Saturday:
After the disappointment of the Copenhagen Summit last year, when even President Barry O and Prime Monster Mr Frown could not wrangle a deal from the World Leaders… against pretty much ALL expectations that ANY progress could be made this year… the Climate Change Summit in Cancun has achieved a (moderate) success!
And Liberal Democrat Climate Change Secretary Mr Chris Huhney-Monster was right at the heart of the process.
Mr Huhney-Monster was proved RIGHT in his decision that it was more important to STAY and try and agree a deal than to come home to vote on Tuition Fees, in spite of Hard Labour's decision to deny him a pair for the evening of the vote. That he ending up with a pair ANYWAY was only down to another LIBERAL DEMOCRAT, and no thanks to Labour playing what can only be described as student politics.
Cancun has seen us contribute to REAL PROGRESS on IMPORTANT ISSUES for developed AND developing countries:
We've established a HUNDRED BILLION DOLLAR Green Climate Fund to help developing countries go low carbon and adapt to climate impacts. PLUS we've set up the mechanisms to help developing countries access low carbon technology, and adapt to climate change
We've agreed a deal on chopping down TREES, to slow, halt and reverse destruction of forests and to agree the rules for delivering it and for monitoring progress.
We've agreed a system for MEASURING, REPORTING and VERIFICATION – if that sounds dull just think how actually it's so important that we know how countries are living up to their promises to take action on emissions.
And ,perhaps most important, we've agreed the OBJECTIVE: to stop emissions from increasing and to limit global temperature rises to an overall target of 2 degrees.
On top of all that, Mr Huhney-Monster was personally responsible for negotiating an agreed way to continue the Kyoto Protocols for controlling CO2 emissions (give or take a couple of FUDGES to keep Russia and Japan on side).
This isn't a world-saving deal YET, but it shows the way and it shows that people can work together and WILL work together.
This last week has been dominated by arguments about how to pay for our kids' FUTURES, but with THIS DEAL we've taken BIG STRIDES towards ensuring that they have a future AT ALL.
And it's another LIBERAL DEMOCRAT policy DELIVERED.
.
Showing posts with label Green. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Green. Show all posts
Monday, December 13, 2010
Thursday, October 22, 2009
Day 3215: Electric Dreams
Tuesday:
Pardon my Eighties flashback, but: "I like driving in my car" PLUS "Together in Electric Dreams" EQUALS have the Chinese found a way to Save the World, with a new electric car that can, allegedly, do 250 miles on one charge and up to 100mph?
Shouldn't we be checking this out with some urgency, 'cos if it's TRUE then it will be a BIG HELP towards cutting CO2 emissions*.
Just as importantly, isn't this EXACTLY the sort of thing that WE should be making? New car plants PLUS zero-carbon cars EQUALS hello new economic miracle. And that's VERY Eighties!
(*so long as you remember to use renewable for GENERATING your electric battery juice!)
And here is Treehugger at the launch a year before that!
Look, if we've KNOW about this super-whizzy long-life battery for THAT long, why the FLUFF are we not URGENTLY tooling up to match the technology?!?!?!
.
Pardon my Eighties flashback, but: "I like driving in my car" PLUS "Together in Electric Dreams" EQUALS have the Chinese found a way to Save the World, with a new electric car that can, allegedly, do 250 miles on one charge and up to 100mph?
Shouldn't we be checking this out with some urgency, 'cos if it's TRUE then it will be a BIG HELP towards cutting CO2 emissions*.
Just as importantly, isn't this EXACTLY the sort of thing that WE should be making? New car plants PLUS zero-carbon cars EQUALS hello new economic miracle. And that's VERY Eighties!
(*so long as you remember to use renewable for GENERATING your electric battery juice!)
PS:
Bless the BBC for their up-to-date-i-tude, but here is the Grauniad with the same story six months earlier.And here is Treehugger at the launch a year before that!
Look, if we've KNOW about this super-whizzy long-life battery for THAT long, why the FLUFF are we not URGENTLY tooling up to match the technology?!?!?!
.
Saturday, August 23, 2008
Day 2790: When the Wind Blows
Thursday:
I am DELIGHTED to hear Mr Clogg's latest plans for ENERGY INDEPENDENCE.
He was off to visit a wind farm to see how it can be done and he pledged an Apollo Project for renewable energy: kind of appropriate to mention the Sun God when Solar Power has got to be up there in the mix!
Regular readers will know that it is the sort of thing I blather on about ALL THE TIME. That is because I think that apart from being jolly sensible in itself, it is a good way to sell the benefits of GREEN ENERGY to those people who are sceptical about the environment but can see the ECONOMIC advantage in not getting clobbered by the energy companies. Basically, Conservatories.
Listening to Mr Clogg on the The Today Programme show, I thought that he was very good EXCEPT for the one question that he ducked, which was about cars.
Now, fair enough, he was on there to talk about plans for generating electrical energy from renewable sources, and it really was a case of the interviewer either totally missing the point or DELIBERATELY missing the point, but actually you CAN answer this one as well.
The first and most obvious thing to say is "One step at a time, Sarah. First we want to deal with securing our domestic power generation in a way that is sustainable and independent."
But you can go further than that. When SERIOUS car companies like MERCEDES are saying that they will phase out producing petrol cars by as soon as 2015 then you CAN say: "but the next step is to look at moving to clean fuel for cars, with technology making advances in areas like hydrogen fuel cells and electric vehicles."
Now, I know that using electric power for cars means we will need a lot MORE electricity than just what we use at the moment. But the thing is we have GOT the capacity – great big open spaces called "The North Sea" and "The Atlantic Ocean" – that is perfect for wind power and wave power.
Green IS going to be the technology for the next generation (assuming that civilisation doesn't accidentally end because the oil runs out too soon or because Prince Vlad and the Monkey-in-Chief get into a "Whose Missiles are Bigger" contest!), and the Germans are already forging ahead.
We need to get into the game if we're to have a bright future.
I am DELIGHTED to hear Mr Clogg's latest plans for ENERGY INDEPENDENCE.
He was off to visit a wind farm to see how it can be done and he pledged an Apollo Project for renewable energy: kind of appropriate to mention the Sun God when Solar Power has got to be up there in the mix!
Regular readers will know that it is the sort of thing I blather on about ALL THE TIME. That is because I think that apart from being jolly sensible in itself, it is a good way to sell the benefits of GREEN ENERGY to those people who are sceptical about the environment but can see the ECONOMIC advantage in not getting clobbered by the energy companies. Basically, Conservatories.
Listening to Mr Clogg on the The Today Programme show, I thought that he was very good EXCEPT for the one question that he ducked, which was about cars.
Now, fair enough, he was on there to talk about plans for generating electrical energy from renewable sources, and it really was a case of the interviewer either totally missing the point or DELIBERATELY missing the point, but actually you CAN answer this one as well.
The first and most obvious thing to say is "One step at a time, Sarah. First we want to deal with securing our domestic power generation in a way that is sustainable and independent."
But you can go further than that. When SERIOUS car companies like MERCEDES are saying that they will phase out producing petrol cars by as soon as 2015 then you CAN say: "but the next step is to look at moving to clean fuel for cars, with technology making advances in areas like hydrogen fuel cells and electric vehicles."
Now, I know that using electric power for cars means we will need a lot MORE electricity than just what we use at the moment. But the thing is we have GOT the capacity – great big open spaces called "The North Sea" and "The Atlantic Ocean" – that is perfect for wind power and wave power.
Green IS going to be the technology for the next generation (assuming that civilisation doesn't accidentally end because the oil runs out too soon or because Prince Vlad and the Monkey-in-Chief get into a "Whose Missiles are Bigger" contest!), and the Germans are already forging ahead.
We need to get into the game if we're to have a bright future.
Saturday, April 26, 2008
Day 2672: Green Shoots herself in the Carbon Footprint
Friday:
Speaking to theLondonPaper yesterday for their first of their Mayoral Interviews, Green Candidate Ms Sian Very-Berry said that to get to work “four of us went in a taxi which is as energy efficient as a two-thirds empty bus”
That would be the bus that was going to run ANYWAY.
So Ms Very-Berry’s “efficient taxi” was an EXTRA carbon cost ON TOP OF the bus, not INSTEAD of it.
Vote Green, Get SMOG! you might say.
To make the bus MORE efficient you want more people to USE it, not make silly excuses for snobbishly choosing a taxi instead.
If the bus has to wait until it’s full, like Ms Very-Berry seems to want, then it will be VERY late, and UNRELIABLE and FEWER people will want to use it.
Congratulations then to Mr Neal Wilson with the “Letter of the Day” in today’s theLondonPaper pointing this out for our obviously very short-sighted Ms Very-Berry.
Sadly, she may be green but, it appears, she’s no friend of the Earth.
Speaking to theLondonPaper yesterday for their first of their Mayoral Interviews, Green Candidate Ms Sian Very-Berry said that to get to work “four of us went in a taxi which is as energy efficient as a two-thirds empty bus”
That would be the bus that was going to run ANYWAY.
So Ms Very-Berry’s “efficient taxi” was an EXTRA carbon cost ON TOP OF the bus, not INSTEAD of it.
Vote Green, Get SMOG! you might say.
To make the bus MORE efficient you want more people to USE it, not make silly excuses for snobbishly choosing a taxi instead.
If the bus has to wait until it’s full, like Ms Very-Berry seems to want, then it will be VERY late, and UNRELIABLE and FEWER people will want to use it.
Congratulations then to Mr Neal Wilson with the “Letter of the Day” in today’s theLondonPaper pointing this out for our obviously very short-sighted Ms Very-Berry.
