Thursday, 11 July 2013

Tidal end of a fantasy...

Got to love this story in the register. Now Mr Alex Salmond, the famed Scottish leader who is preparing more hot air than ever for this coming year to try and persuade his people to vote of independence, has nowhere to hide as regards energy.

Mr Salmond fell for the green energy brigade a long time ago and is very keen on all things green in a wild hope that he can somehow copy Norway or Iceland. The thing is, Iceland is the only country in the world with such large geothermal reserves and Norway too has great natural water resources; both countries have rather poor weather too.


Nothing so inconvenient as facts tend to stop an infection of the mind with make-believe green energy fantasies. We can see this within Westminster too and the mad ramblings of the current DECC occupants. The reality is that green energy is not going to produce anything like enough power to keep our current lifestyle going. So a road to green energy as a big make-up of our power mix is a road to blackouts and eventually in an all too real sense, a new dark age.

Instead of course the money and effort needs to be spent on fuels that will work. One day nuclear fusion power will come on line, perhaps not in our lifetimes in any commercial way, but once it does then many energy problems we have will go away (not aeroplanes though, I do wonder if at the end of the age of fossil fuels they will go the way of the dodo). In the meantime there are adequate resources of shale oil and gas to see us through to the breakthrough.

it's really not that hard, but to convince marxist inspired greens is a task too onerous for anyone.

22 comments:

john miller said...

With mobile nuclear fusion, the aeroplane will again come to the fore as steam engines rule the air!

Of course, this will result in the formation of a protest group, Steam Harm In the Troposphere.

Nick Drew said...

yes, a most enjoyable turn of events

can this really be happening to the same Salmond who was once touted as the shrewdest political charlatan, *sorry*, operator of our times?

I begin to think that seeing him off is just the right level of challenge for the great student-politician 'strategist' Boy Osborne

he may not be good for much, but he's all we need for this particular job

andrew said...

Changing the subject just slightly

If oil runs out just as fusion becomes mainstream:-

(a) Proof of an Intelligent Designer
(b) Proof the market really is perfect
(c) Something else

Sebastian Weetabix said...

This business of Salmond being described as a sharp political operator has always been a mystery to me. He's a third rate huckster, a cock on a midden, given an easy time by brain dead Labour machine politicians and a supine BBC. I wouldn't trust him to run a mennodge.

Anonymous said...

Even the last time I commented here about Salmond a year or so ago, CU or BQ or someone rebuffed me and said "no he really is good".

He's good at reacting. Need to turn something the Tories said on its head? Ask Salmond for a good sound bite.

But he can't lead and most of his policies seem to either involve giving away freebies or laying low in the hopes that no bad press is good press. His big ideas are nicked from other North Sea countries and anybody asking for details about anything is accused of being anti-Scotland or "the oil!"

People say that Cameron played him by bringing the referendum forward but other than removing the devo max choice what difference would another year or two have made? The SNP has done nothing to make the case for Scottish independence and many members seem to believe that they will win the referendum "just because". Sounds an awful lot like the Eurosceptics and their referendum and basically everything Richard North says about that applies equally well to the SNP.

So vote yes and get an independent Scotland ... except for the monarchy ... except for the EU (maybe) ... except for the currency ... except for welfare and pensions ... except for more to follow as the time comes closer. This is all Salmond's fault and anybody who wants us all out of the EU should heed his mistakes.

As Richard North might say: "Salmond doesn't do details."

DtP said...

They've got solar powered planes now, which seems like a bonny idea.

Dimbletie: purple, oh, oh yes, I remember now...booo

Insert Name Here said...

"I begin to think that seeing him off is just the right level of challenge for the great student-politician 'strategist' Boy Osborne"

and

"He's a third rate huckster, a cock on a midden, given an easy time by brain dead Labour machine politicians and a supine BBC."

So a poor politician. A lack of challenge from Labour. Even less of a challenge from the Limp Dumbs...and only 1 Conservative able to muster enough to win a Westminster seat.

