Home  5  Books  5  GBEzine  5  News  5  HelpDesk  5  Register  5  GreenBuilding.co.uk
Not signed in (Sign In)

Categories



Green Building Bible, Fourth Edition
Green Building Bible, fourth edition (both books)
These two books are the perfect starting place to help you get to grips with one of the most vitally important aspects of our society - our homes and living environment.

PLEASE NOTE: A download link for Volume 1 will be sent to you by email and Volume 2 will be sent to you by post as a book.

Buy individually or both books together. Delivery is free!


powered by Surfing Waves




Vanilla 1.0.3 is a product of Lussumo. More Information: Documentation, Community Support.

Welcome to new Forum Visitors
Join the forum now and benefit from discussions with thousands of other green building fans and discounts on Green Building Press publications: Apply now.




    •  
      CommentAuthorfostertom
    • CommentTime7 days ago edited
     
    https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2022/jun/22/cornish-village-to-pilot-communal-grid-to-source-low-carbon-energy

    In Brexit-bastion Cornwall ("What's Europe ever done for us?"),
    "£6.2m of funding from the EU’s European Regional Development Fund (ERDF). Hundreds of homes, both new build and older houses and bungalows, in three areas of Cornwall will be linked up to the new system of underground heating"

    "The first boreholes were drilled this month in the streets, to install a network of pipes to draw heat from the rock beneath, and feed into heat pumps in individual properties"

    Well yes, but apart from that, what's Europe ever done for us?

    https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2022/jun/22/eu-legislation-restoration-ecosystems-biodiversity-aoe

    "targets released by the European Commission include reversing the decline of pollinator populations and restoring 20% of land and sea by 2030, with all ecosystems to be under restoration by 2050. The commission also proposed a target to cut the use of chemical pesticides in half by 2030"

    "Around €100bn (£85bn) will be available for spending on biodiversity, including the restoration of ecosystems"

    Good job we took back our own way to water down measures then.
    • CommentAuthormarsaday
    • CommentTime4 days ago
     
    Why do we need to send money to europe to get it back through these schemes? Are we not able and bright enough to carry out stuff like this ourselves ?

    Lets go one step further and say to the world, we have no idea how to run our lives, please come and do it for us. Would this make you more happy ? Seriously I just cannot understand why pro europeans cannot see the danger in letting other remote bodies control our lives.
    •  
      CommentAuthordjh
    • CommentTime4 days ago
     
    Posted By: marsadayWhy do we need to send money to europe to get it back through these schemes? Are we not able and bright enough to carry out stuff like this ourselves ?
    +1
    • CommentAuthorowlman
    • CommentTime3 days ago edited
     
    ERDF funding my backside, £6.2m,...Bah peanuts, It's simply getting back some of our own money from the billions we're still paying into the EU coffers, and will be until the middle of the century.
    • CommentAuthorcjard
    • CommentTime2 days ago
     
    @marsaday

    >I just cannot understand why pro europeans cannot see the danger in letting other remote bodies control our lives.

    You say that like you're under the impression there is a way to arrange things such that you're in control of your own life..
    •  
      CommentAuthorfostertom
    • CommentTime2 days ago edited
     
    Posted By: marsadayWhy do we need to send money to europe to get it back through these schemes? Are we not able and bright enough to carry out stuff like this ourselves ?
    Very clearly, no. As the record now depressingly makes clear, no such public-benefit motives are in play, when the only priority is to shore up the Tory voter-base.
  1.  
    Paying vast sums of money to EU, which is largely unaudited and unaccountable, results in a massive transfer of wealth from ordinary tax payers to the top 1% in society. I understand that this is happening all the time, but at least within the UK we can change the government and protest for changes to these wealth transfer schemes.

    When Greenpeace analysed the top recipients of EU CAP subsidies in the UK, they found that some 16 of the top 100 are owned or controlled by individuals or families who feature on the 2016 Sunday Times rich list.

    Aberdeenshire farmer Frank Smart topped the list, receiving nearly £3m in grants for his Banchory business, Frank A Smart & Son Ltd. The farmer has been subject to complaints that he has been “slipper farming” - a technique in which farmers buy up land principally for the grants attached to it.

    Prince Khalid Abdullah al Saud, who owns champion racehorse Frankel, has reportedly described his farming interest as a hobby. Juddmonte Farms, which he owns through an offshore holding company in Guernsey, received £406,826 in farm subsidies last year, of which £378,856 came from the single payment scheme.

    The two large estates owned by Billionaire Sir James under Beeswax Farming (Rainbow) Ltd received almost £1.5m.

    Sandringham Farms, the estate owned by the Queen, received £557,707, while Grosvenor Farms Limited, which farms the Duke of Westminster’s estate, raked in £437,434.

    Percy Farms, described by Greenpeace as the “in-hand farming operation” of the Duke of Northumberland, was given £475,031.

    The top 100 received £87.9m in agricultural subsidies in 2016, of which £61.2m came from the single payment scheme, where the size of the land owned largely determines the grant amount. Greenpeace said this was more than what was paid to the bottom 55,119 recipients in the single payment scheme combined.

    Then of course we have the Common fisheries Policy, where the huge fishing magnates are given a substantial number of the licenses and the throwback policy meant thousands of dead fish were thrown back into the sea until the trawler finally caught the correct number of 'allowed' fish.
  2.  
    "letting other remote bodies control our lives... send money to get it back through these schemes... Are we not able and bright enough to carry out stuff like this ourselves"

    I'm hearing a lot of that talk at the moment - though people here are all complaining about London, rather than Brussels.

    Some are even complaining about "remote bodies" sitting down in Edinburgh, and think that governance should be brought back up to Inverness or Aberdeen. It's the age of populist localism.
    • CommentAuthorowlman
    • CommentTime1 day ago
     
    Posted By: fostertom
    Posted By: marsadayWhy do we need to send money to europe to get it back through these schemes? Are we not able and bright enough to carry out stuff like this ourselves ?

    Very clearly, no. As the record now depressingly makes clear, no such public-benefit motives are in play, when the only priority is to shore up the Tory voter-base.



    Tom, I'm surprised you can't see through it. You're quick to rail against the Tory government for lack of public benefit motivation; You can kick them out you know.
    However, you seen no sinister motivation in the EU divvying up funds, not their own, (they don't have any,) but make it suitably EU logo-ed.
    It's quite simply all bribery, exerting influence in order to prop up their corrupt Continent wide scam. Admittedly, aided and abetted by every government that signs up to it looking to get their snouts in the trough.
    •  
      CommentAuthorfostertom
    • CommentTime1 day ago edited
     
    Agreed, pre-Brexit EU was, and still is a mess - more than anything else, I think, because Maggie switched overnight, from highly important and effective moulding of EU to her liking (the Single Market), to opposing it outright. Hate to say about Maggie, and 'United States of Europe' Churchill before her, but in that respect she especially really did fight in the best-of-British tradition, which the other, post-Napoleonic and then re-traumatised nations could not. Her abrupt turn-about, for cheap home-populist reasons (what's new, Tory?), left Europe at the mercy of bureacratic real-politik.

    The Brexit falacy was (is) to think 'taking back control' would leave UK any better off, given the unprincipled shower who skilfully inherited that control. At least EU was slightly independent of the Wall Street/City of London entity, which today's Tories are completely united with.

    The trouble with EU is UK's slanderous abandonment, since mid-Maggie.
Add your comments

    Username Password
  • Format comments as
 
   
The Ecobuilding Buzz
Site Map    |   Home    |   View Cart    |   Pressroom   |   Business   |   Links   
Logout    

© Green Building Press