The Irony Thread

Stevo_666

Jeremy.89 said:

rjsterry said:

There seems to be an urge to damn anything that isn't a perfect solution. Some improvement is better than no improvement.

This.

There is also a tenancy to mumble about life cycle environmental impact, without necessarily knowing what assumptions have been made to give you the life cycle impact.

IIRC, the Co2 impact per mile of a small internal combustion engine could be made to be about the same as an electric car, so long as you assumed the grid was fairly dirty.

But that ignores that electric cars don't spew nox sox and particulates around at pedestrians.

Of course then I'm ignoring that a dirty power station also does the same (although they can be fitted with scrubbers, but then that makes them less thermally efficient...)

That's before we get onto manufacturing either car.

Jeremy.89 said:

rjsterry said:

There seems to be an urge to damn anything that isn't a perfect solution. Some improvement is better than no improvement.

This.

There is also a tenancy to mumble about life cycle environmental impact, without necessarily knowing what assumptions have been made to give you the life cycle impact.

IIRC, the Co2 impact per mile of a small internal combustion engine could be made to be about the same as an electric car, so long as you assumed the grid was fairly dirty.

But that ignores that electric cars don't spew nox sox and particulates around at pedestrians.

Of course then I'm ignoring that a dirty power station also does the same (although they can be fitted with scrubbers, but then that makes them less thermally efficient...)

That's before we get onto manufacturing either car.

You make a good point that it's not a straightforward situation, especially when try to you consider the whole picture.

Longshot

Stevo_666 said:

Jeremy.89 said:

rjsterry said:

There seems to be an urge to damn anything that isn't a perfect solution. Some improvement is better than no improvement.

This.

There is also a tenancy to mumble about life cycle environmental impact, without necessarily knowing what assumptions have been made to give you the life cycle impact.

IIRC, the Co2 impact per mile of a small internal combustion engine could be made to be about the same as an electric car, so long as you assumed the grid was fairly dirty.

But that ignores that electric cars don't spew nox sox and particulates around at pedestrians.

Of course then I'm ignoring that a dirty power station also does the same (although they can be fitted with scrubbers, but then that makes them less thermally efficient...)

That's before we get onto manufacturing either car.

Jeremy.89 said:

rjsterry said:

There seems to be an urge to damn anything that isn't a perfect solution. Some improvement is better than no improvement.

This.

There is also a tenancy to mumble about life cycle environmental impact, without necessarily knowing what assumptions have been made to give you the life cycle impact.

IIRC, the Co2 impact per mile of a small internal combustion engine could be made to be about the same as an electric car, so long as you assumed the grid was fairly dirty.

But that ignores that electric cars don't spew nox sox and particulates around at pedestrians.

Of course then I'm ignoring that a dirty power station also does the same (although they can be fitted with scrubbers, but then that makes them less thermally efficient...)

That's before we get onto manufacturing either car.

You make a good point that it's not a straightforward situation, especially when try to you consider the whole picture.

This. The Green Agenda has fallen into the same trap as nearly everything else these days in that it claims to have the solution when it's actually just scratching the surface. That doesn't make the aims any less laudable and it doesn't mean that one shouldn't take the small steps, however imperfect.

The environmental cause needs more research (into both the causes and, more importantly, long term meaningful solutions) and much more money behind that research to speed it up.

I don't have much time for ER but all the time the agenda is being pushed it helps to build pressure for the above.

elbowloh

Friends of the Earth made some analysis of the major parties policies on the environment and the Greens only came second, behind Labour. Is that ironic?

The Tories were a distant last.

Stevo_666

elbowloh said:

Friends of the Earth made some analysis of the major parties policies on the environment and the Greens only came second, behind Labour. Is that ironic?

The Tories were a distant last.

Did Labour factor in the greenhouse emissions from flights taken by people leaving the country if they got elected?

rick_chasey

1/10 joke

Stevo_666

rick_chasey said:

1/10 joke

See video clip linked in the Labour party thread. They would be flying first class which is very eco-unfriendly.

chris_bass

Stevo_666 said:

rick_chasey said:

1/10 joke

See video clip linked in the Labour party thread. They would be flying first class which is very eco-unfriendly.

only if the rest of the plane is empty, surely?

what if the fact first class is full means that the price of non first class tickets is lower and so more people could afford to fly and therefore the plane was more full than it otherwise would have been? and the people who could now afford it wouldn't have to travel be other means?

