Plain packaging is the way to go.

I think not.

Plain packaging smoking materials, will not for one moment stop me smoking. I started smoking at school when someone offered me one. Although I went a violent shade of green and coughed for England, I was pleasantly surprised at the feeling of relaxation it gave me.

In all my life I’ve never been seduced by the colour or style of the packaging. It’s always been about the quality of the product and the price.

Of course now the price, is everything, and that’s why the antismoking Tobacco control industry and the government are heading into a world of hurt with the idea of plain packaging.

Which brings me onto why plain packaging should be abandoned.

Counterfeiting.

The health zealots insist that this is unlikely to happen. They have to say that as otherwise their whole premise falls.

Here are some facts about counterfeiting that I found interesting,  especially as it comes from the garden of England, Kent.

A recent survey by MSIntelligence revealed Gillingham topped the table for having the worst habit when it comes to smoking counterfeit cigarettes, with more than half being illegal.

It found 54.5% of packets thrown away in the town had avoided tax, while Poole in Dorset came second (50.83%) and Worthing in Sussex third (49.24%). Mr Turner, who has owned the shop for the past 18 months, said: “When I heard about the plans for plain packaging I thought it was loopy.

Now I don’t live in the Medway area so unfortunately can’t avail myself of a cheaper product. But I would if I could. (If there’s bootlegger in West Kent reading this then please let me know).

These counterfeit ciggies can’t be that bad as I haven’t seen any reports that the people of Medway are dying like flies yet.

It seems that the government will be making a rod for it’s own back if it introduces plain packaging as revenues from tobacco products will fall dramatically.

For those antismoker out there. Mull on this.

Supposed costs for all smoking ailments costs the NHS £2.7 billion per annum.

However, revenue from tobacco products is £11 billion. Put that in your pipe and smoke it. (Oh I forgot, you’re antismoking bigots).

Believe it or not, smokers are subsidising the ailments of the antismokers.

So what if all smokers quit tomorrow.

The government would have to make up the shortfall.

Working out on the back of a fag packet (Natch), it would work out that every man, women, and child, would have to pay £250 to make up the shortfall.

So a family with two adults and two kids would be taxed £1,000 more per year.

This is the price you will pay if you're an antismoker. I hope you can afford it. I shall laugh like a drain when I read that dreadful Arnott from ASH has has her house repossessed because she can;t afford her mortgage.

It will serve you right.

The green bubble

Interesting video in a meaured way explaining why renewable energy will wreck the Australian economy.

Tim Le Roy's Overview

Current

• General Manager Vic/SA/NZ at Scottish Pacific Debtor Finance

Past

• Regional Manager Victoria - Business Banking at St.George Bank Ltd
• Business Banking Manager at ANZ
• BDM at Scottish Pacific Business Finance

Education

• St. John's College, Johannesburg

That’ll work then.

More green technology ideas. Having realised that wind turbines only supply power when the wind is blowing, a company is trying to imply that they have a solution to the problem.

Gaelectric Holdings Plc, the Dublin- based developer, is in discussions with infrastructure investors for a 300 million-pound ($466 million) project in Northern Ireland to store surplus energy from wind turbines.

Sounds like a good idea. Or does it?

Gaelectric’s plant will use excess electricity from turbines to power a motor that will drive a compressor to store air in an underground salt cavern. When demand is high, the air is released to run a turbine generating power, burning some natural gas at the same time to boost output.

Now air compressors, even low pressure, high volume, require quite a bit of power. So they’re losing some of their wind energy straight away.

Then the laughable fact that they think that they can contain all that semi free air in salt caverns.

When I was a marine engineer in a past life we relied on compressed air for a number of purposes, such as:

Starting diesel engines. (Ship’s don’t have starter motors and huge banks of batteries).

Air operated control systems.

General purpose air, (Power tools etc).

My point that I’m going to make is all that air at different pressures had to be stored for use.

We stored that air in steel pressure vessels fed by steel pipes.  Guess what? We could never, ever, stop that pesky air from escaping. We had automatic air compressors that had to keep them topped up.

So when that article mentioned storing compressed air in SALT caverns I burst out in hysterical laughter.

If steel pipes and steel pressure vessels with their fittings can’t stop leaking, what hope have we with salt caverns. FFS.

Then the article goes on to state that they are going to use that stored air, you’ve guessed it, in driving another wind turbine. It’s ludicrous. When you consider the losses of efficiencies throughout the whole process, then we are in for even more expensive elektrickery than at present.

But that’s alright though, they’ll supplement it with gas.

FFS(again). Why not simply generate power in a combined cycle gas turbine in the first place?

Engineering simplified.

 

Topblog

My blog stats have shot up today. Now that would seem to be a good thing you might say.

Hundreds have been visiting  from a URL named:

http://topblogstories.com/

Sounds great doesn’t it?

Nope. Do not click on that link if you’re in the office or your other half is around.

This is where it actually takes you.

Sex datings in Hastings.

Very very graphic.

Tax Simplified.

 

Honesty

The most honest three and a half minutes of television, EVER...

It would be nice if some of our politicians talked in plain language like that clip.

My past life.

43 years, man and boy. It’s a pity there are so few ships left. When I joined there were over 60.

Incidentally when I left, I was the longest serving person ever to have served in the RFA.

Still. The pension is good.

PS. The sister ship to the Wave Knight, the Wave Ruler, was the last one I sailed in.

