Discussion:
Trust
Add Reply
Rich80105
2021-01-30 20:58:22 UTC
Reply
Permalink
http://norightturn.blogspot.com/2021/01/national-cannot-be-trusted-on-climate.html

National found themselves on the wrong side of history with the Covid
response, now they are doing it again with our legal and oral
obligations regarding climate change. It was to National's credit that
they made the first commitment to action to meet our share of
international actions regarding climate change, but now their reflex
"Oppose at all costs" attitudes are getting in the way of common
sense. It is like watching Trump with Dr Fauchi - a political party
feeding its fringe dwellers rather than doing what they know is needed
for the country.

Teh ACT and Green parties are much more concerned about human rights
than National - I do not expect either of them to support this idiocy
from National.
John Bowes
2021-01-31 01:55:22 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Rich80105
http://norightturn.blogspot.com/2021/01/national-cannot-be-trusted-on-climate.html
National found themselves on the wrong side of history with the Covid
response, now they are doing it again with our legal and oral
obligations regarding climate change. It was to National's credit that
they made the first commitment to action to meet our share of
international actions regarding climate change, but now their reflex
"Oppose at all costs" attitudes are getting in the way of common
sense. It is like watching Trump with Dr Fauchi - a political party
feeding its fringe dwellers rather than doing what they know is needed
for the country.
What utter crap! National got beaten by Labour purely because the Marxist muppets had six months more campaigning than any other political party! The Paris Accord is garbage! We should tell them to fuck off! By all means cut emissions and look after the planet. What's the betting that the kids of the current youth climate activists are asking their parents why they screwed society by demanding the impossible and didn't bother to look at the consequences of their actions. things like landfill overloaded with carbon turbine blades, solar panels no longer functional and Lithium based battery's causing lethal fires because none of these can be recycled!
Post by Rich80105
Teh ACT and Green parties are much more concerned about human rights
than National - I do not expect either of them to support this idiocy
from National.
Teh ACT party is the only one concerned about our human rights! In fact the silly little Iranian tourist thinks we should only think about what the fucking government wants us to think about.

Sheesh Rich. We know you're a fucking imbecile, no need for you to drive the fact home by ignoring inconvenient facts!
James Christophers
2021-02-01 23:39:54 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by John Bowes
Post by Rich80105
http://norightturn.blogspot.com/2021/01/national-cannot-be-trusted-on-climate.html
National found themselves on the wrong side of history with the Covid
response, now they are doing it again with our legal and oral
obligations regarding climate change. It was to National's credit that
they made the first commitment to action to meet our share of
international actions regarding climate change, but now their reflex
"Oppose at all costs" attitudes are getting in the way of common
sense. It is like watching Trump with Dr Fauchi - a political party
feeding its fringe dwellers rather than doing what they know is needed
for the country.
What utter crap! National got beaten by Labour purely because the Marxist muppets had six months more campaigning than any other political party!
The media remarked more than once on Labour's almost complete absence of campaigning. Unlike you, the media recognised this was because Arden and her party were doing more important stuff like ensuring and securing the survival of snivelling little nihilists like you during a pandemic that will still be with us for some time.

Collins, armed with nothing but her sardonic sniping and her defeatist low-rent rabble to further undermine her, made doubly sure that National would deservedly secure their biggest trouncing within living memory.

IOW, entirely at her own party's expense and to her and their shame and disgrace, New Zealand's long-since-spent force that once might have been Collins did nothing but add further force and validity to what "learner" Ardern was already up to during the election runup.

Slam dunk to Ardern. Fact is, she scarcely had even to try, and you know it.
Crash
2021-01-31 03:35:50 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Rich80105
http://norightturn.blogspot.com/2021/01/national-cannot-be-trusted-on-climate.html
National found themselves on the wrong side of history with the Covid
response, now they are doing it again with our legal and oral
obligations regarding climate change. It was to National's credit that
they made the first commitment to action to meet our share of
international actions regarding climate change, but now their reflex
"Oppose at all costs" attitudes are getting in the way of common
sense. It is like watching Trump with Dr Fauchi - a political party
feeding its fringe dwellers rather than doing what they know is needed
for the country.
Teh ACT and Green parties are much more concerned about human rights
than National - I do not expect either of them to support this idiocy
from National.
While I do not particularly support National's climate change stance,
what is missing from all narratives on this is that even if NZ is
spectacularly successful in addressing climate change with appropriate
reductions, the forecast destruction of the planet will still happen.
It matters not what we do. What matters is that those countries that
are the largest polluters pull back on those emissions.


--
Crash McBash
Gordon
2021-01-31 03:47:38 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Crash
Post by Rich80105
http://norightturn.blogspot.com/2021/01/national-cannot-be-trusted-on-climate.html
National found themselves on the wrong side of history with the Covid
response, now they are doing it again with our legal and oral
obligations regarding climate change. It was to National's credit that
they made the first commitment to action to meet our share of
international actions regarding climate change, but now their reflex
"Oppose at all costs" attitudes are getting in the way of common
sense. It is like watching Trump with Dr Fauchi - a political party
feeding its fringe dwellers rather than doing what they know is needed
for the country.
Teh ACT and Green parties are much more concerned about human rights
than National - I do not expect either of them to support this idiocy
from National.
While I do not particularly support National's climate change stance,
what is missing from all narratives on this is that even if NZ is
spectacularly successful in addressing climate change with appropriate
reductions, the forecast destruction of the planet will still happen.
It matters not what we do. What matters is that those countries that
are the largest polluters pull back on those emissions.
I would argue that *everyone* (all countries) have to do their bit as we are
all in this together.

Small countries can not be let off the hook as we then have the arguement
that if it is good enough for them it is good enough for you.

