Scarlet Fever Llanelli Rugby Sport Wales Tickets Homepage
Forum Home Forum Home > SOCIAL > CHAT BOARD
  New Posts New Posts
  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Register Register  Login Login


If politicians really cared about the environment

 Post Reply Post Reply
Author
Message
roy munster View Drop Down
Veteran
Veteran
Avatar

Joined: 30 August 2010
Status: Offline
Points: 10378
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote roy munster Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Topic: If politicians really cared about the environment
    Posted: 18 January 2017 at 1:37pm
why do they allow volkswagon and many more massive car makers and corporate giants to break their emissions for over 20 million cars? Why arent people going to prison? Why do so few corporate crooks go to prison ? how many went to jail after the whole horse burger / bute burger scandal hit almost every supermarket? why are politicians being more lenient when these corporate crooks are doing infinitely more harm to the environment and public at large than 1000 average crooks? We have more politicians than ever yet corporations get away with more?

why do politicians across the UK and the world allow and encourage out of town retail parks with low rents and free car parking, no train routes , barely any bus routes...thus forcing customers back into their cars and polluting the planet? 

Take the northern irish renewable energy scandal, it cost the tax payer over £500 million in the end.. and of course no one goes to jail
Politicians are full of bull, say one thing do another. I doubt they give a damn about the ozone layer judging by these actions, but of course they must appear to care, especially near election time


Edited by roy munster - 18 January 2017 at 1:51pm
ROYMOND MUNTER MBE (FOR SERVICES TO THE COMBOVER)
Back to Top
Sponsored Links


Back to Top
aber-fan View Drop Down
Veteran
Veteran
Avatar

Joined: 25 October 2004
Location: Wales
Status: Offline
Points: 11511
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote aber-fan Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 18 January 2017 at 1:54pm
Fair points.

I have a few more questions:

1. If the public actually care about the environment - and potentially the future survival of the human race - why did they vote for Trump, who is a global warming denier, and who has appointed many oil and coal barons to positions of importance in his administration?

2. How come the USA government can twist VW's arm to get them to pay billions of dollars in compensation, while in Europe governments seem to let the company slide? (Not the first example of different, weaker treatment over here either.)
I share no-one's ideas. I have my own.
(Ivan Turgenev)
Back to Top
roy munster View Drop Down
Veteran
Veteran
Avatar

Joined: 30 August 2010
Status: Offline
Points: 10378
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote roy munster Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 18 January 2017 at 2:19pm
Originally posted by aber-fan aber-fan wrote:

Fair points.

I have a few more questions:

1. If the public actually care about the environment - and potentially the future survival of the human race - why did they vote for Trump, who is a global warming denier, and who has appointed many oil and coal barons to positions of importance in his administration?

2. How come the USA government can twist VW's arm to get them to pay billions of dollars in compensation, while in Europe governments seem to let the company slide? (Not the first example of different, weaker treatment over here either.)

Politicians are simply using this as a ruse to hammer individuals , as opposed to going after the real corporate crooks ....There is no real strategy or masterplan. when is the last time they actually laid down new train tracks to get to these places? 

meanwhile it appears trump either doesnt consider the environment that important or he doesnt feel the evidence is conclusive. He wants to put the economy first then worry about the environment second. At least thats what he has said thus far. My guess is he will come into the centre on this and unlike the useless career politicians he will hopefully continue to hammer these stinking corporations. 


Edited by roy munster - 18 January 2017 at 2:25pm
ROYMOND MUNTER MBE (FOR SERVICES TO THE COMBOVER)
Back to Top
Dan the Drover View Drop Down
Veteran
Veteran


Joined: 20 April 2005
Status: Online
Points: 3638
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Dan the Drover Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 18 January 2017 at 5:42pm
The problem with VW's fraud is the test.  It has to be standardised, and produce comparable results.  Everyone knows that it doesn't produce realistic figures for gas emissions, because it doesn't really simulate real world driving.  That would be very hard to do if you need the same car to produce the same result whenever it is tested, and you want the results for different cars to be representative of their real world performance. 

