Not normally a fan of daytime quiz show shaming but this is a good one.
7 Likes
Wooooah. Yeah. Thatās fair game.
1 Like
Dāoh!
1 Like
Theyāve clipped this so that it goes viral so Iām obviously playing the game but this is next level.
1 Like
I donāt get it? Timber is clearly more sustainable than concrete. Interviewer comes across as a wanker.
2 Likes
That just came across as a gammon having a pop at a crusty snowflake then flouncing off. No winners there.
6 Likes
Exactly. Why would you promote your radio station with this clip?! It just reminds me never to listen to it.
3 Likes
The interviewer just seemed like Mel Smith playing a dickhead. āYou can grow concreteā. Hmmm, well, a lot of the constituents form organically over millions of years, so thereās thatā¦and then thereās the processing etcā¦ so no, no you canāt.
2 Likes
It all got a bit, āYou feed beef burgers to swans. You have big sheds, but nobodyās allowed in. And in these sheds you have 20ft high chickens, and these chickens are scaredā¦ā
5 Likes
All right, well, perhaps you can tell me whatās wrong with feeding beefburgers to swans.
1 Like
The New Scientist link off the back of that about ālivingā concrete was interesting. Had to check it wasnāt an April 1st job though.
I get the feeling I wouldnāt want to talk to either of those two people.
I mean, Cameron only said about 4 words. Lets not āboth sidesā this one. One of these people comes over much worse, regardless of any feelings about Insulate Britain.
6 Likes
Definitely both sides Iām afraid.
How is it both sides? The young guy didnāt say anything controversial did he? The older guy was being a total bulb.
1 Like
@jimo @Dent_Face - Sorry, Iām in-between trying to be a semi decent parent first and typing this bollocks second haha. Failing both but good points.
Iām likely commenting a little wider than that single āaltercationā, I find the whole debacle really, really frustrating. Old man āglueā jibe first followed by young guy āIād rather not be looking at youā jibe second - this is primary school playground bullshit from two grown adults. Maybe young guy thought āfuck thisā, but heās representing IB.
Iāve had a sniff about out of interest so maybe a bit of a job done thereā¦Irrespective of that whole idiotic shit show - Iāll pluck some random guestimate numbers from āofficial stats on the internetsā as I support what Insulate Britain want but I donāt see their methods particularly great. Insulate Britainās first demand taken from their website;
That the UK government immediately promises to fully fund and take responsibility for the insulation of all social housing in Britain by 2025
Social housing numbers? Two random internet sources suggest between 4 and 4.4Mā¦maybe crap links but suggestion is under the 5M mark.
Maybe just under 10k for profit social housing. A drop in the ocean compared to the overall figure, so Iāll discount these although my expectation is that they should all be fully up to standard as of now (but for profit likely means they arenāt and wonāt be unless new build properties).
Iām all for insulating my house and Iām paying for it out of my own pocket. Using less gas and leccy is good, right? Iām old enough to actually see how things have changed and I have two young kids, so a couple of guesstimate costs on insulating the average house based upon my recent spending. Weighted to north midlands so Iāll round up a little at the end as I live in a cheap area:
DIY insulated my garage, 30m2 - Ā£50ish (plus half a days work cutting and rolling it out). Call it Ā£100 materials (roughly 60m2) and what, Ā£150 labour for an average social house.
Replaced 4 large windows and a toilet window in August '21 with a local window company - Ā£3200
I have no cavity wall insulation but Iād expect to pay betweenā¦Ā£700 - Ā£1k for a detached home.
So for my times sake (Iām rounding up here, not taking into account ā¦)
Insulation - Ā£250
Windows - Ā£3000
Cavity - Ā£750
Fuck it, Iāll round up to Ā£5k per social houseā¦and 5M social houses. Happy for a builder to adjust these down.
Total Ā£25,000,000,000
That the elephant in the room really. Given the material/food shortages weāre now seeing in the UK thereās no way any government will fund nor hit 2025 even if they were to stump up the cost right now. Iāve not taken account the % of social housing that is flats and tower blocks and I do not know that. There is someone out there in government that should, however.
Even, half the cost and weāre looking at Ā£12.5 billion. Deep down Iām thinking is this why theyāre just sitting in roads?
The obvious āwhataboutā and most visible big spending recently that initially comes to mind - Test and Trace?
Total Ā£37,000,000,000
HS2 - that is a real popular waste of our cash. I have a load of folk camping out in Woodland destined to be ripped up near to where I liveā¦
Total Ā£107000000000
IB link to this document. The numbers are pretty hefty long termā¦
Investment & payback of Energy Efficiency measures
Upfront capital investment
Insulating Britainās homes requires significant up-front investment to deliver the broad benefits
described above. Overall, upgrading the nationās homes is estimated to require an average of
around Ā£19 billion annual investment from 2022 to 2050 (CLC, 2020). This is equivalent to 2.2% of
total annual Government spending in the 2018-19 financial year (National Audit Office, 2020).
The challenge of insulating 29 million homes is will be capital-intensive and is required in order to
limit global heating and maintain a liveable climate, but the improvements will also pay for
themselves economically over time. Models for the payback sometimes estimate around 25 years;
whilst this is clearly longer than the planning horizon for most households, homes in the UK stand
for at least 60 years but often much longer (Planning Portal, 2021). Therefore these improvements
will bring long-term benefits over the lifetime of the property.9
A Range of Estimates
Different reports suggest a range of estimates for the level of investment needed, but they are all in
the range of Ā£360 billion to Ā£640 billion depending on the depth of the retrofit delivered (CCC, 2020;
Element Energy & UCL, 2019; CLC, 2020).
The total investment will depend partly on how the process is financed. The New Economics
Foundation (2020) analysis compares a fully publicly-funded approach, a fully privately-funded
approach, and a mixed funding approach. Whilst they recommend the mixed approach, the fully
publicly-funded option provides the lowest overall costs. This is a result of the lower cost of capital
available to the Government compared to individuals. NEF assume that government grants are
provided for low-income households and state-backed 0% interest loans for households deemed
āable to payā.
Iām sat here now thinking that no matter what, weāre just fucked.
7 Likes
Went on one a bit but I think IB have a good point but theyāre really fucking blowing it.
Getting my tea now! 
Yeah I am all for criticism of single issue politics, I donāt think you can focus on insulating houses without looking at the rest of our energy problems. Feels like this is a distraction from the real issue and could even be harmful because itās being presented as a way that our government can buy us out of trouble.
Obviously weāre only going to see more of this kind of thing. Direct action, single issue campaigns, lobbying, and stuff like that is now part of ānormalā eco campaigning and seen as a totally legit way to protest. There are sensible older people doing it. Kids are into it. Schools and scientists even back it to an extent. Itās all a bit mad but when your government is voted in by a majority who donāt give a fuck what you gonna do?
Having said that, in this case at least the young guy had a point. I didnāt understand what the older guy was on about and he just sounded insane.
1 Like
4 Likes
Posted a link to somebody offering their flat up for Ā£20,000 a week a while back. Greenock is about the worst place in the world but this is by no means the worst price.
4 Likes
