Team SKY to be known as Team Ineos.

12357…12

Comments

  • orraloon
    orraloon Posts: 12,690
    I raise you Fukushima, Chernobyl, Three Mile Island...next...
  • bompington
    bompington Posts: 7,674
    orraloon wrote:
    I raise you Fukushima, Chernobyl, Three Mile Island...next...

    So here's a summary of the debate so far:

    Anti-nuclear poster: "nuclear is dangerous and kills lots of people and the planet"
    Pro-nuclear poster: "here are some actual stats that show that coal kills literally 500 times more people than nuclear"
    Anti-nuclear poster: "nuclear is dangerous and kills lots of people and the planet"
  • inseine
    inseine Posts: 5,786
    Although the Cycling News does touch on the moral aspects to other teams sponsors, once again Sky get bashed for taking what is seen as the moral high ground. First anti drugs then anti plastic. CN seen more upset that they promise good things rather than the fact they might do bad things. They mention the likes of Total, Orica and the dodgy political ragimes but I doubt they’ll right a whole column about them. I think they have a point but they should cast the net a bit wider
    http://cyclinganddesign.blogspot.fr/
  • inseine
    inseine Posts: 5,786
    bompington wrote:

    ... and don't forget all the toxic waste from the manufacture of solar panels and the mining of the materials.

    I'd be interested to see your graph that shows there is more toxic waste involved in the manufacture of solar panels than the building and maintenance of a nuclear power plant plus the disposal of all the waste (or storage of, for 10,000 years).
    http://cyclinganddesign.blogspot.fr/
  • rick_chasey
    rick_chasey Posts: 72,707
    bompington wrote:
    orraloon wrote:
    I raise you Fukushima, Chernobyl, Three Mile Island...next...

    So here's a summary of the debate so far:

    Anti-nuclear poster: "nuclear is dangerous and kills lots of people and the planet"
    Pro-nuclear poster: "here are some actual stats that show that coal kills literally 500 times more people than nuclear"
    Anti-nuclear poster: "nuclear is dangerous and kills lots of people and the planet"

    I don't have a horse in this argument but I do think you're slightly underestimating the cost of looking after the waste.

    The waste is, in some instances unbelievably dangerous *for a very very very long time* - so much so there's a whole study into what symbols to use so that generations in 50,000 years time will still understand them.

    That *is* expensive and is particularly damaging. There is also a security risk which adds to the cost, before you get to the cost of a meltdown in one in every 100 power stations or so.

    https://www.ft.com/content/db87c16c-494 ... ab0a67014c
    _
  • inseine
    inseine Posts: 5,786
    Rick Chasey wrote:
    bompington wrote:
    orraloon wrote:
    I raise you Fukushima, Chernobyl, Three Mile Island...next...

    So here's a summary of the debate so far:

    Anti-nuclear poster: "nuclear is dangerous and kills lots of people and the planet"
    Pro-nuclear poster: "here are some actual stats that show that coal kills literally 500 times more people than nuclear"
    Anti-nuclear poster: "nuclear is dangerous and kills lots of people and the planet"

    I don't have a horse in this argument but I do think you're slightly underestimating the cost of looking after the waste.

    The waste is, in some instances unbelievably dangerous *for a very very very long time* - so much so there's a whole study into what symbols to use so that generations in 50,000 years time will still understand them.

    That *is* expensive and is particularly damaging. There is also a security risk which adds to the cost, before you get to the cost of a meltdown in one in every 100 power stations or so.

    https://www.ft.com/content/db87c16c-494 ... ab0a67014c

    I don't have a horse in the race either, to be fair, but I think the stats only show a snapshot of any given day. Also, who is promoting coal?? The shear cost of dealing with the waste would pay for a huge number of solar panels and you never answered my question about the toxic waste associated with solar.
    http://cyclinganddesign.blogspot.fr/
  • rick_chasey
    rick_chasey Posts: 72,707
    inseine wrote:
    Rick Chasey wrote:
    bompington wrote:
    orraloon wrote:
    I raise you Fukushima, Chernobyl, Three Mile Island...next...

