Malibuflyer wrote:
Do you have any (scientific) evidence for that?
my quote was:
Which obviously by that crowd is being predicted to be an extremely bad choice, as the world as we know it is going to end… But as we all know prognosis are difficult, as they concern the future ;)
No I don’t follow that, but that is what we are told is gonna happen if we don’t do what this crowd tells us… Well, many doomsday cults have stated this and have been able to turn their embarrassment into something else…
Malibuflyer wrote:
Again: I’m not at all saying that on balance avoiding climate change is not the better choice – just pointing out that accepting climate change is also not an impossible option and for sure not “the end of the world as we know it”.
Well, yes, we appear to say the same thing. In any case, your conclusion sums it up nicely.
It goes along the old moniker:
Give us grace to accept the things that cannot be changed,
courage to change the things which can be changed,
and the wisdom to distinguish the one from the other.
gallois wrote:
In France each commune or commune grouping decides on rubbish collection.
We have been provide with black wheely bins, yellow wheely bins and a composter.
I really like an admire a system like that.Grown up thinking and allowing an element of self responsibility.
Will not work in the UK…
LeSving wrote:
In the mainstream media here today. Greta is criticized for antidemocratic views and not coming up with solutions of her own Even by other activist by the looks of it.
Took them long enough, didn’t it.
wow. These are quite hefty conditions…
- Basic charge is approx 100 Euros per year
- Our rubbish here gets collected once a week, we have to used taxed bags. Bags cost 1.50 Euros per 35 liter bag.
- Green rubbish gets collected once a week. Price for a 140 l container is somewhere around 200 Euros per year. You can also buy single tickets for about Euro 10 per 140 L.
- All other rubbish can be given back at either the shops you buy them at or at a central dump which is open 3 times a week. That service is free. They collect any sort of electronics/appliances, metal, aluminium (cans), glass, clothes, books, paper, batteries, oil. That service is mostly free, only bulky goods cost per kg.
I suppose that is quite benign in terms of cost.
However, people who try to “save” by putting their rubbish where others have to pay for it are treated very harshly indeed. Fines of up to 1k or more are the rule, not the exception.
Mooney_Driver wrote:-
“… people who try to “save” by putting their rubbish where others have to pay for it are treated very harshly indeed. Fines of up to 1k or more are the rule, not the exception.”
IMO so they should be, I’m happy to see some countries come down harshly on flytippers. Or is 1k harsh enough? After aĺl it can cost farmers and communities on whose land they much more to have ot taken away.
gallois wrote:
IMO so they should be, I’m happy to see some countries come down harshly on flytippers. Or is 1k harsh enough? After aĺl it can cost farmers and communities on whose land they much more to have ot taken away.
Oh, something like this will be much harsher. 1k is if you accidently put a non-taxed bag into a dustbin
Putting something into nature or so would rightly get you prison time or xx k
I have come across this interesting comparison of renewables vs nuclear fission which I had almost forgotten about. I think it had not been posted before. Apologies if otherwise.
Schellenberger is also in the anti-climate-panic gang. Even if we believe the probable causality of CO2 and climate change and panic about it, well, you wont stop Titanic from sinking by plugging the failed valves in the toilet drains with famine-inducing biofuels…you need to weld steel planks on the 500-ft gash: if you want to be effective you need to increase the efficiency of ground transport vehicles (electric or hybrid) and stop all fuel-burning power plants. Fission is the only really effective way with today’s technology: we need to get our bang for our climate-protection buck:
Will not work in the UK…
The problem is that every service has to be paid for…
In the UK, the local governments are supposed to pay for local services, and they raise the money from local taxes or direct charges. The alternative is obviously central taxpayer funding. The reason it was done this way, some decades ago, was to increase accountability of locally elected politicians – a standard idea everywhere.
The problem is that some of the “local expenditure” is what is called “social services”. This is stuff like looking after housing poor people, taking kids away from parents who live on drugs and try to kill each other or kill their kids or starve them to death, and putting these kids into “care”, running council estates where “problem families” are moved to, after they tried to smash up adjacent houses in another council estate (the policy is to congregate these “families” somewhere where there is not much left to smash up), with all this fuelled by alcohol, poverty, stupidity, obesity, vandalism, violence, stupidity, lack of parental involvement and thus no education, stupidity, a general lack of hope, and stupidity. Park your car at one of these estates for a few hours and when you get back it will be stripped, like this one but that is a poor example because it still has the lights intact
And, guess what, “social services” is a bottomless black hole for money. But the local politicians cannot be seen to be neglecting “the most vulnerable members of our society” so this comes first, and everything else is paid out of whatever is left. So we get B-roads (country lanes basically) full of potholes, with legal structures protecting the council from being liable for vehicle damage (I have failed in every damage claim so far; they average £1000) while A-roads (and M-roads of course) are funded centrally so they are generally repaired quickly.
This problem exists everywhere, and everybody complains about it. There is never enough money. Every country in Europe (apart from Brits, few criticise their own country on EuroGA) and every country outside. The only difference is how you wrap it up and label it. Central taxpayer funding is not a bad approach but it leaves local politicians totally unaccountable so they can be even more useless than they generally are anyway. Maybe Scotland is worse than England?
Here, we get waste collection, some of which is locally financed and some, like garden waste, we pay extra for. If one recycles stuff to the max extent possible then collecting domestic landfill waste once a month is ok (it will be extremely smelly but it sits outdoors in plastic wheelie bins). And being in the countryside, I burn bulky stuff like cardboard and wooden garden waste, in an incinerator in the garden, sometimes with some old IO540 engine oil, after sunset obviously 
The waste collection is gradually improving, in the range of what they will accept. They finally now accept plastic bags and such. I think some of mainland Europe is ahead of the UK on this, but that’s because a lot of taxpayer money has been sunk in to set that up.
Fly tipping is a problem here too…
Fission is the only really effective way with today’s technology: we need to get our bang for our climate-protection buck:
Absolutely, but European “green” politics is blocking that.
Very very good video, Antonio!
Peter wrote:
European “green” politics is blocking that
…while the French are laughing at the rest of us behind the scenes at COP26
Not all “Europeans” are blocking them.
Facts will eventually prevail…the issue is how long the “eventually” will take and how many will have fallen on the way there…
Peter wrote:
The problem is that every service has to be paid for…
Like the proverbial grandpa (which I am not yet) I may have told the story before.
A German friend of mine now living in Mallorca told me the story about waste management in his town in Germany. A couple of decades ago there was a lot of social and political debate about how unfair and non-environmental neighbours were producing so much more waste than others. The green and efficient neighbours were effectively paying for the cost to dispose of a lot of dirty waste from others with an equalised waste tax.
Eventually the town implemented a sophisticated waste tracking system to ensure each neighbour paid proportionally to their production of waste. The system had been tendered under public contract and it seemed to work fine. It was definitely fairer on all. All, however, paid more than before due to the increased cost of waste management…goal achieved?
We had a discussion on fusion a while back (started in post 147 above) on Qtot vs Qplasma, which created some different opinions amongst us whether fusion should be pursued at all. I was beginning to doubt we should.
But Sabine apparently sparked a good discussion which brought some other viewpoints providing some hope. Qplasma apparently has a lot of upward potential which would bring a Qtot > 1 into view.
