Go Back  British Expats > Living & Moving Abroad > Europe > Spain
Reload this Page >

EU President-"Global Warming" Being Used As A Vehicle To Suppress Human Freedom

EU President-"Global Warming" Being Used As A Vehicle To Suppress Human Freedom

Old Nov 28th 2009, 6:02 pm
  #31  
Forum Regular
 
carter71's Avatar
 
Joined: Sep 2009
Location: Alacant
Posts: 170
carter71 is a name known to allcarter71 is a name known to allcarter71 is a name known to allcarter71 is a name known to allcarter71 is a name known to allcarter71 is a name known to allcarter71 is a name known to allcarter71 is a name known to allcarter71 is a name known to allcarter71 is a name known to allcarter71 is a name known to all
Default Re: EU President-"Global Warming" Being Used As A Vehicle To Suppress Human Freedom

Originally Posted by Econ
I think everyone knew it was steam and these where cooling towers! but the problem was the amount of coal they where burning at those power stations and not the steam going into the atmosphere.
Sadly not veneer journos! Actually, your cancer comments earlier bought back another memory I had about the good old Telegraph and their veneer journalism.

Many years ago, a BMW travelling above the legal limit crashed through the central reservation of a dual carriageway, crossed two lanes of traffic, and veered into a head-on collision with a tanker travelling in the opposite direction at under the legal speed limit. Despite the impact, which killed the BMW driver (drunk?), the tanker remained in one piece and none of its cargo was spilt.

The Telegraph was quoted as saying something along the lines of: "The tanker was carrying a highly flammable, carcenogenic material, and it's a disgrace that dangerous chemicals like these are transported on our road network every single day."

Fast forward several months later when another tanker driver in another town was actually speeding when he took a mini roundabout too fast and overturned, causing the tanker to rupture and spilling the contents all over the road and into the drainage system. An estimated 5,000 people were evacuated from local homes and business and the environmental cost would have been high.

The contents of this tanker were far more flammable and SIGNIFICANTLY more carcinogenic than the those in the first tanker - and so you would have anticipated an even more direct response from our friends at the Telegraph.

Quote in the telegraph: "This unfortunate accident could could been avoided with better road markings and signage".

So what gives? Completely innocent tanker chastised in a national newspaper for simply being in the wrong place at the wrong time? Tanker driver not obeying the speed limit causes an environmental disaster but gets the thumbs up?

Oh, sorry. Did I forget to mention... the more dangerous, more carcinogenic material in the second tanker had a name?

It was called petrol..., so that's OK then!
carter71 is offline  
Old Nov 28th 2009, 6:37 pm
  #32  
BE Enthusiast
 
Econ's Avatar
 
Joined: Nov 2007
Location: Southern Spain
Posts: 773
Econ has a reputation beyond reputeEcon has a reputation beyond reputeEcon has a reputation beyond reputeEcon has a reputation beyond reputeEcon has a reputation beyond reputeEcon has a reputation beyond reputeEcon has a reputation beyond reputeEcon has a reputation beyond reputeEcon has a reputation beyond reputeEcon has a reputation beyond reputeEcon has a reputation beyond repute
Default Re: EU President-"Global Warming" Being Used As A Vehicle To Suppress Human Freedom

Originally Posted by carter71
Sadly not veneer journos! Actually, your cancer comments earlier bought back another memory I had about the good old Telegraph and their veneer journalism.

Many years ago, a BMW travelling above the legal limit crashed through the central reservation of a dual carriageway, crossed two lanes of traffic, and veered into a head-on collision with a tanker travelling in the opposite direction at under the legal speed limit. Despite the impact, which killed the BMW driver (drunk?), the tanker remained in one piece and none of its cargo was spilt.

The Telegraph was quoted as saying something along the lines of: "The tanker was carrying a highly flammable, carcenogenic material, and it's a disgrace that dangerous chemicals like these are transported on our road network every single day."

Fast forward several months later when another tanker driver in another town was actually speeding when he took a mini roundabout too fast and overturned, causing the tanker to rupture and spilling the contents all over the road and into the drainage system. An estimated 5,000 people were evacuated from local homes and business and the environmental cost would have been high.

The contents of this tanker were far more flammable and SIGNIFICANTLY more carcinogenic than the those in the first tanker - and so you would have anticipated an even more direct response from our friends at the Telegraph.

