Elected ‘leader’ somehow? Or self-appointed? Could he be a mole or a plant?
Do you want to move this preposterous idea to the conspiracy thread?
What you call a preposterous idea is actually three questions.
OK - I'll humour you, but you know exactly what I meant.
Third question.
Yes three mild questions. There are endless descriptions of how these foolish protestors should be harmed, some to my mind pretty distasteful. Set alongside those posts, my asking or posing three questions is as I said a mild contribution.
Seth you obviously have some valid points and in no way should these protesters be harmed by the public. However they are being fed rubbish by people who imo are just trying to cause disruption. What they are doing is causing problems for fellow citizens trying to go about their daily business. If any of them did their homework they would know that from April 1st next year anyone with an income below £31k p.a. will be able to have energy efficient measures installed in their homes such as solar p.v., ASHP, external wall insulation totally FOC. There is £4Bn of funding being made available for this in order to cut emissions and ease fuel poverty. But as usual sheep are being used by the wolves to cause trouble in what they think is a noble cause and you cant blame people for getting angry at the disruption they are causing for no good reason
Interesting … I wasn’t aware of these measures.
Seems strange they have not been highlighted by the government recently as a response to the protests.
Although there is an argument that the protests divert public interest away from other problems.
Elected ‘leader’ somehow? Or self-appointed? Could he be a mole or a plant?
Do you want to move this preposterous idea to the conspiracy thread?
What you call a preposterous idea is actually three questions.
OK - I'll humour you, but you know exactly what I meant.
Third question.
Yes three mild questions. There are endless descriptions of how these foolish protestors should be harmed, some to my mind pretty distasteful. Set alongside those posts, my asking or posing three questions is as I said a mild contribution.
....from April 1st next year anyone with an income below £31k p.a. will be able to have energy efficient measures installed in their homes such as solar p.v., ASHP, external wall insulation totally FOC. There is £4Bn of funding being made available for this in order to cut emissions and ease fuel poverty...
Elected ‘leader’ somehow? Or self-appointed? Could he be a mole or a plant?
Do you want to move this preposterous idea to the conspiracy thread?
What you call a preposterous idea is actually three questions.
OK - I'll humour you, but you know exactly what I meant.
Third question.
Yes three mild questions. There are endless descriptions of how these foolish protestors should be harmed, some to my mind pretty distasteful. Set alongside those posts, my asking or posing three questions is as I said a mild contribution.
Seth you obviously have some valid points and in no way should these protesters be harmed by the public. However they are being fed rubbish by people who imo are just trying to cause disruption. What they are doing is causing problems for fellow citizens trying to go about their daily business. If any of them did their homework they would know that from April 1st next year anyone with an income below £31k p.a. will be able to have energy efficient measures installed in their homes such as solar p.v., ASHP, external wall insulation totally FOC. There is £4Bn of funding being made available for this in order to cut emissions and ease fuel poverty. But as usual sheep are being used by the wolves to cause trouble in what they think is a noble cause and you cant blame people for getting angry at the disruption they are causing for no good reason
I have continually criticised these protesters on this thread, even quoting Samuel Beckett to support the point.
He’s not criticising you. He’s giving you & everyone else for that matter, an education on what the ACTUAL issues are or aren’t. For that reason, it’s an informative post and should be encouraged.
It seems that no decision has been made yet on the various proposals...
...or, have I got it wrong?
Maybe you have a better link?
It is officially in a consultation period mate but that may mean slight tweaks the basis of the scheme is set and the energy companies + industry are gearing up now in order to get ready for April. Im currently negotiating contracts with energy companies for the delivery on the scheme for my business
Elected ‘leader’ somehow? Or self-appointed? Could he be a mole or a plant?
Do you want to move this preposterous idea to the conspiracy thread?
What you call a preposterous idea is actually three questions.
OK - I'll humour you, but you know exactly what I meant.
Third question.
