NetZero 2050 is enshrined in our law. Keeping steelworks open is not. Personally, I know that NetZero 2050 is a nonsense but what I think is irrelevant because I will die and children will be brainwashed at primary school.
Yesterday, a really mild comment I posted about the Trans issue was taken out by UnHerd censors , presumably because Trans people would not like criticism of their group. On the same story quite nasty criticism of feminism was left standing there for all to see.
I predict that UnHerders have about 1 year to say that NetZero 2050 is nonsense and then the comments will be taken out because they will upset people. This is censorship in the extreme. It reminds me of Germany in the 1930s.
Sadly the whole business of censorship, and it is a business as well as part of the prevailing ideology, is a taboo subject. I have repeatedly suggested that an article on how and why moderation operates here and on other comment forums would make an interesting article but without the slightest response from Unherd. To what extent is signing up to woke leaning algorithms a requirement of being a publisher today? An important discussion I would have thought, but perhaps it delves too deeply into the compromises that publishers have to make that their readers might not approve of.
There’s a proposal before parliament now which would enable employees to demand compensation from their employers if they hear distressing things in the workplace. The example of a barrista overhearing offensive conversation has been mentioned.
If this becomes law I suppose forums like this will be finished. Who would risk publishing an opinion that might offend someone?
If Unherd’s moderation becomes woke leaning then who is going to pay a subscription for to be told what to say. I get exasperated with the Microsoft News’ forum for being told “Something went wrong” amongst other gobbledegook from its AI. No chance to talk about vaccines. Our American masters will not allow it.
There’s a proposal before parliament now which would enable employees to demand compensation from their employers if they hear distressing things in the workplace. The example of a barrista overhearing offensive conversation has been mentioned.
If this becomes law I suppose forums like this will be finished. Who would risk publishing an opinion that might offend someone?
If Unherd’s moderation becomes woke leaning then who is going to pay a subscription for to be told what to say. I get exasperated with the Microsoft News’ forum for being told “Something went wrong” amongst other gobbledegook from its AI. No chance to talk about vaccines. Our American masters will not allow it.
I’ve said it to you before but I’m going to say it again: does NetZero necessarily have to be regressive? Does ‘green’ need to be globalist? I’m personally for keeping the steel industry for all the reasons above, but why stop there? Why not expand into creating green industries, based on our competitive advantages (e.g. our massive wind power potential), giving us skilled jobs and for workers, as for those in steel mentioned above, ‘a confidence borne of mastering dangerous elements for their own and everyone’s benefit?’
As to the removal of that comment – is it still removed? Comments are taken down all the time on here and then put back up the next day. I think it’s done as a sort of spot check – I haven’t noticed a pattern in the comments of mine which have been removed (apart from the one which said the Daily Mail, and by extension their Harmsworth family owners, had supported the Nazis – but maybe because that’s verifiable (and so not libellous?) the comment was reposted). I agree though that it would be better if the censors were more transparent about what they’re doing.
I agree with the spirit of your question. But the point to me is that our government will try to achieve NetZero as if they were playing a game of football. They will lie and cheat, fall over and pretend to be injured – anything to get there.
Random questions:
1) We aren’t allowed to burn anything. Does NetZero mean that we will export our rubbish for other countries to burn? Ask your local council where your recycling is being done and how. I’ll bet they won’t answer.
2) NetZero means carbon credits. Research this. Airlines are offering for you to pay them extra money to earn carbon credits. They are audited on this. They give the money to companies who say they will plant trees in the Southern Hemisphere. People have followed this money. Yes, young trees are being planted as old trees are still being cut down. Deforestation has not slowed. Who is kidding who? Older mature trees are being cut down and replaced by saplings.
The problem for me is not NetZero, nor green jobs. The problem is that governments will lie and cheat to get there.
With you on the carbon credits and recycling skulduggery – a lot of work has been done to show that the former at least are (at the moment!) based on a lot of hopeful thinking. I’m not ready though to abandon the case for green reindustrialisation or for at least building the UK’s protections against climate change – and I fear that all this bashing of NetZero is maligning the environmental movement as a whole which is now, with cruel irony, being painted as elitist when it’s the poor who will suffer most from climate change.
You see, I think we are agreeing. I am 100% for tackling the damage we are doing. But there may be more important issues today, like getting rid of plastic from our oceans, like tackling people who tip all their waste in the countryside.
The big fraud is not the point of tackling our problems, it is the sheer disgust I have with this political NetZero target. It is just a heap of lies. People have to be told the truth and, MOST importantly, what is expected of each individual.
To be boring, I will give you an example. There is an area in the west where huge wind farms have been built in the sea. But people will not allow these to be connected to the power grid. There are NIMBYs out there who nod when you say, “NetZero” as long as they don’t have to do anything. Enough.
To give you another example people in my Shire are against building a new Reservoir. They insist the Water company fix the leaks first. But there are huge new housing estates being built all around the shire all pulling off one reservoir. Not difficult to see the “people” saying climate change is to blame. Building extra reservoirs will not bankrupt the UK but the unfunded cost of Net Zero by financially illiterate MP’s will.
Sounds sensible. Are those local inhabitants preventing the connection of turbines to the grid through planning consultations, as with housing? In which case it’s another argument for adopting the zoning practices they have in the Netherlands and Germany maybe.
To give you another example people in my Shire are against building a new Reservoir. They insist the Water company fix the leaks first. But there are huge new housing estates being built all around the shire all pulling off one reservoir. Not difficult to see the “people” saying climate change is to blame. Building extra reservoirs will not bankrupt the UK but the unfunded cost of Net Zero by financially illiterate MP’s will.
Sounds sensible. Are those local inhabitants preventing the connection of turbines to the grid through planning consultations, as with housing? In which case it’s another argument for adopting the zoning practices they have in the Netherlands and Germany maybe.
You see, I think we are agreeing. I am 100% for tackling the damage we are doing. But there may be more important issues today, like getting rid of plastic from our oceans, like tackling people who tip all their waste in the countryside.
The big fraud is not the point of tackling our problems, it is the sheer disgust I have with this political NetZero target. It is just a heap of lies. People have to be told the truth and, MOST importantly, what is expected of each individual.
To be boring, I will give you an example. There is an area in the west where huge wind farms have been built in the sea. But people will not allow these to be connected to the power grid. There are NIMBYs out there who nod when you say, “NetZero” as long as they don’t have to do anything. Enough.
With you on the carbon credits and recycling skulduggery – a lot of work has been done to show that the former at least are (at the moment!) based on a lot of hopeful thinking. I’m not ready though to abandon the case for green reindustrialisation or for at least building the UK’s protections against climate change – and I fear that all this bashing of NetZero is maligning the environmental movement as a whole which is now, with cruel irony, being painted as elitist when it’s the poor who will suffer most from climate change.
I agree with the spirit of your question. But the point to me is that our government will try to achieve NetZero as if they were playing a game of football. They will lie and cheat, fall over and pretend to be injured – anything to get there.
