Jump to content

The United Kingdom and the Death of Boris Johnson as we know it.

CB Fry

By CB Fry,
in The Lounge

 Share

SWF (Non Legally Binding) General Election  

193 members have voted

  1. 1. SWF (Non Legally Binding) General Election

    • Conservatives
      42
    • Labour
      65
    • Liberals
      54
    • UKIP
      1
    • Green
      18
    • Brexit
      8
    • Change UK
      0
    • Other
      5

Recommended Posts

  • 4 weeks later...
saint1977

saint1977

Posted
Posted

Going by the book Mail Men BBC staff had better used to being called a cunt when they have to deal with Dacre.

As for Moore, if he was any more up Boris’s arse he’d be eating his winnets. There’s client journalism but that’s another level of sycophancy. Yes, it trolls part of the electorate but that’s a culture war and not good governance, anymore than if Blair had appointed Gould back in the day. Good governance is appointing someone of independent thought which would also demonstrate some self confidence by this government.

Wes re: Abbott, whether it’s a good hire isn’t so much contingent on Brexit per se, but it does reinforce that the Government is very into the Anglosphere idea. If Trump loses that its a bit of a spanner in the works

Link to comment
Share on other sites
badgerx16

badgerx16

Posted
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, Tamesaint said:

Blimey. Now even Conservative party members think that Johnson is doing a bad job.

 

https://www.conservativehome.com/thetorydiary/2020/10/our-cabinet-league-table-the-prime-minister-falls-into-negative-territory.html

Ahead of the party conference many MPs have said they want an end to reliance on Dom, and want " the old Boris" back. The 'old Boris' was a fabrication, what we have now is the real thing. They fell for a lie.

Edited by badgerx16
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Hockey_saint

Hockey_saint

Posted
Posted
6 minutes ago, badgerx16 said:

Ahead of the party conference many MPs have said they want an end to reliance on Dom, and want " the old Boris" back. The 'old Boris' was a fabrication, what we have now is the real thing. They fell for a lie.

Sadly so did a large population of this country. It's the same story isn't it? given the right conditions, people will fall for anything.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
buctootim

buctootim

Posted
Posted
4 hours ago, Tamesaint said:

Blimey. Now even Conservative party members think that Johnson is doing a bad job.

 

https://www.conservativehome.com/thetorydiary/2020/10/our-cabinet-league-table-the-prime-minister-falls-into-negative-territory.html

Imagine being 70 points behind Dominic Raab and 80 behind Luz Truss! That’s got to sting 🤣

Link to comment
Share on other sites
buctootim

buctootim

Posted
Posted
49 minutes ago, Lord Duckhunter said:

I doubt he gives a shiny shite. 

‘Course he doesn’t dear. Why should a Conservative Party PM give shiny shite if the same members of the party who voted him in just a year ago now think he is a liability. 
 

Thus why you and the other two fanboys are like a turkey shoot. Incapable of objective discussion 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Lord Duckhunter

Lord Duckhunter

Posted
Posted
19 minutes ago, buctootim said:

‘Course he doesn’t dear. Why should a Conservative Party PM give shiny shite if the same members of the party who voted him in just a year ago now think he is a liability. 
 

Thus why you and the other two fanboys are like a turkey shoot. Incapable of objective discussion 

He won’t give a shiny shite because there won’t be a leadership contest and he’ll get a bounce come Jan 21 and the glorious departure. Cameron was unpopular with vast swaths of the party at various different times. It’s only excitable school boys who care. I’d have thought constant defeats would have made you think and calm down a touch, but no you can’t help yourself.
 

Fan boy, I don’t think so. Boris is a vehicle a lot of us used to get out of The EU. I am not, or never have been a fan of Boris Johnson (he’s nearer your pinko politics than mine). In actual fact, the more unpopular he is in the run up to departure, the better. It means he’ll have to keep us onside. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
buctootim

buctootim

Posted
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, Lord Duckhunter said:

Cameron was unpopular with vast swaths of the party at various different times. It’s only excitable school boys who care. 

So was May. Whatever happened to her? Ditched by the excitable schoolboys who constitute most of the Parliamentary Conservative party.   They might no control who is the next leader but they sure control when its time for one to go. 

 

Boris bounce? probably not. He's either going to cave on some redlines - which will get the bangers on his back or put up with hostile press over the thousands of lorries parked in Kent and business screaming about additional costs and running out of stock.  He will be given time though, time enough to be in office to carry the can.   

