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
Good news everyone! The Boards.ie Subscription service is live. See here: https://subscriptions.boards.ie/

"Green" policies are destroying this country

18848858878898901120

Comments

  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,728 ✭✭✭paddyisreal


    ?? Rivers have also been dredged . The Egyptians, Romans dredged rivers a long long time ago. Didn't Leonardo da Vinci invent a dredging machine ffs



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,775 ✭✭✭Pa ElGrande


    Net Zero means we are paying for the destruction of our economy and society in pursuit of an unachievable and pointless policy.



  • Posts: 6,626 ✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    I couldn't have described you better myself. Thanks.



  • Posts: 6,626 ✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    There is a certain class of mainly males who are ideologically opposed to the concept of man made climate change because it disproves the fundamentally conservative neo-liberal beliefs they live their life by.

    Namely;

    • Belief in small non-interventionalist government. They fundamentally disagree that some issues need governmental and internationally coordinated plans of action and interventions in markets to make them happen.
    • That free markets will always produce the best possible outcome by the "magic hand". A minimally regulated environment. AGW been the ultimate refutation of this belief.
    • That growth is the main measure of a societies success.
    • There are always technical fixes to every issue, rather than addressing the fundamental causes.
    • That large complex systems cannot be controlled intentionally.

    Anyone who shows these personal beliefs is to ideologically driven to have a rational discussion on the science of climate.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 986 ✭✭✭InAtFullBack


    From: How Somerset Levels river flooded after it was not dredged for decades (telegraph.co.uk)

    image.png

    Unfortunately here, the before image is what we want to see as the after image... the right hand side is the result of inaction.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 17,346 ✭✭✭✭elperello


    So I was right first time.

    People like myself who are already 100% recyclers of bottles and cans will be inconvenienced by the new system.

    Little consolation that they can avoid the inconvenience by paying a financial penalty when they have been doing the right thing all along.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,021 ✭✭✭creedp


    I know a couple of those guys🤣 What % of the population fits neatly into that student union debating team discussion title IYO



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 14,754 ✭✭✭✭ednwireland


    yeh seen loads , total waste of time . only bottles in the scheme will be accepted so basically we will be charged more for goods pushing up inflation. I already recycle 100 % of my plastic bottles into my green bin. and buy in glass where possible which is taken to a recycling point. they are so small I can't see them takin a lot anyway.

    My weather

    https://www.ecowitt.net/home/share?authorize=96CT1F



  • Posts: 15,801 ✭✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    Depends on what you define as inconvenience. I'm guessing you would define it as any deviation from the normal

    Either way it's coming in and will see our recycling rates increase.

    If this upsets a few, oh well, we're required to do it,all EU members are and by 2025 everywhere you go in the EU, it will be the same

    Think back to the wingeing and moaning when the bag levy came, had a huge effect on litter and waste around the country. This will be no different



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,689 ✭✭✭KildareP


    And we've had climate doom predictions and peak oil announcements for decades now that have also come to nought - am I to assume that we can apply your logic in the same manner to all current day predictions on climate and oil?



  • Advertisement
  • Posts: 15,801 ✭✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    Pretty sure a month's worth of rain in 1 day is not normal



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,689 ✭✭✭KildareP


    No it's not. But then:

    • Hurricane Charlie (1986) wasn't normal.
    • The Thames flooding in 1953 wasn't normal.
    • The Columbian River flooding large parts of the western US in 1862 wasn't normal.

    Have a look at how many "Great Floods" there were going back over the centuries. They weren't normal either, even by today's standards.

    But then, putting everyone on watch that there mightn't be enough electricity to keep the grid powered isn't normal for a western society, either.

    But hey, apparently we should only listen to one expert groups warnings!



