Global warming 'confirmed' by independent study
-
I assume your utility companies are public companies, US and UK ones arent, so there is a fundamental difference you need to understand about how the two are funded becaue when the end user is the sole source of income, then he is going to pay for everything. Period.
============================== Nothing to say.
-
It is Funny isnt it, Ian aparantly works in the finance sector, yet has such an immature view of things that one has to wonder in what capacity. Perhaps he cleans toilets! :)
============================== Nothing to say.
It's actually not Ian that's having these views, the Janitors name is harold.
Light moves faster than sound. That is why some people appear bright, until you hear them speak. List of common misconceptions
-
Of course they are, but they're already paying for it so it's not going to cost anything extra
Yes it will, as there will be a need for added capacity there will be a need for more funding = a larger bill for the customer.
Light moves faster than sound. That is why some people appear bright, until you hear them speak. List of common misconceptions
-
I assume your utility companies are public companies, US and UK ones arent, so there is a fundamental difference you need to understand about how the two are funded becaue when the end user is the sole source of income, then he is going to pay for everything. Period.
============================== Nothing to say.
For UK water companies at least there is a difference between capital and revenue income streams, and what they can spend on what from each is fixed by legislation. Also every penny of any proposed price increases have to be justified. The vast majority of the increase in the costs of water production and supply are from the increase in electricity prices. There are massive demands from government to reduce carbon, the only way to do that from a water company perspective is to move less water around. The only way to do that is to get people on meters and then push the price up. When you do that you make far more money than you need and the government takes it in fines because you are not allowed to make more money than you need.
Every man can tell how many goats or sheep he possesses, but not how many friends.
-
Yes it will, as there will be a need for added capacity there will be a need for more funding = a larger bill for the customer.
Light moves faster than sound. That is why some people appear bright, until you hear them speak. List of common misconceptions
-
It's actually not Ian that's having these views, the Janitors name is harold.
Light moves faster than sound. That is why some people appear bright, until you hear them speak. List of common misconceptions
-
It's actually not Ian that's having these views, the Janitors name is harold.
Light moves faster than sound. That is why some people appear bright, until you hear them speak. List of common misconceptions
-
Larger bill for customer = losing customers. Besides if they have any brains at all over there they have been saving up for the upgrade ever since the previous upgrade.
harold aptroot wrote:
Larger bill for customer = losing customers.
They wouldn't lose any outside the margin. All power companies would need to do this upgrade. so the only real choice for the customers would be to skip being connected to the grid
harold aptroot wrote:
Besides if they have any brains at all over there they have been saving up for the upgrade ever since the previous upgrade.
That's not how it works. When they need to upgrade, they will take a really big loan covering the costs and push the amortization and interest on to the customer.
Light moves faster than sound. That is why some people appear bright, until you hear them speak. List of common misconceptions
-
Sorry Ian. I was a little surprised. It is hard to know who is replying to who when the threads get this long. :)
============================== Nothing to say.
There are more people mixing things up today, harold didn't like me referencing your post.
Light moves faster than sound. That is why some people appear bright, until you hear them speak. List of common misconceptions
-
harold aptroot wrote:
Larger bill for customer = losing customers.
They wouldn't lose any outside the margin. All power companies would need to do this upgrade. so the only real choice for the customers would be to skip being connected to the grid
harold aptroot wrote:
Besides if they have any brains at all over there they have been saving up for the upgrade ever since the previous upgrade.
That's not how it works. When they need to upgrade, they will take a really big loan covering the costs and push the amortization and interest on to the customer.
Light moves faster than sound. That is why some people appear bright, until you hear them speak. List of common misconceptions
Yea keep thinking that. Nuon Vaste Prijs is not going to raise its price because it contractually can't, and that's just one example. And some international player is going to undercut the others and steal all the other customers. So no, they couldn't do it like that.
-
There are more people mixing things up today, harold didn't like me referencing your post.
Light moves faster than sound. That is why some people appear bright, until you hear them speak. List of common misconceptions
-
Indeed, Fistedchuff is a symptom of his own superiority complex. No one can be as clever as him, no one can be as scientific, and yet he is an angry fool incapable of debate. In anycase, given how often doctors misdiagnose I would always validate their opinions with google. :)
============================== Nothing to say.
-
Erudite__Eric wrote:
Indeed, Fistedchuff is a symptom of his own superiority complex. No one can be as clever as him, no one can be as scientific, and yet he is an angry fool incapable of debate.
He's been there. He knows that arguing about scientific phenomena when your only qualification is that you've read a bunch of blogs on the Internet is basically futile. At least read this[^] first.
