Prices of the electricity we use to charge

[Ghost1951]

Try a referendum and ask what proportion of the population will leave meat out of their diet in favour of lentils and beans.....

Unless you force people to do something which is unnatural to them - stop eating meat, they will do what they have always done. We evolved to eat meat when we could get it. That is a fact. Even our long distant cousins the Chimpanzees eat meat. They highly prize it.

10 Things Chimpanzees Eat

Learn about 10 surprising foods chimpanzees eat in the wild and the importance of chimpanzee conservation with the Jane Goodall Institute of Canada.

janegoodall.ca

 

[flecc]

People are not going to give up eating meat in a free society. I know we have fans of dictatorial government on here - people who readily announce that government should never have let people own cars

There you go again, the grossest of exaggeration without any justification whatsoever. This was clearly aimed at me since I am the only one here commenting on this policy.

But I have never at any time advocated such a thing, nor would I ever do so. Nor did government ever have needed to have done so if they'd done as you often advocate, enforce the law.

The roads are for travelling on, not for residential purposes, and when people rode horses or used them to pull vehicles, there was never any street parking, other than to briefly load or unload. Had the authorities, national and local, heavily penalised all use of the roads for garaging motor vehicles, we would never have seen the huge expansion of their ownership that we've experienced.

After all, 85% of the English population live in towns or cities where they are the least likely to have off street parking and the most likely to have public transport. Conversely, those living in rural areas where car ownership has become more important, are the most likely to have off road parking and the least likely to have adeqate public transport.

So merely enforcing the existing law on obstructing the highway from 1920 on would have controlled and restricted the expansion of car use in a fairer way, without any need for the underhand enforcement of banning cheaper and more capable I.C. engined cars in favour of expensive and sometimes impractical e-cars.

But of course our authorities are doing the opposite, installing huge numbers of very slow lamp post and similar street chargers, thus encouraging more long term obstruction of our roads for garaging cars.

One policy versus another.
.

 

[Ghost1951]

There you go again, the grossest of exaggeration without any justification whatsoever. This was clearly aimed at me since I am the only one here commenting on this policy.

But I have never at any time advocated such a thing, nor would I ever do so. Nor did government ever have needed to have done so if they'd done as you often advocate, enforce the law.

The roads are for travelling on, not for residential purposes, and when people rode horses or used them to pull vehicles, there was never any street parking, other than to briefly load or unload. Had the authorities, national and local, heavily penalised all use of the roads for garaging motor vehicles, we would never have seen the huge expansion of their ownership that we've experienced.

After all, 85% of the English population live in towns or cities where they are the least likely to have off street parking and the most likely to have public transport. Conversely, those living in rural areas where car ownership has become more important, are the most likely to have off road parking and the least likely to have adeqate public transport.

So merely enforcing the existing law on obstructing the highway from 1920 on would have controlled and restricted the expansion of car use in a fairer way, without any need for the underhand enforcement of banning cheaper and more capable I.C. engined cars in favour of expensive and sometimes impractical e-cars.

But of course our authorities are doing the opposite, installing huge numbers of very slow lamp post and similar street chargers, thus encouraging more long term obstruction of our roads for garaging cars.

One policy versus another.
.

Oh really? You seem to be saying quite often what a terrible mistake letting people have cars was:

Prices of the electricity we use to charge

People live longer and have fewer children so the ratio is bound to rise for the foreseeable future.

www.pedelecs.co.uk

https://www.pedelecs.co.uk/forum/threads/prices-of-the-electricity-we-use-to-charge.42917/page-265#post-727637

Not to mention your enthusiasm for ending land ownership.......

Prices of the electricity we use to charge

Found this entertaining link about off grid life in BritishColumbia. A resourceful, family making their way without a grid connection. At first I watched a video about making wood gas from firewood to run a generator, but watched many more videos about their life in general. You could never buy...

www.pedelecs.co.uk

I'd go much further with control, I wouldn't allow anyone to buy land since it is the birthright of all born on the planet. I would only allow it to be rented for the needs of the current generation.

No - you aren't a control freak and dictatorial type - not at all.....



https://www.pedelecs.co.uk/forum/threads/prices-of-the-electricity-we-use-to-charge.42917/page-369#post-734300

 

[flecc]

Oh really? You seem to be saying quite often what a terrible mistake letting people have cars was:

Try reading the links again, or take some reading lessons.

I'm commenting neutrally on the authorities view, without condoning or criticising it.

You should try a little neutrality in commenting to help keep your extremism in check. Such as your implied support for a tiny number of people owning most of Britain, at such terrible cost to so many of the others.
.