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,061 ✭✭✭roosterman71


    They did and there wasn't the same demands put on them by massive urban sprawl built up alongside them. Where it was, the rivers were cleaned and kept. Remember that a rivers role is to drain and transfer water from A/B/C to the sea. If the rivers capacity for carrying water is diminished, and the prospect of higher rainfall coming down the line, plus flood plains no longer flood plains or having a higher water table, then the prospect of many more flooding events increases. And then to come in half gloating that it's proof positive of climate change and refusing to acknowledge that cleaning a river may alleviate some issues is quite frankly, a terrible stance to take. In my example a cleaner river would drain more water. There's a cost to doing it but each landowner on the river could be asked to foot some of the bill. That would avoid a big exchequer outlay for flooding and/or counter measures to protect people (like 750k for a 180m wall plus consultation fees).



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,307 ✭✭✭patnor1011


    Lets reopen couple of our silver, lead and copper mines we may be in the money soon since demand is going to pick up considerably.




  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,061 ✭✭✭roosterman71


    Blaming males, then anyone who questions the stance is "ideologically opposed", a "conservative" "neo-liberal". What a load of word scutter.

    When we get internationally coordinated plans then fantastic. But we don't have bar agreements on paper that are ignored by many (I'm looking at India/China mainly) and what's happening here is that this small island is expected to change how we live drastically for gains that no one has been able to quantify, all the while taxing the bejaysus out of the population and putting the cart before the horse in terms of power generation (closing what's working) in the hope of more renewables which may/may not be reliable depending on the weather at some point in the future, while being anti-nuclear but pro burning biomass imported from South America which we'll use to power the grid already under strain but with plans galore to demand more from it by heat pumps, EVs, etc, etc



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 524 ✭✭✭Coolcormack1979


    my local town this morning with millions being spent on flood control works and the road leading into it is flooded worse than ever.why? Because of the refusal by the genius over it to clean up the river leading into it from a certain point.hey just waste about 20 million on it without doing the whole bloody job right.but in this day and age the green zealots must be obeyed and common sense can go to hell.

    all it needed was the river to be cleaned up and the overgrowth cut back to allow the water to flow freely.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 17,346 ✭✭✭✭elperello


    Queueing in the cold and rain to put containers in a slot one at a time when before I could just drive up to the bins and put them in.

    That's inconvenience, not a deviation to the normal but a new normal.

    Having said that if it works and reduces littering/improves recycling I'll support it and do my bit.

    I'm not whinging and moaning, just putting a point of view.

    I campaigned for the plastic bag levy.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,021 ✭✭✭creedp




  • Posts: 15,801 ✭✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    "Normal" is not a static state

    Good to see you support this



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 17,346 ✭✭✭✭elperello


    It's a sort of guarded welcome.

    I first saw these systems working in Germany about 25 years ago.

    They were located inside supermarkets.

    All green initiatives should be scrutinised and discussed.

    They are not necessarily perfect because they have been proposed with good intent.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 17,346 ✭✭✭✭elperello


    Irony is that I'm not really a dissenter.

    We really do need to reduce, reuse, recycle.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 16,881 ✭✭✭✭Grayson


    In Germany all the machines are located inside supermarkets. There's still bottle bins where you can put in stuff that that can't be recycled in machines. And there's plastic bins for stuff that can't be recycled.


    So if I buy a bottle of coke here, I can return the empty in the supermarket. If I buy a bottle of beer here, I can return it in the supermarket.

    A lot of wine bottles can't be returned. I pop those into the bottle bank around the corner.

    The bottle of ballygowan I bought in Dublin airport on the way back her won't be accepted by the machine in the supermarket/ So I pop it into my plastic recycling bin.


    If I wanted to I could put all the glass bottles into the glass bottle bank.

    And likewise I could place all the plastic bottles into the plastic recycling bin.


    For me here, the only deviation is having the option to return a lot of it for cash.



  • Posts: 6,626 ✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    In Germany it has reduced bottle waste and bottle littering to zero. This is because anyone who throws away a bottle quickly has it picked up by a poor person for the refund cash. It's highly effective in all objectives and gives some people a small income.



  • Posts: 6,626 ✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    You have repeatedly missed the point I have made - which is that dredging causes worse downstream flooding. That's an absolute fact. So since almost all the major cities are located at the mouths of rivers that a huge problem. One of the major prediction of climate analysis is that this will become an increasing issue when combined with rising sea levels. Many cities will become uninhabitable unless huge sums of money are sunk into flood defenses - a strategy which is ultimately doomed to fail.