Remember NZ is a small country with more than it fair share of green house
gases production.
Rich80105
2021-01-31 04:06:31 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Gordon
Post by Crash
Post by Rich80105
http://norightturn.blogspot.com/2021/01/national-cannot-be-trusted-on-climate.html
National found themselves on the wrong side of history with the Covid
response, now they are doing it again with our legal and oral
obligations regarding climate change. It was to National's credit that
they made the first commitment to action to meet our share of
international actions regarding climate change, but now their reflex
"Oppose at all costs" attitudes are getting in the way of common
sense. It is like watching Trump with Dr Fauchi - a political party
feeding its fringe dwellers rather than doing what they know is needed
for the country.
Teh ACT and Green parties are much more concerned about human rights
than National - I do not expect either of them to support this idiocy
from National.
While I do not particularly support National's climate change stance,
what is missing from all narratives on this is that even if NZ is
spectacularly successful in addressing climate change with appropriate
reductions, the forecast destruction of the planet will still happen.
It matters not what we do. What matters is that those countries that
are the largest polluters pull back on those emissions.
I would argue that *everyone* (all countries) have to do their bit as we are
all in this together.
Small countries can not be let off the hook as we then have the arguement
that if it is good enough for them it is good enough for you.
Remember NZ is a small country with more than it fair share of green house
gases production.
If every country does try to reduce emissions, we can learn from each
other. Tasmania appears to be using more windpower; talk this
aftgernoon is of New Zealand following in encouraging / requiring more
electric vehicles, and phasing out household gas connections. If some
countries do not do what they can, there may be adverse consequences
in terms of trade for example - we can expect countries with high
emmissions to receive some pressure.
Tony
2021-01-31 08:41:13 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Rich80105
Post by Gordon
Post by Crash
Post by Rich80105
http://norightturn.blogspot.com/2021/01/national-cannot-be-trusted-on-climate.html
National found themselves on the wrong side of history with the Covid
response, now they are doing it again with our legal and oral
obligations regarding climate change. It was to National's credit that
they made the first commitment to action to meet our share of
international actions regarding climate change, but now their reflex
"Oppose at all costs" attitudes are getting in the way of common
sense. It is like watching Trump with Dr Fauchi - a political party
feeding its fringe dwellers rather than doing what they know is needed
for the country.
Teh ACT and Green parties are much more concerned about human rights
than National - I do not expect either of them to support this idiocy
from National.
While I do not particularly support National's climate change stance,
what is missing from all narratives on this is that even if NZ is
spectacularly successful in addressing climate change with appropriate
reductions, the forecast destruction of the planet will still happen.
It matters not what we do. What matters is that those countries that
are the largest polluters pull back on those emissions.
I would argue that *everyone* (all countries) have to do their bit as we are
all in this together.
Small countries can not be let off the hook as we then have the arguement
that if it is good enough for them it is good enough for you.
Remember NZ is a small country with more than it fair share of green house
gases production.
If every country does try to reduce emissions, we can learn from each
other. Tasmania appears to be using more windpower; talk this
aftgernoon is of New Zealand following in encouraging / requiring more
electric vehicles, and phasing out household gas connections. If some
countries do not do what they can, there may be adverse consequences
in terms of trade for example - we can expect countries with high
emmissions to receive some pressure.
There are real problems with windpower, mentioned here more than once.
There are real problems with electric vehicles, als mentioned here more than
once.
They are becoming political credos just like climate change itself.
The science is not yet clear. We should do some things that help (most of them
obvious) but not leap into electric vehicles and wind energy until we
understand the consequences.
Rich80105
2021-01-31 09:10:13 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On Sun, 31 Jan 2021 02:41:13 -0600, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot net
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
Post by Gordon
Post by Crash
Post by Rich80105
http://norightturn.blogspot.com/2021/01/national-cannot-be-trusted-on-climate.html
National found themselves on the wrong side of history with the Covid
response, now they are doing it again with our legal and oral
obligations regarding climate change. It was to National's credit that
they made the first commitment to action to meet our share of
international actions regarding climate change, but now their reflex
"Oppose at all costs" attitudes are getting in the way of common
sense. It is like watching Trump with Dr Fauchi - a political party
feeding its fringe dwellers rather than doing what they know is needed
for the country.
Teh ACT and Green parties are much more concerned about human rights
than National - I do not expect either of them to support this idiocy
from National.
While I do not particularly support National's climate change stance,
what is missing from all narratives on this is that even if NZ is
spectacularly successful in addressing climate change with appropriate
reductions, the forecast destruction of the planet will still happen.
It matters not what we do. What matters is that those countries that
are the largest polluters pull back on those emissions.
I would argue that *everyone* (all countries) have to do their bit as we are
all in this together.
Small countries can not be let off the hook as we then have the arguement
that if it is good enough for them it is good enough for you.
Remember NZ is a small country with more than it fair share of green house
gases production.
If every country does try to reduce emissions, we can learn from each
other. Tasmania appears to be using more windpower; talk this
aftgernoon is of New Zealand following in encouraging / requiring more
electric vehicles, and phasing out household gas connections. If some
countries do not do what they can, there may be adverse consequences
in terms of trade for example - we can expect countries with high
emmissions to receive some pressure.
There are real problems with windpower, mentioned here more than once.
There are real problems with electric vehicles, als mentioned here more than
once.
They are becoming political credos just like climate change itself.
The science is not yet clear. We should do some things that help (most of them
obvious) but not leap into electric vehicles and wind energy until we
understand the consequences.
Electric vehicles are clearly developing year by year - as indeed are
petrol and diesel driven vehicles; currently they are seen as a good
alternative by many countries around the world. They have been around
for long enough for us to understand many consequences, but what
consequences are you concerned about that would indicate that we not
plan to make greater use of electric vehicles, Tony?

Wind energy is simpler, and again while the machinery of generation
continues to develop, there has been considerable success elsewhere -
for example see:
https://reneweconomy.com.au/tasmania-declares-itself-100-per-cent-powered-by-renewable-electricity-25119/