VW fiddled their software to do comparatively better when under test, and produce a better set of official test results.  What they did isn't in the "spirit" of the testing regime, but the only argument you could have with it in law is that it produces unrepresentative results.  Since everyone knows the results aren't representative anyway, the environmental impact is difficult to gauge.

I have one of these engines and it has now been reprogrammed so that it doesn't behave differently when it senses it is being tested.  The reprogramming has made no difference that I can detect to my fuel consumption.


Edited by Dan the Drover - 18 January 2017 at 5:43pm
Back to Top
roy munster View Drop Down
Veteran
Veteran
Avatar

Joined: 30 August 2010
Status: Offline
Points: 10378
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote roy munster Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 18 January 2017 at 8:40pm
Originally posted by Dan the Drover Dan the Drover wrote:

The problem with VW's fraud is the test.  It has to be standardised, and produce comparable results.  Everyone knows that it doesn't produce realistic figures for gas emissions, because it doesn't really simulate real world driving.  That would be very hard to do if you need the same car to produce the same result whenever it is tested, and you want the results for different cars to be representative of their real world performance. 

VW fiddled their software to do comparatively better when under test, and produce a better set of official test results.  What they did isn't in the "spirit" of the testing regime, but the only argument you could have with it in law is that it produces unrepresentative results.  Since everyone knows the results aren't representative anyway, the environmental impact is difficult to gauge.

I have one of these engines and it has now been reprogrammed so that it doesn't behave differently when it senses it is being tested.  The reprogramming has made no difference that I can detect to my fuel consumption.

just bought a key from vw as the car locked out my key, it arrived from germany didnt work i got millbrook to code it in, it didnt work, now i have to tow it to vw to pay them to code in the new key and new steering column ive already off them? thieves treat me better
ROYMOND MUNTER MBE (FOR SERVICES TO THE COMBOVER)
Back to Top
totallybiasedscarlet View Drop Down
Veteran
Veteran
Avatar

Joined: 01 August 2014
Location: Llanelli
Status: Offline
Points: 1447
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (1) Thanks(1)   Quote totallybiasedscarlet Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 18 January 2017 at 10:09pm
If politicians gave a damn about he environment ...

1. All new houses would be insulated to such a standard that they didn't need central heating (this is easy using current technologies - such houses already exist)
2. All new houses would have microgeneration built in such that they produced a surplus of energy (again such houses already exist)
3. All new houses would be fitted with a 10kWh battery system, thus removing the peak power problem
4. Grants would be available to refurbish/retrofit old housing stock to modern standards
5. Indoor/City farming structures would be developed to reduce our need for farmland
6. All new houses to be fitted with anaerobic digesters - no sewage to be allowed to flow out to sea and all cleaning fluids to be non-toxic and biodegradeable
7. All buildings/machinery which currently vent heat required to recover heat with a heat exchanger and use to power a sterling engine/generator
8. Ban the disposal of plastic or its' use as ships ballast
9. All manufacturers to be responsible for the life cycle of goods including collection and recycling
10. Massive investment into the ITER fusion project - Announced recently that laser induced fusion has broken even but torus looks a better bet for large scale energy production
11. All new cars to be electric
12. Build fischer-tropsch plants to turn available carbon feedstock (preferably from managed forestry) into LPG for public transport & HGV's etc
13. Re configure highways and public transport infrastructure to allow safe cycle routes for commuters
14. Have a proper carbon tax!
15. A ban on synthetic fertilizer and an introduction of soil building methods of land management

I could go on ...
I've seen the truth ... and I don't understand it!
Back to Top
John View Drop Down
Veteran
Veteran


Joined: 15 August 2004
Status: Offline
Points: 3582
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote John Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 18 January 2017 at 10:24pm
On each side of the Atlantic, a very small minority of the population actually care about the environment enough to alter their lifestyle in any but the most the most minimal way. Yes sort the recycling a bit but turn the thermostat down? No way. And then of course the politicians reflect the electorate that voted for them.