Yes three mild questions. There are endless descriptions of how these foolish protestors should be harmed, some to my mind pretty distasteful. Set alongside those posts, my asking or posing three questions is as I said a mild contribution.
Seth if you're referencing my last post it was meant to be over the top humour rather than serious and distasteful. That said if people glue themselves to roads or build contraptions to block runways I won't shed a tear if some skin is lost or bones broken. At the end of the day the protestors rights aren't the only ones to consider.
Believe it or not I don’t disagree with what lies behind the point you’re making. If the protestors know they risk arrest and sanctions, but do it anyway, then to my mind they also know they risk having their skin damaged if they are yanked off the road they’re glued to. One interest of mine on this thread has been the practical aspects of the protests. The media knowing in advance of the police that the protests are about to take place, and they’re there to film it raises a number of questions, some of which are about practicalities. Indeed protests like the impact of Fathers for Justice actions, or Black Cab people causing hold ups, or people demonstrating as they did at the Sarah Everard vigil during Covid restrictions, all ask questions about how these actions can happen in the first place, and how they’re dealt with in practical terms.
It seems that no decision has been made yet on the various proposals...
...or, have I got it wrong?
Maybe you have a better link?
It is officially in a consultation period mate but that may mean slight tweaks the basis of the scheme is set and the energy companies + industry are gearing up now in order to get ready for April. Im currently negotiating contracts with energy companies for the delivery on the scheme for my business
Hope you get loads. Well done for getting into a growth sector that can also be said to be "doing good"
For once a thread I can contribute on with a decent amount of knowledge. The figures these people are quoting re uninsulated homes are total rubbish. Or family business was formed in 1974 and its main business activity was insulation. Over the years the business has diversified into other product areas and in 2014 we closed the insulation side. We did this as after 40 years of filling cavities in properties there just were not many left to do. Today there are a few businesses left but in the main they are scratching around trying to find properties or concentrating on new build properties. The problem we have in the UK is that we have old housing stock that is worth far too much money. 1000's of streets of solid wall properties that should have been demolished years ago and replaced with more energy efficient buildings.
Those solid wall properties that you mention. I rather not have them knocked down due to the fact that alot of the new buildings that are put up look shite. (i live in one, well, sort off, 20 years old the building) Can those old buildings be properly insulated (if of course the owner wants them to be)?
Notwithstanding the aesthetic and historical importance of those buildings, there is a also a fine balance between the inefficiency of those buildings and the carbon impact of demolition and rebuild. Its not as simple as saying knock down old buildings and build new ones...
Completely agree. If the people in charge could be trusted to replace them with good quality buildings then maybe it's worth doing in the long run. But they cant. Instead we would have cheap and nasty blocks thrown up covered in flammable cladding on the grounds it had "insulating properties".
You only have to look at places like Deptford, Peckham and Elephant to see what happened last time they tried that in the 60s. Gradually the concrete shitholes are coming down again one by one, whereas the remaining largely Victorian housing stock they replaced is stil there and thriving.
For once a thread I can contribute on with a decent amount of knowledge. The figures these people are quoting re uninsulated homes are total rubbish. Or family business was formed in 1974 and its main business activity was insulation. Over the years the business has diversified into other product areas and in 2014 we closed the insulation side. We did this as after 40 years of filling cavities in properties there just were not many left to do. Today there are a few businesses left but in the main they are scratching around trying to find properties or concentrating on new build properties. The problem we have in the UK is that we have old housing stock that is worth far too much money. 1000's of streets of solid wall properties that should have been demolished years ago and replaced with more energy efficient buildings.
Those solid wall properties that you mention. I rather not have them knocked down due to the fact that alot of the new buildings that are put up look shite. (i live in one, well, sort off, 20 years old the building) Can those old buildings be properly insulated (if of course the owner wants them to be)?
Notwithstanding the aesthetic and historical importance of those buildings, there is a also a fine balance between the inefficiency of those buildings and the carbon impact of demolition and rebuild. Its not as simple as saying knock down old buildings and build new ones...
