Fairer, Greener? Dumber, darker.

[CollioureViews]

Do you hear "Green Party" and think, "I love me muh envrionment"?
You probably do. Who doesn't?
We all love the environment. I like, uhh, animals and shit...

So, naturally, we associate sustainable initiatives with any group that slaps "Green" over all their marketing.
But have you ever questioned how effective your local Green Party's ambitions would actually be?
This thread will lightly touch on such proposals, with Green Party UK as a case study. ​

---

What do the Greens want?


"The UK’s current climate targets do not reflect the urgency of the climate crisis. We would push the Government to transition to a zero-carbon society as soon as possible, and more than a decade ahead of 2050." - A bunch of dumb fucks


On its face, it sounds reasonable, right?
A significant challenge, given the UK's total final energy consumption in 2024 was approximately 1,400 to 1,500 TWh [1], of which only 320 TWh was for electricity [1], but doable, right?.


How will they do it?


- Phasing out all Nuclear power [2] ??????
- Phasing out all fossil fuels [2]
- Phasing out all Biofuels [2]
- Fining frequent flyers [3]
- Banning some domestic flights [3]
- Nationalising railway, energy, and water companies [3]
- Ambiguous objectives to "get us walking" 50% of our trips (turning off our cars, perhaps?) [4]
- Transitioning to a 70/30 split of wind/solar for UK energy [2]

Is this realistic?


Seriously, think about those proposals.
Will they actually deliver the goal of a "zero carbon electricity supply"?


Well, to survive a week with no wind or sun on a renewables-only grid, we'd need at least 100 TWh of storage [5]. And we currently have...? In the order of 13 GWh [6], or thousands of times smaller, worth of battery storage, never mind other currently non-existent forms of storage needed.


AND THAT'S JUST FOR CURRENT ELECTRICITY DEMAND, NOT ENERGY USAGE CURRENTLY ON FOSSIL FUELS LIKE TRANSPORT OR HEATING.


Plus, as far as I recall, getting these batteries together ain't exactly "eco-friendly", or even people-friendly for that matter [7]:

Not to mention an EV needs over 6x the mineral inputs as a conventional car [8]. It's estimated that to reach a net zero scenario globally by 2040, there'd need to be a 4,200% increase in lithium demand and a 2,500% increase in graphite [9].


In essence, that's impossible. So, we'd effectively still be importing nuclear from France, Oil & Gas from Norway, and LPG from the USA, by 2050.


And for fuck sakes. Every little shitty item in our homes says "Made in China" on the reverse. How do you think they power their manufacturing???


There is so much more content here, but I'm bored now...


Fuck the "Greens"​

Spoiler: Sources

Sources:
[1] - https://www.gov.uk/government/stati...k-2025/energy-consumption-in-the-uk-ecuk-2025
[2] - https://greenparty.org.uk/about/our-manifesto/powering-up-fairer-greener-energy/
[3] - https://greenparty.org.uk/about/our-manifesto/creating-a-fairer-greener-economy/
[4] - https://greenparty.org.uk/about/our-manifesto/fairer-greener-transport/
[5] - https://royalsociety.org/-/media/po...ge/large-scale-electricity-storage-report.pdf
[6] - https://www.energy-storage.news/ano...-for-uk-battery-storage-as-4gwh-comes-online/
[7] - https://www.aljazeera.com/gallery/2022/11/4/dr-congos-faltering-fight-against-illegal-cobalt-mines
[8] - https://www.iea.org/reports/the-rol...in-clean-energy-transitions/executive-summary
[9] - https://www.iea.org/reports/the-rol...ral-requirements-for-clean-energy-transitions​

​

 

[Final Fantasy]

can we get a tldr

 

[ewri]

Bro, wtf is that title

 

[CollioureViews]

Bro, wtf is that title

Made sense when I wrote it.

Can't remember why...

 

[CollioureViews]

can we get a tldr

The transition to net zero by 2050, as articulated by the Greens in the UK, is technically infeasible, leaving you relying on fossil fuel imports for energy, as is already the case, only with higher taxes.

 

[CollioureViews]

@optimisticzoomer @Seth Walsh @Jason Voorhees @Brava @irrumator praetor @pleasevanity

 

[Divineincel]

Do you hear "Green Party" and think, "I love me muh envrionment"?
You probably do. Who doesn't?
We all love the environment. I like, uhh, animals and shit...

