Steven P

Never seen piles of dead birds under any of the turbines I have been around....

As I get older, I feel it in my fingers, I feel it in my toes.... hate it when it is wet wet wet.....

You sound genuinely upset by my phrase "Daily Mail Rage"... perhaps you should read that paper. I made a note of the top headlines this evening: The first story was paying tribute to a footballer Next: Killer "threatens to punch someone in court" Solicitor struck off without revealing bitter neighbour dispute Democrat (left side of US politics) who REFUSES to resign tears into "smear campaign" Drivers left furious a self driving cars Johnson: Why are we spineless at giving away military base I scrolled down a lot of stories looking for a good news story. There weren't any. The notes are shortened headlines and the headlines and stories written in an aggressive tone, to produce a sense of injustice in the readers. You might ask about 'Daily Mail Rage'.. just reading them made me angry! The Daily Mail is an angry paper. The press you read is your wndow on the world and if you read papers that are full of anger and paranoia then even the most placid person in the world will start thnking that way. It is a skill, an art to write to a papers style. I wouldn't normally just comment off the topic - prefering to keep in line with the discussion, however under "making the news today", the press are making the news, worth taking a moment to seek out an opposing point of view and to check the facts of what they are telling us I reckon. Worth looking outside our own comfort zones every now and then to check we are in the right place

There is a point I guess when we are responsible to keep others warm that crosses the line from frugal to silly, and that line changes depending on who the others are. By myself the house is a few degrees cooler but when the others are home I can't do that

quite depressing reading - the weather is that bad - usually this time of year a post "Just put the fire on" gets most comments similar to "In September? we put ours on when the temperature drops below freezing"

Have you got the money set aside just in case they come knocking at the door? From Dans comment above, you -might- be able to argue that when they do ask and you pay prompt there is no interest to pay? A long shot but could be worth a cheeky try when they do ask

However I feel that we have recently gone around and around on this, The government have the same targets as before, green energy, electric cars and electric heating, but have adjusted the time scales to be more realistic for the country to develop the infrastructure needed. I think that was in essence 'making the news today' yesterday.

Of course, I forget your monopoly on working. Working on Daily Mail Rage Bingo, this weekend it must be green energy weekend I guess. None of the links below are my opinions but peer reviewed articles. In the short to medium term nuclear power is not viable, oil and fossil fuels not sustainable. Only other options are renewable or turning the lights off. Hinkley C, a joint venture EDF (Electricity De France) and General Nuclear Corporation (China). British involvement... digging holes and pouring concrete. Rolls Royce small and medium reactors are a few years away from being licensed, and to speed that up are requiring about a billion in investment.. which the UK government declined to invest in. They are looking at 2050 to have an established market. Rolls-Royce SMR - Wikipedia EN.WIKIPEDIA.ORG Oil reserves are not my assessment, 60 years, I was wrong when I said 40 above. List of countries by proven oil reserves - Wikipedia EN.WIKIPEDIA.ORG

This chart: Onshore wind is the cheapest electricity generation. Nuclear figures doesn't usually account for reprocessing the spent fuel. Windfarms might be an eyesore to some but would you prefer a nuclear power station in your town.. and thinking of where we put them, nuclear power plants in the UK take about 20+ years from agreement to build one through buying the land, planning, construction and so on, a wind farm about 5. The UK and Europe has the technology for wind farms... nuclear it is China selling their expertise at say, Hinkley (the UKs new nuclear power station) 20+ years and we will be running short of electricity by then, the world will also have half the oil resources left as it does now (I think it is about 40 years oil supply.... at todays rate of use.. which doesn't account for Africa, India and China (outside the cities) joining the modern world where electricity is king, and oil to make it will be sold to the highest bidder) .. and our children and grandchildren will have about 5 years to solve the problems of electricity generation, supply and cost unless we give them a head start now and start making it in a sustainable way so we can power the world for the next 100 years. As I said above he is delaying the changes necessary because the governments have not invested in infrastructure to allow these changes to happen now.

To be fair I tend to agree with some of what he said - there was a bit on question time questioning some of his announcement (7 wheelie bins...), The boiler thing tend to agree with that. Suggesting we change a boiler for a heat pump won't work for older houses, new builds probably though. Should be used in addition to a boiler to keep a house warm rather than heat it up (needs a different mind set that the heat pumps run all the time, boiler is on / off). Electric cars - too soon for a mass changeover, I don't think the country can install the infrastructure needed in time and solve problems such as how do you charge a car at home if you park on the street and not trip up every pedestrian with a trailing wire. and a massive infrastructure upgrade to send renewable electricity from generation to the cities. Not sure if 2035 will be soon enough either to get it all working in the background... but sooner is better than later Then he went a bit mad about 7 wheelie bins and meat North Sea OIl, I reckon we should keep on as we are doing for a while until we can generate our electricity from other means - wind energy for example is cheaper which was his last point and also good to allow more onshore wind generation.. but as above, need to get the wind energy from windy places to the cities.

