Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Climate Change

Options
  • 26-07-2022 4:35pm
    #1
    Registered Users Posts: 11,389 ✭✭✭✭


    Saw this on Twitter, he may as well have put the honest in inverted commas. This is the same journalist who is busy running down Frank Mitloehner, who *checks notes* has an actual PhD and is a professor on the subject. Gibbons loves science, just not the science he disagrees with



    There's a serious information war going on



«1345678

Comments

  • Registered Users Posts: 334 ✭✭JohnChadwick


    If public were fed the actual reality every single day on climate change there'd be too much hysteria leading to radical changes. This type of scenario wouldn't suit big businesses who thrive on predictability to keeping their profits rolling in.



  • Registered Users Posts: 4,969 ✭✭✭endainoz


    Gibbons gets his weekly segment on matt cooper as well. Nearly threw the radio out the window the rubbish he was peddling. Its the usual stuff in the climate debate, two sides that are extreme with no middle ground. Cooper said they invited someone from the IFA to debate with gibbons but they declined. Probably for the best than to give him attention and more importantly credibility.



  • Registered Users Posts: 157 ✭✭Jack C


    Just after watching climate debate on Prime Time. Jayus could we have got anyone worse than Barry Cowen. Yer one the lecturer was probably wondering how this gobshite got elected. Surely to christ the industry can get someone to properly convey the arguments in favour of Irish agriculture.



  • Registered Users Posts: 675 ✭✭✭farmertipp


    I think that's the crux of our problem. we can't get anyone on rte to make a proper coherent argument.



  • Registered Users Posts: 592 ✭✭✭Silverdream




  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 675 ✭✭✭farmertipp


    ciaran Fitzgerald would be a hard nut to crack if he was on prime time



  • Registered Users Posts: 6,150 ✭✭✭TheRiverman


    "Yer one the lecturer" incorrectly said Co. Laois instead of Co. Offaly twice when referring to Conor McMorrow's report.



  • Registered Users Posts: 2,764 ✭✭✭Lime Tree Farm


    She said "other sectors are reducing by 60%", which sectors are those?



  • Registered Users Posts: 5,013 ✭✭✭alps




  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    The government haven’t delivered on ambitious projects like universal healthcare or affordable housing.

    Decarbonising the economy is a massive project.

    They need to come up with realistic plans based on support for good ideas.

    1 million electric cars seems unrealistic. A total shift to green energy generation seem unattainable in a country that has a nimby attitude to turbines etc.

    Why not apply a few practical ideas like:

    1) Promoting car pooling with free tolls, fuel credit and reduction in road tax.

    2) Encourage those people who can to work from home with incentives to reduce car journeys

    3) If they want people to reduce cow numbers then a significant tax credit system should be in place to ensure if a fellows goes down in numbers that he isn’t out of pocket

    4) Promoting solar installation on state buildings, commercial and farm buildings

    5) A funded grassland survey to investigate farms that could benefit from clover to fix nitrogen and multi species swards to replace grain feeding

    6) Afforestation on idle state land to act as a carbon sink

    7) Scrap excess services or opt for smaller buses / less carriages on public transport routes with low uptake on capacity



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 11,389 ✭✭✭✭Green&Red


    Sinead is going to write some music for it, so crisis averted



    https://twitter.com/SMcNallyMusic1/status/1551884738801156103?s=20&t=4pNRj9YZ1EMdc2o6dSllTA



  • Registered Users Posts: 5,059 ✭✭✭bogman_bass


    To be honest I think there is only a handful fit to do it. Harold Kingston from the IFA

    Alan Jagoe and Thomas Duffy both formally of Macra

    After that the standard drops off.



  • Registered Users Posts: 4,619 ✭✭✭White Clover


    Robert Coleman from Cork was on ear to the ground a couple of years ago. I thought he was very articulate.



  • Registered Users Posts: 11,389 ✭✭✭✭Green&Red


    Thomas Duffy is on Claire Byrne at the moment, hes very articulate. Excellent on twitter also



  • Registered Users Posts: 2,957 ✭✭✭cute geoge


    Thomas duffy ,harold kingston etc are the only ones suoiable to represent farmers at the moment even tim cullinan is just not good enough debating with these tree huggers



  • Registered Users Posts: 675 ✭✭✭farmertipp


    Tim knows his stuff. a good operator but not good in public unfortunately



  • Registered Users Posts: 1,073 ✭✭✭minerleague


    The problem as I see it is Ireland is suited to growing grass and keeping cattle ( we export most ) other countries are suited to growing other crops ( bananas, oranges etc. ) Consumers and supermarkets have driven down prices so each country specializes in smaller number of goods ( that they do cheaper than anyone else ) and we trade these goods around the world. What the greens are suggesting is that we farm less cattle and diversify into other crops not taking into account more energy and costs needed here to grow crops that need hot weather ect. Even though global warming is just that ( global ) they seem to suggest each country tackle its own emissions without considering knockon effects ( ie more cattle elsewhere ) or indeed if some countries are doing anything.