Again what consequences are you concerned about, Tony?
Tony
2021-01-31 19:45:16 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Rich80105
On Sun, 31 Jan 2021 02:41:13 -0600, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot net
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
Post by Gordon
Post by Crash
Post by Rich80105
http://norightturn.blogspot.com/2021/01/national-cannot-be-trusted-on-climate.html
National found themselves on the wrong side of history with the Covid
response, now they are doing it again with our legal and oral
obligations regarding climate change. It was to National's credit that
they made the first commitment to action to meet our share of
international actions regarding climate change, but now their reflex
"Oppose at all costs" attitudes are getting in the way of common
sense. It is like watching Trump with Dr Fauchi - a political party
feeding its fringe dwellers rather than doing what they know is needed
for the country.
Teh ACT and Green parties are much more concerned about human rights
than National - I do not expect either of them to support this idiocy
from National.
While I do not particularly support National's climate change stance,
what is missing from all narratives on this is that even if NZ is
spectacularly successful in addressing climate change with appropriate
reductions, the forecast destruction of the planet will still happen.
It matters not what we do. What matters is that those countries that
are the largest polluters pull back on those emissions.
I would argue that *everyone* (all countries) have to do their bit as we are
all in this together.
Small countries can not be let off the hook as we then have the arguement
that if it is good enough for them it is good enough for you.
Remember NZ is a small country with more than it fair share of green house
gases production.
If every country does try to reduce emissions, we can learn from each
other. Tasmania appears to be using more windpower; talk this
aftgernoon is of New Zealand following in encouraging / requiring more
electric vehicles, and phasing out household gas connections. If some
countries do not do what they can, there may be adverse consequences
in terms of trade for example - we can expect countries with high
emmissions to receive some pressure.
There are real problems with windpower, mentioned here more than once.
There are real problems with electric vehicles, als mentioned here more than
once.
They are becoming political credos just like climate change itself.
The science is not yet clear. We should do some things that help (most of them
obvious) but not leap into electric vehicles and wind energy until we
understand the consequences.
Electric vehicles are clearly developing year by year - as indeed are
petrol and diesel driven vehicles; currently they are seen as a good
alternative by many countries around the world. They have been around
for long enough for us to understand many consequences, but what
consequences are you concerned about that would indicate that we not
plan to make greater use of electric vehicles, Tony?
I and others have mentioned this before here and more than once.
There are a number of issues that will (not might) bite us unless we find a
solution.
One of those is the massive potential for polution from discarded batteries the
size of a divan when ev car batteries need replacing. This is not yet resolved.
So regardless of how the electricity is generated there is a dsiposal or re-use
issue.
Post by Rich80105
Wind energy is simpler, and again while the machinery of generation
continues to develop, there has been considerable success elsewhere -
No - wind energy is not simple, there are many experts who are suggesting it is
not the answer - also posted here before several times.
There is only one truly renewable energy at this time and that is hydro and the
world does not have enough of it.
Solar power has the same issues as vehicle batteries with battery disposal and
in addition has the question of how to re purpose the panels.
To suggest that electric vehicles is the answer is either naive or politically
motivated.
Post by Rich80105
https://reneweconomy.com.au/tasmania-declares-itself-100-per-cent-powered-by-renewable-electricity-25119/
Rich80105
2021-01-31 23:49:10 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On Sun, 31 Jan 2021 13:45:16 -0600, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot net
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
On Sun, 31 Jan 2021 02:41:13 -0600, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot net
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
Post by Gordon
Post by Crash
Post by Rich80105
http://norightturn.blogspot.com/2021/01/national-cannot-be-trusted-on-climate.html
National found themselves on the wrong side of history with the Covid
response, now they are doing it again with our legal and oral
obligations regarding climate change. It was to National's credit that
they made the first commitment to action to meet our share of
international actions regarding climate change, but now their reflex
"Oppose at all costs" attitudes are getting in the way of common
sense. It is like watching Trump with Dr Fauchi - a political party
feeding its fringe dwellers rather than doing what they know is needed
for the country.
Teh ACT and Green parties are much more concerned about human rights
than National - I do not expect either of them to support this idiocy
from National.
While I do not particularly support National's climate change stance,
what is missing from all narratives on this is that even if NZ is
spectacularly successful in addressing climate change with appropriate
reductions, the forecast destruction of the planet will still happen.
It matters not what we do. What matters is that those countries that
are the largest polluters pull back on those emissions.
I would argue that *everyone* (all countries) have to do their bit as we are
all in this together.
Small countries can not be let off the hook as we then have the arguement
that if it is good enough for them it is good enough for you.
Remember NZ is a small country with more than it fair share of green house
gases production.
If every country does try to reduce emissions, we can learn from each
other. Tasmania appears to be using more windpower; talk this
aftgernoon is of New Zealand following in encouraging / requiring more
electric vehicles, and phasing out household gas connections. If some
countries do not do what they can, there may be adverse consequences
in terms of trade for example - we can expect countries with high
emmissions to receive some pressure.
There are real problems with windpower, mentioned here more than once.
There are real problems with electric vehicles, als mentioned here more than
once.
They are becoming political credos just like climate change itself.
The science is not yet clear. We should do some things that help (most of them
obvious) but not leap into electric vehicles and wind energy until we
understand the consequences.
Electric vehicles are clearly developing year by year - as indeed are
petrol and diesel driven vehicles; currently they are seen as a good
alternative by many countries around the world. They have been around
for long enough for us to understand many consequences, but what
consequences are you concerned about that would indicate that we not
plan to make greater use of electric vehicles, Tony?
I and others have mentioned this before here and more than once.
There are a number of issues that will (not might) bite us unless we find a
solution.
One of those is the massive potential for polution from discarded batteries the
size of a divan when ev car batteries need replacing. This is not yet resolved.
So regardless of how the electricity is generated there is a dsiposal or re-use
issue.
So how would that pollution compare with pollution from pertroleum
powered vehicles, Tony?
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
Wind energy is simpler, and again while the machinery of generation
continues to develop, there has been considerable success elsewhere -
No - wind energy is not simple,
I did not say it was simle, just that it is simpler than use of
electric vehicles.
Post by Tony
there are many experts who are suggesting it is
not the answer - also posted here before several times.
I have seen a lot of opinions, but I cannot recall any from experts -
can you post a url?
Post by Tony
There is only one truly renewable energy at this time and that is hydro and the
world does not have enough of it.
Solar power has the same issues as vehicle batteries with battery disposal and
in addition has the question of how to re purpose the panels.
Solar power at an industrial level may not involve batteries - when
used to feed power directly to the grid it may reduce the timing of
the need for hydro power or geothermal power for example.
Post by Tony
To suggest that electric vehicles is the answer is either naive or politically
motivated.
There must be a lot of naive people around the world, or a wide range
of political parties or without any particular political affiliation
who are advocating for the use of electric vehicles. Do you see any
correlation between political views and adoption of rules requiring
electic vehicles from a date in the future? In New Zealand both
National and Labour have encouraged the adoption of electic vehicles -
National was critical of Labour not having changes government vehicles
as fast as they claimed was appropriate. What is the political
motivation you have identified, Tony?
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
https://reneweconomy.com.au/tasmania-declares-itself-100-per-cent-powered-by-renewable-electricity-25119/
Tony
2021-02-01 00:37:06 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Rich80105
On Sun, 31 Jan 2021 13:45:16 -0600, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot net
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
On Sun, 31 Jan 2021 02:41:13 -0600, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot net
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
Post by Gordon
Post by Crash
Post by Rich80105
http://norightturn.blogspot.com/2021/01/national-cannot-be-trusted-on-climate.html
National found themselves on the wrong side of history with the Covid
response, now they are doing it again with our legal and oral
obligations regarding climate change. It was to National's credit that
they made the first commitment to action to meet our share of
international actions regarding climate change, but now their reflex
"Oppose at all costs" attitudes are getting in the way of common
sense. It is like watching Trump with Dr Fauchi - a political party
feeding its fringe dwellers rather than doing what they know is needed
for the country.
Teh ACT and Green parties are much more concerned about human rights
than National - I do not expect either of them to support this idiocy
from National.
While I do not particularly support National's climate change stance,
what is missing from all narratives on this is that even if NZ is
spectacularly successful in addressing climate change with appropriate
reductions, the forecast destruction of the planet will still happen.
It matters not what we do. What matters is that those countries that
are the largest polluters pull back on those emissions.
I would argue that *everyone* (all countries) have to do their bit as we are
all in this together.
Small countries can not be let off the hook as we then have the arguement
that if it is good enough for them it is good enough for you.
Remember NZ is a small country with more than it fair share of green house
gases production.
If every country does try to reduce emissions, we can learn from each
other. Tasmania appears to be using more windpower; talk this
aftgernoon is of New Zealand following in encouraging / requiring more
electric vehicles, and phasing out household gas connections. If some
