Register to Comment
Page 7 of 7 FirstFirst ... 567
Results 61 to 70 of 70
  1. #61
    BarryW BarryW is offline

    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Posts
    4,404

    Todays Star sums it up well really



    Another fabulous PR triumph for the highly professional "Government Information Service" (headed up by Mandy Johnston - an old friend of the Star Newspaper as it happens )
    Sign in or Register Now to reply

  2. #62
    SPN SPN is offline

    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    17,603

    The most optimistic estimates on Peak Oil have it occuring about 2015, just about the time FFailure intend to stop building Motorways.

    Wouldn't it make more sense to spend our current wealth on future-proofing our economy (by making it less reliant on oil & gas) instead of building glory projects that emulate those Germany built in the 30s, USA in the 40s, UK in the 60s and France in the 70s.

    Ireland is 90% dependent on imported energy. The European average is 50%. Our competitors can cope with increasing oil prices because it has proportionally less impact on their economy.

    We are dependent, more and more, on Natural Gas that comes by pipeline from Siberia and Algeria. The UK is forecasting supply shortages tis winter - how will we manage if they are draining the pipe?

    FFailure's damp squib dog & pony show tells us all we need to know about these clowns. All bread & circuses, short term eye candy for the proles, sugar coated contract opportunities for the Ballybrit Tent Set, but no vision of the bigger picture and preparing the Country to cope in the future.

    ... and then some muppet goes and describes The Buffalo as "competent"!

    Sheeeesh!
    Sign in or Register Now to reply

  3. #63
    joemomma joemomma is offline

    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Posts
    3,628

    Quote Originally Posted by Biffo
    For people to criticise on the basis of a lack of an implementation policy at this time is a nonsense, the strategy comes first the tactical approach comes after. However I do hope the budgets are flexible as it is impossible for anybody (even somebody as competent as the minister for finance) to estimate, with exact accuracy, at this stage how much all the proposals will cost or how long it will take to achieve them.
    That would all be fine if anything in the plan were new, but each of the elements of the plan has been around for years. All that is new is that the Government is telling us they intend to implement them. If they're not going to give us the detail of how they're going to implement them, then excuse me if I stifle a yawn.

    It's worth noting that many elements of the plan have been previously committed to by this government and not progressed. Worse still, one element - the joining of the Luas lines in the city centre - was previously in the works before being knocked on the head by this Government eight years ago. Detailed implementation plans were available for that scheme but will naturally have to be re-done now. Great is the joy in heaven when a sinner repenteth and all that, but this is ridiculous.
    Sign in or Register Now to reply

  4. #64
    pluralist pluralist is offline

    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Posts
    2,713

    Quote Originally Posted by SPN
    The most optimistic estimates on Peak Oil have it occuring about 2015, just about the time FFailure intend to stop building Motorways.

    Wouldn't it make more sense to spend our current wealth on future-proofing our economy (by making it less reliant on oil & gas) instead of building glory projects that emulate those Germany built in the 30s, USA in the 40s, UK in the 60s and France in the 70s.

    Ireland is 90% dependent on imported energy. The European average is 50%. Our competitors can cope with increasing oil prices because it has proportionally less impact on their economy.

    We are dependent, more and more, on Natural Gas that comes by pipeline from Siberia and Algeria. The UK is forecasting supply shortages tis winter - how will we manage if they are draining the pipe?
    But surely rail projects are a good idea then?
    Sign in or Register Now to reply

  5. #65
    Biffo Biffo is offline

    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Posts
    1,452

    Quote Originally Posted by joemomma
    Quote Originally Posted by Biffo
    For people to criticise on the basis of a lack of an implementation policy at this time is a nonsense, the strategy comes first the tactical approach comes after. However I do hope the budgets are flexible as it is impossible for anybody (even somebody as competent as the minister for finance) to estimate, with exact accuracy, at this stage how much all the proposals will cost or how long it will take to achieve them.
    That would all be fine if anything in the plan were new, but each of the elements of the plan has been around for years. All that is new is that the Government is telling us they intend to implement them. If they're not going to give us the detail of how they're going to implement them, then excuse me if I stifle a yawn.

