Corona Virus main thread

[Crafty Canary 495]

If you can’t smell the coffee you might never wake up.

[sgncfc 1,227]

1 hour ago, Bill said:

Not only are fossil fuels running out

No, they're not.

https://ourworldindata.org/how-long-before-we-run-out-of-fossil-fuels

As ever, it comes down to money. If renewable energy is cheaper than fossil fuels emerging economies will use them - if not, then Africa, Asia and South America will keep putting coal on their fires. Developed economies may choose to pay more for renewables in order to hit climate change targets but poorer people have no choice.

Also, no one seems to mention that the key ingredient of lithium-ion batteries powering all those electric cars is cobalt, which is effectively also a fossil fuel, and with a very limited supply. 

[Ian 1,129]

2 hours ago, keelansgrandad said:

Next is an economic model to improve on what we have had. Very good article by John Harris today in The Guardian about a newer green deal. I'm worried though we have learnt nothing about what is important in life and we go back to his things were"

 

Learning nothing and not developing a greener and more socially aware society, with a greater respect for our fellow creatures and diverse habitats would be the biggest disaster of the pandemic imo.

I'm worried on two fronts about this. Those with so much money at stake will not let it happen and those with the couldn't give a siht as long as I can have my nails done.

I never really understand this argument. Those with "so much money at stake" will jump on anything they can make **** loads of money out of. If one of those things is renewables, then so be it. 

[Bill 1,788]

2 minutes ago, sgncfc said:

No, they're not.

https://ourworldindata.org/how-long-before-we-run-out-of-fossil-fuels

As ever, it comes down to money. If renewable energy is cheaper than fossil fuels emerging economies will use them - if not, then Africa, Asia and South America will keep putting coal on their fires. Developed economies may choose to pay more for renewables in order to hit climate change targets but poorer people have no choice.

Also, no one seems to mention that the key ingredient of lithium-ion batteries powering all those electric cars is cobalt, which is effectively also a fossil fuel, and with a very limited supply. 

There is a finite amount of fossil fuel - and what I posted in regard to renewables was related to the UK only, as that was the subject.

Cobalt is not what we would know as a fossil fuel - it's a mineral. And can be recycled after use. The amount varies, but unlike fossil fuels is not completed used up in energy production.

Of course, it is money based. What isn't ? Just as the high price of oil saw greater investment in renewables, then the low price of oil has made much of its current extraction uneconomic.

I would suggest that these wildly fluctuating prices are what is also driving the need for more stable energy production cost wise. As to counties near the equator, the development of solar power will be one of the great life/economy changes as so much moves away from direct physical labour and towards A1, leapfrogging industrialisation.

[Bill 1,788]

14 minutes ago, Ian said:

I never really understand this argument. Those with "so much money at stake" will jump on anything they can make **** loads of money out of. If one of those things is renewables, then so be it. 

yep, that's how they got it in the first place.

What I think KG means is that there are those with money tied up in, say, fossil fuels who will want to protect their investment.

However we have seen what happened with tobacco. Even BP is now Beyond Petrol.

And watch how further the car industry aligns itself to develop electric cars - sharing the financial burden. There is only so much you can do to thwart consumer demand, as a host of High Street names have shown recently.

And for all China's use of coal look at how advanced they are with solar power.

And I suspect this 'jolt' will be seen later on as one where certain stuff was ended/not re-started rather than it being an introduction to new methods.

[Ian 1,129]

3 minutes ago, Bill said:

yep, that's how they got it in the first place.

What I think KG means is that there are those with money tied up in, say, fossil fuels who will want to protect their investment.

However we have seen what happened with tobacco. Even BP is now Beyond Petrol.

And watch how further the car industry aligns itself to develop electric cars - sharing the financial burden. There is only so much you can do to thwart consumer demand, as a host of High Street names have shown recently.

And for all China's use of coal look at how advanced they are with solar power.

And I suspect this 'jolt' will be seen later on as one where certain stuff was ended/not re-started rather than it being an introduction to new methods.

IMO Lithium battery electric cars are not the answer. There's no doubting electric motors are very efficient, and superior to combustion in a lot of ways. However, not only are there a lot of infrastructure issues that need to be solved before they become feasible as a replacement to gasoline, somebody needs to come up with something other than Lithium based batteries to power them.