 



Originally posted by aber-fan aber-fan wrote:

Fair points.

I have a few more questions:

1. If the public actually care about the environment - and potentially the future survival of the human race - why did they vote for Trump, who is a global warming denier, and who has appointed many oil and coal barons to positions of importance in his administration?

2. How come the USA government can twist VW's arm to get them to pay billions of dollars in compensation, while in Europe governments seem to let the company slide? (Not the first example of different, weaker treatment over here either.)
Back to Top
dr_martinov View Drop Down
Veteran
Veteran
Avatar

Joined: 06 August 2005
Location: Oxford
Status: Offline
Points: 9646
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote dr_martinov Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 19 January 2017 at 8:21am
TBS you are completely right in your points: these are all things that any government could certainly do and a brilliant post. I don't know if the government could afford the new eco-friendly houses you suggest as things are, but this could be made up in tax. Surely people would see the bigger picture?

I also wonder about human overpopulation and consumerism as being two factors politicians simply don't want to talk about. I accept exploring the first has some very dangerous connotations - I am not suggesting introducing a child quota proportional to wealth for example! - while the second is, unfortunately, what drives the economy: people buying non biodegradable crap they don't need, often for their children. Just look at the majority of adverts.

As you say John, the majority only make minor changes - myself included - but this means the focus is on the government for strong leadership as many people making the same minor change can have a big effect. I know you are demeaning it slightly, but even the increase in recycling has been significant in my lifetime and you can see an attitude difference now due to these efforts, particularly in the younger generations I would say. You do have to convince people it won't impact their quality of life though - that's your argument with the thermostat - but it certainly can be done.
Back to Top
GPR - Rochester View Drop Down
Veteran
Veteran
Avatar

Joined: 01 December 2014
Location: Rhydcymerau
Status: Offline
Points: 2492
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote GPR - Rochester Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 19 January 2017 at 8:51am
Excellent posts. Unfortunately politicians work to a short timeframe & most will not introduce costly/limiting decisions on their populace for the very real fear of losing power. The answer, of course, is the grown up model of cross political projects which are ring fenced for long periods of time as an agreed must be way forward. We have seen this thinking, in a limited way, with transport/rail policies in some European countries.

However hoping for this grown up attitude in our country to long term issues is a little forlorn at the moment as evidenced every Wednesday in Parliament. In addition for this to work we have to have this grown up, cross party attitude globally. What a tall order. However, I agree, we in the UK could/should have already made major progress along the lines of TBS's excellent outline above. 
Back to Top
Ffidel Bennett View Drop Down
Veteran
Veteran


Joined: 31 August 2014
Location: Caerdydd
Status: Offline
Points: 4172
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Ffidel Bennett Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 19 January 2017 at 10:28am
While large corporations pay lip service to the environment, it is the profit motive that drives them on and the more they can make us buy, and the more often we do so  the more money they make. Their use of PR and advertising to make us feel inferior unless we buy has reached a brilliant art form, often better than television and film entertainment.
To limit consumption we must start educating our children to see through these adverts and look more closely at whether we need their products and if so which ones are best for us and the planet. If this involves naming names of the most fraudulent companies and adverts then those who do it should be protected from the well-paid lawyers of the corporations. 
I subscribe to Which magazine- a good start in sorting the sheep from the wolves when it comes to finding the most environmentally damaging products and those badly made or overpriced.
 The huge and increasing gap between the rich and the poor is also greatly  responsible for  environmental degradation. If you are struggling to feed and keep your family warm you are unlikely to worry too much about your carbon dioxide emissions or  the environmental impact of your actions especially when you are also bombarded with the temptations of consumerism and the implication that you are failing unless you can provide these "desirable" items for your family.  
Back to Top
aber-fan View Drop Down
Veteran
Veteran
Avatar

Joined: 25 October 2004
Location: Wales
Status: Offline
Points: 11511
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote aber-fan Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 19 January 2017 at 2:17pm
Originally posted by totallybiasedscarlet totallybiasedscarlet wrote:

If politicians gave a damn about he environment ...

