Clarkson and Martin

Porgy

MacAndCheese wrote:

Sorry Porgy, my comment wasn't aimed at you - I was referring to the quote the rolling your eyes at.

ahhh! OK - I was slightly confused by that 8)

Porgy

Stoo61 wrote:

Clarkson is a total legend. People who can't see that just won't ever get it. He takes life exactly the right way especially for someone with the perfect job.

Long live the Clarkson, half of the stuff he says is to purposely wind people up.

I find him to be a tedious old windbag - and I also find that tedious old windbags tend to like him. But he doesn;t wind me up - I know exactly what he's up to.

Porgy

papasmurf. wrote:

The only thing Martin got wrong in my view was using an electric car...I'd have used a HGV for running down roadies, then gone on and strangled some hookers and been home for tea and crumpets in no time.

Raymondavalon

papasmurf. wrote:

The only thing Martin got wrong in my view was using an electric car...I'd have used a HGV for running down roadies, then gone on and strangled some hookers and been home for tea and crumpets in no time.

Electric cars and hybrids.. something else I have an opinion on....

supersonic

Another thing about the electric car fanatics - where do they get the electricity from?! Usually that big dirty coal fired powerstation.

Porgy

supersonic wrote:

Another thing about the electric car fanatics - where do they get the electricity from?! Usually that big dirty coal fired powerstation.

the point being though that it doesn't have to come from that big dirty coal fired powerstation.

supersonic

But at the minute, especially in the UK, over 70% of the electricity produced is fossil flle derived.

It is a step in the right direction maybe, but not without the source being fossil fuel free.

Raymondavalon

SS this was my point in my Blog entry
Tree huggers and green message do gooders believe that we can cure the world with unsightly wind farms and solar panels.
Well, the Devon countryside has been ruined by the windfarms and the chemical process in manufacturing solar panels isn't exactly a friendly process either.
However the green goblins can never back their superficial claims with in depth proof..

Porgy

Raymondavalon wrote:

Tree huggers and green message do gooders ..

I could do without the unnecessary derogatory language thankyou.

I do not hug trees and I am not a "do gooder" *spits* - but I do give a shit about the environment i live in.

supersonic

I crash into trees quite a lot!

Porgy

Raymondavalon wrote:

.
Well, the Devon countryside has been ruined by the windfarms ..

oh yeah i noticed that last time i went home to Devon :roll:

Personally I think it would be much better if they built a nuclear power station and all associated pylons in the middle of Dartmoor, don;t you?

Porgy

supersonic wrote:

I crash into trees quite a lot!

i don;t think they mind that too much

supersonic

The nuclear discussion is an interesting one.

I am all for a new generation of reactors - at least to buy us time to develop 'green' energy to a better level.

Coal fired stations ae gradually being shut, and gas does yield more energy per unit of C02 realeased. It will be a gradual process, and shift from one source to another - nuke can bridge some of that gap I feel.

Porgy

supersonic wrote:

The nuclear discussion is an interesting one.

I am all for a new generation of reactors - at least to buy us time to develop 'green' energy to a better level.

Coal fired stations ae gradually being shut, and gas does yield more energy per unit of C02 realeased. It will be a gradual process, and shift from one source to another - nuke can bridge some of that gap I feel.

we may need to go nuclear - for a very short time i hope - but nuclear power stations dow't lend themselves too well to being a short term stop gap solution - they take about ten years to build and then have to be maintained for decades afetr their useful life has ended; we still don;t really have a good solution for what to do with the waste; how carbon free is it really?; who wants a nuclear power station near them? who is willing to fund the industry bearing in mind that the Tories bailed out of privatising nuclear fuels when it looked like noone wanted to buy?

Answer all those issues and we may be on to a winner.

Personally, I think fusion can't be too far away now - great breakthoughs are being made.

Anyway there's lots that can be done before we start buidling new power stations - this society must waste so much energy compared to other societies - I'm for energy efficiency anywhere we can have it.

supersonic

"Anyway there's lots that can be done before we start buidling new power stations - this society must waste so much energy compared to other societies - I'm for energy efficiency anywhere we can have it."

Absolutely and I was going to move onto that point. Developing more efficient products, and altering our lifestyles is a major factor on energy demands. I also think new homes could integrate solar panels into the roof (not cells) for hot water, and generally be thermally more eficient.

I hope we are past the days of Windscale and Chernobyl but of course there are many concerns that have to be remedied.

papasmurf.

if you factor in the whole life cycle the a Jeep wrangler comes out the most enviromentally friendly car..and hybrids and electric cars come pretty low down.. this is from some study

CNW Marketing Research argues their dust-to-dust yardstick measures the environmental impact of a vehicle from the date of its manufacturer to the date it is scrapped. It takes in not just the car’s fuel consumption and CO2 emissions but also the energy used in its design and production both in car assembly plants and by suppliers of parts and sub-assemblies. The energy used in transporting cars to dealers and in maintaining, servicing and scrapping and recycling them is also taken into account.

Raymondavalon

Porgy wrote:

Raymondavalon wrote:

Tree huggers and green message do gooders ..

I could do without the unnecessary derogatory language thankyou.

I do not hug trees and I am not a "do gooder" *spits* - but I do give a shoot about the environment i live in.

They weren't aimed at you and there's nothing derogatory in any of those words.

Did I mention that the majority of green goblin, do good, carbon critic planet savers are also Prima Donnas?

bomberesque

supersonic wrote:

But at the minute, especially in the UK, over 70% of the electricity produced is fossil flle derived.