Sadly, she may be green but, it appears, she’s no friend of the Earth.
Friday, April 25, 2008
Day 2662: Biofuel Bad
Tuesday:
(All that typing about Master Gideon left my nose VERY tired last week, so there are GAPS in my diary again that I've got to fill in.)
A new law came in saying that all petrol for cars must now include something called BIOFUELS.
What this means is… you know how OIL and COAL got made by lots and lots of plants getting buried under the Earth and millions and millions of years of SQUISHING going on to squeeze them into OIL? Well, the idea is to cut out the GEOLOGICAL middle-man and make oil straight from the plants.
On the face of it, that might seem like quite a good idea. Instead of unlocking carbon deposits from under the Earth, we would be locking up the CO2 first before releasing it, the very definition of carbon neutral.
Except, of course, processes like that are RARELY 100% efficient, so you wouldn't be REALLY completely neutral.
Farmers in Europe, America and even Brazil, for years cursed with GRAIN MOUNTAINS, WINE LAKES and BUTTER ESCARPMENTS have seen the development of bio-ethanol as a great BOON, because it is a way for them to greatly increase the economic value of their land: rather than being subsidised to not use it, they can get a good price for a fuel crop and by reducing the amount of cereal on the market, get a better price for that too. It sounds like a WIN-WIN scenario until you remember that that better price for the farmer means that it has cost SOMEONE more to eat.
And if you think about it you don't have MILLIONS of years' worth of plants storing up sunlight energy in their carbohydratey goodness, you only have THIS year's crop.
But this year's crop is ALREADY looking a bit too THIN to feed all of the animals and people and animals-that-will-go-to-feed-people without taking out a great area of land to grow car food.
Even if it wasn't for current crises in farming like drought and poor harvests, the simple fact is that there are just too many people.
Leaders in Latin America have issued a warning that using growing land for fuel crops instead of food is harming some of the poorest people in the world and there have even been RIOTS in Haiti.
Anyway, you probably already know that my PREFERRED alternative is to use untapped sources of RENEWABLE ENERGY (like windmills) to turn water into easily-portable* Hydrogen (plus spare Oxygen in the air) to use in fuel cells that turn the Hydrogen (with Oxygen from the air) back into water and energy.
(*No, don't think Hindenburg; liquid Hydrogen is no more dangerous than Petrol… which means QUITE dangerous but within acceptable and controllable limits.)
(All that typing about Master Gideon left my nose VERY tired last week, so there are GAPS in my diary again that I've got to fill in.)
A new law came in saying that all petrol for cars must now include something called BIOFUELS.
What this means is… you know how OIL and COAL got made by lots and lots of plants getting buried under the Earth and millions and millions of years of SQUISHING going on to squeeze them into OIL? Well, the idea is to cut out the GEOLOGICAL middle-man and make oil straight from the plants.
On the face of it, that might seem like quite a good idea. Instead of unlocking carbon deposits from under the Earth, we would be locking up the CO2 first before releasing it, the very definition of carbon neutral.
Except, of course, processes like that are RARELY 100% efficient, so you wouldn't be REALLY completely neutral.
Farmers in Europe, America and even Brazil, for years cursed with GRAIN MOUNTAINS, WINE LAKES and BUTTER ESCARPMENTS have seen the development of bio-ethanol as a great BOON, because it is a way for them to greatly increase the economic value of their land: rather than being subsidised to not use it, they can get a good price for a fuel crop and by reducing the amount of cereal on the market, get a better price for that too. It sounds like a WIN-WIN scenario until you remember that that better price for the farmer means that it has cost SOMEONE more to eat.
And if you think about it you don't have MILLIONS of years' worth of plants storing up sunlight energy in their carbohydratey goodness, you only have THIS year's crop.
But this year's crop is ALREADY looking a bit too THIN to feed all of the animals and people and animals-that-will-go-to-feed-people without taking out a great area of land to grow car food.
Even if it wasn't for current crises in farming like drought and poor harvests, the simple fact is that there are just too many people.
Leaders in Latin America have issued a warning that using growing land for fuel crops instead of food is harming some of the poorest people in the world and there have even been RIOTS in Haiti.
Anyway, you probably already know that my PREFERRED alternative is to use untapped sources of RENEWABLE ENERGY (like windmills) to turn water into easily-portable* Hydrogen (plus spare Oxygen in the air) to use in fuel cells that turn the Hydrogen (with Oxygen from the air) back into water and energy.
(*No, don't think Hindenburg; liquid Hydrogen is no more dangerous than Petrol… which means QUITE dangerous but within acceptable and controllable limits.)
Friday, February 08, 2008
Day 2587: Good Eiggs; Rotten Egg
Friday:
I am VERY impressed with the news from the good little Isle of Eigg that not only are they now fully supplied with electrical energy for the first time and ALL of it comes from their very own renewable sources!
I am considerably NOT impressed though by the Internet bank Egg who have apparently taken the UNILATERAL decision to cancel the credit cards of one-hundred and sixty-one thousand people; that is more than one in fifteen of their customers.
The Eigg scheme is a combination of windmill and hydro-electric and solar power providing more than 95% of their needs, with battery storage (and emergency diesel generators) to cover any gaps. This has been in the planning for TEN years, ever since the islanders gained their independence from the absentee landlord that used to own their little island. With help from Europe and the Lottery added to their own contributions they have seen their dream become a reality.
Good for them! We should take careful note and see how successful this is – it could be the blueprint for a much larger, nationwide energy self-sufficiency plan!
Such LONG-TERM planning is, of course, not to be found in the world of BANKERS. They are too busy playing with their small change.
The Egg bank was recently bought out by the gigantic Citibank Group and they have made a "review" of their new acquisition and decided to SQUEEZE the customers for more money.
They claim that they are cancelling all those credit cards because these people's "credit risk" has worsened – meaning that they are more in debt – which would be bad enough, since they are not going to give people the opportunity to put their credit risk right. But there is the SUSPICION that actually, Egg are REALLY getting rid of the GOOD customers, the ones who pay off their bills every month… i.e. the ones who do not give Egg whopping great interest payments every month.
This, of course, is because it is EGG'S credit risk that has worsened, what with the Credit Crunch making banks realise that the REALLY risky customers are… other banks.
I am VERY impressed with the news from the good little Isle of Eigg that not only are they now fully supplied with electrical energy for the first time and ALL of it comes from their very own renewable sources!
I am considerably NOT impressed though by the Internet bank Egg who have apparently taken the UNILATERAL decision to cancel the credit cards of one-hundred and sixty-one thousand people; that is more than one in fifteen of their customers.
The Eigg scheme is a combination of windmill and hydro-electric and solar power providing more than 95% of their needs, with battery storage (and emergency diesel generators) to cover any gaps. This has been in the planning for TEN years, ever since the islanders gained their independence from the absentee landlord that used to own their little island. With help from Europe and the Lottery added to their own contributions they have seen their dream become a reality.
Good for them! We should take careful note and see how successful this is – it could be the blueprint for a much larger, nationwide energy self-sufficiency plan!
Such LONG-TERM planning is, of course, not to be found in the world of BANKERS. They are too busy playing with their small change.
The Egg bank was recently bought out by the gigantic Citibank Group and they have made a "review" of their new acquisition and decided to SQUEEZE the customers for more money.
They claim that they are cancelling all those credit cards because these people's "credit risk" has worsened – meaning that they are more in debt – which would be bad enough, since they are not going to give people the opportunity to put their credit risk right. But there is the SUSPICION that actually, Egg are REALLY getting rid of the GOOD customers, the ones who pay off their bills every month… i.e. the ones who do not give Egg whopping great interest payments every month.
This, of course, is because it is EGG'S credit risk that has worsened, what with the Credit Crunch making banks realise that the REALLY risky customers are… other banks.
Saturday, January 12, 2008
Day 2565: Nuke Labour New Danger
Thursday:
The bright hope of the sixties that turned into a frightening nightmare relic of enormous expenses overruns and imminent danger of meltdown: it can only mean… fuchsia-finished old fraud, Mr Peter Vain!
Oh no, sorry it's the return of Nuclear Power.
What MOST turns me off the Nuclear Industry – yes, even MORE than the thought of becoming a GLOW-IN-THE-DARK toy! – is the way that their ADVOCATES cannot seem to control their TELLING of FIBS.
A typical one is the "you cannot rely on renewables – the wind doesn’t blow all the time" meme that they trot out.
It seems so SELF-EVIDENT, doesn't it? Sometimes the wind is blowing and sometimes it is not. And yet, it would really be ASTONISHINGLY UNLIKELY if the wind stopped EVERYWHERE at once. It is a case of making sure that you have windmill farms in SEVERAL places so that there are always some catching the breeze.
Though of course, there are parts of the country where the wind RARELY falls, particularly out at sea – funnily enough this is how SAILING SHIPS work and we seem to have found THOSE fairly reliable over the centuries.
Even MORE outrageous was the suggestion one of their mealy mouthed apologists offered on News 24: "oh well, Tidal Barrage only works twice a day".
Er, NO. It works as the tide goes in and then goes into reverse and works AGAIN as the tide goes out. ALL the way in and ALL the way out. And then all the way in and all the way out AGAIN (twice a day, you see).
A little learning is a DANGEROUS THING, said the Sainted Oscar, and you can see why: you think you know a LITTLE about something and then RADIOACTIVE MAN and chums come along and FOOL YOU!