    So here's a summary of the debate so far:

    Anti-nuclear poster: "nuclear is dangerous and kills lots of people and the planet"
    Pro-nuclear poster: "here are some actual stats that show that coal kills literally 500 times more people than nuclear"
    Anti-nuclear poster: "nuclear is dangerous and kills lots of people and the planet"

    I don't have a horse in this argument but I do think you're slightly underestimating the cost of looking after the waste.

    The waste is, in some instances unbelievably dangerous *for a very very very long time* - so much so there's a whole study into what symbols to use so that generations in 50,000 years time will still understand them.

    That *is* expensive and is particularly damaging. There is also a security risk which adds to the cost, before you get to the cost of a meltdown in one in every 100 power stations or so.

    https://www.ft.com/content/db87c16c-494 ... ab0a67014c

    I don't have a horse in the race either, to be fair, but I think the stats only show a snapshot of any given day. Also, who is promoting coal?? The shear cost of dealing with the waste would pay for a huge number of solar panels and you never answered my question about the toxic waste associated with solar.

    I’ve pretty much reached the limit of my knowledge on this.
    _
  • bompington
    bompington Posts: 7,674
    inseine wrote:
    I think the stats only show a snapshot of any given day.
    Err, no, that's over quite a number of years - including the whole history of nuclear power generation.
    inseine wrote:
    you never answered my question about the toxic waste associated with solar.
    Well, I am trying to work here as well as more important stuff - but since you asked:
    https://www.forbes.com/sites/michaelshe ... 3e230c121c
  • RichN95.
    RichN95. Posts: 27,157
    edited March 2019
    All I know is that I probably use some sort of product of the Petrochemical industry every minute of my life and without them my quality of life would be vastly diminished. Probably to a level most first world people would find unbearable.

    I also know that while the likes of Friends of the Earth and Greenpeace can highlight environmental concerns, they will never come up with an solutions. These will be developed by the industries that they demonise.

    Pick areas for improvement by all means, but dismissing the whole industry as 'evil' is just asinine.
    Twitter: @RichN95
  • inseine
    inseine Posts: 5,786
    bompington wrote:
    inseine wrote:
    I think the stats only show a snapshot of any given day.
    Err, no, that's over quite a number of years - including the whole history of nuclear power generation.
    inseine wrote:
    you never answered my question about the toxic waste associated with solar.
    Well, I am trying to work here as well as more important stuff - but since you asked:
    https://www.forbes.com/sites/michaelshe ... 3e230c121c
    Good article, interesting too.
    Now back to cycling...... :D
    http://cyclinganddesign.blogspot.fr/
  • bompington
    bompington Posts: 7,674
    RichN95 wrote:
    Pick areas for improvement by all means, but dismissing the whole industry as 'evil' is so much easier and helps make us feel a lot more virtuous, as well as providing tidy careers for a privileged few.
    FTFY
  • FocusZing
    FocusZing Posts: 4,373
    ademort wrote:
    .Internet observers have noticed that the TeamIneos.com website domain was registered on March 5, with the @teamineos account also registered on Twitter.Apparently Team SKY have refused to comment .

    Cheers.

    Anybody know the bikes they will be using?
  • RichN95.
    RichN95. Posts: 27,157
    FocusZing wrote:
    ademort wrote:
    .Internet observers have noticed that the TeamIneos.com website domain was registered on March 5, with the @teamineos account also registered on Twitter.Apparently Team SKY have refused to comment .

    Cheers.

    Anybody know the bikes they will be using?
    Pinarello were committed for another season or two with or without Ineos
    Twitter: @RichN95
  • kingstongraham
    kingstongraham Posts: 26,255
    It is quite a shift from #passonplastic
  • FocusZing
    FocusZing Posts: 4,373
    RichN95 wrote:
    FocusZing wrote:
    ademort wrote:
    .Internet observers have noticed that the TeamIneos.com website domain was registered on March 5, with the @teamineos account also registered on Twitter.Apparently Team SKY have refused to comment .