Quote in the telegraph: "This unfortunate accident could could been avoided with better road markings and signage".

So what gives? Completely innocent tanker chastised in a national newspaper for simply being in the wrong place at the wrong time? Tanker driver not obeying the speed limit causes an environmental disaster but gets the thumbs up?

Oh, sorry. Did I forget to mention... the more dangerous, more carcinogenic material in the second tanker had a name?

It was called petrol..., so that's OK then!
You keep quoting journalistic views from years ago to put down a newspaper 'what! does this mean you are right?'... maybe you should take the problems you have with the Telegraph up with them they where not the only reference given to the issues I mentioned.

You strike me as someone determined that you are the one that knows better than the scientists, journalists and publications. It's obvious you do not have the same views as me and I don't agree with yours so maybe best left at that...

Last edited by Econ; Nov 28th 2009 at 7:10 pm.
Econ is offline  
Old Nov 28th 2009, 6:43 pm
  #33  
Straw Man.
 
rugbymatt's Avatar
 
Joined: Aug 2006
Location: That, there, that's not my post count... nothing to see here, move along.
Posts: 46,302
rugbymatt has a reputation beyond reputerugbymatt has a reputation beyond reputerugbymatt has a reputation beyond reputerugbymatt has a reputation beyond reputerugbymatt has a reputation beyond reputerugbymatt has a reputation beyond reputerugbymatt has a reputation beyond reputerugbymatt has a reputation beyond reputerugbymatt has a reputation beyond reputerugbymatt has a reputation beyond reputerugbymatt has a reputation beyond repute
Default Re: EU President-"Global Warming" Being Used As A Vehicle To Suppress Human Freedom

Originally Posted by warren d
Everyone goes on about how much pollution China is causing but China is only causing pollution because it is producing products for us to use.
... and the award for the poster who understands little about how the world works goes to....
rugbymatt is offline  
Old Nov 28th 2009, 7:20 pm
  #34  
Forum Regular
 
carter71's Avatar
 
Joined: Sep 2009
Location: Alacant
Posts: 170
carter71 is a name known to allcarter71 is a name known to allcarter71 is a name known to allcarter71 is a name known to allcarter71 is a name known to allcarter71 is a name known to allcarter71 is a name known to allcarter71 is a name known to allcarter71 is a name known to allcarter71 is a name known to allcarter71 is a name known to all
Default Re: EU President-"Global Warming" Being Used As A Vehicle To Suppress Human Freedom

Originally Posted by Econ
You keep quoting journalistic views from years ago to put down a newspaper 'what! does this mean you are right?'... maybe you should take the problems you have with the Telegraph up with them they where not the only reference given to the issues I mentioned.

You strike me as someone determined that you are the one that knows better than the scientists, journalists and publications. It's obvious you do not have the same views as me and I don't agree with yours so maybe best left at that...
Time will tell who's right and who's wrong. I still have my money on impending disaster narrowly avoided more by luck than any political will. That won't stop whoever is in power at the time taking full credit or blaming those before them if it all goes belly up.

Neither side in this "debate" plays fair, and there going to be no "easy answers"

But nothing wrong in some healthy debate in the meantime!
carter71 is offline  
Old Nov 28th 2009, 7:27 pm
  #35  
Straw Man.
 
rugbymatt's Avatar
 
Joined: Aug 2006
Location: That, there, that's not my post count... nothing to see here, move along.
Posts: 46,302
rugbymatt has a reputation beyond reputerugbymatt has a reputation beyond reputerugbymatt has a reputation beyond reputerugbymatt has a reputation beyond reputerugbymatt has a reputation beyond reputerugbymatt has a reputation beyond reputerugbymatt has a reputation beyond reputerugbymatt has a reputation beyond reputerugbymatt has a reputation beyond reputerugbymatt has a reputation beyond reputerugbymatt has a reputation beyond repute
Default Re: EU President-"Global Warming" Being Used As A Vehicle To Suppress Human Freedom

Originally Posted by carter71
Time will tell who's right and who's wrong. I still have my money on impending disaster narrowly avoided more by luck than any political will. That won't stop whoever is in power at the time taking full credit or blaming those before them if it all goes belly up.

