Forum

 
  Back to OzPolitic.com   Welcome, Guest. Please Login or Register
  Forum Home Album HelpSearch Recent Rules LoginRegister  
 

Pages: 1 ... 7 8 9 10 11 
Send Topic Print
A Price on Carbon - Immediate Results (Read 9905 times)
progressiveslol
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 17029
Re: A Price on Carbon - Immediate Results
Reply #120 - Oct 20th, 2012 at 12:10pm
 
MOTR wrote on Oct 20th, 2012 at 12:07pm:

You got one with the late 20's to 40's. Nah wouldnt expect you would.
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
rabbitoh07
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 2783
Gender: male
Re: A Price on Carbon - Immediate Results
Reply #121 - Oct 20th, 2012 at 12:11pm
 
progressiveslol wrote on Oct 20th, 2012 at 12:03pm:
rabbitoh07 wrote on Oct 20th, 2012 at 11:58am:
progressiveslol wrote on Oct 20th, 2012 at 11:57am:
rabbitoh07 wrote on Oct 20th, 2012 at 11:48am:
progressiveslol wrote on Oct 20th, 2012 at 11:42am:
rabbitoh07 wrote on Oct 20th, 2012 at 11:37am:
progressiveslol wrote on Oct 20th, 2012 at 11:29am:
rabbitoh07 wrote on Oct 20th, 2012 at 11:18am:
progressiveslol wrote on Oct 20th, 2012 at 8:38am:
rabbitoh07 wrote on Oct 20th, 2012 at 6:20am:
progressiveslol wrote on Oct 19th, 2012 at 10:38pm:
rabbitoh07 wrote on Oct 19th, 2012 at 10:28pm:
Shane B wrote on Oct 19th, 2012 at 10:18pm:

Nice graph.

I hope Progressiveslol looks at it.

It shows very clearly that the earth has indeed been warming since 1997.

The rate of warming in 1997 was very high.  Not as high as 2005 - but still very high.

But overall - the eath has been warming every year since 1997 - at varying rates of increase.

Do you understand this Progressiveslol?

Do you need it explained to you in simpler terms?

The temperature anomoly has been positive every year since 1997 (and longer). 
Hence - the planet has been warming every year since 1997 (and longer). 

hmmm let me see if I can view it in your AGW eyes........ nope. 2 is bigger than 1, im pretty sure of that, but 1 is equal to 1, so.... 0.5 would be or can be assumed by my edumacation, to be equal to 0.5. Yep, I certainly cant see it in your AGW eyes.

You don't understand what that graph shows - do you.

It is the annual temperature above a baseline average.

Every year that the temperature anomaly is positive - means the earth is warming.

If the temperature were cooling, as you and Jonesy claim - then that graph would show predominantly negative values.  It doesn't.  Every single year represented in that graph THE TEMPERATURE ANOMALY IS POSITIVE.

Imagine that your mummy or daddy are driving their car.  When they press the accelerator - they accelerate.  They go faster.  If they press it hard - they will go faster at a greater rate than if they press it softly - but as long as they keep up some rate of positive acceleration - they will keep going faster.  That graph shows that the foot has been of the accelerator for the earth's temperature every year since 1997 (at least).

That is why the earth is warming.
That is why global glacial mass balance is decreasing
That is why sea level is rising
That is why the arctic Ice cap has shrunk to the lowest level ever recorded.

Alan Jones has been lying to you.  He has a problem with facts.  You should stop listening to him.  And you should definitely stop repeating his nonsense.  It indicates you are not very bright.

lol that is pathetic

so every year at 0.5 above some number someone made up, the baseline, is somehow different 16 years later at the same 0.5 degrees. Get a grip.

At 0.5 degrees above the baseline 16 years ago, is still the same 0.5 degrees above the baseline 16 years later. Meaning it has not warmed in 16 years. The baseline is static.

Talk about nutters from AGW.

Still having trouble aren't you.  But you seem like a bright kiddie trying to learn.  So let's try again shall we?

Imagine that your mummy and daddy give you pocket money every week.

The exact amount they give you differs each week - sometimes it is more than a dollar, sometimes it is less than a dollar - but over the course of a year the amount they give you averages out to exactly $1.00 per week.

