Monday, August 11, 2014

All house prices are off if we allow nuclear to displace safe coal

EDF shuts two nuclear power stations after cracks in boiler

We have been duped about CO2, and our lives and the value of our land and property and lives are at high risk. CO2 is a non-toxic trace gas that plants breathe, yet in a plan to globally tax and regulate all human activity, they had to demonise life itself. Yet CO2 is a trace gas measuring in parts per million and is far less capable of storing heat than water vapour, which is a whopping 2% of the atmosphere. Note, central heating uses water, not CO2, because water is a better "greenhouse" chemical. Incredibly, photosynthesis increases by a whopping 50% when CO2 levels in greenhouses is raised to 1000ppm, which is why commercial greenhouses do that (Ontario Govt. study in the thread below), and plants need less water with more CO2. More CO2 = more life, nuclear = death and destruction.

Posted by libertas @ 08:15 PM (4617 views)
Please complete the required fields.



29 thoughts on “All house prices are off if we allow nuclear to displace safe coal

  • Dungeoness Nuclear Power Plant in East Anglia was forced to shut down recently also during the St Jude Storm. This is serious stuff. One explosion and the whole of the UK is just worthless. All bets are off, but it is happening all the time now.
    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/energy/nuclearpower/10409160/Dungeness-nuclear-power-station-shuts-down-following-hurricane-strength-winds.html

    Yet we just shut fantastic coal plants in Didcot. To satisfy this obsessive compulsive drive to get rid of CO2, which the above statement proves cannot cause climate change and also, even if it did, if we had 2 degrees extra heat plus 50% more photosynthesis, OF COURSE life would not end on earth. BUT nuclear holocaust WOULD end life on earth.

    Here is the study by the Ontario Government in Canada stating that 1000ppm CO2, about 3x more than present atmospheric levels, would increase photosynthesis by 50%. This is like the best fertiliser on the planet. We could feed EVERYBODY on half the land, but instead, we need expensive, dirty, stinking nuclear, to ensure centralisation of control and access to nuclear weapons, yet Britain has over 1000 years of coal reserves on its own:

    http://www.omafra.gov.on.ca/english/crops/facts/00-077.htm

    If this pitiful storm we had over the weekend causes shut downs of TWO nuclear power stations, what would a REAL crisis do, what if ISIS decides to blow one up? What then? SHUT THEM DOWN, BURN COAL

    and you know what? We would soon find a yet cleaner method of electricity in 10 years time.

    Reply
    Please complete the required fields.



  • Hahahahhahhahahhhaaaaa. He’s finally lost it -:)

    Reply
    Please complete the required fields.



  • arh not to worry we have tracking and they can steal any gas from under any property they wish to 🙂 thanks to the government on holiday while the world wages lots of wars, in the meantime oil is below $100 a barrel and petrol prices in USA are lower than they were a year ago, yet we are still getting screwed

    Reply
    Please complete the required fields.



  • libertas – yes, CO2 is good and oxygen is good, but you can have too much of a good thing. It’s not a good idea to breathe pure oxygen and CO2 would be fine if there weren’t so much of it in the atmosphere or, alternatively, if it stayed in the atmosphere for days, like your water vapour, rather than for decades, as CO2 does. On the other hand, you can trust nuclear interests as far as you can throw an ox.

    Reply
    Please complete the required fields.



  • This debate seems more about ecology than house prices.

    …unless you intend to convert these power stations to flats….now there’s an idea 🙂

    Reply
    Please complete the required fields.



  • We have not had global warming since 1995, and that is according to UK Govt Met Office!!!!!!! And you call me a fringe nut? This is the UK Government’s own weather office stating that for almost 20 years now, that there has been ZERO global warming, destroying all the computer models that said pay trillions in tax to a global government or the wind and rain will get you. Total nonsense.

    http://www.metoffice.gov.uk/research/news/recent-pause-in-warming

    It is a total scam. The carbon trading is totally fraudulent and they are pilfering trillions worldwide. They even managed to end tax breaks for company cars for the “environment” for goodness sakes, depriving families of low cost transport. Many here are probably not old enough to remember that and other similar scams.

