Just Stop Oil protester punched and kicked
- Thread starter swordtrombonefish
- Start date
coluka
Well-known member
Sunak has a lot to answer for after praising Bairstow for taking matters in to his own hands. I appreciate the two events are far from the same, apart from the protester being one and the same, but Sunak should look himself in the mirror as he gave a form of credence to tackling the protestors (albeit not through such unwarranted violence).
I do not support JSO methods mind and feel they should target politicians, embassies, big organisations and industries, who can all do much more, I genuinely do not feel the majority of the public agree with their strategy and they need to review tactics imho. I sincerely hope the thug gets jail time mind.
I do not support JSO methods mind and feel they should target politicians, embassies, big organisations and industries, who can all do much more, I genuinely do not feel the majority of the public agree with their strategy and they need to review tactics imho. I sincerely hope the thug gets jail time mind.
Alzi
Well-known member
“complete idiots” who I imagine history will look much more favourably on than the right wing deniers and those who stood by and did nothing to try and raise awareness of our planet’s plight.
the simple answer to that is that the voting system. They'd all have to live in the same place (which of course they don't). In the last election every Tory seat was earned with an average of 38000 votes. The Greens got 866000 votes and won one seat. A minor party has almost no chance of gaining any influence via Parliament because of the way their votes are spread through 600+ constituencies.
Alzi
Well-known member
Oh well at least that can bring you some comfort as the world burns and our children’s futures are ruined
All respect to the protestors in my opinion. They aren’t resorting to violence to get their message across but certainly people are taking note. (Hence the need for disruptive rather than non disruptive protest)
At least they can say they are trying to do something as most just sleep walk into or ignore the biggest crisis mankind has ever faced.
Zoophonic
Well-known member
I do too and I do as well.
Redka
Well-known member
As said they can easily protest without impacting others !
Alzi
Well-known member
Disruptive protest helps rather than hinders activists’ cause, experts say
Results contradict public view that disrupting events such as Wimbledon and Pride achieves nothing
www.theguardian.com
The_Lizards_Jumpers
Well-known member
Have you really thought that trough ? Perhaps they could sign a petition or make a nice banner ?
If this board was around 110 years ago I bet the same few on here would be saying "it's all well and good women wanting the vote, but to disrupt a annual horse race is just too much"
festa5
Well-known member
It's a difficult one Col. Only target the government and your average bloke doesn't really care.
Target the man on the street and your average Joe might get annoyed, but at least they're forced to pay attention.
I don't know what the answer is. I agree with the message though.
And 100% agree that Sunak, and this government have a lot to answer for.
I also admire the fact JSO at least have the courage of their convictions. Is it the right way to go about it? Not sure
Andy_W
Well-known member
The thing I don't get is what they're actually protesting, it doesn't seem efficient or realistic. If they protested other things it may do a lot more good, and actually help their aim (the environment) much more.
We can't "just stop oil", if we did just stop we would all likely starve within a few months, or those worse off would. Fuel (from fossil fuels) was the only thing in today's inflation numbers which actually came down (deflated). Energy cost has contributed massively to inflation (lack of fossil fuels), and if inflation was kept up then rates would be even higher and more people would be going on the street in the next 2-3 years.
They need to put their efforts into something which is better placed, more realistic and which will have an impact quicker which won't hurt the least well off. Protest against the demand for grid energy, the lower this is the less fossil fuels will get used. Protest car makers making ICE cars. Protest our crap trade rules where we're buying products from the other side of the world as we spite our neighbours in the EU. Protest against Highways England, Network Rail, Local Councils, The Environment Agency, The Canal and Rivers Trust, The Coal Authority etc which are all the bane of every single renewables project which is trying to be constructed. Protest against the Tories for blocking onshore wind. Protest people who complain about onshore wind and solar farms. Protest against restrictive planning laws for homeowner renewable projects. Protest that every new house built should have a battery. Protest that almost everyone should be load shifting and on time of day demand-based tariffs (makes it far easier for the grid to manage, and less storage needed).
We need more renewables, a lot more, everyone sane knows this and by god the construction industry is trying, but we also need to secure our own short-term, quick and fast energy sources for the meantime (effectively they act as our battery backup). The fossil fuels we (and the EU) currently rely on may not be reliable as they're a competitive market which we have zero control over (and could get priced out). This is why we have to scrap and scrape for what we have left, it's our backup battery (for now), which enables renewables to function in harmony with the grid. The UK is building loads of grid-balancing batteries currently.
We can't do nuclear as it takes too long to build and is far too expensive (to build, and cost per MWh). By the time it is built it will be out of date and outdone by the cost of wind and solar and any kind of energy storage. Wind and solar are far cheaper, even if we stored it at 50% efficiency/ recovery, everyone is aware of this, but doing it is still difficult as we get blocked by our own people, regulation and various agencies (most of them public) which operate at a snail's pace.