See the title, put the fire on this morning. Not even October yet - the thermometer says it is OK, suspect air is a bit damp so draft from the fire should sort that for a few days

I can see a side line here, I have string, I have a door and if that doesn't work a cross pein hammer (more accurate than a claw hammer I think but that's the last option, hook the claw under the tooth and pop)

Your title says hard wood, are you particular for wanting what everyone else wants? This week I have had 4 (ford focus) car loads of leylandii (boot + back seat till I worry about the suspension) just from being out and about and asking. The ash tree next to it... the house owners had that but the soft wood "help yourself"

Detracting from the post some landlord sums: Put in 20% deposit: Say 50k Borrow £250k Buy an average house - lets say £300k to keep sums easier Do the sums right and your tenants pay the mortgage, maintenance, insurances and agency fees. T'Internet reckons a landlord should see 5% profit... This 5% isn't 5% of what they p[ut in (50k) but 5% off what the tenants pay, lets say £100 a month. Awww, that isn't much to get a house paid for for free.. ...so lets fast forward 25 years when the mortgage is paid off, house price will have at least doubled at current rates. Lets go double. Landlord sells up, £50k has turned into £630k over 25 years (including the £100 a month). Ahhh, my bleeding heart.

It is a valid point, at the moment and while the trees are healthy just in case it takes longer than you think I'd make sure the house insurance covers it.

So you can cut the trees back to your boundary no problem - you are allowed to do that. Most land will be registered to someone - if it is not council land it could still belong to a developer and not transferred to anyone else yet? (depends how old the houses are). I assume you have had a look at the land register to see who owns the land? If it is a conservation area, is there someone who manages that? They should know who owns what, or is the land unmanaged?

Beginning to think that from the press reports that the last few years of his career have been a plan to leave a past behind that he doesn't want following and a defence if it does catch up. Running rampant in the British TV studios, the heat was getting to him when he was told to his face about being a predator, he up sticks and goes to the US... trickier to sue or prosecute someone in a different country, and away from a daily dose of him on TV his victims might just let bygones be bygones ... couple of films, but ran away from film making.. and now a following of 28 million was it? conspiracy theories galore, all believing now that the establishment is out to get him.

Is that the "P.C." brigade then?

There is a joke in there but pretty sure writing it down would ruin it.

Slight difference Mike, you were paying out to buy the complete business which I guess was a shared asset you and the business partner - sucks though that you being the good guy had to pay out to the bad guy. You were never accused of anything - so any payment you made wasn't to make allegations against you vanish. In the cases where the accused makes a payment and the threat of court action vanishes, the payment is the lesser of the 2 evils, the greater of the 2 is the victim having their day in court. The analogy here would be you taking your old business partner to court and them saying "here is the business, website et al and also £50k to make the court side of things go away". The greater of the 2 evils is only greater if you won't walk away from the court proceedings with an apology from the accuser.

That kind of emphasises a point I made earlier, those who are rich and famous are protected because of this attitude "they are only reporting this to go after their cash". The victims are often put off reporting what happened because of that attitude. Mentioned earlier that the courts should decide guilt but the victims should be able to report any crimes without fear or prejudice. Any guilty verdicts and then the victims should be able to chase for a payout. To me making a payout is almost an admission of guilt - why make a payment if there is nothing to defend yourself from? Noting that there was a report to the police about Brand (not from someone in the documentary) - shows that the program has shown other victims that they weren't the only ones. Of course, writing here as if he is guilty, he could be found to be innocent of specific charges in a court of law if it gets that far

Wow, what a lot of words from a simple question for a clarification about what you were referring to. Taking a lot of interest in my comments....

D'Oh, you posted a comment on an open forum, which I think needed clarification to aid the discussion. No clarification was coming, so I answered the question as asked. If you don't want a discussion following your comments on the open threads, wanting only the opinions of specified individuals then perhaps a private message is more appropriate. Noting that your preference to insult those that have opposing opinions on anything I'd perhaps give a warning that private messages to insult people shouldn't be looked on favourably so keep them nice eh? My question answered by your silence, so back to the discussion.

So that is a no then, you aren't going to answer what I asked. You are asking what we think to the timing of all of this and yet there is nothing going on in the background to suggest this documentary was released to coincide with anything. So I'll give my answer. the timing of this documentary is irrelevant to the discussion apart from TV schedules and advertising revenue..

So are you going to answer what I asked or just throw out insults? You were insinuating that the timing of this documentary and newspaper reports were convenient, so a nice and civil question to ask for clarification throws up an insult. Just to remind you, why is the timing of this significant? I have missed something along the way, so do enlighten us. For a mock outrage of a Downing street comment, I think the journalists contacted and asked Downing street for a comment, who cannot win either way perhaps, if the press officer answer "horrified" and so on some will say get on with the day job, if they answer "none of our business" then others will be saying they don't care about the people. I very much doubt that Sunak stuck out his podium on the front steps and said "I am horrified by this"... t was a journalist phoning and askign that provided that response