They want you to believe that Nuclear has a TRACK RECORD – well yes, it has a track record of promising "energy too cheap to meter" and then delivering tons of deadly toxic waste that lasts forever and oops sorry no more cash, the government will have to clean it up. How can we POSSIBLY believe promises that the private sector will properly dispose of waste that will literally last longer than humans have been on this Earth?
And while we're at it, just what IS the annual carbon footprint of safely storing this crud? Because multiply THAT by a million years and factor it into your calculations before claiming that Nuclear Power is GREEN.
Meanwhile, the government is threatening to take away MP's right to vote on their own pay.
Typical NuLabour thinking: oh, some people do not like this thing; it must be up to US to order it changed!
It seems Ms Harriet Harpy does not believe that MPs can be TRUSTED with the responsibility.
Well, maybe they CAN and maybe they CAN'T but it is the VOTERS who get to decide on their MPs performances. The MPs are there to keep charge of the government, NOT the other way around, no matter what bossy Ms Harpy might think – and yes, they are NOT very good at it, are they. But just imagine how much worse they will be if their salary depends on being compliant with her.
Well, maybe they CAN and maybe they CAN'T but it is the VOTERS who get to decide on their MPs performances. The MPs are there to keep charge of the government, NOT the other way around, no matter what bossy Ms Harpy might think – and yes, they are NOT very good at it, are they. But just imagine how much worse they will be if their salary depends on being compliant with her.
The bright hope of the sixties that turned into a frightening nightmare relic of enormous expenses overruns and imminent danger of meltdown: it can only mean… fuchsia-finished old fraud, Mr Peter Vain!
Oh no, sorry it's the return of Nuclear Power.
What MOST turns me off the Nuclear Industry – yes, even MORE than the thought of becoming a GLOW-IN-THE-DARK toy! – is the way that their ADVOCATES cannot seem to control their TELLING of FIBS.
A typical one is the "you cannot rely on renewables – the wind doesn’t blow all the time" meme that they trot out.
It seems so SELF-EVIDENT, doesn't it? Sometimes the wind is blowing and sometimes it is not. And yet, it would really be ASTONISHINGLY UNLIKELY if the wind stopped EVERYWHERE at once. It is a case of making sure that you have windmill farms in SEVERAL places so that there are always some catching the breeze.
Though of course, there are parts of the country where the wind RARELY falls, particularly out at sea – funnily enough this is how SAILING SHIPS work and we seem to have found THOSE fairly reliable over the centuries.
Even MORE outrageous was the suggestion one of their mealy mouthed apologists offered on News 24: "oh well, Tidal Barrage only works twice a day".
Er, NO. It works as the tide goes in and then goes into reverse and works AGAIN as the tide goes out. ALL the way in and ALL the way out. And then all the way in and all the way out AGAIN (twice a day, you see).
A little learning is a DANGEROUS THING, said the Sainted Oscar, and you can see why: you think you know a LITTLE about something and then RADIOACTIVE MAN and chums come along and FOOL YOU!
They want you to believe that Nuclear has a TRACK RECORD – well yes, it has a track record of promising "energy too cheap to meter" and then delivering tons of deadly toxic waste that lasts forever and oops sorry no more cash, the government will have to clean it up. How can we POSSIBLY believe promises that the private sector will properly dispose of waste that will literally last longer than humans have been on this Earth?
And while we're at it, just what IS the annual carbon footprint of safely storing this crud? Because multiply THAT by a million years and factor it into your calculations before claiming that Nuclear Power is GREEN.
Meanwhile, the government is threatening to take away MP's right to vote on their own pay.
Typical NuLabour thinking: oh, some people do not like this thing; it must be up to US to order it changed!
It seems Ms Harriet Harpy does not believe that MPs can be TRUSTED with the responsibility.
Well, maybe they CAN and maybe they CAN'T but it is the VOTERS who get to decide on their MPs performances. The MPs are there to keep charge of the government, NOT the other way around, no matter what bossy Ms Harpy might think – and yes, they are NOT very good at it, are they. But just imagine how much worse they will be if their salary depends on being compliant with her.
Well, maybe they CAN and maybe they CAN'T but it is the VOTERS who get to decide on their MPs performances. The MPs are there to keep charge of the government, NOT the other way around, no matter what bossy Ms Harpy might think – and yes, they are NOT very good at it, are they. But just imagine how much worse they will be if their salary depends on being compliant with her.
Friday, January 04, 2008
Day 2558: Old King Coal
Wednesday:
Conservatory controlled Medway Council in Kent have voted in favour of a new COAL POWERED electricity station.
Coal is BAD because it produces the GREENHOUSE GAS Carbon Dioxide when burned. But things are a little more complicated than just "Coal: Bad".
The electric company, E.On, are promising that they will be REPLACING an existing coal station with a new, more efficient, less polluting one. Which sounds good, doesn't it? And, they say, they will be using the very latest in "Carbon Capture technology" further to reduce the climate change impact. So that is nice, isn't it?
Or is it?
Simply comparing the – hypothetical – better carbon emissions from the new plant to the old one sounds good, but it is not really the very best way of planning. For starters, you should do a PROPER calculation of the Carbon Footprint that involves adding in all the Carbon Dioxide that will be released by the process of BUILDING the new power station (and presumably demolishing the old one), add up the emissions over the plant's expected working life and then see if they are any better than keeping as you are.
But, more importantly, you should ask yourself: what are the ALTERNATIVES? The new coal plant MAY WELL be better than the old one, but is it cleaner than a nice WINDMILL FARM?
And how much do the promised "better emissions" rely upon as yet unproven carbon capture and storage processes?
I would also like to know where this proposed coal is to come from. Believe it or not, despite having billions of tonnes of coal reserves underneath our island, Great Britain nowadays IMPORTS the vast majority of the coal that we use for generating power. This, it seems to me, adds a whole load of extra carbon footprints to the TRAIL of GUILT! What is more, the coal that we import is often more SULPHUROUS than the stuff we dig up at home, meaning that it is worse for making ACID RAIN and other non-greenhouse pollution.
Of course, there are PRACTICALITIES involved here. A coal-fired station may well be QUICKER to build and CLOSER to where it is needed (though not THAT much closer than the Thames Array in the estuary that the Kingsnorth station will overlook). The company has an obligation to maintain the supply of electricity and at a reasonable cost. At the moment the financial incentive is on CHEAPER power, with the environment as at best a concern for the PR office. That is why there should be a proper CARBON TAX to rebalance the decision in favour of the most environmentally friendly option.
Anyway, "greening up" our fossil fuel based power generation can only be, at best, a STOP GAP solution while we get on a build a Hydrogen Economy. Even if it wasn't halfway to roasting the planet, coal – like gas and oil – is a FINITE resource that will run out. Sticking the CO2 back at the bottom of the sea is NOT going to magically replenish the oil reserves! The possibility of mopping up the CO2 by artificially triggering ALGAL BLOOMS (like the one that took place in the Silurian Period!) may do more HARM than good! It may even be "blooming stupid".
We need to think about LONG TERM SUSTAINABILITY as well as SHORT TERM PROFITS.
This would be Britain's first new coal powered station in thirty years. I think that this needs a LOT more thought.
Conservatory controlled Medway Council in Kent have voted in favour of a new COAL POWERED electricity station.
Coal is BAD because it produces the GREENHOUSE GAS Carbon Dioxide when burned. But things are a little more complicated than just "Coal: Bad".
The electric company, E.On, are promising that they will be REPLACING an existing coal station with a new, more efficient, less polluting one. Which sounds good, doesn't it? And, they say, they will be using the very latest in "Carbon Capture technology" further to reduce the climate change impact. So that is nice, isn't it?
Or is it?
Simply comparing the – hypothetical – better carbon emissions from the new plant to the old one sounds good, but it is not really the very best way of planning. For starters, you should do a PROPER calculation of the Carbon Footprint that involves adding in all the Carbon Dioxide that will be released by the process of BUILDING the new power station (and presumably demolishing the old one), add up the emissions over the plant's expected working life and then see if they are any better than keeping as you are.
But, more importantly, you should ask yourself: what are the ALTERNATIVES? The new coal plant MAY WELL be better than the old one, but is it cleaner than a nice WINDMILL FARM?
And how much do the promised "better emissions" rely upon as yet unproven carbon capture and storage processes?
I would also like to know where this proposed coal is to come from. Believe it or not, despite having billions of tonnes of coal reserves underneath our island, Great Britain nowadays IMPORTS the vast majority of the coal that we use for generating power. This, it seems to me, adds a whole load of extra carbon footprints to the TRAIL of GUILT! What is more, the coal that we import is often more SULPHUROUS than the stuff we dig up at home, meaning that it is worse for making ACID RAIN and other non-greenhouse pollution.
Of course, there are PRACTICALITIES involved here. A coal-fired station may well be QUICKER to build and CLOSER to where it is needed (though not THAT much closer than the Thames Array in the estuary that the Kingsnorth station will overlook). The company has an obligation to maintain the supply of electricity and at a reasonable cost. At the moment the financial incentive is on CHEAPER power, with the environment as at best a concern for the PR office. That is why there should be a proper CARBON TAX to rebalance the decision in favour of the most environmentally friendly option.
Anyway, "greening up" our fossil fuel based power generation can only be, at best, a STOP GAP solution while we get on a build a Hydrogen Economy. Even if it wasn't halfway to roasting the planet, coal – like gas and oil – is a FINITE resource that will run out. Sticking the CO2 back at the bottom of the sea is NOT going to magically replenish the oil reserves! The possibility of mopping up the CO2 by artificially triggering ALGAL BLOOMS (like the one that took place in the Silurian Period!) may do more HARM than good! It may even be "blooming stupid".
