Seen elsewhere



Click images for more details



Recent comments
Recent posts
Currently discussing

A few sites I've stumbled across recently....

Powered by Squarespace


Aug 17, 2017 at 11:34 PM | stewgreen

If burning wood is known to be dangerous, why does the Green Blob ensure that 100s of millions are compelled to continue cooking on wood fires inside their basic houses?

Aug 18, 2017 at 9:02 AM | Unregistered Commentergolf charlie

Quote from Biofuel watch on Drax
"equivalent to adding three million diesel cars to the roads each year".

Thats BS cos what kind of diesel ?Euro 6 ?

also say
“we know that burning wood is * the largest source of particulate air pollution nationwide*
, yet the Government are pouring money into these schemes without any proper assessment of the public health impacts, and with air pollution already a major health crisis in this country.”

Aug 17, 2017 at 11:34 PM | Registered Commenterstewgreen

@Tomo Point taken , maybe Underhill hasn't released enough info to be debunked.

But his report breaks the "too wow to be true rule"

There must have been parliamentary enquiries, so he negligent if he had evidence and didn't release it at that time

Aug 17, 2017 at 11:32 PM | Registered Commenterstewgreen


I had a look at the Facebook thing - what I saw isn't imho a debunk at all - merely partisan querulousness and comparing chalk with cheese in terms of Smythe vs. Underhill. Prof Underhill has considerably more documented experience in relevant areas than Smythe who frankly was short of a few marbles.

As Supertroll says we don't know the whole story, Underhill is being selective with his prognostications - without offering the relevant evidence and it would seem that Horrible Harrabin and chums got first dibs on the good news.... it's not easy to accept the sweeping scope of the analysis without some supporting information.

I repeat though that geophysics is bound to "ground truthing" and there have been many, many episodes where what's been found in core samples and digger buckets has been both a lot worse than predicted *and* also a lot better than predicted too - you never really know until you test ... and I'm curious why the prof feels the need to publicly kite his presently unsupported opinion when he damn well knows that the proof of the pudding is the test wells.

The major oil companies have on occasion got things wildly wrong and spent loads of money failing and selling out the "dud concession" to another exploration outfit who've re-evaluated the data and hit a series of really big finds.

The way this particular interpretation has been released smacks of attention seeking - no doubt there must be more to come - but why didn't he give some evidence and why go to the BBC with it?

Aug 17, 2017 at 11:03 PM | Registered Commentertomo

@Radical Rodent tried to give a link to the facebook post debunking the BBC Underhill article
Here's a direct link

(withTwitter/Facebook right click over the post's timstamp bit and that gives you its direct URL)

Aug 17, 2017 at 10:04 PM | Registered Commenterstewgreen

@Pcar re train subsidies
I agree there should be no subsidies in principle for anything
But then there can be sophisticated loops

Towns subsidise Ryan Air to bring tourists in

I think London builds train lines to cause £5m landplots to become £30m landplots with a megatower on them.
if people managing such subsidies can show proper cost/benefit payback then that is OK by me,

Aug 17, 2017 at 9:38 PM | Registered Commenterstewgreen

Re shale predictions
like peak oil predictions ?

Aug 17, 2017 at 9:29 PM | Registered Commenterstewgreen

Supertroll 4:25 PM

The Polish fracking experience is indeed relevant - and geophysical interpretation has a strong element of SWAG-ing going on a lot of the time >>> digging or drilling are the only two ways in most cases to close the loop.

I wouldn't be surprised if the UK shale resource is dramatically less than the extents of "shale" on the geological maps that have has $$$ signs in some folks eyes. The test wells should've been drilled as a matter of routine (by BGS?) and Harrabin , Greenpeace, FoE should've simply been robustly instructed on reproduction and travel as in Foxtrot Oscar. It is an indicator of the incompetence of our politicians and public servants that they fell for the mendacious bilge spouted about "fracking".

Aug 17, 2017 at 8:28 PM | Registered Commentertomo

Hence the paradox
#1 Drax flaky claim that Drax powered EVs are twice as green *
is matched by
#2 Biofuelwatch claim same Drax powered EVs cause twice as high particulates

* BTW that claim was for the whole year I think, but they emphasised in Summer your car is low CO2 cos it's powered by sun
But deconstruct that
#1 They forgo the massive CO2 in solar manufacturing
#2 Of course you'd still be charging your car at night, so it wouldn't have been powered by sun anyway.

Aug 17, 2017 at 8:10 PM | Registered Commenterstewgreen

PostCreate a New Post

Enter your information below to create a new post.
Author Email (optional):
Author URL (optional):
Some HTML allowed: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <code> <em> <i> <strike> <strong>