Marmora Man

Have just been searching EDF for a B&B fir a nights stay to visit sons (their flats too small to accommodate Dad). Took a nostalgic look around and pleased to find one of my threads still running. Can't resist a comment: I do not, cannot and would not want, to make a case against the emotional draw of "Scottishness" and thus a vote for independence. There's always been a small part of me that has been jealous of the Scots or the Irish or even the Welsh for having a glorious and emotionally satisfying heritage - kilts, swirling bagpipes, misty glens, craggy highlands and so on - all I've got as a mongrel Englishman is bloody Morris Dancing and warm beer. However, the Scots with England and Wales have been a nation for 407 years and a Union for over 300. To break that successful partnership up is, for me, just wrong. The argument central to the SNP seems to be - lets get rid of those nasty, usually Tory, Westminster politicians who have been so horrid to us. It's become a nasty chippy campaign - long on rhetoric and (very) short on facts. The timing of the independence vote coming, as it does, after 6 years of post recession austerity makes it easy to criticise Westminster polticians and much of the argument seems to be that Scotland would have been better if it had not been linked to UK. However, "wee Eck's" history as a master politician and economic forecaster is pretty weak too, remember his proposed "arc of prosperity" with Ireland and Iceland? The UK is, essentially, a provident organisation. We all contribute and we all take out - after all Scotland joined the Union to gain access to English overseas markets and counter the losses to Scotland of the failed Darien Scheme. (England wasn't being simply magnanimous - it wanted Scotland in a Union to bolster a Protestant monarchy). I don't agree Alex Salmond's analysis of the economics, but even if he were right about Scotland having a better per head GDP than the rest of UK his proposal to ring fence his part of the country and argue that it's income can only be used for itself is to go against the original concept of the Union. If that selfish argument were to prevail then London would secede taking 35%, or more, of the UK economy with it, East Dulwich would secede from Southwark, Marmora Road from East Dulwich. Selfishness never looks good. What would happen to the deprived areas of UK in that case? I still visit Scotland regularly and have classic "taxi driver" discussions - the last taxi driver told me ( in June) "every time I see that Alec Salmond and Nicola Sturgeon I want to give them both a slap" - that's the spirit! Brother, I don't want a divorce Cheers to all & sl?inte mh?r

It's been a while so I think I'm over the addiction. Currently overseas but returning UK in April. How is the world that is centred on ED?

Just had supper at Peckham Bazaar with Son No. 1. Excellent stuff, scallop, grilled octopus which was tender and beautifully charred. Good sea bass, great wine and friendly service. I was the oldest in the room by about 30 years but absolutely loved the place and recommend it highly.

The one positive thing a makeover could do is to shift the mountain of rubbish and delivery pallets / trolleys that sit outside the shop and make the area look and feel untidy.

This seems to me to be a GBO - or "Glimpse of the Bleeding Obvious" and politicking masquerading as help. If an individual has access to to this interwebby thingy I'm sure they can read the newspapers, listen to the radio and watch TV - it hardly needs a Lib Dem to point it out. But then state nannying is a Lib Dem policy.

I used to transport a small nuclear reactor around with me that was capable of generating quote "enough power to support a small town". As a full nuclear submarine costs, roughly, ?1bn the reactor costs about ?500m. The expertise resides in UK - mostly at Rolls Royce Associates in Derby. The units would take little more room than a decent sized detached house. The ?16bn Hinckly Point spend could fund 32 smaller units that could be churned out by RRA on an industrial scale pretty quickly. Would also create a second career for a bunch of my mates from the submarine world. PS: Not sure why there was any need to reference Mrs Thatcher in this discussion - she's dead.

When I first lived in Cornwall our house was assessed as being "radon positive" as it sat above a granite seam. The hamlet however had a graveyard and the average age of death in the previous two centuries seems to be well over 75 - so it didn't seem to me to be of major importance. Our new house in Cornwall has radon traps fitted which are, I understand, nothing more than thick polythene sheets with extraction vents to allow the radon to vent out into fresh air rather than through the floors to be concentrated inside the house.

Not touring -I'm returning to London for the weekend.

Off to see Midsummer Night 's Dream with David Walliams and the brilliant Sheridan Smith tomorrow and have high hopes of an entertaining evening.

It's a trend I applaud

It is likely GF, that if your ambition to freeze all developments in East Dulwich until the "community" has considered whether to raise funds to buy out a potential developer, will have two or three perverse effects. 1. It could reduce the likelihood of investment in the area 2. It could make every member of the community bankrupt - as I doubt it would bear the cost of more than one such community asset 3. It could engender a massive outburst of apathy and be totally ignored.

Try this http://www.tripadvisor.co.uk/Restaurant_Review-g186338-d3628450-Reviews-Bar_Tozino-London_England.html

Well I liked it - tho no one followed up my post http://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/forum/read.php?20,1135729,1135729#msg-1135729

I rather liked Bar Tozino on The Ropwalk, Maltby St, Bermondset. Spanish coffee, toast, oil, salt & tomatoes. Great stuff. Down here in the South West we don't do Brunch - just early doors Sunday pubs.

And my roof terrace with Kirsty ended up on the cutting room floor. Damn! Never mind - we sold the house anyway and are now Cornish!

