Jump to content
British Speedway Forum
jrs

Covid-19 Are we being told the truth ?

Recommended Posts

A solar panel requires 19 mineral products and metals. Eight of these metals are designated critical materials. Vast amounts of fossil fuels are required to mine these metals. It's green fraud...

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post

Big oil fans don't like you having your own energy source, as you then don't have to pay others for your energy. :rolleyes:

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post

Q: Is Moderna safe for pregnant women

A: You'll find out in 2024...

Image

  • Sad 1

Share this post


Link to post
2 hours ago, Blupanther said:

A solar panel requires 19 mineral products and metals. Eight of these metals are designated critical materials. Vast amounts of fossil fuels are required to mine these metals. It's green fraud...

Irrespective of all this technical stuff, they look bloody awful on house roofs,  however I don't mind them in fields,  especially as livestock can happily graze amongst them.

Sorry that's my opinion,  one of my pet hates actually. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
18 minutes ago, Badge said:

Irrespective of all this technical stuff, they look bloody awful on house roofs,  however I don't mind them in fields,  especially as livestock can happily graze amongst them.

Sorry that's my opinion,  one of my pet hates actually. 

Sheep can, but cattle are considered unsuitable because they can cause serious damage...

Share this post


Link to post
Posted (edited)
10 minutes ago, Blupanther said:

Sheep can, but cattle are considered unsuitable because they can cause serious damage...

Is that to the cattle, or the panels?

The last thing you want is some fat cow lying on your flatscreen!!!,,, it's a good idea to put them on ya roofs, cos cattle aren't very good at climbing ladders! :t:

and, it's closer to the sun. ;)

Edited by ruffdiamond
  • Haha 2

Share this post


Link to post
5 hours ago, Blupanther said:

A solar panel requires 19 mineral products and metals. Eight of these metals are designated critical materials. Vast amounts of fossil fuels are required to mine these metals. It's green fraud...

That may be - including the fact that I'm not really energy neutral because I still use power when the sun goes down. However, I don't have any energy bills, the installation cost has just about been recouped after a couple of years, and that is bottom line for the consumer who has little 'power' to shape global energy strategy. 

Share this post


Link to post
Posted (edited)
13 hours ago, DC2 said:

Using the internet or phone to work isn’t globalisation!

If I'm doing things in another country via the Internet, then it is globalisation. 

Quote

It’s a nutty capitalist idea where the world swaps products from thousands of miles apart just because it’s cheaper to do so and one greedy chancer can undercut another.

Self-sufficiency, national security, decent pay, human rights, emissions, sustainability and local seasonality are sacrificed as a result.

It's not nutty if you can't get produce/grow certain products in your own country far less backyard. Products like erm.. nuts, bananas and oranges that most people want whether you do or not, and you still haven't told me where you can grow them in the UK. 

With respect to manufacturing, it does make sense to build a limited number of factories in the world that specialise in manufacturing particular products. It vastly improves economies of scale and makes many products affordable to the masses that would otherwise not be the case - just as it once did during the Industrial Revolution in the UK - in turn generating economic growth.

Shipping these products around the world on giant container ships actually adds very little cost and uses very little energy per unit. Most of the energy expended in delivering the product will be at the UK end, particularly when Dashcam puts it in his van and drives around Taunton.

Decent pay, human rights and national security. Well the first couple of things are quite honestly up to the Chinese (or whoever) people to sort out.

National security - well I fully agree that military materiel, nuclear reactors, certain telecommunications equipment and probably a few other things should not be made in potentially hostile countries. However, the vast majority of products made in China are not things we absolutely need to have. 

I think it's naive to believe that if we suddenly stop importing stuff from other countries then we'll start making it in the UK. People stopped buying British cars in favour of German and Japanese ones in the 1980s because we made crap like the Maestro, Ital and Ambassador which were simply re-trimmed cars from the 1970s if not 1960s that BL thought the public would be gullible enough to buy.

