Ouch ! 35% price hike from British Gas - Page 7

cashman · 06-08-2008, 09:19

paris heard a report on radio lancs this morning, was a lancs coalman,saying more people are switching back to coal, they still have coal nooks so have a storage place, he also said they were looking at re-opening some pits in lancs, cos theres still plenty of coal in em, will be interesting to see how/if that develops, have me doubts personally, but think it would be great, warmer homes, extra jobs, etc, mind that would never do,would it?

entwisi · 06-08-2008, 10:24

extra smog, decent sunsets, etc

seriously though, if you have a fireplace, there is loads of places to get free wood, why not go back to burning it?

andrewb · 06-08-2008, 10:54

Quote:

Originally Posted by cashman

paris heard a report on radio lancs this morning, was a lancs coalman,saying more people are switching back to coal, they still have coal nooks so have a storage place, he also said they were looking at re-opening some pits in lancs, cos theres still plenty of coal in em, will be interesting to see how/if that develops, have me doubts personally, but think it would be great, warmer homes, extra jobs, etc, mind that would never do,would it?

May well become viable with the increasing wholesale cost of energy. However I would rather we invest in cleaner energy sources which don't contribute to global warming. Rising water levels and enlarging deserts could lead to a lot of housing displacement and starvation in the future.

MargaretR · 06-08-2008, 11:04

The coal fired stations being considered have a system to capture their emissions for underground storage - safer than nuclear waste storage

entwisi · 06-08-2008, 11:48

Quote:

Originally Posted by andrewb

May well become viable with the increasing wholesale cost of energy. However I would rather we invest in cleaner energy sources which don't contribute to global warming. Rising water levels and enlarging deserts could lead to a lot of housing displacement and starvation in the future.

Its OK mate, Baxenden is pretty high above sea level, we will be OK

there are plenty of examples of housing on stilts/pontoons etc around the world, flooding does not necessarily displace the housing, only the way we currently build them.

andrewb · 06-08-2008, 11:49

Quote:

Originally Posted by [email protected]

The coal fired stations being considered have a system to capture their emissions for underground storage - safer than nuclear waste storage

That's good then. Coal will still run out though, we need a better alternative. Nuclear is one of them. Nuclear waste amounts are tiny for the amount of energy they generate.

andrewb · 06-08-2008, 11:50

Quote:

Originally Posted by entwisi

Its OK mate, Baxenden is pretty high above sea level, we will be OK

there are plenty of examples of housing on stilts/pontoons etc around the world, flooding does not necessarily displace the housing, only the way we currently build them.

I was thinking about people in mudhuts in other countries.

Benipete · 07-08-2008, 17:19

Quote:

Originally Posted by andrewb

I was thinking about people in mudhuts in other countries.

The more water - the more mud -the more huts - solved.

Eric · 07-08-2008, 18:29

Quote:

Originally Posted by [email protected]

The coal fired stations being considered have a system to capture their emissions for underground storage - safer than nuclear waste storage

What about coke? No ... not the peruvian marching powder, the stuff you get from burning coal in coke ovens? I remember we burnt coke after the clean air acts; worked great.

Eric · 07-08-2008, 18:32

Quote:

Originally Posted by entwisi

extra smog, decent sunsets, etc

seriously though, if you have a fireplace, there is loads of places to get free wood, why not go back to burning it?

Are there not harmful emissions from burning wood? And there is not much wood in England when you think about it. Is there any geothermal potential? There is probably enough hot air generated in Westminster to heat the whole country

Eric · 07-08-2008, 19:24

Quote:

Originally Posted by Royboy39

Explain......................

Without going to google, just off the top of my head, I believe that natural gas "sits" on top of the oil .... back in the old days (my youth

) they used to burn the gas off before pumping the oil. Nowadays the gas is piped off and is used to heat homes etc. Like oil,it is a non-renewable resource. Fortunately, in Canada, we have lots of it.

and we export to the US.

entwisi · 08-08-2008, 08:54

Posted via Mobile Device
Thats the stuff i use in my car.

They still burn off about 70% as we don't have a use for it all

andrewb · 13-08-2008, 22:47

I hear a few people suggesting windfall taxes or higher taxes for energy companies. Obama wants to do it in the US.

It might be popular with the public, to attack those nasty rich shareholders and energy companies, but its the public who get hit in the long run. Energy companies already get taxed a massive amount. To increase supply, to meet demand, and lower prices, energy companies have to drill for more oil. Currently fields are only around 10/20% used and it costs a fortune to drill further. It is often a very, very risky investment to search for oil and dig in new places. These places often don't give a return on the investment.

If we windfall tax these companies, who exactly is going to have the money to search for new supply or spend more drilling deeper? Supply will drop, and prices will increase. The taxed money will only be wasted by our government anyway. Who loses out?

For those who are going to suggest nationalisation. That's where the problem lies, 90% of oil produced is by nationalised companies bumping up prices through inefficiency and bureaucracy.

We need to start looking more seriously at lowering our energy consumption, as this problem is not going to go away. Perhaps with government nudging through massive reductions in taxation on energy saving goods.

Mancie · 13-08-2008, 23:11

Quote:

Originally Posted by andrewb

For those who are going to suggest nationalisation. That's where the problem lies, 90% of oil produced is by nationalised companies bumping up prices through inefficiency and bureaucracy.

We need to start looking more seriously at lowering our energy consumption, as this problem is not going to go away. Perhaps with government nudging through massive reductions in taxation on energy saving goods.

Try telling that to old aged pensioners and poor families who already suffer in winter because they have to almost freeze before they turn the heating on... I don't believe in any windfall taxes.. but I do believe that a buy back..or even a forced nationalisation of basic public services would be good, but is there a political party that has the guts to do it?

When these sevices..water, electricity, gas were sold off to all comers..the big lie was that they would be owned by the public..or was it "Sid".. it amounted to selling the public something they already owned!...I agree that we have no choice left but nuclear power.. but we still had/have enough coal to last for decades but the then Tory Government felt the best way forward was to shut down the mines..not for care of global warming, but because they wanted to smash the communities they saw as "militant"

Benipete · 13-08-2008, 23:17

Quote:

Originally Posted by andrewb

I hear a few people suggesting windfall taxes or higher taxes for energy companies. Obama wants to do it in the US.

It might be popular with the public, to attack those nasty rich shareholders and energy companies, but its the public who get hit in the long run. Energy companies already get taxed a massive amount. To increase supply, to meet demand, and lower prices, energy companies have to drill for more oil. Currently fields are only around 10/20% used and it costs a fortune to drill further. It is often a very, very risky investment to search for oil and dig in new places. These places often don't give a return on the investment.

If we windfall tax these companies, who exactly is going to have the money to search for new supply or spend more drilling deeper? Supply will drop, and prices will increase. The taxed money will only be wasted by our government anyway. Who loses out?

For those who are going to suggest nationalisation. That's where the problem lies, 90% of oil produced is by nationalised companies bumping up prices through inefficiency and bureaucracy.

We need to start looking more seriously at lowering our energy consumption, as this problem is not going to go away. Perhaps with government nudging through massive reductions in taxation on energy saving goods.

And as usual you are right.What we really need is a government That works out what we need.dresses us all the same and shoots people that want to improve themselves.Then and only then can they go out and buy Football Clubs.We Are All Equal!!!!OK