countries do not do what they can, there may be adverse consequences
in terms of trade for example - we can expect countries with high
emmissions to receive some pressure.
There are real problems with windpower, mentioned here more than once.
There are real problems with electric vehicles, als mentioned here more than
once.
They are becoming political credos just like climate change itself.
The science is not yet clear. We should do some things that help (most of them
obvious) but not leap into electric vehicles and wind energy until we
understand the consequences.
Electric vehicles are clearly developing year by year - as indeed are
petrol and diesel driven vehicles; currently they are seen as a good
alternative by many countries around the world. They have been around
for long enough for us to understand many consequences, but what
consequences are you concerned about that would indicate that we not
plan to make greater use of electric vehicles, Tony?
I and others have mentioned this before here and more than once.
There are a number of issues that will (not might) bite us unless we find a
solution.
One of those is the massive potential for polution from discarded batteries the
size of a divan when ev car batteries need replacing. This is not yet resolved.
So regardless of how the electricity is generated there is a dsiposal or re-use
issue.
So how would that pollution compare with pollution from pertroleum
powered vehicles, Tony?
Ask a scientist, the point is, and you have deliberately ignored it, that the
battery problem is yet to be resolved and you want us to dive headlong into the
unknown.
Post by Rich80105
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
Wind energy is simpler, and again while the machinery of generation
continues to develop, there has been considerable success elsewhere -
No - wind energy is not simple,
I did not say it was simle, just that it is simpler than use of
electric vehicles.
Post by Tony
there are many experts who are suggesting it is
not the answer - also posted here before several times.
I have seen a lot of opinions, but I cannot recall any from experts -
can you post a url?
No I'm not interested in your silliness.
Try to keep to the issues.
Post by Rich80105
Post by Tony
There is only one truly renewable energy at this time and that is hydro and the
world does not have enough of it.
Solar power has the same issues as vehicle batteries with battery disposal and
in addition has the question of how to re purpose the panels.
Solar power at an industrial level may not involve batteries - when
used to feed power directly to the grid it may reduce the timing of
the need for hydro power or geothermal power for example.
Currently it does not and until the research is complete it is a major issue.
Post by Rich80105
Post by Tony
To suggest that electric vehicles is the answer is either naive or politically
motivated.
There must be a lot of naive people around the world, or a wide range
of political parties or without any particular political affiliation
who are advocating for the use of electric vehicles. Do you see any
correlation between political views and adoption of rules requiring
electic vehicles from a date in the future? In New Zealand both
National and Labour have encouraged the adoption of electic vehicles -
National was critical of Labour not having changes government vehicles
as fast as they claimed was appropriate. What is the political
motivation you have identified, Tony?
Stop moving the goalpost. This is about science.
Post by Rich80105
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
https://reneweconomy.com.au/tasmania-declares-itself-100-per-cent-powered-by-renewable-electricity-25119/
Rich80105
2021-02-01 01:51:45 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On Sun, 31 Jan 2021 18:37:06 -0600, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot net
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
On Sun, 31 Jan 2021 13:45:16 -0600, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot net
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
On Sun, 31 Jan 2021 02:41:13 -0600, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot net
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
Post by Gordon
Post by Crash
Post by Rich80105
http://norightturn.blogspot.com/2021/01/national-cannot-be-trusted-on-climate.html
National found themselves on the wrong side of history with the Covid
response, now they are doing it again with our legal and oral
obligations regarding climate change. It was to National's credit that
they made the first commitment to action to meet our share of
international actions regarding climate change, but now their reflex
"Oppose at all costs" attitudes are getting in the way of common
sense. It is like watching Trump with Dr Fauchi - a political party
feeding its fringe dwellers rather than doing what they know is needed
for the country.
Teh ACT and Green parties are much more concerned about human rights
than National - I do not expect either of them to support this idiocy
from National.
While I do not particularly support National's climate change stance,
what is missing from all narratives on this is that even if NZ is
spectacularly successful in addressing climate change with appropriate
reductions, the forecast destruction of the planet will still happen.
It matters not what we do. What matters is that those countries that
are the largest polluters pull back on those emissions.
I would argue that *everyone* (all countries) have to do their bit as we are
all in this together.
Small countries can not be let off the hook as we then have the arguement
that if it is good enough for them it is good enough for you.
Remember NZ is a small country with more than it fair share of green house
gases production.
If every country does try to reduce emissions, we can learn from each
other. Tasmania appears to be using more windpower; talk this
aftgernoon is of New Zealand following in encouraging / requiring more
electric vehicles, and phasing out household gas connections. If some
countries do not do what they can, there may be adverse consequences
in terms of trade for example - we can expect countries with high
emmissions to receive some pressure.
There are real problems with windpower, mentioned here more than once.
There are real problems with electric vehicles, als mentioned here more than
once.
They are becoming political credos just like climate change itself.
The science is not yet clear. We should do some things that help (most of them
obvious) but not leap into electric vehicles and wind energy until we
understand the consequences.
Electric vehicles are clearly developing year by year - as indeed are
petrol and diesel driven vehicles; currently they are seen as a good
alternative by many countries around the world. They have been around
for long enough for us to understand many consequences, but what
consequences are you concerned about that would indicate that we not
plan to make greater use of electric vehicles, Tony?
I and others have mentioned this before here and more than once.
There are a number of issues that will (not might) bite us unless we find a
solution.
One of those is the massive potential for polution from discarded batteries the
size of a divan when ev car batteries need replacing. This is not yet resolved.
So regardless of how the electricity is generated there is a dsiposal or re-use
issue.
So how would that pollution compare with pollution from pertroleum
powered vehicles, Tony?
Ask a scientist, the point is, and you have deliberately ignored it, that the
battery problem is yet to be resolved and you want us to dive headlong into the
unknown.
I am not ignored that there may well be a problem with batteries - we
have had problems for years with bettary production and disposal for
motor vehicle batteries; modern batteries appear to cause fewer
problems, but relevant to a decision as to how to move to cheaper
cleaner alternatives to petrol and diesel is the extent ot the
relative levels of pollution - it is the scientists that appear to be
saying that electric vehicles should be favoured.
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
Wind energy is simpler, and again while the machinery of generation
continues to develop, there has been considerable success elsewhere -
No - wind energy is not simple,
I did not say it was simle, just that it is simpler than use of
electric vehicles.
Post by Tony
there are many experts who are suggesting it is
not the answer - also posted here before several times.
I have seen a lot of opinions, but I cannot recall any from experts -
can you post a url?
No I'm not interested in your silliness.
You say there are many experts who are suggesting that wind energy is
not the answer - and you cannot identify even one of them?
Post by Tony
Try to keep to the issues.
So what issue were you addressing when you referred to those experts?
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
Post by Tony
There is only one truly renewable energy at this time and that is hydro and the
world does not have enough of it.
Solar power has the same issues as vehicle batteries with battery disposal and
in addition has the question of how to re purpose the panels.
Solar power at an industrial level may not involve batteries - when
used to feed power directly to the grid it may reduce the timing of
the need for hydro power or geothermal power for example.
Currently it does not and until the research is complete it is a major issue.
So tell us about the batteries that Meridian Energy is using to store
electricity generated from its Turbines, Tony.
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
Post by Tony
To suggest that electric vehicles is the answer is either naive or politically
motivated.
There must be a lot of naive people around the world, or a wide range
of political parties or without any particular political affiliation
who are advocating for the use of electric vehicles. Do you see any
correlation between political views and adoption of rules requiring
electic vehicles from a date in the future? In New Zealand both
National and Labour have encouraged the adoption of electic vehicles -
National was critical of Labour not having changes government vehicles
as fast as they claimed was appropriate. What is the political
motivation you have identified, Tony?
Stop moving the goalpost. This is about science.
No, you asserted that the suggestion to use electric venhicles is
either naive or politically motivated. Why did you say that, Tony?
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
https://reneweconomy.com.au/tasmania-declares-itself-100-per-cent-powered-by-renewable-electricity-25119/
Gordon
2021-02-01 07:37:53 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Rich80105
On Sun, 31 Jan 2021 18:37:06 -0600, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot net
Post by Tony
Ask a scientist, the point is, and you have deliberately ignored it, that the
battery problem is yet to be resolved and you want us to dive headlong into the
unknown.
I am not ignored that there may well be a problem with batteries - we
have had problems for years with bettary production and disposal for
motor vehicle batteries;
Rich, long before recycling was a thing to do, the lead acid car battery was
recycled 98% of the time. Sure dealing with the lead was not considered a
issue as it is to-day.
Post by Rich80105
modern batteries appear to cause fewer
problems, but relevant to a decision as to how to move to cheaper
cleaner alternatives to petrol and diesel is the extent ot the
relative levels of pollution - it is the scientists that appear to be
saying that electric vehicles should be favoured.
Your thinking is becoming muddled Rich. Batteries store electricity for
either sarting the engine or driving the car. The merits should be on the
batteries alone. After all a LiIon battery will start a internal combustion
engine.

One thing for sure the batteries in a EV weigh a great deal and they are big
so disposal is going to be an issue world wide and China, for example may
not wish to take our waste batteries.
Rich80105
2021-02-01 09:25:20 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Gordon
Post by Rich80105
On Sun, 31 Jan 2021 18:37:06 -0600, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot net
Post by Tony
Ask a scientist, the point is, and you have deliberately ignored it, that the
battery problem is yet to be resolved and you want us to dive headlong into the
unknown.
I am not ignored that there may well be a problem with batteries - we
have had problems for years with bettary production and disposal for
motor vehicle batteries;
Rich, long before recycling was a thing to do, the lead acid car battery was
recycled 98% of the time. Sure dealing with the lead was not considered a
issue as it is to-day.
Post by Rich80105
modern batteries appear to cause fewer
problems, but relevant to a decision as to how to move to cheaper
cleaner alternatives to petrol and diesel is the extent ot the
relative levels of pollution - it is the scientists that appear to be
saying that electric vehicles should be favoured.
Your thinking is becoming muddled Rich. Batteries store electricity for
either sarting the engine or driving the car. The merits should be on the
batteries alone. After all a LiIon battery will start a internal combustion
engine.
One thing for sure the batteries in a EV weigh a great deal and they are big
so disposal is going to be an issue world wide and China, for example may
not wish to take our waste batteries.
Our need for electricity goes far beyond the need to power vehicles,
and batteries are not a problem for wind generation of power. I have
not seen projections of hte life of geothermal energy in New Zealand
(and there may be good reasons why we should not bedrawing on that
source anyway for other reasons.) The whole world is sharing many of
the issues that have been raised ; if we make no changes the whole
world will suffer damage from climate change.
John Bowes
2021-02-01 21:48:36 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Rich80105
Post by Rich80105
On Sun, 31 Jan 2021 18:37:06 -0600, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot net
Our need for electricity goes far beyond the need to power vehicles,
and batteries are not a problem for wind generation of power. I have
not seen projections of hte life of geothermal energy in New Zealand
(and there may be good reasons why we should not bedrawing on that
source anyway for other reasons.) The whole world is sharing many of
the issues that have been raised ; if we make no changes the whole
world will suffer damage from climate change.
Geothermal power had problems in it's early days because it was destroying the geothermal field. Until they started pumping the water back into the field which solved two problems. One of the problems was pollution in the Waikato river from sulphur and other minerals in the steam. Using this system the field will last as long as the volcanic hotspot is still there.
Tony
2021-02-01 18:56:17 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Rich80105
On Sun, 31 Jan 2021 18:37:06 -0600, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot net
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
On Sun, 31 Jan 2021 13:45:16 -0600, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot net
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
On Sun, 31 Jan 2021 02:41:13 -0600, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot net
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
Post by Gordon
Post by Crash
Post by Rich80105
http://norightturn.blogspot.com/2021/01/national-cannot-be-trusted-on-climate.html
National found themselves on the wrong side of history with the Covid
response, now they are doing it again with our legal and oral
obligations regarding climate change. It was to National's credit that
they made the first commitment to action to meet our share of
international actions regarding climate change, but now their reflex
"Oppose at all costs" attitudes are getting in the way of common
sense. It is like watching Trump with Dr Fauchi - a political party
feeding its fringe dwellers rather than doing what they know is needed
for the country.
Teh ACT and Green parties are much more concerned about human rights
than National - I do not expect either of them to support this idiocy
from National.
While I do not particularly support National's climate change stance,
what is missing from all narratives on this is that even if NZ is
spectacularly successful in addressing climate change with appropriate
reductions, the forecast destruction of the planet will still happen.
It matters not what we do. What matters is that those countries that
are the largest polluters pull back on those emissions.
I would argue that *everyone* (all countries) have to do their bit as
we
are
all in this together.
Small countries can not be let off the hook as we then have the arguement
that if it is good enough for them it is good enough for you.
Remember NZ is a small country with more than it fair share of green house
gases production.
If every country does try to reduce emissions, we can learn from each
other. Tasmania appears to be using more windpower; talk this
aftgernoon is of New Zealand following in encouraging / requiring more
electric vehicles, and phasing out household gas connections. If some
countries do not do what they can, there may be adverse consequences
in terms of trade for example - we can expect countries with high
emmissions to receive some pressure.
There are real problems with windpower, mentioned here more than once.
There are real problems with electric vehicles, als mentioned here more than
once.
They are becoming political credos just like climate change itself.
The science is not yet clear. We should do some things that help (most of them
obvious) but not leap into electric vehicles and wind energy until we
understand the consequences.
Electric vehicles are clearly developing year by year - as indeed are
petrol and diesel driven vehicles; currently they are seen as a good
alternative by many countries around the world. They have been around
for long enough for us to understand many consequences, but what
consequences are you concerned about that would indicate that we not
plan to make greater use of electric vehicles, Tony?
I and others have mentioned this before here and more than once.
There are a number of issues that will (not might) bite us unless we find a
solution.
One of those is the massive potential for polution from discarded batteries the
size of a divan when ev car batteries need replacing. This is not yet resolved.
So regardless of how the electricity is generated there is a dsiposal or re-use
issue.
So how would that pollution compare with pollution from pertroleum
powered vehicles, Tony?
Ask a scientist, the point is, and you have deliberately ignored it, that the
battery problem is yet to be resolved and you want us to dive headlong into the
unknown.
I am not ignored that there may well be a problem with batteries - we
have had problems for years with bettary production and disposal for
motor vehicle batteries; modern batteries appear to cause fewer
problems, but relevant to a decision as to how to move to cheaper
cleaner alternatives to petrol and diesel is the extent ot the
relative levels of pollution - it is the scientists that appear to be
saying that electric vehicles should be favoured.
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
Wind energy is simpler, and again while the machinery of generation
continues to develop, there has been considerable success elsewhere -
No - wind energy is not simple,
I did not say it was simle, just that it is simpler than use of
electric vehicles.
Post by Tony
there are many experts who are suggesting it is
not the answer - also posted here before several times.
I have seen a lot of opinions, but I cannot recall any from experts -
can you post a url?
No I'm not interested in your silliness.
You say there are many experts who are suggesting that wind energy is
not the answer - and you cannot identify even one of them?
Post by Tony
Try to keep to the issues.
So what issue were you addressing when you referred to those experts?
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
Post by Tony
There is only one truly renewable energy at this time and that is hydro and the
world does not have enough of it.
Solar power has the same issues as vehicle batteries with battery disposal and
in addition has the question of how to re purpose the panels.
Solar power at an industrial level may not involve batteries - when
used to feed power directly to the grid it may reduce the timing of
the need for hydro power or geothermal power for example.
Currently it does not and until the research is complete it is a major issue.
So tell us about the batteries that Meridian Energy is using to store
electricity generated from its Turbines, Tony.
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
Post by Tony
To suggest that electric vehicles is the answer is either naive or politically
motivated.
There must be a lot of naive people around the world, or a wide range
of political parties or without any particular political affiliation
who are advocating for the use of electric vehicles. Do you see any
correlation between political views and adoption of rules requiring
electic vehicles from a date in the future? In New Zealand both
National and Labour have encouraged the adoption of electic vehicles -
National was critical of Labour not having changes government vehicles
as fast as they claimed was appropriate. What is the political
motivation you have identified, Tony?
Stop moving the goalpost. This is about science.
No, you asserted that the suggestion to use electric venhicles is
either naive or politically motivated. Why did you say that, Tony?
Once more you divert the subject.
See this posted by Gordon as an example -
https://www.nationalobserver.com/2021/01/21/opinion/electric-cars-have-dirty-little-recycling-problem-their-batteries
That summarises what I have said quite nicely but is not the whole story.
there are real issues with wind generation as well, as I wrote. They are noisy,
kill birds and some people say they are ugly.
Post by Rich80105
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
https://reneweconomy.com.au/tasmania-declares-itself-100-per-cent-powered-by-renewable-electricity-25119/
John Bowes
2021-02-01 21:50:01 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
On Sun, 31 Jan 2021 18:37:06 -0600, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot net
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
On Sun, 31 Jan 2021 13:45:16 -0600, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot net
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
On Sun, 31 Jan 2021 02:41:13 -0600, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot net
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
Post by Gordon
Post by Crash
Post by Rich80105
http://norightturn.blogspot.com/2021/01/national-cannot-be-trusted-on-climate.html
National found themselves on the wrong side of history with the Covid
response, now they are doing it again with our legal and oral
obligations regarding climate change. It was to National's credit that
they made the first commitment to action to meet our share of
international actions regarding climate change, but now their reflex
"Oppose at all costs" attitudes are getting in the way of common
sense. It is like watching Trump with Dr Fauchi - a political party
feeding its fringe dwellers rather than doing what they know is needed
for the country.
Teh ACT and Green parties are much more concerned about human rights
than National - I do not expect either of them to support this idiocy
from National.
While I do not particularly support National's climate change stance,
what is missing from all narratives on this is that even if NZ is
spectacularly successful in addressing climate change with appropriate
reductions, the forecast destruction of the planet will still happen.
It matters not what we do. What matters is that those countries that
are the largest polluters pull back on those emissions.
I would argue that *everyone* (all countries) have to do their bit as
we
are
all in this together.
Small countries can not be let off the hook as we then have the arguement
that if it is good enough for them it is good enough for you.
Remember NZ is a small country with more than it fair share of green house
gases production.
If every country does try to reduce emissions, we can learn from each
other. Tasmania appears to be using more windpower; talk this
aftgernoon is of New Zealand following in encouraging / requiring more
electric vehicles, and phasing out household gas connections. If some
countries do not do what they can, there may be adverse consequences
in terms of trade for example - we can expect countries with high
emmissions to receive some pressure.
There are real problems with windpower, mentioned here more than once.
There are real problems with electric vehicles, als mentioned here more than
once.
They are becoming political credos just like climate change itself.
The science is not yet clear. We should do some things that help (most of them
obvious) but not leap into electric vehicles and wind energy until we