We need to think about LONG TERM SUSTAINABILITY as well as SHORT TERM PROFITS.
This would be Britain's first new coal powered station in thirty years. I think that this needs a LOT more thought.
Saturday, December 15, 2007
Day 2534: Coast
Sunday:
Excellent News! The Government has agreed to the building of thousands of new windmill farms to really make use of the offshore winds.
People say: "but this will change our coast FOREVER!"
Yes, true – but the alternative is to allow GLOBAL WARMING to melt the icecaps, raise the sea level by twenty metres and change the coast forever ANYWAY!
Excellent News! The Government has agreed to the building of thousands of new windmill farms to really make use of the offshore winds.
People say: "but this will change our coast FOREVER!"
Yes, true – but the alternative is to allow GLOBAL WARMING to melt the icecaps, raise the sea level by twenty metres and change the coast forever ANYWAY!
Thursday, November 22, 2007
Day 2516: Conservatory and Labour Show their True Colours… They have Red Faces Not Green Credentials
Wednesday:
Hilarity at the end of Prime Monster's Questionable Time as Conservatory Mr David Half-cocked Amoral demands a stop to windmills… like the one on Mr Balloon's roof.
But the SERIOUS damage is to be done by the Secretary of State for Ruining Everyone's Environment, Mr Ruth Kelly, who is going to give the go-ahead to a THIRD runway and a SIXTH terminal at Britain's Busiest Noise Polluter: Heathrow Airport.
"These plans could see the number of flights from Heathrow rise to 800,000 per year, making a mockery of any attempts to tackle climate change," said Ms Susan Kramer-vs-Kramer, Liberal Democrat Transport Spokesperson.
The Labour and Conservatories both back these proposals – involving the BULLDOZING of two local villages – leaving only the Liberal Democrats to stick up for local people and future generations.
The argument for ever-increasing air travel into Heathrow is surely very weak.
From a climate change point of view we NEED to be looking at keeping increases in air travel to a minimum. And there are two PERFECTLY LOGICAL alternatives available to us, neither of which need to impose more on a Heathrow already stretched to capacity.
Firstly, we need to look at reducing the number of INTERNAL air flights, and the answer to that is surely to make our RAILWAYS work properly. High speed rail links from the capital to the regions would be the environmentally friendly alternative, and would ease the overcrowding on those Heathrow runways.
Liberal Democrats already have plans to Get Britain Back on Track
and THAT is where we should be spending money, not on making things worse in West London.
Secondly, if more air-travel really IS necessary, we should be looking at using the available capacity in regional airports, like Manchester or Bristol or Glasgow. Instead of having EVERYTHING fly into Heathrow – in order to be packed onto lorries and driven round the motorways causing more congestion and pollution – and instead of having EVERYONE fly off out of Heathrow – packing themselves and their kids into cars to try and drive there on motorways already congested with lorries. We should be looking at SMARTER thinking about routes in and out of the country.
And we all know that one of the big PROBLEMS of the British economy is the INEQUALITY caused by most of the businesses and work being drawn to London while the regions are left behind. Expanding Heathrow at the expense of everywhere else is only going to EXACERBATE that!
Mr Kelly's promises that the development must meet strict NOISE POLLUTION tests do not carry much weight either when the Government is apparently trying to SIDELINE its own report into the PROBLEM of Airport Noise. What is the use of the Government insisting that airports do not exceed the limit of 57 decibels when their own experts are saying that noise becomes intrusive at an average of just 50 decibels?
We cannot just carry on agreeing to the endless expansion of Heathrow's concrete. We need a BETTER ANSWER!
Hilarity at the end of Prime Monster's Questionable Time as Conservatory Mr David Half-cocked Amoral demands a stop to windmills… like the one on Mr Balloon's roof.
But the SERIOUS damage is to be done by the Secretary of State for Ruining Everyone's Environment, Mr Ruth Kelly, who is going to give the go-ahead to a THIRD runway and a SIXTH terminal at Britain's Busiest Noise Polluter: Heathrow Airport.
"These plans could see the number of flights from Heathrow rise to 800,000 per year, making a mockery of any attempts to tackle climate change," said Ms Susan Kramer-vs-Kramer, Liberal Democrat Transport Spokesperson.
The Labour and Conservatories both back these proposals – involving the BULLDOZING of two local villages – leaving only the Liberal Democrats to stick up for local people and future generations.
The argument for ever-increasing air travel into Heathrow is surely very weak.
From a climate change point of view we NEED to be looking at keeping increases in air travel to a minimum. And there are two PERFECTLY LOGICAL alternatives available to us, neither of which need to impose more on a Heathrow already stretched to capacity.
Firstly, we need to look at reducing the number of INTERNAL air flights, and the answer to that is surely to make our RAILWAYS work properly. High speed rail links from the capital to the regions would be the environmentally friendly alternative, and would ease the overcrowding on those Heathrow runways.
Liberal Democrats already have plans to Get Britain Back on Track
and THAT is where we should be spending money, not on making things worse in West London.
Secondly, if more air-travel really IS necessary, we should be looking at using the available capacity in regional airports, like Manchester or Bristol or Glasgow. Instead of having EVERYTHING fly into Heathrow – in order to be packed onto lorries and driven round the motorways causing more congestion and pollution – and instead of having EVERYONE fly off out of Heathrow – packing themselves and their kids into cars to try and drive there on motorways already congested with lorries. We should be looking at SMARTER thinking about routes in and out of the country.
And we all know that one of the big PROBLEMS of the British economy is the INEQUALITY caused by most of the businesses and work being drawn to London while the regions are left behind. Expanding Heathrow at the expense of everywhere else is only going to EXACERBATE that!
Mr Kelly's promises that the development must meet strict NOISE POLLUTION tests do not carry much weight either when the Government is apparently trying to SIDELINE its own report into the PROBLEM of Airport Noise. What is the use of the Government insisting that airports do not exceed the limit of 57 decibels when their own experts are saying that noise becomes intrusive at an average of just 50 decibels?
We cannot just carry on agreeing to the endless expansion of Heathrow's concrete. We need a BETTER ANSWER!
Thursday, October 18, 2007
Day 2476: President Al and the Peace Prize
Friday:
So it turns out that Mr Al Bore has won the Nobel Peace Prize for his film "An Inconvenient Truth". Which is nice. I am sure it will make a useful matching bookend to his Oscar.
(Factoid courtesy of Mr Jon Snomail of the Channel Four News: the only OTHER person to win both was Mr George Bernard Shaw, who won the Nobel Prize for Literature and the Oscar Prize for the screenplay of the film Pygmalion. Coo!)
The "Inconvenient Truth" is that I have not seen the DVD yet, so I cannot comment on the alleged nine factual errors.
But at least it but CAN be shown to children.
Obviously this latest bout of post-political success has triggered a CAVALCADE of calls for Mr Bore to enter the 2008 Presidential Race as the only man capable of beating the Hillary-Billary Bandwagon [R: Republicans, surely?]
For the good of everyone, Mr Bore has now said "No, thank you."
Obviously this is because he sees his future as doing more good though his Climate Change Campaign than in another Presidential Bid, and has noting at all to do with the fact that even Mr Bore can see that jetting around the world meeting POP STARS is a whole lot more fun than the BURIAL IN GUANO that the Monkey-in-Chief made of the Presidency.
And DEFINITELY nothing to do with not wanting to tick off his old boss! [R: surely his old boss's WIFE?]
I know what I'm saying!
I am remembering the recent interview with President Billary-Hillary when he said he wouldn't mind accepting a job in Hillary-Billary's White House.
"But what would happen if you wanted to do one thing and she wanted to do another?"
"Well, haha haha, exactly the same as LAST time she was President, haha haha!"
So it turns out that Mr Al Bore has won the Nobel Peace Prize for his film "An Inconvenient Truth". Which is nice. I am sure it will make a useful matching bookend to his Oscar.
(Factoid courtesy of Mr Jon Snomail of the Channel Four News: the only OTHER person to win both was Mr George Bernard Shaw, who won the Nobel Prize for Literature and the Oscar Prize for the screenplay of the film Pygmalion. Coo!)
The "Inconvenient Truth" is that I have not seen the DVD yet, so I cannot comment on the alleged nine factual errors.
But at least it but CAN be shown to children.
Obviously this latest bout of post-political success has triggered a CAVALCADE of calls for Mr Bore to enter the 2008 Presidential Race as the only man capable of beating the Hillary-Billary Bandwagon [R: Republicans, surely?]
For the good of everyone, Mr Bore has now said "No, thank you."
Obviously this is because he sees his future as doing more good though his Climate Change Campaign than in another Presidential Bid, and has noting at all to do with the fact that even Mr Bore can see that jetting around the world meeting POP STARS is a whole lot more fun than the BURIAL IN GUANO that the Monkey-in-Chief made of the Presidency.
And DEFINITELY nothing to do with not wanting to tick off his old boss! [R: surely his old boss's WIFE?]
I know what I'm saying!
I am remembering the recent interview with President Billary-Hillary when he said he wouldn't mind accepting a job in Hillary-Billary's White House.
"But what would happen if you wanted to do one thing and she wanted to do another?"
"Well, haha haha, exactly the same as LAST time she was President, haha haha!"
Friday, October 12, 2007
Day 2473: My Next Car
Wednesday:
Now, I KNOW that I am TOO LITTLE to have my own car JUST YET, but this prototype looks VERY COOL! And – more importantly – because it uses HYDROGEN FUEL it has ZERO Carbon Dioxide emissions from driving.
