Heated Argument Awaits -

[Observer II]

We've got mountains in Wales and Scotland providing fresh water to the rest of the country;  we already have complaints of insufficient water supply in hot weather; it would seem dams and reservoirs would provide the driving force for turbines.   Then we've got tidal esturies like the Severn,   with a regular bore, to provide two way driving force for turbines.  Finally, we have regular sea storms along our lengthy coast line begging for wave power turbines.  If we can't do it, perhaps we could ask the Chinese !     

[Confused52]

29 minutes ago, Observer II said:

We've got mountains in Wales and Scotland providing fresh water to the rest of the country;  we already have complaints of insufficient water supply in hot weather; it would seem dams and reservoirs would provide the driving force for turbines.   Then we've got tidal esturies like the Severn,   with a regular bore, to provide two way driving force for turbines.  Finally, we have regular sea storms along our lengthy coast line begging for wave power turbines.  If we can't do it, perhaps we could ask the Chinese !     

Asp was right, they were all too costly or engineering nightmares. We need reliable long lasting energy source like nuclear and not expensive toys that appeal to green fanatics. The long coast that makes you so hopeful means massive lengths of cable for distribution with correspondingly large power losses making their net contribution to the national grid arguable. 

[Confused52]

Bill,

I found this article interesting because it touches (obliquely) on the way you viewed weather and gardening and its support for Climate change. How we fool ourselves. Part II: Scientific consensus building | Climate Etc. (judithcurry.com)

I fear that the media and NGO pressure on scientists is causing a distortion in the research which is resulting in the lack of proper peer review and thus bad science. This manifests itself in that publishing papers that do not support the consensus is not easy which means that the normal checks and balances are not functioning.

[Bill]

Blimey that was a bit of a heavy read. I ended up skipping a lot of it but understood the point that was trying to make. There’s not a lot you can do about it though because whether it’s global warming, politics, football etc we all tend to take sides and once we’ve done that we’ve automatically become biased whether we think so or not. We call it having an opinion and while we believe that it’s our own, in most cases it’s based on opinions expressed by others.

There’s only two people on the face of this planet that’s completely unbiased and who’s opinion is always 100% correct and that’s me, and that other bloke, what was his name, oh yes it’s me as well. 😊

Anyhow back on the global warming thing, Like most things in my life, I’m right in the middle of the road on the issue. I think there’s some change happening, I don’t believe it’s all man made, and I certainly don’t think we should turn the clocks back to address the problem. But given nobody knows for certain we should still be able to make gradual changes that improves the environment without it costing a fortune or sacrificing our standards of life.

 

Bill 😊

[Observer II]

4 hours ago, Confused52 said:

Asp was right, they were all too costly or engineering nightmares. We need reliable long lasting energy source like nuclear and not expensive toys that appeal to green fanatics. The long coast that makes you so hopeful means massive lengths of cable for distribution with correspondingly large power losses making their net contribution to the national grid arguable. 

I read that as another way of saying we, the Brits, can't do it - when there are examples around the globe of huge hydro-electric schemes, from Aswan to Hoover operating for some time.  So again, perhaps we could ask the Chinese.   

[asperity]

We don't have the geography to build huge dams Like the Hoover or Aswan is the simple answer. I think you're being a bit unfair on your countrymen to imply that they are technically incompetent.

[Observer II]

Well, the evidence to-date suggests we're incapable of major IT projects, so major infrastructure schemes seem to be in the same frame.  

[asperity]

That would be "the government are incapable of major IT projects" surely? Which could be rephrased as "the government are incapable".

[Observer II]

Any Gov !  To much "no Minister" I guess.  

[Confused52]

4 hours ago, Observer II said:

I read that as another way of saying we, the Brits, can't do it - when there are examples around the globe of huge hydro-electric schemes, from Aswan to Hoover operating for some time.  So again, perhaps we could ask the Chinese.   

Well you misread that badly. Even British engineers cannot make ludicrous ego driven projects work economically. If brits can't do it don't think that others can. You need to understand that the Chinese advantage is only ever cheap money which they lift from the bank accounts of their population and not engineering expertise.

[Observer II]

When they (the Chinese) can physically build their infrastructure up to modern standards in a matter of decades;  build emergency hospitals within weeks, and export building programmes throughout Africa - sounds like engineering expertise to me - but most importantly, having the will to do it.     

[Confused52]

9 hours ago, Observer II said:

When they (the Chinese) can physically build their infrastructure up to modern standards in a matter of decades;  build emergency hospitals within weeks, and export building programmes throughout Africa - sounds like engineering expertise to me - but most importantly, having the will to do it.     

Things are not always as they seem. They fool the unwary but not those who can check!

[Observer II]

So they haven't built artificial islands in the S/China sea, in order to extend their territory, thus winding everyone up ?    

