The Dirty Independence Question

[Comfy Bean]

13 hours ago, eFestivals said:

Scotland already has full-capacity employment in its generation industry, which is generating 100% of Scotland's energy needs.

 

 

 

I disagree with this short sighted opinion. 

We have the potential to lead the world in renewable energy. 

Jobs, research,  science, skills plus the resources of course. We won't replace the billions and billions generated from that cursed oil over night but renewable energy can be our long game. 

Investment is now what's needed. Fortunately we voted for the broad shoulders of the union so I'm sure this won't be a problem in the short term ;-)

[Stash]

1 hour ago, comfortablynumb1910 said:

For anyone who can be bothered...... here`s an excellent efest slight of hand or a touch of smoke and mirrors as I said earlier.

Above is my post that introduced some of the research around Scotland`s renewable energy capacity. As I often try and do I provided a source for the info ( this doesn`t make it right of course ). The numbers, and the words that accompany them are the key here so now in red for ease of reference.

Boom ! Neil responds to my figures and keeps the 25% but look what`s happened to the words after the numbers. It`s brilliant !

No-one would believe that Scotland has 25% of Europe`s coastline surely 

Stash has to check the internet but he`s got the numbers (see below). He then advises us that Scotland has    " nowhere near 25% of the coastline of Europe ".

Add a touch of French and a twist of " fanciful snippers " and jobs a good `un.

Well almost.

Stash`s detailed analysis confirms that only an idiot would claim that Scotland had 25% of Europe`s coastline and he provides the actual length of Norway and Greece`s coastline plus Italy for good measure.

We are all impressed with the attention to detail required to point out the stupidity of Neil`s claim and Russy is moved to give Stash a well deserved up-vote thingy.

 The final card is played by Neil who, without a hint of irony, then posts " brilliantly done Stash " ending on a wee laugh out loud thing.

Marvellous scenes 

And the award for Best Use of Deflection 2015 goes to.....

 

Same old see no evil, hear no evil from the comftser.

[russycarps]

3 hours ago, comfortablynumb1910 said:

Have you looked into this yet Russ ? There was a reason why I never mentioned coal ( you keep doing it ). Your the resident oil expert but your clearly not following what`s happening with the burning of coal up my way so closely.

I don't know what I'm supposed to be looking into.

2 hours ago, comfortablynumb1910 said:

 

For anyone who can be bothered...... here`s an excellent efest slight of hand or a touch of smoke and mirrors as I said earlier.

Above is my post that introduced some of the research around Scotland`s renewable energy capacity. As I often try and do I provided a source for the info ( this doesn`t make it right of course ). The numbers, and the words that accompany them are the key here so now in red for ease of reference.

 

Boom ! Neil responds to my figures and keeps the 25% but look what`s happened to the words after the numbers. It`s brilliant !

No-one would believe that Scotland has 25% of Europe`s coastline surely 

 

Stash has to check the internet but he`s got the numbers (see below). He then advises us that Scotland has    " nowhere near 25% of the coastline of Europe ".

Add a touch of French and a twist of " fanciful snippers " and jobs a good `un.

Well almost.

 

 

Stash`s detailed analysis confirms that only an idiot would claim that Scotland had 25% of Europe`s coastline and he provides the actual length of Norway and Greece`s coastline plus Italy for good measure.

We are all impressed with the attention to detail required to point out the stupidity of Neil`s claim and Russy is moved to give Stash a well deserved up-vote thingy.

 The final card is played by Neil who, without a hint of irony, then posts " brilliantly done Stash " ending on a wee laugh out loud thing.

 

 

Marvellous scenes 

You seem to have completely ignored the relevant part of his post. Or more likely, not understood it.

Edited December 3, 2015 by russycarps

[Comfy Bean]

18 minutes ago, russycarps said:

I don't know what I'm supposed to be looking into.

You seem to have completely ignored the relevant part of his post. Or more likely, not understood it.

I'll admit that I struggled with what has changed with the potential in wind and waves round my way in the last 14 years and I was a bit rusty on the French but I got there. 

