It’s been over £10 everywhere I’ve been for many years. Just haven’t been able to justify it, especially when they skimp out on the chips ¯\(ツ)/¯
There’s also the fact that National grid are very wary of running without spinning turbines being available to restart the grid if a problem occured. The number of cases where, in retrospect, we could have switched gas off, but didnt, is growing month by month.
Apparently they have a plan to do it using pumped hydro stored energy, but we are always turning the wind power down rather than turning the gas off.
Once Dogger Bank is online it’ll be very common to have too much power being generated, and yet I’m sure gas will dictate the energy price if something doesn’t change.
It’s all faith really. There is no faith renewables can see us through when the wind is no blowing and their is no sun. Maybe tidal will help easy that fear. I absolutely believe there is plenty of time gas could have been off but wasn’t.
When the faith is there we don’t really need gas, that will when the price is decoupled and the markets will kill gas overnight.
No. Unfortunately Tricky Dicky’s vote-winning “war on drugs” put paid to what used to be referred to as “the British system” where GPs could prescribe substances to those suffering with addiction in order to remove the pressure (on the addict as well as society as a whole) of acquiring the substance. Alas.
AFAIK Mike Lynch was the highest net worth individual on the yacht and Reuters says his net worth is ~$450 million so there may actually not be any missing billionaires. (The Evening Standard claims he had a net worth of £986.4 million which would make him a billionaire in USD but rich lists are often BS so I’m going off what was claimed in court)
Edit: So everyone else on the boat was evil and they didn’t care that they were gone. But “18 year old Hannah” was innocent though right? And why do we just assume that? If it was an 18 year old son would he be given the same innocence?
I heard in the news that this yacht costs hundreds of thousands to hire. They probably had a “business meeting” on board, and most likely would have claimed the cost for renting the yacht as “business expenses” for tax purposes. Just saying.
Funny how this gets plastered all over the news as tens of thousands have been drowning in the Mediterranean for years now without anyone paying much attention.
Unfortunately, someone would vandalise it or try and steal it in some way. The best they can do is move it into the zoo behind a protective screen of some kind imo.
Tagging or defacing a banksy is not “art”. The art here can be appreciated by anyone, I think the idea is that the Gorilla opened the zoo and the animals are escaping, so the rest of London has the animals all over it
Defining something as “art” or “not art” seems a rather simplistic worldview.
Does art need to be “appreciated by anyone” to be “art”, is art only what is popular, or simplistic enough to be understood by a mass audience?
Is stencilling over/tagging a banksy vandalism, or is it a making a statement on the middle class hypocrisy of its widespread acceptance of street works from one author and the derision of others?
Which of these are “art” or “not art”…
banksy later tagging his own work
banksy later tagging his own work but not claiming authorship
banksy later tagging his own work, but publicly saying someone else did it, and that he doesn’t approve
someone else tagging banksy’s work, and banksy publicly saying that he approves
banksy stencilling over the mona lisa (on the actual paint)
banksy stencilling on the outside wall of fallingwater
banksy stencilling something regarded as offensive by some people
banksy stencilling something you like on the front of your house
banksy stencilling something you don’t like on the front of your house, but is widely liked by others
somebody else stencilling the same thing on the front of your house
Seems like the rules for what is/isn’t art could be quite complicated. There would be endless possible scenarios to judicate on. Not to mention, who gets to decide? Popular vote, experts, the owner of the substrate?
Much simpler to let art be undefined and interpretable however one wishes.
bbc.co.uk
Active