Random questions:
1) We aren’t allowed to burn anything. Does NetZero mean that we will export our rubbish for other countries to burn? Ask your local council where your recycling is being done and how. I’ll bet they won’t answer.
2) NetZero means carbon credits. Research this. Airlines are offering for you to pay them extra money to earn carbon credits. They are audited on this. They give the money to companies who say they will plant trees in the Southern Hemisphere. People have followed this money. Yes, young trees are being planted as old trees are still being cut down. Deforestation has not slowed. Who is kidding who? Older mature trees are being cut down and replaced by saplings.
The problem for me is not NetZero, nor green jobs. The problem is that governments will lie and cheat to get there.
Sadly the whole business of censorship, and it is a business as well as part of the prevailing ideology, is a taboo subject. I have repeatedly suggested that an article on how and why moderation operates here and on other comment forums would make an interesting article but without the slightest response from Unherd. To what extent is signing up to woke leaning algorithms a requirement of being a publisher today? An important discussion I would have thought, but perhaps it delves too deeply into the compromises that publishers have to make that their readers might not approve of.
I’ve said it to you before but I’m going to say it again: does NetZero necessarily have to be regressive? Does ‘green’ need to be globalist? I’m personally for keeping the steel industry for all the reasons above, but why stop there? Why not expand into creating green industries, based on our competitive advantages (e.g. our massive wind power potential), giving us skilled jobs and for workers, as for those in steel mentioned above, ‘a confidence borne of mastering dangerous elements for their own and everyone’s benefit?’
As to the removal of that comment – is it still removed? Comments are taken down all the time on here and then put back up the next day. I think it’s done as a sort of spot check – I haven’t noticed a pattern in the comments of mine which have been removed (apart from the one which said the Daily Mail, and by extension their Harmsworth family owners, had supported the Nazis – but maybe because that’s verifiable (and so not libellous?) the comment was reposted). I agree though that it would be better if the censors were more transparent about what they’re doing.
Last edited 1 year ago by Desmond Wolf
Chris Wheatley
1 year ago
NetZero 2050 is enshrined in our law. Keeping steelworks open is not. Personally, I know that NetZero 2050 is a nonsense but what I think is irrelevant because I will die and children will be brainwashed at primary school.
Yesterday, a really mild comment I posted about the Trans issue was taken out by UnHerd censors , presumably because Trans people would not like criticism of their group. On the same story quite nasty criticism of feminism was left standing there for all to see.
I predict that UnHerders have about 1 year to say that NetZero 2050 is nonsense and then the comments will be taken out because they will upset people. This is censorship in the extreme. It reminds me of Germany in the 1930s.
Lukas Nel
1 year ago
Net Zero is pie in the sky silliness. Steel is something tangible and should not be sacrificed on the green altar
Lukas Nel
1 year ago
Net Zero is pie in the sky silliness. Steel is something tangible and should not be sacrificed on the green altar
Ian McKinney
1 year ago
“I fail to understand how any country can really exist with any sort of wealth if it doesn’t make anything and consumes a lot.”
100% correct!
Add to that the insatiable desire for cheap labour from the EU and now Albania etc, the remittances going overseas, continued reliance on foreign technology and foreign investment – we are an upside down pyramid of a nation and it could collapse at any moment.
The question is did you in the 2019 election trust this government (whose vision for a global Britain seems to be pushing them towards accepting investment from countries like China, mentioned above) more with the task of protecting jobs in industry than Corbyn’s Labour, which promised a Green New Deal and the creation of green skilled jobs?
anyone who seriously wanted to vote for Corbyn – didnt have the first understanding of what Corbyn and his henchmen have been up to for their past 40 years.
It beggars belief that time after time Starmer declared ”100% confidence” in Corbyn many, many times (is this a tortoligy?) and the moment Corbyn was throguh the door – Starmer (rightly) ditched the madness of the Corbyn dream.
Now we have a born liar and a ”man”? – who cannot confirm what a woman is – likely to be our next PM.
And it’s thanks to the refined thinking of you two fine gentlemen (I think it’s safe to assume) that we now have a government far more honest than Corbyn’s would ever have been, with his mad, acceptable-to-much-of-western-Europe ideas.
Is it a tautology? At phrase level, not necessarily, unless you think confidence is always entire (and then the 100% becomes redundant). In the context of his repetition of the phrase – yes it is. Of course we can’t accuse Johnson of the same thing. He only once promised the 40 new hospitals which he never built, maybe because he has more respect for our time or because he’s more careful with his language? Difficult to say
My understanding is that Hospital trusts pay for new Hospitals through the PFI scheme and will continue to pay for them up until 2040. Not too difficult to understand why they cannot afford new Equipment.
Either hospitals take a sort of ”mortgage” as many people do on their homes, so we get 40 hospitals – or we (tax payer) can pay cash for each development and we get 2 hospitals – you choose.
The first hospital I talked about above, in fact we paid for that ourselves from built up reserves and by selling a chunk of our unused/unsuitable victorian assets (which we keep the freehold on) and we now have chrysalis right now turning into a butterfly.
Either hospitals take a sort of ”mortgage” as many people do on their homes, so we get 40 hospitals – or we (tax payer) can pay cash for each development and we get 2 hospitals – you choose.
The first hospital I talked about above, in fact we paid for that ourselves from built up reserves and by selling a chunk of our unused/unsuitable victorian assets (which we keep the freehold on) and we now have chrysalis right now turning into a butterfly.
Hold on a second. you dont build ”40 hospitals” in 12 months. It takes a year to get it throguh planning thats after a year with the architects.
In fact I am directly involved in probably the FIRST of the 40 central London – its a fabulous facility – we hope we will complete Septemebr 2023. The others were promised and on track for 2030. https://moorfieldseyecharity.org.uk/about-us/oriel – copy/paste that link for project Oriel Moorfields – which I am also involved in – it will be a magnificant jewel when its finished.
I know what I am talking about.
That’s a fair point, and I wish you all the best with that. But as I understand, because many of the 40 hospital building projects are rebuilds and extensions, it was a dishonest use of the word ‘new’ when he promised 40 new ones: https://www.bbc.com/news/59372348
That’s a fair point, and I wish you all the best with that. But as I understand, because many of the 40 hospital building projects are rebuilds and extensions, it was a dishonest use of the word ‘new’ when he promised 40 new ones: https://www.bbc.com/news/59372348
My understanding is that Hospital trusts pay for new Hospitals through the PFI scheme and will continue to pay for them up until 2040. Not too difficult to understand why they cannot afford new Equipment.
Hold on a second. you dont build ”40 hospitals” in 12 months. It takes a year to get it throguh planning thats after a year with the architects.
In fact I am directly involved in probably the FIRST of the 40 central London – its a fabulous facility – we hope we will complete Septemebr 2023. The others were promised and on track for 2030. https://moorfieldseyecharity.org.uk/about-us/oriel – copy/paste that link for project Oriel Moorfields – which I am also involved in – it will be a magnificant jewel when its finished.