I accept that you see no future in renewable energy. Keep digging on the future plans up here on burning coal. When you've got that, the rest will make more sense.

No pun intended with the "digging " :-)

[eFestivals]

 

Quote

Does anyone know if the SNP is now undertaking any Ref2 preparatory work around currency and EU membership? These were clearly significant failings last time out so it would be wise for them to start developing more coherent plans now while they have space and time.

Yes, I do - and they're not.

They have no answers and can see there are no answers.

They're hoping they can get over the line before the myths run out.

Edited December 4, 2015 by eFestivals

[eFestivals]

12 hours ago, LJS said:

They would be crazy not to.

 

& they're not crazy.

 

Politically, they would also be crazy to announce they were doing so as it would just lead to "SNP admit to indyref lies" headlines.

Just to save Neil's dribbling exultation, this is not me conceding that the SNP Lied in the Indyref...at least not anymore than BT did.

PMSL .... you've just called the SNP crazy.

Go googling and you can find clear statements by Sturgeon and co saying they're doing nothing at all to address these problems.

In your word that's part of their clever plan, cos they're super clever people ... so clever they put forwards a laughable economic argument in Sept 2014, now exposed to all as everything its critics always said it was.

Baldrick "I have a cunning plan".

FFS. :lol:

 

[eFestivals]

12 hours ago, comfortablynumb1910 said:

I never said renewable energy would be Scotland`s " salvation ". Why would I use a word like that. I don`t believe we need salvation.

It`s not my fault that you cannot remember the various times I have brought it or Patrick Harvie up over the months / years.

The suggestion I just make up " new ideas " that you knock down is as laughable as it is accurate. I do believe that you think that is exactly what`s happening here but it`s really not.

So if it's not an economic benefit for Scotland, why raise it here as tho it is?

If it's not to be Scotland's salvation it's meaningless to the indie debate.

[eFestivals]

11 hours ago, comfortablynumb1910 said:

 

For anyone who can be bothered...... here`s an excellent efest slight of hand or a touch of smoke and mirrors as I said earlier.

Above is my post that introduced some of the research around Scotland`s renewable energy capacity. As I often try and do I provided a source for the info ( this doesn`t make it right of course ). The numbers, and the words that accompany them are the key here so now in red for ease of reference.

 

Boom ! Neil responds to my figures and keeps the 25% but look what`s happened to the words after the numbers. It`s brilliant !

No-one would believe that Scotland has 25% of Europe`s coastline surely 

 

Stash has to check the internet but he`s got the numbers (see below). He then advises us that Scotland has    " nowhere near 25% of the coastline of Europe ".

Add a touch of French and a twist of " fanciful snippers " and jobs a good `un.

Well almost.

 

 

Stash`s detailed analysis confirms that only an idiot would claim that Scotland had 25% of Europe`s coastline and he provides the actual length of Norway and Greece`s coastline plus Italy for good measure.

We are all impressed with the attention to detail required to point out the stupidity of Neil`s claim and Russy is moved to give Stash a well deserved up-vote thingy.

 The final card is played by Neil who, without a hint of irony, then posts " brilliantly done Stash " ending on a wee laugh out loud thing.

 

 

Marvellous scenes 

Whatever fault you might find in things we've commented on, Stash also demolished the actual heart of your argument, too. :rolleyes

That Scotland has nothing special with tide and wave, and the figures you've quoted do not stand up.

But you just pretend that bit doesn't matter, and you just pretend you've won the argument.

When in actual fact you've been 100% disproven in your claims. Scotland has no tidal or wave generation and there's nothing to suggest it will have.

[eFestivals]

10 hours ago, comfortablynumb1910 said:

I disagree with this short sighted opinion. 

We have the potential to lead the world in renewable energy. 

Jobs, research,  science, skills plus the resources of course. We won't replace the billions and billions generated from that cursed oil over night but renewable energy can be our long game. 

Investment is now what's needed. Fortunately we voted for the broad shoulders of the union so I'm sure this won't be a problem in the short term ;-)

Scotland has the potential to lead the world in moon landings too, but having the potential and it actually happening are two entirely different things. :rolleyes:

What you've really said there is that Scotland is super special - when in fact it has no more potential to be a world leader in these things than anywhere else that has a coastline.