Then suddenly - over a 16 week period they suddenly start giving you more than $1.00 every single week!  Some weeks it is $1.10, some weeks it is $1.50, some weeks it is $1.01 - whatever - but it is always more than $1.00 - the amount you were getting on average up till then.

Are you telling us that if this happened, you would run to your mummy and daddy in tears saying - "Why is my pocket money decreasing?!?!?!?"

So whats your answer little boy. You can play, I will just go onto more adult things.

Do you have any real arguments or is it all air in that head of yours.

We are still waiting for you to explain to us how you interpret 16 years of positive temperature anomalies, all greater than the 30 year base line average, as showing that temperature is decreasing?!?!?

It is completely illogical.

Could you show us any actual scientific study that suggests the planet's temperature has been decreasing?


Could you explain to us why, if as you and Jonesy say, the global temperature is decreasing,  why global glacial mass balance is decreasing
Could you explain to us why, if as you and Jonesy say, the global temperature is decreasing,  why sea level is rising
Could you explain to us why, if as you and Jonesy say, the global temperature is decreasing, why the arctic Ice cap has shrunk to the lowest level ever recorded.

Any answers?  Or still just placing your faith in what a shock jock with truth issues has told you?

Well there is your problem. Really, no need to thank me.

You seem to think that 2 is less than 1 or that 1 is less than 1 and to the point, that 0.5 is somehow less than 0.5.

No answers huh?

Just clinging to what Jonesy told you - in the face of all facts to the contrary.

What would cause global glacial mass balance to decrease - if the planet's temperature was decreasing?
What would cause global average seal level to increase - if the planet's temperature was decreasing?
What would cause the arctic ice cap to shrink to the lowest ever recorded level - if the planet's temperature was decreasing?

And how is it - when we have had 16 years in a row of average global temperatures which were in excess of the 30 year average global temperature - you interpret this as the earth's temperature decreasing?

Any answers?

If you want to be some kind of idiot, then go for it, but the answer is still the same.

I did not state the word decrease. You did.
0.5 is the same as 0.5. Even with it being warmer than a static baseline, it is still the same as 16 years ago.

Too bad co2 and temperature doesnt correlate, then you may seem to have a bit less air in that head of yours.

What would cause global glacial mass balance to decrease - if the planet's temperature was not increasing?
What would cause global average seal level to increase - if the planet's temperature was not increasing?
What would cause the arctic ice cap to shrink to the lowest ever recorded level - if the planet's temperature was not increasing?

And how is it - when we have had 16 years in a row of average global temperatures which were in excess of the 30 year average global temperature - you interpret this as the earth's temperature not increasing?

hmmm how is 0.5 equal to 0.5. Im stumped, how about you lol  Grin Grin Grin

Yes. 0.5 = 0.5.
0.5 degC was the temperature anomaly over the 1961-1990 average in 1997.
And 0.5 degC was the temperature anomaly over the 1961-1990 average in 2011.

Remarkable considering that 1997 was an El Nino year - the hottest ever recorded up till that time.  But 2011 was a La Nina year!!!!  A La Nina year  (again - the hottest ever recorded) that is as hot as the 1997 El Nino!!!

And of course - every single year between 1997 and 2011 likewise recorded temperature anomalies greater than the 1961-1990 average.  The global temperature has been very clearly and unambiguously increasing.

Given that - it is not surprising that we have also observed global glacial mass balance is decreasing, sea level is rising and the arctic Ice cap has shrunk to the lowest level ever recorded.


But the key point you need to take away from this Progs is that the planet is very clearly and unambiguously warming.  the only people who deny this nowdays are complete loons like your mate Jones.

Fitted linear trends in temperature anomalies are approximately 0.07 degC/decade from 1901 to 2010 and 0.17 degC/decade from 1979 to 2010 globally.
http://www.metoffice.gov.uk/hadobs/hadcrut4/HadCRUT4_accepted.pdf
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
rabbitoh07
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 2783
Gender: male
Re: A Price on Carbon - Immediate Results
Reply #122 - Oct 20th, 2012 at 12:12pm
 
progressiveslol wrote on Oct 20th, 2012 at 12:01pm:
Go look at the other drivers, you may learn something.