    It is far better to manage floods at their source which is in the uplands and the middle reached of rivers.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,061 ✭✭✭roosterman71


    And you missed my point about carrying water from A to the sea. By your logic, rivers filling with dirt and weeds and trees and silt and banks falling in will lead to less flooding in cities because the water will take longer to get there. Rising sea levels has nothing to do with it, but again, by green logic adaption isn't allowed and the money should be spent on wind turbines. Let the places flood and be told it's because you don't drive an EV that it's happening. Cop on.

    I don't get how anyone can say cleaning rivers is a bad thing! Cities at mouths of rivers are easier to defend against for floods as the rivers are usually wider and it's easier build defences along the sides. The Shannon has ESB managing the water flow and Bord na Mona pumping silt in. As a result vast areas are flooding at much less rain than normal (look at the callow floods from this summer). It wasn't because ESB closed of the gates to back up the water to protect Limerick, it's because the water can't get away quick enough to the sea. Cleaning rivers should be handled by the OPW, start at the mouth and work your way up along. When finished, start again. Just like was done 50+ years ago until numpties decided it wasn't cost effective anymore, but makes more sense to spend millions on walls in towns and screw the land and people outside of them



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 524 ✭✭✭Coolcormack1979


    Too much common sense in that post.should be banned😁



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 596 ✭✭✭deholleboom


    Yes, it is laughable. It is not uncommon to see the greens display their usual ignorance but you can also turn it around, mirror it. Any ideology can oppose anything on principle and reject even the most basic logical assumptions. You dont have to be a total Ayn Rand style free market absolutist OR a total Marxist totalitarian state proponent to make sensible statements about climate change.

    If only the greens would be willing to admit a level of uncertainty about it i for one would be happy to have a conversation about climate change. But since 2006 the debate has been cancelled by one side. That side has become more totalitarian in the last decade and display no tolerance whatsoever, only ignorance. It is a pathetic persistent narrow mindedness and self rightiousness constantly on the attack. No self reflection at all. And then they have the gall to criticise the belligerence of free marketeers, totally unaware of their own stupidity.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,775 ✭✭✭Pa ElGrande


    It's works much better when you don't build on a flood plain.

    image.png


    Net Zero means we are paying for the destruction of our economy and society in pursuit of an unachievable and pointless policy.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,098 ✭✭✭randomname2005


    I wonder what our recycling percentage is for bottles and cans given the local drop off point is often too full to use. I think there are many other things that could be done, that would make a bigger difference but not as palatable. We already recycle bottles and cans, so this is just a different way of doing it. people are malleable and will accept the change, do the refund with their shop rather than a separate trip.

    Having been to a few festivals in Spain they sell reusable plastic cups for drinks. You didn't get a drink without one. There is no deposit but you can keep it and bring it to the next festival. As a tourist I kept the different ones as souvenirs but it cuts down massively on plastic cups at concerts, games, etc. Locals would bring their old ones with them and reuse them, certainly for most of the summer festival season. An easy change here if it was desired. Just like plastic bags and the charge for them, just force all vendors to use and charge for them. Sell FAI ones at Irish soccer matches, IRFU ones at rugby games, and the like. Easy to reuse and not a massive weight to carry to a game.

    From my perspective the biggest offender from a rubbish on the side of the road perspective is take away containers. Imagine if we had a re-usable take away container and had a deposit on it, something meaningful like 5 quid. Could potentially help with the obesity crisis as people might be less likely to impulse buy fast food with the extra up front cost, but would reduce litter. People would not throw it from the car window, or else if it was, others would pick it up for the refund. Yes yes cleaning and sanitising needs to be figured out but I think other areas should be looked at too rather than setting up a massive infrastructure for something that looks reasonably well done by most.



  • Advertisement
  • Posts: 6,626 ✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    There is no scientific basis to entertain the doubt you speak of. Not going to happen.



Advertisement