frame-src 'self' data:
 

Lewes Forum thread

Go on, tell 'em what you think


Lewes Forum New message

Climate change,Fracking,the Future of our Kids.

6
2
On 4 Sep 2018 at 10:55am What about our kids? wrote:
Most of the world's climate scientists agree that we are close to the tipping point of what could be irreversible climate change rendering human and animal life increasingly difficult , and even our own government has made serious commitments to drastically reduce carbon emissions.So why is the government giving hundreds of licences to explore sites for fracking? Why is Quadrilla flow testing at Balcombe again? Do we not care about the future of our children our grandchildren our wildlife and environment? Could someone please explain to me? I really do not understand the logic of our government or the heads of our oil companies.Does their enthusiasm to make profits totally override our natural human instinct to protect our children and our grandchildren's and to try give them a decent future?Are they in any sense "normal"?
1
5
On 4 Sep 2018 at 11:03am common sense wrote:
Does it make more sense to use the oil and gas that is sitting beneath our soil or import it at huge cost and using lots of fuel to get it here? It'll be many years before cleaner methods are available to warm our houses so would you rather use less clean fuels or have no power this winter.
6
2
On 4 Sep 2018 at 11:15am What about our kids? wrote:
There are many cleaner alternatives to gas and oil already available not to mention the recent advances that have been made in house insulation.So your question of whether I would like NO power this winter is a straw man argument.Would I prepared to suffer some inconvenience in order to protect my kid's and my grandkid's future being a normal person the answer is a very definite YES.
2
6
On 4 Sep 2018 at 11:17am common sense wrote:
There aren't enough cleaner fuels yet. Accept it.
5
2
On 4 Sep 2018 at 11:25am What about our kids? wrote:
Britain can produce 85% of its power via renewable energy by 2030 provided it undergoes significant changes in energy production and use, according to a new study by Greenpeace.
The study attempts to counter the argument that only fossil fuels and nuclear power can keep the lights on for the next few decades. It foresees wind leaping from today’s level of 13 gigawatts (GW) of wind farms in operation – enough to power around 10 million homes – to a level of 77GW in 2030, with solar rising from just more than 5GW to 28GW.
However, the renewables drive would need to be accompanied by a 60% reduction in demand for domestic heating through a home insulation programme and other initiatives, according to the report by energy system analysts, Demand Energy Equality.

Sign up to the Green Light email to get the planet's most important stories
Read more
“For a long time the government and the fossil fuel industry have peddled the argument that renewables can’t keep the lights on if the wind’s not blowing. This hasn’t been based on evidence, but out of date instincts seemingly from staring out the window to see how windy it is,” said Doug Parr, chief scientist at Greenpeace.
“For the first time, we have the evidence showing it is possible to keep the power system working and decarbonise the electricity system. We need to go for renewable energy with the help of new smart technology and reducing demand for power too.
“It is hugely ambitious but definitely doable, and it will take the same kind of enthusiasm and financial support from government, normally the sole preserve of the nuclear and fossil fuel industries.”


Check it out here »
2
3
On 4 Sep 2018 at 11:44am common sense wrote:
All stuff for the future. so this winter do you want to import fuel or have power shortages? Those are the choices.
1
2
On 4 Sep 2018 at 12:22pm Obi wrote:
Great example of people arguing past each other. The only consideration is cost. Long term as opposed to short term. Battery storage is the game changer. You don't need to cover the land with ugly windmills if you can storage energy in battery banks or capacitor banks. The main downside is insurance costs due to potential fire risk due to faulty installation.
If you are invested in wind I would get out, solar is the future. Fracking is not worth the potential downside and is an obsolescent technology.
1
2
On 4 Sep 2018 at 12:30pm common sense wrote:
Nobody is arguing Obi. I'm just being realistic. I'm all in favour of decreasing pollution but these things take time.
2
 
On 5 Sep 2018 at 12:12am YES! wrote:
Determined and organised resistance pays off. We now need the minister to place the same value on our health, and the health of the planet, and not just relocate it to the not so desolate North. Tory MPs increasingly concerned and realise that these developments are not what they were led to believe. But those same MPs need to organise and kill off this onshore industry and make proper steps to disinvest and stop subsidising fossil fuels. Ian Conlan.


Check it out here »


28 posts left

Your response


You must now log in (or register) to post
Click here to add a link »
Smile
Smile Wink Sad Confused Kiss Favourite Fishing Devil Cool

terms


 

Lewes Spires 80:132
Lewes Spires

Does anyone know the owner of a ginger cat on Hamsey Crescent that wears a blue/yellow or blue/grey collar? It is quite skinny... more
QUOTE OF THE MOMENT
I may not agree with you, but I will defend to the death your right to make an ass of yourself.
Oscar Wilde