So, naturally, we associate sustainable initiatives with any group that slaps "Green" over all their marketing.
But have you ever questioned how effective your local Green Party's ambitions would actually be?
This thread will lightly touch on such proposals, with Green Party UK as a case study. ​

---

What do the Greens want?


"The UK’s current climate targets do not reflect the urgency of the climate crisis. We would push the Government to transition to a zero-carbon society as soon as possible, and more than a decade ahead of 2050." - A bunch of dumb fucks


On its face, it sounds reasonable, right?
A significant challenge, given the UK's total final energy consumption in 2024 was approximately 1,400 to 1,500 TWh [1], of which only 320 TWh was for electricity [1], but doable, right?.


How will they do it?


- Phasing out all Nuclear power [2] ??????
- Phasing out all fossil fuels [2]
- Phasing out all Biofuels [2]
- Fining frequent flyers [3]
- Banning some domestic flights [3]
- Nationalising railway, energy, and water companies [3]
- Ambiguous objectives to "get us walking" 50% of our trips (turning off our cars, perhaps?) [4]
- Transitioning to a 70/30 split of wind/solar for UK energy [2]

Is this realistic?


Seriously, think about those proposals.
Will they actually deliver the goal of a "zero carbon electricity supply"?


Well, to survive a week with no wind or sun on a renewables-only grid, we'd need at least 100 TWh of storage [5]. And we currently have...? In the order of 13 GWh [6], or thousands of times smaller, worth of battery storage, never mind other currently non-existent forms of storage needed.


AND THAT'S JUST FOR CURRENT ELECTRICITY DEMAND, NOT ENERGY USAGE CURRENTLY ON FOSSIL FUELS LIKE TRANSPORT OR HEATING.


Plus, as far as I recall, getting these batteries together ain't exactly "eco-friendly", or even people-friendly for that matter [7]:


View attachment 5047462


Not to mention an EV needs over 6x the mineral inputs as a conventional car [8]. It's estimated that to reach a net zero scenario globally by 2040, there'd need to be a 4,200% increase in lithium demand and a 2,500% increase in graphite [9].


In essence, that's impossible. So, we'd effectively still be importing nuclear from France, Oil & Gas from Norway, and LPG from the USA, by 2050.


And for fuck sakes. Every little shitty item in our homes says "Made in China" on the reverse. How do you think they power their manufacturing???


There is so much more content here, but I'm bored now...


Fuck the "Greens"​

Spoiler: Sources

Sources:
[1] - https://www.gov.uk/government/stati...k-2025/energy-consumption-in-the-uk-ecuk-2025
[2] - https://greenparty.org.uk/about/our-manifesto/powering-up-fairer-greener-energy/
[3] - https://greenparty.org.uk/about/our-manifesto/creating-a-fairer-greener-economy/
[4] - https://greenparty.org.uk/about/our-manifesto/fairer-greener-transport/
[5] - https://royalsociety.org/-/media/po...ge/large-scale-electricity-storage-report.pdf
[6] - https://www.energy-storage.news/ano...-for-uk-battery-storage-as-4gwh-comes-online/
[7] - https://www.aljazeera.com/gallery/2022/11/4/dr-congos-faltering-fight-against-illegal-cobalt-mines
[8] - https://www.iea.org/reports/the-rol...in-clean-energy-transitions/executive-summary
[9] - https://www.iea.org/reports/the-rol...ral-requirements-for-clean-energy-transitions​

​

We must liberate the earth and end this capitalism or socialism nonsense. Going back to pre industrial times is the way. We will do everything in our power to destroy the current system

 

[CollioureViews]

We must liberate the earth and end this capitalism or socialism nonsense. Going back to pre industrial times is the way. We will do everything in our power to destroy the current system

I agree.

I think the cure to these environmental issues is more innovation, not retardation.

Technology created the issue; it'll solve it too.

 

[Divineincel]

I agree.

I think the cure to these environmental issues is more innovation, not retardation.

Technology created the issue; it'll solve it too.

we must destroy all kinds off technology. There are too many people in the world right now all thanks to technology. Technology so far is only serving reptilians not us

 

[CollioureViews]

we must destroy all kinds off technology. There are too many people in the world right now all thanks to technology. Technology so far is only serving reptilians not us

Too true, king.

We need more tech.

Chips in our brains. Digital IDs. Unlimited energy.

Keep preaching, brother.