Its makers, General Motors (who actually own Vauxhall so they sort of made Daddy's tank Penfold, too), have created a "Project Driveway" to give over a hundred drivers Fuel Cell cars like this for a year.
HINT HINT!
Maybe Daddy could try one out for me!
HINT HINT!
Failing that, and since it IS a prototype, maybe by the time that the production model is ready I will be all grown up!
Meanwhile, I hear that Honda are developing a Home Refuelling Station – initially for use with their natural gas hybrid Civic, but eventually for Hydrogen Fuel too. Basically it is a box the size of the TARDIS that you plug in and it separates water into hydrogen and oxygen, essentially the reverse of the process by which the Fuel Cell turns hydrogen into water and electric power for the car.
Now, I know what you are thinking – that's going to need a lot MORE electricity, and that electricity is going to come from somewhere that probably ISN'T carbon neutral. You are RIGHT!
But let us not get too up in arms about this. Remember first that this is a MEANS to an END, not the final end itself, and if we are aiming to convince people to switch over to a Hydrogen-powered emissions-free car, then this is something that will make it EASIER while we wait for somebody to please start installing Hydrogen Petrol stations everywhere.
Of course, in the end it will probably be more efficient to electrolyse water into hydrogen and oxygen AT the green power station – so you do not lose power transmitting it through cables. (Though you also have to transport the hydrogen safely too – so there is a balance to be found.)
Also, more and more of our electricity WILL be being generated from RENEWABLE sources. For example, plans are going ahead this year for two of the largest wind farms in the world.
After a public inquiry, the government have given permission for (specifically the substation that will connect to) a huge wind farm in the Thames Estuary between Essex and Kent called the London Array. Three-hundred and forty-one majestic windmills will generate power for three-quarters of a million homes and potentially save one-and-a-half million tons of CO2 emissions.
And an even (slightly) larger farm of three-hundred and fifty windmills called the Atlantic Array is planned for the North Devon coast.
Each of these huge projects is capable of generating a whole 1% of the UK's electricity.
Yes, I know (again) – a whopping 2%; we have a LOOOOOOOOOOOONG way to go. But it is a beginning.
As the old Chinese Proverb goes – the journey of a thousand miles begins with a single step… into your shiny new Hydrogen Fuel car!
Now, I KNOW that I am TOO LITTLE to have my own car JUST YET, but this prototype looks VERY COOL! And – more importantly – because it uses HYDROGEN FUEL it has ZERO Carbon Dioxide emissions from driving.
Its makers, General Motors (who actually own Vauxhall so they sort of made Daddy's tank Penfold, too), have created a "Project Driveway" to give over a hundred drivers Fuel Cell cars like this for a year.
HINT HINT!
Maybe Daddy could try one out for me!
HINT HINT!
Failing that, and since it IS a prototype, maybe by the time that the production model is ready I will be all grown up!
Meanwhile, I hear that Honda are developing a Home Refuelling Station – initially for use with their natural gas hybrid Civic, but eventually for Hydrogen Fuel too. Basically it is a box the size of the TARDIS that you plug in and it separates water into hydrogen and oxygen, essentially the reverse of the process by which the Fuel Cell turns hydrogen into water and electric power for the car.
Now, I know what you are thinking – that's going to need a lot MORE electricity, and that electricity is going to come from somewhere that probably ISN'T carbon neutral. You are RIGHT!
But let us not get too up in arms about this. Remember first that this is a MEANS to an END, not the final end itself, and if we are aiming to convince people to switch over to a Hydrogen-powered emissions-free car, then this is something that will make it EASIER while we wait for somebody to please start installing Hydrogen Petrol stations everywhere.
Of course, in the end it will probably be more efficient to electrolyse water into hydrogen and oxygen AT the green power station – so you do not lose power transmitting it through cables. (Though you also have to transport the hydrogen safely too – so there is a balance to be found.)
Also, more and more of our electricity WILL be being generated from RENEWABLE sources. For example, plans are going ahead this year for two of the largest wind farms in the world.
After a public inquiry, the government have given permission for (specifically the substation that will connect to) a huge wind farm in the Thames Estuary between Essex and Kent called the London Array. Three-hundred and forty-one majestic windmills will generate power for three-quarters of a million homes and potentially save one-and-a-half million tons of CO2 emissions.
And an even (slightly) larger farm of three-hundred and fifty windmills called the Atlantic Array is planned for the North Devon coast.
Each of these huge projects is capable of generating a whole 1% of the UK's electricity.
Yes, I know (again) – a whopping 2%; we have a LOOOOOOOOOOOONG way to go. But it is a beginning.
As the old Chinese Proverb goes – the journey of a thousand miles begins with a single step… into your shiny new Hydrogen Fuel car!
Thursday, August 23, 2007
Day 2422: Joe and the Cat Monsters
Sunday:
Daddies' lunch guest on Sunday had to leave early because he was going back to feed Joe's pet cats. Joe could not feed his own cats because he was busy super-gluing himself to the front door of the Shouty Sheep People BAA.
The Camp for Climate Protest has gone off without too much of a fuss, Sunday's climax being a day of COLOURFUL PROTEST, in spite of the HYSTERICAL whinging from certain quarters that a collection of students, hippies, grannies and local residents might somehow bring about the END OF MODERN CIVILISATION. As though shutting down an airport is THAT important to civilisation. As though the Shouty Sheep People don't manage to shut THEIR OWN airports down with baggage handlers' strikes often enough.
There were SOME minor scuffles mostly involving policepeople on horses or in armour trying to batter their way into the camp, clearly intent on zealously pursuing someone for illegal flower picking or perhaps copyright infringement of one of Ms Joan Byes protest songs.
Police said "a number" (later described as "eight") of the protestors had been arrested. Using the words "a number" makes it seem much more THREATENING though – like it was worth them being there in force, outnumbering the actual protesters three-to-two.
Sombre announcements from the BBC that the protesters had "split into a number of disparate groups" (like they were slipping into their NINJA PYJAMAS ready to attack from all sides) ever so slightly overlooked the fact that they STARTED OUT as "a number of disparate groups".
Their OH-SO-CUNNING plan appeared to be to stage a SIT-IN (and other non-violent direct action) starting on SUNDAY, thus catching the policepeople and the Shouty Sheep People on the HOP. Oooh, better hope AL-FLIPPIN'-QAEDA don't get that idea.
One policeperson (name and address supplied) wrote in to the Metro to EXPLAIN the apparent OVER-THE-TOP behaviour of his or her colleagues. "What if," said the police person, "a TERRORIST had infiltrated the Peace Camp and got into a HIGHLY SENSITIVE AREA (i.e. the airport)…" (I'm not making this bit up!) "…then you'd be sorry!"
Well, I AM sorry, but I think that terrorists tend NOT to try and join up with a group of people who are not only highly colourful and very visible but are also surrounded by hundreds of police. Quite apart from avoiding bunches of people all with different politics and beliefs and agenda because they tend to STICK OUT like SORE THUMBS in that sort of environment.
Terrorists tend to prefer to keep a LOW PROFILE. In fact they would be better off sneaking into the airport another way while all the police people are looking at the Climate Camp going "ooh, look at them stinkin' 'ippies!"
Either that or to infiltrate a rigidly hierarchical organisation where it is easier to blend in AND gain greater access to secure areas. Like the police!
Before he had to go, we watched some of the news with our friend… and thought that we saw Joe! We texted him and he was fine. And so were the cats!
Daddies' lunch guest on Sunday had to leave early because he was going back to feed Joe's pet cats. Joe could not feed his own cats because he was busy super-gluing himself to the front door of the Shouty Sheep People BAA.
The Camp for Climate Protest has gone off without too much of a fuss, Sunday's climax being a day of COLOURFUL PROTEST, in spite of the HYSTERICAL whinging from certain quarters that a collection of students, hippies, grannies and local residents might somehow bring about the END OF MODERN CIVILISATION. As though shutting down an airport is THAT important to civilisation. As though the Shouty Sheep People don't manage to shut THEIR OWN airports down with baggage handlers' strikes often enough.
There were SOME minor scuffles mostly involving policepeople on horses or in armour trying to batter their way into the camp, clearly intent on zealously pursuing someone for illegal flower picking or perhaps copyright infringement of one of Ms Joan Byes protest songs.
Police said "a number" (later described as "eight") of the protestors had been arrested. Using the words "a number" makes it seem much more THREATENING though – like it was worth them being there in force, outnumbering the actual protesters three-to-two.
Sombre announcements from the BBC that the protesters had "split into a number of disparate groups" (like they were slipping into their NINJA PYJAMAS ready to attack from all sides) ever so slightly overlooked the fact that they STARTED OUT as "a number of disparate groups".
Their OH-SO-CUNNING plan appeared to be to stage a SIT-IN (and other non-violent direct action) starting on SUNDAY, thus catching the policepeople and the Shouty Sheep People on the HOP. Oooh, better hope AL-FLIPPIN'-QAEDA don't get that idea.
One policeperson (name and address supplied) wrote in to the Metro to EXPLAIN the apparent OVER-THE-TOP behaviour of his or her colleagues. "What if," said the police person, "a TERRORIST had infiltrated the Peace Camp and got into a HIGHLY SENSITIVE AREA (i.e. the airport)…" (I'm not making this bit up!) "…then you'd be sorry!"
