Jump to content

chrisp65

Established Member
  • Posts

    29,491
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    149

Posts posted by chrisp65

  1. 46 minutes ago, blandy said:

    Genuine question. Is it down to water companies to determine future growth in water needs, assess sites for reservoir suitability and apply for permission to build them?  I’ve no quibble with them being profiteering, polluting scumbags, but didn’t know it was their job to plan for this stuff.

    Thames Water, Southern, and others have sold off reservoirs.

    I guess the question, should the water monopoly in your area be responsible for planning to supply sufficient water, is essentially a political one.

     

     

    • Thanks 1
  2. 46 minutes ago, Davkaus said:

    The whole point of cups is you can just scoop to the top and you're done. If you've got to faff around only filling up to a specific line, levelling it within the container, putting a bit more in or taking some out, it's kind of pointless, just use the grams and weigh it properly

    Yep, that’s where our cups are super easy, all colour coded. A blue cup of ‘x’ and a yellow cup of ‘y’.

    As you say, no measuring no adding and subtracting small amounts, just scoop, tap, go. 

  3. 35 minutes ago, sidcow said:

    Without question. Canned beer would always have a slight metallic tang to it.  But my main objection is can or bottle over a Cask beer. 

    That’s genuinely a level of palate or taste that’s above mine. If I was around someone’s house and they handed me a glass of beer there is zero chance I could tell if it had been poured from a can or bottle, unless I saw it.

    • Like 3
  4. Several years ago we were attempting to collaborate with a U.S. based aero engine company. They were using what they described as metric inches. That is to say, they would tell us a measurement and it would be expressed to 4 decimal places of an inch. So for instance they’d tell us something had to be 393.7008 inches. But when we converted that, it was apparent really quickly that was 10000mm. So we were asking for the original source material, and they always claimed their inches were the original design dims. Like bollocks they were.

     

     

    • Haha 2
  5. 24 minutes ago, Lichfield Dean said:

    I've often thought about this, as someone who was a little 'un at the time and wasn't really directly affected by it.

    From a modern perspective, the concept of men going into mines to dig up coal is so archaic and, in fact, seems pretty distasteful in many ways.

    So, was the real problem with the shutting down of the coal mining not the end aim of removing that industry, but the manner in which is it was done? The timescales, the pension issues, the police behaviour etc.? Because I cannot imagine any world in which manual coal mining would still be a thing now.

    Don't get me wrong - I'm not defending Thatcher in any way at all, I'm just curious what people think the "best" solution should have been to this assuming that we should have arrived ultimately at a point where coal mining was a thing of the past anyway.

    It was the manner of what happened. It was an industry that needed reform, but the way it was done was contrived to extract a crushing victory, enabled by an egotistical NUM leadership that didn’t spot coal reserves being built up in preparation, didn’t go for a proper ballot of members, and began a coal strike in Spring and through the summer. An ugly trap was set and the idiot jumped on it. 

     

    • Like 3
  6. 1 minute ago, Stevo985 said:

    It's less than 2.5m, that bit isn't a problem. 

    The bit I'm confused about is whether it needs to be 2m from the boundary or not.

    Some sources say less than 2.5m high AND at least 2m from a boundary. Some say less than 2.5m IF it's less than 2m from a boundary

    From the planning portal:

    Quote

    Maximum height of 2.5 metres in the case of a building, enclosure or container within two metres of a boundary

     

    • Thanks 1
×
×
  • Create New...
Â