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2217286/Global-warming-stopped-16-years-ago-reveals-Met-Office-report-quietly-released–chart-prove-it.html

    Great to see that I’ve drawn out some disinfo operatives on this site. For those who know what is really going on, you know better who to trust and who not to trust. Will the person who thinks Chernobyl = life please turn off the light?!

    Reply
    Please complete the required fields.



  • sibley's b'stard child says:

    Good point Alan, they’d also heat and light themselves.

    Reply
    Please complete the required fields.



  • I’m afraid he is right about the carbon footprint nonsense. CO2 does trap a bit more infra red radiation, but not nearly enough to account for changes they assign to it. Just look for any older paleontological research showing CO2 levels in the prehistoric eras, in some of those eras (Cambrian in particular) CO2 levels were up to 7000ppm if data is to be believed, yet flora and fauna flourished in those eras like never since! There were very few deserts back then.
    So all this IGCC nonsense is purely a political device to control developing countries and as a bonus illegaly tax people of their own countries for no good reason. As soon as any governmental panel gets involved in using science to dictate policy you know its a bad thing. Please leave science for peer review only and no govenrmental vested interests.

    Reply
    Please complete the required fields.



  • with the way Britain is going, Fracking, taxation, heavy sneaky handed tactics, police state, reduction of freedom on daily basis, corruption etc, I am surprised why any illegal immigrant would want to come here, there are plenty of better countries on route to cra99y UK

    this nuclear stuff is just another crack in the UK

    Reply
    Please complete the required fields.



  • i was under the impression we are entering a mini ice age

    Reply
    Please complete the required fields.



  • Mark ,

    What is it exactly which leads you to a negative view of frac’ing ?
    – the actual process of hydraulically stimulating fractures ?
    – the potential scale of industrial operations ?

    If UK shales can be commercially produced it would create a heck of a lot of jobs and just as much to the point keep a heck of lot of existing jobs from leaving as much of the Bowland shale is rich in longer chain hydrocarbons used by the chemical industry .

    To those people who would otherwise be on the dole it would be fantastic .

    Whether the UK can get an unconventional hydrocarbon industry going is pretty much a litmus test of whether it can do anything – rather than just talk about it .

    Once the industry got going the taxation would be higher than just about any other industry . The tax on hydrocarbon production is so high it is virtually a nationalised industry .

    People who are asking for surface location value taxation are pretty well asking for an extension of the ownership which already applies to subsurface oil and gas resources .

    Reply
    Please complete the required fields.



  • @Gorkov 9
    The trouble is that peer review is failing in this field. There is a frequent witch-hunt of “climate-change sceptics” making it difficult for them to publish their findings and views or acquire funding. So they are then driven into the denial camp funded by vested interests like oil companies. Sad state of affairs really.

    Reply
    Please complete the required fields.



  • Maybe look at the planet Venus when talking about, More CO2 = more life. Surface temperatures of 864ºC

    What site am I on again…

    Reply
    Please complete the required fields.



  • Scientists whose findings challenge the existence of climate change would probably get a fairer hearing if climate change skeptics didn’t tend to be tin-hat-wearing conspiracy theorists with lots of other crazy ideas.

    Can someone with some authority here please delete this thread?

    Reply
    Please complete the required fields.



  • As for the truthers who’ve sussed out that the govt. has invented climate change just as an excuse to tax us, here are some interesting nuggets from wikipedia:

    Climate Change Levy £0.7bn
    Petroleum Revenue Tax £1.7bn
    Air Passenger Duty £2.1bn
    Vehicle Excise Duties £6.1bn
    Fuel Duties £25.7bn

    Seems like taxes on fuel ARE quite a money-spinner for the govt. “They” are going to be kicking themselves when they’ve engineered a shift to renewables and can’t get that revenue anymore. Strange that “they” would want to do that, since fuel duty had been contributing to the company coffers long before the phrase “global warming” had even been coined.

    Reply
    Please complete the required fields.



  • Unfortunately, nearly all climate change deniers try to turn the laws of Physics on their head.

    CO2 absorbs two frequencies of light. Water absorbs more ‘bands’. This is knows as molecular absorption and re-emission and is just quantum physics. The earth is a black body radiator and these gases absorb these energies radiated upwards from the ground. Adding CO2 causes a small quantity of warming.