Edited by buctootim
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Wes Tender

Wes Tender

Posted
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, buctootim said:

So was May. Whatever happened to her? Ditched by the excitable schoolboys who constitute most of the Parliamentary Conservative party.   They might no control who is the next leader but they sure control when its time for one to go. 

Boris bounce? probably not. He's either going to cave on some redlines - which will get the bangers on his back or put up with hostile press over the thousands of lorries parked in Kent and business screaming about additional costs and running out of stock.  He will be given time though, time enough to be in office to carry the can.   

You lack any sort of perspective about Tory Party politics because you are a total outsider who doesn't understand how things work in the Party. It's all about Brexit, you see, Timmy. What happened to May? Apart from being the worst leader the party has ever had, she allowed the EU to walk all over her and Robbins in the negotiations, and then through lack of judgement, lost her majority in an election. You would have to be pretty naive not to accept or understand that she was a total liability to the Party, so had to go.

Boris need not be too concerned about popularity polling among the party membership, as a lot of that is down to the handling of the Chinese virus. If he were to make serious concessions on the FTA negotiations, fisheries  and the so-called level playing field and state aid, then he would be in real trouble, because he would lose a lot of membership support and Farage and the Brexit Party are waiting in the wings  Lord Frostie the No Man is doing a brilliant job, and the EU are starting to wobble as time runs short. If we hold firm and get a Canada style deal, then all this project fear stuff about massive lorry parks in Kent will largely go away. If a FTA is not arranged shortly, then Boris needs to walk away to allow the time to arrange the logistical side of things. Even in a worst case scenario, any disruption would not last long before alternative arrangements would be made through other ports.to take the strain off Dover.

I suspect that if Boris decides to step back from the party leadership, it will be at a time of his choosing, as he will want to be remembered by history as the PM who got Brexit done.

Edited by Wes Tender
Link to comment
Share on other sites
ecuk268

ecuk268

Posted
Posted
15 hours ago, Wes Tender said:

Even in a worst case scenario, any disruption would not last long before alternative arrangements would be made through other ports.to take the strain off Dover.

 

What other ports have the infrastructure to make much of an impact on the up to 10000 trucks that go through Dover every day? Can they take the large ferries that operate into Dover? How many ro-ro berths do they have (Dover can unload 7 ships simultaneously)? 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
badgerx16

badgerx16

Posted
Posted
16 minutes ago, ecuk268 said:

What other ports have the infrastructure to make much of an impact on the up to 10000 trucks that go through Dover every day? Can they take the large ferries that operate into Dover? How many ro-ro berths do they have (Dover can unload 7 ships simultaneously)? 

 

The plan is for Felixstowe and Harwich, but their traffic comes from Belgium and Holland, and whether those routes have the capacity to take traffic from Calais-Dover is yet to be shown.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Whitey Grandad

Whitey Grandad

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, badgerx16 said:

The plan is for Felixstowe and Harwich, but their traffic comes from Belgium and Holland, and whether those routes have the capacity to take traffic from Calais-Dover is yet to be shown.

Harwich doesn’t have the capacity. Not since the Bathside Bay development got stalled.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
badgerx16

badgerx16

Posted
Posted
18 minutes ago, Whitey Grandad said:

Harwich doesn’t have the capacity. Not since the Bathside Bay development got stalled.

It's a Government plan, so unlikely to have been sufficiently thought through. There is also Tilbury, but I suspect the new development there is more LoLo than RoRo, whenever it becomes operational.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Wes Tender

Wes Tender

Posted
Posted
5 hours ago, badgerx16 said:

It's a Government plan, so unlikely to have been sufficiently thought through. There is also Tilbury, but I suspect the new development there is more LoLo than RoRo, whenever it becomes operational.

The RoRo at Tilbury looks as if it is going well.

https://www.forthports.co.uk/latest-news/tilbury2s-new-roro-terminal-completes-successful-ship-trials/

Link to comment
Share on other sites
badgerx16

badgerx16

Posted
Posted (edited)
7 minutes ago, Wes Tender said:

The RoRo at Tilbury looks as if it is going well.

https://www.forthports.co.uk/latest-news/tilbury2s-new-roro-terminal-completes-successful-ship-trials/

So it is an 'unaccomapnied freight' terminal, using dedicated freight ferries, not an alternative berthing for cross-channel ships, nor for trucks being driven on / off by their own drivers.