Neither side in this "debate" plays fair, and there going to be no "easy answers"

But nothing wrong in some healthy debate in the meantime!
But time is telling. While I don't for one second believe in "global warming" climate change is definitely happening and to say we are not contributing in a heavy way is short sited and strikes me as a little bit of burying your head in the sand....

... but hey, what do I know, you seem to know all the answers.
rugbymatt is offline  
Old Nov 28th 2009, 7:49 pm
  #36  
Democracy advocate
 
Cape Blue's Avatar
 
Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 12,433
Cape Blue has a reputation beyond reputeCape Blue has a reputation beyond reputeCape Blue has a reputation beyond reputeCape Blue has a reputation beyond reputeCape Blue has a reputation beyond reputeCape Blue has a reputation beyond reputeCape Blue has a reputation beyond reputeCape Blue has a reputation beyond reputeCape Blue has a reputation beyond reputeCape Blue has a reputation beyond reputeCape Blue has a reputation beyond repute
Default Re: EU President-"Global Warming" Being Used As A Vehicle To Suppress Human Freedom

Originally Posted by warren d
You miss my point. It's hypocrisy. Those people are using up for more fuel than I am. Some of it is coming via those power stations that you mentioned.
I already use as little electric and oil etc as possible because the more I use, the more it costs me. I don't need somebody that uses more than me telling me to use less.
Everyone goes on about how much pollution China is causing but China is only causing pollution because it is producing products for us to use. Much of those products are not even necessary. If people stop buying things they don't really need then that would cut down on a lot of pollution. Politicians don't want us buying less items though so they tell us to not use standby on the TV and drive 5 miles less. It's a pathetic effort.
Its chump change, tiny, miniscule - there are very few politicians and they have extraordinary jobs that often require large vehicles for their protection and flights to meet their international counterparts.

There are around 650 UK MPs - you could put them all in big cars and then fly them around all week and it would still be tiny in comparison to the 60,000,000+ people in the UK. Ignore them, it means zero when it comes to setting up the infrastructure for the average person and is a classic diversion technique for people to focus on MP X flying to Y rather than looking at their own life.

You can see the idiocracy use the same argument all the time with Al Gore, doubtless stoked up by the coal and oil lobbyists who pull the ill-educated's strings like puppet masters.

Standby power in the UK accounts for 8% of UK domestic power usage - 8%! or the equivalent of 4.8 MILLION peoples home power usage - and yet the focus ends up on a few MPs and a "if they are not doing it, I am not doing it" child-like argument. How is 4.8 Million peoples-worth of electricity pathetic?

Perhaps the MPs are turning off their TV's standby, perhaps they are trying to reduce their mileage by 5 miles, who knows? But it actually means zilch.

China is both making stuff for us and rapidly industrializing as a country and become wealthier and more fuel-hungry as a result. We have off-shored some of our CO2-creating manufacture to a country with worse CO2 efficiency than us - hence we need international agreements and pressure such as the next Copenhagen meeting to try and minimize this problem - regardless of the tiny amount of C02 the leaders will use flying to the meeting.
Cape Blue is offline  
Old Nov 28th 2009, 7:50 pm
  #37  
Forum Regular
 
carter71's Avatar
 
Joined: Sep 2009
Location: Alacant
Posts: 170
carter71 is a name known to allcarter71 is a name known to allcarter71 is a name known to allcarter71 is a name known to allcarter71 is a name known to allcarter71 is a name known to allcarter71 is a name known to allcarter71 is a name known to allcarter71 is a name known to allcarter71 is a name known to allcarter71 is a name known to all
Default Re: EU President-"Global Warming" Being Used As A Vehicle To Suppress Human Freedom

Originally Posted by rugbymatt
But time is telling. While I don't for one second believe in "global warming" climate change is definitely happening and to say we are not contributing in a heavy way is short sited and strikes me as a little bit of burying your head in the sand....

... but hey, what do I know, you seem to know all the answers.
No, of course I don't have all the answers - but I can spot when newspapers are trying to pull the wool over people's eyes by diverting from the real issues.

Yes - we are heading for disaster - or at least hopefully a near miss - caused by us.