I know what I am talking about.
And it’s thanks to the refined thinking of you two fine gentlemen (I think it’s safe to assume) that we now have a government far more honest than Corbyn’s would ever have been, with his mad, acceptable-to-much-of-western-Europe ideas.
Is it a tautology? At phrase level, not necessarily, unless you think confidence is always entire (and then the 100% becomes redundant). In the context of his repetition of the phrase – yes it is. Of course we can’t accuse Johnson of the same thing. He only once promised the 40 new hospitals which he never built, maybe because he has more respect for our time or because he’s more careful with his language? Difficult to say
anyone who seriously wanted to vote for Corbyn – didnt have the first understanding of what Corbyn and his henchmen have been up to for their past 40 years.
It beggars belief that time after time Starmer declared ”100% confidence” in Corbyn many, many times (is this a tortoligy?) and the moment Corbyn was throguh the door – Starmer (rightly) ditched the madness of the Corbyn dream.
Now we have a born liar and a ”man”? – who cannot confirm what a woman is – likely to be our next PM.
The question is did you in the 2019 election trust this government (whose vision for a global Britain seems to be pushing them towards accepting investment from countries like China, mentioned above) more with the task of protecting jobs in industry than Corbyn’s Labour, which promised a Green New Deal and the creation of green skilled jobs?
Ian McKinney
1 year ago
“I fail to understand how any country can really exist with any sort of wealth if it doesn’t make anything and consumes a lot.”
100% correct!
Add to that the insatiable desire for cheap labour from the EU and now Albania etc, the remittances going overseas, continued reliance on foreign technology and foreign investment – we are an upside down pyramid of a nation and it could collapse at any moment.
Samir Iker
1 year ago
I personally find the talk of UK moving towards services because of “competitive advantages” to be a bit hilarious.
Because, based on more interactions with “service providers” than I would have preferred, if anything a lot of the services industry – especially administration, government run sectors and even large parts of hospitality and retail – are far more uncompetitive than British industry and Engineering when compared to China or India
Samir Iker
1 year ago
I personally find the talk of UK moving towards services because of “competitive advantages” to be a bit hilarious.
Because, based on more interactions with “service providers” than I would have preferred, if anything a lot of the services industry – especially administration, government run sectors and even large parts of hospitality and retail – are far more uncompetitive than British industry and Engineering when compared to China or India
F Hugh Eveleigh
1 year ago
Net zero will be the death of the UK as we know it – if it doesn’t fall sick from other causes in the meanwhile. A groundlessly based policy passed by parliament without much ado and of no use to the climate and certainly no use to the economy. What with it and HS2 and millions of immigrants our infrastructures collapse, our lives affected for the worse and yet we go on and on down the same path. As for British steel, once it goes then China and others have the open door as it will manufacture, using as much carbon as needed, all of our needs – or not and therein the problem. Self-sufficiency will have gone and we become dependent on a communist-based superpower. Talk of madness!
I shall vote Reform UK.
Reform UK? Are they promising to protect British jobs? What support has Farage shown British workers apart from making them angry about foreign ones? During the rail strikes, when workers of the RMT and other unions were asking for better job security and wages (exactly what they had hoped to achieve through Brexit), was Farage on their side? Maybe Tice will be better but I’ve never heard economic policies from Farage that show support for ordinary working people.
Reform UK? Are they promising to protect British jobs? What support has Farage shown British workers apart from making them angry about foreign ones? During the rail strikes, when workers of the RMT and other unions were asking for better job security and wages (exactly what they had hoped to achieve through Brexit), was Farage on their side? Maybe Tice will be better but I’ve never heard economic policies from Farage that show support for ordinary working people.
F Hugh Eveleigh
1 year ago
Net zero will be the death of the UK as we know it – if it doesn’t fall sick from other causes in the meanwhile. A groundlessly based policy passed by parliament without much ado and of no use to the climate and certainly no use to the economy. What with it and HS2 and millions of immigrants our infrastructures collapse, our lives affected for the worse and yet we go on and on down the same path. As for British steel, once it goes then China and others have the open door as it will manufacture, using as much carbon as needed, all of our needs – or not and therein the problem. Self-sufficiency will have gone and we become dependent on a communist-based superpower. Talk of madness!
I shall vote Reform UK.
Dugan E
1 year ago
I was ‘furnace wrecking’ there in ’75. In the re-heaters, not the blast furnaces.First man in, aged 20, after the furnace had been switched off for 12 hours. My suede desert boots (only helmets were issued as safety wear) left a line of melted rubber smoking footprints. Half an hour in, half an hour out. The rolling mill had regular accidents. White hot lengths of wire speeding along the line would hit a rolling bank and snake through the air, no warning, just stay on your toes!!
Incidentally, Rileys Crisps, salt n’ shake only!
Incredible – did you feel ‘a confidence borne of mastering dangerous elements for your own and everyone’s benefit?’ Or do you think these skilled industrial jobs are romanticised these days?
Incredible – did you feel ‘a confidence borne of mastering dangerous elements for your own and everyone’s benefit?’ Or do you think these skilled industrial jobs are romanticised these days?
Last edited 1 year ago by Desmond Wolf
Dugan E
1 year ago
I was ‘furnace wrecking’ there in ’75. In the re-heaters, not the blast furnaces.First man in, aged 20, after the furnace had been switched off for 12 hours. My suede desert boots (only helmets were issued as safety wear) left a line of melted rubber smoking footprints. Half an hour in, half an hour out. The rolling mill had regular accidents. White hot lengths of wire speeding along the line would hit a rolling bank and snake through the air, no warning, just stay on your toes!!
Incidentally, Rileys Crisps, salt n’ shake only!
And so, therefore.. NetZero does not have to be a drag on the economy or a punishment on ordinary people, right? You dribbled the ball to the box there and then forgot to shoot methinks..
I’m not commenting on NetZero, rather on possible alternatives for steel production as an alternative to shutting down and letting the Chinese produce even more CO2. The NetZero debate is full of ignorance and denial on both sides making it futile to advance any thoughts or opinions on this.
Britain’s carbon output makes not one jot of difference: our air quality is perfectly adequate, and the sandaloid net zero obsession is just a sad religion come tribe that the inadequate who need some quasi religion, cling to.
