Jump to content

New 'garden' city on Thames estuary, 15,000 homes at Ebbsfleet


Recommended Posts

George Osbourne was talking about this on the Andrew Marr show this morning. On the same day the Telegraph published that the cost of buying a house in London could buy you 25 in Scotland. Claire Short made an interesting point in saying that she believes that the North/South divide in property prices could be the thing that in the end rebalances the economy long term, as people move out of London and the South East to buy homes. So as welcome as the new city is, I still think the government have things the wrong way round. They should be seeking ways to economically regenerate the north, to ease pressure on the south east.

....three ways tom start that.


Give more power back to regional govt but no bail out if they hang themselves as some will.....(usual suspects)

Unions recognise that we need regional pay rates so Public Sector jobs in economically suffering areas don't cream off a huge amount of local talent to the detriment of Private sector/entreprenueralism

Scrap HS 2 and improve transport links between the major regional cities


Still pretty cynical that govt/the state can do much about this though to be hones but more devolved power will at least give regions a chance to reinvent themselves...but some will choose the wrong route ie high public spending

???? Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------


> Scrap HS 2 and improve transport links between the

> major regional cities


Surely HS2 is an improvement between major regional cities?? And one that drags us (forward) to the late 20th century?

...or it just makes Birmingham the next commuter suburb for London



...or as I saw from someone last week in City AM "if you gave Manchester or Birmingham etc ?Xbn to develop business in their regions how many would come up with 'Let's spend it all on a fast link to London'?"

I agreed ????, on everything you write.


I also agree that HS2 won't serve enough people to justifiy the expense and disruption. There are already good links between Birmingham, Manchester and London and knowing how things go in this country, it's likely to go widely over budget. And the only people who will be able to afford to use it will be those with high paying jobs in London.


Manchester has reinvented itself as the media capital of the North, so regeneration can happen.

And just to add that the other problem with HS2 is that it is already outdated technology. The future of high speed trains is Maglev - trains that run on magnets. They already exist - reaching speeds of 300mpr in the far east and China. They sit above ground and can't derail and are way more energy efficient.

I thinks it's always easier to stick with what you have than start afresh, I guess. There are all kinds of magnetic/ hydrogen technologies around that we should be using now - the reasons we aren't are often political and in the interests of established corporations.


Interesting view of HS2 here though....


http://www.stokesentinel.co.uk/gravy-train-loaded-money-ndash-isn-t-stopping/story-20821933-detail/story.html

Maglev? Not sure that would stand up to a cost/benefit analysis! The Chinese are very fond of their status symbols....


Just because newer/whizzier technologies exist, doesn't mean more traditional methods are outdated. Bicycles didn't become outdated when the motorbike came along (and countless other analogies).

That's true, but that's because cycles are very good at what they do, and have little or no impact on the environment. A perfect design if you like. Train technology of the future won't run on tracks at all (the laying of which is the most expensive part of bulding a railway). There are already hoop systems being designed for example. And we have to find ways to cut oil and fossil fuel consumption. Hydrogen will always be a cleaner fuel than oil (and we can create that from bacteria and waste). A railway that runs on small amounts of efficient energy will always be better than the diesel and electric systems we have now. I think any future capital projects have to look to those things in their design.

But Hydrogen from bacterial power plants can. It uses the bacteria found in all plants that makes them photosynthesize. It would take just 25,000 square kilometres of algea tanks, to displace gasoline use in the USA. That's just 10% of the area already used to grow soya. At present, the process is 1% efficient, but needs to be 10% efficient to make for a price comparable to the cheap gasoline that Americans use. So the leading area of research in biochemical hydrogen is in ways to improve efficiency. But there is no reason to assume science won't get there.


The other issue of course, is that we all see fossil fuels as just energy, petrol etc. But oil is used to make pretty much everything. All plastics and rubber use vast amounts of oil. So we have to look to ways to reduce consumption of those things. Do we really need the billions of cracker toys - plastic items that have no use and no point? Thay are just a massive waste of oil.