Woods and Trees Ravel. You dont need to go into that kind of depth, since as even the IPCC says, 4/5ths of it has a "very low level of scientific understanding" The basic facts speak for themselves. No feedbacks, 12 years of slight cooling, no increase in severe weather and insuficient troposphere warming all cast a great deal of doubt on the CO2 = catastrophe theory. I prefer to look at the basic facts, as do many scientists. (It is called empiricism) Oh, plus the fact the earth has been a lot warmer this interglacial, Vostock and Greenland ice core data. SO there are lots of reasons to doubt the meager warming caused by CO2 is any problem at all.
============================== Nothing to say.
-
Erudite__Eric wrote:
Indeed, Fistedchuff is a symptom of his own superiority complex. No one can be as clever as him, no one can be as scientific, and yet he is an angry fool incapable of debate.
He's been there. He knows that arguing about scientific phenomena when your only qualification is that you've read a bunch of blogs on the Internet is basically futile. At least read this[^] first.
Exactly. I don't really think there's a point to arguing with people like this, but for me on here it's quite therapeutic as I wouldn't ever want to damage the relationship with a patient, despite how much I might disagree with them. It's very interesting - people just smart enough to do some basic research and take an interest in a subject, but not educated enough to understand the subtle nuances of what they're reading and ultimately arguing, yet SO ABSOLUTELY CONVINCED of their ability. It's a broad psychological phenomenon - the less someone knows about something, the more people are likely to overestimate their knowledge of it. These guys are a perfect example. Heck, most of the people heavily into pseudoscientific nonsense like alternative medicine, chiropractic, alternate vaccine schedules, etc, are generally well educated - arts or engineering degrees; it gives them a false sense of confidence when exploring other avenues of knowledge and it can be nail-bitingly frustrating when people like that are determined to drive themselves or their loved ones off the edge of a proverbial cliff based on what they read on the internet.
- F
-
Still dodging the facts while piling on the insults. :)
============================== Nothing to say.
What was insulting about that? You guys were the ones doing the piling on. The fact is that you're not a climate scientist and ultimately your opinion on any raw data or cherry-picked studies is worth nothing. The fact is that I'm not a climate scientist and ultimately my opinion on the raw data or cherry-picked studies is worth nothing. Unfortunately, only one of us recognizes this. Toodles, champ!
- F
-
Woods and Trees Ravel. You dont need to go into that kind of depth, since as even the IPCC says, 4/5ths of it has a "very low level of scientific understanding" The basic facts speak for themselves. No feedbacks, 12 years of slight cooling, no increase in severe weather and insuficient troposphere warming all cast a great deal of doubt on the CO2 = catastrophe theory. I prefer to look at the basic facts, as do many scientists. (It is called empiricism) Oh, plus the fact the earth has been a lot warmer this interglacial, Vostock and Greenland ice core data. SO there are lots of reasons to doubt the meager warming caused by CO2 is any problem at all.
============================== Nothing to say.
-
Erudite__Eric wrote:
I prefer to look at the basic facts, as do many scientists
No, actually, scientists are expected to (duh) really understand what they're talking about.
- F
IPCC 4/5ths of factors affecting climate have a "Very low level of scientific understanding" http://www.ipcc.ch/graphics/2001syr/large/06.01.jpg[^] So that means none of them actually know what they are talking about either. In which case I agree with you entirely. :) Come back at me when you have something worth arguing against. That was too easy.
============================== Nothing to say.
-
Exactly. I don't really think there's a point to arguing with people like this, but for me on here it's quite therapeutic as I wouldn't ever want to damage the relationship with a patient, despite how much I might disagree with them. It's very interesting - people just smart enough to do some basic research and take an interest in a subject, but not educated enough to understand the subtle nuances of what they're reading and ultimately arguing, yet SO ABSOLUTELY CONVINCED of their ability. It's a broad psychological phenomenon - the less someone knows about something, the more people are likely to overestimate their knowledge of it. These guys are a perfect example. Heck, most of the people heavily into pseudoscientific nonsense like alternative medicine, chiropractic, alternate vaccine schedules, etc, are generally well educated - arts or engineering degrees; it gives them a false sense of confidence when exploring other avenues of knowledge and it can be nail-bitingly frustrating when people like that are determined to drive themselves or their loved ones off the edge of a proverbial cliff based on what they read on the internet.
- F
-
What was insulting about that? You guys were the ones doing the piling on. The fact is that you're not a climate scientist and ultimately your opinion on any raw data or cherry-picked studies is worth nothing. The fact is that I'm not a climate scientist and ultimately my opinion on the raw data or cherry-picked studies is worth nothing. Unfortunately, only one of us recognizes this. Toodles, champ!
- F
So you have no opinoins worth anything about anything other than what you have studied, or acchieved some kind of medal for? (Be it some publicaitons or so) Oh, and by the way, I am merely repeating the opinoins of climate scientists, so I gues you have to accept what I say then. :)
============================== Nothing to say.