Not so much opinions but hard facts although debateable. W Antarctica and Greenland hold approx. 12-15m of sea level rise from melting ice and much of the Antarctic ice is not resting on bedrock, aiding melting. If warming which is taking place takes 50 years or 500 for this melting is another matter but the populations of the Maldives and maybe Miami/New Orleans might be more worried than most of us. If humanity hadn’t built so many cities and other settlements on the coast then it would be less of a problem. Then there’s the overall increase in temperature affecting 3rd world populations and wildlife, but that doesn’t bother us living in Western cities. The modelling done as a basis for decision making is probably deficient but the need for change seems obvious and it has to be dramatic, but unless China, India and the US take the lead, then anything else done is futile. The NetZero campaign and any other panic initiatives are just like most countries’ handling of the pandemic, lacking in balance and common sense. It’s ironic that the Greens and environmentalists have just made things worse through their opposition to nuclear. There, I’ve already said too much, and I don’t have any solutions apart from massive investments in nuclear, solar, wind and HVDC long distance links from the deserts to where the electricity is needed. I’ve spent 10 years towards the end of my working career studying Geoscience at University evening classes just for fun: oceanography, glacialogy, deserts, Antarctica, vulcanology, geology, life development (last 400M years including 3 mass extinction events), global climate development. It’s all interconnected and the planet as such will survive anything for the next 2-3 billion years, but the species on the surface won’t. Maybe another war will make the problem irrelevant.
Not so much opinions but hard facts although debateable. W Antarctica and Greenland hold approx. 12-15m of sea level rise from melting ice and much of the Antarctic ice is not resting on bedrock, aiding melting. If warming which is taking place takes 50 years or 500 for this melting is another matter but the populations of the Maldives and maybe Miami/New Orleans might be more worried than most of us. If humanity hadn’t built so many cities and other settlements on the coast then it would be less of a problem. Then there’s the overall increase in temperature affecting 3rd world populations and wildlife, but that doesn’t bother us living in Western cities. The modelling done as a basis for decision making is probably deficient but the need for change seems obvious and it has to be dramatic, but unless China, India and the US take the lead, then anything else done is futile. The NetZero campaign and any other panic initiatives are just like most countries’ handling of the pandemic, lacking in balance and common sense. It’s ironic that the Greens and environmentalists have just made things worse through their opposition to nuclear. There, I’ve already said too much, and I don’t have any solutions apart from massive investments in nuclear, solar, wind and HVDC long distance links from the deserts to where the electricity is needed. I’ve spent 10 years towards the end of my working career studying Geoscience at University evening classes just for fun: oceanography, glacialogy, deserts, Antarctica, vulcanology, geology, life development (last 400M years including 3 mass extinction events), global climate development. It’s all interconnected and the planet as such will survive anything for the next 2-3 billion years, but the species on the surface won’t. Maybe another war will make the problem irrelevant.
Britain’s carbon output makes not one jot of difference: our air quality is perfectly adequate, and the sandaloid net zero obsession is just a sad religion come tribe that the inadequate who need some quasi religion, cling to.
I’m not commenting on NetZero, rather on possible alternatives for steel production as an alternative to shutting down and letting the Chinese produce even more CO2. The NetZero debate is full of ignorance and denial on both sides making it futile to advance any thoughts or opinions on this.
Just shifting the CO2 emissions upstream to electricity production rather than at the mills. And seems like a lot of capex. Which of course will be passed on to Swedish industry, making Volvo and co uncompetitive
Yes they are. Most of the steelworks are in Northern Sweden where there is a glut of hydro and windpower with large wind turbine parks. Very little of Sweden’s electricity generation comes from fossil fuels, mainly only on cold winter days at peak consumption.
It’s the industries and transport which are the big CO2 emitters. The population is mainly in the south but the ”green” energy production is mainly in the north. So the Greens and Socialists decided to shut down half of the nuclear reactors, all in the south, in the name of environmental good! The south now has supply issues and they’re not so keen on noisy (not so) wind turbines there but they still want the electricity. Finland is fairly flat and doesn’t have a lot of hydro power but they at least have kept their nuclear power.
It’s the industries and transport which are the big CO2 emitters. The population is mainly in the south but the ”green” energy production is mainly in the north. So the Greens and Socialists decided to shut down half of the nuclear reactors, all in the south, in the name of environmental good! The south now has supply issues and they’re not so keen on noisy (not so) wind turbines there but they still want the electricity. Finland is fairly flat and doesn’t have a lot of hydro power but they at least have kept their nuclear power.
Yes they are. Most of the steelworks are in Northern Sweden where there is a glut of hydro and windpower with large wind turbine parks. Very little of Sweden’s electricity generation comes from fossil fuels, mainly only on cold winter days at peak consumption.
And so, therefore.. NetZero does not have to be a drag on the economy or a punishment on ordinary people, right? You dribbled the ball to the box there and then forgot to shoot methinks..
Just shifting the CO2 emissions upstream to electricity production rather than at the mills. And seems like a lot of capex. Which of course will be passed on to Swedish industry, making Volvo and co uncompetitive
”Scunthorpe was renowned” Sadly, far too many places and industries in UK are was– or ‘has beens’ (as are other developed countries – US for example).
A couple of weeks ago I took a train from NYC to Philly – I was totally shocked on that short journey, to see the quantity of devastated of once great proud multilevel – enormous – brick built factories.
The faded names on the exteriors were once proud employers of their areas – the ubiquitous rusting watertanks towering above the buildings, was indeed a metaphor to the ‘developed’ world. I hope the buildings can be ‘re-purposed’ – but sadly the watertanks thjemselves are past saving.
Without a UK based Steel Industry we are (I agree) destined to exclude ourselves from manufacturing.
Scunthorpe.. how ironic that the town contains the word that aptly describes the saddoe net zero sandaloid eco lemmings!
rob drummond
1 year ago
”Scunthorpe was renowned” Sadly, far too many places and industries in UK are was– or ‘has beens’ (as are other developed countries – US for example).
A couple of weeks ago I took a train from NYC to Philly – I was totally shocked on that short journey, to see the quantity of devastated of once great proud multilevel – enormous – brick built factories.
The faded names on the exteriors were once proud employers of their areas – the ubiquitous rusting watertanks towering above the buildings, was indeed a metaphor to the ‘developed’ world. I hope the buildings can be ‘re-purposed’ – but sadly the watertanks thjemselves are past saving.
Without a UK based Steel Industry we are (I agree) destined to exclude ourselves from manufacturing.
Last edited 1 year ago by rob drummond
Peter Lee
1 year ago
I hate to say this but ‘If you want to know what makes sense, see what China is doing’
NetZero 2050 is enshrined in our law. Keeping steelworks open is not. Personally, I know that NetZero 2050 is a nonsense but what I think is irrelevant because I will die and children will be brainwashed at primary school.
Yesterday, a really mild comment I posted about the Trans issue was taken out by UnHerd censors , presumably because Trans people would not like criticism of their group. On the same story quite nasty criticism of feminism was left standing there for all to see.
I predict that UnHerders have about 1 year to say that NetZero 2050 is nonsense and then the comments will be taken out because they will upset people. This is censorship in the extreme. It reminds me of Germany in the 1930s.