(don't worry - i know this wasn't your point or remotely serious!!)

TheBigBean

elbowloh said:

Friends of the Earth made some analysis of the major parties policies on the environment and the Greens only came second, behind Labour. Is that ironic?

The Tories were a distant last.

I was pretty much saying that this is the problem with the Green party in the other thread.

rjsterry

Stevo_666 said:

rick_chasey said:

1/10 joke

See video clip linked in the Labour party thread. They would be flying first class which is very eco-unfriendly.

You know there aren't actually that many of them. Hence that QT chap being unable to comprehend that an £80K salary put him in the top 5%. A couple of A380s would hold the lot.

pinno

chris_bass said:

Stevo_666 said:

rick_chasey said:

1/10 joke

See video clip linked in the Labour party thread. They would be flying first class which is very eco-unfriendly.

only if the rest of the plane is empty, surely?

what if the fact first class is full means that the price of non first class tickets is lower and so more people could afford to fly and therefore the plane was more full than it otherwise would have been? and the people who could now afford it wouldn't have to travel be other means?

Shurely flying off to sunny climes would mean not heating their indoor swimming pools and turning the central heating on in their mansions here?
Therefore, carbon neutral.

Stevo_666

pinno said:

chris_bass said:

Stevo_666 said:

rick_chasey said:

1/10 joke

See video clip linked in the Labour party thread. They would be flying first class which is very eco-unfriendly.

only if the rest of the plane is empty, surely?

what if the fact first class is full means that the price of non first class tickets is lower and so more people could afford to fly and therefore the plane was more full than it otherwise would have been? and the people who could now afford it wouldn't have to travel be other means?

Shurely flying off to sunny climes would mean not heating their indoor swimming pools and turning the central heating on in their mansions here?
Therefore, carbon neutral.

But not tax neutral. Back to the parable of the ten men in a bar...

P.S. some people didn't spot I wasnt being entirely serious about the environment thing. But this is Cake Stop.

orraloon

Liverpool FC owner screws up Liverpool airport so Scousers can't escape except by going to Manchester.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-merseyside-50740693

Isn't it ironic, don't you think?

Stevo_666

Jo Swinson (who made overturning a democratic result her main election theme) losing her seat in a democratic process.

Longshot

Stevo_666 said:

Jo Swinson (who tried to represent the wishes of a significant block of the population) losing her seat in a democratic process.

FTFY

Stevo_666

Longshot said:

Stevo_666 said:

Jo Swinson (who tried to represent the wishes of a significant block of the population) losing her seat in a democratic process.

FTFY

Clearly the block wasn't significant enough...

Longshot

Stevo_666 said:

Longshot said:

Stevo_666 said:

Jo Swinson (who tried to represent the wishes of a significant block of the population) losing her seat in a democratic process.

FTFY

Clearly the block wasn't significant enough...

No and that question has been answered once and for all. It doesn't mean that someone should not represent that view. Sometimes principle is more important than victory.

Stevo_666

Longshot said:

Stevo_666 said:

Longshot said:

Stevo_666 said:

Jo Swinson (who tried to represent the wishes of a significant block of the population) losing her seat in a democratic process.

FTFY

Clearly the block wasn't significant enough...

No and that question has been answered once and for all. It doesn't mean that someone should not represent that view. Sometimes principle is more important than victory.

It usually is for the losers

Longshot

Stevo_666 said:

Longshot said:

Stevo_666 said:

Longshot said:

Stevo_666 said:

Jo Swinson (who tried to represent the wishes of a significant block of the population) losing her seat in a democratic process.

FTFY

Clearly the block wasn't significant enough...

No and that question has been answered once and for all. It doesn't mean that someone should not represent that view. Sometimes principle is more important than victory.

It usually is for the losers

Yep, I get that. What's the point in winning if you have to compromise your beliefs to do so? There are others that will do that job better than you because they actually believe in whatever cause or position you need to adopt in order to win.