The more we try and fool ourselves that it's "all the fault of a handful of ships out in the North sea", which is the real aim of the article, the more we really ARE burying our heads in the sand.
carter71 is offline  
Old Nov 28th 2009, 7:58 pm
  #38  
Forum Regular
 
carter71's Avatar
 
Joined: Sep 2009
Location: Alacant
Posts: 170
carter71 is a name known to allcarter71 is a name known to allcarter71 is a name known to allcarter71 is a name known to allcarter71 is a name known to allcarter71 is a name known to allcarter71 is a name known to allcarter71 is a name known to allcarter71 is a name known to allcarter71 is a name known to allcarter71 is a name known to all
Default Re: EU President-"Global Warming" Being Used As A Vehicle To Suppress Human Freedom

Originally Posted by Cape Blue

Standby power in the UK accounts for 8% of UK domestic power usage - 8%! or the equivalent of 4.8 MILLION peoples home power usage - and yet the focus ends up on a few MPs and a "if they are not doing it, I am not doing it" child-like argument. How is 4.8 Million peoples-worth of electricity pathetic?

Perhaps the MPs are turning off their TV's standby, perhaps they are trying to reduce their mileage by 5 miles, who knows? But it actually means zilch.
I can never understand that figure. I have never come across an appliance, computer or piece of equipment made in the last 20 years that used more than 1% of normal operating power when on standby. Typically, things that have standby are all things like TVs which only use small amounts of power anyway - so cookers, heaters, immersion, etc aren't included anyway - therefore representing even less of a fraction of used power in the home.

So how anyone can calculate 8% is beyond me. Unless people use TVs from America from the 1950's where standby kept the heater circuit live on all the valves - I can't see how that computes!
carter71 is offline  
Old Nov 28th 2009, 8:15 pm
  #39  
Democracy advocate
 
Cape Blue's Avatar
 
Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 12,433
Cape Blue has a reputation beyond reputeCape Blue has a reputation beyond reputeCape Blue has a reputation beyond reputeCape Blue has a reputation beyond reputeCape Blue has a reputation beyond reputeCape Blue has a reputation beyond reputeCape Blue has a reputation beyond reputeCape Blue has a reputation beyond reputeCape Blue has a reputation beyond reputeCape Blue has a reputation beyond reputeCape Blue has a reputation beyond repute
Default Re: EU President-"Global Warming" Being Used As A Vehicle To Suppress Human Freedom

Originally Posted by Econ
Yes, absolutely right... mind you, there is this thing called the EU who are involved with a lot of countries... 27 at last count I think, then there is the fact that every one of these countries use the ships that are connected with bringing goods in and trash out of those countries, in other words 'all throughout Europe'... Brussels, ah they don't seem too interested as they are probably busy filling their pockets with our money to do anything serious about it... as per usual.
I am vaguely aware of this EU thingy, however the vast majority of ships are not moving between EU countries but between Asia and the EU, they can often hold enough fuel for a round-trip. No individual country wants to ban ships of a certain type (pollution level) on their own as only that country loses out on cheap freight - it needs international agreements of a global nature.

Suggesting that "Brussels" is filling its pockets is the usual cheap-shot and has nothing to do with the discusion.


Sorry but that is kind of obvious, what is more important anyway?... cheap goods or our health and our childrens health?

I think you are missing what I am saying... but what is the point of crying green, taxing us on it and making fuel cleaner then letting ships pump out the left over after the clean bits are passed on to cars... even though ships pump it out into the air at sea it still comes around as the air moves and the water absorbs the chemicals. It a bit like making people pay to have different bins for different types of rubbish and the rest that goes along with that then just chucking the rubbish all into the same hole... as is what happens to a lot of it probably.
You are coming up with the classic argument "because X hasn't been done then we shouldn't bother doing Y" - perhaps governments have prioritized the pollution importance (and associated costs) of various measures and the ships pollution is small in comparison to say, encouraging people to not use standby power.

The recycling thing is wrong - occasionally when commodity prices were low a local authority could have messed up their contracts and ended up landfilling recyclables - again, tiny, miniscule, hardly ever happens - but was great press for the reactionary media when it did occur.

The EU has enacted various waste Directives - on electronics goods, cars, packaging etc that have price-support mechanisms built-in and have legal targets for the manufacturers of these items to meet - Sony has to make sure so much of each TV is recycled, Tesco has to ensure a high percentage of packaging it sells is recycled (they do this partly by paying Local Authorities to do it for them).