Sadly the whole business of censorship, and it is a business as well as part of the prevailing ideology, is a taboo subject. I have repeatedly suggested that an article on how and why moderation operates here and on other comment forums would make an interesting article but without the slightest response from Unherd. To what extent is signing up to woke leaning algorithms a requirement of being a publisher today? An important discussion I would have thought, but perhaps it delves too deeply into the compromises that publishers have to make that their readers might not approve of.
There’s a proposal before parliament now which would enable employees to demand compensation from their employers if they hear distressing things in the workplace. The example of a barrista overhearing offensive conversation has been mentioned.
If this becomes law I suppose forums like this will be finished. Who would risk publishing an opinion that might offend someone?
If Unherd’s moderation becomes woke leaning then who is going to pay a subscription for to be told what to say. I get exasperated with the Microsoft News’ forum for being told “Something went wrong” amongst other gobbledegook from its AI. No chance to talk about vaccines. Our American masters will not allow it.
There’s a proposal before parliament now which would enable employees to demand compensation from their employers if they hear distressing things in the workplace. The example of a barrista overhearing offensive conversation has been mentioned.
If this becomes law I suppose forums like this will be finished. Who would risk publishing an opinion that might offend someone?
If Unherd’s moderation becomes woke leaning then who is going to pay a subscription for to be told what to say. I get exasperated with the Microsoft News’ forum for being told “Something went wrong” amongst other gobbledegook from its AI. No chance to talk about vaccines. Our American masters will not allow it.
I’ve said it to you before but I’m going to say it again: does NetZero necessarily have to be regressive? Does ‘green’ need to be globalist? I’m personally for keeping the steel industry for all the reasons above, but why stop there? Why not expand into creating green industries, based on our competitive advantages (e.g. our massive wind power potential), giving us skilled jobs and for workers, as for those in steel mentioned above, ‘a confidence borne of mastering dangerous elements for their own and everyone’s benefit?’
As to the removal of that comment – is it still removed? Comments are taken down all the time on here and then put back up the next day. I think it’s done as a sort of spot check – I haven’t noticed a pattern in the comments of mine which have been removed (apart from the one which said the Daily Mail, and by extension their Harmsworth family owners, had supported the Nazis – but maybe because that’s verifiable (and so not libellous?) the comment was reposted). I agree though that it would be better if the censors were more transparent about what they’re doing.
I agree with the spirit of your question. But the point to me is that our government will try to achieve NetZero as if they were playing a game of football. They will lie and cheat, fall over and pretend to be injured – anything to get there.
Random questions:
1) We aren’t allowed to burn anything. Does NetZero mean that we will export our rubbish for other countries to burn? Ask your local council where your recycling is being done and how. I’ll bet they won’t answer.
2) NetZero means carbon credits. Research this. Airlines are offering for you to pay them extra money to earn carbon credits. They are audited on this. They give the money to companies who say they will plant trees in the Southern Hemisphere. People have followed this money. Yes, young trees are being planted as old trees are still being cut down. Deforestation has not slowed. Who is kidding who? Older mature trees are being cut down and replaced by saplings.
The problem for me is not NetZero, nor green jobs. The problem is that governments will lie and cheat to get there.
With you on the carbon credits and recycling skulduggery – a lot of work has been done to show that the former at least are (at the moment!) based on a lot of hopeful thinking. I’m not ready though to abandon the case for green reindustrialisation or for at least building the UK’s protections against climate change – and I fear that all this bashing of NetZero is maligning the environmental movement as a whole which is now, with cruel irony, being painted as elitist when it’s the poor who will suffer most from climate change.
You see, I think we are agreeing. I am 100% for tackling the damage we are doing. But there may be more important issues today, like getting rid of plastic from our oceans, like tackling people who tip all their waste in the countryside.
The big fraud is not the point of tackling our problems, it is the sheer disgust I have with this political NetZero target. It is just a heap of lies. People have to be told the truth and, MOST importantly, what is expected of each individual.
To be boring, I will give you an example. There is an area in the west where huge wind farms have been built in the sea. But people will not allow these to be connected to the power grid. There are NIMBYs out there who nod when you say, “NetZero” as long as they don’t have to do anything. Enough.
To give you another example people in my Shire are against building a new Reservoir. They insist the Water company fix the leaks first. But there are huge new housing estates being built all around the shire all pulling off one reservoir. Not difficult to see the “people” saying climate change is to blame. Building extra reservoirs will not bankrupt the UK but the unfunded cost of Net Zero by financially illiterate MP’s will.
Sounds sensible. Are those local inhabitants preventing the connection of turbines to the grid through planning consultations, as with housing? In which case it’s another argument for adopting the zoning practices they have in the Netherlands and Germany maybe.
To give you another example people in my Shire are against building a new Reservoir. They insist the Water company fix the leaks first. But there are huge new housing estates being built all around the shire all pulling off one reservoir. Not difficult to see the “people” saying climate change is to blame. Building extra reservoirs will not bankrupt the UK but the unfunded cost of Net Zero by financially illiterate MP’s will.
Sounds sensible. Are those local inhabitants preventing the connection of turbines to the grid through planning consultations, as with housing? In which case it’s another argument for adopting the zoning practices they have in the Netherlands and Germany maybe.
You see, I think we are agreeing. I am 100% for tackling the damage we are doing. But there may be more important issues today, like getting rid of plastic from our oceans, like tackling people who tip all their waste in the countryside.
The big fraud is not the point of tackling our problems, it is the sheer disgust I have with this political NetZero target. It is just a heap of lies. People have to be told the truth and, MOST importantly, what is expected of each individual.
To be boring, I will give you an example. There is an area in the west where huge wind farms have been built in the sea. But people will not allow these to be connected to the power grid. There are NIMBYs out there who nod when you say, “NetZero” as long as they don’t have to do anything. Enough.
With you on the carbon credits and recycling skulduggery – a lot of work has been done to show that the former at least are (at the moment!) based on a lot of hopeful thinking. I’m not ready though to abandon the case for green reindustrialisation or for at least building the UK’s protections against climate change – and I fear that all this bashing of NetZero is maligning the environmental movement as a whole which is now, with cruel irony, being painted as elitist when it’s the poor who will suffer most from climate change.
I agree with the spirit of your question. But the point to me is that our government will try to achieve NetZero as if they were playing a game of football. They will lie and cheat, fall over and pretend to be injured – anything to get there.
Random questions:
1) We aren’t allowed to burn anything. Does NetZero mean that we will export our rubbish for other countries to burn? Ask your local council where your recycling is being done and how. I’ll bet they won’t answer.
2) NetZero means carbon credits. Research this. Airlines are offering for you to pay them extra money to earn carbon credits. They are audited on this. They give the money to companies who say they will plant trees in the Southern Hemisphere. People have followed this money. Yes, young trees are being planted as old trees are still being cut down. Deforestation has not slowed. Who is kidding who? Older mature trees are being cut down and replaced by saplings.
The problem for me is not NetZero, nor green jobs. The problem is that governments will lie and cheat to get there.