But apparently the indy debate has nothing to do with claims of Scottish exceptionalism. :P

 

[russycarps]

9 hours ago, comfortablynumb1910 said:

I'll admit that I struggled with what has changed with the potential in wind and waves round my way in the last 14 years and I was a bit rusty on the French but I got there. 

I accept that you see no future in renewable energy. Keep digging on the future plans up here on burning coal. When you've got that, the rest will make more sense.

No pun intended with the "digging " :-)

Absolutely no idea what you're talking about here.

 

[eFestivals]

15 minutes ago, russycarps said:

Absolutely no idea what you're talking about here.

I don't think he does either.

He raised an issue suggesting it was a future benefit to Scotland, and then has ended up admitting that it's not, making everything of what he said pointless towards indy.

No one here is denying that Scotland has an economic production future that will be around average, or that the things its economy is based around will change as the world changes as it does everywhere - which is the best that comfy has managed to say in all of this.

 

[russycarps]

15 minutes ago, eFestivals said:

I don't think he does either.

He raised an issue suggesting it was a future benefit to Scotland, and then has ended up admitting that it's not, making everything of what he said pointless towards indy.

No one here is denying that Scotland has an economic production future that will be around average, or that the things its economy is based around will change as the world changes as it does everywhere - which is the best that comfy has managed to say in all of this.

 

Yes I hope they do hit their 100% renewables target. There's nothing wrong with that at all (apart from the poor being hit with higher bills). Good on them. But it wont make a jot of difference to the huge deficit, which is the point we were discussing, or so I thought. 

Scotland would of course function as an independent country. But they would have to accept £15bn sliced off public spending, or £15bn in tax increases. It's that simple. The scottish economic potential is already being maximised, there is no secret resource or secret industry that the UK government hasnt thought of.

Well, actually there is potential for coal-gasification under the firth of forth. But I wonder if there is any appetite among scots for this sort of industry?

Also, I found the source for comfys discredited 25% claims. None other than......wikipedia. If I used that as a research tool at work my boss would roar with laughter at me.

 

 

Edited December 4, 2015 by russycarps

[Comfy Bean]

Don't think I've ever been on Wikipedia but carry on.... 

I gave my source.

There were others but I always try and pick one that appears neutral eg. Not the snp website or the national. 

[eFestivals]

10 minutes ago, comfortablynumb1910 said:

Don't think I've ever been on Wikipedia but carry on.... 

I gave my source.

There were others but I always try and pick one that appears neutral eg. Not the snp website or the national. 

You gave your source, and Stash dug out the background of that source and showed it for the massive over-statement it is.

Meanwhile, Scotland still has a massive deficit, and even you are admitting that what you put forwards does nothing to address it.

 

[Comfy Bean]

39 minutes ago, eFestivals said:

I don't think he does either.

He raised an issue suggesting it was a future benefit to Scotland, and then has ended up admitting that it's not, making everything of what he said pointless towards indy.

No one here is denying that Scotland has an economic production future that will be around average, or that the things its economy is based around will change as the world changes as it does everywhere - which is the best that comfy has managed to say in all of this.

 

I realise that you are just trolling me now but once more for luck. I am now just repeating myself.

In my opinion, shared by many, disagreed with by many, Scotland has the potential to be a world leader across the renewable energy sector. This will create jobs and help with our targets around climate change.

We have a huge % of Europes potential for wind and wave energy. I stand by the figures I mentioned earlier.

We should remember that we are talking about geography,science and weather systems and nothing to do with the SNP 

We do not have 25% of Europe`s coastline as Neil claimed I claimed.

I accept that many people disagree with my views but I have held them for decades and discussed them on here over the years. This is not a new angle to try and replace oil revenue or whatever although every little helps.

I don`t agree that Scotland has reached it`s potential in this area.

I never once claimed that this sector could raise £15 or £10 billion. I have no idea what shape our Finances will be in in the event of Independence.

