We need your help now
Support from readers like you keeps The Journal open.
You are visiting us because we have something you value. Independent, unbiased news that tells the truth. Advertising revenue goes some way to support our mission, but this year it has not been enough.
If you've seen value in our reporting, please contribute what you can, so we can continue to produce accurate and meaningful journalism. For everyone who needs it.
Sign in. It’s quick, free and it’s up to you.
An account is an optional way to support the work we do. Find out more.
By continuing, you are indicating that you accept our Terms of Service and Privacy Policy.
POLICE IN LONDON are investigating after a young boy died and a young girl was critically injured in an incident at a flat last night.
Police were called to a flat on the Wilberforce Road in London at about 11.10pm last night.
There they found a young boy and girl – both aged one – with critical injuries.
They were taken by ambulance to an east London hospital, but the boy was pronounced dead at 12.48am.
The girl remains in hospital where her condition is described as critical.
Police said that the boy’s next of kin had been notified. He is yet to be formally identified and a post-mortem is due to be carried out.
The incident is being investigated by detectives from the Homicide and Major Crime Command division.
Enquiries are underway in order to establish the full circumstances and no arrests have been made.
Anyone with information that may assist the investigation is asked to contact the London Metropolitan Police at the incident room on the UK number 020 8345 3775.
To embed this post, copy the code below on your site
I.M.F ..?/
Give us back our money you thieves !
Somehow, I don’t think China, Russia or the US will pay much attention to that report.
China has been doing quite well with reducing it’s carbon emissions.
Mad Max here we come
Shocking. Truly horrifying. All as a result of the theory of man made global warming which has since been proven false. We see it in our energy bills where we must subsidise daft ‘green’ energy projects such as wind turbines etc. These green energy projects will never be cost efficient and as every economy is directly influenced by the unit price of electricity this man made global warming rubbish has led to reduced standards of living for all of us here in the West.
In undeveloped countries the incorrect theory of man made global warming is used to thwart cheap electricity(coal plants) and keep those economies on slow growth rates this persevering the inequality needed for our western way of life.
It’s climate change, not global warming. Like all good science, when the data proves a theory wrong, the original hypothesis is changed accordingly. also, proved wrong? By whom? To my understanding a change is happening; the cause and eventual effect of this change is the debate now
The PSO levy in Ireland also supports Peat energy as it’s indigenous. Noting the more indigenous energy we produce from whatever source the less we are dependent on imports with its security of supply issues and prices rises. Around six billion is spent everyday in imported energy. Hence green energy, which would be produced here would be more favourable now and in the long-term.
It’s been charged to climate change Padraig bit it’s still the same theory they are pushing. They still says it’s caused by CO2 emissions from humans and nothing else. It’s an absurd theory if you think about it. Anyway, climate change is real, it happens all the time, look at the past few million years.
The increase in measured global Temps is solid data. For me, the records are over too short a period to show a long term trend on a global scale. Co2 levels are up, and increasing; again, the current data is solid but again, for me, from too narrow a window. The historical data is derived, from solid scientific methods; I don’t know enough to question it’s validity but there will always be doubts raised, as there should be.
Is it all down to mankind? I don’t know. It could be, and I wouldn’t think that absurd, but maybe not.
I do think we should examine how we live as a species, but I also think that the earth’s resilience is grossly underrated
Of course its due to mankind.
Its not such a cognitive leap really? Fossil fuels are carbon. Carbon is a greenhouse gas.
What’s the problem?
So us water vapour Gavin. Carbon Dioxide is vital to life, it’s not a pollutant. The current 400ppm is dangerously low. An increase would be beneficial to us all with increased vegetation and bumper crops.
Stop being an idiot! A pollutant is a substance or energy introduced into the environment that has undesired effects, or adversely affects the usefulness of a resource.
Whether its too much water vapour or greenhouse gases, we’re talking about having a habitable planet.
Excessive concentrations of CO2 is therefore a pollutant.
George, carbon is 0.04% or 400ppm of the atmosphere!
12% is massive. Just 10 or 50 ppm has a huge effect. I know its difficult to get your head around.
If you put fossil fuels + the destruction of rainforests (sequestration) + wetland drainage = huge anthropogenic impact.
So I’m sorry, you’re completely wrong
I would put “the scam” the other way around. The few people stealing money are the giant corporations and fossil fuel companies who capture more and more of the worlds resources and wealth to themselves while immiserating billions in servitude and impoverishing their environment (and that of their children)
They perpetuate ideology as their weapon of choice and use people like your good self to spread it for them.