Sadly the whole business of censorship, and it is a business as well as part of the prevailing ideology, is a taboo subject. I have repeatedly suggested that an article on how and why moderation operates here and on other comment forums would make an interesting article but without the slightest response from Unherd. To what extent is signing up to woke leaning algorithms a requirement of being a publisher today? An important discussion I would have thought, but perhaps it delves too deeply into the compromises that publishers have to make that their readers might not approve of.
I’ve said it to you before but I’m going to say it again: does NetZero necessarily have to be regressive? Does ‘green’ need to be globalist? I’m personally for keeping the steel industry for all the reasons above, but why stop there? Why not expand into creating green industries, based on our competitive advantages (e.g. our massive wind power potential), giving us skilled jobs and for workers, as for those in steel mentioned above, ‘a confidence borne of mastering dangerous elements for their own and everyone’s benefit?’
As to the removal of that comment – is it still removed? Comments are taken down all the time on here and then put back up the next day. I think it’s done as a sort of spot check – I haven’t noticed a pattern in the comments of mine which have been removed (apart from the one which said the Daily Mail, and by extension their Harmsworth family owners, had supported the Nazis – but maybe because that’s verifiable (and so not libellous?) the comment was reposted). I agree though that it would be better if the censors were more transparent about what they’re doing.
NetZero 2050 is enshrined in our law. Keeping steelworks open is not. Personally, I know that NetZero 2050 is a nonsense but what I think is irrelevant because I will die and children will be brainwashed at primary school.
Yesterday, a really mild comment I posted about the Trans issue was taken out by UnHerd censors , presumably because Trans people would not like criticism of their group. On the same story quite nasty criticism of feminism was left standing there for all to see.
I predict that UnHerders have about 1 year to say that NetZero 2050 is nonsense and then the comments will be taken out because they will upset people. This is censorship in the extreme. It reminds me of Germany in the 1930s.
Net Zero is pie in the sky silliness. Steel is something tangible and should not be sacrificed on the green altar
Net Zero is pie in the sky silliness. Steel is something tangible and should not be sacrificed on the green altar
“I fail to understand how any country can really exist with any sort of wealth if it doesn’t make anything and consumes a lot.”
100% correct!
Add to that the insatiable desire for cheap labour from the EU and now Albania etc, the remittances going overseas, continued reliance on foreign technology and foreign investment – we are an upside down pyramid of a nation and it could collapse at any moment.
The question is did you in the 2019 election trust this government (whose vision for a global Britain seems to be pushing them towards accepting investment from countries like China, mentioned above) more with the task of protecting jobs in industry than Corbyn’s Labour, which promised a Green New Deal and the creation of green skilled jobs?
anyone who seriously wanted to vote for Corbyn – didnt have the first understanding of what Corbyn and his henchmen have been up to for their past 40 years.
It beggars belief that time after time Starmer declared ”100% confidence” in Corbyn many, many times (is this a tortoligy?) and the moment Corbyn was throguh the door – Starmer (rightly) ditched the madness of the Corbyn dream.
Now we have a born liar and a ”man”? – who cannot confirm what a woman is – likely to be our next PM.
Sadly, a t**d rolled in glitter remains a t**d.
And it’s thanks to the refined thinking of you two fine gentlemen (I think it’s safe to assume) that we now have a government far more honest than Corbyn’s would ever have been, with his mad, acceptable-to-much-of-western-Europe ideas.
Is it a tautology? At phrase level, not necessarily, unless you think confidence is always entire (and then the 100% becomes redundant). In the context of his repetition of the phrase – yes it is. Of course we can’t accuse Johnson of the same thing. He only once promised the 40 new hospitals which he never built, maybe because he has more respect for our time or because he’s more careful with his language? Difficult to say
My understanding is that Hospital trusts pay for new Hospitals through the PFI scheme and will continue to pay for them up until 2040. Not too difficult to understand why they cannot afford new Equipment.
A government that always has billions to spare for its incompetent friends in the PPE VIP lane, but not enough for the people they’re meant to serve?
Either hospitals take a sort of ”mortgage” as many people do on their homes, so we get 40 hospitals – or we (tax payer) can pay cash for each development and we get 2 hospitals – you choose.
The first hospital I talked about above, in fact we paid for that ourselves from built up reserves and by selling a chunk of our unused/unsuitable victorian assets (which we keep the freehold on) and we now have chrysalis right now turning into a butterfly.
A government that always has billions to spare for its incompetent friends in the PPE VIP lane, but not enough for the people they’re meant to serve?
Either hospitals take a sort of ”mortgage” as many people do on their homes, so we get 40 hospitals – or we (tax payer) can pay cash for each development and we get 2 hospitals – you choose.
The first hospital I talked about above, in fact we paid for that ourselves from built up reserves and by selling a chunk of our unused/unsuitable victorian assets (which we keep the freehold on) and we now have chrysalis right now turning into a butterfly.
Hold on a second. you dont build ”40 hospitals” in 12 months. It takes a year to get it throguh planning thats after a year with the architects.
In fact I am directly involved in probably the FIRST of the 40 central London – its a fabulous facility – we hope we will complete Septemebr 2023. The others were promised and on track for 2030.
https://moorfieldseyecharity.org.uk/about-us/oriel – copy/paste that link for project Oriel Moorfields – which I am also involved in – it will be a magnificant jewel when its finished.
I know what I am talking about.
That’s a fair point, and I wish you all the best with that. But as I understand, because many of the 40 hospital building projects are rebuilds and extensions, it was a dishonest use of the word ‘new’ when he promised 40 new ones:
https://www.bbc.com/news/59372348
That’s a fair point, and I wish you all the best with that. But as I understand, because many of the 40 hospital building projects are rebuilds and extensions, it was a dishonest use of the word ‘new’ when he promised 40 new ones:
https://www.bbc.com/news/59372348
My understanding is that Hospital trusts pay for new Hospitals through the PFI scheme and will continue to pay for them up until 2040. Not too difficult to understand why they cannot afford new Equipment.
Hold on a second. you dont build ”40 hospitals” in 12 months. It takes a year to get it throguh planning thats after a year with the architects.
In fact I am directly involved in probably the FIRST of the 40 central London – its a fabulous facility – we hope we will complete Septemebr 2023. The others were promised and on track for 2030.
https://moorfieldseyecharity.org.uk/about-us/oriel – copy/paste that link for project Oriel Moorfields – which I am also involved in – it will be a magnificant jewel when its finished.
I know what I am talking about.
And it’s thanks to the refined thinking of you two fine gentlemen (I think it’s safe to assume) that we now have a government far more honest than Corbyn’s would ever have been, with his mad, acceptable-to-much-of-western-Europe ideas.
Is it a tautology? At phrase level, not necessarily, unless you think confidence is always entire (and then the 100% becomes redundant). In the context of his repetition of the phrase – yes it is. Of course we can’t accuse Johnson of the same thing. He only once promised the 40 new hospitals which he never built, maybe because he has more respect for our time or because he’s more careful with his language? Difficult to say
anyone who seriously wanted to vote for Corbyn – didnt have the first understanding of what Corbyn and his henchmen have been up to for their past 40 years.