Never said there wasn't merit in it! Wouldn't want to sound like I'm anti-renewables at all... it's fascinating stuff and without doubt we're all stuffed if we don't come up with reliable clean energy.


But surely HS2 will be electric anyway? It's just a matter of how that electricity will be generated in years to come.

It does work, but the issue is quantity (ie all the waste produced by the homes of Sheffield won't produce enough hydrogen to power all the homes of Sheffield).


It's the same with renewables like solar, wind and tidal. They don't constantly generate electricity (no wind, sunlight or tide). So they are never going to be the solution to fossil fuels.


We already do have a solution in nuclear power. France has the cheapest energy prices in Europe and generates 80% of it's energy from nuclear power. It sells energy to the rest of europe. Todays third generation power stations have a lifespan of around 70 -100 years and fourth generation stations are being designed that will be able to recycle plutonium waste. America also buy Russian warheads and recyle those in their power stations.


And just on the issue of waste. There's been a lot of nonsense created by the ant-nuclear lobby. Nuclear power is one of the cleanest energy forms out there. if you were to take all of the waste ever created from every nuclear power station in the USA since construction, it would only fill a football pitch to a height of three meters, and of that only 3% is hot plutonium (ie would still be hot in 1000 years).


America stores it's waste in seal containers above ground. France in tubes in the floor of it's stations. And of course, all of this can be reused with the next generation stations. Compare that to the particulates of fossil fuels that have killed people for decades. China are experiencing the same smog western cities did in the past. It's a no brainer to me.

I saw a documentary once where the manager of a nuclear plant in the US had a red alert signal, and so complacent was the culture, he didn't even realise he was responsible


Oh hang on, no wait. That was an episode of the Simpsons

I love that episode of the Simpsons!


But seriously, for the projected cost of HS2, we could build ten modern nuclear power plants, and third generation plants automatically shut down in the event of a problem or human error (so a Chernobyl couldn't happen). Given how much fuel we import and how much we pay for energy, I think ten nationalised power stations would be a much better spend of 42bn of tax payers money. The power stations only take around five years to build as well - but throw in all the alarmist anti-nuclear legal challenges and it could take 15 years.

PokerTime Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> We already do have a solution in nuclear power.

> France has the cheapest energy prices in Europe

> and generates 80% of it's energy from nuclear

> power. It sells energy to the rest of europe.


I'm not knee-jerk anti-nuclear, but these energy prices need to be taken with a pinch of salt. French state subsidies (mostly indirect) to their nuclear industry are significant and are not reflected in cost to consumers, although French consumers, of course, do pay these through their taxes. I'm not saying that's necessarily wrong, but nuclear as an alternative to fossil fuels is not a cheap option.

It's way cheaper than wind, solar and tidal production, and yet we are investing billions into those things. And nuclear is cost comparative to other energy except where there is direct access to cheap fossil fuels. The main difference is in the cost of building nuclear power plants compared to coal and gas plants, but it's still econimically a better option than wind turbines and other renewables over the long term.


If we can find 42bn for a rail link when the country is being held to ransom on the price of energy, then you have to ask if this government has it's priorities right? One of the biggest failings was to privatise energy companies. We are all paying for it now.