Completely agree. If the people in charge could be trusted to replace them with good quality buildings then maybe it's worth doing in the long run. But they cant. Instead we would have cheap and nasty blocks thrown up covered in flammable cladding on the grounds it had "insulating properties".
You only have to look at places like Deptford, Peckham and Elephant to see what happened last time they tried that in the 60s. Gradually the concrete shitholes are coming down again one by one, whereas the remaining largely Victorian housing stock they replaced is stil there and thriving.
They'll be less rental properties, which some may say is a good thing, others not. The cost of getting old buildings up to the required level just won't be worth the financial outlay, but I doubt many will get knocked down.
We'll start selling ours off from next year, a shame for some of the tenants, some of whom have lived there for 30+ years.
According to BBC News Prince Charles understands the protesters’ anger. if I knew how to post a link I would. it was only a matter of time before that buffoon put his oar in.
According to BBC News Prince Charles understands the protesters’ anger. if I knew how to post a link I would. it was only a matter of time before that buffoon put his oar in.
According to BBC News Prince Charles understands the protesters’ anger. if I knew how to post a link I would. it was only a matter of time before that buffoon put his oar in.
I believe Charles has got more immediate and closer to home problems to sort out. I mean Edinburgh is dukeless so it’s now all going to chite up there.
is it is it time for water cannons yet? Tasers maybe? There needs to be some deterrent before someone gets seriously pissed off and does something they’ll regret
Didn’t Boris buy a few water cannon when he was Mayor?
I believe Charles has got more immediate and closer to home problems to sort out. I mean Edinburgh is dukeless so it’s now all going to chite up there.
How many private jets and helicopters does Chucky take? I'd wager a fair few more than most people! Not to say he's not right in a lot of the things he's saying, but clean your own house first
How many private jets and helicopters does Chucky take? I'd wager a fair few more than most people! Not to say he's not right in a lot of the things he's saying, but clean your own house first
Always good to be lectured on climate change by the wealthy and privileged. The sacrifices they make!
is it is it time for water cannons yet? Tasers maybe? There needs to be some deterrent before someone gets seriously pissed off and does something they’ll regret
Didn’t Boris buy a few water cannon when he was Mayor?
I believe Prince Charles runs his 40 year old Aston Martin on cheese or something like that.
He said Challenged about his own efforts to reduce his carbon footprint, Prince Charles said he had switched the heating of Birkhall to biomass boilers, using wood chips from trees felled in the estate's forest.
He has installed solar panels at Clarence House, his London residence, and on the farm buildings of his Gloucestershire home, Highgrove.
He said he had installed heat pumps at some of his properties and a hydroelectric turbine in the river that runs beside Birkhall.
He was also challenged on his long-standing love of cars, and asked if he was "a bit of a Jeremy Clarkson, a bit of a petrol-head?"
"Well, yes", the prince acknowledged: "But that was before we knew what the problems were."
He said he had converted his favourite vehicle, an Aston Martin he has owned for 51 years, to run on what he described as "surplus English white wine and whey from the cheese process".
His Aston Martin has been modified to run on a fuel called E85 - made up of 85% bioethanol and 15% unleaded petrol.
Bioethanol can be derived from different sources - including in the case of the prince's car - surplus wine and alcohol extracted from fermented whey.
He also said action such as blocking roads isn't helpful and they are doing it in a way that alienates people.
Don't let facts get in the way of knocking the privileged few @Covered End.
Lets defend the so called 'leader' of Insulate Britain for doing feck all to his lifestyle instead, other than waste time and lives of people just trying to get on with living and doing the best they can for their families.
I believe Prince Charles runs his 40 year old Aston Martin on cheese or something like that.
He said Challenged about his own efforts to reduce his carbon footprint, Prince Charles said he had switched the heating of Birkhall to biomass boilers, using wood chips from trees felled in the estate's forest.
He has installed solar panels at Clarence House, his London residence, and on the farm buildings of his Gloucestershire home, Highgrove.