You can dress it up how you want, with reference to consumer demands and/or those naughty fossil fuel investors, but the fact of the matter is gasoline is an incredibly-dense energy source, which can be easily scaled nationwide, and can facilitate vehicles being refuelled at a very high speed. Somebody needs to come up with an equivalent alternative before electric cars become a nation-wide replacement, let along a global one.

[TIL 1010 4,738]

I thought i might have seen mention on here of the official visit of the Belgium PM to a hospital yesterday where all the doctors and medical staff turned their backs on her because of the way the Belgium authorities have mismanaged the pandemic with accusations of under funding and lack of resources to deal with it.

 

[sonyc 5,511]

1 minute ago, TIL 1010 said:

I thought i might have seen mention on here of the official visit of the Belgium PM to a hospital yesterday where all the doctors and medical staff turned their backs on her because of the way the Belgium authorities have mismanaged the pandemic with accusations of under funding and lack of resources to deal with it.

 

This was it Til.

[Bill 1,788]

2 minutes ago, TIL 1010 said:

I thought i might have seen mention on here of the official visit of the Belgium PM to a hospital yesterday where all the doctors and medical staff turned their backs on her because of the way the Belgium authorities have mismanaged the pandemic with accusations of under funding and lack of resources to deal with it.

which makes the failures in the UK, ok ? 🤨

[TIL 1010 4,738]

12 minutes ago, Bill said:

which makes the failures in the UK, ok ? 🤨

Merely pointing out the that lack of resources and money in healthcare surrounding the handling of the crisis is not the exclusive domain of the UK.

Edited May 18, 2020 by TIL 1010

[Herman 9,756]

I think it is the lying about the equipment as well as the lack of that annoys people. 

[Bill 1,788]

1 minute ago, TIL 1010 said:

Merely pointing out the that lack of resources and money in healthcare is not the exclusive domain of the UK.

whereas if you had actually read up you would have seen that their protest was about a 'righty' plan to downgrade their professional status - much as the idea that anyone can be a police officer if they are given the uniform, as no training, or advanced knowledge is needed for specialist roles either.... just a uniform

so have a read and stop posting up silly unfounded 'whataboutery' guff

"It came after the signing into law of a royal decree on 4 May that allowed unqualified staff to undertake nursing duties during the pandemic. Nurses said they were “outraged” by the decree which was prepared by federal health minister Maggie De Block. Nurses are calling for the decree to be repealed, saying that it disregards the skill and training needed to work as a nurse."

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/coronavirus-belgium-medics-protest-hospital-sophie-wilmes-a9519686.html

 

 

 

 

 

[sonyc 5,511]

Copying this because it explains just how complex C19 is and how it develops. It's a very long article and probably not for the squeamish:

How coronavirus kills, one organ at a time | https://www.wired.co.uk/article/how-coronavirus-kills?utm_medium=email&utm_source=Wired+Awake&utm_campaign=Wired+Awake_2020-05-18&utm_content=How+coronavirus+destroys+the+human+body%2C+one+organ+at+a+time&utm_source=Adestra&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=The Email (From WIRED) 180520&utm_content=How coronavirus destroys the human body%2C one organ at a time

 

[Yellow Fever 3,772]

1 hour ago, sgncfc said:

No, they're not.

https://ourworldindata.org/how-long-before-we-run-out-of-fossil-fuels

As ever, it comes down to money. If renewable energy is cheaper than fossil fuels emerging economies will use them - if not, then Africa, Asia and South America will keep putting coal on their fires. Developed economies may choose to pay more for renewables in order to hit climate change targets but poorer people have no choice.

Also, no one seems to mention that the key ingredient of lithium-ion batteries powering all those electric cars is cobalt, which is effectively also a fossil fuel, and with a very limited supply. 

Nearly all 'green' technologies require 'non-green' processes - mining, extraction etc. Most greenies are often incapable it seems of recognising such if it happens elsewhere.

That said, the move away from fossil fuel petrochemicals is is a good idea - I however expect Li-Ion technology for EVs to be a passing fad or have niche uses.

Fuel cell is likely the way of the future - and I note the recent huge leaps and bounds on the main limiting factor - storage of hydrogen in 'fuel tanks ' under sensible pressures and hence weight. By comparison batteries will only now slowly improve and evolve.