It beggars belief that time after time Starmer declared ”100% confidence” in Corbyn many, many times (is this a tortoligy?) and the moment Corbyn was throguh the door – Starmer (rightly) ditched the madness of the Corbyn dream.
Now we have a born liar and a ”man”? – who cannot confirm what a woman is – likely to be our next PM.
Sadly, a t**d rolled in glitter remains a t**d.
The question is did you in the 2019 election trust this government (whose vision for a global Britain seems to be pushing them towards accepting investment from countries like China, mentioned above) more with the task of protecting jobs in industry than Corbyn’s Labour, which promised a Green New Deal and the creation of green skilled jobs?
“I fail to understand how any country can really exist with any sort of wealth if it doesn’t make anything and consumes a lot.”
100% correct!
Add to that the insatiable desire for cheap labour from the EU and now Albania etc, the remittances going overseas, continued reliance on foreign technology and foreign investment – we are an upside down pyramid of a nation and it could collapse at any moment.
I personally find the talk of UK moving towards services because of “competitive advantages” to be a bit hilarious.
Because, based on more interactions with “service providers” than I would have preferred, if anything a lot of the services industry – especially administration, government run sectors and even large parts of hospitality and retail – are far more uncompetitive than British industry and Engineering when compared to China or India
I personally find the talk of UK moving towards services because of “competitive advantages” to be a bit hilarious.
Because, based on more interactions with “service providers” than I would have preferred, if anything a lot of the services industry – especially administration, government run sectors and even large parts of hospitality and retail – are far more uncompetitive than British industry and Engineering when compared to China or India
Net zero will be the death of the UK as we know it – if it doesn’t fall sick from other causes in the meanwhile. A groundlessly based policy passed by parliament without much ado and of no use to the climate and certainly no use to the economy. What with it and HS2 and millions of immigrants our infrastructures collapse, our lives affected for the worse and yet we go on and on down the same path. As for British steel, once it goes then China and others have the open door as it will manufacture, using as much carbon as needed, all of our needs – or not and therein the problem. Self-sufficiency will have gone and we become dependent on a communist-based superpower. Talk of madness!
I shall vote Reform UK.
Reform UK? Are they promising to protect British jobs? What support has Farage shown British workers apart from making them angry about foreign ones? During the rail strikes, when workers of the RMT and other unions were asking for better job security and wages (exactly what they had hoped to achieve through Brexit), was Farage on their side? Maybe Tice will be better but I’ve never heard economic policies from Farage that show support for ordinary working people.
Reform UK? Are they promising to protect British jobs? What support has Farage shown British workers apart from making them angry about foreign ones? During the rail strikes, when workers of the RMT and other unions were asking for better job security and wages (exactly what they had hoped to achieve through Brexit), was Farage on their side? Maybe Tice will be better but I’ve never heard economic policies from Farage that show support for ordinary working people.
Net zero will be the death of the UK as we know it – if it doesn’t fall sick from other causes in the meanwhile. A groundlessly based policy passed by parliament without much ado and of no use to the climate and certainly no use to the economy. What with it and HS2 and millions of immigrants our infrastructures collapse, our lives affected for the worse and yet we go on and on down the same path. As for British steel, once it goes then China and others have the open door as it will manufacture, using as much carbon as needed, all of our needs – or not and therein the problem. Self-sufficiency will have gone and we become dependent on a communist-based superpower. Talk of madness!
I shall vote Reform UK.
I was ‘furnace wrecking’ there in ’75. In the re-heaters, not the blast furnaces.First man in, aged 20, after the furnace had been switched off for 12 hours. My suede desert boots (only helmets were issued as safety wear) left a line of melted rubber smoking footprints. Half an hour in, half an hour out. The rolling mill had regular accidents. White hot lengths of wire speeding along the line would hit a rolling bank and snake through the air, no warning, just stay on your toes!!
Incidentally, Rileys Crisps, salt n’ shake only!
Incredible – did you feel ‘a confidence borne of mastering dangerous elements for your own and everyone’s benefit?’ Or do you think these skilled industrial jobs are romanticised these days?
Incredible – did you feel ‘a confidence borne of mastering dangerous elements for your own and everyone’s benefit?’ Or do you think these skilled industrial jobs are romanticised these days?
I was ‘furnace wrecking’ there in ’75. In the re-heaters, not the blast furnaces.First man in, aged 20, after the furnace had been switched off for 12 hours. My suede desert boots (only helmets were issued as safety wear) left a line of melted rubber smoking footprints. Half an hour in, half an hour out. The rolling mill had regular accidents. White hot lengths of wire speeding along the line would hit a rolling bank and snake through the air, no warning, just stay on your toes!!
Incidentally, Rileys Crisps, salt n’ shake only!
Sweden’s SSAB steelmaker is planning to build a prototype Steelworks in Northern Sweden using fossil-free electricity and hydrogen instead of coke by 2026, also converting existing plants. https://www.ssab.com/en/company/sustainability/first-in-fossil-free-steel/timeline
And so, therefore.. NetZero does not have to be a drag on the economy or a punishment on ordinary people, right? You dribbled the ball to the box there and then forgot to shoot methinks..
I’m not commenting on NetZero, rather on possible alternatives for steel production as an alternative to shutting down and letting the Chinese produce even more CO2. The NetZero debate is full of ignorance and denial on both sides making it futile to advance any thoughts or opinions on this.
Britain’s carbon output makes not one jot of difference: our air quality is perfectly adequate, and the sandaloid net zero obsession is just a sad religion come tribe that the inadequate who need some quasi religion, cling to.
‘full of ignorance and denial on both sides’ – Just hearing that makes me want to know your opinions on it, but I won’t hassle you!
Not so much opinions but hard facts although debateable. W Antarctica and Greenland hold approx. 12-15m of sea level rise from melting ice and much of the Antarctic ice is not resting on bedrock, aiding melting. If warming which is taking place takes 50 years or 500 for this melting is another matter but the populations of the Maldives and maybe Miami/New Orleans might be more worried than most of us. If humanity hadn’t built so many cities and other settlements on the coast then it would be less of a problem. Then there’s the overall increase in temperature affecting 3rd world populations and wildlife, but that doesn’t bother us living in Western cities. The modelling done as a basis for decision making is probably deficient but the need for change seems obvious and it has to be dramatic, but unless China, India and the US take the lead, then anything else done is futile. The NetZero campaign and any other panic initiatives are just like most countries’ handling of the pandemic, lacking in balance and common sense. It’s ironic that the Greens and environmentalists have just made things worse through their opposition to nuclear. There, I’ve already said too much, and I don’t have any solutions apart from massive investments in nuclear, solar, wind and HVDC long distance links from the deserts to where the electricity is needed. I’ve spent 10 years towards the end of my working career studying Geoscience at University evening classes just for fun: oceanography, glacialogy, deserts, Antarctica, vulcanology, geology, life development (last 400M years including 3 mass extinction events), global climate development. It’s all interconnected and the planet as such will survive anything for the next 2-3 billion years, but the species on the surface won’t. Maybe another war will make the problem irrelevant.
