View 3 more replies »
FreddieUK · 70-79, M
@peterlee All political actions are fundamentally about what individuals in government believe. Politics is essentially about how we organise the economy and it's good that we can make a choice between differing ideologies (up to a point) now and again. A 'whim' for one person is a 'considered opinion' to someone else, depending on personal ideology.
peterlee · M
@SunshineGirl but we need oil for plastics , don’t forget that!
Kevlar!
And don’t forget the production of ammonium derivatives, fertilisers some pharmaceuticals,
Kevlar!
And don’t forget the production of ammonium derivatives, fertilisers some pharmaceuticals,
This comment is hidden.
Show Comment
peterlee · M
@Magicianzini This is a trivial bit of nonsense. It is hardly likely to save the planet. Doubling the time to dry clothes at a lower temperature.
Perhaps they should have a washing across Whitehall and Downing Street.
And as for carbon capture, another of Eds ideas’. There is no evidence it works. Perhaps he should build follies instead. At least they look attractive.
My solutions.. more wind turbines, nuclear power stations, and all new houses fitted with solar panels.
Perhaps they should have a washing across Whitehall and Downing Street.
And as for carbon capture, another of Eds ideas’. There is no evidence it works. Perhaps he should build follies instead. At least they look attractive.
My solutions.. more wind turbines, nuclear power stations, and all new houses fitted with solar panels.
Magicianzini · M
@peterlee He will never do clothes - it's easy to implement on the plebs.
ArishMell · 70-79, M
@peterlee ... new house - and new business and public-service premises (office-blocks, supermarkets, factories and warehouses, schools, hospitals) too.
Some councils are fitting solar panels on their property where suitable; but obviously not all premises are suitable, usually by their locations and orientations. Some existing commercial buildings such as supermarket may be too flimsy for such installations, being merely big sheds with lightly-built roofs..
So called "carbon capture" is not one of Ed Milliband's ideas. I doubt very much he invented it. Besides, this proposal to extract carbon-dioxide (not "carbon"!) from the atmosphere and compress it into exhausted natural-gas wells, pre-dates the present government.
Mr. Milliband is a politician and most politicians barely know power from energy, iron from steel or carbon from carbon-dioxide; so cannot and do not originate any scientific and engineering ideas. They might propose such-and-such a scheme, but without really knowing the subject.
Rather, many politicans and "green" campaigners do accept genuine technical problems but having desperately poor technical knowledge, they latch naively, uncomprehendingly and uncritically onto any possible solution suggested, studied and perhaps doubted by people who do understand such things.
Though given the fears of carbon-dioxide shortages as one result of a certain, special military operation, can we not simply extract it from the atmosphere? It's not technically difficult but is there some other, valid objection?
However, we must remember that such extraction "removes" the gas from the air only where it is used as a reagent that subsumes either or both elements into a product compound. That used as a food preservative or effervescent, for animal-stunning or as a fire-extinguishant*, is only "borrowed" from the air for a short time.
After use, any non-reagent CO2 derived from mineral sources simply adds to the CO2 in the atmosphere.
......
*Fire-extiguishant. I believe in certain enclosed situations, bulk nitrogen flooding is used instead; as safer for the personnel.
Some councils are fitting solar panels on their property where suitable; but obviously not all premises are suitable, usually by their locations and orientations. Some existing commercial buildings such as supermarket may be too flimsy for such installations, being merely big sheds with lightly-built roofs..
So called "carbon capture" is not one of Ed Milliband's ideas. I doubt very much he invented it. Besides, this proposal to extract carbon-dioxide (not "carbon"!) from the atmosphere and compress it into exhausted natural-gas wells, pre-dates the present government.
Mr. Milliband is a politician and most politicians barely know power from energy, iron from steel or carbon from carbon-dioxide; so cannot and do not originate any scientific and engineering ideas. They might propose such-and-such a scheme, but without really knowing the subject.
Rather, many politicans and "green" campaigners do accept genuine technical problems but having desperately poor technical knowledge, they latch naively, uncomprehendingly and uncritically onto any possible solution suggested, studied and perhaps doubted by people who do understand such things.
Though given the fears of carbon-dioxide shortages as one result of a certain, special military operation, can we not simply extract it from the atmosphere? It's not technically difficult but is there some other, valid objection?
However, we must remember that such extraction "removes" the gas from the air only where it is used as a reagent that subsumes either or both elements into a product compound. That used as a food preservative or effervescent, for animal-stunning or as a fire-extinguishant*, is only "borrowed" from the air for a short time.
After use, any non-reagent CO2 derived from mineral sources simply adds to the CO2 in the atmosphere.
......
*Fire-extiguishant. I believe in certain enclosed situations, bulk nitrogen flooding is used instead; as safer for the personnel.