It's not really possible to build renewables much faster than we are, not from the construction side anyway, we don't have the skilled manpower, willing labour or companies to do any more. Everyone who can work on wind or solar farms is already working on wind and solar farms (with a backlog of others), and tendering for 100's of others each month for work for the next 5 years. I've priced up things for 3 or 4 wind/ solar/ battery farms in the last week alone, and my company is small, I would be surprised if we don't win 70% of them. It's what I've been mostly pricing the last year, and before that it was largely housing. It would help if construction was able to build onshore wind instead of offshore wind, we can build 2 or 3 onshore in the time it takes to build one offshore, and they're more efficient too as the grid connections are closer, so there are less efficiency losses.
Home solar installers have jacked up the price, because they're flat out, this can't be helping those who want to do it. I've tried to get solar at our new company premises, but the cost I got from the first quote is ludicrous, it's like 15-20 year pay back. It doesn't make any sense, the only thing which does is the battery, effectively charge it when it's cheap through the night, and discharge it during the day (pays itself back in about 4-5 years).
The problem isn't so much the fossil fuels, it's the demand for them, and when that is, how many people are thinking about replacing their gas boiler with an electric one, or buying an air source heat pump? This is what needs to be happening now. Anyone buying a gas boiler now or a home with gas is likely going to be using gas for the next 10 years until something breaks. How many people load shift? It's super easy and could make an absolutely massive difference.
Same with cars, ICE is still for sale and will be till 2030, that's us still needing fossil fuels till 2045, these either come from here (what we have left) where they're probably extracted responsibly, or they come from Saudi/ Qatar where they do the opposite and use slaves to get them.
To be fair we've also done alright on renewables, not sure we could have expected more considering we've had Tories in for 13 years either. I don't think the Tories have helped this mind, I think it's more private companies taking the initiative to build something profitable and reliable, from my experience anyway.
At least we're progressing, this is for the grid, for electricity generation.
We can't "just stop oil", if we did just stop we would all likely starve within a few months, or those worse off would. Fuel (from fossil fuels) was the only thing in today's inflation numbers which actually came down (deflated). Energy cost has contributed massively to inflation (lack of fossil fuels), and if inflation was kept up then rates would be even higher and more people would be going on the street in the next 2-3 years.
They need to put their efforts into something which is better placed, more realistic and which will have an impact quicker which won't hurt the least well off. Protest against the demand for grid energy, the lower this is the less fossil fuels will get used. Protest car makers making ICE cars. Protest our crap trade rules where we're buying products from the other side of the world as we spite our neighbours in the EU. Protest against Highways England, Network Rail, Local Councils, The Environment Agency, The Canal and Rivers Trust, The Coal Authority etc which are all the bane of every single renewables project which is trying to be constructed. Protest against the Tories for blocking onshore wind. Protest people who complain about onshore wind and solar farms. Protest against restrictive planning laws for homeowner renewable projects. Protest that every new house built should have a battery. Protest that almost everyone should be load shifting and on time of day demand-based tariffs (makes it far easier for the grid to manage, and less storage needed).
We need more renewables, a lot more, everyone sane knows this and by god the construction industry is trying, but we also need to secure our own short-term, quick and fast energy sources for the meantime (effectively they act as our battery backup). The fossil fuels we (and the EU) currently rely on may not be reliable as they're a competitive market which we have zero control over (and could get priced out). This is why we have to scrap and scrape for what we have left, it's our backup battery (for now), which enables renewables to function in harmony with the grid. The UK is building loads of grid-balancing batteries currently.
We can't do nuclear as it takes too long to build and is far too expensive (to build, and cost per MWh). By the time it is built it will be out of date and outdone by the cost of wind and solar and any kind of energy storage. Wind and solar are far cheaper, even if we stored it at 50% efficiency/ recovery, everyone is aware of this, but doing it is still difficult as we get blocked by our own people, regulation and various agencies (most of them public) which operate at a snail's pace.
It's not really possible to build renewables much faster than we are, not from the construction side anyway, we don't have the skilled manpower, willing labour or companies to do any more. Everyone who can work on wind or solar farms is already working on wind and solar farms (with a backlog of others), and tendering for 100's of others each month for work for the next 5 years. I've priced up things for 3 or 4 wind/ solar/ battery farms in the last week alone, and my company is small, I would be surprised if we don't win 70% of them. It's what I've been mostly pricing the last year, and before that it was largely housing. It would help if construction was able to build onshore wind instead of offshore wind, we can build 2 or 3 onshore in the time it takes to build one offshore, and they're more efficient too as the grid connections are closer, so there are less efficiency losses.