 

( Surely this strand should be on the Brexit thread ? )

Edited by badgerx16
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Lord Duckhunter

Lord Duckhunter

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, Plastic said:

The guy is a clown, but the commitment to wind power is admirable. Hopefully moves us away from the bottomless money-pits of collaborative nuclear with EDF/CGN/Hitachi.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-54421489

Wind power, more like pony power. 

You’re right, this is clownish, pinko clownish. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Plastic

Plastic

Posted
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, Lord Duckhunter said:

Wind power, more like pony power. 

You’re right, this is clownish, pinko clownish. 

 

Assume you like the idea of paying China for our electricity, or maybe you prefer coal power? Renewables are a legitimate alternative now, unlike 10 years ago - but more importantly they are commercially very attractive, hence the massive amount of VCs invested in the space. Have a day off. 

Edited by Plastic
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Whitey Grandad

Whitey Grandad

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, Plastic said:

Assume you like the idea of paying China for our electricity, or maybe you prefer coal power? Renewables are a legitimate alternative now, unlike 10 years ago - but more importantly they are commercially very attractive, hence the massive amount of VCs invested in the space. Have a day off. 

Renewables are useful and important but is wind power any good in a prolonged spell of high pressure in February?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
buctootim

buctootim

Posted
Posted (edited)
2 hours ago, Whitey Grandad said:

Renewables are useful and important but is wind power any good in a prolonged spell of high pressure in February?

If you plan properly it isn’t an issue. Through a combination of having turbine sites in a wide range of locations, energy exchange cables with France , dynamic demand (eg appliances that  only run at low demand times), standby reserve power stations powered by fossil fuels and a means to use excess electricity to create hydrogen you can have an uber  stable and clean electricity supply.  When you properly cost nuclear it is even more hideously expensive than people realise and we shouldn’t be doing it imo

Edited by buctootim
Link to comment
Share on other sites
aintforever

aintforever

Posted
Posted
8 hours ago, Plastic said:

The guy is a clown, but the commitment to wind power is admirable. Hopefully moves us away from the bottomless money-pits of collaborative nuclear with EDF/CGN/Hitachi.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-54421489

Would be admirable if it was actually a commitment and not just more headline grabbing bullshit.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Whitey Grandad

Whitey Grandad

Posted
Posted
2 hours ago, buctootim said:

If you plan properly it isn’t an issue. Through a combination of having turbine sites in a wide range of locations, energy exchange cables with France , dynamic demand (eg appliances that  only run at low demand times), standby reserve power stations powered by fossil fuels and a means to use excess electricity to create hydrogen you can have an uber  stable and clean electricity supply.  When you properly cost nuclear it is even more hideously expensive than people realise and we shouldn’t be doing it imo

True, but all these contingencies come at a cost. 

Regarding standby turbines, when I was studying engineering at university one of my subjects was power generation and we were told about a problem that arose with outdated generators that had previously been running 24 hours a day but were used to cover peak demands. They were going through two or three thermal cycles a day instead of one or two a year and were suffering failures due to metal fatigue of their casings.

Energy exchange is a good idea and necessary with renewables like wind where the source of generation is widely dispersed. Let’s hope that we can stay friends with the French and Ireland.

As you say, nuclear is very expensive and the reason for the fast breeder reactors was to provide fuel for our nuclear weapons. We are bequeathing a hideous problem to our descendants.

I’m all for cleaner sources of energy but to expect to achieve total supply within ten years is cloud cuckoo land.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
ecuk268

ecuk268

Posted
Posted
5 hours ago, Whitey Grandad said:

Renewables are useful and important but is wind power any good in a prolonged spell of high pressure in February?

That's where storage comes in. There's been considerable advances in storage technology, particularly using Lithium-Ion batteries. 95% efficient and storing up to 100MW. Quite costly at the moment but a lot of research going on to reduce this. Can be used with wind, solar and wave power and are already used in locations to cover breaks in conventional energy generation.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Whitey Grandad

Whitey Grandad

Posted
Posted
2 hours ago, ecuk268 said:

That's where storage comes in. There's been considerable advances in storage technology, particularly using Lithium-Ion batteries. 95% efficient and storing up to 100MW. Quite costly at the moment but a lot of research going on to reduce this. Can be used with wind, solar and wave power and are already used in locations to cover breaks in conventional energy generation.

 

Is there enough lithium in the world? Motor vehicles alone will probably need more than the known resources can provide.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
buctootim

buctootim

Posted
Posted (edited)
8 hours ago, Whitey Grandad said:

Is there enough lithium in the world? Motor vehicles alone will probably need more than the known resources can provide.

