eliotness

Looks like they though "all was done and dusted", just the Irish to beat.  Ooops ! 

This self inflicted problem just grows and grows.  The eventual outcome is in the balance, but the indications are that it's going to turn very nasty within the next few years.

Just a few  months ago the government stated that the unrest in the South was reducing. Since that statement things seem to have actually got worse.  RIP soldiers,, your leaders have lost the plot.

Why does the official media always confuse "sustainability" and "sufficiency", they are two very different concepts ?

Old news really.  I read the report in November 2015.  It's worth a look.  The scale of the pollution emitted by Thailand should have been addressed years ago.  It (we) releases more litter into the sea than the whole of the EU with a much smaller coastline and a much smaller population.  When talking to Thais, if they can't sell it, e.g. bottles, cardboard, metal etc, then they just shrug their shoulders.  Some might say it's a cultural problem, but plastic bags have only been here for about 50 years, probably much less, so maybe it's just being lazy and not caring about future generations.

Sustainable development and sufficiency economy are not the same and can never be.  I guess someone in the government  needs a copy of the Oxford English Dictionary.

We have a similar problem caused by a mushroom farm just 200 metres up the road.  The owners have stated that if we (us and neighbouring houses) wish them to stop growing mushrooms, then we must pay them.  No such thing as planning permission here.  When we built the house 11 years ago, the site was just a glade in the forest.  Up to 3 years ago everything was good, but now it's impossible to sit on my patio having a quiet beer without a plague of flies coming to join me.  So not just rubbish dumps are responsible.

They are still in a state of denial over the vote to leave.  I suspect much more BS to come before the end of March, with, of course, the BBC doing its Remoaner bit at every chance it gets.

Trying to find out which other countries took part, but the story link at the end of the article is the wrong one !

Banksters offering yet more debt !

I wonder how many were certified to the ISO standard.  I've experienced companies claiming CSR,  but so much "window dressing", just scratch below the glossy surface and you find the real truth.  Not knocking Thailand because this a worldwide problem. 

So much hot air.  Transport, waste management, shopping mals with huge aircons are just a few sectors that aren't being addressed sustainably.  Assuming one believes in global warming, then Thailand is only scratching the surface, but then compared to China and India they are only minnows in a sea of some very big fish.

Banksters all of them.  Come the revolution 2nd up against the wall.  The politicians would of course be first.  Hey silly dream I know, but sometimes fantasy really happens !???

I think the best solution is to call for a general election asap and then see how many remoaning MPs hold onto their seats !

1984 over again !

Is there no Ministry of the Environment to protect the environment ?

1 hour ago, somo said:

This will do very little to help. In Dec market forces should push the price above 2 Baht unless the Chinese give up on Thailand altogether. At 1,90 it is hardly worth doing. I am switching to producing bamboo shoots and plants for the European market.

Last year we got just 2 baht per kg.  Even at that price we suffered a loss.  It seems the middle men are due to make a good profit, just like what happened with the rice scheme.

Such a rise in sea levels would be worldwide as all the oceans are interconnected.  Should that happen, then there will be far more to worry about than one remote NASA tracking station.  Yet another GW  scare story methinks !

Recent reports stated that the European banks and the Euro were in a very fragile state, so any such move would seem to be "out of the frying pan and into the fire".  Yet another Brexit scare story !

17 hours ago, RuamRudy said:

What a bizarre statement. According to this, around 800,000 Scots live in England. Scotland's population is around 5.3 million. That is more than 800,000 so you are incorrect.

 

Presumably they provide a function - then that function would also be required by an independent Scotland, albeit in a more slimmed down and (hopefully) efficient form.

 

Well Thatcher did her damndest to kill it off in the 80s. According to this, there are around 2,400 people working in shipbuilding in the Clyde. While those jobs are, without a doubt, important, do we hold back the nation because of the potential loss of RN orders? Will an independent Scotland not require ships? Will we be unable to sustain shipbuilding without our mighty southern benefactors?