Well, I AM sorry, but I think that terrorists tend NOT to try and join up with a group of people who are not only highly colourful and very visible but are also surrounded by hundreds of police. Quite apart from avoiding bunches of people all with different politics and beliefs and agenda because they tend to STICK OUT like SORE THUMBS in that sort of environment.
Terrorists tend to prefer to keep a LOW PROFILE. In fact they would be better off sneaking into the airport another way while all the police people are looking at the Climate Camp going "ooh, look at them stinkin' 'ippies!"
Either that or to infiltrate a rigidly hierarchical organisation where it is easier to blend in AND gain greater access to secure areas. Like the police!
Before he had to go, we watched some of the news with our friend… and thought that we saw Joe! We texted him and he was fine. And so were the cats!
Wednesday, August 15, 2007
Day 2406: Let's Get this Green Revolution Moving
Friday:
I have been on HOLIDAY but I am BAAAAACK!
And now, here are some stories I may have missed…
Don't you think that it is a bit STRANGE that oftentimes travelling by railway can be MORE expensive that travelling by car? Or, even more bizarrely, that it can be more expensive than travelling by AEROPLANE?
This CANNOT be very good for the planet!
Just this week, the House of Commons Joint Committee on Climate Change said that the government's targets for cutting carbon emissions should be tougher.
But here we are, actually giving people an incentive to use the WORST forms of polluting travel.
I think that the problem is caused because there are only so many trains that you can run. Already they are carrying more people than ever and, without importing those people from Tokyo with their foam rubber battering rams, there is no way to cram any more bodies on board.
This is why the Liberal Democrats have a PLAN.
We want to raise billions of pounds to spend on fixing the BOTTLENECKS in the system so that you can run more trains; to build improved, fast-rail links to major cities, sort of like railway bypasses, so that passengers can get about more quickly and more goods can go on goods trains without getting in the way; and to support much needed relief projects like the London Crossrail. We also want to help cut fares so that people think it is better to use railways than their cars.
Liberal Democrat Shadow Minister for the Environment, Mr Hewn, launched the plan to fix our railways saying:
"The Future Transport Fund will provide ring-fenced funding for the improvements that future generations need if we are to cut our carbon emissions."
While Ms Susan Kramer-vs-Kramer, Liberal Democrat Shadow Secretary for Industry added:
"Rail is the key to cleaning up Britain's transport, not an added extra as ministers seem to think."
Funding from new charge on road freight and on internal air travel. This is GOOD! First because, as we know, air travel causes more pollution, and it should therefore cost MORE and not LESS. And second because freight lorries do more damage to our roads than cars do – in fact they do ALMOST ALL the damage to the road surface, causing all the roadworks for resurfacing, whereas you could run cars practically forever before wearing out a motorway.
I do have one little QUALM. Did we not say that we were going to try to be FISCALLY NEUTRAL from now on? I may be wrong, but this does look like raising just the teensiest bit more tax in order to do some more spending.
I think this must be why we have said that these taxes will be a TEMPORARY measure. Let us hope that they are MORE temporary than that other temporary tax – introduced to cover the expense of going to war against NAPOLEON! – the Income Tax!
When the Conservatories flogged off the old British Rail, they made what even THEY now admit was a horrible botch up of it all. Because they made it all so COMPLICATED it is not just a simple matter of the government paying money to support the train companies. I think that someone is going to have to look at the way that some companies can, say, OWN the railway carriages and make HUGE profits leasing them to the people who are ACTUALLY running the railways and making it more difficult for those people to make a fair profit of their own.
Sorting this sort of thing out would help US in our aim of getting private business to help the railways.
Making our trains work would be a massive undertaking and a big risk… but it would be of immense benefit to many, many people and to all of our futures if we succeed.
I have been on HOLIDAY but I am BAAAAACK!
And now, here are some stories I may have missed…
Don't you think that it is a bit STRANGE that oftentimes travelling by railway can be MORE expensive that travelling by car? Or, even more bizarrely, that it can be more expensive than travelling by AEROPLANE?
This CANNOT be very good for the planet!
Just this week, the House of Commons Joint Committee on Climate Change said that the government's targets for cutting carbon emissions should be tougher.
But here we are, actually giving people an incentive to use the WORST forms of polluting travel.
I think that the problem is caused because there are only so many trains that you can run. Already they are carrying more people than ever and, without importing those people from Tokyo with their foam rubber battering rams, there is no way to cram any more bodies on board.
This is why the Liberal Democrats have a PLAN.
We want to raise billions of pounds to spend on fixing the BOTTLENECKS in the system so that you can run more trains; to build improved, fast-rail links to major cities, sort of like railway bypasses, so that passengers can get about more quickly and more goods can go on goods trains without getting in the way; and to support much needed relief projects like the London Crossrail. We also want to help cut fares so that people think it is better to use railways than their cars.
Liberal Democrat Shadow Minister for the Environment, Mr Hewn, launched the plan to fix our railways saying:
"The Future Transport Fund will provide ring-fenced funding for the improvements that future generations need if we are to cut our carbon emissions."
While Ms Susan Kramer-vs-Kramer, Liberal Democrat Shadow Secretary for Industry added:
"Rail is the key to cleaning up Britain's transport, not an added extra as ministers seem to think."
Funding from new charge on road freight and on internal air travel. This is GOOD! First because, as we know, air travel causes more pollution, and it should therefore cost MORE and not LESS. And second because freight lorries do more damage to our roads than cars do – in fact they do ALMOST ALL the damage to the road surface, causing all the roadworks for resurfacing, whereas you could run cars practically forever before wearing out a motorway.
I do have one little QUALM. Did we not say that we were going to try to be FISCALLY NEUTRAL from now on? I may be wrong, but this does look like raising just the teensiest bit more tax in order to do some more spending.
I think this must be why we have said that these taxes will be a TEMPORARY measure. Let us hope that they are MORE temporary than that other temporary tax – introduced to cover the expense of going to war against NAPOLEON! – the Income Tax!
When the Conservatories flogged off the old British Rail, they made what even THEY now admit was a horrible botch up of it all. Because they made it all so COMPLICATED it is not just a simple matter of the government paying money to support the train companies. I think that someone is going to have to look at the way that some companies can, say, OWN the railway carriages and make HUGE profits leasing them to the people who are ACTUALLY running the railways and making it more difficult for those people to make a fair profit of their own.
Sorting this sort of thing out would help US in our aim of getting private business to help the railways.
Making our trains work would be a massive undertaking and a big risk… but it would be of immense benefit to many, many people and to all of our futures if we succeed.
Saturday, July 14, 2007
Day 2383: Sun NOT linked to Global Warming!
Wednesday:
Well that was the BBC’s rather CONFUSED headline.
I am fairly sure that the Sun DOES have something to do with warming the planet which is why we are not a FROZEN ROCK like the planet/not-a-planet Pluto.
What they ACTUALLY meant was “Climate Change Deniers Proved Wrong (AGAIN!)”
Well that was the BBC’s rather CONFUSED headline.
I am fairly sure that the Sun DOES have something to do with warming the planet which is why we are not a FROZEN ROCK like the planet/not-a-planet Pluto.
What they ACTUALLY meant was “Climate Change Deniers Proved Wrong (AGAIN!)”
Wednesday, June 13, 2007
Day 2353: Waving Not Drowning
Monday:
Okay, Daddy Richard CHEATED this week and skipped two of my diaries! This was very BAD.
On the other fluffy foot, I WAS very keen to tell you about Lord Blairimort’s speech, er, tomorrow.
I will make him use his TIMEY-WIMEY powers to fix thislater earlier!
Meanwhile, here is a nice story about green energy and some swinging wavey things.
Okay, Daddy Richard CHEATED this week and skipped two of my diaries! This was very BAD.
On the other fluffy foot, I WAS very keen to tell you about Lord Blairimort’s speech, er, tomorrow.
I will make him use his TIMEY-WIMEY powers to fix this
Meanwhile, here is a nice story about green energy and some swinging wavey things.
Wednesday, May 02, 2007
Day 2311: Car Made Bon
Monday:
Last year I told you about Daddy Richard's car, Penfold, and the nasty Carbon Dioxide. I said how we went online and found a website that would let us buy a CARBON OFFSET, to cancel out all of Daddy's BADNESS.
It is called a Carbon Offset because it makes your Car Bon! (This is a joke in FRENCH!)
Well, that was LAST YEAR. It is time that I gave you an UPDATE!
Daddy has just got a nice letter from Mr Frown demanding more CAR TAX – which Daddy could pay on the Wibbly Wobbly Web this year because Mr Frown's SINISTER AGENTS have been keeping an eye on Daddy's MOT and insurance – and so I have pestered Daddy into updating his Carbon Offset TOO.
Last year, when we looked, Penfold had driven 22,943 miles which is the same as 36,923 kilometres. That is an average of about three-thousand-and-three-hundred miles a year, or five-thousand-and-three-hundred kilometres a year if you prefer.
We worked out that at 265 grammes of carbon dioxide for every kilometre this was 9.785 tonnes in total! So we bought 9.8 tonnes of carbon offset.
This year, we have checked Penfold's mileage again and it has gone up to 26,549 miles equals 42,726 kilometres. This means Daddy has driven another three-thousand-and-six-hundred miles this year, which is a bit up on the average. I think it is because we have been going up and down to Personchester a bit more often.
Doing the maths like last year, we worked out that this means that Daddy's total carbon footprint from Penfold has increased to 11.323 tonnes, an increase of 1.538 tonnes.
I have therefore made Daddy buy another 1.6 tonnes of offset in order to NEUTRALISE himself again!