What other drivers may these be?

Please enlighten us!
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
progressiveslol
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 17029
Re: A Price on Carbon - Immediate Results
Reply #123 - Oct 20th, 2012 at 12:13pm
 
rabbitoh07 wrote on Oct 20th, 2012 at 12:11pm:
progressiveslol wrote on Oct 20th, 2012 at 12:03pm:
rabbitoh07 wrote on Oct 20th, 2012 at 11:58am:
progressiveslol wrote on Oct 20th, 2012 at 11:57am:
rabbitoh07 wrote on Oct 20th, 2012 at 11:48am:
progressiveslol wrote on Oct 20th, 2012 at 11:42am:
rabbitoh07 wrote on Oct 20th, 2012 at 11:37am:
progressiveslol wrote on Oct 20th, 2012 at 11:29am:
rabbitoh07 wrote on Oct 20th, 2012 at 11:18am:
progressiveslol wrote on Oct 20th, 2012 at 8:38am:
rabbitoh07 wrote on Oct 20th, 2012 at 6:20am:
progressiveslol wrote on Oct 19th, 2012 at 10:38pm:
rabbitoh07 wrote on Oct 19th, 2012 at 10:28pm:
Shane B wrote on Oct 19th, 2012 at 10:18pm:

Nice graph.

I hope Progressiveslol looks at it.

It shows very clearly that the earth has indeed been warming since 1997.

The rate of warming in 1997 was very high.  Not as high as 2005 - but still very high.

But overall - the eath has been warming every year since 1997 - at varying rates of increase.

Do you understand this Progressiveslol?

Do you need it explained to you in simpler terms?

The temperature anomoly has been positive every year since 1997 (and longer). 
Hence - the planet has been warming every year since 1997 (and longer). 

hmmm let me see if I can view it in your AGW eyes........ nope. 2 is bigger than 1, im pretty sure of that, but 1 is equal to 1, so.... 0.5 would be or can be assumed by my edumacation, to be equal to 0.5. Yep, I certainly cant see it in your AGW eyes.

You don't understand what that graph shows - do you.

It is the annual temperature above a baseline average.

Every year that the temperature anomaly is positive - means the earth is warming.

If the temperature were cooling, as you and Jonesy claim - then that graph would show predominantly negative values.  It doesn't.  Every single year represented in that graph THE TEMPERATURE ANOMALY IS POSITIVE.

Imagine that your mummy or daddy are driving their car.  When they press the accelerator - they accelerate.  They go faster.  If they press it hard - they will go faster at a greater rate than if they press it softly - but as long as they keep up some rate of positive acceleration - they will keep going faster.  That graph shows that the foot has been of the accelerator for the earth's temperature every year since 1997 (at least).

That is why the earth is warming.
That is why global glacial mass balance is decreasing
That is why sea level is rising
That is why the arctic Ice cap has shrunk to the lowest level ever recorded.

Alan Jones has been lying to you.  He has a problem with facts.  You should stop listening to him.  And you should definitely stop repeating his nonsense.  It indicates you are not very bright.

lol that is pathetic

so every year at 0.5 above some number someone made up, the baseline, is somehow different 16 years later at the same 0.5 degrees. Get a grip.

At 0.5 degrees above the baseline 16 years ago, is still the same 0.5 degrees above the baseline 16 years later. Meaning it has not warmed in 16 years. The baseline is static.

Talk about nutters from AGW.

Still having trouble aren't you.  But you seem like a bright kiddie trying to learn.  So let's try again shall we?

Imagine that your mummy and daddy give you pocket money every week.

The exact amount they give you differs each week - sometimes it is more than a dollar, sometimes it is less than a dollar - but over the course of a year the amount they give you averages out to exactly $1.00 per week.

Then suddenly - over a 16 week period they suddenly start giving you more than $1.00 every single week!  Some weeks it is $1.10, some weeks it is $1.50, some weeks it is $1.01 - whatever - but it is always more than $1.00 - the amount you were getting on average up till then.

Are you telling us that if this happened, you would run to your mummy and daddy in tears saying - "Why is my pocket money decreasing?!?!?!?"