[Bill]

If you don’t mind me saying Con, that’s a bit of an odd way of looking at things. I agree, China is quite different to us but you can’t deny that they get things done a lot quicker to create or build public infrastructure. They seem to get things done while we’re still talking about it. Look at the third runway at Heathrow, twenty-five years of talk and nothing to show for it. We must look like a load of fools to the Chinese and to some extent, they’re right.

Moving our country away from manufacturing and becoming a financial and service based society had totally changed the way we think and act.

 

Bill 😊

[Confused52]

3 minutes ago, Bill said:

If you don’t mind me saying Con, that’s a bit of an odd way of looking at things. I agree, China is quite different to us but you can’t deny that they get things done a lot quicker to create or build public infrastructure. They seem to get things done while we’re still talking about it. Look at the third runway at Heathrow, twenty-five years of talk and nothing to show for it. We must look like a load of fools to the Chinese and to some extent, they’re right.

 

Bill 😊

What delays airport development is planning and environmentalists not technology or engineering. The point about artificial islands from Obs is ludicrous. Do not assume that things they build are to the same standards that you assume British firms would use. Most of their speed is derived from both a lack of political accountability and the use of a large standing army. That applies to their actions in those "islands" and the Wuhan hospital. I do not admire their political system,

[Observer II]

Not admiring their political system, doesn't mean it doesn't get results, and as a totalitarian State it gets things done; where we dither and dance around each and every decision.   

[Bill]

We don’t admire their political ways but how much of that is down to years of being told they’re the bad guys. We’re not perfect and from their perspective we probably look just as bad.  

I’d have hoped that better global communication over the years might have removed much of our deep routed mistrust but that doesn’t seem to be the case.

And we're getting a bit side tracked from what this discussion started on.

 

Bill 😊

[Confused52]

17 minutes ago, Bill said:

We don’t admire their political ways but how much of that is down to years of being told they’re the bad guys. We’re not perfect but from their perspective we probably look just as bad.  

I’d have hoped that better global communication over the years might have removed much of our deep routed mistrust but that doesn’t seem to be the case.

And we're getting a bit side tracked from what this discussion started on.

 

Bill 😊

So getting back to the heating issue do you both admire the way they keep getting more electricity supply  capacity by building new coal fired stations. According to Reuters "China put 38.4 gigawatts (GW) of new coal-fired power capacity into operation in 2020". That as the rest of the world cut coal generation by 17.2 GW in the same period. 

[Bill]

They have the same problem as we do Con in that they have a cheap and plentiful fuel and don’t see any great reason why they should change. The crazy thing is, they need all that power to make the heat pumps for us so that we can claim the moral high ground. It’s a bit like keeping a nice tidy garden while next door’s garden looks more like a jungle. He claims his is better for nature and the environment but somewhere between the two there has to be some compromise or solution otherwise the alternative is a never ending conflict.

My small dealings with China allowed me the opportunity to chat to some on a personal level and on the face of it they seem happy enough people and no different than us. It’s the bloody politicians with their adversarial ways that causes so much of the mistrust just like we see here between our main political parties.

If we could sack all the worlds politicians and replace them with people who truly represent the views of the ordinary people then the world would have less arguments and be a better place to live.

 

Bill 😊

[asperity]

So the question is do we want to live in a democracy where we can disagree with the actions of the government and can vote them out if enough people disagree with their actions, or do we want to live in a society like China where anybody who disagrees with the actions of the government disappears? I know which system I prefer, and until enough people in the country agree they want to live under such a totalitarian regime we will have our system, however bad it is at building coal fired power stations and third runways.

[Observer II]

Don't kid yourself Asp;  China is now a corporate capitalist state, where the average punter is happy to see their standards of living grow, to the extent that they have the second largest economy in the world.  The CCP has to keep them happy with the modern version of bread and games, and they have a long historical perspective of how they were exploited by the West in the past, something they no doubt resent and now wish to rectify.   We on the other hand, have the illusion of democracy without economic benefit.  I've no doubt that our engineers are as good as the Chinese, but we have Governments incapable of unleashing our abilities.   Getting back to major infrastructure schemes, such as a future energy policy,   it can be thrown off track by a few eco-warriors or the presence of a greater crested newt, enjoying their "democratic" freedom to protest.          

[asperity]

I now know to whom the expression "useful idiot" refers Obs, you meet the specification perfectly.

[Observer II]

Tut, tut, personal abuse.     

[asperity]

I thought you had thicker skin than that Obs 🙄

[Bill]

Moving on over that one quickly.

I think I understand how democracy works Asp but which system is best isn’t the issue. For us to become as efficient as China doesn’t mean that we’d have stop being a democratic country, we just need to change the way we go about things.

We’re such a politically divided society these days that any decision is inevitably met with criticism from half the population. Add to that all the various pressure groups who’ll claim it infringes some rights and it’s not surprising that governments seem to go out of their way to avoid anything too ambitious or risky.

 

Bill 😊