Mailwatch(ed) Forum

That's what lots of Greens do think, and to be fair to them, they're prepared to be up front about the sacrifices of making reducing consumption do very many hard yards. Zack's more into "green power and more trains", which is a more politically viable route to power. But you can't be nimby or reduce types of power you don't like because blah blah Three Mile Island.

Tubby Isaacs wrote: ↑Sun Oct 26, 2025 12:29 pm That's what lots of Greens do think, and to be fair to them, they're prepared to be up front about the sacrifices of making reducing consumption do very many hard yards. Zack's more into "green power and more trains", which is a more politically viable route to power. But you can't be nimby or reduce types of power you don't like because blah blah Three Mile Island.

I think the bêtes noires these days are Chernobyl and Fukushima. Well, as far as I know none of our nuclear stations are built on a fault line...

Reduction of energy consumption is a good idea and I wish more miles of railway could be electrified, but electric trains still use a lot of energy and as we've seen, post-construction insulation of buildings can be disastrous.

Our old house had some cavity wall insulation years ago, and the wall went all shitty. So I can see this may be more difficult than "just insulate everywhere ffs"

When I took advantage of the Government insulation schemes, I had the roof done but when the absolute mouth-breathers who turned up to fill the wall cavities insisted that the late Mrs. Boiler's garden had to be torn up to allow them access I told them to fuck off.

In retrospect I'm glad I did that now, having read many a horror story.