes EVs less affordable to ordinary well off types, and makes motorised personal transportation the preserve of the super rich. 

That's a long way off, but think China 50 years ago, when everyone cycled around, except for elite party members. 

[12gauge82]

The real technological breakthrough isn't going to be eletric vehicles but high storage, cheap, batteries made with easily attainable plentiful materials. Sodium batteries are a start but I believe we're still a long way off.

[Scully]

I believe S.Korea have developed a hydrogen derived engine, which is the way to go in my opinion. 
No doubt governments will have to work out a means by which it is taxed if there are no oil based fuels used. 

[amateur]

Just to add a counterview.

I was forced to get rid of my perfectly servicable 2010 diesel by that b@&&£r Ghengiz Khan and an now contract hiring a Nissan Leaf.

It costs me hardly anything to run, I've just done a run to the coast from London to visit our daughter. I used half the charge. The car is currently charging in a carpark about 100 yards away. There are plenty of vacant chargers nearby.

All cheaper than diesel

[London Best]

18 minutes ago, amateur said:

Just to add a counterview.

I was forced to get rid of my perfectly servicable 2010 diesel by that b@&&£r Ghengiz Khan and an now contract hiring a Nissan Leaf.

It costs me hardly anything to run, I've just done a run to the coast from London to visit our daughter. I used half the charge. The car is currently charging in a carpark about 100 yards away. There are plenty of vacant chargers nearby.

All cheaper than diesel

But no fun to drive and practically useless.

[amateur]

55 minutes ago, London Best said:

But no fun to drive and practically useless.

That view is, of course, subjective.

It works well for my local driving and I certainly have no concerns about charging it on the move.

I find it pleasant to drive.

I wouldn’t use it on a longer trip, however.

Edited September 24, 2023 by amateur