Aquarius Moon wrote: Christmas is all about money. So are most things in life, but it is more noticeable at christmas. I raised my children as a single parent. Yes, it's social pressure, but try telling children that Santa Claus isn't coming because he is broke! So, you borrow on cards to make sure your children get a great christmas & you spend the next few years paying it back! Although my children have now grown up, my financial cicumstances haven't changed, so christmas is still nothing to look forward to, let alone get excited about. Presents don't require huge expense? No, but any expense is a struggle if you don't have the money. Christmas is wonderful for those who can afford it & I'm happy that they are looking forward to it. I, personally, am not! To modify the words of P G Wodehouse "it's not difficult to tell the difference between Aquarius Moon and a ray of sunshine"

aquarius moon Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Christmas is only great if you have loads of money > for presents & loads of money for food shopping. > > If you don't, where is the pleasure in wanting to > buy certain things for people & not being able > to? > > Where is the pleasure in seeing all the fancy > christmas stuff in the supermarket & only being > able to do your normal weekly shop? > > Where is the pleasure in running up an even bigger > credit card bill? > > For people struggling to make ends meet, christmas > isn't exciting, it's an absolute nightmare :( Happy thoughts - is your pessimism justified?. You could say alternatively that Christmas is a time to celebrate family and friendship. Doesn't require huge expense - that's social pressure but it's not an immutable rule.

East Dulwich Deli has good beans - tho occasionally runs low.

Ejb123 Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Me too please Marmora man! > > May i suggest a leaving party??

dc Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > So, Marmora Man, what's your new forum name going > to be given that your current, now out of date, > one was determined by your location, location, > location? Giving it some thought - WhickerMan perhaps to reflect the new West Country location

I think it may feature what was my home. The lovely Kirsty was trying to film a closing shot on the corner of Marmora & Scutari with the Shard in the background as I was arriving home. Belatedly recognising her, and as she was standing almost under our "for sale" sign I asked if she would find us a buyer. That didn't happen but I did invite her and the crew to film from our roof terrace where the view of the Shard was better.

DLR!

An article from Professor Robert Mair It persuaded me to consider Fracking and Shale Gas as an, overall, positive initiative. ENVIRONMENT Drilling in places such as Balcombe in Sussex can be safe if we simply follow the rules, argues Prof Robert Mair IN RECENT weeks, the Sussex village of Balcombe has found itself at the centre of the argument around hydraulic fracturing, or ?fracking?. This debate has become heavily polarised, and there has been much speculation around the environmental risks of shale-gas extraction, concerning water contamination and earth tremors. There are many factors that policy-makers and local people must consider before deciding whether or not they are in favour of fracking ? but I believe that the scientific and engineering evidence should play a key part in that decision. Everyone deserves to know the evidence, as it currently stands. Over the past 30 years, more than 2,000 onshore wells have been drilled in Britain, approximately 200 of which have used techniques similar to fracking to enhance the recovery of oil or gas. Chief among these is Wytch Farm in Dorset ? Europe?s largest onshore oil field, located in one of England?s most famous regions of outstanding natural beauty and special scientific interest, and therefore an area where the aesthetic and environmental impact of drilling are highly sensitive issues. Last year, I chaired a joint committee set up by the Royal Society and Royal Academy of Engineering to analyse the environmental, health and safety risks associated with shale gas exploration in Britain. We came up with a set of recommendations for the Government to make it as safe as possible, if they decided to go ahead. The report concluded that these risks could be managed effectively as long as operational best practices were implemented, and enforced through regulation. The Government has accepted all the report?s recommendations. Fracking in Britain would take place at depths of many hundreds of metres or several kilometres. So far the only shale gas fracking in this country has been at depths of 1.06 miles (1.7km) and 1.93 miles (3.1km), equivalent to the height of many London Shards placed on top of each other. It would be highly unlikely for water contamination to occur by means of fractures extending upwards from these deep shales and intercepting an aquifer, since the two are separated by a vast cover of rock. Even if it were possible, pressure conditions mean that the fracking water would not flow that far upwards. If there is water contamination, it is much more likely to be due to poorly constructed and regulated wells. These are lined with a steel casing, which is sealed into the ground by cement: ensuring the well?s integrity is very important if the risk of contamination is to be kept to an absolute minimum. Here in Britain, we have a long history of world-class oil and gas industry regulation, plus a unique examination scheme to ensure that the design, construction and abandonment of wells is reviewed by independent, specialist experts. The other main potential cause of environmental contamination is poor site construction at the surface. However, any risks can again be minimised by best practice and good regulation, which Britain has a good track record of upholding. For example, every company must disclose the contents of the fracturing fluid they use, which is not mandatory in America. There has also been concern about fracking causing earth tremors ? but the evidence indicates that this will not be a big issue in Britain. Coal operations have been causing barely noticeable levels of seismicity for many years, and we expect that those caused by fracking will be at an even lower level, no more severe at the surface than the passing of a truck. Another allegation against fracking in America is that it can result in methane leakage. We must therefore start to monitor methane emissions and groundwater composition at potential sites now, before any fracking takes place (as well as during and after such operations). This baseline monitoring is vital, since methane can be present in groundwater naturally. Such data will be the only way of keeping close track of the environmental impacts of fracking in situ, and should be submitted to regulators to inform local planning processes and address wider concerns. Shale gas companies must also play their part in building public confidence. It should be mandatory for operators to conduct Environmental Risk Assessments. Local communities should be involved and informed from the very start. People need have a say in the planning process and to feel their concerns are being addressed. In our report, we did not assess the climate risks associated with shale gas exploration, although we recommended that the Government should do so. The chief scientific adviser to the Department for Energy and Climate Change is currently leading a study on the potential for methane and other greenhouse gas leakages during extraction. The results will help form a clearer idea of the overall carbon footprint associated with shale gas. Difficult decisions lie ahead for the Government. Opinions on all sides of the debate must be heard and considered, and uncertainties explored. However, at the heart of any judgment should be evidence-based science and engineering, which will help to ensure that the best decisions are made, unswayed by preconceived notions of risk or benefit.

I wouldn't complain. I'd be very surprised if the KK situate would ever arise. A liberal approach should work

Otta Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > MM you heartless fiend, I take back all the well > wishes! Think of it as Darwinian parenting!