Page 5 of 11

Re: Team Sky is now Team INEOS

Posted: 8 Apr 2019, 1:16pm
by Bonefishblues
100%JR wrote:
Bonefishblues wrote:You may need a new compass for those morals :wink:

Well I work in the Steel Industry.Even though we're classed as a "Green Steel" company 90% of the Steel we make goes to either Oil and Gas,Aerospace or Automotive Industries.In fact every single Plane/Helicopter flying today is made up of parts with Steel from us.So it would be hypocritical of me to get on my high horse about it.
Before our company was sold we were owned by Tata.Tata also own Tetley Tea.It was once pointed out to me(by a checkout worker) that by drinking Tetley Tea I was helping supply Arms to Terrorists.The young lady was quite shocked when I told her I also worked for Tata and really could not care less :lol:
We all directly or indirectly fund "unethical" companies.....I'm just realistic about it :wink:

I agree, we do, no matter how much we try. However, whilst accepting that, having some sort of critical view of whom we do business with is somewhat different to the attitude which you espoused, where it doesn't matter, "...it's just a name on a shirt", I'd suggest.

Re: Team Sky is now Team INEOS

Posted: 8 Apr 2019, 1:18pm
by mjr
100%JR wrote:
mjr wrote:I can see the front pages now: "Shock revelation: People With Amoral View On Subject Friends With Person With Amoral View On Subject".

Amoral/just don't care/indifferent...all the same to me.It's just a company putting money into a Sport.Cycling(and other Sports) have a long History of "less than ethical" Sponsorship.I don't watch/follow the Sport for where the money comes from I watch it for the Racing.

Yep, sorry, indifferent would have been a far better word than amoral but it was Monday morning ;)

100%JR wrote:Far too many Tree-huggers sticking their noses in IMO :roll:

It's not only the trees that will be harmed by fracking.

Re: Team Sky is now Team INEOS

Posted: 8 Apr 2019, 1:30pm
by 100%JR
mjr wrote:
100%JR wrote:
mjr wrote:I can see the front pages now: "Shock revelation: People With Amoral View On Subject Friends With Person With Amoral View On Subject".

Amoral/just don't care/indifferent...all the same to me.It's just a company putting money into a Sport.Cycling(and other Sports) have a long History of "less than ethical" Sponsorship.I don't watch/follow the Sport for where the money comes from I watch it for the Racing.

Yep, sorry, indifferent would have been a far better word than amoral but it was Monday morning ;)
100%JR wrote:Far too many Tree-huggers sticking their noses in IMO :roll:

It's not only the trees that will be harmed by fracking.

I'm sure getting Oil and Gas from beneath the Sea bed is totally environmentally friendly :wink: Taking all the Planets resources is never good however it's done.We as a society have come to depend on these resources so no point getting all high and mighty about how we get them.
This Planet is damaged,probably beyond repair and it as done before my parents,grandparents and even great grandparents were born.In fact we as a species have been destroying the Planet since we first set foot on it.
Someone holding a "No Fracking" sign at a protest is doing nothing to reverse this they're just trying to make themselves feel a bit better :|
I used to take part in all kinds of Marches/protests in the 80s...then I opened my eyes.

Re: Team Sky is now Team INEOS

Posted: 8 Apr 2019, 1:45pm
by mjr
100%JR wrote:
mjr wrote:It's not only the trees that will be harmed by fracking.

I'm sure getting Oil and Gas from beneath the Sea bed is totally environmentally friendly :wink:

It's not great, no, but at least it's not harming homes.

100%JR wrote:Taking all the Planets resources is never good however it's done.We as a society have come to depend on these resources so no point getting all high and mighty about how we get them.
This Planet is damaged,probably beyond repair and it as done before my parents,grandparents and even great grandparents were born.In fact we as a species have been destroying the Planet since we first set foot on it.

Contrary to the popular quote, I don't much like the smell of pessimism in the morning.

100%JR wrote:Someone holding a "No Fracking" sign at a protest is doing nothing to reverse this they're just trying to make themselves feel a bit better :|

Why else does anyone do anything? And I think it's fairer to say they're doing very little to reverse this, by publicising the link and problem, but then what better could one person alone do to reverse it anyway?

100%JR wrote:I used to take part in all kinds of Marches/protests in the 80s...then I opened my eyes.

That may be the root of this attitude: people hate few more than those who resemble one's discarded past selves.

Re: Team Sky is now Team INEOS

Posted: 8 Apr 2019, 1:54pm
by 100%JR
mjr wrote:That may be the root of this attitude: people hate few more than those who resemble one's discarded past selves.

I don't particularly "hate" anyone.I just think it's all a bit pointless.Some people don't see the irony in what they're doing...protesting about one thing but directly funding something just as bad :roll:
If you actually sat down and thought about it you'd either top yourself or go mad.It is what it is.Might as well just get on with it for the brief time we're here.

Re: Team Sky is now Team INEOS

Posted: 9 Apr 2019, 6:30pm
by 1982john
100%JR wrote:
mjr wrote:That may be the root of this attitude: people hate few more than those who resemble one's discarded past selves.

I don't particularly "hate" anyone.I just think it's all a bit pointless.Some people don't see the irony in what they're doing...protesting about one thing but directly funding something just as bad :roll:
If you actually sat down and thought about it you'd either top yourself or go mad.It is what it is.Might as well just get on with it for the brief time we're here.


This is a long shot but have you read any Schopenhour? If not you really should he'd be right up your ally!

Re: Team Sky is now Team INEOS

Posted: 9 Apr 2019, 7:02pm
by 100%JR
1982john wrote:
100%JR wrote:
mjr wrote:That may be the root of this attitude: people hate few more than those who resemble one's discarded past selves.

I don't particularly "hate" anyone.I just think it's all a bit pointless.Some people don't see the irony in what they're doing...protesting about one thing but directly funding something just as bad :roll:
If you actually sat down and thought about it you'd either top yourself or go mad.It is what it is.Might as well just get on with it for the brief time we're here.


This is a long shot but have you read any Schopenhour? If not you really should he'd be right up your ally!

I’ve not read an actual book since 1984(the year not the book)which was the year I left school.I don’t read Newspapers either, never bought one.
I need to leave myself something to do in my(hopefully) long retirement :wink:
My wife and daughter read all the time,me?I don’t have the time or inclination!

Re: Team Sky is now Team INEOS

Posted: 2 May 2019, 7:07pm
by brynpoeth
ineos has fracking licences for large areas of Yorkshire, looks like the TdY shall have even more spectators but for different reasons, not just to adore sporting heroes, people are waking up, Plus One!

Re: Team Sky is now Team INEOS

Posted: 2 May 2019, 7:24pm
by Psamathe
Saw the head fracker on TV and he was not being 100% truthful about what fracking is (most sources discuss the questionable chemicals injected into the ground whilst Head Greenwasher was claiming it’s just injecting water!).

Ian

Re: Team Sky is now Team INEOS

Posted: 2 May 2019, 7:32pm
by Mike Sales
Known reserves of oil and gas are far more than we can burn if we are going to stay within present proposed limits for CO2 emissions. Why are we looking for more?
It is urgent that we cut emissions, not plan for more.

Re: Team Sky is now Team INEOS

Posted: 2 May 2019, 8:16pm
by 100%JR
Psamathe wrote:Saw the head fracker on TV and he was not being 100% truthful about what fracking is (most sources discuss the questionable chemicals injected into the ground whilst Head Greenwasher was claiming it’s just injecting water!).

Ian

Can you prove it’s not just water?
“Most” sources are probably just clutching at straws :roll:
Until there is irrefutable proof that it’s “questionable chemicals” then we’ll assume it is indeed water.
Then again the halfwit protestors rarely let the truth get in the way of a good old waste of time.

Re: Team Sky is now Team INEOS

Posted: 2 May 2019, 8:36pm
by Psamathe
100%JR wrote:
Psamathe wrote:Saw the head fracker on TV and he was not being 100% truthful about what fracking is (most sources discuss the questionable chemicals injected into the ground whilst Head Greenwasher was claiming it’s just injecting water!).

Ian

Can you prove it’s not just water?
“Most” sources are probably just clutching at straws :roll:
Until there is irrefutable proof that it’s “questionable chemicals” then we’ll assume it is indeed water.
Then again the halfwit protestors rarely let the truth get in the way of a good old waste of time.

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2015/jul/05/fracking-injection-chemicals-drinking-water-transparency wrote:Secrecy over fracking chemicals clouds environmental risks, advocates say

Despite a report that links practice to contaminated drinking water, list of more than 1,076 chemicals used during fracking process remains unknown to public


https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-14432401 wrote:Water, sand and chemicals are injected into the rock at high pressure which allows the gas to flow out to the head of the well.


https://www.factcheck.org/2017/04/facts-fracking-chemical-disclosure/ wrote:The process involves injecting water, sand and various chemicals into drilling wells at high pressure


https://www.nottinghamshire.gov.uk/planning-and-environment/shale-gas-development/shale-gas-development/about-shale-gas-development wrote:A mixture of water, sand and chemicals is pumped under high pressure into the bore hole to fracture the rock underground.


etc. etc., etc.

https://academic.oup.com/endo/article/156/12/4458/2422671 wrote:Hydraulic fracturing — or fracking — uses hundreds of chemicals, many of which are known to have adverse effects on the endocrine system.


https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2014/06/140623103939.htm wrote:Hormone-disrupting activity of fracking chemicals worse than initially found




https://chemicalwatch.com/17713/study-links-edcs-in-water-to-fracking-chemicals wrote: Using fracking to extract natural gas can require "hundreds of products containing more than 750 chemicals and components", including more than 100 known or suspected EDCs, write scientists from the University of Missouri, Columbia and the US Geological Survey.


etc., etc., etc.

Ian

Re: Team Sky is now Team INEOS

Posted: 2 May 2019, 9:05pm
by irc
Mike Sales wrote:Known reserves of oil and gas are far more than we can burn if we are going to stay within present proposed limits for CO2 emissions. Why are we looking for more?
It is urgent that we cut emissions, not plan for more.


why frack for gas in the UK? Because as a country we import huge amounts of gas. For energy security it is better to burn our own gas. There has to be some CO2 savings in not transporting gas from around the world to the UK. While there are already many people in fuel poverty asking them to heat their homes with electricity at 4 times the cost of gas is mad.

Why are we looking for more? Supply and demand. If we cut world supply of oil and gas there isn't enough for everyone. Prices go up and people suffer. It won't be us in the wealthy west suffering (apart from fuel poverty) but those in poorer countries no longer able to afford oil and gas at all.

Cut emissions? It isn't going to happen. The west might reduce them slightly. China, India, and the developing world won't.

And for all the money invested in wind and solar over the last couple of decades fossil fuels provided a higher percentage of world energy in 2017 than they did in 1985.

http://euanmearns.com/the-bp-2018-stati ... emissions/

Re: Team Sky is now Team INEOS

Posted: 2 May 2019, 9:22pm
by Mike Sales
irc wrote:
Mike Sales wrote:Known reserves of oil and gas are far more than we can burn if we are going to stay within present proposed limits for CO2 emissions. Why are we looking for more?
It is urgent that we cut emissions, not plan for more.


why frack for gas in the UK? Because as a country we import huge amounts of gas. For energy security it is better to burn our own gas. There has to be some CO2 savings in not transporting gas from around the world to the UK. While there are already many people in fuel poverty asking them to heat their homes with electricity at 4 times the cost of gas is mad.

Why are we looking for more? Supply and demand. If we cut world supply of oil and gas there isn't enough for everyone. Prices go up and people suffer. It won't be us in the wealthy west suffering (apart from fuel poverty) but those in poorer countries no longer able to afford oil and gas at all.

Cut emissions? It isn't going to happen. The west might reduce them slightly. China, India, and the developing world won't.

And for all the money invested in wind and solar over the last couple of decades fossil fuels provided a higher percentage of world energy in 2017 than they did in 1985.

http://euanmearns.com/the-bp-2018-stati ... emissions/


I don't think you have grasped the urgency of the situation.
If we do not cut emissions it is the poorest who will, as always, suffer most. A drive to insulate our shoddy housing stock would help more.
The Third world poorest are already suffering from climate change.
You seem to have reached third stage of denial. "It is too late to do anything."
The Committee on Climate Change wants a target of zero emissions by 2050. Investing in more fossil fuel use is going in the wrong direction.

Re: Team Sky is now Team INEOS

Posted: 2 May 2019, 9:49pm
by landsurfer
And the Chinese and Indian Governments are right behind you on this are they ..... ... not ...

While we destroy our industry and lifestyle ..for absolutely no effect on global warming .... the new economies of the East will continue to burn Lignite / coal products in thermal energy conversion ...
We will be sitting in the dark ... our babies dying as the the SCBU units lose power, as the wealthy fossil fuelled middle class of the far east strut down to Starbucks in Shanghai..

Grow up and smell the ( Starbucks ) coffee ....

If you protest against Fracking.
Which is a reasonable position.
Do not be hypocritical enough to use any gas derived energy.

It's like a Vegan protesting against the murder of meat then popping into McD's for a burger on the way home ...