1. All new houses would be insulated to such a standard that they didn't need central heating (this is easy using current technologies - such houses already exist)
2. All new houses would have microgeneration built in such that they produced a surplus of energy (again such houses already exist)
3. All new houses would be fitted with a 10kWh battery system, thus removing the peak power problem
4. Grants would be available to refurbish/retrofit old housing stock to modern standards
5. Indoor/City farming structures would be developed to reduce our need for farmland
6. All new houses to be fitted with anaerobic digesters - no sewage to be allowed to flow out to sea and all cleaning fluids to be non-toxic and biodegradeable
7. All buildings/machinery which currently vent heat required to recover heat with a heat exchanger and use to power a sterling engine/generator
8. Ban the disposal of plastic or its' use as ships ballast
9. All manufacturers to be responsible for the life cycle of goods including collection and recycling
10. Massive investment into the ITER fusion project - Announced recently that laser induced fusion has broken even but torus looks a better bet for large scale energy production
11. All new cars to be electric
12. Build fischer-tropsch plants to turn available carbon feedstock (preferably from managed forestry) into LPG for public transport & HGV's etc
13. Re configure highways and public transport infrastructure to allow safe cycle routes for commuters
14. Have a proper carbon tax!
15. A ban on synthetic fertilizer and an introduction of soil building methods of land management

I could go on ...

Many sensible points here... I'll just pick you up on 11, though... OK, electric cars will cut pollution in cities and reduce deaths from air pollution, BUT the electricity has to be generated somehow... in China, I think that most electricity is generated from coal-burning plants, so that wouldn't help global warming an awful lot!

No-one seems to talk any more about heat pumps (effectively, fridges in reverse), which in terms of heat gained per electrical energy unit 'used', are more than 100% efficient (not the correct term in this instance, but I won't get into that here). I wonder if that is because refrigerants are not pleasant chemicals, usually? Or because they'd be ugly? Really don't know.
I share no-one's ideas. I have my own.
(Ivan Turgenev)
Back to Top
supertaf View Drop Down
Veteran
Veteran
Avatar

Joined: 17 August 2004
Location: Down the Parc
Status: Offline
Points: 6994
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote supertaf Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 19 January 2017 at 3:56pm
Originally posted by Dan the Drover Dan the Drover wrote:

The problem with VW's fraud is the test.  It has to be standardised, and produce comparable results.  Everyone knows that it doesn't produce realistic figures for gas emissions, because it doesn't really simulate real world driving.  That would be very hard to do if you need the same car to produce the same result whenever it is tested, and you want the results for different cars to be representative of their real world performance. 

VW fiddled their software to do comparatively better when under test, and produce a better set of official test results.  What they did isn't in the "spirit" of the testing regime, but the only argument you could have with it in law is that it produces unrepresentative results.  Since everyone knows the results aren't representative anyway, the environmental impact is difficult to gauge.

I have one of these engines and it has now been reprogrammed so that it doesn't behave differently when it senses it is being tested.  The reprogramming has made no difference that I can detect to my fuel consumption.
 
The whole VW thing is a bit ridiculous frankly.
Only Californian testing was failed which is so tight it's almost impossible for a diesel to pass. The media have then blown it all out of proportion and have carefully ignored that fact.
EU emission testing is much less rigorous and hence the cars would be more likely to pass even without the defeat device over here.
What bothers me more is 2 things, VW is a massive group and those same engines are used throughout Seat, Skoda and Audi yet hardly anyone seems to be bothered that they are also affected.
Secondly, shouldn't we worry about something tangible that affects real world driving like MPG figures which are ALWAYS incorrect for every manufacturer?
It's also good to see that despite the media frenzy, they are still selling well (despite a dip) as they are great cars.
One team in scarlet, there's only one team in scarlet
Back to Top
totallybiasedscarlet View Drop Down
Veteran
Veteran
Avatar

Joined: 01 August 2014
Location: Llanelli
Status: Offline
Points: 1447
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote totallybiasedscarlet Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 19 January 2017 at 6:14pm
Originally posted by aber-fan aber-fan wrote:

Originally posted by totallybiasedscarlet totallybiasedscarlet wrote:


If politicians gave a damn about he environment ...