So he's lucky then.

I cannot understand why an independent North not just Scotland is not in Boy George's interest given a) the number of Labour MP's the area generates and b) the amount of subsidy that flows from South to North.

And yet it is a perverse mindset that says we hate the socialist spongers - but we wouldn't be without them.

Could someone give me a rational explanation?

Sebastian Weetabix said...

I'll have a go. The Tories are the old Protestant unionist bigots in disguise so west of Scotland Catholics won't vote for 'em. Apart from that these days they are an overwhelmingly English party perceived to look down their noses so for all sorts of emotional non-rational reasons other people won't vote for them either. Finally they are so completely nowhere in Scotland, why bother its a wasted vote etc. On the other hand you have the limp dumbs who are in bed with the Tories and/or teuchters so Glaswegians aren't too impressed. Then you have a completely corrupt and useless Labour Party in Scotland which had everything its own way for 50+ years. So where to turn to get rid of the thieves? Might as well vote SNP, at least they haven't been running the shambles...

Many of my relatives think that way and vote that way. But they still think the Union is better than independence so Salmond's going to lose his referendum. If he was a first rate huckster rather than a third rate one, he'd have a credible plan for independence which didn't include staying in the EU, keeping the pound etc etc. and he might win his referendum. He's not so stupid he doesn't know he's going to lose; since he can't convince the Scots he's working on annoying the English so the Union will fall apart from the other end.

Anonymous said...

You clearly havent heard of STOR -(where there are big bucks to be made) all detailed on a long running thread at EU Referendum.

Budgie said...

Anon 2:56, it is irrational to maintain that Richard North's idiosyncratic views of "the eurosceptics and their referendum" sounds anything like Salmond and his referendum. There is no causal connection, as well as putting words into Dr North's mouth. And what's with the eurosceptics anyway? Isn't Dr North supposed to be a eurosceptic?

Moreover, the last time I looked, politicians regularly get votes despite having asinine policies, or none at all. I believe that Salmond will win his vote; not by a majority of registered voters but by a majority of those who vote. And, no, that does not mean that consequently "the eurosceptics" will win "their referendum". The two are unconnected.

For what it's worth my view is that Salmond's "win" will be bad for Scotland, and bad for England too. Salmond's magic is to have created a mood in Scotland similar to the Bolshevik feelings towards the Tsarist regime. So simply the fact of Cameron, Osborne et al speaking out in favour of union will bolster Salmond's vote. The only opening is to kick the man (Salmond), rather than defend the ball of union.

Anonymous said...

@Budgie

Where are you seeing these "feelings"? Sebastian's comment is much more realistic about how it is on the ground.

People vote for SNP because they hate the rest. Same deal with UKIP where polls show that leaving the EU is not a top priority for UKIP supporters. Both parties also have populist leaders who are good at getting on TV and sticking it to the man.

Both causes have plenty of vocal supporters who are convinced they will win their referendums despite the polls showing otherwise, and the polls being basically the same for decades (though Scottish independence has much bigger fluctuations). They tend to be self reinforcing on the internet and best avoided.

Both causes are reluctant to actually get into the details of how to become independent. We see the effects of this becoming clear as each month a new report is released about how dependent an independent Scotland might be. Both causes have had decades to prepare but have done little to nothing. You cannot just pull out overnight (this is where North's Article 50 stuff comes in).

Salmond should have figured out how to make Scotland independent in the first couple decades of his career and held a referendum when he won the general election. He failed to do that so he should have spent the four years spewing propaganda and held a referendum at the end. That seemed to be his initial plan except he forgot the propaganda and Cameron made him bring the referendum forward a year. His position is not unwinable but he has allowed the odds to stack up against him while continuing to grandstand as if he's on top.

Budgie said...

Anon, I see these "feelings" in exactly the same places that Sebastian Weetabix does - he calls them "emotional non-rational reasons". It seems he and I are in agreement at least on this.

