Climate Emergency

Stig said:

Chizz said:

MrWalker said:

I'll keep making my savings while Katie Perry blasts into space for  a10 minute jolly.
Seems reasonable.

The rocket is fueled by liquid hydrogen and liquid oxygen, with the main emission being water vapour.  The flight will probably emit significantly less greenhouse gas than the reporters who drive to the launch site to cover the pointless, narcissistic joy ride. 

If it's a joy ride, it's not pointless. Joy is the very point of it. 

"...pointless, narcissistic waste of money"?

Katy*

I wonder what  Greta (Thunderbergs are go) has to say about it?  I'm not on 'X' but I know she is. Anyone seen her post anything about it? 

Chizz said:

MrWalker said:

I'll keep making my savings while Katie Perry blasts into space for  a10 minute jolly.
Seems reasonable.

The rocket is fueled by liquid hydrogen and liquid oxygen, with the main emission being water vapour.  The flight will probably emit significantly less greenhouse gas than the reporters who drive to the launch site to cover the pointless, narcissistic joy ride. 

So a magic carbon free tree created all the Infrastructure, testing, design etc. Pardon me if I don't fall for the PR bollocks

Wouldn't fancy being installed as the guy in the orange for when a train comes though. You'd have thought they could have designed that better. 

ME14addick said:

So sad to read this article today, the damage being done to the planet by humans, is having a drastic effect on insects, which play a crucial role in the food chain and the 'tree of life'. 

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2025/jun/03/climate-species-collapse-ecology-insects-nature-reserves-aoe?CMP=share_btn_url&fbclid=IwY2xjawKr_7FleHRuA2FlbQIxMQBicmlkETBhUjNwNGpnOG9nU3F2eHFUAR4LlOgh3avWLW3yAS5TXZyinpPX3NJUNhLL7AvRt4hzflsiyzml8vvVQeLgJA_aem_ZeJGb9dm3jc3o09lbYD4Iw

That is tragic 

swords_alive said:

ShootersHillGuru said:

Stig said:

That is a fantastic idea!

It is but look at the openness of that track compared to the majority of the UKs tracks, found down in cuttings and behind trees and bushes. 

Railway companies/ authorities/ network rail- someone will be along soon to clarify which one I'm sure- seem to like nothing more than stripping back trees and other foliage. They would see that as a win win for their climate credentials! Though I doubt we'll get so far as serious consideration for a multitude of reasons.

I believe there have been cases made and proven for solar panels over car parking space, as well as roof tops.

Solar panels can and should be in all those places and a lot more. Warehouses, government buildings etc.  Unfortunately there is not the political will or the public opinion to make it happen. 

Costs of panels themselves are really quite cheap now, the costs are labour, inverters and batteries. I've posted about batteries getting better with the development and release of solid state batteries in China. With political will we could encourage solar panels and bring down costs whilst also boosting employment, skills etc. For example offering apprenticeships specifically for solar electician qualifications would bring down Labour costs and prices and availability.  

Given the panels are such a small part of the cost now its actually much more efficient to do these on a larger scale as once you have the expertise these and the inverter paid for the marginal cost of extra panels gets smaller. So there should be incentives for businesses to donthis on commercial premises and government should be leading the way with all their buildings (also reduces ongoing costs).

Also expect to see mini wind turbines (a 2ft bladeless model has been produced in China) start appearing on people's homes too. 

cantersaddick said:

swords_alive said:

ShootersHillGuru said:

Stig said:

That is a fantastic idea!

It is but look at the openness of that track compared to the majority of the UKs tracks, found down in cuttings and behind trees and bushes. 

Railway companies/ authorities/ network rail- someone will be along soon to clarify which one I'm sure- seem to like nothing more than stripping back trees and other foliage. They would see that as a win win for their climate credentials! Though I doubt we'll get so far as serious consideration for a multitude of reasons.

I believe there have been cases made and proven for solar panels over car parking space, as well as roof tops.

Solar panels can and should be in all those places and a lot more. Warehouses, government buildings etc.  Unfortunately there is not the political will or the public opinion to make it happen. 

Costs of panels themselves are really quite cheap now, the costs are labour, inverters and batteries. I've posted about batteries getting better with the development and release of solid state batteries in China. With political will we could encourage solar panels and bring down costs whilst also boosting employment, skills etc. For example offering apprenticeships specifically for solar electician qualifications would bring down Labour costs and prices and availability.  

Given the panels are such a small part of the cost now its actually much more efficient to do these on a larger scale as once you have the expertise these and the inverter paid for the marginal cost of extra panels gets smaller. So there should be incentives for businesses to donthis on commercial premises and government should be leading the way with all their buildings (also reduces ongoing costs).

Also expect to see mini wind turbines (a 2ft bladeless model has been produced in China) start appearing on people's homes too. 

It’s been a few years since I was involved in trying to install solar panels on existing roofs, but going back roughly 5 years, the major problem was the cost and practicality’s of fitting additional supports to the roofs to ensure they could take the additional weight of the solar panels and the associated infa-structure. Obviously if the design of the existing is such that it is impossible to take the additional loads then there no way they can be installed. Warehouses are an example are built to a minimal roof loadings as this keep the initial costs down, and no doubt this will be the case for governmental buildings.

£500m was paid to wind farm compaies to keep wind turbines from producing , so as not to overload the grid. 

swords_alive said:

Dansk_Red said:

£500m was paid to wind farm compaies to keep wind turbines from producing , so as not to overload the grid. 

Yes. Constraint payments. Been known of for some time but seems have come back round in news cycles recently. This sky news report from 2023 predicts such payments will rise to £2.5bn annually before falling back. 
https://news.sky.com/story/britons-paying-hundreds-of-millions-to-turn-off-wind-turbines-as-network-cant-handle-the-power-they-make-on-the-windiest-days-12822156

This is the problem of uk infrastructure lag.

I think this also forms basis for the case for local battery storage so generation and consumption is local to the premises, and so the grid itself isnt as involved is distribution and supply until the upgrades have happened.

Bang on. Localised grids with storage is and has always been the way to make renewables work. 

Will increase house prices but probably a good move to combat the insane electricity costs in this country.

Be nice if this policy was introduced alongside the scrapping of Biodiversity Net Gain policies which are a huge burden in the planning system.

I have no objection to increasing biodiversity, obviously, but the implementation of 'Biodiversity Net Gain' in the planning system by the Conservatives doesn't provide enough exemptions for smaller sites. Even Angela Rayner has woken up to this.

Basically all development sites are required to improve biodiversity on-site by 10%, and this must be certified by an ecologist who has to undertake surveys and submit a BNG plan as part of the application. This includes literally any development over 5m x 5m (which is basically 99% of all applications). Ecologists have got everyone over a barrel and are charging everyone thousands because the government has mandated their input.

This country really doesn't help itself.

cafcnick1992 said:

I have no objection to increasing biodiversity, obviously, but the implementation of 'Biodiversity Net Gain' in the planning system by the Conservatives doesn't provide enough exemptions for smaller sites. Even Angela Rayner has woken up to this.

Basically all development sites are required to improve biodiversity on-site by 10%, and this must be certified by an ecologist who has to undertake surveys and submit a BNG plan as part of the application. This includes literally any development over 5m x 5m (which is basically 99% of all applications). Ecologists have got everyone over a barrel and are charging everyone thousands because the government has mandated their input.

This country really doesn't help itself.

It does matter, lots of smaller sites add up. Developers want to make as much profit as possible and won't do anything to improve the conditions for wildlife unless they are forced.