    It's worth noting that many elements of the plan have been previously committed to by this government and not progressed. Worse still, one element - the joining of the Luas lines in the city centre - was previously in the works before being knocked on the head by this Government eight years ago. Detailed implementation plans were available for that scheme but will naturally have to be re-done now. Great is the joy in heaven when a sinner repenteth and all that, but this is ridiculous.
    I don’t know your political allegiance, its safe to assume you support one of the opposition parties. Off the top of my head I would suggest that one of the reasons for a transport policy being scrapped would be that the estimates at the time were not correct, which resulted in the department not being able to afford all of what they promised. This problem has been rectified as is evidenced by many of the most recent infrastructural projects coming in on time and on budget(in some cases under). The proposed investment announced yesterday will be subject to the same strict criteria as the recently successful ones.
    This will come down to who the electorate trust more to achieve what is proposed the current government or the opposition. I would suggest as the ones who announced the proposal that it may just be the government. I’m sure you disagree, but what can you do.
    Sign in or Register Now to reply

  6. #66
    joemomma joemomma is offline

    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Posts
    3,628

    Quote Originally Posted by Biffo
    I don’t know your political allegiance, its safe to assume you support one of the opposition parties.
    I'll save you the bother of trying to work it out, I'm a Green.

    Off the top of my head I would suggest that one of the reasons for a transport policy being scrapped would be that the estimates at the time were not correct, which resulted in the department not being able to afford all of what they promised.
    I'm talking about projects like the Metro to the airport, which has been announced several times, with completion dates attached, but has never been included as a budget line in any department's estimates. The linking of the Luas lines I believe was scrapped for non-budgetary reasons.

    This will come down to who the electorate trust more to achieve what is proposed the current government or the opposition. I would suggest as the ones who announced the proposal that it may just be the government. I’m sure you disagree, but what can you do.
    What possible significance can the fact that the government announced it have? Obviously only the government can make these sorts of announcements. What people judge a government on is not what they announce, but what they deliver.
    Sign in or Register Now to reply

  7. #67
    Pax Pax is offline

    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    3,841

    Quote Originally Posted by KingKane
    An electrified rail network would mean that if we were to happen upon an efficient method of generating power from wind, wave or tidal power, we could plug it into the grid for the rail network. No such ease with the road network.
    Given what is going to happen, and speaking of transport technologies here, we should be looking at the most efficient rail transport for people and goods and making plans for the future viability of such technologies as say Inductrack Maglev trains (possibly running in vacuum tubes), and the possibility of large scale renewables and microrenewables to power them.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inductrack
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magnetic_levitation_train
    http://www.skytran.net/press/sciam01.htm

    http://www.skytran.net/press/sciam03.htm
    ....The tests verified our predictions of the Inductrack's performance and proved that the concept is workable. What is more, a preliminary feasibility study conducted in 1997 by the consulting company of Booz-Allen & Hamilton concluded that a full-scale Inductrack system would be less expensive to build and operate than the German maglev. For example, the study estimated that a train car equipped with Halbach arrays would cost between $3.2 million and $4.2 million, whereas a car in the German maglev would cost more than $6 million. (The estimated cost of a Japanese maglev car has not been made available.) The Inductrack vehicle would be more expensive than a conventional railcar, which costs between $2 million and $3 million, and building the system's track could cost as much as 80 percent more than constructing an ordinary track. The study noted, however, that the Inductrack's energy usage and maintenance costs would be significantly lower than those of a conventional railway.....
    But that would require not only 'the vision thing' but the 'common sense thing'.