Part of the "UK exports waste" issue is a technical one down to the definition of waste - the UK exports shredded steel from the recycling of cars, its worth $400/tonne when iron ore is only worth $50/t and is far more refined than iron ore requiring only 10% of the energy to make a new steel billet - the UK Env Agency still calls this material a "waste" - so the several million tonnes of this sold abroad each year to steelworks around the world who bid for this valuable material are several million tonnes of "waste export" on paper. There is some export of "real waste" which the Env Agency is slowly getting to grips with - there are very clear laws on export that are EU ones.
Cape Blue is offline  
Old Nov 28th 2009, 8:20 pm
  #40  
Democracy advocate
 
Cape Blue's Avatar
 
Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 12,433
Cape Blue has a reputation beyond reputeCape Blue has a reputation beyond reputeCape Blue has a reputation beyond reputeCape Blue has a reputation beyond reputeCape Blue has a reputation beyond reputeCape Blue has a reputation beyond reputeCape Blue has a reputation beyond reputeCape Blue has a reputation beyond reputeCape Blue has a reputation beyond reputeCape Blue has a reputation beyond reputeCape Blue has a reputation beyond repute
Default Re: EU President-"Global Warming" Being Used As A Vehicle To Suppress Human Freedom

Originally Posted by carter71
I can never understand that figure. I have never come across an appliance, computer or piece of equipment made in the last 20 years that used more than 1% of normal operating power when on standby. Typically, things that have standby are all things like TVs which only use small amounts of power anyway - so cookers, heaters, immersion, etc aren't included anyway - therefore representing even less of a fraction of used power in the home.

So how anyone can calculate 8% is beyond me. Unless people use TVs from America from the 1950's where standby kept the heater circuit live on all the valves - I can't see how that computes!
Perhaps the computer/TV left plugged-in for 8 times the duration it is used?

i.e. if the TV uses 100 watts when working for 2 hours and 1 watt for the standby power for the remaining 22 hrs we have:

Usage - 100W * 2 = 200W
Standby - 1W * 22 = 22W

This would give 222W power use for the day, of which 10% (22W) was standby.
Cape Blue is offline  
Old Nov 28th 2009, 8:28 pm
  #41  
BE Enthusiast
 
Econ's Avatar
 
Joined: Nov 2007
Location: Southern Spain
Posts: 773
Econ has a reputation beyond reputeEcon has a reputation beyond reputeEcon has a reputation beyond reputeEcon has a reputation beyond reputeEcon has a reputation beyond reputeEcon has a reputation beyond reputeEcon has a reputation beyond reputeEcon has a reputation beyond reputeEcon has a reputation beyond reputeEcon has a reputation beyond reputeEcon has a reputation beyond repute
Default Re: EU President-"Global Warming" Being Used As A Vehicle To Suppress Human Freedom

Originally Posted by carter71
The more we try and fool ourselves that it's "all the fault of a handful of ships out in the North sea", which is the real aim of the article, the more we really ARE burying our heads in the sand.
Well it wasn't the full 'or real' aim actually, it was part of the issue in making a point about the hypocrisy of the politicians and how our money is spent and we are taxed to get 'us' to save a little when they allow the shipping problem which is a much bigger pollution issue 'sulphur, CO2 or whatever' that they should have and could have been on top of by now and actually made more money in tax from it if they use their heads, never mind the fact that we are preached at on the importance of clean fuel and pay for it while the left over is used by these large ships for fuel (around 5400 of them as far as I know) . I mentioned the sulphur side of it' and pointing their energies in that direction would probably be more productive. It just happened that you picked up on the shipping issue which in all fairness was being used as a major part of the point but still the point I was actually trying to make was the politicians in this and how they spend our money and tax us for small change green issues when they could actually do something with a problem that is fairly dam big.

Last edited by Econ; Nov 28th 2009 at 9:22 pm.
Econ is offline  
Old Nov 28th 2009, 8:37 pm
  #42  
BE Enthusiast
 
Econ's Avatar
 
Joined: Nov 2007
Location: Southern Spain
Posts: 773
Econ has a reputation beyond reputeEcon has a reputation beyond reputeEcon has a reputation beyond reputeEcon has a reputation beyond reputeEcon has a reputation beyond reputeEcon has a reputation beyond reputeEcon has a reputation beyond reputeEcon has a reputation beyond reputeEcon has a reputation beyond reputeEcon has a reputation beyond reputeEcon has a reputation beyond repute
Default Re: EU President-"Global Warming" Being Used As A Vehicle To Suppress Human Freedom

Originally Posted by Cape Blue
I am vaguely aware of this EU thingy, however the vast majority of ships are not moving between EU countries but between Asia and the EU, they can often hold enough fuel for a round-trip. No individual country wants to ban ships of a certain type (pollution level) on their own as only that country loses out on cheap freight - it needs international agreements of a global nature.
They are moving between Asia and EU, yes international agreement between Asia and the EU, we are buying the products so we have the scale on our side.