    Cheers.

    Anybody know the bikes they will be using?
    Pinarello were committed for another season or two with or without Ineos

    Cheers Rich.
  • salsiccia1
    salsiccia1 Posts: 3,725
    Without getting too lost in the moral maze I do feel a bit uneasy with the new sponsor's business. However, as mentioned above, that's a bit hypocritical as everyone uses and benefits from these type of products.

    The main issue for me is not with plastic per se, but with how the products are handled. No-one is making someone chuck a food container/bottle/whatever in the sea instead of getting it recycled, for example.
    It's only a bit of sport, Mun. Relax and enjoy the racing.
  • m.r.m.
    m.r.m. Posts: 3,342
    RichN95 wrote:
    All I know is that I probably use some sort of product of the Petrochemical industry every minute of my life and without them my quality of life would be vastly diminished. Probably to a level most first world people would find unbearable.

    I also know that while the likes of Friends of the Earth and Greenpeace can highlight environmental concerns, they will never come up with an solutions. These will be developed by the industries that they demonise.

    Pick areas for improvement by all means, but dismissing the whole industry as 'evil' is just asinine.
    Quoted for absolute truth

    Pinarello made a post on their instagram stating they will be continuing with Team INEOS (as per contract probably). I'd expect both parties to resign that deal as well, since there really isn't a downside. The team will continue to be the best GT team for as long as Froome, Thomas, Bernal etc. are riding.

    Regarding Ratcliffe and why he is in this, I'd suspect there is some type of financial benefit to using the cycling team as a tax write off for marketing for the company?! Additionally to billionaires enjoying buying sports franchises.
    PTP Champion 2019, 2022 & 2023
  • RichN95.
    RichN95. Posts: 27,157
    KingstonGraham wrote:
    It is quite a shift from #passonplastic
    But it really isn't. Pass on Plastic was never about getting rid of plastics, it was about tackling plastic waste, particularly single use plastic - something that plastics companies invest quite a lot in trying to fix as well - via producing more recyclable materials and recycling methods - not least because there's money to be made from it.

    The plastic industry has 'Operation Clean Sweep' which is devoted to providing practical solutions to ocean pollution, while Pass On Plastic is pitched at a consumer level to try to reduce unnecessary usage.
    Twitter: @RichN95
  • ridgerider
    ridgerider Posts: 2,851
    I am getting round this change of ownership by not thinking of the new owner as one of the richest men in the UK, but thinking of him as one of the poorest in Monaco.
    Half man, Half bike
  • poweredbyidris
    poweredbyidris Posts: 848
    Ridgerider wrote:
    I am getting round this change of ownership by not thinking of the new owner as one of the richest men in the UK, but thinking of him as one of the poorest in Monaco.

    was in Monaco at the weekend (#humblebrag) - saw a shop that's sole purpose was for the interior design of private jets
  • inseine
    inseine Posts: 5,786
    PoweredByIdris wrote:
    Ridgerider wrote:
    I am getting round this change of ownership by not thinking of the new owner as one of the richest men in the UK, but thinking of him as one of the poorest in Monaco.

    was in Monaco at the weekend (#humblebrag) - saw a shop that's sole purpose was for the interior design of private jets
    Funny, I'm designing a private jet as we speak. It's another world
    http://cyclinganddesign.blogspot.fr/
  • r0bh
    r0bh Posts: 2,194
    This takeover deal makes me happy for two reasons: (1) because it keeps the team going which is a good thing, and (2) it is schadenfreude for everyone who rejoiced that Sky were pulling out that it seems like the team will now have an even bigger budget than before :)
  • poweredbyidris
    poweredbyidris Posts: 848
    inseine wrote:
    PoweredByIdris wrote:
    Ridgerider wrote:
    I am getting round this change of ownership by not thinking of the new owner as one of the richest men in the UK, but thinking of him as one of the poorest in Monaco.

