National Conservatives?!?!
National Conservatives?!?!
Wasn’t America formed with strict rules about maintaining a division between government and religion?
Ah, just got that. Saw Braverman and put 2 and 2 together…got 5.Yeah. Not our nation though. The American nation.
They have been receiving briefings and information since January, so either (a) the civil service were lying to them and not providing full disclosure or (b) narrative building as you suggest.They take the public for absolute mugs, this is just narrative building aided by the media to justify why nothing can get better.
Miraculously under the bonnet £3bn is found for Ukraine
So pigs really will fly!Vertical farming will be the future anyway.
Of course, the Tony Blair institute is an entirely unbiased organisation.
I’m just trying to imagine how much land will need to be taken up by solar to meet Labours renewables target. Or wind turbines - I’m not sure if you can still farm around the latter. And of course, what happens when the sun doesn’t shine or the wind doesn’t blow. I suppose we could surround the UK with wave power generators, that might stop the boatsI'm sure they're not, but the article is in a farming magazine. I'm not exactly a Blairite.
I was looking for something with a bit of data about food security versus solar use. If you've got some alternate research that suggests the figures are different, then get it out there.
Currently the line that there is far more land used by golf courses than solar, seems to stand up.
How much of the UK is covered in golf course?
A planning battle has been raging over what campaigners say will be the 142nd golf course in Surrey. But how much golf course is too much?www.bbc.co.uk
I'm sure they're not, but the article is in a farming magazine. I'm not exactly a Blairite.
I was looking for something with a bit of data about food security versus solar use. If you've got some alternate research that suggests the figures are different, then get it out there.
Currently the line that there is far more land used by golf courses than solar, seems to stand up.
How much of the UK is covered in golf course?
A planning battle has been raging over what campaigners say will be the 142nd golf course in Surrey. But how much golf course is too much?www.bbc.co.uk
Ah, just got that. Saw Braverman and put 2 and 2 together…got 5.
I’m just trying to imagine how much land will need to be taken up by solar to meet Labours renewables target. Or wind turbines - I’m not sure if you can still farm around the latter. And of course, what happens when the sun doesn’t shine or the wind doesn’t blow. I suppose we could surround the UK with wave power generators, that might stop the boats.
I wonder which Labour crony and funder has an interest in all this?
And, to repeat myself, some on here assured me that roofs would do the trick and that covering fields with eyesore panels would not be necessary.
We aren’t ever going to be food secure. It’s such a weird argument. And it probably wouldn’t be the worst thing to give some agricultural land a couple of decades out of rotation while we build the network up fully. Solar is cheap and can be put down quickly with little long term impact on the area. In places like California it already removes the need for gas during the day mostly and now battery storage is starting to eat into night time gas usage.
Nope. I just don’t like the look of solar farms, personally I prefer wind turbines. I lived in France for a while and there were loads there.If you're a Tory supporter, then I think the cronyism argument isn't somewhere you'd really want to go.
Is there any evidence that someone in the Labour party is making money out of this policy or indeed doing it for that reason?
As for how much land, I don't know, but I think that all of the current "solar takes too much land arguments", aren't based on any facts I can find.
Personally, I'm very much in favour of renewables. We've only got the one planet, it would need better not to trash it, imho. We can't sort the whole problem ourselves, but we've got to start somewhere, and right now.
Is your argument really more about the fact that it's a Labour policy, which by definition must make it wrong?
Neither are great on the look, it must be said. Not sure I'd want to live next to a massive farm of either of them... but then wouldn't have been keen on living in Binley Village when the pit was there either, or next to Hams Hall power station.Nope. I just don’t like the look of solar farms, personally I prefer wind turbines.
You haven’t got much of a clue and seem to have some issue with solar.I’m just trying to imagine how much land will need to be taken up by solar to meet Labours renewables target. Or wind turbines - I’m not sure if you can still farm around the latter. And of course, what happens when the sun doesn’t shine or the wind doesn’t blow. I suppose we could surround the UK with wave power generators, that might stop the boats.
I wonder which Labour crony and funder has an interest in all this?
And, to repeat myself, some on here assured me that roofs would do the trick and that covering fields with eyesore panels would not be necessary.
She’s an absolute lunatic. How was she ever let anywhere near government let alone the top seat. It wasn’t even a secret before she was. Mad as a box of frogs seems to have been a label that’s followed her around her whole life.Of course it did
Sunak decision to ‘trash my reputation’ added to Tory election defeat – Truss
The former prime minister, who lost her seat in the General Election, said she felt it was time to speak out.www.standard.co.uk
You certainly couldn’t graze sheep around the solar fields I have seen locally.You haven’t got much of a clue and seem to have some issue with solar.
It is by fair and away the simplest, cheapest and most logical solution for power world wide. It has its place in the UK alongside wind. Wave is great in theory but underdeveloped, technological immature and not as easy to maintain.
To answer a specific question you can graze sheep around it and not all land is arable or suitable for homes anyway.
Nope. I just don’t like the look of solar farms, personally I prefer wind turbines. I lived in France for a while and there were loads there.
Tory or not, I dont condone cronyism. It’s not a great optic to take so much money from Dale Vince and then within days of taking office change regulations which will benefit him and his company,
Tory or not, I dont condone cronyism. It’s not a great optic to take so much money from Dale Vince and then within days of taking office change regulations which will benefit him and his company,
They would say that, wouldn’t they?Fucking hell mate this is a stretch!
They would say that, wouldn’t they?
All fair comment.Fair enough, appreciate the honesty.
I am 100% with you on the cronyism thing. If Starmer is serious about cleaning up politics then everything has to be completely open and above board. I think it's fair enough to build solar etc. if that's your stated policy, but the actual tendering process has to be completely open to public scrutiny so that we can be confident that party donors do not get an advantage.
I'd rather a minor loss of amenity from wind farms and solar than the substantial loss of amenity that comes from not getting climate change under control.
The appearance of solar farms doesn't much bother me much in truth, I should add. I'm not sure it's a good enough reason to not take advantage of the technology, but again that's my personal opinion.
Fucking hell mate this is a stretch!
The ‘I like foot-ball’ derby is back on when Arsenal face Southampton next season anyway.You won't be laughing when Forest Green Rovers mysteriously appear in the Premier League fixtures next year.
The leftie woke environmentalist tentacles' reach, is long.
So Dale doesn’t make money from his green company? And doesn’t stand to make more by changes in regulations?If you think the left are pro climate change for the money you’re further gone than I thought.
The ‘I like foot-ball’ derby is back on when Arsenal face Southampton next season anyway.
Do you have evidence that he has lobbied or donated to Labour in order to get favourable legislation?So Dale doesn’t make money from his green company? And doesn’t stand to make more by changes in regulations?
He has donated significant sums to the Labour Party. He has said that he wants to influence policy but not by buying access. However, donating significant sums is bound to grant access and the opportunity to influence.Do you have evidence that he has lobbied or donated to Labour in order to get favourable legislation?
The Tory ban only came in last year and was essentially an election gimmick as they thought the electorate was made up of nimbys. On a wider level it was part of their phoney culture bollocks , we’ve scrapped 7 bins etc because only woke believe in climate issues. It was a cynical policy in the first place and had the Tories won the GE I wouldn’t have been shocked to see the ridiculous policy scrapped. Maybe not as quickly as Labour have but it was always bollocks and any government serious about running the country would have done the same.So Dale doesn’t make money from his green company? And doesn’t stand to make more by changes in regulations?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?