Perhaps for a different topic
George every investor has energy in their portfolio. It used to be oil companies which have been proven to be unethical in their dealing but the fact that renewables happen to be part of an investment portfolio has nothing to do with crazy notions on scams and elite. A lot of money was invested in banks and property I am sure people prefer to place some in energy. Obviously this benefits the rich and does who can afford it, not their fault I would do the same if I was a rich investor. Your ideas are quite strange, is this what direct democracy ireland believe in?
George, that’s sounds good a voice yes. But what are Direct Democracy views on renewables and energy aswell as climate change??
Because what I have taken is that Climate Change is a scam and renewables are some investment scam for the elites. Well another political party I can respect for the education… Hummmm
So can we better use those subsidies to go full green by 2040 and shrink energy bills nationwide?
It will never happen. Google, to much fanfare, says it would crack the renewables market, do away with the current problems re efficiency and cost and make renewables a mainstay of economies. It quietly shelved the project when it resided renewables is a no go. They never will be.
http://m.theregister.co.uk/2014/11/21/renewable_energy_simply_wont_work_google_renewables_engineers/
In theory we could. Denmark are going the 100% renewable route by 2050 but they do have very high electricity prices for the consumer. This is offset by the benefits to the society it brings. It’s a very progressive country.
Thanks for that link… Surprised that didn’t get more attention.
Ian, that link is BS! Google is massively investing in and supporting renewables. Like apple it’s going the 100% renewable route. Over 1.8 billion they have invested in it. such as this link. http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2015-02-26/google-makes-biggest-bet-on-renewables-to-fund-solarcity. The best engineers in the world in this companies are supporting the power to be provided by renewables.
Underlying it all is the fact that we have blown through a gift of easily accessible cheap billions of years accumulated concentrated solar energy in little over a century and there is nothing to replace it.
Time for head cracking followed by goo feasting
There is enough oil to last millions of years. There is another theory on oil and it’s origins and it’s nothing to do with the fairytale of compacted vegetation and animals. It’s the abiotic their of oil. “The Deep Hot Biosphere” by Thomas Gold is a good starting point.
Accessible oil is finite.
Hence tar sands etc
Million of years?! God that is ridiculous. The easily accessible oil is probably 30 years supply and the harder and less economical to extract are at about 50 years supply. Coal has around 100 years left. There is a lifetime of fossils fuels left at the current use. Shale gas could add some years also. Not finite. Corrib for instance is seven years at supplying just our gas.
We’ve had 30 years of oil left since the 1970s.
You fundamentally misunderstand the theory. Its about production not supply.
We reached peak production in the mid – late 2000s as the theory said we would. Its a rather simple equation really.
Emily yes, if you review what oil is being extracted and used there is the traditional models and now the non conventional finds, such as to the tar Sands. Conventional cheap oil is finite and the future is more difficult and environmentally suspect extractions. Ireland has one oil field off cork for extraction also. Not drilled yet to finances. Before we frack we should follow renewables as the source.
The deniers go on about subsidies to green energy but fossil fuel companies reaping benefit from global subsidies of $5.3tn (£3.4tn) a year, equal to $10m a minute every day. These fossil fuels are rapidly destroying our climate, even in Ireland giving us treble the amount of rain and wind compared to what we used to have and this Winter coming could be one of the coldest on record with the effect of climate change and El Nino.
El Nino is a natural weather effect and clients change has nothing to do with humans. More scare mongering. There are physicists who believe a global drop of 1 degrees Celsius will occur over the decade or so due to reduced solar cycles.
Climate modelling suggest increased occurrence and intensity of El Nino effects
Good god. Climate modelling you say. These are the climate models that have not only been disastrously wrong but criminally so. Every single climate model has been wrong and the models themselves while pretending to be complex are simplistic at best wity very little data from weather stations around the world being inputted. We’ve had 33% of all CO2 emissions since the Industrial Revolution occur in the last 15 years yet no temperature rises for 17 years and that’s after they fiddled with and adjusted the temperatures. According to the models such CO2 rises should have led to multiple degree increases, showing first in the tropics. They haven’t. Go read Gavin and then come back and debate.
Increased CO2 in the atmosphere has also turned oceans more acidic as they absorb it. In the past 200 years, ocean acidification has happened at a speed not seen for around 60 million years. There is about 1,600 billion tonnes of carbon in the Siberian permafrost that is alreadly beginnig to melt that- about twice the amount in the atmosphere today . The northern high latitudes are experiencing the most severe temperature change of any part of the planet. We need to switch to green energy to avert the worst disasters. You should go Green. Even the Amazon which stores over 120 billion tonnes of carbon is dying, quite apart from the mass logging that is taking place.