Salmond, in a similar manner to the initial Bolshevik propaganda ploy, is winning on emotion, not rationality, so the detailed mechanics of independence are therefore not in play and not needed at this stage. To pretend that Salmond's failure to do details will lose him the referendum is amazingly complacent.

It appears that you and Dr North fail to recognise (assuming you are his faithful mouthpiece, which actually I doubt) that political decisions like Scottish independence, or exiting the EU, will be taken by the demos largely for emotional reasons ("feelings") and not because of the existence of some carefully crafted legal timetable.

Moreover you know perfectly well that exiting the EU by invoking Article 50 leaves the control, the timetable, and the outcome, in the hands of the EU, not us. By contrast repealing the ECA means the UK retains control of both the the procedures and the timetable.

And, no, this does not mean "pulling out overnight" (a straw man argument) the UK would in its own parliament and in its own time prepare, negotiate and legislate for exit, the final act being the repeal of the ECA. In this way we would not be beholden to the EU for any exit penalties (oops, "conditions") that would be imposed by the EU under Article 50.

To be frank, we are almost "out" anyway. This is because the EU power base is shifting to the EZ (eurozone) in which we have no say. I suspect the EU without EMU will become moribund.

Anonymous said...

@Budgie

What I imagine Sebastian is referring to is the age old sectarianism with a modern boost of anti-Thatcherism. Neither are to do with Salmond and both have little effect on Scottish independence per se, just like how the recent boosts to UKIP have not manifested in EU related polls. It may feel like we're at the height of an anti-(E)Union fervor but it just doesn't seem to be true. You need to separate the SNP and Scottish Independence as they are not the same thing (as Sebastian also points out).

Salmond isn't winning his referendum campaign and it's still about a 50/35 split as it has been for the last 30 odd years (with big spikes every now and then). As the time comes closer other emotions will play a factor such as inertia of the status quo and FUD stirred up by the establishment (in this case the Union). We've already seen how the EU establishment can quickly turn around a referendum in Ireland. If it really does look like Scotland will become independent I wouldn't discount Westminster offering a last minute federal option (which could be pretty good actually).

The idea behind a thought out exit plan is not for rational thinking in the poll booth but for emotional thinking on the campaign trail. It's hard to win with a negative campaign and positive substanceless nationalism will only get you so far, especially with the Unionist BBC/STV/Sky out to get you and asking the tough questions every time you go on TV. It looks especially bad for somebody like Salmond, who has been the most prominent political figure in Scotland for the last 14 years and his brand of nationalism is wearing pretty thin yet he still has no concrete plans.

The exit plan needs to be drawn up before even the campaign, not after the referendum. Otherwise you are susceptible to what is happening to Salmond where his own party's reports are saying that an independent Scotland would be very much dependent on the remaining UK. Such ridiculous embarrassments are exactly the type of thing that will stick in the minds of low information emotional voters.

Sebastian Weetabix said...

Anon, you imagine absolutely correctly. Voting SNP is a good way to give Labour a fucking good kicking in the tin-pot talking shop in Edinburgh which doesn't take any really important decisions anyway. Independence is honestly neither here nor there in that process.

English people (I presume Budgie is one) tend to be very ignorant of how much sectarianism lurks under the surface in Scotland. All of us brought up Catholic in the west of Scotland have experienced it. Many of the people who enjoy that view of the world have historically lurked in the Scottish Conservative and Unionist Party. Having your windows broken when these bastards wear orange sashes and march past your house tends to put you off voting for them. Labour on the other hand tended to ban these marches. Put that together with the unsympathetic English bossiness of Thatcher/poll tax etc and you no longer have Tories in Scotland.

My "feeling" is that people who are motivated largely by a small-minded hatred of the English also tend to nurture quite healthy hatreds of other Scots. All sorts of vile nasties lurk in the corners of the broad church that is the SNP.

Anonymous said...

@Sebastian

The third to half of my still short life I spent in Scotland was in the inner Hebrides and west coast and didn't really pick up on the sectarianism until probably my 20s (but then again I didn't really spend my teens in Scotland either).

