By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions. We in turn value your personal details in accordance with our Privacy Policy.
Please log in or register. Registered visitors get fewer ads.
We're drilling for more fossil fuels to suit corporate interests under the guise of "energy security" and bundling it up with a fairly unproven technology in carbon capture to try and convince people it's green.
Probably a combination of responding to lobbying, pressure to preserve jobs (and thus votes) in Scotland and the North East, plus short-termist, simplistic ideas of economics and energy security.
We've accepted that we won't sacrifice our luxuries in order to prevent the collapse of climate systems, food and water supplies, law and order, civil society, international peace and natural ecosystems.
We've then taken the arguably rational if immoral and defeatist position of maximising pretty meaningless personal and corporate wealth in a dying and blindingly obviously incompatible growth-focussed economic system.
We don't care.
We've given up, whilst trying to pretend we haven't.
We're dead.
And that's what we're passing on to our children.
...except there's still a chance to make some potentially beneficial changes if we all just face up to the fact that we have to live far, far, far more frugally, and co-incidentally more happily.
# WE ARE STEALING THE FUTURE FROM OUR CHILDREN --- WE MUST CHANGE COURSE #
We've accepted that we won't sacrifice our luxuries in order to prevent the collapse of climate systems, food and water supplies, law and order, civil society, international peace and natural ecosystems.
We've then taken the arguably rational if immoral and defeatist position of maximising pretty meaningless personal and corporate wealth in a dying and blindingly obviously incompatible growth-focussed economic system.
We don't care.
We've given up, whilst trying to pretend we haven't.
We're dead.
And that's what we're passing on to our children.
...except there's still a chance to make some potentially beneficial changes if we all just face up to the fact that we have to live far, far, far more frugally, and co-incidentally more happily.
Well it's something I have no particular great expertise on but if I were to play devils advocate I would probably suggest it's to have enough energy for an ever increasing requirement should the wind stop and the sun go in, I would also put it that it might help to solve fossil fuel reliance on potential future enemy and or rogue states and at the same time reducing the need to import it from 1000's of miles away thus decreasing the energy footprint.
“Hello, I'm your MP. Actually I'm not. I'm your candidate. Gosh.”
Boris Johnson canvassing in Henley, 2005.
Less of the "we" please - I don't think any of us on here are execs in global oil corporations, & going by previous similar threads I'd say the vast majority of TWTDers are fully signed up to reducing our carbon footprints, lowering emissions, encouraging renewables, environmental protections etc., as well as to booting out the tories asap.
Less of the "we" please - I don't think any of us on here are execs in global oil corporations, & going by previous similar threads I'd say the vast majority of TWTDers are fully signed up to reducing our carbon footprints, lowering emissions, encouraging renewables, environmental protections etc., as well as to booting out the tories asap.
Well yes I certainly wouldn't want to associate myself with the Tories or new drilling. But you get my point which is: WTF?
Well it's something I have no particular great expertise on but if I were to play devils advocate I would probably suggest it's to have enough energy for an ever increasing requirement should the wind stop and the sun go in, I would also put it that it might help to solve fossil fuel reliance on potential future enemy and or rogue states and at the same time reducing the need to import it from 1000's of miles away thus decreasing the energy footprint.
If we want to reduce fossil fuel reliance, the most straight forward solution is to use less, not make more ourselves. This is especially true if we're going to talk about the stupid false economy they sex up as "carbon capture".
Additionally if you want to maintain adequate power on sunless windless days, we can have a baseline of Nuclear plus energy storage to keep everything ticking along. No need for oil,coal or gas.
Well yes I certainly wouldn't want to associate myself with the Tories or new drilling. But you get my point which is: WTF?
Yep, completely understand your vent.
Supposedly pro-business, pro-entreprenurial Con party refusing to get it about the potential boom for a green economy - guaranteed market for it as it's blindingly obviously the only way to go for humans to be able to continue living on this planet - just confirms their complete & bizarre short-sighted* corruption to me.
*"Yee haa, we'll leave our grandkids £squillions in the bank. So what if they don't have any water or food or agricultural land or live-able climate to survive on?".
Well it's something I have no particular great expertise on but if I were to play devils advocate I would probably suggest it's to have enough energy for an ever increasing requirement should the wind stop and the sun go in, I would also put it that it might help to solve fossil fuel reliance on potential future enemy and or rogue states and at the same time reducing the need to import it from 1000's of miles away thus decreasing the energy footprint.
Except that oil is used to produce just 0.2% of the UK's electricity supply*, so it won't help replace renewables.
The other problem with oil is that different regions of the world produce varying grades (heavy/light, sulphur levels, etc.), which are used for different things, from heating oil to petrol to plastics and chemicals. North Sea crude will not supply all of our needs and obviate imports.
They won’t even be in office when this comes to fruition. By the time exploration and preparatory drilling was carried out a decade will have passed and the demand won’t even be there (at least from a UK perspective. Not to mention it’s fairly deep water, so highly reliant on a strong crude price in order to be viable anyway.
Except that oil is used to produce just 0.2% of the UK's electricity supply*, so it won't help replace renewables.