Summer

I was looking on the web to update my summer holiday. Unfortunately I don’t think I’ll have a summer holiday in the UK this year.

Oh well. I’ll go to Portugal instead.

A most excellent letter.

Earlier I was reading an article in the Financial Times (As you do), when I came across this comment in the comments. It’s a letter to our esteemed (spits) Prime Minister exhorting him to get real where our energy policy is concerned.

I’m going to reproduce it in full here. I hope the author won’t take offence. It really hits all the right notes.

Yertizz | May 9 5:04pm | Permalink

In line with Nick Butler's excellent piece there follows the text of my letter to David Cameron:

29th April 2013

Dear Prime Minister,

Re: Energy Policy

It was with amazement and increasing trepidation that I read the front page article of the Mail on Sunday yesterday about plans to introduce ‘smart appliances’ designed to shut down at times of peak demand and to force users to pay astronomical energy prices for the privilege. I had to pinch myself and check the calendar several times to ensure the date was not 1st April!

What I was reading was an indication of a government in complete panic over energy policies which informed opinion tells us are destined to cripple the entire country in the next 2-5 years and all of which are driven by the Committee on Climate Change. The CCC is promoted as ‘independent’ yet it is funded by public money and stuffed with MP’s, only one of which as far as I can tell is a climate change sceptic and whose Chairman has his snout in the renewables trough. How that qualifies as independent is beyond parody. Additionally it seems to me that the CCC slavishly follows the gospel of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) without any consideration that the opposing views have any validity. In the past few years it has become self-evident the IPCC has its roots in flawed science. This was demonstrated by the failure of the Copenhagen conference 2 years ago to come anywhere near unanimity in approach and was further confirmed with the result of the Mexico meeting a few months ago.

In more recent times Professor James Lovelock, himself a founder member of the Green lobby, has recanted saying that no single contributory factor can be found to be responsible for climate change. Almost daily more independent peer-reviewed scientific evidence is emerging which supports the view that increasing levels of carbon dioxide do not materially add to global warming. In this context it is a complete mystery why increased atmospheric CO2, for which mankind is held responsible, is promulgated as the sole driver of climate change!

The only logical conclusion is that those who promote these fantasies stand to benefit from their beliefs and actions. For all the pain and anguish that will descend upon the people and businesses in this country there will be little or no advantages and in a global sense will have no effect whatsoever on emissions. Rather it will be nothing more than cynical political posturing on a Biblical scale.

Recently Drax power station began a £multi-billion conversion programme to burn biofuel (wood!) which will be imported from America at huge cost: and for what? Simply to satisfy the requirements of the ill-founded Climate Change Act which itself is driven by purely political EU directives. Yet Germany opened 2 new coal-fired stations last year, 6 more are due to open this year and a further 6 by 2020! Furthermore, in light of the events in Fukushima, Japan is to build more coal-fired plants as quickly as possible in the coming years. Then there is China currently opening a new coal-fired plant every four days and let’s not forget Russia and Brazil.

Meanwhile your government’s policies will ensure more of our coal-fired stations are closed in the coming years with absolutely no chance of renewables filling the void. Instead we will suffer power cuts and increasing energy bills; yet Employment and Pensions Minister Ian Duncan Smith chooses this time to suggest that pensioners, like me, give up our Winter Fuel Allowance! If ever there was a time for joined-up thinking now is it.

The only way I can see of getting out of this mess is to cancel the coal-fired closures until new gas and nuclear stations come on stream and ditch the odious Carbon Floor Price completely to show the EU how it’s done and, if Nick Clegg objects, show him the door.

It would be easy for you to simply dismiss these views as the hysterical ramblings of a climate change denier. Let me advise you of my stance on this: in almost 20 years’ involvement in the debate I have NEVER denied climate change but accept it as a normal and cyclical natural phenomenon supported by independent peer-reviewed scientific evidence. Neither am I ignorant of many of the factors which illuminate the debate. Before retirement over 5 years ago I spent nearly 50 years in the gas industry. I saw the emergence of natural gas and the impact it had, not only on what was a dying industry but upon the fortunes of the country at large. At the time of its discovery estimates told that there were some 20 years’ reserves. Here we are 50 years on and we still have not exhausted those reserves; which brings me to shale gas.

There, surely, lies the future for the energy industry in this country? Back in the 60’s the environmentalists of the day were issuing dire warnings of the consequences of drilling for natural gas. Some were even convinced that removal of the gas from its pockets beneath the sea bed would lead to it collapsing and draining the North Sea! Today’s warnings of the dangers of fracking leading to earthquakes and contamination of the aquifers must be regarded as the same fatuous nonsense.

If nothing is done to arrest the march of the Green Ideologues the future of our country is in mortal danger. I feel sure there are millions of voters, like me, who want their children and grandchildren to live in a country built upon common sense and honesty, not greed and obfuscation and that can keep them in plentiful, secure and continuous supplies of energy.

As you contemplate your reply (please don’t insult my intelligence by getting a researcher, intern or civil servant to respond parroting the party line) please be advised I will not accept any attempt to take the moral high ground as is so beloved of politicians. Do you wish your legacy to be as the Prime Minister who allowed his country to perish for the sake of political expediency or as a worthy equal of Margaret Thatcher? I have voted Conservative at every General Election since 1964 but unless there is some serious re-arrangement of energy policy I will have to change the habit of a lifetime at the next one.

Good innit