Condensed version: "bought more Carbon Offset 'cos Daddy hasn't stopped driving!"
Last year I told you about Daddy Richard's car, Penfold, and the nasty Carbon Dioxide. I said how we went online and found a website that would let us buy a CARBON OFFSET, to cancel out all of Daddy's BADNESS.
It is called a Carbon Offset because it makes your Car Bon! (This is a joke in FRENCH!)
Well, that was LAST YEAR. It is time that I gave you an UPDATE!
Daddy has just got a nice letter from Mr Frown demanding more CAR TAX – which Daddy could pay on the Wibbly Wobbly Web this year because Mr Frown's SINISTER AGENTS have been keeping an eye on Daddy's MOT and insurance – and so I have pestered Daddy into updating his Carbon Offset TOO.
Last year, when we looked, Penfold had driven 22,943 miles which is the same as 36,923 kilometres. That is an average of about three-thousand-and-three-hundred miles a year, or five-thousand-and-three-hundred kilometres a year if you prefer.
We worked out that at 265 grammes of carbon dioxide for every kilometre this was 9.785 tonnes in total! So we bought 9.8 tonnes of carbon offset.
This year, we have checked Penfold's mileage again and it has gone up to 26,549 miles equals 42,726 kilometres. This means Daddy has driven another three-thousand-and-six-hundred miles this year, which is a bit up on the average. I think it is because we have been going up and down to Personchester a bit more often.
Doing the maths like last year, we worked out that this means that Daddy's total carbon footprint from Penfold has increased to 11.323 tonnes, an increase of 1.538 tonnes.
I have therefore made Daddy buy another 1.6 tonnes of offset in order to NEUTRALISE himself again!
Condensed version: "bought more Carbon Offset 'cos Daddy hasn't stopped driving!"
PS
Happy Beltane, everyone!Saturday, April 07, 2007
Day 2287: Fear of Climate or Climate of Fear?
Friday:
What is the world coming to? Well, a STICKY END, it would appear – but at least everyone seems to be agreed on that now!
Obviously it is a BIT of a rum do when a lot of scientists submit their workings and it is up to a bunch of politicians to say whether they are right or not. You might think that in a SENSIBLE world it would be the other way around.
So, the general problem is that there’s not going to be enough water for lots of places and the land for growing food is going to get a good bit smaller. Not to mention the most diverse ecology in the world, the Amazon rainforest, turning into a grass car park. Still, who needs oxygen? Meanwhile here in Britain scuba diving is to become part of our daily commute.
How doomed are YOU? Well, here is a handy BBC map to tell you.
But this is actually the SECOND report into Climate Change because, like Doctor Who, they come in a SERIES this year. All that was missing was the bit at the start where Giles-from-Buffy says: “Previously on ‘So this is it, we’re all going to die!’.” In the LAST report, it was agreed that something is going on and that it is probably YOUR fault.
Unfortunately, we all have to wait for part three before we can find out what we are supposed to DO about any of this.
So, could everyone please not PANIC in the meantime and we’ll see if we can agree on some ideas that the Chinese and the Americans will actually let us do.
You know, sometimes I don’t think you people are even TRYING to survive.
Where are the “Recycling Can Be FUN” initiatives? Where are the “Cycle to Work and Leave Your Shoes and Chauffeur Behind” schemes? Where are the ALIEN SPACE LIZARDS trying to sell you a “Clean up your planet electric whisk with filter coffee attachment”? I still think we have not put enough thought into the idea of everybody going to the seaside and blowing on the ocean till it cools down a bit.
I have said it before and I will say it again: the future should be FUN, not all of this grim death nonsense.
Saying “Billions will perish” just makes you sound like Sean Connery doing his Avengers-villain accent. If everyone makes a little change, we CAN all work together to make a really BIG difference.
The future is OURS to make – let’s make it better!
What is the world coming to? Well, a STICKY END, it would appear – but at least everyone seems to be agreed on that now!
Obviously it is a BIT of a rum do when a lot of scientists submit their workings and it is up to a bunch of politicians to say whether they are right or not. You might think that in a SENSIBLE world it would be the other way around.
So, the general problem is that there’s not going to be enough water for lots of places and the land for growing food is going to get a good bit smaller. Not to mention the most diverse ecology in the world, the Amazon rainforest, turning into a grass car park. Still, who needs oxygen? Meanwhile here in Britain scuba diving is to become part of our daily commute.
How doomed are YOU? Well, here is a handy BBC map to tell you.
But this is actually the SECOND report into Climate Change because, like Doctor Who, they come in a SERIES this year. All that was missing was the bit at the start where Giles-from-Buffy says: “Previously on ‘So this is it, we’re all going to die!’.” In the LAST report, it was agreed that something is going on and that it is probably YOUR fault.
Unfortunately, we all have to wait for part three before we can find out what we are supposed to DO about any of this.
So, could everyone please not PANIC in the meantime and we’ll see if we can agree on some ideas that the Chinese and the Americans will actually let us do.
You know, sometimes I don’t think you people are even TRYING to survive.
Where are the “Recycling Can Be FUN” initiatives? Where are the “Cycle to Work and Leave Your Shoes and Chauffeur Behind” schemes? Where are the ALIEN SPACE LIZARDS trying to sell you a “Clean up your planet electric whisk with filter coffee attachment”? I still think we have not put enough thought into the idea of everybody going to the seaside and blowing on the ocean till it cools down a bit.
I have said it before and I will say it again: the future should be FUN, not all of this grim death nonsense.
Saying “Billions will perish” just makes you sound like Sean Connery doing his Avengers-villain accent. If everyone makes a little change, we CAN all work together to make a really BIG difference.
The future is OURS to make – let’s make it better!
Wednesday, March 21, 2007
Day 2263: Bill for Climate Change (£50 billion + tip)
Tuesday:
Oh dear, Mr James has thonked me with a PYRAMID SELLING SCHEME!
I had better wake up Daddy Richard and make him start typing in my diary. WE have a LOT to get through – I wonder if we will finish before Mr Frown starts his budget…
So, after the Liberal Democrats lead the way on Green Policies, tailed by the me-too Conservatories, at last the Labour have brought up some proposals of their own to try and help the environment.
Mr Millipede has announced that the government will cut Carbon Dioxide by setting TARGETS using LEGISLATION.
Is it just me, or does this not sound a TOTALLY NuLabour way of approaching the issue? Almost ANY problem, and their answer is "set some targets and pass more laws".
I bet it will not be long before people are finding CUNNING WAYS to get around the targets that Mr Millipede sets – probably by reclassifying Carbon Dioxide as "Oxygen+" or claiming to be REDUCING emissions by BREATHING IN!
Setting a FIVE YEAR TARGET is all very well – very NuSoviet – but how are you going to go about meeting it? You have not been very good at meeting your own targets so far!
What we need is some SOLID PROPOSALS for things that we can do.
And to be fair the government does plan to investment in low-carbon fuels and technologies, such as carbon capture and storage, wind, wave and solar power. We want to hear MORE about that, though. How much? And how soon?
Mr Frown, too, has some proposals. Taking the opportunity to have a pop at Mr Balloon's not-very-well-thought-out, not-very-well-received "Let's Tax Air" plan, he says he thinks that homes should be greener pointing out that they account for 25% of our Carbon Dioxide emissions, as opposed to aeroplanes that only account for 5%.
(At least 5% SO FAR – that is why we want to arrest the growth in air travel before we burn up the entire sky!)
Of course what Mr Frown really means is that a lot of our Greenhouse Gasses come from the generation of ELECTRICAL POWER – mainly from the burning of GAS.
There are TWO ways to reduce that: number one – everyone get better insulation, long-life bulbs and switch the telly OFF rather than to stand-by; number two – stop burning so much gas and switch to cleaner generating methods like wind or wave or hydroelectric. (Nuclear power also cuts emissions but ONLY if you think highly dangerous radioactive waste that lasts for millions of years does not count as POLLUTION.)
Method number one involves everyone in the country being forced into changing their behaviour, probably with targets to check up our progress and CCTV cameras cross-checked with I.D.iot cards to make sure we are not secretly using the stand-by button.
Method number two requires investment either directly or by applying tax incentives.
Guess which one is Mr Frown's preferred option!
That is NOT TO SAY that we shouldn't be ENCOURAGING people to do their own bit, however small. Simple methods to save power – and save some cash too – can all help the nation cut back on emissions.
This calls for a revival of the GOOD OLD British spirit: EVERYONE pulling together like we did to get through World War Part Two, or the Eurovision Song Contest. Yes, even in time of ADVERSITY we can draw courage from our fellow Brits!
And most people WANT to do good. Young people – who especially connect with the Liberal Democrats – young people are the most in favour of Environmental Action. Not JUST because they want there still to BE a world, but because it is the RIGHT THING TO DO.
So, a bit less of the TARGETS and COMPULSION, Mr Frown. A bit more of the leading by example and setting up projects and not laying down the law.
Oh dear, Mr James has thonked me with a PYRAMID SELLING SCHEME!
I had better wake up Daddy Richard and make him start typing in my diary. WE have a LOT to get through – I wonder if we will finish before Mr Frown starts his budget…
So, after the Liberal Democrats lead the way on Green Policies, tailed by the me-too Conservatories, at last the Labour have brought up some proposals of their own to try and help the environment.
Mr Millipede has announced that the government will cut Carbon Dioxide by setting TARGETS using LEGISLATION.
Is it just me, or does this not sound a TOTALLY NuLabour way of approaching the issue? Almost ANY problem, and their answer is "set some targets and pass more laws".