    was in Monaco at the weekend (#humblebrag) - saw a shop that's sole purpose was for the interior design of private jets
    Funny, I'm designing a private jet as we speak. It's another world

    Is it like the ones I used to draw on my schoolbooks? How many machine-guns has it got?
  • amrushton
    amrushton Posts: 1,253
    PoweredByIdris wrote:
    inseine wrote:
    PoweredByIdris wrote:
    Ridgerider wrote:
    I am getting round this change of ownership by not thinking of the new owner as one of the richest men in the UK, but thinking of him as one of the poorest in Monaco.

    was in Monaco at the weekend (#humblebrag) - saw a shop that's sole purpose was for the interior design of private jets
    Funny, I'm designing a private jet as we speak. It's another world

    Is it like the ones I used to draw on my schoolbooks? How many machine-guns has it got?

    As many as its owner and designer are allowed to buy and fit! It's the same in superyacht world. A seemingly small amount of v.wealthy people but go to cannes/monaco and there are some incredible vessels there and that's just two harbours.
  • inseine
    inseine Posts: 5,786
    PoweredByIdris wrote:
    inseine wrote:
    PoweredByIdris wrote:
    Ridgerider wrote:
    I am getting round this change of ownership by not thinking of the new owner as one of the richest men in the UK, but thinking of him as one of the poorest in Monaco.

    was in Monaco at the weekend (#humblebrag) - saw a shop that's sole purpose was for the interior design of private jets
    Funny, I'm designing a private jet as we speak. It's another world

    Is it like the ones I used to draw on my schoolbooks? How many machine-guns has it got?
    Damn. Rapidly sketches the machine guns.
    http://cyclinganddesign.blogspot.fr/
  • RichN95.
    RichN95. Posts: 27,157
    Ridgerider wrote:
    I am getting round this change of ownership by not thinking of the new owner as one of the richest men in the UK, but thinking of him as one of the poorest in Monaco.
    He's quite possibly the richest in Monaco too. Probably top 5, definitely top ten.
    Twitter: @RichN95
  • mamil314
    mamil314 Posts: 1,103
    RichN95 wrote:
    KingstonGraham wrote:
    It is quite a shift from #passonplastic
    But it really isn't. Pass on Plastic was never about getting rid of plastics, it was about tackling plastic waste, particularly single use plastic - something that plastics companies invest quite a lot in trying to fix as well - via producing more recyclable materials and recycling methods - not least because there's money to be made from it.

    The plastic industry has 'Operation Clean Sweep' which is devoted to providing practical solutions to ocean pollution, while Pass On Plastic is pitched at a consumer level to try to reduce unnecessary usage.

    You seem to be correct
    https://skybiggerpicture.com/impact/pdf ... t_2018.pdf
  • kingstongraham
    kingstongraham Posts: 26,255
    I'm always suspicious of those energy company adverts that want to help you use less energy too.
  • ridgerider
    ridgerider Posts: 2,851
    RichN95 wrote:
    Ridgerider wrote:
    I am getting round this change of ownership by not thinking of the new owner as one of the richest men in the UK, but thinking of him as one of the poorest in Monaco.
    He's quite possibly the richest in Monaco too. Probably top 5, definitely top ten.

    Bugger
    Half man, Half bike
  • awavey
    awavey Posts: 2,368
    M.R.M. wrote:
    Pinarello made a post on their instagram stating they will be continuing with Team INEOS (as per contract probably). I'd expect both parties to resign that deal as well, since there really isn't a downside. The team will continue to be the best GT team for as long as Froome, Thomas, Bernal etc. are riding.

    but Im sure I read in another post recently someone had posted an article from last December from a cycling mag,INEOS are actually the company that supplies Toray, the worlds largest maker of carbon fibre, with acrylonitrile, which is the core ingredient needed to make carbon fibre, and Toray happen to be Pinarellos exclusive partner, and supplier of a special carbon fibre with nanoalloy technology to make bike frames like the Dogma F8 with.

    literally INEOS already help make Froomes bike...I dont think Pinarello are going to quit being their bike supplier.

Categories