1. All new houses would be insulated to such a standard that they didn't need central heating (this is easy using current technologies - such houses already exist)
2. All new houses would have microgeneration built in such that they produced a surplus of energy (again such houses already exist)
3. All new houses would be fitted with a 10kWh battery system, thus removing the peak power problem
4. Grants would be available to refurbish/retrofit old housing stock to modern standards
5. Indoor/City farming structures would be developed to reduce our need for farmland
6. All new houses to be fitted with anaerobic digesters - no sewage to be allowed to flow out to sea and all cleaning fluids to be non-toxic and biodegradeable
7. All buildings/machinery which currently vent heat required to recover heat with a heat exchanger and use to power a sterling engine/generator
8. Ban the disposal of plastic or its' use as ships ballast
9. All manufacturers to be responsible for the life cycle of goods including collection and recycling
10. Massive investment into the ITER fusion project - Announced recently that laser induced fusion has broken even but torus looks a better bet for large scale energy production
11. All new cars to be electric
12. Build fischer-tropsch plants to turn available carbon feedstock (preferably from managed forestry) into LPG for public transport & HGV's etc
13. Re configure highways and public transport infrastructure to allow safe cycle routes for commuters
14. Have a proper carbon tax!
15. A ban on synthetic fertilizer and an introduction of soil building methods of land management

I could go on ...


Many sensible points here... I'll just pick you up on 11, though... OK, electric cars will cut pollution in cities and reduce deaths from air pollution, BUT the electricity has to be generated somehow... in China, I think that most electricity is generated from coal-burning plants, so that wouldn't help global warming an awful lot!

No-one seems to talk any more about heat pumps (effectively, fridges in reverse), which in terms of heat gained per electrical energy unit 'used', are more than 100% efficient (not the correct term in this instance, but I won't get into that here). I wonder if that is because refrigerants are not pleasant chemicals, usually? Or because they'd be ugly? Really don't know.


I wasn't proposing we use TPS's to provide energy for that. The nice thing about electric cars is that they're mobile batteries. If we have a public charging infrastructure we could plug in when parked and help smooth out the supply/demand graph. This would be particularly helpful for renewable suppliers who presently have very little capacity for storage. On the TPS front, I'm particularly excited about the development of JET in France. Looking forward to seeing if it can break even. We will then have a significant piece of the low carbon/pollution picture in place.

Ground and air source heat pumps are taught at GCSE physics. It is a pity better use hasn't been made. If we could take heat out of the air and use it to power stirling engines on an industrial scale it might be a useful source of energy. Not looked into that much, not sure how feasible it is.

Edited by totallybiasedscarlet - 19 January 2017 at 6:18pm
I've seen the truth ... and I don't understand it!
Back to Top
aber-fan View Drop Down
Veteran
Veteran
Avatar

Joined: 25 October 2004
Location: Wales
Status: Offline
Points: 11511
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote aber-fan Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 19 January 2017 at 7:25pm
Stick your hand down the back of a fridge, and you'll soon see how effective heat pumps are - and that's moving heat from the inside of a supposedly 'cold' fridge to a warm room! The problems (I think - haven't checked on recent debates) are more to do with aesthetics - people don't want black radiators on their walls - and the chemicals used.
I share no-one's ideas. I have my own.
(Ivan Turgenev)
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply
  Share Topic   

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down

Forum Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 11.04
Copyright ©2001-2015 Web Wiz Ltd.

This page was generated in 0.063 seconds.