 

[lenny]

Researcher proposes first-time model that replaces dark energy and dark matter in explaining nature of the universe
"The theory offers instead the notion that the universe is expanding due to a series of step-like bursts called "transient temporal singularities" that flood the entire cosmos with matter and energy, yet happen so rapidly, they cannot be observed as these singularities wink in and out of existence. "

https://phys.org/news/2025-04-dark-energy-nature-universe.html

 

[lenny]

Microsoft researchers say they’ve developed a hyper-efficient AI model that can run on CPUs

Microsoft researchers say they've developed a hyper-efficient AI model that can run on CPUs | TechCrunch

Microsoft researchers have developed — and released — a hyper-efficient AI model that can run on CPUs, including Apple's M2.

techcrunch.com

 

[saneagle]

Can somebody tell me which EVs have no Chinese parts in case I want to visit MOD?

Electric cars with Chinese parts banned from UK military sites over spying fears

Staff working at Britain's premier intelligence hub have been told to park their EVs at least two miles away over fears their cars could be spying on them

inews.co.uk

 

[lenny]

 

[MikelBikel]

C'mon now, play nice children. hehe ;-)

Oh, by the way, I think if one totes it up, drivers pay way over the odds in gov Tax theft to "garage" their vehicles on the public highway?
How much do the "taxes" on an average vehicle owner come to?
Why not ask yere new A.I. "friendz"! .

Its also curious how someone can argue for "No Ownership of Land", and at the same time, that people's vehicles must be parked on "Private" land, not "Public land". Logical Contradiction. Or did I misunderstand?

 

[flecc]

C'mon now, play nice children. hehe ;-)

Oh, by the way, I think if one totes it up, drivers pay way over the odds in gov Tax theft to "garage" their vehicles on the public highway?
How much do the "taxes" on an average vehicle owner come to?
Why not ask yere new A.I. "friendz"! .

Its also curious how someone can argue for "No Ownership of Land", and at the same time, that people's vehicles must be parked on "Private" land, not "Public land". Logical Contradiction. Or did I misunderstand?

Deliberately misunderstand.

The land belongs to all, so roads are provided on it by democratic rule for ALL to travel on, not for SOME to obstruct travel on them for residential purposes.

Without ownership of land there is no "private" land, but can be, as I posted, private RENTED land for homes etc, doing away with the evil of that form of inheritance. By the same token, the taxes on motoring are temporarily renting the road space for travel. For vehicle storage one must rent space elsewhere, it's called public parking.

And of course all those rental revenues of land space are owned by all as state revenue, in lieu of taxes.

It's very easy to understand if one reads what is actually posted or clearly implied.
.

 

[Ghost1951]

Deliberately misunderstand.

The land belongs to all, so roads are provided on it by democratic rule for ALL to travel on, not for SOME to obstruct travel on them for residential purposes.

Without ownership of land there is no "private" land, but can be, as I posted, private RENTED land for homes etc, doing away with the evil of that form of inheritance. By the same token, the taxes on motoring are temporarily renting the road space for travel. For vehicle storage one must rent space elsewhere, it's called public parking.

And of course all those rental revenues of land space are owned by all as state revenue, in lieu of taxes.

It's very easy to understand if one reads what is actually posted or clearly implied.
.

This is utter tripe. The land does NOT belong to all. This is a blatant falsehood. I don't know anywhere that the land belongs to all. Perhaps some aboriginal people in Australia take an attitude like that - but only among themselves.

Of course in communist societies the gangster rulers often claim the land belongs to all, but in reality, it only belongs to them. THEY make all the decisions and have all the ownership and power. This is the way that kind of criminal deprivation of liberty always works - and we all know some useful fools who advocate for that. I do for sure.

You may WISH that the land belonged to all, but it doesn't. You have to buy it. We have an expensive civil service organisation called the Land Registry which records who owns what.

You state that inheritance is an evil? Another bizarre nonsense. YOU THINK it is evil. This is an opinion and it has no value at all.

You make up more bo llox in saying that road taxes are a means by which the road is rented to you? Complete fantastical nonsense. Road taxes are simply taxes - a revenue raising ploy by overbearing government. In your mad Alice in Wonderland nuthouse , perhaps fuel duty is some form of renting petrol - petrol that you already bought and owned. About half the cost of road fuel is tax. Soon, they'll be doing the same thing with electricity - as soon as it suits the gangsters in power - whichever lot they are.

TAXES are taxes - a form of government extortion - demanding money with menaces.

As for my reading comprehension capabilities - that's pretty good coming from someone who seemingly has lost all contact with reality and is asserting nonsensical, crazy opinions as if they were facts.