 

[irrumator praetor]

Do you hear "Green Party" and think, "I love me muh envrionment"?
You probably do. Who doesn't?
We all love the environment. I like, uhh, animals and shit...

So, naturally, we associate sustainable initiatives with any group that slaps "Green" over all their marketing.
But have you ever questioned how effective your local Green Party's ambitions would actually be?
This thread will lightly touch on such proposals, with Green Party UK as a case study. ​

---

What do the Greens want?


"The UK’s current climate targets do not reflect the urgency of the climate crisis. We would push the Government to transition to a zero-carbon society as soon as possible, and more than a decade ahead of 2050." - A bunch of dumb fucks


On its face, it sounds reasonable, right?
A significant challenge, given the UK's total final energy consumption in 2024 was approximately 1,400 to 1,500 TWh [1], of which only 320 TWh was for electricity [1], but doable, right?.


How will they do it?


- Phasing out all Nuclear power [2] ??????
- Phasing out all fossil fuels [2]
- Phasing out all Biofuels [2]
- Fining frequent flyers [3]
- Banning some domestic flights [3]
- Nationalising railway, energy, and water companies [3]
- Ambiguous objectives to "get us walking" 50% of our trips (turning off our cars, perhaps?) [4]
- Transitioning to a 70/30 split of wind/solar for UK energy [2]

Is this realistic?


Seriously, think about those proposals.
Will they actually deliver the goal of a "zero carbon electricity supply"?


Well, to survive a week with no wind or sun on a renewables-only grid, we'd need at least 100 TWh of storage [5]. And we currently have...? In the order of 13 GWh [6], or thousands of times smaller, worth of battery storage, never mind other currently non-existent forms of storage needed.


AND THAT'S JUST FOR CURRENT ELECTRICITY DEMAND, NOT ENERGY USAGE CURRENTLY ON FOSSIL FUELS LIKE TRANSPORT OR HEATING.


Plus, as far as I recall, getting these batteries together ain't exactly "eco-friendly", or even people-friendly for that matter [7]:


View attachment 5047462


Not to mention an EV needs over 6x the mineral inputs as a conventional car [8]. It's estimated that to reach a net zero scenario globally by 2040, there'd need to be a 4,200% increase in lithium demand and a 2,500% increase in graphite [9].


In essence, that's impossible. So, we'd effectively still be importing nuclear from France, Oil & Gas from Norway, and LPG from the USA, by 2050.


And for fuck sakes. Every little shitty item in our homes says "Made in China" on the reverse. How do you think they power their manufacturing???


There is so much more content here, but I'm bored now...


Fuck the "Greens"​

Spoiler: Sources

Sources:
[1] - https://www.gov.uk/government/stati...k-2025/energy-consumption-in-the-uk-ecuk-2025
[2] - https://greenparty.org.uk/about/our-manifesto/powering-up-fairer-greener-energy/
[3] - https://greenparty.org.uk/about/our-manifesto/creating-a-fairer-greener-economy/
[4] - https://greenparty.org.uk/about/our-manifesto/fairer-greener-transport/
[5] - https://royalsociety.org/-/media/po...ge/large-scale-electricity-storage-report.pdf
[6] - https://www.energy-storage.news/ano...-for-uk-battery-storage-as-4gwh-comes-online/
[7] - https://www.aljazeera.com/gallery/2022/11/4/dr-congos-faltering-fight-against-illegal-cobalt-mines
[8] - https://www.iea.org/reports/the-rol...in-clean-energy-transitions/executive-summary
[9] - https://www.iea.org/reports/the-rol...ral-requirements-for-clean-energy-transitions​

​

they're not even a serious sort of thing because the whole shit was made up so that there would be an energy alternative made before the iran war

 

[CollioureViews]

they're not even a serious sort of thing because the whole shit was made up so that there would be an energy alternative made before the iran war

It's more of a commentary on the entire conversation.

We are all environmentalists these days, compared to 100 years ago.

We're all massively more aware of our impact on the environment.

But groups that fashion themselves as "Green" attempt to monopolise the discussion, the conceit being that their proposals are less likely to deliver on the ultimate goal.

The indoctrination starts young - https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/01402382.2025.2466122#abstract

In other words, the "Greens" and climate radicals are dragging every party left of centre (and even centre right) further into their lunacy. This is a global phenomenon.