Probably not. I still see a big role for hydrogen, People says its too expensive or too polluting to make because it needs so much electricity - but that assumes you're using fossil fuels from a grid power station. The price of the fuel cells is falling all the time

Creating hydrogen by splitting water is very simple, low tech and can be done anywhere. There is one company trialling small scale plants located directly at petrol stations. All you need is a 10m turbine, a water supply and a hydrogen storage tank. The beauty of it is that you are turning an inconstant variable electricity source into a go anywhere quantified transport fuel. The same can be done using photovoltaics - obviously not so much in the UK - but in sunny countries its absolutely viable.  So Saudi Arabia could become the Saudi Arabia of hydrogen as opposed to the Saudi Arabia of oil.     

 https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-50212037

Edited by buctootim
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Lord Duckhunter

Lord Duckhunter

Posted
Posted
12 hours ago, rallyboy said:

We'll become the Saudi Arabia of wind!...another field we'll lead the world in, hurrah for plucky old us!.... 😂

More made-up shit to fool the simpler voter.

Agreed.
 

It clearly wasn’t aimed at the core Tory vote, aimed at pinkos and soft arsed lefties. As you say simpler voters. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Wes Tender

Wes Tender

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, badgerx16 said:

Yeah, fuck the environment.

As if having bloody huge windmills everywhere isn't fucking up the environment in a different way.

I agree with Timmy for once, and see a future for Hydrogen as a viable alternative to battery power. Certainly the Japanese seem to be putting their research and development that way. But in other areas, whereas wind power can play a part, the solution will have to involve a mix of several alternatives, like wave, tide, solar and water power generation.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
badgerx16

badgerx16

Posted
Posted
39 minutes ago, Wes Tender said:

As if having bloody huge windmills everywhere isn't fucking up the environment in a different way.

I agree with Timmy for once, and see a future for Hydrogen as a viable alternative to battery power. Certainly the Japanese seem to be putting their research and development that way. But in other areas, whereas wind power can play a part, the solution will have to involve a mix of several alternatives, like wave, tide, solar and water power generation.

Wes, again I broadly agree with you. Fracking, and it's potential impact on the environment is a local issue for me as the 2 Lancashire test bores are within 10 miles of my house. ( Notwithstanding I disagree with the industry on principle ).

Link to comment
Share on other sites
buctootim

buctootim

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, Wes Tender said:

As if having bloody huge windmills everywhere isn't fucking up the environment in a different way.

 

We are talking about offshore. Offshore is where the most constant wind is, there is no or minimal impact on visual amenity and overall its good for the marine environment as well as it stops trawlers destroying the seabed where the turbines are located.     

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Wes Tender

Wes Tender

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, buctootim said:

We are talking about offshore. Offshore is where the most constant wind is, there is no or minimal impact on visual amenity and overall its good for the marine environment as well as it stops trawlers destroying the seabed where the turbines are located.     

Bloody great wind turbines give no or minimal visual impact to sea views? I certainly don't appreciate seeing them any more than I do bloody great electricity pylons, and the difference with sea views, is that they are flat and visible over longer distances than pylons which can partly be hidden by the land contours.  And won't the installation of them in itself cause considerable damage to the seabed?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
ecuk268

ecuk268

Posted
Posted
17 hours ago, Whitey Grandad said:

Is there enough lithium in the world? Motor vehicles alone will probably need more than the known resources can provide.

Technology is always moving forward.

In California they are experimenting with a type of zinc battery which provides equal performance to Lithium while holding a charge for longer. 

They are also developing organic flow batteries (don't ask me to explain how they work) which have greater storage density, lower cost and more environmentally friendly.

All this is for grid storage to smooth out the peaks and troughs of wind and solar power.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
badgerx16

badgerx16

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, Wes Tender said:

Bloody great wind turbines give no or minimal visual impact to sea views? I certainly don't appreciate seeing them any more than I do bloody great electricity pylons, and the difference with sea views, is that they are flat and visible over longer distances than pylons which can partly be hidden by the land contours.  And won't the installation of them in itself cause considerable damage to the seabed?

All 'renewable' solutions will have an impact physically and visually on the environment. It's their impact on the atmosphere, as compared to current generation and power systems, that is the ultimate decider.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • Lighthouse changed the title to The United Kingdom and the Death of Boris Johnson as we know it.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share
Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...