EU to Splash Billions on Battery Factories

[jaycee + 348]

10 minutes ago, DA? said:

The tax on fossil fuels in the UK was pissed up the wall especially by the government in the 80's, made a few wealthy and that was it and we know wealth doesn't trickle down. Then add in all the external costs of fossil fuels deaths, illness, environmental damage and so on. That tax goes up in smoke. When renewables come in those external costs rapidly go down, saving far more than is gained in taxes at present. Although if we just look at taxes around roads, it all gets knocked out of whack in the not distant future with the autonomous vehicles. I tend to be far more general looking at the world rather than one narrow case and renewables becoming cheap does help a considerable percent of the worlds population.

A few points there. I dont get your point the tax from the North Sea was wasted? All tax is wasted on buying votes for the party in power to get elected so whats so special about NS taxes we still have to find a way to replace the massive tax take from fossil fuels so our masters can bribe the gullible voters and reward their backers.. Renewables will not change anything taxes will be applied to users of EVs to make up the tax loss on petrol. The benefactors will be the people pushing for the change, no not the Greens they are the mugs that believe the BS the sellers of renewables tel them. When its all over we pay more taxes, because somebody has to pay for the massive infrastructure changes as well as the normal taxes MAY have less pollution but only if renewables are able to meet the promises they are making on the scale they can manage but so far they have failed everytime so not holding my breath. Old and cynical been there seen it before.

I dont get why autonomous vehicles are goign to change anything. People still need to move the same distance and the same amount of taxes needs to be collect, all I see is a tax per mile you use an autonomous vehicle to make up for the fact you don't supply the energy.

26 minutes ago, DA? said:

The amount to clean up the North Sea that has been paid in by the industry has been far to little compared to the damage done.

Pure speculation and BS sorry. What damage? Sealife actually flourishes around NS platforms and trawlers cannot go there as its too dangerous so sea life havens have been created in the NS!

 

27 minutes ago, DA? said:

We are all guilty there is more than voting that can be done. Again blame displacement is a great thing.

There is absolutely nothing I can do or could have done so I am blameless. If you think I should have been a greenie before greenies were popular I was in the CND I learnt a lot from that mostly the information I am trying to impart to you about the level of control and manipulation in your life you seem to be unaware of.

 

32 minutes ago, DA? said:

Well if we can't tax the more profitable organisations and general wealthy many countries are stuffed. And as I've said before expect massive disruption coming soon, the system is broken. As for the UK's debt and it's "austerity" measures they have hurt the country. My wife has taught in British schools and I have seen how many children grow up there and my mother was a child social worker. The country has acted in a terrible manner and has not invested in it's future. The damage done has been terrible just to make a few more wealthy, the debt will never be repaid.

I get the feeling you are a left wing UK citizen in which case lets go on that topic I am not seeing how this is related to fossil fuels but here we go.

The UK was screwed in the 70s after a very left wing Labour government bankrupted the country but NS oil saved it. Another Labour government got in after Maggie Thatcher and ran up massive debts again on the back of globalization and oil receipts and then there was a financial crisis these debts became unsustainable, and the Labour party blamed the banks. Yes the banks caused the disaster however lax regulation, due to massive receipt of tax from the City was the real cause and that again was the Labour party's fault. The banks have now repaid more than was loaned to them, RBS is still a basket case but the returns from Northern Rock and Lloyds has more than covered it plus RBS is still paying interest to the government for the loan. We are now in austerity due to previous overspending but not for long as the narrative has shifted to the left due to Corbyn and we are now embarking on a spending spree asthe Torys seek to bribe the electorate away from the communist Corbyn if he gets in we will be backrupt and isolated from most capitalist economies within 5 years on a Venezuelan road to hell. The Shadow Cahncellor John Macdonald is quoted as saying The problem with Venezuela’s revolution is that it didn’t go far enough. So go tax the wealthy take the private companies into state ownership and drive them into the ground. All that will happen is those that pay the taxes will leave the country and the state run industries will return to their former useless selves of the 70s. Been there done that. Please stop listening to people with an agenda that is not for your benefit think outside the box and realize you are being fed lines by others who wish to benefit from changes.