I bet it will not be long before people are finding CUNNING WAYS to get around the targets that Mr Millipede sets – probably by reclassifying Carbon Dioxide as "Oxygen+" or claiming to be REDUCING emissions by BREATHING IN!
Setting a FIVE YEAR TARGET is all very well – very NuSoviet – but how are you going to go about meeting it? You have not been very good at meeting your own targets so far!
What we need is some SOLID PROPOSALS for things that we can do.
And to be fair the government does plan to investment in low-carbon fuels and technologies, such as carbon capture and storage, wind, wave and solar power. We want to hear MORE about that, though. How much? And how soon?
Mr Frown, too, has some proposals. Taking the opportunity to have a pop at Mr Balloon's not-very-well-thought-out, not-very-well-received "Let's Tax Air" plan, he says he thinks that homes should be greener pointing out that they account for 25% of our Carbon Dioxide emissions, as opposed to aeroplanes that only account for 5%.
(At least 5% SO FAR – that is why we want to arrest the growth in air travel before we burn up the entire sky!)
Of course what Mr Frown really means is that a lot of our Greenhouse Gasses come from the generation of ELECTRICAL POWER – mainly from the burning of GAS.
There are TWO ways to reduce that: number one – everyone get better insulation, long-life bulbs and switch the telly OFF rather than to stand-by; number two – stop burning so much gas and switch to cleaner generating methods like wind or wave or hydroelectric. (Nuclear power also cuts emissions but ONLY if you think highly dangerous radioactive waste that lasts for millions of years does not count as POLLUTION.)
Method number one involves everyone in the country being forced into changing their behaviour, probably with targets to check up our progress and CCTV cameras cross-checked with I.D.iot cards to make sure we are not secretly using the stand-by button.
Method number two requires investment either directly or by applying tax incentives.
Guess which one is Mr Frown's preferred option!
That is NOT TO SAY that we shouldn't be ENCOURAGING people to do their own bit, however small. Simple methods to save power – and save some cash too – can all help the nation cut back on emissions.
This calls for a revival of the GOOD OLD British spirit: EVERYONE pulling together like we did to get through World War Part Two, or the Eurovision Song Contest. Yes, even in time of ADVERSITY we can draw courage from our fellow Brits!
And most people WANT to do good. Young people – who especially connect with the Liberal Democrats – young people are the most in favour of Environmental Action. Not JUST because they want there still to BE a world, but because it is the RIGHT THING TO DO.
So, a bit less of the TARGETS and COMPULSION, Mr Frown. A bit more of the leading by example and setting up projects and not laying down the law.
Tuesday, March 13, 2007
Day 2261: Mr Balloon Fails to Fly
Sunday:
Bit of a PR disaster for the normally sure-footed Mr Balloon today, as his new environment policy failed to get off the ground.
The BBC went to an airport to ask passengers if they'd like Mr Balloon to CANCEL THEIR HOLIDAYS and funnily enough the answers were all pretty NEGATIVE.
In another ASTONISHING move, the airlines have widely condemned the Conservatory plans!
No! Do no LAUGH! Normally we should condemn this sort of reporting.
But if the Conservatories are STUPID enough to make themselves sound like a HIGH TAX PARTY then I say we let them have it!
This is IMPORTANT POLITICS and we need people to know that they have a CHOICE between REAL green action with the Liberal Democrats and some half thought through, half baked me-too band-wagon jumping from the Conservatories.
In addition to looking like they want to RESTRICT flying to the RICH, the Conservatories this week added to the appearance of confusion when they announced plans to have Mr Al Gore fly in and, er, tell them about the evils of flying.
(Fluffy wave to Mr Paul.)
This comes on top of Mr Balloon's new Euro-sceptic allies from the Czech Republic turning out to believe that Global Warming is a "false myth" while the European Peoples' Party that Mr Balloon has turned his back on, led by German Chancellor Ms Angela Meercat, have just managed to secure an historic deal on renewable energy targets.
It is not that Mr Balloon has no GOOD IDEAS AT ALL in there. But they are all of a mish-mash with other stuff and without practical considerations. Targeting unnecessary short-haul flights sounds reasonable, but if you put tax on INTERNAL flights won't that push people into flying London-Dublin-Glasgow instead, which actually makes the problem worse not better. And Green Air Miles might sound like it puts the burden of tax on people who fly more but how are you going to work it? Some monster bureaucracy or maybe electronic tags on everybody's passports?
This all plays up the WISDOM of our own environmental policies: the Green Tax Switch. We emphasised our intention to GIVE MONEY BACK to people – and by spelling out exactly how and who will benefit – and THEN saying that they will have the choice of whether to spend that money on more expensive travel or to look for a cheaper, less polluting alternative or to save it altogether.
Mr Balloon and Mr Boy George had only got the vaguest idea when they nicked the policy, so they end up saying "we'll tax you more" with some meaningless promise to "reduce tax for families" tacked on at the end. People are all too familiar with – and all too cynical about –STEALTH TAXES.
(And don't forget, that although Mr Frown has become the MASTER, it was Conservatory Chancellor Fatty Clarke who first came up with a whole load of hidden taxes to try and balance the budget after Black Wednesday.)
We already know that Mr Balloon is not above MISREPRESENTING us in order to grub for votes. He says that only HE wants to get the Labour out.
Well, that's just not true. He wants to change the names round the cabinet table – BUT HE WANTS THE POLICIES TO CARRY ON THE SAME.
Just this week, for example, we know that he is going to vote FOR the government on Trident – only the Liberal Democrats are offering an alternative. We want to CUT TRIDENT NOW!
And do not forget how Mr Balloon was the one who saved Lord Blairimort's education top-up fees policy. Only the Liberal Democrats believe in helping students – just like we have done in Scotland!
We HAVE to be telling people that the choice is between More-of-the-Same-Labour from Mr Frown and Mr Balloon or a REAL CHANCE OF CHANGE with the Liberal Democrats.
So, on the environment, the message is clear:
The Conservatories are JUST LIKE the Labour – they want to tax you MORE.
Only the Liberal Democrats offer you the tax cut UP FRONT and then trust you to make your own choices on the environment.
Bit of a PR disaster for the normally sure-footed Mr Balloon today, as his new environment policy failed to get off the ground.
The BBC went to an airport to ask passengers if they'd like Mr Balloon to CANCEL THEIR HOLIDAYS and funnily enough the answers were all pretty NEGATIVE.
In another ASTONISHING move, the airlines have widely condemned the Conservatory plans!
No! Do no LAUGH! Normally we should condemn this sort of reporting.
But if the Conservatories are STUPID enough to make themselves sound like a HIGH TAX PARTY then I say we let them have it!
This is IMPORTANT POLITICS and we need people to know that they have a CHOICE between REAL green action with the Liberal Democrats and some half thought through, half baked me-too band-wagon jumping from the Conservatories.
In addition to looking like they want to RESTRICT flying to the RICH, the Conservatories this week added to the appearance of confusion when they announced plans to have Mr Al Gore fly in and, er, tell them about the evils of flying.
(Fluffy wave to Mr Paul.)
This comes on top of Mr Balloon's new Euro-sceptic allies from the Czech Republic turning out to believe that Global Warming is a "false myth" while the European Peoples' Party that Mr Balloon has turned his back on, led by German Chancellor Ms Angela Meercat, have just managed to secure an historic deal on renewable energy targets.
It is not that Mr Balloon has no GOOD IDEAS AT ALL in there. But they are all of a mish-mash with other stuff and without practical considerations. Targeting unnecessary short-haul flights sounds reasonable, but if you put tax on INTERNAL flights won't that push people into flying London-Dublin-Glasgow instead, which actually makes the problem worse not better. And Green Air Miles might sound like it puts the burden of tax on people who fly more but how are you going to work it? Some monster bureaucracy or maybe electronic tags on everybody's passports?
This all plays up the WISDOM of our own environmental policies: the Green Tax Switch. We emphasised our intention to GIVE MONEY BACK to people – and by spelling out exactly how and who will benefit – and THEN saying that they will have the choice of whether to spend that money on more expensive travel or to look for a cheaper, less polluting alternative or to save it altogether.
Mr Balloon and Mr Boy George had only got the vaguest idea when they nicked the policy, so they end up saying "we'll tax you more" with some meaningless promise to "reduce tax for families" tacked on at the end. People are all too familiar with – and all too cynical about –STEALTH TAXES.
(And don't forget, that although Mr Frown has become the MASTER, it was Conservatory Chancellor Fatty Clarke who first came up with a whole load of hidden taxes to try and balance the budget after Black Wednesday.)
We already know that Mr Balloon is not above MISREPRESENTING us in order to grub for votes. He says that only HE wants to get the Labour out.
Well, that's just not true. He wants to change the names round the cabinet table – BUT HE WANTS THE POLICIES TO CARRY ON THE SAME.
Just this week, for example, we know that he is going to vote FOR the government on Trident – only the Liberal Democrats are offering an alternative. We want to CUT TRIDENT NOW!
And do not forget how Mr Balloon was the one who saved Lord Blairimort's education top-up fees policy. Only the Liberal Democrats believe in helping students – just like we have done in Scotland!
We HAVE to be telling people that the choice is between More-of-the-Same-Labour from Mr Frown and Mr Balloon or a REAL CHANCE OF CHANGE with the Liberal Democrats.
So, on the environment, the message is clear:
The Conservatories are JUST LIKE the Labour – they want to tax you MORE.
Only the Liberal Democrats offer you the tax cut UP FRONT and then trust you to make your own choices on the environment.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)