Edited by Humphrey Appleby
  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Posted (edited)
7 hours ago, Vince said:

The truck delivering the solar panels also has to deliver the materials all the way through the manufacturing process and of course not only your panels. Not to mention those same trucks move virtually everything you use, reducing the costs associated with fuel prices could very easily be achieved by letting commercial vehicles use heavily discounted fuel.

Those trucks will be delivering the materials to build lots of solar panels, not just mine. 

Quote

The past couple of years maybe because of Covid but previously you have told us how you divided your time between Australia, the UK and (if I remember rightly) Holland. Not to mention all the other countries you have visited.  That's not to mention the CO2 emissions, London to Perth about 3000 tons, a fairly inefficient car about 4 tons per year!

Well according to this calculator (https://www.carbonfootprint.com/calculator.aspx), a flight from London to Perth produces just over 2 tonnes of CO2 per passenger. It's probably even less as Australia flights use the most fuel efficient aircraft and are usually carrying 300-400 passengers, as well as having fewer take-off and landing cycles. 

That's the equivalent of driving about 7,500 miles in a car, which most people will easily be doing every year. Even in a normal year my carbon footprint is still less than that of Dashcam driving around the same county in his brown van, far less him tearing up the countryside in his 4x4 chasing feathered and furry creatures around. 

But as I'm sure you're well aware, my job is putting in place the infrastructure that makes the Internet work which allows millions of people to do business remotely, which is further reducing unnecessary travel. And now that most countries have achieved a usable level of connectivity (helped by COVID), it's practical to do a lot more remotely anyway.

Complaining about people undertaking necessary travel for work is as daft as me pointing out the huge carbon footprint that's undoubtedly generated by your trucking company. It's quite obvious that goods are always going to need be delivered, but that doesn't mean that people need to be doing pointless commutes every day to go and do work in an office they could easily do from home. It's only out-of-touch reactionaries like Littlejohn that seem to think everyone should be forced to do that these days.

On the fuel prices, there's an inherent cost to buying oil which is whatever it is at any given moment in time. I don't see why commercial vehicles should expect to be subsidised on the cost of the product, especially as they invariably pass on the costs to their customers anyway. You might have a point about fuel duty, but you need to take that up with the government. 

Edited by Humphrey Appleby

Share this post


Link to post
Posted (edited)
7 hours ago, Badge said:

Irrespective of all this technical stuff, they look bloody awful on house roofs

I wouldn't disagree, but you can't see them on my roof because it's low pitched with a raised fascia around it. It was specifically designed that way to hide the solar panels. 

The bottom line is whether they look bloody awful or not, I easily get enough power for household requirements from about 9am until 5pm, and surplus goes into the power grid (which you get credited for). I don't think you'd get enough power in the UK climate - especially during the winter - to really justify the purchasing costs unless you have a south facing roof, but that's another issue.

Edited by Humphrey Appleby

Share this post


Link to post
9 hours ago, Humphrey Appleby said:

If I'm doing things in another country via the Internet, then it is globalisation. 

It's not nutty if you can't get produce/grow certain products in your own country far less backyard. Products like erm.. nuts, bananas and oranges that most people want whether you do or not, and you still haven't told me where you can grow them in the UK. 

With respect to manufacturing, it does make sense to build a limited number of factories in the world that specialise in manufacturing particular products. It vastly improves economies of scale and makes many products affordable to the masses that would otherwise not be the case - just as it once did during the Industrial Revolution in the UK - in turn generating economic growth.

Shipping these products around the world on giant container ships actually adds very little cost and uses very little energy per unit. Most of the energy expended in delivering the product will be at the UK end, particularly when Dashcam puts it in his van and drives around Taunton.

Decent pay, human rights and national security. Well the first couple of things are quite honestly up to the Chinese (or whoever) people to sort out.