Anyone who constantly points out that Scotland`s finances are a horrible mess ( currently ) could be accused of criticising our Westminster Tory masters as much as I always do 

 

[russycarps]

3 minutes ago, comfortablynumb1910 said:

I realise that you are just trolling me now but once more for luck. I am now just repeating myself.

In my opinion, shared by many, disagreed with by many, Scotland has the potential to be a world leader across the renewable energy sector. This will create jobs and help with our targets around climate change.

We have a huge % of Europes potential for wind and wave energy. I stand by the figures I mentioned earlier.

We should remember that we are talking about geography,science and weather systems and nothing to do with the SNP 

We do not have 25% of Europe`s coastline as Neil claimed I claimed.

I accept that many people disagree with my views but I have held them for decades and discussed them on here over the years. This is not a new angle to try and replace oil revenue or whatever although every little helps.

I don`t agree that Scotland has reached it`s potential in this area.

I never once claimed that this sector could raise £15 or £10 billion. I have no idea what shape our Finances will be in in the event of Independence.

Anyone who constantly points out that Scotland`s finances are a horrible mess ( currently ) could be accused of criticising our Westminster Tory masters as much as I always do 

 

I'm not sure where the 25% coastline thing came from, but I dont think you ever said that either. I'm on your side on this one.

I agree scotland has potential for renewable energy. But this point was initially raised when we were discussing how scotlands natural resources could be used to chip away at the deficit. We now agree that renewable energy wont have an impact on the deficit.

I mentioned wikipedia as I just read an article on there that was almost word for word the same as one of your posts, but admittedly it did cite the same sources as you.

So, after all that, which of massive tax rises or massive cuts to public spending do you advocate?

 

 

[Comfy Bean]

20 minutes ago, eFestivals said:

You gave your source, and Stash dug out the background of that source and showed it for the massive over-statement it is.

Meanwhile, Scotland still has a massive deficit, and even you are admitting that what you put forwards does nothing to address it.

 

Flogging dead horse territory now............

As I said, Stash`s post gave alot of info primarily to prove wrong something I never said. I also said that I stand by the figures and that I didn`t get what he thinks has changed in the last 14 years. I had assumed you agreed with that bit as no-one has picked up on it. Very little has changed ( comparatively ) for centuries with our weather systems and certainly not with europes geography..

I know about our Finances. I am supporting doing something about that.

What I am puting forward DOES potentially do something about it but it requires investment as I have repeatedly said.

You claimed we were maxed out in this area. I think there is huge potential going forward. I mentioned climate change, jobs, science, research, new technologies. I cannot prove we can be a future world leader but we have the potential which alot of countries in europe are not blessed with.

Investment is what`s required and forward thinking views.............in my opinion.

You said earlier I thought I was winning the " argument ". This is where we mostly differ I think. I don`t really think I`m in an argument never mind winning it. Our Independence will not be won or lost on here but I enjoy discussing the issues with you fellas ( on both sides ).

It`s nothing personal. If the SNP vote for something something we all agree with, I`m thinking fox`s, nukes even the vote on Syria then it is not a crime to be on the same side now and again 

[Comfy Bean]

6 minutes ago, russycarps said:

I'm not sure where the 25% coastline thing came from, but I dont think you ever said that either. I'm on your side on this one.

I agree scotland has potential for renewable energy. But this point was initially raised when we were discussing how scotlands natural resources could be used to chip away at the deficit. We now agree that renewable energy wont have an impact on the deficit.

I mentioned wikipedia as I just read an article on there that was almost word for word the same as one of your posts, but admittedly it did cite the same sources as you.

So, after all that, which of massive tax rises or massive cuts to public spending do you advocate?

 

 

I didn`t get the numbers from wikipedia.

Google it. There are umpteen sources. Most of them are scottish govt ones and I don`t remember ever linking to that for reasons I gave earlier.

WWF is another one and loads of renewable technology companies speak highly of Scotland`s efforts and potential going forward ( they would of course ).

Plenty of BBC articles as well if you are interested.

Public spending has already been massively cut for 5 plus years. Our block grant has went down quicker than the oil price ( joke ! ).