    However, Atmospheric Physics is very complex. To be able to argue rationally on the subject, you need a good understanding of Quantum Physics, Astrophysics, Thermal Physics, Maths, Electromagnetic radiation, albedo effects, cloud formation, ocean currents, Weins law and the list goes on and on.

    Quoting stuff from fringe websites and politically biased ‘news’ sources just won’t cut it.

    Also, water in central heating is used as it has a high thermal heat capacity and is easy to work with. This has (almost) nothing whatsoever to do with electromagnetic absorption of energies by molecular bonds of gases in the atmosphere.

    Reply
    Please complete the required fields.



  • MG
    I’m not sure that peer review is failing in the field of climate research, or no more than in any other. Trouble is there are very many individuals like libertas (wearing his old planning4acrash hat) who talk nonsense about it, such that anyone with something sensible to say against the prevailing view (which is quite well supported by observation) gets lumped in with them.

    Unfair, but I’ve learned that the conduct of science is pretty unfair.

    Reply
    Please complete the required fields.



  • Reticent. is the Met Office not credible enough?

    Do you not know basic physics to understand that CO2 CANNOT have a major impact on climate when it is measured in parts per million and is significantly less capable of holding heat than water vapour, which is 2% of the atmosphere? The fraud is so bloody great that it falls under the Hitlarian principal that the bigger the lie, the more you say it, the more likely folk are to believe it.

    The reason why contrarians sound kooky is because they do not have billions or millions in funding.

    It used to be that folk trusted those who were close to them or down to earth, not trusting those in politics, media or wearing suits. That all changed much down to the works of Edward Bernays, the father of modern propaganda.

    Reply
    Please complete the required fields.



  • Reticent. The conspiracy is more down to the justification of global regulations. The focus has been on using the threat of climate change to guilt trip countries into ceding national sovereignty to global bodies like the United Nations. The collapse of the Copenhagen climate talks occurred because the leaked text of the agreement would have destroyed third world sovereignty, which was a major reason for them pulling out of the talks.

    Yes, the Met Office tried to explain away the “pause” in global warming, but the chart exists, nonetheless and it is contrary to the computer models used to justify the global taxation and regulation of all life. Do not look at the taxation level today, moreover, look at the trend. All taxes start small and then grow, and grow, and grow, like a cancer.

    Reply
    Please complete the required fields.



  • The key point is, that we can debate all we like about house prices, but when homes and the energy being used to make them comfortable are being taxed and regulated for a fraud, and when those policies lead to dangerous technologies like nuclear, all bets are off. Plus, it has created numerous wars. The requirement for biofuels fuelled the Arabic Spring and other conflicts because grains that once fed the third and developed world are now being burned in cars, but human suffering is not a crisis, because according to the powers that be, humans are not an endangered or protected species. Yes, some minority groups are, but not the most of us.

    Reply
    Please complete the required fields.



  • And the United Nation’s key policy is reduction of population to 2bn, as stated in the UN Biodiversity Agreements. This is on record.

    Reticent, the 7,000ppm CO2 levels you described help explain the dinosaurs. This higher level of CO2 allowed far, far greater plant growth and likely more fatty plants like palm and coconut, which helps explain the ginormous herbivores and the lack of dessert. How else could a Brontosaurus exist? They certainly could not be sustained from today’s level of plant growth. Even in the tropics.

    Think about it guys.

    Reply
    Please complete the required fields.



  • I love the science bit …

    All things being equal, you’d say that H2O is way more important, but all things aren’t equal.

    1) CO2 gas has 2 strong absorption lines around 3-4um, and a wider absoption band 13-15um. Of the two around 3um, one coincides closely with H2O so doesn’t matter, where the other is in a place where H2O is totally transparent. And at 13-15um H2O is still 70% transparent. So, adding CO2 can absorb infra-red radiation that otherwise would pass through.

    See fig 6.2 page 4 – http://irina.eas.gatech.edu/EAS8803_Fall2009/Lec6.pdf . Ozone is also bad.