[keelansgrandad 6,679]

I never really understand this argument. Those with "so much money at stake" will jump on anything they can make **** loads of money out of. If one of those things is renewables, then so be it. 

My argument is not solely about energy either. For instance, I can live without Mexican strawberries on Christmas day and sprouts during Wimbledon. What happened to seasons? To many people live in artificial lighting just to make a buck. There are alternatives to what we think is appropriate at the moment.

 

Nature has a plan for each and every part. We can and should revert to what makes sense and not what makes profit.

[Indy 3,297]

4 hours ago, Bill said:

It was brought up after a comment about how people attitude was back less than couple of months ago, not nearly four months ago.

Yours was one of extreme concern about yourself and money.. And it is nonsense to say as people die all the time we should accept it.

We all have different priorotes and values - however it does no harm to remind us where each of us stand.

You know nothing about me, but I’m comfortable in knowing how much I’ve done for those in need in my community, recently and before! My priority and values are mine, I’ve got to pay bills and I’ve been involved in enough Hazops and risk analysis in my time to know you can’t save everyone, the cost would have been and still are well over the top in my book, especially when you you consider you old boys have lived your life through probably the best of years......I’m not prepared to burden the kids and their future like some would be happy to do.

Edited May 18, 2020 by Indy

[Indy 3,297]

1 hour ago, Ian said:

IMO Lithium battery electric cars are not the answer. There's no doubting electric motors are very efficient, and superior to combustion in a lot of ways. However, not only are there a lot of infrastructure issues that need to be solved before they become feasible as a replacement to gasoline, somebody needs to come up with something other than Lithium based batteries to power them.

You can dress it up how you want, with reference to consumer demands and/or those naughty fossil fuel investors, but the fact of the matter is gasoline is an incredibly-dense energy source, which can be easily scaled nationwide, and can facilitate vehicles being refuelled at a very high speed. Somebody needs to come up with an equivalent alternative before electric cars become a nation-wide replacement, let along a global one.

The big oil giants and us their sub companies are moving towards Hydrogen power. Storage and manufacturing processes for hydrogen have recently been improved to the point of standard garages now putting in Hydrogen pumps.

There’s massive technology in the hydrogen fuel cells being used in everything from drones, generators, cars bikes and into aviation.

So tend to agree, electric powered cars are in my opinion a fad or folly till the hydrogen network is fully up and running.

[Bill 1,788]

22 minutes ago, Indy said:

You know nothing about me, but I’m comfortable in knowing how much I’ve done for those in need in my community, recently and before! My priority and values are mine, I’ve got to pay bills and I’ve been involved in enough Hazops and risk analysis in my time to know you can’t save everyone, the cost would have been and still are well over the top in my book, especially when you you consider you old boys have lived your life through probably the best of years......I’m not prepared to burden the kids and their future like some would be happy to do.

you old boys ?

I'm not anywhere near the [pension age so hardly qualify as an 'old boy'

no one is or ever was talking about saving everyone so stop making up sh yte

and stop trying to hide behind some guff about burdening future generations as clearly you have no idea how government borrowing works

but anyone reading your posts will have a good idea of where you are coming from - a greedy, self interested sh it who originally dismissed this as scaremongering, and now continues with expressing a callous indifference to the lives of so many due to their age

what next, the disabled ?

maybe they cost too much as well - better tell Nutty and all the others who help with our Downes syndrome friends to stop as it is costing us too much

for my part there are some elderly righties on here who I disagree with regularly - but they have as much right on this earth as me, or anyone, so maybe a bit more concern for the sh it they must be going through with medical problems would not go amiss rather than trying to justify your odious views by some spurious concern for the future generation

 

 

[Mark .Y. 352]

2 hours ago, Ian said:

IMO Lithium battery electric cars are not the answer. There's no doubting electric motors are very efficient, and superior to combustion in a lot of ways. However, not only are there a lot of infrastructure issues that need to be solved before they become feasible as a replacement to gasoline, somebody needs to come up with something other than Lithium based batteries to power them.

You can dress it up how you want, with reference to consumer demands and/or those naughty fossil fuel investors, but the fact of the matter is gasoline is an incredibly-dense energy source, which can be easily scaled nationwide, and can facilitate vehicles being refuelled at a very high speed. Somebody needs to come up with an equivalent alternative before electric cars become a nation-wide replacement, let along a global one.