Please don't say that we need their products...... because if Europe had any sense then we could be making a lot of the stuff here in EU countries.... No! not being vastly more expensive, more expensively maybe but by probably not by that much, it is just a case of EU using their heads a little... taxation would be a good place to start.

Originally Posted by Cape Blue
Suggesting that "Brussels" is filling its pockets is the usual cheap-shot and has nothing to do with the discusion.
I think it has to do with the discussion, because basically it is all connected at the end of the day, taxation, green issues, global warming... we need to pay more to be greener and then the taxes collected don't go there.

BBC news

Originally Posted by Cape Blue
The recycling thing is wrong - occasionally when commodity prices were low a local authority could have messed up their contracts and ended up landfilling recyclables - again, tiny, miniscule, hardly ever happens - but was great press for the reactionary media when it did occur.

The EU has enacted various waste Directives - on electronics goods, cars, packaging etc that have price-support mechanisms built-in and have legal targets for the manufacturers of these items to meet - Sony has to make sure so much of each TV is recycled, Tesco has to ensure a high percentage of packaging it sells is recycled (they do this partly by paying Local Authorities to do it for them).

Part of the "UK exports waste" issue is a technical one down to the definition of waste - the UK exports shredded steel from the recycling of cars, its worth $400/tonne when iron ore is only worth $50/t and is far more refined than iron ore requiring only 10% of the energy to make a new steel billet - the UK Env Agency still calls this material a "waste" - so the several million tonnes of this sold abroad each year to steelworks around the world who bid for this valuable material are several million tonnes of "waste export" on paper. There is some export of "real waste" which the Env Agency is slowly getting to grips with - there are very clear laws on export that are EU ones.
Guardian

Sky video, think this is about 8 months old

I prefer to see and read than someone 'just telling me' everyone except them is wrong.

Last edited by Econ; Nov 28th 2009 at 8:56 pm.
Econ is offline  
Old Nov 28th 2009, 11:50 pm
  #43  
Democracy advocate
 
Cape Blue's Avatar
 
Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 12,433
Cape Blue has a reputation beyond reputeCape Blue has a reputation beyond reputeCape Blue has a reputation beyond reputeCape Blue has a reputation beyond reputeCape Blue has a reputation beyond reputeCape Blue has a reputation beyond reputeCape Blue has a reputation beyond reputeCape Blue has a reputation beyond reputeCape Blue has a reputation beyond reputeCape Blue has a reputation beyond reputeCape Blue has a reputation beyond repute
Default Re: EU President-"Global Warming" Being Used As A Vehicle To Suppress Human Freedom

Originally Posted by Econ
They are moving between Asia and EU, yes international agreement between Asia and the EU, we are buying the products so we have the scale on our side.

Please don't say that we need their products...... because if Europe had any sense then we could be making a lot of the stuff here in EU countries.... No! not being vastly more expensive, more expensively maybe but by probably not by that much, it is just a case of EU using their heads a little... taxation would be a good place to start.

I think it has to do with the discussion, because basically it is all connected at the end of the day, taxation, green issues, global warming... we need to pay more to be greener and then the taxes collected don't go there.

BBC news
We want their products and we could not dream of producing them for the prices they do - some of this is down to poor safety and environmental controls and some down to paying someone in China 50p an hour who will work faster than someone in the UK at 10GBP/hr.

The EU does not set domestic taxation policy, as you think they are already filling their pockets I am not sure you want them to?

The hackneyed wailing of EU bureaucrats filling their pockets has nothing to do with the discusion of global warming, recycling or any other issue - it is just a side-line that the anti-EU brigade can't stop repeating.

Guardian

Sky video, think this is about 8 months old

I prefer to see and read than someone 'just telling me' everyone except them is wrong.
You have read, but you have not comprehended nor have you understood.