Climate models have already predicted many of the phenomena for which we now have empirical evidence. Climate models form a reliable guide to potential climate change.
But models are models, exactly that. Most are conservative.
And the so called ‘pause’ has been completely debunked.
If you want to read, i’d suggest you use Google scholar rather than those conspiracy websites you frequent.
Well said Gavin. Keep up the good posts.
If governments didn’t keep f#cking up the whole thing, we’d all be a lot further on with all this but when you throw corruption and money into the mix, it all becomes very skewed. If it was fair and we all benefit from it by lower bills etc, people would embrace it. Raising taxes will not save the planet.
I don’t think the private sector – who operate for short-term profit – will get us very far without the significant intervention of government
Most of the subsidies goes to fossil fuels. Chech this out
http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2015/may/18/fossil-fuel-companies-getting-10m-a-minute-in-subsidies-says-imf
I agree there needs to a be a fairer system with regard to wind farms where the community share.
http://www.seai.ie/Archive1/Files_Misc/File5.pdf
To be honest, when big money is involved I trust neither. How many of them who are supposedly acting in the planets and our interests really give a fiddlers. Money talks and always will I’m afraid, we have ‘celebrities, politicians and other pontificating to us while flying about in private jets, living in mansions driving gas guzzlers while the prius is taken out for photocalls. The problem is the lack of trust, you’re a decent guy Gavin as is Go Green but there’s not many like you both.
I agree. I argue trenchantly against the climate change conspiracy idiots but I would be extremely pessimistic.
We need enlightened government but unfortunately we never elect same and they have been Co-opted by economic power
Follow the money. 21st century consumerism commoditicises citizens. GOING, GOING, GONE. Energy is more profitable, no contest, welcome to the beginning of the end. Dystopia, realised.
The dirtiest, most polluting, and most subsidised method of producing Ireland’s electricity is at peat burning power plants. That the government has this month caved-in to pressure from semi-state bodies and decided to permit ESB and BNM to operate three of the world’s most filthy power plants beyond the planned shut-down date of 2019 is incomprehensible in light of national greenhouse gas reduction targets and the hundreds of premature deaths linked each year to pollution caused by burning peat. But why did Green Party leader Eamon Ryan not close the filthy state owned and taxpayer subsidised polluters during his term as Minister for Energy from 2007 to 2011? I guess ESB and BNM management also out-smarted Eamon on that topic.
The easiest and lowest cost way to reduce the quantity of CO2 and killer particle pollution in our electricity production is to close our filthy peat stations and run the clean modern gas fired plants which produce less than 1/3 the CO2 per kWh, and perhaps 1/20th the killer particle pollution of burning peat. It is a national scandal that new, clean and efficient gas fired plants stand idle as dirty peat is given preference by government policy. The clean natural gas burned can be locally sourced from the Corrib gas field which is finally due to enter production later this year thereby replacing Ireland’s dirtiest fuel with Ireland’s cleanest. Is this too much logic in one short comment?
One of these peaks plants is powered by 30% renewables. Edenderrry power plant is supplied with 30 % of its fuel in biomass now, co-firing. This is a step forward in utilising and switching over these valuable old assets. Peat is as you a very dirty fuel though also quite low efficiency.
Let’s see if I’ve got this right? If a country has a quota for burning fossil fuel, which it doesn’t use they can sell that surplus quota to some other country for them to use instead? Jaysus boys, this could be the answer to our economic woes. If we just even threaten to set fire to the Bog of Allen but instead sell on that potential quota to the US, China or whoever else wants it; we’d all be rich once again!
No, not the bog of Allen but ask yourself the question, are they trying to stop private individuals from cutting turf and sign them over for a paltry sum just to save habitats? Think about it.
Use precise geolocation data. Actively scan device characteristics for identification. Store and/or access information on a device. Personalised advertising and content, advertising and content measurement, audience research and services development.
These cookies are necessary for the website to function and cannot be switched off in our systems. They are usually only set in response to actions made by you which amount to a request for services, such as setting your privacy preferences, logging in or filling in forms. You can set your browser to block or alert you about these cookies, but some parts of the site will not then work.
These cookies may be set through our site by our advertising partners. They may be used by those companies to build a profile of your interests and show you relevant adverts on other sites. They do not store directly personal information, but are based on uniquely identifying your browser and internet device. If you do not allow these cookies, you will experience less targeted advertising.
These cookies enable the website to provide enhanced functionality and personalisation. They may be set by us or by third party providers whose services we have added to our pages. If you do not allow these cookies then these services may not function properly.