So whats your answer little boy. You can play, I will just go onto more adult things.

Do you have any real arguments or is it all air in that head of yours.

We are still waiting for you to explain to us how you interpret 16 years of positive temperature anomalies, all greater than the 30 year base line average, as showing that temperature is decreasing?!?!?

It is completely illogical.

Could you show us any actual scientific study that suggests the planet's temperature has been decreasing?


Could you explain to us why, if as you and Jonesy say, the global temperature is decreasing,  why global glacial mass balance is decreasing
Could you explain to us why, if as you and Jonesy say, the global temperature is decreasing,  why sea level is rising
Could you explain to us why, if as you and Jonesy say, the global temperature is decreasing, why the arctic Ice cap has shrunk to the lowest level ever recorded.

Any answers?  Or still just placing your faith in what a shock jock with truth issues has told you?

Well there is your problem. Really, no need to thank me.

You seem to think that 2 is less than 1 or that 1 is less than 1 and to the point, that 0.5 is somehow less than 0.5.

No answers huh?

Just clinging to what Jonesy told you - in the face of all facts to the contrary.

What would cause global glacial mass balance to decrease - if the planet's temperature was decreasing?
What would cause global average seal level to increase - if the planet's temperature was decreasing?
What would cause the arctic ice cap to shrink to the lowest ever recorded level - if the planet's temperature was decreasing?

And how is it - when we have had 16 years in a row of average global temperatures which were in excess of the 30 year average global temperature - you interpret this as the earth's temperature decreasing?

Any answers?

If you want to be some kind of idiot, then go for it, but the answer is still the same.

I did not state the word decrease. You did.
0.5 is the same as 0.5. Even with it being warmer than a static baseline, it is still the same as 16 years ago.

Too bad co2 and temperature doesnt correlate, then you may seem to have a bit less air in that head of yours.

What would cause global glacial mass balance to decrease - if the planet's temperature was not increasing?
What would cause global average seal level to increase - if the planet's temperature was not increasing?
What would cause the arctic ice cap to shrink to the lowest ever recorded level - if the planet's temperature was not increasing?

And how is it - when we have had 16 years in a row of average global temperatures which were in excess of the 30 year average global temperature - you interpret this as the earth's temperature not increasing?

hmmm how is 0.5 equal to 0.5. Im stumped, how about you lol  Grin Grin Grin

Yes. 0.5 = 0.5.
0.5 degC was the temperature anomaly over the 1961-1990 average in 1997.
And 0.5 degC was the temperature anomaly over the 1961-1990 average in 2011.

Remarkable considering that 1997 was an El Nino year - the hottest ever recorded up till that time.  But 2011 was a La Nina year!!!!  A La Nina year  (again - the hottest ever recorded) that is as hot as the 1997 El Nino!!!

And of course - every single year between 1997 and 2011 likewise recorded temperature anomalies greater than the 1961-1990 average.  The global temperature has been very clearly and unambiguously increasing.

Given that - it is not surprising that we have also observed global glacial mass balance is decreasing, sea level is rising and the arctic Ice cap has shrunk to the lowest level ever recorded.


But the key point you need to take away from this Progs is that the planet is very clearly and unambiguously warming.  the only people who deny this nowdays are complete loons like your mate Jones.

Fitted linear trends in temperature anomalies are approximately 0.07 degC/decade from 1901 to 2010 and 0.17 degC/decade from 1979 to 2010 globally.
http://www.metoffice.gov.uk/hadobs/hadcrut4/HadCRUT4_accepted.pdf

As it does. Ask 1930's what type of SUV's it experienced.
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
progressiveslol
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 17029
Re: A Price on Carbon - Immediate Results
Reply #124 - Oct 20th, 2012 at 12:14pm
 
rabbitoh07 wrote on Oct 20th, 2012 at 12:12pm:
progressiveslol wrote on Oct 20th, 2012 at 12:01pm:
Go look at the other drivers, you may learn something.

What other drivers may these be?

Please enlighten us!

Come on now. Are you seriously telling me you dont know.
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
rabbitoh07
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 2783
Gender: male
Re: A Price on Carbon - Immediate Results
Reply #125 - Oct 20th, 2012 at 12:15pm
 
progressiveslol wrote on Oct 20th, 2012 at 12:13pm:
As it does. Ask 1930's what type of SUV's it experienced.

