The Australian Election result

[ahinton]

I also make efforts to cut my carbon footprint (heat heat-pump, external lagging to house, etc.) but only to save money. My philosophy would be to apply the Precautionary Principle to any application of the Precautionary Principle.

Good for you; I assume that you've also done what you can to ensure that your roof and floor insulation is the most efficient that it can be and that you use LED low energy lighting and low energy consumption whilte goods as far as is practicable; have you considered an HRV? - they're not always easy to retro-fit but, in terms of value for money, they're a good idea provided that the building's insulation is up to scratch.

But what's wrong with taking these steps to save money? I'm all for it and it's probably the most widely held reason for people to try this kind of thing! I know several people who've gone to town on this kind of thing in France and Spain with the aim to achieve passive results and they've done it by spending their own rather than other taxpayers' money on it, all but one doing so by borrowing from the bank (which I thought that I'd better mention before you cite Pedro and Pablo!); OK, all but one of them is now reaping the benefit of being able to sell surplus energy back to the grid at a vastly higher rate than they pay for the much smaller amounts that they actually use - which some might argue amounts to a kind of "subsidy" - but they've none of them expected to be financed by taxpayers to do it and the one who's not doing this simply cannot do so because his property is not on the grid anyway.

As for renewables, what I'd do in this northern European context is to recognise that none of them are yet fit for purpose and send them back to a (subsidised) research laboratory, meanwhile continuing with unsubsidised, modern, fossil-fuel technology that is economic and with the lowest emissions possible.

I think that this is a somewhat pessimistic viewpoint; I understand it up to a point, but such research is continuing and, frankly, I'd sooner see governments pouring money into that than into subsidising the end products which, as I've said several times before, will plummet in price once they're mass-produced and widely sold, to the point at which few if any subsidies for them will even be necessary - but what currently available fossil fuel technology has the lowest emissions possible, in your view and how "economic" is it really? UK EPC certificates can be notoriously unreliable but, when accurate, they demonstrate that the savings that can sometimes be achieved by moving away from non-fossil fuels can on occasion be sufficient to persuade lenders to bankroll certain installations.

[Mr Pee]

http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/jamesdelingpole/100238047/global-warming-believers-are-feeling-the-heat/

[amateur51]

http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/ja...ling-the-heat/

Mr Delingpole getting his retaliation in first, at a guess.

[scottycelt]

Not being a scientist, I simply have to take the word of the majority of qualified scientists regarding global warming.

Still, with some on the 'believer' side accusing 'non-believers' of being idiots and extremists, it's a bit like the usual Religion v Atheism discussions in reverse.

It almost makes some shaky believers like myself secretly yearn that the non-believers in this case are right ... which, in any case, would be a very good thing for believers, non-believers and global warming 'agnostics' alike!

[MrGongGong]

For some reason images wont upload
but

http://blogs.rgj.com/factchecker/files/2013/05/Doran_Anderegg_Cook.jpg

[jean]

The reason is they've been disabled along with the smileys.

[Beef Oven!]

For some reason images wont upload
but

http://blogs.rgj.com/factchecker/fil...eregg_Cook.jpg

Money talks, science walks.

[Beef Oven!]

Mr Delingpole getting his retaliation in first, at a guess.

No. They leaked their report to create impact and lend artificial importance (usual tactics), so my guess is that it's a response to that.

It fooled MrGG though!

[amateur51]

No. They leaked their report to create impact and lend artificial importance (usual tactics), so my guess is that it's a response to that.

It fooled MrGG though!

Well Mr Dellingpole has very aggressive form on these issues, hence my comment.

[MrGongGong]

Money talks, science walks.

Of course
it's the shape shifting lizards who live in the caves at the north pole controlled remotely from the evil empire of the EU .......

Loose the paranoia matey
not everyone is driven by money

[Beef Oven!]

Loose the paranoia matey
not everyone is driven by money

Don't you believe it!

[MrGongGong]

Don't you believe it!

I know it (i'll send you a link...... but you don't want messages It tells me :-()

Try being a composer for a living ! (ask Ah)

http://www.independent.co.uk/environment/climate-change/ipcc-report-scientists-are-95-certain-humans-are-responsible-for-climate-change-8843573.html

of course it's all made up
I mean, Nigel Lawson says so ..... and he's not motivated by capitalism is he ? :Ha:

[Beef Oven!]

Try being a composer for a living ! (ask Ah)

He's too busy doing his tax return.

[ahinton]

He's too busy doing his tax return.

Not true, actually but thank for the unwitting reminder; I OUGHT to be doing it and, for once, it's slipped what remains of my mind!

I can't say that I'm entirely clear about the connection between the how and when of completion of my tax return and the most recent General Election in Australia, but perhaps someone could enlighten me on that.

[Mr Pee]

The reason is they've been disabled along with the smileys.

Blimey. This really does feel like the naughty corner. (Frown smiley)