The other problem with oil is that different regions of the world produce varying grades (heavy/light, sulphur levels, etc.), which are used for different things, from heating oil to petrol to plastics and chemicals. North Sea crude will not supply all of our needs and obviate imports.
Regarding gas, which does still produce a lot of our electricity (42.7%), we have good reserves of that already. It was imported from Russia because it was cheap and because our suppliers are European owned, making the UK part of a continental problem.
The fastest way to ensure gas security would be to bring it all under government control (i.e. nationalisation).
Look at this astonishing chart (see tweet below)- the potential for new gas is miniscule- you can hardly see it (needs a big red arrow to point it out). It proves that govt's arguements are bogus and performative.
Short answer: VERY little. More N Sea oil & gas exploration will make a marginal difference to UK production at best. We will still be a net importer. We’ll still see declining production. This is NOT a game-changer. Something to remember when you hear people bang on about this. pic.twitter.com/UtCeMORzFb
Well it's something I have no particular great expertise on but if I were to play devils advocate I would probably suggest it's to have enough energy for an ever increasing requirement should the wind stop and the sun go in, I would also put it that it might help to solve fossil fuel reliance on potential future enemy and or rogue states and at the same time reducing the need to import it from 1000's of miles away thus decreasing the energy footprint.
Sadly, that is not the case though. Most of our gas for instance is from non-hostile Norway (only 4% from Russia). Moreover, most of the oil and gas platforms are run by foriegn companies, including China! And the products are sold on the open market so the prices are also not goign to change. The 1.5 billion that Sunak's company invested in this area 2 months ago is more likely to be the reason...
Sadly, that is not the case though. Most of our gas for instance is from non-hostile Norway (only 4% from Russia). Moreover, most of the oil and gas platforms are run by foriegn companies, including China! And the products are sold on the open market so the prices are also not goign to change. The 1.5 billion that Sunak's company invested in this area 2 months ago is more likely to be the reason...
See also Cameron's fracking "dash for gas" idiocy. Same pseudo argument for it, same rock solid (sorry) arguments against it (plus other additional serious negatives).
We've accepted that we won't sacrifice our luxuries in order to prevent the collapse of climate systems, food and water supplies, law and order, civil society, international peace and natural ecosystems.
We've then taken the arguably rational if immoral and defeatist position of maximising pretty meaningless personal and corporate wealth in a dying and blindingly obviously incompatible growth-focussed economic system.
We don't care.
We've given up, whilst trying to pretend we haven't.
We're dead.
And that's what we're passing on to our children.
...except there's still a chance to make some potentially beneficial changes if we all just face up to the fact that we have to live far, far, far more frugally, and co-incidentally more happily.
Yeah, we've entered the bargaining phase of climate change denial.
We've got time to be gradual (we don't) We'll soon have tech that'll solve this (we won't) There must be a way to halt climate change that doesn't involve sacrifices (there isn't) OK, but we don't want to spend much money (we have to) We'll do it when the bigger countries do it (we won't)
Regarding gas, which does still produce a lot of our electricity (42.7%), we have good reserves of that already. It was imported from Russia because it was cheap and because our suppliers are European owned, making the UK part of a continental problem.
The fastest way to ensure gas security would be to bring it all under government control (i.e. nationalisation).
Yes true. The UK doesnt own the oil as such...the oil companies just produce it and sell it to the market. So we dont really secure our own resources.
However having taken billlions ro sell the right to explore these oil fields im not sure legally how we woule ever be able to nationalise it now
we're flying too much, we're driving too much, we're consuming too much and shipping it round the world, our consumption is energy intensive, we're over heating our houses and losing the heat through bad insulation and we're producing that heat inefficiently. all of which which means that current wealthy western lifestyles consume vast amounts of fossil fuels. the exact hole those fossil fuels come out of is neither here nor there. the government shouldn't be increasing north sea production, but we can't pretend this is nothing to do with us or what we do.
And so as the loose-bowelled pigeon of time swoops low over the unsuspecting tourist of destiny, and the flatulent skunk of fate wanders into the air-conditioning system of eternity, I notice it's the end of the show
we're flying too much, we're driving too much, we're consuming too much and shipping it round the world, our consumption is energy intensive, we're over heating our houses and losing the heat through bad insulation and we're producing that heat inefficiently. all of which which means that current wealthy western lifestyles consume vast amounts of fossil fuels. the exact hole those fossil fuels come out of is neither here nor there. the government shouldn't be increasing north sea production, but we can't pretend this is nothing to do with us or what we do.
We're encouraged to consume. Maybe advertising should be outlawed, but that would mean the end of capitalism.
We're encouraged to consume. Maybe advertising should be outlawed, but that would mean the end of capitalism.
[Post edited 2 Aug 2023 19:08]
what a cop out. people don't need to be encouraged to want plenty and convenience and novelty and status. humans are acquisitive. we want an easy life with lots of material things. fossil fuels have given us all that. you can't blame some "them".
[Post edited 2 Aug 2023 19:34]
And so as the loose-bowelled pigeon of time swoops low over the unsuspecting tourist of destiny, and the flatulent skunk of fate wanders into the air-conditioning system of eternity, I notice it's the end of the show
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