Speaking as somebody who works for ExxonMobil (as a contractor now, rather than an actual employee any longer), I'm really quite surprised that they are a bit of an outlier as far as Petroleum companies go, they still believe that fossil fuels will be around a long time yet and haven't made purchases of "new" technology companies as some of the other majors eg BP have done.

Personally, I think that if the same amount of R&D money went into hydrogen fuel cells as has gone into batteries, they would probably be the way to go. Relatively simple to install a hydrogen tank into an existing forecourt location and then nobody has range issues. 

Edited May 18, 2020 by Mark .Y.

[Borman 0]

41 minutes ago, Bill said:

you old boys ?

I'm not anywhere near the [pension age so hardly qualify as an 'old boy'

no one is or ever was talking about saving everyone so stop making up sh yte

and stop trying to hide behind some guff about burdening future generations as clearly you have no idea how government borrowing works

but anyone reading your posts will have a good idea of where you are coming from - a greedy, self interested sh it who originally dismissed this as scaremongering, and now continues with expressing a callous indifference to the lives of so many due to their age

what next, the disabled ?

maybe they cost too much as well - better tell Nutty and all the others who help with our Downes syndrome friends to stop as it is costing us too much

for my part there are some elderly righties on here who I disagree with regularly - but they have as much right on this earth as me, or anyone, so maybe a bit more concern for the sh it they must be going through with medical problems would not go amiss rather than trying to justify your odious views by some spurious concern for the future generation

 

 

Please don't go further with this Bill

I remember on the Brexit thread you ended up getting so wound up you were posting images of Norwich fans (members of the LGBT community that you'd got from facebook) in order to goad a poster you were accusing - correctly,  of being homophobic.

But it was distasteful and got both you banned and the thread pulled.

[Monty13 2,231]

5 hours ago, keelansgrandad said:

Next is an economic model to improve on what we have had. Very good article by John Harris today in The Guardian about a newer green deal. I'm worried though we have learnt nothing about what is important in life and we go back to his things were"

 

Learning nothing and not developing a greener and more socially aware society, with a greater respect for our fellow creatures and diverse habitats would be the biggest disaster of the pandemic imo.

I'm worried on two fronts about this. Those with so much money at stake will not let it happen and those with the couldn't give a siht as long as I can have my nails done.

You are forgetting one other element, the ideologues that will take a good idea with chance of consensus and insist on enough unpalatable elements to get it killed. It not the apathetic you really need to worry about, its those that give the ones with money and an agenda the ammunition they need.

[Bill 1,788]

13 minutes ago, Borman said:

Please don't go further with this Bill

I remember on the Brexit thread you ended up getting so wound up you were posting images of Norwich fans (members of the LGBT community that you'd got from facebook) in order to goad a poster you were accusing - correctly,  of being homophobic.

But it was distasteful and got both you banned and the thread pulled.

well, at least you are not the newbie your name implies

can't remember a  ban

and I was not wound up, but certainly saw no problem in challenging such views, nor do I with this comment

"the cost would have been and still are well over the top in my book, especially when you you consider you old boys have lived your life through probably the best of years.."

which is distasteful give the number of 'old boys' who are on this forum and will not see themselves as 'surplus to needs' or that we cannot afford to treat them, or anyone else irrespective of age. class, creed. colour etc

[Indy 3,297]

20 minutes ago, Borman said:

Please don't go further with this Bill

I remember on the Brexit thread you ended up getting so wound up you were posting images of Norwich fans (members of the LGBT community that you'd got from facebook) in order to goad a poster you were accusing - correctly,  of being homophobic.

But it was distasteful and got both you banned and the thread pulled.

I’m not even going to give the fishing troll the pleasure, as nutty well knows I’m more than happy to support his and a number of good causes, as lots of people who are now no doubt on harder times.