That's the mark of a successful politician. Win first, principles second.

ballysmate

Robbie Williams singing 'Let me entertain you'

orraloon

Is not 'you' he's entertaining. You gotta get down wiv da... 40 somethings? 🤔

ballysmate

Perhaps he could juggle some chainsaws to entertain me while he assaulted my ears.

pblakeney

As has been pointed out elsewhere, he doesn't even do the singing.
Panto cheerleader.

pinno

ballysmate said:

Perhaps he could juggle some chainsaws to entertain me while he assaulted my ears.

What a god idea. He's no Micheal Buble who's no Harry Connick jnr who was no Frank Sinatra and even he was a out off key at times.
I wish he would just shuddup.

ballysmate

pinno said:

ballysmate said:

Perhaps he could juggle some chainsaws to entertain me while he assaulted my ears.

What a god idea. He's no Micheal Buble who's no Harry Connick jnr who was no Frank Sinatra and even he was a out off key at times.
I wish he would just shuddup.

Frank is one of my guilty pleasures, alomg with the singing bus driver, Matt Monro

briantrumpet

ballysmate said:

pinno said:

ballysmate said:

Perhaps he could juggle some chainsaws to entertain me while he assaulted my ears.

What a god idea. He's no Micheal Buble who's no Harry Connick jnr who was no Frank Sinatra and even he was a out off key at times.
I wish he would just shuddup.

Frank is one of my guilty pleasures, alomg with the singing bus driver, Matt Monro

No need to feel guilty about Sinatra... yes he was a showman, but also a great musician. Do you know the album Sinatra Basie? I reckon he never sounded better...

Wheelspinner

briantrumpet said:

ballysmate said:

pinno said:

ballysmate said:

Perhaps he could juggle some chainsaws to entertain me while he assaulted my ears.

What a god idea. He's no Micheal Buble who's no Harry Connick jnr who was no Frank Sinatra and even he was a out off key at times.
I wish he would just shuddup.

Frank is one of my guilty pleasures, alomg with the singing bus driver, Matt Monro

No need to feel guilty about Sinatra... yes he was a showman, but also a great musician. Do you know the album Sinatra Basie? I reckon he never sounded better...

Francis A and Edward K? That one? Great album

pinno

A vegan who the judge said, that his rights should be on a par with religion...
Okay.

But he won't wear Wool amongst other things. So that means he's happy to wear man made fibre's (or go naked?).

Now we know that Polysters etc are a plastic, which is derived from oil and ends up in the eco system via the washing machine/poor waste management etc etc.

I'm trying to get my head around this one.

Pross

pinno said:

A vegan who the judge said, that his rights should be on a par with religion...
Okay.

But he won't wear Wool amongst other things. So that means he's happy to wear man made fibre's (or go naked?).

Now we know that Polysters etc are a plastic, which is derived from oil and ends up in the eco system via the washing machine/poor waste management etc etc.

I'm trying to get my head around this one.

Linen or cotton?

He sounds a complete nutjob though, I respect (non-preachy) vegans for their principles but to not travel by bus in case it runs over a bird? Does he wear a mask to avoid accidentally ingesting flies and how does he avoid crush insects, snails etc. when walking? I should think all sorts of living things also get killed accidentally when harvesting the food he eats. It is literally impossible to live a life that doesn't as adversely affect other living creatures and even the most ardent vegans I know accept all they can realistically do is ensure they don't deliberately do anything that kills or exploits a living creature.

pblakeney

It is on a par with religion then.
Complete BS practiced by nutters at the extreme.

pinno

Pross said:

pinno said:

A vegan who the judge said, that his rights should be on a par with religion...
Okay.

But he won't wear Wool amongst other things. So that means he's happy to wear man made fibre's (or go naked?).

Now we know that Polysters etc are a plastic, which is derived from oil and ends up in the eco system via the washing machine/poor waste management etc etc.

I'm trying to get my head around this one.

Linen or cotton?

Yeah well, cotton requires an adverse amount of water to grow, process, dye...

Devout Buddhists sweep the ground so that they don't stand on an insect, they don't eat meat, it's a long standing religion, so why not be a Buddhist instead of re-inventing the wheel?