These cookies allow us to count visits and traffic sources so we can measure and improve the performance of our site. They help us to know which pages are the most and least popular and see how visitors move around the site. All information these cookies collect is aggregated and therefore anonymous. If you do not allow these cookies we will not be able to monitor our performance.
Cookies, device or similar online identifiers (e.g. login-based identifiers, randomly assigned identifiers, network based identifiers) together with other information (e.g. browser type and information, language, screen size, supported technologies etc.) can be stored or read on your device to recognise it each time it connects to an app or to a website, for one or several of the purposes presented here.
Advertising presented to you on this service can be based on limited data, such as the website or app you are using, your non-precise location, your device type or which content you are (or have been) interacting with (for example, to limit the number of times an ad is presented to you).
Information about your activity on this service (such as forms you submit, content you look at) can be stored and combined with other information about you (for example, information from your previous activity on this service and other websites or apps) or similar users. This is then used to build or improve a profile about you (that might include possible interests and personal aspects). Your profile can be used (also later) to present advertising that appears more relevant based on your possible interests by this and other entities.
Advertising presented to you on this service can be based on your advertising profiles, which can reflect your activity on this service or other websites or apps (like the forms you submit, content you look at), possible interests and personal aspects.
Information about your activity on this service (for instance, forms you submit, non-advertising content you look at) can be stored and combined with other information about you (such as your previous activity on this service or other websites or apps) or similar users. This is then used to build or improve a profile about you (which might for example include possible interests and personal aspects). Your profile can be used (also later) to present content that appears more relevant based on your possible interests, such as by adapting the order in which content is shown to you, so that it is even easier for you to find content that matches your interests.
Content presented to you on this service can be based on your content personalisation profiles, which can reflect your activity on this or other services (for instance, the forms you submit, content you look at), possible interests and personal aspects. This can for example be used to adapt the order in which content is shown to you, so that it is even easier for you to find (non-advertising) content that matches your interests.
Information regarding which advertising is presented to you and how you interact with it can be used to determine how well an advert has worked for you or other users and whether the goals of the advertising were reached. For instance, whether you saw an ad, whether you clicked on it, whether it led you to buy a product or visit a website, etc. This is very helpful to understand the relevance of advertising campaigns.
Information regarding which content is presented to you and how you interact with it can be used to determine whether the (non-advertising) content e.g. reached its intended audience and matched your interests. For instance, whether you read an article, watch a video, listen to a podcast or look at a product description, how long you spent on this service and the web pages you visit etc. This is very helpful to understand the relevance of (non-advertising) content that is shown to you.
Reports can be generated based on the combination of data sets (like user profiles, statistics, market research, analytics data) regarding your interactions and those of other users with advertising or (non-advertising) content to identify common characteristics (for instance, to determine which target audiences are more receptive to an ad campaign or to certain contents).
Information about your activity on this service, such as your interaction with ads or content, can be very helpful to improve products and services and to build new products and services based on user interactions, the type of audience, etc. This specific purpose does not include the development or improvement of user profiles and identifiers.
Content presented to you on this service can be based on limited data, such as the website or app you are using, your non-precise location, your device type, or which content you are (or have been) interacting with (for example, to limit the number of times a video or an article is presented to you).
With your acceptance, your precise location (within a radius of less than 500 metres) may be used in support of the purposes explained in this notice.
With your acceptance, certain characteristics specific to your device might be requested and used to distinguish it from other devices (such as the installed fonts or plugins, the resolution of your screen) in support of the purposes explained in this notice.
Your data can be used to monitor for and prevent unusual and possibly fraudulent activity (for example, regarding advertising, ad clicks by bots), and ensure systems and processes work properly and securely. It can also be used to correct any problems you, the publisher or the advertiser may encounter in the delivery of content and ads and in your interaction with them.
Certain information (like an IP address or device capabilities) is used to ensure the technical compatibility of the content or advertising, and to facilitate the transmission of the content or ad to your device.
Information about your activity on this service may be matched and combined with other information relating to you and originating from various sources (for instance your activity on a separate online service, your use of a loyalty card in-store, or your answers to a survey), in support of the purposes explained in this notice.
In support of the purposes explained in this notice, your device might be considered as likely linked to other devices that belong to you or your household (for instance because you are logged in to the same service on both your phone and your computer, or because you may use the same Internet connection on both devices).
Your device might be distinguished from other devices based on information it automatically sends when accessing the Internet (for instance, the IP address of your Internet connection or the type of browser you are using) in support of the purposes exposed in this notice.
The choices you make regarding the purposes and entities listed in this notice are saved and made available to those entities in the form of digital signals (such as a string of characters). This is necessary in order to enable both this service and those entities to respect such choices.
have your say