Tax`s will need to rise and I hope a new fairer council tax system will be introduced ( report due out in a couple of weeks ).

We are relying on the Tories for many of the investments around the renewable stuff we have been blethering about and I think we all agree that is a worry.

We have or maybe had a huge number of people ( % wise ) * employed in the public sector up here and the ongoing Tory cuts will not help with all these folk losing their jobs as they slowly but surely shrink the state.

 

* I`m not giving the number as we know how that went last time 

 

 

[eFestivals]

1 hour ago, comfortablynumb1910 said:

I realise that you are just trolling me now but once more for luck. I am now just repeating myself.

In my opinion, shared by many, disagreed with by many, Scotland has the potential to be a world leader across the renewable energy sector. This will create jobs and help with our targets around climate change.

We have a huge % of Europes potential for wind and wave energy. I stand by the figures I mentioned earlier.

We should remember that we are talking about geography,science and weather systems and nothing to do with the SNP 

We do not have 25% of Europe`s coastline as Neil claimed I claimed.

I accept that many people disagree with my views but I have held them for decades and discussed them on here over the years. This is not a new angle to try and replace oil revenue or whatever although every little helps.

I don`t agree that Scotland has reached it`s potential in this area.

I never once claimed that this sector could raise £15 or £10 billion.

I don't agree that Scotland has reached it's potential in this area either.

But that doesn't make it anything useful for sorting out Scotland's finances in the case of self-funding.

This is a discussion about indy, not a discussion about something that is of no relevance or benefit towards indy.

 

Quote

I have no idea what shape our Finances will be in in the event of Independence.

We know what they are now.

We know there's no visible reason or reason given by the SNP for why that might change before indy.

We know that there's no plan and no idea within the SNP to address it post-indy.

Anyone who's referencing the facts knows what the shape of Scottish finances will be in the event of indy.

PARTICULARLY the SNP - which is why they don't want another indy vote, and why they don't want FFA.

 

Quote

Anyone who constantly points out that Scotland`s finances are a horrible mess ( currently ) could be accused of criticising our Westminster Tory masters as much as I always do 

Except of course Westminster is not mistreating Scotland, but the exact opposite.

As you want to suggest that it is, perhaps you'd like to give us all a laugh and say how?

 

Edited December 4, 2015 by eFestivals

[eFestivals]

 

38 minutes ago, comfortablynumb1910 said:

Flogging dead horse territory now............

As I said, Stash`s post gave alot of info primarily to prove wrong something I never said.

he also goave a lot of info that that absolutely proved you wrong about what you'd said.

It's you flogging the dead horse here, by pretending you said something that stands up to scrutiny when it doesn't.

 

38 minutes ago, comfortablynumb1910 said:

I also said that I stand by the figures and that I didn`t get what he thinks has changed in the last 14 years.

He pointed out with solid facts that the viability you claimed isn't there.

 

38 minutes ago, comfortablynumb1910 said:

What I am puting forward DOES potentially do something about it but it requires investment as I have repeatedly said.

It only does something *IF* it brings money into Scotland (more than just start-up investment) that wouldn't otherwise be there - which means money from new external markets for what is generated.

Start up investment doesn't count as anything extra without a new market external for what's produced, because otherwise that start up investment meanly replaces the investment that would be required to replace Scotland's current generating capacity (which has to be scrapped and replaced periodically anyway).

 

38 minutes ago, comfortablynumb1910 said:

You claimed we were maxed out in this area. I think there is huge potential going forward. I mentioned climate change, jobs, science, research, new technologies. I cannot prove we can be a future world leader but we have the potential which alot of countries in europe are not blessed with.

Investment is what`s required and forward thinking views.............in my opinion.

You said earlier I thought I was winning the " argument ". This is where we mostly differ I think. I don`t really think I`m in an argument never mind winning it. Our Independence will not be won or lost on here but I enjoy discussing the issues with you fellas ( on both sides ).

It`s nothing personal. If the SNP vote for something something we all agree with, I`m thinking fox`s, nukes even the vote on Syria then it is not a crime to be on the same side now and again 

I have no issue at all with the desire to generate green.