Christ. Fair to say this whole comment section has made me more keen on net zero and less keen on NetZero
Christ. Fair to say this whole comment section has made me more keen on net zero and less keen on NetZero
Not so much opinions but hard facts although debateable. W Antarctica and Greenland hold approx. 12-15m of sea level rise from melting ice and much of the Antarctic ice is not resting on bedrock, aiding melting. If warming which is taking place takes 50 years or 500 for this melting is another matter but the populations of the Maldives and maybe Miami/New Orleans might be more worried than most of us. If humanity hadn’t built so many cities and other settlements on the coast then it would be less of a problem. Then there’s the overall increase in temperature affecting 3rd world populations and wildlife, but that doesn’t bother us living in Western cities. The modelling done as a basis for decision making is probably deficient but the need for change seems obvious and it has to be dramatic, but unless China, India and the US take the lead, then anything else done is futile. The NetZero campaign and any other panic initiatives are just like most countries’ handling of the pandemic, lacking in balance and common sense. It’s ironic that the Greens and environmentalists have just made things worse through their opposition to nuclear. There, I’ve already said too much, and I don’t have any solutions apart from massive investments in nuclear, solar, wind and HVDC long distance links from the deserts to where the electricity is needed. I’ve spent 10 years towards the end of my working career studying Geoscience at University evening classes just for fun: oceanography, glacialogy, deserts, Antarctica, vulcanology, geology, life development (last 400M years including 3 mass extinction events), global climate development. It’s all interconnected and the planet as such will survive anything for the next 2-3 billion years, but the species on the surface won’t. Maybe another war will make the problem irrelevant.
Britain’s carbon output makes not one jot of difference: our air quality is perfectly adequate, and the sandaloid net zero obsession is just a sad religion come tribe that the inadequate who need some quasi religion, cling to.
‘full of ignorance and denial on both sides’ – Just hearing that makes me want to know your opinions on it, but I won’t hassle you!
I’m not commenting on NetZero, rather on possible alternatives for steel production as an alternative to shutting down and letting the Chinese produce even more CO2. The NetZero debate is full of ignorance and denial on both sides making it futile to advance any thoughts or opinions on this.
Read carefully.
They are not going “fossil free”.
Just shifting the CO2 emissions upstream to electricity production rather than at the mills. And seems like a lot of capex. Which of course will be passed on to Swedish industry, making Volvo and co uncompetitive
Yes they are. Most of the steelworks are in Northern Sweden where there is a glut of hydro and windpower with large wind turbine parks. Very little of Sweden’s electricity generation comes from fossil fuels, mainly only on cold winter days at peak consumption.
Yes, but look at the population of Sweden, particularly the population density. I would bet that Finland wouldn’t have a problem either.
It’s the industries and transport which are the big CO2 emitters. The population is mainly in the south but the ”green” energy production is mainly in the north. So the Greens and Socialists decided to shut down half of the nuclear reactors, all in the south, in the name of environmental good! The south now has supply issues and they’re not so keen on noisy (not so) wind turbines there but they still want the electricity. Finland is fairly flat and doesn’t have a lot of hydro power but they at least have kept their nuclear power.
It’s the industries and transport which are the big CO2 emitters. The population is mainly in the south but the ”green” energy production is mainly in the north. So the Greens and Socialists decided to shut down half of the nuclear reactors, all in the south, in the name of environmental good! The south now has supply issues and they’re not so keen on noisy (not so) wind turbines there but they still want the electricity. Finland is fairly flat and doesn’t have a lot of hydro power but they at least have kept their nuclear power.
Yes, but look at the population of Sweden, particularly the population density. I would bet that Finland wouldn’t have a problem either.
Yes they are. Most of the steelworks are in Northern Sweden where there is a glut of hydro and windpower with large wind turbine parks. Very little of Sweden’s electricity generation comes from fossil fuels, mainly only on cold winter days at peak consumption.
And so, therefore.. NetZero does not have to be a drag on the economy or a punishment on ordinary people, right? You dribbled the ball to the box there and then forgot to shoot methinks..
Read carefully.
They are not going “fossil free”.
Just shifting the CO2 emissions upstream to electricity production rather than at the mills. And seems like a lot of capex. Which of course will be passed on to Swedish industry, making Volvo and co uncompetitive
Sweden’s SSAB steelmaker is planning to build a prototype Steelworks in Northern Sweden using fossil-free electricity and hydrogen instead of coke by 2026, also converting existing plants. https://www.ssab.com/en/company/sustainability/first-in-fossil-free-steel/timeline
”Scunthorpe was renowned” Sadly, far too many places and industries in UK are was– or ‘has beens’ (as are other developed countries – US for example).
A couple of weeks ago I took a train from NYC to Philly – I was totally shocked on that short journey, to see the quantity of devastated of once great proud multilevel – enormous – brick built factories.
The faded names on the exteriors were once proud employers of their areas – the ubiquitous rusting watertanks towering above the buildings, was indeed a metaphor to the ‘developed’ world. I hope the buildings can be ‘re-purposed’ – but sadly the watertanks thjemselves are past saving.
Without a UK based Steel Industry we are (I agree) destined to exclude ourselves from manufacturing.
Scunthorpe.. how ironic that the town contains the word that aptly describes the saddoe net zero sandaloid eco lemmings!
Scunthorpe.. how ironic that the town contains the word that aptly describes the saddoe net zero sandaloid eco lemmings!
”Scunthorpe was renowned” Sadly, far too many places and industries in UK are was– or ‘has beens’ (as are other developed countries – US for example).
A couple of weeks ago I took a train from NYC to Philly – I was totally shocked on that short journey, to see the quantity of devastated of once great proud multilevel – enormous – brick built factories.
The faded names on the exteriors were once proud employers of their areas – the ubiquitous rusting watertanks towering above the buildings, was indeed a metaphor to the ‘developed’ world. I hope the buildings can be ‘re-purposed’ – but sadly the watertanks thjemselves are past saving.
Without a UK based Steel Industry we are (I agree) destined to exclude ourselves from manufacturing.
I hate to say this but ‘If you want to know what makes sense, see what China is doing’
.
.
I hate to say this but ‘If you want to know what makes sense, see what China is doing’
“From a global point of view, it’s just shifting the problem elsewhere.”
This is obvious, but our politicians pretend not to see it.
It’s hard to understand why any government would pursue Local Net Zero.
“From a global point of view, it’s just shifting the problem elsewhere.”
This is obvious, but our politicians pretend not to see it.
It’s hard to understand why any government would pursue Local Net Zero.