Is that supposed to make any sense at all?
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
progressiveslol
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 17029
Re: A Price on Carbon - Immediate Results
Reply #126 - Oct 20th, 2012 at 12:16pm
 
rabbitoh07 wrote on Oct 20th, 2012 at 12:15pm:
progressiveslol wrote on Oct 20th, 2012 at 12:13pm:
As it does. Ask 1930's what type of SUV's it experienced.

Is that supposed to make any sense at all?

Not to you. I think the 30's are beyond the agenda.
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
rabbitoh07
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 2783
Gender: male
Re: A Price on Carbon - Immediate Results
Reply #127 - Oct 20th, 2012 at 12:16pm
 
progressiveslol wrote on Oct 20th, 2012 at 12:14pm:
rabbitoh07 wrote on Oct 20th, 2012 at 12:12pm:
progressiveslol wrote on Oct 20th, 2012 at 12:01pm:
Go look at the other drivers, you may learn something.

What other drivers may these be?

Please enlighten us!

Come on now. Are you seriously telling me you dont know.


Drivers that would cause global glacial mass balance to decrease ?
and
that  would cause global average seal level to increase ?
and
that would cause the arctic ice cap to shrink to the lowest ever recorded level ?

No.  I don't know.  Seriously.

Please enlighten us.
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
MOTR
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 6646
Re: A Price on Carbon - Immediate Results
Reply #128 - Oct 20th, 2012 at 12:17pm
 
progressiveslol wrote on Oct 20th, 2012 at 12:10pm:
MOTR wrote on Oct 20th, 2012 at 12:07pm:

You got one with the late 20's to 40's. Nah wouldnt expect you would.


Look at the inset, progs.
Back to top
 

Hunt says Coalition accepts IPCC findings

"What does this mean? It means that we need to do practical things that actually reduce emissions."
 
IP Logged
 
rabbitoh07
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 2783
Gender: male
Re: A Price on Carbon - Immediate Results
Reply #129 - Oct 20th, 2012 at 12:17pm
 
progressiveslol wrote on Oct 20th, 2012 at 12:16pm:
rabbitoh07 wrote on Oct 20th, 2012 at 12:15pm:
progressiveslol wrote on Oct 20th, 2012 at 12:13pm:
As it does. Ask 1930's what type of SUV's it experienced.

Is that supposed to make any sense at all?

Not to you. I think the 30's are beyond the agenda.

Take a deep breath and use your words.

WTF are you on about?
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
MOTR
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 6646
Re: A Price on Carbon - Immediate Results
Reply #130 - Oct 20th, 2012 at 12:18pm
 
rabbitoh07 wrote on Oct 20th, 2012 at 12:16pm:
progressiveslol wrote on Oct 20th, 2012 at 12:14pm:
rabbitoh07 wrote on Oct 20th, 2012 at 12:12pm:
progressiveslol wrote on Oct 20th, 2012 at 12:01pm:
Go look at the other drivers, you may learn something.

What other drivers may these be?

Please enlighten us!

Come on now. Are you seriously telling me you dont know.


Drivers that would cause global glacial mass balance to decrease ?
and
that  would cause global average seal level to increase ?
and
that would cause the arctic ice cap to shrink to the lowest ever recorded level ?

No.  I don't know.  Seriously.

Please enlighten us.


Yes, progs, please enlighten us.
Back to top
 

Hunt says Coalition accepts IPCC findings

"What does this mean? It means that we need to do practical things that actually reduce emissions."
 
IP Logged
 
bambu
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 1084
Gender: male
Re: A Price on Carbon - Immediate Results
Reply #131 - Oct 20th, 2012 at 1:56pm
 
buzzanddidj wrote on Oct 19th, 2012 at 8:05am:
THE carbon tax has helped to drive a sharp fall in the emissions intensity of Australia's power generation as coal-fired stations are closed, moth-balled or sell less electricity.

As Victoria's Yallourn brown-coal-fired power station became the latest to announce a production cut, experts said falling demand for electricity, more renewables such as wind farms and solar, and
the carbon price
were all pushing Australia's coal-fired stations out of the market, making generation cleaner.


