Donate SIGN UP

More Of Thatcher's Deceit Revealed.

Avatar Image
Canary42 | 01:33 Fri 03rd Jan 2014 | ChatterBank
78 Answers
In spite of Government denials at the time, there was a secret hit list of over 70 coal mines set for closure.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-25549596
Gravatar

Answers

61 to 78 of 78rss feed

First Previous 1 2 3 4

Avatar Image
It's easy to hate Thatcher. I've done it all my adult life. She's the most loathsome person who ever walked this sceptered isle, IMO. But Scargill is a very close second...
01:38 Fri 03rd Jan 2014
> The government and National Coal Board said at the time they wanted to close 20. But the documents reveal a plan to shut 75 mines over three years.
> ...
> The National Coal Board was closing something like 20 pits a year anyway

I'm sure the spin would go something like "20 pits above the 55 that were already planned over 3 years."

//The National Coal Board was closing something like 20 pits a year anyway, he said - 75 over three years was not such a big increase. The real issue was Mr Scargill's "impossible demand" for a guarantee that uneconomic pits would not be closed//.

Ding Dong the Unions dead!
I think the point is that this appears to be evidence that pit closures were calculated *not because they were uneconomic* but to reduce mining as an industry.

That second clip seems to illustrate that plans were not being made on a pit by pit basis depending on economics but rather as a broad brush to strategically reduce coal production
I didn't refer to the chelmsford line and Wiki has a very different opinion on the Glasgow suburban. I quote:

"Glasgow Suburban

Suburban electrification was begun during the 1960s in the wake of the BR 1955 Modernisation Plan. Electrification was piecemeal during the preceding year and is still incomplete, with several suburban, rural and intercity lines still unelectrified.

See also: Strathclyde Partnership for Transport and Transport in Glasgow
The Glasgow Suburban railway network can be divided into three main areas:
North Clyde: Also known as the "Glasgow North Electric Suburban Line", this was one of the first lines in Glasgow to be electrified in 1960 (Helensburgh Central, Balloch and Milngavie to Glasgow Queen Street (Low Level) and to Springburn and Airdrie).

South Clyde: The Cathcart Circle Line (Glasgow Central to Newton and Neilston) was electrified on 22 May 1962.[8] The Inverclyde Line (Glasgow Central to Gourock and Wemyss Bay) was electrified in 1967.[8] The Ayrshire Coast Line (Glasgow Central to Ayr, Largs and Ardrossan Harbour) was electrified in 1986–1987.[9] The Paisley Canal Line was electrified only as far as Corkerhill (from Glasgow Central) but in late 2012 was extended to Paisley.
Argyle Line: The Argyle Line runs between Dalmuir and Milngavie via Glasgow Central (Low Level) to Hamilton Circle, Larkhall, Lanark and Carstairs (via a variety of lines via Hamilton, Motherwell or Holytown). There is also peak service to Coatbridge Central."
Oh, Wilson was right to convert the lines by the way; it just served to add to the demise of coal underway, a demise that started before WW1 and was only delayed by that war and WW2.
It is a fact that many of the mines in this country at that time were uneconomic. IMHO Scargill did more damage to the miners than Mrs T.

Whatever your view on Margaret Thatcher it is a fact that the following Labour government inherited from her the healthiest economy this country has ever known...and look at the economy they left us
//Oh, Wilson was right to convert the lines by the way; it just served to add to the demise of coal underway, a demise that started before WW1 and was only delayed by that war and WW2. //

the railways needed to be modernised, but whether electric traction was (or is) the right solution for the uk. electric traction is clean at point of use, but not so at point of generation. the electricity the trains use is generated in power stations that waste 37% of the primary energy, there are then transmission losses of (4-8)% followed by losses on the trains themselves. not to mention an extensive and expensive to maintain transmission system that has a tendency to blow over at the slightest hint of a breath of wind. Hence electric trains have a carbon footprint not much different from that of a modern diesel powered train.
I don't get your point, mushroom, but yes the diesel engine is the most effective way of generating power and nothing comes close.....exactly the argument to continue oil and particularly gasification to middle-distillates synthesis.
Well, she was deceitful wasn't she?
@mushroom

I recall being taught (school-level physics) that most mechanical devices were, at best 30% efficient, in thermodynamics terms. So 63% efficiency (the converse of "37% waste, as you said it) seems pretty darned impressive, to me.

You mentioned a few single-figure-percent additional downstream losses so, for comparison, what is the energy efficiency of good old steam engines?

Btw, you're right about the pollution merely being relocated, which is the same problem we stand to have with electric cars. However, moving the smuts elsewhere was the whole point - get it out of the cities and stick it where only handfuls of houses get the soot landing on their car/washing line etc.

Incidentally, China's coal-fired station pollution is, technically our pollution if, as I suspect, they are being put in place to drive all the factories making our consumer products. (Cough, hack, wheeze).



-- answer removed --
steam locomotives are at best 15% to 20% efficient. but coal was cheap, water was plentiful and the machines themselves were simple to build and maintain. but the whole enterprise was very labour intensive, and the biggest savings to be made in transport are in reducing human costs.
Scargill actually drew up a fake list to unite all the different minefields because a Notts miner wouldn't 'come out' in support of a Yorkshire or Welsh one. He needed a common enemy and so invented the list.
-- answer removed --
-- answer removed --
Thanks for the info mushroom.

Human costs are probably what did for the miners. If nothing else, Thatcher's legacy is getting across the concept that no-one had the 'right' to a job and a livelihood any more, especially if it meant that a business had to be run at a loss.

Also, the miners had to be her main victim because few other groups of employees had that ability to hold the country to ransom. Diversity of power generation means that no given industry will be able to call all of the shots.

To be fair to Thatcher, she saw herself as a radical in politics and after the bumblings of Heath and Callaghan she had grounds to be radical. Having said that she was, as a political leader, a good chemist. Even at the time of the dash for gas there were many who felt we were squandering our new assets in short term benefits.
//she was, as a political leader, a good chemist. //

LOL.


61 to 78 of 78rss feed

First Previous 1 2 3 4

Do you know the answer?

More Of Thatcher's Deceit Revealed.

Answer Question >>

Related Questions

Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.