National security - well I fully agree that military materiel, nuclear reactors, certain telecommunications equipment and probably a few other things should not be made in potentially hostile countries. However, the vast majority of products made in China are not things we absolutely need to have. 

I think it's naive to believe that if we suddenly stop importing stuff from other countries then we'll start making it in the UK. People stopped buying British cars in favour of German and Japanese ones in the 1980s because we made crap like the Maestro, Ital and Ambassador which were simply re-trimmed cars from the 1970s if not 1960s that BL thought the public would be gullible enough to buy.

What a load of hackneyed rubbish.

If you think China is the only country that is appalling regarding human rights how about Russia and numerous countries in Asia, the Middle East, South America and Africa?

We are hypocrites for preaching democracy, fair elections and human rights while at the same time trading with rogue nations that treat their citizens badly and gain their commercial edge by slave and child labour with terrible conditions and pay, and we even sell them arms and bribe them with aid which we know is embezzled by corrupt dictators.

We should trade ethically, solely with decent nations, even if that means restricting supplies, such as oil from America and Norway.

Nuts, bananas and oranges do grow in this country but I have no objection to such peripheral products coming from Spain and the Commonwealth Caribbean.  

It’s the fundamental commodities and manufacturing that we should be concerned about, making sure that we retain capability ourselves or have secure, ethical supply lines to service food, defence, energy, construction, communications and transport industries.

And while 1970s UK cars may have been below par in some cases there’s no reason why the UK today should not lead the world in modern day technology and production.

It’s a matter of will, invention and entrepreneurial spirit, rather than excuses, laziness and sacrificing principles for the quickest buck..

 

Share this post


Link to post
22 minutes ago, DC2 said:

We should trade ethically, solely with decent nations, even if that means restricting supplies, such as oil from America and Norway.

I don't basically disagree on the above, but you're now acknowledging that the UK can't be entirely self-sufficient and some form of globalisation is necessary.

Neither it is always as straightforward as you make out. The UK needs oil for the foreseeable future and there are few ethical suppliers of it. Not to mention that Norway has long restricted supply to get the best value for their oil, and to ensure they have an income long into the future.

22 minutes ago, DC2 said:

Nuts, bananas and oranges do grow in this country but I have no objection to such peripheral products coming from Spain and the Commonwealth Caribbean.  

They do not grow in commercial quantities, if at all.

22 minutes ago, DC2 said:

And while 1970s UK cars may have been below par in some cases there’s no reason why the UK today should not lead the world in modern day technology and production.

Yes, but the UK doesn't lead the world in car production, and arguably never has beyond a few bespoke marques. It therefore doesn't make sense to try to re-enter a competitive market rather than focus on something that you can be better at (like biotech or software engineering). 

That was the mistake of post-war British governments that wasted huge amounts of money trying to develop or prop-up industries because of the dogmatic notion of self-sufficiency. And many of those industries ended-up going down the pan anyway.

 

Share this post


Link to post
58 minutes ago, Humphrey Appleby said:

I don't basically disagree on the above, but you're now acknowledging that the UK can't be entirely self-sufficient and some form of globalisation is necessary.

I’m not saying that we should not trade, but we should be as self-sufficient as possible in the key industries or have an ethical and secure supply chain.

And trading is not “globalisation” or a form of it.

Globalisation involves a huge, worldwide interdependent web of supply and it takes only one big State or key (usually cheap or exclusive) supplier to go rogue and you’re knackered.

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, Humphrey Appleby said:

Yes, but the UK doesn't lead the world in car production, and arguably never has beyond a few bespoke marques. It therefore doesn't make sense to try to re-enter a competitive market rather than focus on something that you can be better at (like biotech or software engineering). 

I’m quite sure that our current or recent employees of Nissan, Toyota, Honda and Ford coupled with our Formula One engineers and commercial and university scientists could provide the expertise upon which to build a car manufacturing company.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue. Privacy Policy