It is a step in the right direction maybe, but not without the source being fossil fuel free.

and 100% of car fuel is currently fossil fuel derived

....except bio fuels, which are made out of food

so, with respect, it's still a step in the right direction, even with the state of the current grid supply.

don't get me wrong, I work in the oil industry and love my cars but electric cars are the future not matter how flawed the concepts are at the moment. Powerstations have a lifetime and as they are replaced, alternatives will need to be found. Like it or not, the one thing that is certain about hydrocarbons is there's not gonna be any more of it. Once we're out we're out and we *are* going to run out. .... unless some dudes I know who are working on using electricity to synthesise hydrocarbons crosses certain efficiency barriers, then we could be into something different

I suspect we won't have a viable large scale alternative to burining gas and oil for power by the time we need to start making chages (well, that's about now, really) so nuclear will almost certainly be the stop-gap solution, like it or not (and I don't especially)

/edit; and papasmurf; do you have a link to that study you quote? I'd like to read it

supersonic

Also need to add in the efficiency of taking the power from the grid and using it in a car, the charging cycles - all extra steps.

Quite probable that a diesel engined car is at the minute cleaner and more efficient than running an electric car in the UK when we look at the overall picture. That 70% has to come down!

bomberesque

supersonic wrote:

Also need to add in the efficiency of taking the power from the grid and using it in a car, the charging cycles - all extra steps.

Quite probable that a diesel engined car is at the minute cleaner and more efficient than running an electric car in the UK when we look at the overall picture. That 70% has to come down!

I agree it has to come down, my point is it's bound to.

to be fair though, you also have to figure in all the transport and refining costs that produce low sulphur deisel then the transport costs out to retail with the same for power stations (which, with gas, is largely just transporting the gas then gridding out the power) if you're comparing.

there is a dedicated power station feeding the refinery compex I work on part of. Anecdotal I know, but you get the picture....

supersonic

It is a huge model that is for sure, with a lot of inputs!

Porgy

Raymondavalon wrote:

Porgy wrote:

Raymondavalon wrote:

Tree huggers and green message do gooders ..

I could do without the unnecessary derogatory language thankyou.

I do not hug trees and I am not a "do gooder" *spits* - but I do give a shoot about the environment i live in.

They weren't aimed at you and there's nothing derogatory in any of those words.

I thought they were aimed at environmental activists?

I've been one of those on and off for 20 years.

bomberesque

Porgy wrote:

I thought they were aimed at environmental activists?

I've been one of those on and off for 20 years.

BURN THE HIPPY!

Porgy

bomberesque wrote:

Porgy wrote:

I thought they were aimed at environmental activists?

I've been one of those on and off for 20 years.

BURN THE HIPPY!

No I am not Neil from the Young ones! :evil:

i got accused of that yesterday

bomberesque

for anyone who thinks Clarkson is a cock, ^that was a JOKE, hmkay?

burning hippies is bad for the environment and just makes them shake their heads, stroke their beards and tutt more

bomberesque

bugger Progy, you beat me to it!

supersonic

Could be a good fuel source though.

Porgy

supersonic wrote:

Could be a good fuel source though.

i don't think the human body burns too well - you'd proabbly have to dry it out first.

Better to eat it I reckon

Anonymous

MrChuck wrote:

sheepsteeth wrote:

am i the only person who doesnt mind what james martin said? why is everyone getting so upset with someone expressing an opinion?

He said he deliberately ran some people off the road because he doesn't like the group of people he thinks they belong to. Do you really think that's OK?

Everybody is free to express their opinion, but not like that.

are you sure anyone was actually run off of any road? bore off. webster.

bomberesque

Seriously though we have a problem

we are currently polluting the athmosphere more than it can take. Truth be told we've been doing this for decades, possibly centuries. The industrial revolutions that powered just about all currently "developed" economies gave no real consideration to environmental effects. Anyone of my vintage will recall the state of the thames only 25 years ago... and river pollution *was* on the agenda

thing is, the currently developed nations have managed to get though their own mega-developement phase while no-one was thinking about pollution or such stuff and are now largely sitting pretty atop a largely middle class (disposable income-wise, sorry Pineapples, I know you're solidly *not* middle class) society that can afford to throttle back energy usage and find cleaner ways to maintain their lifestyles.

The developing nations are not in this position. The reason they are still developing is, IMO, largely irrelevant. Yes, Africa was under the yoke of .... well... everyone .... for bloody yonks but the chinese have had a fairly clear run at it and India have been independant for over 50 years now. The point is that they *are* developing and they want to get where we are now (lifestyle resource wise, their value and political systems are their own to work out) and they want to do it a *lot* faster than the 200 odd years that we took.

Now, when they get there, they too will need power and heating to all homes, cars in every driveway, cold beer in the fridge and a TV in every room. In short, all the members of the curently developing nations will demand, and have a right to, the lifestyle we currently live and frankly, no-one is going to convince the human race that the lifestyle its developed so far needs to be or can be rolled back.

so; no matter what energy profile we come up with as acceptable and sustainable for ourselves in the developed world, we will need to be able to expand that ... sustainably ... to accommodate everyone currently in the developing one.

Meaning if (as I mentioned earlier) the UK (pop. 60+ mil or 1% of the world pop) is currently producing 2% of the world's polution (as Ramondavalon claims) and if (as is generally accepted) the total pollution currently being produced is unsustainable then once the rest of the world catches up we are potentially going to have to find a way to maintain the lifestyles we have now with around 25% the pollution ouput that we currently do.

Fusion; Piece of piss

sorry, I may be drinking.