He said he had installed heat pumps at some of his properties and a hydroelectric turbine in the river that runs beside Birkhall.
He was also challenged on his long-standing love of cars, and asked if he was "a bit of a Jeremy Clarkson, a bit of a petrol-head?"
"Well, yes", the prince acknowledged: "But that was before we knew what the problems were."
He said he had converted his favourite vehicle, an Aston Martin he has owned for 51 years, to run on what he described as "surplus English white wine and whey from the cheese process".
His Aston Martin has been modified to run on a fuel called E85 - made up of 85% bioethanol and 15% unleaded petrol.
Bioethanol can be derived from different sources - including in the case of the prince's car - surplus wine and alcohol extracted from fermented whey.
He also said action such as blocking roads isn't helpful and they are doing it in a way that alienates people.
Fair play to him but it's easier for him than the average person isn't it. I wonder if I can get an A3 converted to run on surplus alcohol. Not knocking him really just find the whole preaching of wealthy people quite galling
Just get pissed off with the lack of effort made by this so called 'leader' and those that eulogise him and then go on to knock Prince Charles - the future King - who speaks out in support and has been working directly on the environment for almost 40 years, especially with the Duchy, yet it's so much easier for him because of whom he his.
True, bit he's hardly done feck all about it has he?
Comments
https://www.ofgem.gov.uk/publications/energy-company-obligation-eco4-consultation-scoring-methodology-part-1
There's a lot of info there.
It seems that no decision has been made yet on the various proposals...
...or, have I got it wrong?
Maybe you have a better link?
One interest of mine on this thread has been the practical aspects of the protests.
The media knowing in advance of the police that the protests are about to take place, and they’re there to film it raises a number of questions, some of which are about practicalities. Indeed protests like the impact of Fathers for Justice actions, or Black Cab people causing hold ups, or people demonstrating as they did at the Sarah Everard vigil during Covid restrictions, all ask questions about how these actions can happen in the first place, and how they’re dealt with in practical terms.
You only have to look at places like Deptford, Peckham and Elephant to see what happened last time they tried that in the 60s. Gradually the concrete shitholes are coming down again one by one, whereas the remaining largely Victorian housing stock they replaced is stil there and thriving.
We'll start selling ours off from next year, a shame for some of the tenants, some of whom have lived there for 30+ years.
if I knew how to post a link I would.
it was only a matter of time before that buffoon put his oar in.
I mean Edinburgh is dukeless so it’s now all going to chite up there.
He has installed solar panels at Clarence House, his London residence, and on the farm buildings of his Gloucestershire home, Highgrove.
He said he had installed heat pumps at some of his properties and a hydroelectric turbine in the river that runs beside Birkhall.
He was also challenged on his long-standing love of cars, and asked if he was "a bit of a Jeremy Clarkson, a bit of a petrol-head?"
"Well, yes", the prince acknowledged: "But that was before we knew what the problems were."
He said he had converted his favourite vehicle, an Aston Martin he has owned for 51 years, to run on what he described as "surplus English white wine and whey from the cheese process".
His Aston Martin has been modified to run on a fuel called E85 - made up of 85% bioethanol and 15% unleaded petrol.
Bioethanol can be derived from different sources - including in the case of the prince's car - surplus wine and alcohol extracted from fermented whey.
Lets defend the so called 'leader' of Insulate Britain for doing feck all to his lifestyle instead, other than waste time and lives of people just trying to get on with living and doing the best they can for their families.
I wonder if I can get an A3 converted to run on surplus alcohol.
Not knocking him really just find the whole preaching of wealthy people quite galling
Just get pissed off with the lack of effort made by this so called 'leader' and those that eulogise him and then go on to knock Prince Charles - the future King - who speaks out in support and has been working directly on the environment for almost 40 years, especially with the Duchy, yet it's so much easier for him because of whom he his.
True, bit he's hardly done feck all about it has he?