Electricity sold into the east coast market
in the three months since the tax was introduced created on average 7.6 per cent less carbon dioxide for each megawatt hour of power
, an analysis of figures compiled by the Australian Energy Market Operator shows.

The decline in emissions intensity was sharpest in South Australia (16.1 per cent) ...


Victoria's LOSS, South Australia's GAIN


http://www.ozpolitic.com/forum/YaBB.pl?num=1350555285


... and Victoria (8.7 per cent). In NSW it was 4.3 per cent.
The dip began in June, shortly before the introduction of carbon pricing, as the market began to factor in the change
.

http://www.smh.com.au/business/carbon-economy/power-demand-slump-sends-emissions...






There's less demand for electricity because many pensioners and others are staying in bed all winter, eating pet food, showering once a week [the electricity turned off for 6 days a week]etc ...as the 'politicians' keep jacking up the price of electricity to unaffordable levels.

Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
bambu
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 1084
Gender: male
Re: A Price on Carbon - Immediate Results
Reply #132 - Oct 20th, 2012 at 2:05pm
 
"Close all the coal-fired power stations"!!!!!

Lovely, and where do you think our electricity comes from? ...a few stoopid windmills and a few solar panels on people's houses?


"Tax the big polluters"!!!!!

Lovely, tax them out of business, only trouble is, as Alan Jones says "The big polluters are the big employers"!

With our national debt now at $175 billion or so, all money borrowed by Rudd, Gillard and co...this green energy nonsense is all unaffordable.

http://www.leaderandtimes.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=9487:...

Obama’s green energy is costing us more green than we can afford    
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
adelcrow
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 20133
everywhere
Gender: male
Re: A Price on Carbon - Immediate Results
Reply #133 - Oct 20th, 2012 at 2:06pm
 
bambu wrote on Oct 20th, 2012 at 1:56pm:
buzzanddidj wrote on Oct 19th, 2012 at 8:05am:
THE carbon tax has helped to drive a sharp fall in the emissions intensity of Australia's power generation as coal-fired stations are closed, moth-balled or sell less electricity.

As Victoria's Yallourn brown-coal-fired power station became the latest to announce a production cut, experts said falling demand for electricity, more renewables such as wind farms and solar, and
the carbon price
were all pushing Australia's coal-fired stations out of the market, making generation cleaner.


Electricity sold into the east coast market
in the three months since the tax was introduced created on average 7.6 per cent less carbon dioxide for each megawatt hour of power
, an analysis of figures compiled by the Australian Energy Market Operator shows.

The decline in emissions intensity was sharpest in South Australia (16.1 per cent) ...


Victoria's LOSS, South Australia's GAIN


http://www.ozpolitic.com/forum/YaBB.pl?num=1350555285


... and Victoria (8.7 per cent). In NSW it was 4.3 per cent.
The dip began in June, shortly before the introduction of carbon pricing, as the market began to factor in the change
.

http://www.smh.com.au/business/carbon-economy/power-demand-slump-sends-emissions...






There's less demand for electricity because many pensioners and others are staying in bed all winter, eating pet food, showering once a week [the electricity turned off for 6 days a week]etc ...as the 'politicians' keep jacking up the price of electricity to unaffordable levels.



Pet food is hardly a cheap alternative to fresh food so I assume people consuming it have mental health issues rather than financial problems.
Back to top
 

Go the Bunnies
 
IP Logged
 
rabbitoh07
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 2783
Gender: male
Re: A Price on Carbon - Immediate Results
Reply #134 - Oct 20th, 2012 at 2:07pm
 
bambu wrote on Oct 20th, 2012 at 1:56pm:
There's less demand for electricity because many pensioners and others are staying in bed all winter, eating pet food, showering once a week [the electricity turned off for 6 days a week]etc ...as the 'politicians' keep jacking up the price of electricity to unaffordable levels.


Pensioners like staying in bed all winter, eating pet food and showering once a week.  As like as that nice Jones man comes on the wireless every morning for them, they are as happy as Larry.
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
Pages: 1 ... 7 8 9 10 11 
Send Topic Print