Politicians know all about Peak Oil

UndercoverElephant · Post by **UndercoverElephant** » 14 May 2010, 22:20

kenneal wrote:

You often hear of "Sustainable Growth" now, whatever that might be. Could it mean negative growth? Maybe they are making an effort to wean the populace off "more, more, more."

Unfortunately, the word "sustainable" has been co-opted to mean something rather different to economists to what it means to ecologists. It all rather depends what you are attempting to sustain.

Post by **kenneal - lagger** » 15 May 2010, 15:16

Prono 007 wrote:
Neily at the peak wrote:I think this link means that Chris Huhne the new energy and environment secretary has signed edm 1453. Or have I interpreted this incorrectly?

http://edmi.parliament.uk/EDMi/EDMDetai ... DMID=35715

Neil

Good link. However I note only 69 MP's have signed - around 10% of all MP's.

90% haven't signed!

If they were anywhere near the level of PO awareness as people on here then I think they'd probably have signed without question. It's not exactly a contentious EDM after all - not if you know and understand the implications of PO.

Can an EDM pass from one parliament to another? I've asked my MP to sign it so he will give me an answer to that question. Or can John Hemming answer it if he's reading this?

Quintus · Post by **Quintus** » 16 May 2010, 20:33

I'm sure our politicians get it, it's whether they know what to about it that worries me.

David Miliband supports low carbon economy

The foreign secretary has said Europe faces a "resource crunch" and must now work to end its dependency on carbon fuels.

Speaking at the London School of Economics, David Miliband said the EU must pioneer a trans-national low-carbon economy that relies less on undemocratic oil-rich regimes. He said Europe must embrace regulation, markets and "negotiating positions" that set an example for the rest of the world to follow, especially now that food and fuel prices are rising.

"We risk a scramble for resources, with each nation pitted against the other," he said.

"The alternative is a transition from a global economy dependent on oil and gas to a low-carbon economy with a diverse mix of energy sources and suppliers."

In related news, the United Nations Development Programme has told the Financial Times that spiralling food and fuel prices has made the urban poor in developing countries up to 25 percent les well off within the past 12 months.

08/05/2008
http://www.lowcarboneconomy.com/communi ... _news/1058

RenewableCandy · Post by **RenewableCandy** » 17 May 2010, 10:26

Chin up!!

Yorkshire and Tyneside in unseemly fisticuffs as battle to land wind turbine contracts hots up...or something.

Funnily enough the YP has published a lot of anti-wind-turbine letters over the years, including Editorial rants by the dreaded Bernie Ingham (hey why isn't there a crucifix-and-garlic emoticon??) I wonder if they'll change their tune now?

syberberg · Post by **syberberg** » 17 May 2010, 17:13

RenewableCandy wrote:Chin up!!
Yorkshire and Tyneside in unseemly fisticuffs as battle to land wind turbine contracts hots up...or something.
Funnily enough the YP has published a lot of anti-wind-turbine letters over the years, including Editorial rants by the dreaded Bernie Ingham (hey why isn't there a crucifix-and-garlic emoticon??) I wonder if they'll change their tune now?

Well, they won't be getting the turbines that Siemens are ordering, they're being built in the Northeast and shipped out via South Shields, a company in Hartlepool is building the substations (starting with the one for the wind farm off the Norfolk coast).

The Humber is a good choice for transporting the turbines out to sea, good deep water port, but I have reservations about Whitby and Scarborough being big enough for the ships, support vessels, sure.

RenewableCandy · Post by **RenewableCandy** » 17 May 2010, 18:18

Yer right, they're not big inough for the big rigs. I think the idea was to station the maintenance guys at Whitby and Scarboro' once the heavy stuff had been done.