  • Registered Users Posts: 4,619 ✭✭✭White Clover


    Good assessment there. The bottom line is a very small cohort of TD’s are trying to railroad their naive ideals into legislation in this country. If this is democracy, I am lost for words.



  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    Bit of theater for you from the aforementioned TD's....... sorry, this one is a senator rejected by the electorate, too.




  • Registered Users Posts: 4,619 ✭✭✭White Clover




  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 11,389 ✭✭✭✭Green&Red


    The idea that we switch to crops ignores so much, primary being the massive start up cost, the lack of a market and the lack of knowledge. They just think farmers are all the same and have the same skillset



  • Registered Users Posts: 6,671 ✭✭✭jaymla627


    You'd imagen the government will fold over this, if Charlie gives in to the 30% any rural fg/ff td that backs it is finished and any green td that relents to a lower limit is also finished with their target electorate



  • Registered Users Posts: 2,460 ✭✭✭J.O. Farmer


    I know the greens don't know much about farming but there's big differences in land as well.

    There's a big difference in the land around the ploughing championships compared to the west.

    Then there's some of the small fields you'd hardly turn a combine harvester in the size of them now.



  • Registered Users Posts: 2,460 ✭✭✭J.O. Farmer


    It'll hardly come to that, they'll come down somewhere in the middle round 25/26% where both sides claim a victory.

    That said the greens possibly are daft enough to walk if they don't get 28/29%. They might get re-elected in leafy foxrock but depending on the outcome of an election some other group may have enough to make up the numbers in a new government.



  • Registered Users Posts: 554 ✭✭✭Morris Moss


    Just listened to it, your right he is very articulate, but he talked for 6 or 7 mins and said absolutely nothing of relevance, going on about conspiracy theories instead of addressing some of the inaccuracies that have been spouted on rte over the last week.



  • Registered Users Posts: 6,896 ✭✭✭amacca


    Or the same soils.....or that they want to poison them with the pesticides it would take to get appropriate yields of those crops to even keep them at a subsistence level with the **** return they would get from the multiples driving down prices on them when they get the squeeze on.



  • Registered Users Posts: 5,059 ✭✭✭bogman_bass


    And you can see why SF are shutting up and letting them duke it out.

    Let the government parties get their digs in while remaining an option to either side during the next election.

    cynical? Very! But also politically clever



  • Registered Users Posts: 5,059 ✭✭✭bogman_bass


    Disagree. he delt with the fundamental point that Georgie is an environmental extremist and shouldn’t be given the airtime.

    too late to be going on about an interview that happened a week ago.

    He took a different line to “oh no we’re not!” That might pique the public’s interest.

    Preaching to the choir is not the name of the game.



  • Registered Users Posts: 554 ✭✭✭Morris Moss


    The public have little or no interest in this he said she said rubbish, what they do have an interest in is what all of this is going to cost them if agriculture doesn't "do it's part".

    A figure of 4000 a year per house was pulled out of somewhere if agriculture only does 22%, I mean challenge the likes of that shite talk.

    Anyway as I said he's very articulate and a lot more capable than myself on this, but sometimes you need to fight fire with fire.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 11,472 ✭✭✭✭Say my name


    If this cohort of tds or the ifa or whoever signs this piece on reducing emissions in agriculture as it stands, it's goodbye all ruminants.

    Reason it doesn't matter if it's 22 or 30% now. It's signing for a 50% reduction by 2030 and 100% of a reduction by 2050.

    This is all optics on the Greens side and to give the farmers some false win if they sign.

    Now soil sequestration is not included in this. Only emissions like you're a BMW factory. And by emissions, no carbon emissions from the soil. So to protect and enhance tillage farming in this country. But as above methane emissions are counted from cattle and as above it's an agreement that will descend to zero by 2050. As that's impossible from livestock that's the end of livestock farming.

    It's drawn up with a mission. Only a fool would sign this in it's current form without having soil sequestration or even emissions included. Ammonia (fert ) emissions are included but not soil carbon. Which as anyone with cattle knows are higher from cattle grazing and lower and/or reducing in tilled ground.

    It should be left till September and revised again.



Advertisement