 

[swaggers]

reform and right-wingers are usually less educated than left-wingers

theres a reason for that

 

[CollioureViews]

reform and right-wingers are usually less educated than left-wingers

theres a reason for that

I'm not sure what thread you're tryna weave here?

Both ends of the political spectrum have their intelligentsia and formal doctrines.

If you mean that academia has been overtaken by left-wing sympathisers, therefore naturally producing more left-wing voters, I'd agree.

Both sides have masses of low-information voters.

Finally, there's a huge difference between formal schooling and political awareness.

 

[swaggers]

I'm not sure what thread you're tryna weave here?

Both ends of the political spectrum have their intelligentsia and formal doctrines.

If you mean that academia has been overtaken by left-wing sympathisers, therefore naturally producing more left-wing voters, I'd agree.

Both sides have masses of low-information voters.

Finally, there's a huge difference between formal schooling and political awareness.

Academia hasn't been taken over by left-wing sympathisers

People are not in universities/colleges because they are left winged,
They are left winged because they are in universities/colleges

People who are left-winged tend to be more educated than their right-winged counterparts, I think that says enough about the difference between both sides.

Both sides have masses of low-information voters.

There is a higher-percentage of poorly educated right-wing voters

 

[CollioureViews]

They are left winged because they are in universities/colleges

That's literally the point I was making...

Can you read???

I'm arguing it's a positive feedback loop. Ever heard of an echo-chamber? Nah, those only exist with the "muh fascist right".

You're arbitrarily asserting that higher education leads to a lean left.

Can you substantiate why that would happen, or does it just come out of the ether?

Academia hasn't been taken over by left-wing sympathisers

Are you arguing against yourself now?

Left-wing sympathisers haven't taken it over, yet "They are left winged because they are in universities/colleges"

reform and right-wingers are usually less educated than left-wingers

theres a reason for that

Remember this?

Bro's shadowboxing Reform outta nowhere.

You come out with this gem of a non-sequiter in a thread focused solely on the poor energy policies of one party.

Nowhere did I mention an alternative. Certainly not Reform (the cunts).

By the way, there are many climate scientists (liberal leaning field, by the way) who agree that the Green Party's energy policies would be an abject failure.

You are one of the dumbest fucks I've encountered on this forum.

 

[swaggers]

That's literally the point I was making...

Can you read???

I'm arguing it's a positive feedback loop. Ever heard of an echo-chamber? Nah, those only exist with the "muh fascist right".

You're arbitrarily asserting that higher education leads to a lean left.

Can you substantiate why that would happen, or does it just come out of the ether?

Are you arguing against yourself now?

Left-wing sympathisers haven't taken it over, yet "They are left winged because they are in universities/colleges"



Remember this?

Bro's shadowboxing Reform outta nowhere.

You come out with this gem of a non-sequiter in a thread focused solely on the poor energy policies of one party.

Nowhere did I mention an alternative. Certainly not Reform (the cunts).

By the way, there are many climate scientists (liberal leaning field, by the way) who agree that the Green Party's energy policies would be an abject failure.

You are one of the dumbest fucks I've encountered on this forum.

JFL nigga


People are left winged because theyre in uni / college because of the fact that being in higher education requires a higher intelligence and level of critical thinking

 

[CollioureViews]

JFL nigga


People are left winged because theyre in uni / college because of the fact that being in higher education requires a higher intelligence and level of critical thinking

Why do you even bother replying at this point?

Honestly?

If your responses are gonna be this bad.

I'm dropping the insults at this point.

If you read what I wrote, REALLY CAREFULLY, you'll realise you didn't actually engage with anything I said in a new way.

This was the actual chain of the conversation:

1. OP on Green's bad energy policies ->
2. Your non-sequiter about low-info Reform/right-wing voters ->
3. A back and forth on your rebuttal (which I won) ->
4. Me reminding you that the original post was about energy policies, with no alternatives suggested ->
5. You ignoring that, whilst also not offering a sharper/different argument about how higher education produces left-wing ideological sympathy

 

[swaggers]

3. A back and forth on your rebuttal (which I won) ->

did this nigga js hand himself a win

If you read what I wrote, REALLY CAREFULLY, you'll realise you didn't actually engage with anything I said in a new way.

DNR to all right wing posts nigger

5. You ignoring that, whilst also not offering a sharper/different argument about how higher education produces left-wing ideological sympathy

higher education produces left-leaning people because higher education requires a high level of critical thinking and intelligence