    2) Atmospherically, CO2 is quite evenly distributed and H2O not so much. This page shows less than 10% CO2 variation globally – http://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/IOTD/view.php?id=82142 . For water, warm equatorial air can actually hold a lot of vapour. It rises, moves north or south, generating well known wind and desertification patterns along the way, and then falls as precipitation in places like the tropics and beyond. At the poles, there’s actually very little atmospheric water – it freezes out a lot. So CO2 can have a big effect at the poles too.

    Reply
    Please complete the required fields.



  • Libertas CO2 does most likely have an effect of warming the earth and this will gradually affect the climate. In fact if it wasn’t for geological tectonic activity and volcanoes recycling CO2 fixed at the bottom of oceans we would probably have a snow ball earth. I personally don’t agree with the current climate change consensus because the models used are inadequate and have been shown time and again to be wrong. I don’t think it will be a complete disaster but it may be for some. Sea levels are likely to rise and displace millions of people living in low lying areas like Bangladesh for example. I think nature is adaptable and animals and plants will simply move into areas better suited to them. So I think rising CO2 levels need to be treated with caution and we should each try our best to reduce our footprint just in case.

    Lethemfall
    IMO there is not a free debate about the facts, measurements and opinions relating to climate anymore. It is divided into camps of opposing views and peer review suffers from this too.

    Reply
    Please complete the required fields.



  • The clues in the name global warming means cross the whole globe not just countries that might get colder. Doesn’t C02 prevent heat absorbed by earth being re emitted out to space so heating up earth which clearly is not composed of C02.

    Reply
    Please complete the required fields.



  • The reason(s) why you sound kooky Libertas is that you believe every conspiracy theory under the sun, you think the ten commandments have something to say about taxation and you post your outlandish opinions on all sorts of economic, political and scientific topics (that you clearly aren’t that well-versed in) on a website that’s supposed to be about the prospect of falling prices in the housing market.

    Icarus already pointed out that the Met Office have posted other articles that acknowledge the ongoing process of ocean warming.

    As MG said, it is entirely likely that climate change is massively overblown, but if you think the elitist, lefty, tax-happy environmental lobby has as much to gain from overblowing climate change as pollutant industries have to gain from denying it exists, than you don’t understand much about economic incentives or the oil prices you’re so busy posting. Unlike governments, who mostly have to spend tax revenue on public services, corporations get to keep their profits, so they probably have a little more incentive to be play down climate change and fund researchers who are willing to write papers corroborating that line of enquiry.

    I suppose you don’t believe that cigarettes are harmful, either. The governments probably just cooked that one up to get all that juicy tax revenue so they could blow it all on environmental quangos (aka the public servant equivalent of CEOs buying themselves new Lear jets).

    Reply
    Please complete the required fields.



  • 13. Striebs said…

    I have witnessed first hand in USA the tracking effect on local people and environment inc water

    also in the UK the councils, government etc will ride over any person just to get what they want, if they want to build a tracking site in your front garden I am sure they will find a way to do it and leave the tax payer footing the bill

    Reply
    Please complete the required fields.



  • Libertas, how come whenever the government quotes figures that don’t suit your arguments you write them off as garbage, yet when they quote figures that support your point of view they are suddenly perfectly reliable? The only conclusion is that you are a complete conspiracy theorist or just a nutcase. You are not capable of meaningful debate because you are either too stupid or too fixated to hear other opinions. You have pretty much single handedly ruined what used to be a good site. This thread is probably the most intellectual debate that’s been on this site for a while. Unfortunately it’s got nothing to do with house prices and is dominated by your drivel.

    Reply
    Please complete the required fields.



  • 29 Mark ,

    Horizontal drilling gives tremendous freedom to locate surface infrastructure where it is most convenient .

    Could you be more specific about the effects on water you have witnessed first hand ?

    Is it shortage of water , contamination or what ?

    Thanks

    Reply
    Please complete the required fields.



Add a comment

  • Your email address is required so we can verify that the comment is genuine. It will not be posted anywhere on the site, will be stored confidentially by us and never given out to any third party.
  • Please note that any viewpoints published here as comments are user´s views and not the views of HousePriceCrash.co.uk.
  • Please adhere to the Guidelines

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes:

<a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>