You have repeatedly said to me in the past that you are not left wing but in fact have been a a Conservative voter for most of your life (having voted differently for strategic, tactical reasons to get good people into power). This is not born out by the hard left policies you continually advocate.

Nuts

 

[MikelBikel]

Net Zero Sense in "FIRES", hehe. They can't even Spell acronyms properly and repeat the lie that such NonGovOrgans are Taxpayer funded, not gov!
What do they eat in No 10? Or Parliament? Anyone know how to find out? Bet its not nutz n bugz

 

[MikelBikel]

More Net Zero nonsense
Since windmills and solar flaps die and get landfilled, they are Not Renewables, they are Pollutionables.
Oh and the Offshore Galway windmill farce is no more, hooray. Drill Baby Drill!

 

[flecc]

I wondered how long it would be before you jumped in!

You may WISH that the land belonged to all, but it doesn't. You have to buy it. We have an expensive civil service organisation called the Land Registry which records who owns what.

Your distortion is the utter tripe. In the original absence of any other state, the land, or the use of it, belonged to all the biological states upon it. UNTIL, certain parties started to seize and declare ownership on no basis whatsover. Most relevant to us of course is the Enclosures, one of the greatest crimes ever perpetrated against a lands people. That of course eventually led to the creation of the Land Registry, a fabrication to protect for the few what was stolen from all in favour of the few.

You state that inheritance is an evil? Another bizarre nonsense. YOU THINK it is evil. This is an opinion and it has no value at all.

Only someone completely blind to all the undeserved privilege and loss to others that inheritance has created over time could not see the outcome of inheritance as evil.

My opinion in this has immense moral value, far in excess of the value of any of the carefully disguised self interest you promote as good sense.

But of course I've covered much of this below in response to you previously:

Prices of the electricity we use to charge

France is not a place you need to flee from. Not since my father's generation cleared out the Nazis and the Vichy French collaborators. That was before any of us were born - just about, though Flecc might have been around as a boy back then. Very much so, I've been around since the mid 1930s...

www.pedelecs.co.uk

.

 

[flecc]

More Net Zero nonsense
Since windmills and solar flaps die and get landfilled, they are Not Renewables, they are Pollutionables.

More deliberate "misunderstanding".

What they produce is the renewable. The difference is they do not have to fed with fossil fuels, as you well know.
.

 

[saneagle]

What they produce is the renewable. The difference is they do not have to fed with fossil fuels, as you well know.

There's no such thing as renewable energy. Energy is persistent. It can neither be created nor destroyed. You can only move it around.

Any energy you use for heating your house or working your fridge moves off into the sky and gets radiated into space, never to be see by us again.

Any energy that comes into your solar panels is fresh from the Sun, and the energy that goes into the windmills and comes out as electricity is also is fairly fresh from the Sun. It just went through a couple of conversions first.

 

[flecc]

There's no such thing as renewable energy. Energy is persistent. It can neither be created nor destroyed. You can only move it around.

Any energy you use for heating your house or working your fridge moves off into the sky and gets radiated into space, never to be see by us again.

Any energy that comes into your solar panels is fresh from the Sun, and the energy that goes into the windmills and comes out as electricity is also is fairly fresh from the Sun. It just went through a couple of conversions first.

Of course, and my post explained what the term meant:

"The difference is they do not have to fed with fossil fuels, as you well know. "
.

 

[soundwave]

RAC develops UK’s first lightweight charger to deliver a ‘journey-saving’ boost to electric vehicles – RAC Corporate

RAC develops UK’s first lightweight charger to deliver a ‘journey-saving’ boost to electric vehicles

www.raccorporate.co.uk

The new EV Boost system uses a generator permanently fitted to the 1.9 litre Euro 6 diesel engine, the power produced is passed through an invertor to give an out-of-charge electric vehicle a boost.

 

[saneagle]

Of course, and my post explained what the term meant:

"The difference is they do not have to fed with fossil fuels, as you well know. "
.

That's just an arbitrary definition. It's not what renewable means at all. You could just as easily define it as not fed with eggs, or not fed by anything mechanical. Your definition is just done for political and commercial purposes because some people don't want others to use fossil fuels for whatever reasons.

All our energy comes from the Sun. It's a continuous process as long as the Sun continues to radiate and we stay at the same distance from it. As far as the Earth is concerned, any energy used is renewable by the same process that made it available. The claim is that, eventually, fossil fuels will run out. Their solution to ban it's use doesn't make any sense because all they've done is brought forward the lack of its use when we're least able to deal with its loss.

 

[soundwave]