Agreed re wind, solar and tidal. These are fine for local and specific needs (eg solar passive water heating, wind power for pumping etc), but to suggest they will feed the grid to replace the contribution from fossil fuels is delusional. One of my problems with nuclear is that it too (along with the hi-tech renewables options) relies heavily on fossil fuels. Think of the mining, shipping, construction etc that is dependent on oil. As those costs squeeze, so do those of nuclear. There is no cheap way out of the cheap fossil fuel era I fear.
There's no cheap way, but using exisiting fossil fuel energies to build plants that provide an alternative over their life time to fossil fuels has to be a good starting point. What we can't do, is stick with coal, gas and oil burning energy plants. Nuclear power is a workable alternative to those things.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • So top of Lane. Local Sainsbury, middle Co Op and M and S and bottom Tesco Express…..now everyone should be happy except those that want a Waitrose as well…0h and  don’t forget M and S near ED Station….
    • Direct link to joint statement : https://thehaguegroup.org/meetings-bogota-en/?link_id=2&can_id=2d0a0048aad3d4915e3e761ac87ffe47&source=email-pi-briefing-no-26-the-bogota-breakthrough&email_referrer=email_2819587&email_subject=pi-briefing-no-26-the-bogot_-breakthrough&&   No. 26 | The Bogotá Breakthrough “The era of impunity is over.” That was the message from Bogotá, Colombia, where governments from across the Global South and beyond took the most ambitious coordinated action since Israel’s genocidal assault on Gaza began 21 months ago. Convened by The Hague Group and co-chaired by the governments of Colombia and South Africa, the Emergency Conference on Palestine brought together 30 states for two days of intensive deliberation — and emerged with a concrete, coordinated six-point plan to restrain Israel’s war machine and uphold international law. States took up the call from their host, Colombian President and Progressive International Council Member Gustavo Petro, who had urged them to be “protagonists together.” Twelve governments signed onto the measures immediately. The rest now have a deadline: 20 September 2025, on the eve of the United Nations General Assembly. The unprecedented six measures commit states to:     Prevent military and dual use exports to Israel.     Refuse Israeli weapons transfers at their ports.     Prevent vessels carrying weapons to Israel under their national flags.     Review all public contracts to prevent public institutions and funds from supporting Israel’s illegal occupation.     Pursue justice for international crimes.     Support universal jurisdiction to hold perpetrators accountable. “We came to Bogotá to make history — and we did,” said Colombian President Gustavo Petro. “Together, we have begun the work of ending the era of impunity. These measures show that we will no longer allow international law to be treated as optional, or Palestinian life as disposable.” The measures are not symbolic. They are grounded in binding obligations under international law — including the International Court of Justice’s July 2024 advisory opinion declaring Israel’s occupation unlawful, and September 2024’s UN General Assembly Resolution ES-10/24, which gave states a 12-month deadline to act. UN Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights in the occupied Palestinian territory Francesca Albanese called them “a momentous step forward.” “The Hague Group was born to advance international law in an era of impunity,” said South Africa’s Foreign Minister, Ronald Lamola. “The measures adopted in Bogotá show that we are serious — and that coordinated state action is possible.” The response from Washington was swift — and revealing. In a threatening statement to journalists, a US State Department spokesperson accused The Hague Group of “seeking to isolate Israel” and warned that the US would “aggressively defend our interests, our military, and our allies, including Israel, from such coordinated legal and diplomatic” actions. But instead of deterring action, the threats have only clarified the stakes. In Bogotá, states did not flinch. They acted — and they invite the world to join them. The deadline for further states to take up the measures is now two months away. And with it, the pressure is mounting for governments across the world — from Brazil to Ireland, Chile to Spain — to match words with action. As Albanese said, “the clock is now ticking for states — from Europe to the Arab world and beyond — to join them.” This is not a moment to observe. It is a moment to act. Share the Joint Statement from Bogotá and popularise the six measures. Write to your elected representative and your government and demand they sign on before 20 September. History was made in Bogotá. Now, it’s up to all of us to ensure it becomes reality, that Palestinian life is not disposable and international law is not optional. The era of impunity is coming to an end. Palestine is not alone. In solidarity, The Progressive International Secretariat  
    • Most countries charge for entry to museums and galleries, often a different rate for locals (tax payers) and foreign nationals. The National Gallery could do this, also places like the Museums in South Kensington, the British Library and other tax-funded institutions. Many cities abroad add a tourist tax to hotel bills. It means tourists help pay for public services.
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...