I'm simply pointing out that it needs a new external market to bring extra benefit to Scotland - and it's almost impossible for that to happen on a financially-benefical basis.

If the conditions exist to make green generation that success, Scotland will be too busy pumping oil and gloating to care about it.

[Stash]

The biggest problem with hoping that the renewables sector can be a success in iScotland, is that any success hangs on the need for two things; 

1. External investement

2. Access to external markets

As has been mentioned before in the thread, electricity isn't generally sold to markets at some distance to it's source. That means that even if iScotland can get it's hands on the investment & successfully generate large amounts of electricity, it needs rUK & Ireland to buy electricity from them. 

Ireland has it's own renewables market and is very keen to try and sell to the UK, as can be seen by their investment in the new electricity inter-connector between the UK & Ireland. 

If Scotland does become independent in the next 10-15 years, possibly alienating goodwill from the rUK in the process. Who do you think will buy this expensive electricity from you. New nuclear power will be on stream and further renewables will also be built in the rest of the UK & Ireland to match any Scottish investement. 

[eFestivals]

1 minute ago, Stash said:

The biggest problem with hoping that the renewables sector can be a success in iScotland, is that any success hangs on the need for two things; 

1. External investement

2. Access to external markets

As has been mentioned before in the thread, electricity isn't generally sold to markets at some distance to it's source. That means that even if iScotland can get it's hands on the investment & successfully generate large amounts of electricity, it needs rUK & Ireland to buy electricity from them. 

Ireland has it's own renewables market and is very keen to try and sell to the UK, as can be seen by their investment in the new electricity inter-connector between the UK & Ireland. 

If Scotland does become independent in the next 10-15 years, possibly alienating goodwill from the rUK in the process. Who do you think will buy this expensive electricity from you. New nuclear power will be on stream and further renewables will also be built in the rest of the UK & Ireland to match any Scottish investement. 

rUK is certainly not going to pay over the odds for electricity from Scotland where rUK has been the one to provide the investment for that generation capacity.

As I said in one of my earlier posts, there will be a charge-back in one form or another if that were to happen.

[Stash]

I see another SNP MP has made the news for being a hypocrite. Despite tabling questions to Government looking for tax loopholes to be closed, Phil Bosworth has in the past used such schemes to maximise his income.  

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-35025601

This is despite publicaly campaigning against such schemes, this quote if from a newspaper article in August:

 "Tax avoidance costs the economy nearly four times as much as benefit fraud, yet this government blames the most vulnerable in society for the economic problems caused by a lack of regulation and enforcement in the financial industry."

And let's not forget what Sturgeon has to say on tax avoidance in February, when she called for a "zero tolerance" approach to tax avoidance in all of its forms as it is both obscene and immoral. 

I assumed this would mean that Bosworth was to be in for some trouble with his party. But according to the SNP, he has done nothing wrong as tax avoidance is perfectly legal and this is a non-story. They didn't go so far as to say SNP-BAD, but I guess that'll be the response of most dedicated snippers. 

Whatever happened to the different type of politics that kept being espoused around here last year? Seems like the SNP really is no different to the rest of the parties after all! 

 

[eFestivals]

Just now, Stash said:

I see another SNP MP ....

And let's not forget what Sturgeon has to say on ...

I had to laugh the other day at Sturgeon giving quite strong backing for one of the suspended-two - who Sturgeon seems to have decided is innocent (I don't know either way, tho if it was that easy to answer I wonder why WFI needed the police) - but gave no support whatsoever towards Michelle Thomson.

[eFestivals]

4 minutes ago, Stash said:

Whatever happened to the different type of politics that kept being espoused around here last year? Seems like the SNP really is no different to the rest of the parties after all! 

The difference is that it['s not allowed to be said about the SNP. Fair comment is SNP-baaaad.

This is quite interesting, for how the SNP are trying to make the myths stand up. The fact that their MSPs can still say "the oil was just a bonus" gets to show just how low the candidate quality is and that it's in a major paper shows how low the scrutiny is.
http://chokkablog.blogspot.co.uk/2015/12/joan-mcalpine-in-daily-record.html