 

[Indy 3,297]

1 minute ago, Bill said:

well, at least you are not the newbie your name implies

can't remember a  ban

and I was not wound up, but certainly saw no problem in challenging such views, nor do I with this comment

"the cost would have been and still are well over the top in my book, especially when you you consider you old boys have lived your life through probably the best of years.."

which is distasteful give the number of 'old boys' who are on this forum and will not see themselves as 'surplus to needs' or that we cannot afford to treat them, or anyone else irrespective of age. class, creed. colour etc

Not distasteful at all, just you trying to stir ****e up as normal when you don’t like others views. Now jog on old boy.

[Bill 1,788]

3 minutes ago, Indy said:

I’m not even going to give the fishing troll the pleasure, as nutty well knows I’m more than happy to support his and a number of good causes, as lots of people who are now no doubt on harder times.

but would happily see the 'old boys' allowed to die because their treatment might cost more - not cost effective

so the question still remains

who is worthy of saving and who is not ?

[Indy 3,297]

22 minutes ago, Bill said:

but would happily see the 'old boys' allowed to die because their treatment might cost more - not cost effective

so the question still remains

who is worthy of saving and who is not ?

😂 making ****e up to gain sympathy! Not said anything of the sort, the cost of our response to this crises has cost billions with lots of overreaction like ventilators which weren’t needed, nightingale hospitals which weren’t needed.....and on and on........so stop making **** up and bog ff to the Brexit thread, because as you so rightly said it’s not going to happen!

I’m not responding to your childlike need to start fights all over this board because you’re an opinionated old man with a chip on his shoulder for people with different priorities to yours. Mine is looking after our next generations and making sure we don’t burden them with health, financial and other issues, so I’m more than happy with the government’s advice and the sooner we go back to some forms of normality the better as hundreds of thousands of jobs wI’ll be lost the longer we go on.

I’m not responding anymore, this thread deserves the opinions of all and to keep it on topic not used as you have others to have a go at posters and continuously argue! You need to get out! Oh wait!

Edited May 18, 2020 by Indy

[keelansgrandad 6,679]

So there is going to be an attempt to hit Boris the Spiders 200K a day testing so anyone who coughs and sneezes can book a test.

Might pop round the nearest Care Home to see if they have any spares.

[sonyc 5,511]

11 minutes ago, keelansgrandad said:

So there is going to be an attempt to hit Boris the Spiders 200K a day testing so anyone who coughs and sneezes can book a test.

Might pop round the nearest Care Home to see if they have any spares.

It feels that way these days...hit your targets so it looks good but at the cost of a joined up public health response and what you keep reading from the point of view of local authorities. 

The WHO today has warned that now is the time to improve / build up your nation's public health system, your tracking capability and ICU capacity for preparation purposes in case of a second escalation of cases later in the year.

Let's hope that tracking and testing become 'hard wired' here.

[Bill 1,788]

1 hour ago, Indy said:

😂 making ****e up to gain sympathy! Not said anything of the sort, the cost of our response to this crises has cost billions with lots of overreaction like ventilators which weren’t needed, nightingale hospitals which weren’t needed.....and on and on........so stop making **** up and bog ff to the Brexit thread, because as you so rightly said it’s not going to happen!

I’m not responding to your childlike need to start fights all over this board because you’re an opinionated old man with a chip on his shoulder for people with different priorities to yours. Mine is looking after our next generations and making sure we don’t burden them with health, financial and other issues, so I’m more than happy with the government’s advice and the sooner we go back to some forms of normality the better as hundreds of thousands of jobs wI’ll be lost the longer we go on.

I’m not responding anymore, this thread deserves the opinions of all and to keep it on topic not used as you have others to have a go at posters and continuously argue! You need to get out! Oh wait!

so you post up stuff saying old people are too costly to be treated/kept alive- and then get ar sey when challenged about it

and it is not making up stuff to ask you, ask you, not state how far this euthanasia should be taken, because to me your views border on the disturbing

and yes we do have different priorities, one being that I see every human life as valid, something that is very pertinent to this topic, more so when we have the man who is telling the PM what to say and do talking about not worrying about 'losing a few pensioners'

and no I am not an 'old man', nor do I have a chip on my shoulder - but you certainly sound as if you have a screw loose.... a latter day Dr Mengele it would seem

[ricardo 7,384]

Took a chance today and had a bit of a ride round on my bike for the first time in eight weeks. It was very quiet and a pleasant change from just being in the garden. I don't  think Ive been in any danger but my bloody legs ache and I feel stiff as a board.🚲😷