Maybe it is on the way out which is why the youth vote is most against independence (why did Salmond give them the vote, another blunder?). But I feel like some of that has to be due to the internet where it's definitely drilled in that you are in the UK rather than just England or Scotland or your county.

I feel like it's never pointed out how many constituencies the Tories come second in Scotland in the UK general election. Outside of the cities and the far north they really are competitive. The right leader or the right policy could change things more than anybody seems to currently believe is possible. But that's probably not going to happen with a 30 year old lesbian BBC reporter at the helm (to those that don't know, that's not a joke).

Budgie said...

Anon, The biggest factor swaying the popular vote in favour of Scottish independence is emotion rather than a rational analysis of all the details (and, no, I am not saying there isn't a rational case).

Salmond has been singularly successful in persuading Scots to feel that all interventions by English politicians/people, simply because they are English, are both risible and a reason to vote for independence. This is knee-jerk - irrational, but highly effective.

Nor is there any need to speculate whether this mood/emotion/feeling comes from minor sub-sets of sectarianism, and/or anti-Thatcherism, and/or hit-back-at-Labour-ism, and/or a dozen other background causes (and I don't). The independence emotion is there, and it will be devastatingly effective for Salmond. Not doing detail has nothing to do with it. Being complacent about the power of emotion will just help Salmond win.

Conversely the UK (or what's left of it) will fail to exit the EU in the "cast iron" referendum (if we ever even get it). And we will fail not because of "detail", done or not done, but because of the broad brush of fear expertly slathered on by the europhile establishment. Again, everything to do with the mood/emotion/feelings of the UK demos generated by propaganda rather than by the rational but esoteric concerns of eurosceptic researchers.

Sebastian Weetabix said...

Bollocks. He isn't going to win.

Agence Web said...

thanks for sharing with us those ideas "" Nothing so inconvenient as facts tend to stop an infection of the mind with make-believe green energy fantasies. We can see this within Westminster too and the mad ramblings of the current DECC occupants. The reality is that green energy is not going to produce anything like enough power to keep our current lifestyle going. So a road to green energy as a big make-up of our power mix is a road to blackouts and eventually in an all too real sense, a new dark age. ""

cours informatique said...

this is one of the nice point that i read in all over those comment.......Nor is there any need to speculate whether this mood/emotion/feeling comes from minor sub-sets of sectarianism, and/or anti-Thatcherism, and/or hit-back-at-Labour-ism, and/or a dozen other background causes (and I don't). The independence emotion is there, and it will be devastatingly effective for Salmond. Not doing detail has nothing to do with it. Being complacent about the power of emotion will just help Salmond win."""

creation site web said...

as one of the very interesting ideas on this article is that it is very good.....really this is very interesting in the fact that can make us know more and more about this subject....... in this respect i would like to thank you so much for this great ideas that you give to the readers...... as i' m one of them i enjoy reading this article really....... so thanks so much for sharing those important informations with us ............ thanks so much for sharing it with us ............

Agence communication said...

right really this is the great things hear "" Instead of course the money and effort needs to be spent on fuels that will work. One day nuclear fusion power will come on line, perhaps not in our lifetimes in any commercial way, but once it does then many energy problems we have will go away (not aeroplanes though, I do wonder if at the end of the age of fossil fuels they will go the way of the dodo). In the meantime there are adequate resources of shale oil and gas to see us through to the breakthrough. ""

Agence communication said...

very good notes ""
Army Air Corps and REME both being enlarged. Good
Sappers and transport units apparently being reduced. Not so sure about that.
No new infantry units, so if numbers of bayonets are to be increased it will be by pumping up the existing regiments. If you insist on doing so, this way makes sense: most line battallions are under strength now.
Medical Corps essentially unchanged in every detail. The reservist medics have performed brilliantly in theatre (pun intended) from 1991 onwards and it is no surprise nothing needs to be changed.
""