 

Are you sure? The number seems very disputed, however either way, many jobs will be created during the removal and decommissioning of Trident from Faslane, and the opening up of the area to development will create many more, not to mention the removal of the moratorium on producing oil from the Clyde Basin.

 

Oil prices are on the rise and OPEC finally appears to have gotten its house in order, however no economy should be based upon a volatile market, and thankfully Scotland has a modern, diverse economy, not to mention being a world leader in renewable energy..

 

Examples, please, or is this just a huge chip on your shoulder?

You are of course correct, the population of Scotland is 5.3 million, of whom 800,000 live and work in England and over 200,000  in Wales.  So that means the number of Scots who actually live and work in Scotland is less than 4.3 million.  The English and Welsh figures does not include the children of Scottish parents born in England.

As for the other points, I think you are wrong, but respect your right to be wrong.  As for the chip on my shoulder, that from a Scotsman, which I presume you are, is so funny.

27 minutes ago, harleyclarkey said:

It's just started.

 

The spat between Unilever and Tesco is but the start of rising prices, inflation and a long road to recovery.

 

If you think the EC will reward the UK for leaving the EC and slapping them in the face you are not in the real world.

 

Single market access, with zero tolerance, will depend on;

1. Free movement of goods and people.

 

2. The UK will still have to pay in billions to the EC or ignore the single market.

 

Boreis (sic) Johnson and that twit Nigel Farage have done the UK no service. Patriots? That's a laugh. Their lies and more lies in their campaigns were a total falsehood.

Just one lie....." During the EU referendum, Vote Leave claimed leaving the EU could save the UK £350m a week in contributions.  But an unnamed cabinet minister has told Newsnight that the UK may end up "paying quite a lot" of that money to secure access to the single market. "   (BBC)

 

Wait for Scotland to have their second referendum and watch the break up of their beloved UK. 

Nice one Boys.

If Scotland does vote to leave the UK it would be political and economic suicide.  More "Scots" live and work in England than do in Scotland.  Just imagine they'd all need work permits.  All the government agencies that moved North of Hadrian's Wall would move South, creating a surge of jobs in the rest of the UK.  All RN ships would be built in England or NI, the Clyde would die.  They may not like Faslane, but it provides thousands of related jobs.  Oil prices will remain low, but fracking will boost the UK without the need for Scottish oil.  The SNP are just full of BS and the Remainers are backing a losing horse - again !!!

35 minutes ago, ilostmypassword said:

Embarrasing in the sense that a thoughtful person should be embarrassed to ask such a question.  Compared to the huge reduction in global warming, an infinitesimal amount of CO2 was generated.  What comments likeJetssetBkk demonstrate is mathematical cluelessness.  I don't know if you are in business or not, but if so, I certainly hope you don't use a similar criterion to evaluate cost vs. benefit.

Ah ! surely you mean Climate Change.  Global Warming has been on hold for a few decades, climate change is now the new religion.  But one would hope that all the high priests of "climate change" would use something like a video link to hold such meetings instead of a few days junket in Rwanda.  If they ever hold a meeting in Sheffield (UK) or Detroit (USA) then I'd listen, but the list of exotic destinations for such meetings show these priests have absolutely no shame.

Just an aside, why was the meeting held in Rwanda and how much CO2 was emitted flying all those so environmentally concerned delegates to such an exotic location, never mind the accommodation and "entertainment" provided.

Bit confusing the last couple of lines as coal fired power stations don't emit HFCs and although HFCS global warming potential is measured in CO2 equivalents it doesn't mean banning them will actually reduce CO2 in the atmosphere.  Unfortunately the time scale proposed is quite generous (to the manufactures) and HFCs tend to be persistent.  CFCs were a much different matter as they were proven to deplete the ozone layer, which is much more clear cut than the environmental effect of HFCs. Pretty ironic that HFCs were introduced to replace the "bad" CFCs.   What isn't made clear is what they will replace HFCs with ???

But but but General Canute said no floods ! ???