    To a certain extent the coalition have these qualities. They can get up, go to the Dail without forgetting were it is and work to ensure that they continue to do so. They can think up visionary say 'bertie bowl', broadband “rollout” and evoting style ideas/policies. But unfortunately for the rest of us, they suffer and are hampered by the incompetence, blinkered idealogy and Galway tent 'vested-interestism' things.
    Sign in or Register Now to reply

  8. #68
    SPN SPN is offline

    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    17,603

    Until a son, daughter, niece or nephew of a serving (or former) FFailure Minister gets the franchise for Inductrack Maglev trains in Ireland, there is zero chance that it will get onto the radar screen of any Government Minister.

    We SHOULD be looking to the future, but some people's idea of what the word "future" means has it's beginning, middle and end in the concept of "how will it help us win the next election" (or not, as the case may be).

    Quote Originally Posted by Pax
    But that would require not only 'the vision thing' but the 'common sense thing'.
    Aaaah, memories of Billy Kelleher TD and John Cregan TD at the Joint Oireachtas Committee on the Environment when numerous and assorted IT Professionals ripped the DOEHLG and NEDAP/Powervote a new one.

    Those two ************************ers' "common sense thing" was more interested in Party Politics than it was in looking at the possibility of flaws in the system in a logical and systematic way.

    But hey: They are FFailures after all! (as in - dumb, blinkered, gobsheens who won't get out of bed for less than a brown envelope!)


    But unfortunately for the rest of us, they suffer and are hampered by the incompetence, blinkered idealogy and Galway tent 'vested-interestism' things.
    Leave Micheal Martin out of this! :twisted:
    Sign in or Register Now to reply

  9. #69
    hiding behind a poster hiding behind a poster is offline

    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Posts
    61,861

    Quote Originally Posted by Maximus
    The level of bitterness and sour grapes by certain posters on this site is really encouraging, yee must be really worried by the new proposals. The panic on the part of the opposition was palpable yesterday around the Dáil, with Bruton and Gormley clutching at straws and Labour choosing to ignore the issue altogether.

    You know there is nothing stopping the opposition putting forward an alternative plan? Except perhaps their lack of ability to do so.

    TK, I've now heard 5 (yes, FIVE) announcments by FF of a "Metro for Dublin". If you can tell me where the first four are, I'd really appreciate it, as I find trying to get around Dublin a right pain. But while you're trying to find the four metros too, have a think about this. Suppose, in 2001, the Rainbow had been in government, and announced plans for a metro to Dublin Airport, to be up and running by 2007. Suppose they announced it three more times (having won the 2002 general election), and then finally, in late 2005, they announced - hey presto! a metro to Dublin Airport! This time to be up and running in 2012, not 2007. And supposing that in all this time, no planning applications had gone in, no site surveys had been done, no studies had been done re likely demand, etc, and no project had been put out to tender.

    Now, what would Fianna Fail, in opposition, say to all this? Would they crow with derision? You bet they would. Would they deride the rainbow as being incapable of organising a p*ss-up in a brewery? Oh yeah. Would the general public agree with them? Oh, you better believe it. Would they be right? Course they would.

    Well, guess what - that, with the names changed, is exactly what the general public are saying about all this con-job.
    Sign in or Register Now to reply

  10. #70
    hivemind hivemind is offline

    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Posts
    398

    On the radio this morning:

    Three businessmen are volunteering to do the Luas green line extension for free. Their benefit is the increase in value of their property along this line. I'd rather the government spent the money and based their plan on what would be best for the transport infrastructure rather than what would enrich property speculators. Of course we are faced with the possibility of government money being used to enrich speculators but at least they will be accountable.

    The metro/rail interconnector will be a disaster! The city will be 'screwed for a decade' because of the construction work. Apart from a need to fill time I'm not sure what the point of this was. Are Dunphy and his pundits trying to say these things shouldn't be done because they'll disrupt traffic? Which at least has the benefit of being different to the usual 'it won't get done because the government is incompetent' line. I seem to remember a lot of similar squealing about the existing two lines, if we could go back in time would these people never build them?
    Sign in or Register Now to reply

Page 7 of 7 FirstFirst ... 567
Sign in to CommentRegister to Comment