51 minutes ago, DA? said:

So the short term is screwed, but looking out to the future for my son things get far better. Cheap energy (not free) changes everything, the two factors that put most cost on an item are energy and labour, both will become far less.

 

Put away the rose tinted specs and look at history.

[DA? + 301]

in answer to the above, take a look at Norway and how it invested it's taxs from oil/gas. If you don't understand why autonomous EV's change everything you have no idea what the future holds as this is only one part of the disruption to economies and society we shall see. For a start just about every country in the world has 8 to10% of it's GDP wiped out by "accidents" on the roads all factors included, the great majority of accidents will not occur when an AI is in control of a vehicle. This makes taxes from oil seems puny. Ownership of cars for the most part disappears and it becomes more of a taxi/Uber based transportation system, most people will see an 80 to 90% saving on transport related costs.

But again I look at the future for the majority of the human population not isolated cases.

Err got those figures from estimations from organisations involved with fossil fuels for the clean up of the NE from oil/gas operations.

I am well aware we are but sheep.

I don't class my self as belonging to any group as that normally means a person becomes sloppy and lazy in their thinking. I was born in the UK but have spent the majority of my adult life out of it and don't feel like a British citizen. I don't think you understand my opinion on British finances, yes it has been screwed from all sides and with Brexit is a basket case. Although the west has turned into somewhat of a basket case and doesn't seem at all prepared for the future and of course energy (fossil fuels included) plays a massive part in the economy.

I don't have rose tinted specs, I have no faith in governments and society taking the path that's best for the world. But despite this, which will cause a mess for a while the future looks good on a longer time span. What leads me to this opinion science and technology. If you don't understand where science and technology is and how fast it's moving (the past was so slow) you can not understand whats coming up. And understanding technology is not knowing how to use all the apps on your smart phone as many journalists think.

 

[Dan Warnick + 6,100]

Good discussion, fellas.  I may be wrong, but I think you have more readers than you know.

[DA? + 301]

2 hours ago, Dan Warnick said:

Good discussion, fellas.  I may be wrong, but I think you have more readers than you know.

Not sure if that's a good or bad thing, I could be totally wrong and in 10/20 years be getting lots of people writing to me to say "told you so". As long as I continue to learn from my mistakes then it's all good. 

[jaycee + 348]

6 hours ago, DA? said:

Err got those figures from estimations from organisations involved with fossil fuels for the clean up of the NE from oil/gas operations.

Well the simple facts are the oil companies do the decommissioning pay for it and claim it back costs as any otter industry does for money spent on assets not seeing why you think oil companies are doing anything wrong here considering how much they have sunk into the economy in taxes and jobs since the 1970s, I think you mentioned they will cost more than they have paid in well I suggest you use a conversion rate if you are thinking of comparing actual numbers, inflation has been very high in the last 50 years, a pint of beer was 14p in 1970 compared to £5 now. They would be much better left in place if you ask me to continue their role as artificial reefs but there you go rules are rules. and it gives the Greens something to complain about.

6 hours ago, DA? said:

I am well aware we are but sheep.

Speak for yourself I do everything I can to educate others, I can see you maybe a promising project though as you at least have now taken the first step and recognized what you are doing.

 

6 hours ago, DA? said:

I don't class my self as belonging to any group as that normally means a person becomes sloppy and lazy in their thinking. I was born in the UK but have spent the majority of my adult life out of it and don't feel like a British citizen. I don't think you understand my opinion on British finances, yes it has been screwed from all sides and with Brexit is a basket case. Although the west has turned into somewhat of a basket case and doesn't seem at all prepared for the future and of course energy (fossil fuels included) plays a massive part in the economy.

You quote many left wing/Green propaganda lines so I call them as I see them. I understand very well how screwed the West is but EVs is not going to save any economies I have not heard any argument from you that makes me believe this miracle either.