Home solar installers have jacked up the price, because they're flat out, this can't be helping those who want to do it. I've tried to get solar at our new company premises, but the cost I got from the first quote is ludicrous, it's like 15-20 year pay back. It doesn't make any sense, the only thing which does is the battery, effectively charge it when it's cheap through the night, and discharge it during the day (pays itself back in about 4-5 years).
The problem isn't so much the fossil fuels, it's the demand for them, and when that is, how many people are thinking about replacing their gas boiler with an electric one, or buying an air source heat pump? This is what needs to be happening now. Anyone buying a gas boiler now or a home with gas is likely going to be using gas for the next 10 years until something breaks. How many people load shift? It's super easy and could make an absolutely massive difference.
Same with cars, ICE is still for sale and will be till 2030, that's us still needing fossil fuels till 2045, these either come from here (what we have left) where they're probably extracted responsibly, or they come from Saudi/ Qatar where they do the opposite and use slaves to get them.
To be fair we've also done alright on renewables, not sure we could have expected more considering we've had Tories in for 13 years either. I don't think the Tories have helped this mind, I think it's more private companies taking the initiative to build something profitable and reliable, from my experience anyway.
At least we're progressing, this is for the grid, for electricity generation.
Last edited:
festa5
Well-known member
Quite hard to fit all that on a placard though
(That said, you make some very good points).
MidlandsBoroFan
Well-known member
Exactly right imo.
Everyone already knows their opinion on most issues, right or wrong. Standing in the middle of the road and ****ing everyone off isn’t going to change that, or make those drivers think “actually I shouldn’t be driving my car”.
These protesters are affecting the lives and livelihoods of ordinary people, and while their hearts are in the right place, they achieve nothing with this kind of disruption.
But agree with most, kicking someone in the head = jail time.
Alzi
Well-known member
Why don't you go along (virtually) to one of their talks and I'm sure they'll be happy to answer any questions? Their goal is quite simple and absoloutely vital for the future of humanity - averting climate crash. We might already be too late in fairness, but there's still hope.
Quicksilvera
Well-known member
Then you would be wrong, I care about future generations.
Osboro
Well-known member
Oh, and the current civilisation is about to come crashing down too. Jeez......
Quicksilvera
Well-known member
Yes let’s hold them accountable by booting them in the head whilst they are on the floor.
Cowards trick.
Laughing
Well-known member
Then his wife is a crap driver and endangered their baby. He should be mad at her.
Andy_W
Well-known member
Hmm, that sounds interesting, I might look into that, never thought of that. They might just think I'm some climate change denier moron though, and that couldn't be further from the truth. It wouldn't be them answering questions mind, it might be more me telling them what they may not realise about the renewable energy sector. They're a big movent, getting a lot of press, but I think their time and effort could be better placed (in the UK at least), but it's not up to me to tell them that. I think they're wasting the airtime they get, for the effort, at a super critical time.
I can't see them changing their name though, which I think is one of the key problems, it's like it's trying to tackle problem 95, without tackling problems 1-94 which are causing far bigger problems immediately, which makes problem 95 worse.
The thing is I've got the exact same overall aims as them, but they just don't seem to be realistic or realise what the main problems the renewable energy sector is facing, and what they've actually managed to achieve given the horrendous hurdles.
The problem isn't fossil fuels, it's us and our need for them and our batshit rules guaranteeing this need for longer. We regulate for a 1 in 100,000 risk of something small and low cost, not realising it's slowing down a renewable energy project, aiming to limit the damage of an absolute certainty, which has a massive risk to life and cost.
I had a battery grid project delayed for 6 weeks the other week, because the canal and rivers trust (a charitable trust/ public company I suppose) would not let the client put a guy across the canal in a boat to get an accurate depth, which would have took 5 minutes (the depth given by the C&RT was out by over a metre/ 30%, according to a remote survey). This was on the critical path too, so any delay there, is a delay to the end date (and adding millions). Then we got held up for another two weeks for taking water out of the canal (which was in the approved method statement and risk assessment for 6 months), when some member of the public complained, although it was already approved, which we demonstrated. Then the C&RT decided that they wanted 10k for a licence from our client for the water (effectively a ransom, would have took another month to sort the legals out), yet we were only taking 20k litres per day max (which is permitted abstraction by the EA) and the canal was being topped up by an EA river (for free). All of these **** ups jacked up our invoice value too (to sit there and do nothing), we didn't lose out, but the UK did, as people don't look at the bigger picture. That cost maybe two months, but in total I reckon the ludicrous delays (from various parties) were getting on for 6-12 months in total.
I spend most of my working life trying to get renewable energy and battery schemes built, and all the UK does is shoot itself in the foot over, and over and over again, it's laughable.
Last edited: