Forum Topic

Parents for Future to hold pop-up kids wind farm to raise awareness of green energy

Parents for Future are fracked off with the government's new energy strategy and hope you are too.Susan O'Leary from Parents for Future - West London commented: "We are dismayed by the Government's response to the energy crisis - fracking and a huge expansion of new oil and gas fields - as parents we want to make it clear that the answer to the energy and cost of living crisis, goes hand in hand with the answer to the climate crisis. There is no logic in handing out oil and gas licenses to the likes of Shell - the fields won't start producing for years - so won't lower our bills, but will instead create massive emissions, and profits for the oil and gas giants."We deserve an energy strategy that does not side with oil companies over the interests of the people in this country. And a strategy that does NOT prioritise profits over the UK's commitment to reducing the devastating climate impacts of its oil and gas sector. We want a safe and just future for our children".Parents will be making these demands across the country on Friday 23 September, marking the Global Climate Strikes that this year focus on #PeopleNotProfit.Join parents in Ealing at Elthorne Park (W7 2LZ) on September 23rd from 3.30-5pm for a pop-up wind farm as part of Parents for Future's campaign to show our MPs and local communities that we have the power in our hands.The event is a fun family friendly after-school event and will include crafting wind turbines for kids, snacks, games and prizes. All ages are welcome.

Susan O'Leary ● 1085d31 Comments

The trouble is these blanket rules.They are implemented with no real  concern  for everyone

Peter Yale ● 1079d

Paul does, clearly.More people = more traffic. Not necessarily cars, but certainly deliveries and taxis.And Paul, every time you drive a vehicle you become part of the problem you so passionately denounce. A bit like being a vegan who occasionally eats meat ‘because he has to’.

Simon Hayes ● 1080d

It really isnt ( the simplistic approach)For example, they tried a scheme in Liverpool - could have been any where.The results were absolutely diabolical.People do not drive for fun

Peter Yale ● 1080d

>But your simplistic approach to the world isn’t workable Paul.Wanting society to use cars much less?I beg to differ.

Paul James ● 1080d

But your simplistic approach to the world isn’t workable Paul.

Simon Hayes ● 1080d

Argument is against me? Said Simon trying to convince people not to bother doing anything that are doing this stuff anyway :D

Paul James ● 1080d

How strange. Paul doesn’t engage when the argument is against him. Why is that?

Simon Hayes ● 1081d

Stop preaching at everyone you simpleton.Climate change has been happening since the end of the last ice age. Yes, humans have contributed to an acceleration but temperatures were going to rise anyway.What you fail to comprehend is how those nice big wind turbines are made. Carbon fibre requires temperatures in excess of 1000 degrees to manufacture. They use filthy fossil fuels to reach those temperatures. Strangely enough they also make bikes from carbon fibre, including ones from ‘cycling commissioner’ Chris Boardman. Just fancy that!What makes your constant bleating about other people’s responsibilities laughable is your inconsistency. Too many cars on the road, yet you drive one when it suits you. Supporting Heathrow expansion isn’t in any way going to reduce emissions either. Oh, and I bet you’ve got a wood burner at home for those cosy winter nights.And 10,000 people have to be housed somewhere. The solution seems to be massive tower blocks which produce huge amounts of CO2 in construction and then have a life expectancy of less than 50 years.It’s incredible that you really don’t seem to understand anything.

Simon Hayes ● 1081d

>cramming too many people into Ealing and other parts of west London.I've said this before as well.I reckon 10,000 people living carefully can live within the same means as 1,000 people living profligately and those 1,000 people living profligately a can make changes so they can live in the same means as 100 people living profligately.An oversimplification sure, but I'm sure you get what I mean.Time to change Simon, we have to, have you not seen the forecasts?"The world is in a climate emergency – “a code red for humanity” according to the UN Secretary-General. The concentration of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions in the atmosphere is wreaking havoc across the world and threatening lives, economies, health and food. The world is far from securing a global temperature rise to below 2°C as promised in the Paris Agreement. With a baseline in 1990, some countries are emitting more, some the same and others are emitting less."

Paul James ● 1081d

But your solutions aren’t solutions Paul. You just hate anyone who doesn’t fit into your idea of personal mobility.Yes, we’ve been over it before and the key problem is cramming too many people into Ealing and other parts of west London. Those people will generate motor vehicle movements however you try to spin it.

Simon Hayes ● 1081d

I'm not anti car, I'm anti too many cars Simon (as are you). We've been over this a fair few times!

Paul James ● 1082d

Not all are on a closed loop and those that use evaporative cooling are a proven source of clusters of Legionella in the USA

N V Brooks ● 1082d

The big towers are coming, unfortunately. Too late for West Ealing. Too late for Acton. Probably too late for Ealing Broadway. Mason is not anyone’s friend, unless it suits him. Those big banker bonuses will have to be spent somewhere, so why not Ealing?And the water might be on a closed system, but there are lots of data centres all demanding a resource that’s limited.

Simon Hayes ● 1082d

The water is recirculated within closed cooling systems so it hardly represents flagrant misuse of a precious resource.If data centres truly are soaking up any and all electricity capacity in the local area then I say bring it on if it stops the building of these monstrous tower blocks everywhere.(By hook or by crook...)

Tony Colliver ● 1082d

Ah, but the anti car lobby and its vociferous mouthpieces such as Paul, don’t recognise that. It doesn’t fit their narrative.Maybe they should stand next to a construction site for a couple of hours? Why, they could even cycle there and make a day out of it, with sandwiches and a flask of coffee. Paul might even spot some skip lorries....

Simon Hayes ● 1083d

Our supposedly environmentally aware of council would never admit to the fact that construction causes almost as much  pollution and carbo and particulate emissions as all forms of transport in the Greater London area, source for this:. GLA

N V Brooks ● 1083d

Perhaps they should knock down all the old housing stock and rehome us all in some if those nice new shiny tower blocks.Of course, the construction industry has a tiny carbon footprint....

Simon Hayes ● 1083d

Very true, old stock poorly built in terms of insulation and most pre-1930s buildings with solid walls.

N V Brooks ● 1083d

And it would all be a lot simpler if we didn't have the leakiest buildings in Europe.  Insulate Britain!

Philippa Bond ● 1083d

Paul, you seem to have a very simple view of the world.Renewable energy does have a role to play but cannot provide the energy needs of the country on its own. Wind turbines don’t work when there’s no wind. The UK is a hungry consumer of energy.Without continuing use of gas and other fuels we’d simply grind to a halt. Self sufficiency is a long way off, but don’t let that stop you moralising ad naueam.

Simon Hayes ● 1084d

And do you believe that the children would be making windmills in the park if their parents weren't taking them there? The parents need to understand the root cause of the current problem.Those who deny them these facts equally as much to blame as those causing the problem in the first place.Suggest you stick to your fantasies about slaloming skip lorries. Hopefully, one day if the drugs work, the hallucinations will stop.

N V Brooks ● 1084d

Listen to you Nigel. This is about some kids making windmills and learning about using wind to generate electricity, and then you come along with your ponderous musings about fossil fuel.Take a reading!

Paul James ● 1084d

Simple really. Middle class bleating and patronism.Stop having so many children. If you are that concerned, contribute by not having any children at all.Not so palatable is it?It's over population and no practicable solutions.

Raymond Havelock ● 1084d

Add in water consumption to cool the servers and the viability of data centres looks distinctly dodgy. For a water stressed area ((c) Thames Water) it doesn’t make much sense to stick so many in west London.But then all the people want to store their Instagram pictures in the cloud. I suspect many of them think it really is a cloud....

Simon Hayes ● 1084d

London, Frankfurt and Amsterdam will each need more than one Gigawatt of power simply to power the data centres within the curtilege of their cities by the end of 2025. Much has been made of clean centres which use 100% renewables but the issue of transmission remains. Equally the capacity to generate to meet the demands of housing is compromised as a watt is a watt irrespective of whether it is boiling a kettle or powering a server

N V Brooks ● 1084d

Perhaps if there weren’t umpteen data centres being opened every week there wouldn’t be such a drain on our power supplies. Things are so bad in west London that developers have been told there’s no spare electricity capacity for a decade or more.So when eco mentalists like Paul sit at their computers all day they are adding to the problem. Maybe he should turn his off more often.Oh, and this is the same green washer who wants Heathrow expansion, because it’s our ‘local airport and should be supported’. Aviation accounts for around 4% of global emissions. Compare that to the UK’s total contribution of around 1% and you’ll easily see why advocating more flying is a stupid thing to do. But then how would these people get to Mont Ventoux to fulfill their Tour de France fantasies?

Simon Hayes ● 1084d

Where does it say don't bother? Stop making things up Paul. I know that you belive that you are good at it but you are not. I actually enjoy posting here so I will not express what I really think of your pathetic fantasies.You really are a silly little man.

N V Brooks ● 1084d

>Who said don't bother?You did.Shall I repeat what you said?"At the same time I do hope that you will be informing those attending of the need to lobby and protest to the Russian Federation"

Paul James ● 1084d

Who said don't bother?Good grief, Paul, the intellectual challenges you face must be crippling.  I simply referred to the root cause of the immediate issues.Never mind, you carry on, in your fantasy world, silly little man!

N V Brooks ● 1084d

Yeah, let's not bother Nigel, Russia blah blah blah, China blah blah blah, everybody else, blah blah blah.

Paul James ● 1084d

At the same time I do hope that you will be informing those attending of the need to lobby and protest to the Russian Federation who are currently burning off billions of cubic metres of gas rather than send it through pipelines to homes in Europe.  This has lead to nations, even as ostensibly green as Sweden, restarting their coal and biomass power plants to stop their people freezing and keep their businesses producing. Yes there is a need for clean alternatives to fossil fuels but the problem is immediate and fossil fuels provide a more expedient albeit very far from perfect, solution to an immediate need. The situation is further exacerbated by the French shutting down almost 40% of their ostensibly clean nuclear power generation because the reactors are proven to be unsafe.

N V Brooks ● 1084d