understand the consequences.
Electric vehicles are clearly developing year by year - as indeed are
petrol and diesel driven vehicles; currently they are seen as a good
alternative by many countries around the world. They have been around
for long enough for us to understand many consequences, but what
consequences are you concerned about that would indicate that we not
plan to make greater use of electric vehicles, Tony?
I and others have mentioned this before here and more than once.
There are a number of issues that will (not might) bite us unless we find a
solution.
One of those is the massive potential for polution from discarded batteries the
size of a divan when ev car batteries need replacing. This is not yet resolved.
So regardless of how the electricity is generated there is a dsiposal or re-use
issue.
So how would that pollution compare with pollution from pertroleum
powered vehicles, Tony?
Ask a scientist, the point is, and you have deliberately ignored it, that the
battery problem is yet to be resolved and you want us to dive headlong into the
unknown.
I am not ignored that there may well be a problem with batteries - we
have had problems for years with bettary production and disposal for
motor vehicle batteries; modern batteries appear to cause fewer
problems, but relevant to a decision as to how to move to cheaper
cleaner alternatives to petrol and diesel is the extent ot the
relative levels of pollution - it is the scientists that appear to be
saying that electric vehicles should be favoured.
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
Wind energy is simpler, and again while the machinery of generation
continues to develop, there has been considerable success elsewhere -
No - wind energy is not simple,
I did not say it was simle, just that it is simpler than use of
electric vehicles.
Post by Tony
there are many experts who are suggesting it is
not the answer - also posted here before several times.
I have seen a lot of opinions, but I cannot recall any from experts -
can you post a url?
No I'm not interested in your silliness.
You say there are many experts who are suggesting that wind energy is
not the answer - and you cannot identify even one of them?
Post by Tony
Try to keep to the issues.
So what issue were you addressing when you referred to those experts?
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
Post by Tony
There is only one truly renewable energy at this time and that is hydro and the
world does not have enough of it.
Solar power has the same issues as vehicle batteries with battery disposal and
in addition has the question of how to re purpose the panels.
Solar power at an industrial level may not involve batteries - when
used to feed power directly to the grid it may reduce the timing of
the need for hydro power or geothermal power for example.
Currently it does not and until the research is complete it is a major issue.
So tell us about the batteries that Meridian Energy is using to store
electricity generated from its Turbines, Tony.
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
Post by Tony
To suggest that electric vehicles is the answer is either naive or politically
motivated.
There must be a lot of naive people around the world, or a wide range
of political parties or without any particular political affiliation
who are advocating for the use of electric vehicles. Do you see any
correlation between political views and adoption of rules requiring
electic vehicles from a date in the future? In New Zealand both
National and Labour have encouraged the adoption of electic vehicles -
National was critical of Labour not having changes government vehicles
as fast as they claimed was appropriate. What is the political
motivation you have identified, Tony?
Stop moving the goalpost. This is about science.
No, you asserted that the suggestion to use electric venhicles is
either naive or politically motivated. Why did you say that, Tony?
Once more you divert the subject.
See this posted by Gordon as an example -
https://www.nationalobserver.com/2021/01/21/opinion/electric-cars-have-dirty-little-recycling-problem-their-batteries
That summarises what I have said quite nicely but is not the whole story.
there are real issues with wind generation as well, as I wrote. They are noisy,
kill birds and some people say they are ugly.
Plus the blades fill landfill VERY quickly as Denmark is finding out.
John Bowes
2021-02-01 21:43:01 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Rich80105
On Sun, 31 Jan 2021 18:37:06 -0600, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot net
I am not ignored that there may well be a problem with batteries - we
have had problems for years with bettary production and disposal for
motor vehicle batteries; modern batteries appear to cause fewer
problems, but relevant to a decision as to how to move to cheaper
cleaner alternatives to petrol and diesel is the extent ot the
relative levels of pollution - it is the scientists that appear to be
saying that electric vehicles should be favoured.
Some scientists Rich! Even within the climate science world more and more are speaking out against the UN's tame scientists!
Post by Rich80105
You say there are many experts who are suggesting that wind energy is
not the answer - and you cannot identify even one of them?
There is no single solution Rich. Tony has identified others which regretably were beyond your non existent comprehension skills!
Post by Rich80105
Post by Tony
Try to keep to the issues.
So what issue were you addressing when you referred to those experts?
Post by Tony
Post by Tony
There is only one truly renewable energy at this time and that is hydro and the
world does not have enough of it.
Hint here's proof that your just another fucking liar Rich!
Post by Rich80105
So tell us about the batteries that Meridian Energy is using to store
electricity generated from its Turbines, Tony.
They're big and will cause problems when they need to be replaced!
Post by Rich80105
No, you asserted that the suggestion to use electric venhicles is
either naive or politically motivated. Why did you say that, Tony?
Because it's an obvious truth that you will deny for the fact it's an obvious truth Rich!
John Bowes
2021-02-01 21:34:13 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Rich80105
On Sun, 31 Jan 2021 13:45:16 -0600, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot net
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
Electric vehicles are clearly developing year by year - as indeed are
petrol and diesel driven vehicles; currently they are seen as a good
alternative by many countries around the world. They have been around
for long enough for us to understand many consequences, but what
consequences are you concerned about that would indicate that we not
plan to make greater use of electric vehicles, Tony?
I and others have mentioned this before here and more than once.
There are a number of issues that will (not might) bite us unless we find a
solution.
One of those is the massive potential for polution from discarded batteries the
size of a divan when ev car batteries need replacing. This is not yet resolved.
So regardless of how the electricity is generated there is a dsiposal or re-use
issue.
So how would that pollution compare with pollution from pertroleum
powered vehicles, Tony?
To the extent that when the batteries burn firemen stay well clear of the smoke because it's toxic. I suggest instead of being your usual imbecilic self you do some research on lithium batteries!
Post by Rich80105
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
Wind energy is simpler, and again while the machinery of generation
continues to develop, there has been considerable success elsewhere -
No - wind energy is not simple,
I did not say it was simle, just that it is simpler than use of
electric vehicles.
Prove your claim for once in your pointless life Rich!
Post by Rich80105
Post by Tony
there are many experts who are suggesting it is
not the answer - also posted here before several times.
I have seen a lot of opinions, but I cannot recall any from experts -
can you post a url?
Stop being stupid!
Post by Rich80105
Post by Tony
There is only one truly renewable energy at this time and that is hydro and the
world does not have enough of it.
Solar power has the same issues as vehicle batteries with battery disposal and
in addition has the question of how to re purpose the panels.
Solar power at an industrial level may not involve batteries - when
used to feed power directly to the grid it may reduce the timing of
the need for hydro power or geothermal power for example.
Explaining stuff to you Rich is like training an elephant to understand physics!
Post by Rich80105
Post by Tony
To suggest that electric vehicles is the answer is either naive or politically
motivated.
There must be a lot of naive people around the world, or a wide range
of political parties or without any particular political affiliation
who are advocating for the use of electric vehicles. Do you see any
correlation between political views and adoption of rules requiring
electic vehicles from a date in the future? In New Zealand both
National and Labour have encouraged the adoption of electic vehicles -
National was critical of Labour not having changes government vehicles
as fast as they claimed was appropriate. What is the political
motivation you have identified, Tony?
Control of the state by the use of fear Rich! So typical of totalitarian regimes like ours is looking more and more like!
Gordon
2021-02-01 07:22:12 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
On Sun, 31 Jan 2021 02:41:13 -0600, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot net
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
Post by Gordon
Post by Crash
Post by Rich80105
http://norightturn.blogspot.com/2021/01/national-cannot-be-trusted-on-climate.html
National found themselves on the wrong side of history with the Covid
response, now they are doing it again with our legal and oral
obligations regarding climate change. It was to National's credit that
they made the first commitment to action to meet our share of
international actions regarding climate change, but now their reflex
"Oppose at all costs" attitudes are getting in the way of common
sense. It is like watching Trump with Dr Fauchi - a political party
feeding its fringe dwellers rather than doing what they know is needed
for the country.
Teh ACT and Green parties are much more concerned about human rights
than National - I do not expect either of them to support this idiocy
from National.
While I do not particularly support National's climate change stance,
what is missing from all narratives on this is that even if NZ is
spectacularly successful in addressing climate change with appropriate
reductions, the forecast destruction of the planet will still happen.
It matters not what we do. What matters is that those countries that
are the largest polluters pull back on those emissions.
I would argue that *everyone* (all countries) have to do their bit as we are
all in this together.
Small countries can not be let off the hook as we then have the arguement
that if it is good enough for them it is good enough for you.
Remember NZ is a small country with more than it fair share of green house
gases production.
If every country does try to reduce emissions, we can learn from each
other. Tasmania appears to be using more windpower; talk this
aftgernoon is of New Zealand following in encouraging / requiring more
electric vehicles, and phasing out household gas connections. If some
countries do not do what they can, there may be adverse consequences
in terms of trade for example - we can expect countries with high
emmissions to receive some pressure.
There are real problems with windpower, mentioned here more than once.
There are real problems with electric vehicles, als mentioned here more than
once.
They are becoming political credos just like climate change itself.
The science is not yet clear. We should do some things that help (most of them
obvious) but not leap into electric vehicles and wind energy until we
understand the consequences.
Electric vehicles are clearly developing year by year - as indeed are
petrol and diesel driven vehicles; currently they are seen as a good
alternative by many countries around the world. They have been around
for long enough for us to understand many consequences, but what
consequences are you concerned about that would indicate that we not
plan to make greater use of electric vehicles, Tony?
I and others have mentioned this before here and more than once.
There are a number of issues that will (not might) bite us unless we find a
solution.
One of those is the massive potential for polution from discarded batteries the
size of a divan when ev car batteries need replacing. This is not yet resolved.
So regardless of how the electricity is generated there is a dsiposal or re-use
issue.
Post by Rich80105
Wind energy is simpler, and again while the machinery of generation
continues to develop, there has been considerable success elsewhere -
No - wind energy is not simple, there are many experts who are suggesting it is
not the answer - also posted here before several times.
There is only one truly renewable energy at this time and that is hydro and the
world does not have enough of it.
The phrase truly renewable is kind of silly when you think about it.