You have absolutely zero idea how much "ewaste" is exported nor do you have any idea of the WEEE Directive, the TFS Regs and you were unable to comprehend my post where I said.
There is some export of "real waste" which the Env Agency is slowly getting to grips with - there are very clear laws on export that are EU ones.
I was actually referring to the recent cases of ewaste and mixed recyclables - they are important, but are a tiny percentage of the "waste" exports which are predominantly metals, paper, plastics etc all of which are valuable - selling recovered copper at $5,000/tonne is, in the eye of the UK Env Agency, still an export of waste.

Last edited by Cape Blue; Nov 28th 2009 at 11:52 pm.
Cape Blue is offline  
Old Nov 29th 2009, 12:04 am
  #44  
Forum Regular
 
Joined: Oct 2009
Location: Manchester
Posts: 42
Makingthemove has a brilliant futureMakingthemove has a brilliant futureMakingthemove has a brilliant futureMakingthemove has a brilliant futureMakingthemove has a brilliant futureMakingthemove has a brilliant futureMakingthemove has a brilliant future
Default Re: EU President-"Global Warming" Being Used As A Vehicle To Suppress Human Freedom

I am sorry but I am extremely sceptical of any messages re global warming from any government.

You can shoot me down now, but my own approach to the green agenda goes back to my upbringing - 'you don't buy anything you don't need ' and 'you don't waste anything'

Global corporations are using global warming to encourage us to buy more stuff, be it cars, designer bags (in place of carrier bags) or more efficient washing machines...

The householder is getting the pressure whether it's from ads (eg the 5 miles one), Love Food Hate Waste, etc, etc whilst the largest contributors to CO2 emissions, ie industry, get off scot free.

In the same way air travel gets the 'environmental evil' tag but when compared to emissions from other sources, its CO2 contribution is tiny.

Sorry to rant and I am not a conspiracy theorist but I do think when companies see the words 'green agenda' they hear 'selling opportunity'
Makingthemove is offline  
Old Nov 29th 2009, 12:32 am
  #45  
Democracy advocate
 
Cape Blue's Avatar
 
Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 12,433
Cape Blue has a reputation beyond reputeCape Blue has a reputation beyond reputeCape Blue has a reputation beyond reputeCape Blue has a reputation beyond reputeCape Blue has a reputation beyond reputeCape Blue has a reputation beyond reputeCape Blue has a reputation beyond reputeCape Blue has a reputation beyond reputeCape Blue has a reputation beyond reputeCape Blue has a reputation beyond reputeCape Blue has a reputation beyond repute
Default Re: EU President-"Global Warming" Being Used As A Vehicle To Suppress Human Freedom

Originally Posted by Makingthemove
I am sorry but I am extremely sceptical of any messages re global warming from any government.
The messages have been coming from NGOs for the past 20+ years and from governments for the past 10+. I don't see Greenpeace getting in bed with the UK Gov, nor FoE with the US gov.

You can shoot me down now, but my own approach to the green agenda goes back to my upbringing - 'you don't buy anything you don't need ' and 'you don't waste anything'
Nothing wrong in that.

Global corporations are using global warming to encourage us to buy more stuff, be it cars, designer bags (in place of carrier bags) or more efficient washing machines...
Of course they are, this doesn't mean that MMCC is not real and signifcant though does it?

The householder is getting the pressure whether it's from ads (eg the 5 miles one), Love Food Hate Waste, etc, etc whilst the largest contributors to CO2 emissions, ie industry, get off scot free.
That's not true, you are just unaware of legislation like the Packaging Directive that makes Tesco and Heinz pay for the recycling of baked bean cans or cap and trade which costs large energy users to comply with. What we really need is a straight carbon tax which would make energy more expensive and incentivise people and business to minimize their use, perhaps in conjunction with a reduction in income taxes.

In the same way air travel gets the 'environmental evil' tag but when compared to emissions from other sources, its CO2 contribution is tiny.
Small, but growing rapidly - around 3.5% now but could be 15% by 2050. The other significant is that high-altitude emissions are thought to be much worse than those at ground-level.

Sorry to rant and I am not a conspiracy theorist but I do think when companies see the words 'green agenda' they hear 'selling opportunity'
Of course they do, that their job to try and make money, the key is trying to separate the wheat from the chaff. Just because companies want to make money it does not mean that MMCC is any less real or any less of a problem for us.
Cape Blue is offline  

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service -

Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.