Cambon Posted June 21 Share Posted June 21 11 hours ago, Happier diner said: Yes indeed. But @Cambon doesnt want wind ( well not in his backyard) and the power station makes electricity by......burning fossil fuels. Where have I ever said I am against wind? I am against Earystane, or any other nature reserve being used for this £100 million + waste of tax payers money. It is the wrong turbines in the wrong place at the wrong time. Put them at the industrial brown field site at Jurby, which has better wind direction range. Put them at Andreas Airfield along with the proposed solar farm. But don’t ruin the ruin what remaining countryside we have left. 2 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Radiolistner Posted June 21 Share Posted June 21 23 minutes ago, Cambon said: I am against Earystane, Where the MUA and the Climate Change Board are intent on leaving an eerie stain for future generations. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HiVibes Posted June 21 Share Posted June 21 1 hour ago, Idleweiss said: Why would I know this? Well if you 'did your own research', it comes up as the first result to the question 'is Paul Burgess a member of the BNP' so I guess he lied to you, and you did indeed attend a fascist meeting. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HiVibes Posted June 21 Share Posted June 21 35 minutes ago, Cambon said: Where have I ever said I am against wind? I am against Earystane, or any other nature reserve being used for this £100 million + waste of tax payers money. It is the wrong turbines in the wrong place at the wrong time. Put them at the industrial brown field site at Jurby, which has better wind direction range. Put them at Andreas Airfield along with the proposed solar farm. But don’t ruin the ruin what remaining countryside we have left. Earystane will still be countryside after they get built, will be quite a nice landmark a bit like the Laxey Wheel, and with all this publicity about how nice Earystane is (its not really, as its windy all the time) property prices will be shooting up. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cambon Posted June 21 Share Posted June 21 2 hours ago, Roger Mexico said: Have an interesting graph: Younger drivers are certainly dangerous, but at least they improve with time. Older drivers less so. It's interesting that it also shows women drivers as a bit worse in most age groups than men. I suspect this is because women are more likely to make more short journeys than men and these are more dangerous per mile statistically. The same may apply a bit to older drivers, but not enough to explain these figures. Yes, but Hivibes is on about banning over 65s who for a good few years after are still amongst the safest drivers. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cambon Posted June 21 Share Posted June 21 1 hour ago, Happier diner said: You tell me. You quoted it. I assumed you meant the current gas or oil central heating that the vast majority of houses on the Isle of man have. Or did you mean something else? No. I mean ban central heating. Unnecessary and expensive. We don’t even live in a cold country! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cambon Posted June 21 Share Posted June 21 1 hour ago, Roger Ram said: You are missing one major thing in those figures. Roger Mexico has already covered it but you graph is meaningless, while his shows the true story. But does it? Relatively few people over 80 still drive. Even by 70 they are throwing in the towel due to the costs versus free bus pass. That is why the percentages of older drivers having collisions is low. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Happier diner Posted June 21 Share Posted June 21 13 minutes ago, Cambon said: No. I mean ban central heating. Unnecessary and expensive. We don’t even live in a cold country! Good luck with that one. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cambon Posted June 21 Share Posted June 21 18 minutes ago, HiVibes said: Earystane will still be countryside after they get built, will be quite a nice landmark a bit like the Laxey Wheel, and with all this publicity about how nice Earystane is (its not really, as its windy all the time) property prices will be shooting up. No, it wont. The amount of infrastructure required to support the windmills will make it a small village. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roger Mexico Posted June 21 Share Posted June 21 12 hours ago, Idleweiss said: It was actually a very worthwhile event tonight. Well run, respectful, and relatively well informed. It was sort of ruined though by Legislative Councils own version of ‘Statto’ constantly making pathetic nitpicking points about some of the science discussed. Now there is a man who does not want to listen to any alternative view and who is literally chomping at the bit to burn tens (if not hundreds) of millions of pounds of our money on the next failed IOM big infrastructure scheme. What? Did the naughty man come and spoil the meeting by pointing out some inconvenient facts? How very dare he! Actually what's very revealing about the discussion around this topic is how the climate 'sceptics' etc people tend to personalise everything. They feel that it's a convincing argument against something Lamara Craine says is to point out she's young and female or that they don't like her voice (rather than what she says in it). Or that Paul Craine wears glasses or whatever. What they are saying can therefore be ignored 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cissolt Posted June 21 Share Posted June 21 2 hours ago, Happier diner said: Corrected. Every scenario calls for a 2nd interconnector. All scenarios are +£1 billion, so add another 30-50% due to it being a government project. Can we afford it? Not the way our government is currently wasting money, including reserves. The favourable scenario is importing biomass to burn. Burning trees for fuel at industrial scale doesn't sound very environmentally friendly Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HiVibes Posted June 21 Share Posted June 21 17 minutes ago, Cambon said: No, it wont. The amount of infrastructure required to support the windmills will make it a small village. Wow what are they planning to mill? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Idleweiss Posted June 21 Share Posted June 21 (edited) 52 minutes ago, Roger Mexico said: What? Did the naughty man come and spoil the meeting by pointing out some inconvenient facts? How very dare he! Actually what's very revealing about the discussion around this topic is how the climate 'sceptics' etc people tend to personalise everything. They feel that it's a convincing argument against something Lamara Craine says is to point out she's young and female or that they don't like her voice (rather than what she says in it). Or that Paul Craine wears glasses or whatever. What they are saying can therefore be ignored But I’m not a climate sceptic and neither was much climate skepticism on display last night. I simply think this whole project will be a monstrous waste of taxpayers money built on a fragile business case. Not unlike the Liverpool Terminal. Neither did I suggest he (Craine) was a naughty man. I suggested that he made an arse of himself being a ridiculous pedant to try to point score. As I’m sure the video will attest when it’s published. Added for balance as you mentioned voices. I don’t know where he is from but Paul Burgess does sound a bit like Ken Dodd. Which I think took a bit of an edge off some of the message for me. Edited June 21 by Idleweiss Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
b4mbi Posted June 21 Share Posted June 21 12 minutes ago, cissolt said: Every scenario calls for a 2nd interconnector. All scenarios are +£1 billion, so add another 30-50% due to it being a government project. Can we afford it? Not the way our government is currently wasting money, including reserves. The favourable scenario is importing biomass to burn. Burning trees for fuel at industrial scale doesn't sound very environmentally friendly So, we can't afford it, unless the gas field comes good. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cambon Posted June 21 Share Posted June 21 8 minutes ago, b4mbi said: So, we can't afford it, unless the gas field comes good. Or we convince the UK that they need another interconnector to Northern Ireland via the IOM, where we can tap into it. Split the costs 3 ways, perhaps? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.