6 hours ago, DA? said:

in answer to the above, take a look at Norway and how it invested it's taxs from oil/gas. If you don't understand why autonomous EV's change everything you have no idea what the future holds as this is only one part of the disruption to economies and society we shall see. For a start just about every country in the world has 8 to10% of it's GDP wiped out by "accidents" on the roads all factors included, the great majority of accidents will not occur when an AI is in control of a vehicle. This makes taxes from oil seems puny. Ownership of cars for the most part disappears and it becomes more of a taxi/Uber based transportation system, most people will see an 80 to 90% saving on transport related costs.

Again I refer you to the taxation issue I brought  up and you have avoided giving a clear answeron. Nobody is going to save on on transportation as the government has to recoup all those taxes it is losing where do you think the billions of £s is going to come from? Dont say tax industry again I have shown you the margins are small there and further taxation will shut them down. I point you to the effect of making the North Sea the highest taxed oil fields in the world when the Tory/Lib alliance went into power and low and behold oil production ran right down and there was a bigger hole in the UK finances, companies and people leave stupidly high tax regimes, for a further example look at France where it was tried a few years ago even Gerad Depardieu became a Russian citizen to avoid the penal taxes and many French moved to London and businesses left it was called to a halt eventually and was one of the reasons Macron is now in power. 

Regarding Norway what is your point they have as much oil as the UK but 1/12 the population of course they have plenty of money to invest in what ever they want. It would cost the UK a large amount of money to convert to EVs something the UK economy will struggle to swallow especially if you think there is no taxation on them.

6 hours ago, DA? said:

don't have rose tinted specs, I have no faith in governments and society taking the path that's best for the world. But despite this, which will cause a mess for a while the future looks good on a longer time span. What leads me to this opinion science and technology. If you don't understand where science and technology is and how fast it's moving (the past was so slow) you can not understand whats coming up. And understanding technology is not knowing how to use all the apps on your smart phone as many journalists think.

I am glad someone is optimistic however I just look at other disruptive technologies and the failure of any benefit to the normal man. Computers and automation were supposed to give the working man more free time all it has done is make people contactable 24/7 and lose their jobs as humans are more expensive than machines, You may think that nobody thought that but I was taught at University by a professor, a leader in his field of computing and robotics, who wrote a book with those ideas in it. So i do understand science and technology and I understand how you are being suckered by the propaganda having been there and done that before, history is a good guide on how to avoid mistakes I find.

Edited October 20, 2018 by jaycee

[jaycee + 348]

5 hours ago, Dan Warnick said:

Good discussion, fellas.  I may be wrong, but I think you have more readers than you know.

Excellent I hope I make a few people think differently for a few minutes at least.

[mcambl61 + 20]

On 10/18/2018 at 6:24 PM, DA? said:

Yes fossil fuels were an important part of the rise of technology and wealth. But it's time has come, tech's available today can replace it and are been actively slowed by the industry in many ways. When the use of fossil fuels causes such great harm to the environment and human health this is just evil.

this is a remarkably ignorant statement. Fossil fuels (gas) to drive generators are exponentially more efficient to any renewable source and can deliver PEAK load, unlike renewables.

 

There is no effort to "slow" anything, if someone comes up with an economically viable alternative that has the ability to react to large power demands it would be in widespread use.  basic physics and economics are why fossil fuels are in use. 

 

stop the emotional irrational "evil" nonsense and the ridiculous "great harm" exaggerations based on your narrow opinions 

[GESPER + 1]

I my opinion is necessary to modify the approach on two main items.

1/The status of debt involved

2/ The ways used to consider value

On the first one the debt involved are not equal in consideration of the risk involved. some are constrain Europe ans main Bric's except China. other are not China and US. It is necessary to modify this situation that induce regularly important crisis as in 2009. The best approach may be the conversion of part of the debt involved in a global new world money. the negotiation will be tough as it necessary not to induce new imbalancs

On the second topic it is necessary to modify the rules of price fixing on three references. First the risks involved  related to climate imbalance and not only of those of investment and work. second in slitting price relative to availability and second to anticipations  ie short term that evaluate time from production to delivery and long term that involve anticipation on technologies  evolution and estimates in future production.

The process is to slip value on quasi known availability and the value base  on estimate. It imply to modify the way we think on risk evaluation from computation with model to valuate the future to a valuation on unknown based on catastrophic events