All energy has waste or damage. It is better to argue that x has these pros
and these cons while y has these pros and cons.

Hydro as you point out does not work if the lake is dry, nuclear has nasty
waste, solar has how to dispose, refurbish the panels, oil has CO2 in the
atmosphere, hydrogen is tricky to keep hold of and wants to join up with any
other atom, it does not exist in abundance as an element on the earth
surface. Electricity only exists instantly.

There is one thing that concerns me is that no one has thought through the
implications of "Lets do this!" type of policy.

Lets all go on a road trip this summer. Refulling is about 5 mins at the
petrol station. Not so for electric vehicles. Several tens of minutes. Range
between refueling is going to be less so we need charging stations closer
together. Good for small towns I guess.

Then the infra structure has to be built. A fast charger is no household 3
pin plug. It is about 50 amps at 400V. Electric welding anyone? So we need
to have a infrasture built for the peaks which sits idle the rest of the
time. The petrol station just increases it tanker delivery frequency when
needed.
Tony
2021-02-01 18:50:00 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Gordon
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
On Sun, 31 Jan 2021 02:41:13 -0600, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot net
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
Post by Gordon
Post by Crash
Post by Rich80105
http://norightturn.blogspot.com/2021/01/national-cannot-be-trusted-on-climate.html
National found themselves on the wrong side of history with the Covid
response, now they are doing it again with our legal and oral
obligations regarding climate change. It was to National's credit that
they made the first commitment to action to meet our share of
international actions regarding climate change, but now their reflex
"Oppose at all costs" attitudes are getting in the way of common
sense. It is like watching Trump with Dr Fauchi - a political party
feeding its fringe dwellers rather than doing what they know is needed
for the country.
Teh ACT and Green parties are much more concerned about human rights
than National - I do not expect either of them to support this idiocy
from National.
While I do not particularly support National's climate change stance,
what is missing from all narratives on this is that even if NZ is
spectacularly successful in addressing climate change with appropriate
reductions, the forecast destruction of the planet will still happen.
It matters not what we do. What matters is that those countries that
are the largest polluters pull back on those emissions.
I would argue that *everyone* (all countries) have to do their bit as we are
all in this together.
Small countries can not be let off the hook as we then have the arguement
that if it is good enough for them it is good enough for you.
Remember NZ is a small country with more than it fair share of green house
gases production.
If every country does try to reduce emissions, we can learn from each
other. Tasmania appears to be using more windpower; talk this
aftgernoon is of New Zealand following in encouraging / requiring more
electric vehicles, and phasing out household gas connections. If some
countries do not do what they can, there may be adverse consequences
in terms of trade for example - we can expect countries with high
emmissions to receive some pressure.
There are real problems with windpower, mentioned here more than once.
There are real problems with electric vehicles, als mentioned here more than
once.
They are becoming political credos just like climate change itself.
The science is not yet clear. We should do some things that help (most of them
obvious) but not leap into electric vehicles and wind energy until we
understand the consequences.
Electric vehicles are clearly developing year by year - as indeed are
petrol and diesel driven vehicles; currently they are seen as a good
alternative by many countries around the world. They have been around
for long enough for us to understand many consequences, but what
consequences are you concerned about that would indicate that we not
plan to make greater use of electric vehicles, Tony?
I and others have mentioned this before here and more than once.
There are a number of issues that will (not might) bite us unless we find a
solution.
One of those is the massive potential for polution from discarded batteries the
size of a divan when ev car batteries need replacing. This is not yet resolved.
So regardless of how the electricity is generated there is a dsiposal or re-use
issue.
Post by Rich80105
Wind energy is simpler, and again while the machinery of generation
continues to develop, there has been considerable success elsewhere -
No - wind energy is not simple, there are many experts who are suggesting it is
not the answer - also posted here before several times.
There is only one truly renewable energy at this time and that is hydro and the
world does not have enough of it.
The phrase truly renewable is kind of silly when you think about it.
All energy has waste or damage. It is better to argue that x has these pros
and these cons while y has these pros and cons.
Hydro as you point out does not work if the lake is dry, nuclear has nasty
waste, solar has how to dispose, refurbish the panels, oil has CO2 in the
atmosphere, hydrogen is tricky to keep hold of and wants to join up with any
other atom, it does not exist in abundance as an element on the earth
surface. Electricity only exists instantly.
There is one thing that concerns me is that no one has thought through the
implications of "Lets do this!" type of policy.
Lets all go on a road trip this summer. Refulling is about 5 mins at the
petrol station. Not so for electric vehicles. Several tens of minutes. Range
between refueling is going to be less so we need charging stations closer
together. Good for small towns I guess.
Then the infra structure has to be built. A fast charger is no household 3
pin plug. It is about 50 amps at 400V. Electric welding anyone? So we need
to have a infrasture built for the peaks which sits idle the rest of the
time. The petrol station just increases it tanker delivery frequency when
needed.
Exactly, those people who think that electric vehicles are the answer are
deluded or are reading biased reports.
Crash
2021-01-31 21:56:16 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Gordon
Post by Crash
Post by Rich80105
http://norightturn.blogspot.com/2021/01/national-cannot-be-trusted-on-climate.html
National found themselves on the wrong side of history with the Covid
response, now they are doing it again with our legal and oral
obligations regarding climate change. It was to National's credit that
they made the first commitment to action to meet our share of
international actions regarding climate change, but now their reflex
"Oppose at all costs" attitudes are getting in the way of common
sense. It is like watching Trump with Dr Fauchi - a political party
feeding its fringe dwellers rather than doing what they know is needed
for the country.
Teh ACT and Green parties are much more concerned about human rights
than National - I do not expect either of them to support this idiocy
from National.
While I do not particularly support National's climate change stance,
what is missing from all narratives on this is that even if NZ is
spectacularly successful in addressing climate change with appropriate
reductions, the forecast destruction of the planet will still happen.
It matters not what we do. What matters is that those countries that
are the largest polluters pull back on those emissions.
I would argue that *everyone* (all countries) have to do their bit as we are
all in this together.
That is a utopian goal. The fact is that relatively few Northern
Hemisphere countries produce almost all the offending emissions.
Getting those few countries to reduce their emissions is the sole key
to addressing climate change.
Post by Gordon
Small countries can not be let off the hook as we then have the arguement
that if it is good enough for them it is good enough for you.
Remember NZ is a small country with more than it fair share of green house
gases production.
The world will be destroyed by climate change according to some. What
value is there when we indulge in virtue-signaling as we are taken out
by climate-change that we did not contribute to?


--
Crash McBash
Gordon
2021-01-31 03:54:24 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Rich80105
http://norightturn.blogspot.com/2021/01/national-cannot-be-trusted-on-climate.html
National found themselves on the wrong side of history with the Covid
response, now they are doing it again with our legal and oral
obligations regarding climate change. It was to National's credit that
they made the first commitment to action to meet our share of
international actions regarding climate change, but now their reflex
"Oppose at all costs" attitudes are getting in the way of common
sense.
"Common sense"? I thought the *Science* was done. Which it is not as things
keep changing, it is arogrant to assume that the current theory is correct.

National is the opposition, good on them for doing their job.
Post by Rich80105
It is like watching Trump with Dr Fauchi - a political party
feeding its fringe dwellers rather than doing what they know is needed
for the country.
Well, that is somewhat extreme. It is not the country but the planet. Soon
as you tlak about countries you have taken the wrong turn down the us and
them road.
Post by Rich80105
Teh ACT and Green parties are much more concerned about human rights
than National - I do not expect either of them to support this idiocy
from National.
National maybe just flying a kite, after all there does seem to be a windy
summer.
Tony
2021-01-31 08:36:16 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Rich80105
http://norightturn.blogspot.com/2021/01/national-cannot-be-trusted-on-climate.html
National found themselves on the wrong side of history with the Covid
response, now they are doing it again with our legal and oral
obligations regarding climate change. It was to National's credit that
they made the first commitment to action to meet our share of
international actions regarding climate change, but now their reflex
"Oppose at all costs" attitudes are getting in the way of common
sense. It is like watching Trump with Dr Fauchi - a political party
feeding its fringe dwellers rather than doing what they know is needed
for the country.
To relate the National party to Trump is just plain silly. There is zero
similarity and we all know that (well, most of us).
Post by Rich80105
Teh ACT and Green parties are much more concerned about human rights
than National - I do not expect either of them to support this idiocy
from National.
Rich80105
2021-01-31 09:03:29 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On Sun, 31 Jan 2021 02:36:16 -0600, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot net
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
http://norightturn.blogspot.com/2021/01/national-cannot-be-trusted-on-climate.html
National found themselves on the wrong side of history with the Covid
response, now they are doing it again with our legal and oral
obligations regarding climate change. It was to National's credit that
they made the first commitment to action to meet our share of
international actions regarding climate change, but now their reflex
"Oppose at all costs" attitudes are getting in the way of common
sense. It is like watching Trump with Dr Fauchi - a political party
feeding its fringe dwellers rather than doing what they know is needed
for the country.
To relate the National party to Trump is just plain silly. There is zero
similarity and we all know that (well, most of us).
It certainly would be silly but fortunately I did not do that. I
referred to a specific response by National's Climate Change
Spokesperson Stuart Smith in this article:
https://www.stuff.co.nz/marlborough-express/300216332/plans-to-reduce-emissions-must-not-meddle-with-personal-freedoms
You may see that response as characteristic of the National Party but
I do not. It is not clear whether Smith was giving teh views of the
National Party, just as Trump seldom expressed views that anyone in
the Republican Party would want to have attributed to them.

The report has now been released, and the National Party appears not
to share the concerns of Smith, and in fact appear to have been
broadly in favour of the general direction outlined by the government.
Certainly we can anticipate change, but concerns about personal
freedoms make as little sense as many of Trumps statements.
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
Teh ACT and Green parties are much more concerned about human rights
than National - I do not expect either of them to support this idiocy
from National.
Tony
2021-01-31 19:48:22 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Rich80105
On Sun, 31 Jan 2021 02:36:16 -0600, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot net
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
http://norightturn.blogspot.com/2021/01/national-cannot-be-trusted-on-climate.html
National found themselves on the wrong side of history with the Covid
response, now they are doing it again with our legal and oral
obligations regarding climate change. It was to National's credit that
they made the first commitment to action to meet our share of
international actions regarding climate change, but now their reflex
"Oppose at all costs" attitudes are getting in the way of common
sense. It is like watching Trump with Dr Fauchi - a political party
feeding its fringe dwellers rather than doing what they know is needed
for the country.
To relate the National party to Trump is just plain silly. There is zero
similarity and we all know that (well, most of us).
It certainly would be silly but fortunately I did not do that.
Yes you did by implication, a generally unpleasant method you use often.I
Post by Rich80105
referred to a specific response by National's Climate Change
https://www.stuff.co.nz/marlborough-express/300216332/plans-to-reduce-emissions-must-not-meddle-with-personal-freedoms
You may see that response as characteristic of the National Party but
I do not.
Obviously you don't, or at least you claim not to.
Post by Rich80105
It is not clear whether Smith was giving teh views of the
National Party, just as Trump seldom expressed views that anyone in
the Republican Party would want to have attributed to them.
The report has now been released, and the National Party appears not
to share the concerns of Smith, and in fact appear to have been
broadly in favour of the general direction outlined by the government.
Certainly we can anticipate change, but concerns about personal
freedoms make as little sense as many of Trumps statements.
Concerns about personal freedoms is always sensible.
Post by Rich80105
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
Teh ACT and Green parties are much more concerned about human rights
than National - I do not expect either of them to support this idiocy
from National.
BR
2021-01-31 18:55:33 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Rich80105
http://norightturn.blogspot.com/2021/01/national-cannot-be-trusted-on-climate.html
National found themselves on the wrong side of history with the Covid
response, now they are doing it again with our legal and oral
obligations regarding climate change. It was to National's credit that
they made the first commitment to action to meet our share of
international actions regarding climate change, but now their reflex
"Oppose at all costs" attitudes are getting in the way of common
sense. It is like watching Trump with Dr Fauchi - a political party
feeding its fringe dwellers rather than doing what they know is needed
for the country.
Teh ACT and Green parties are much more concerned about human rights
than National - I do not expect either of them to support this idiocy
from National.
Man made catastrophic climate change is a fraud. 50 years of failed
climate disaster predictions are testimony to that.

Bill.
--
This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.
https://www.avg.com
Willy Nilly
2021-02-01 01:11:57 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by BR
Man made catastrophic climate change is a fraud. 50 years of failed
climate disaster predictions are testimony to that.
Yep, we've had 10 years to save the planet, for about the past 50
years, and the next 50 years, ad nauseum....
John Bowes
2021-02-01 21:36:31 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Willy Nilly
Post by BR
Man made catastrophic climate change is a fraud. 50 years of failed
climate disaster predictions are testimony to that.
Yep, we've had 10 years to save the planet, for about the past 50
years, and the next 50 years, ad nauseum....
It's the current generations nuclear moment Willy. Imbeciles like Rich believe humans are causing it to change and ignoring the fact the climates been changing ever since planet earth had one :)
Loading...