In message , Andy
Burns writes
Steve Firth wrote:

wrote:

Steve, do you ever go near Chieri?

Oddly enough, yes.

Hmmm, no sign of geoff's message that this is in reply to, is there
still news b0rking going on?



This was it in its entirety and completely off topic

"Steve Firth writes
Adam Aglionby wrote:

Windmill, wave and solar are all non fossil and look good against
this
sort of competition ;-)

sigh Horsefeathers.

Steve, do you ever go near Chieri?"



--
geoff

Andy Burns wrote:

Steve Firth wrote:

wrote:

Steve, do you ever go near Chieri?

Oddly enough, yes.

Hmmm, no sign of geoff's message that this is in reply to, is there
still news b0rking going on?

It was:

Message-ID:

Showed up fine here.

"David Hansen" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 13 Sep 2010 13:24:09 +0100 someone who may be Tim Streater
wrote this:-

The normal definition relates to fuels created out of organic material,
previously living material, laid down in geological times since the
planet was created.

Uranium and other minerals (e.g. other metals such as iron, tungsten,
etc) are what was left in the earth's crust after it solidified. Not
fossil at all.

Iron and tungsten are not used as fuels. Uranium is and it seems
sensible to me to consider it along with other fuels which are dug
out of the ground, no matter what definition some may use. I can see
why nuclear enthusiasts hate the comparison, but it is a valid one.



Sorry, but you simply can't bend definitions to suit your own viewpoints.

See http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/fossil+fuel

Whilst uranium might be a mined commodity, it is not a fossil fuel, not
least because it doesn't generate carbon compounds when used for electricity
generation ...

Arfa



--
David Hansen, Edinburgh
I will *always* explain revoked encryption keys, unless RIP prevents me
http://www.opsi.gov.uk/acts/acts2000...#pt3-pb3-l1g54

Steve Firth wrote:
Andy wrote:

Steve Firth wrote:

wrote:

Steve, do you ever go near Chieri?

Oddly enough, yes.

Hmmm, no sign of geoff's message that this is in reply to, is there
still news b0rking going on?

It was:



Showed up fine here.

Hmmm, I also notice a reply to js.b1's message which I didn't see in the
"Gas Pipe In Loft Quote" thread, I wonder if giganews is suffering, will
check message-IDs later ...

geoff wrote:

Umm this isn't going to turn into "Would you mind towing a SCUD missile
launcher back to the UK" is it?

You sussed it

Its actually a load (about a dozen) of watch with mother videos

May be possible but there's no guarantee of when it would be possible.

I'm not sure when the next time I'll go that way will be. Probably later
this year, trying very hard to not get caught in a blizzard.

Snow and Italians is generally ... entertaining

Don't remind me. It's bad enough dealing with the Swiss (Ticinese hence
almost Italian), Germans, French, Luxembuggers and Belgians. At least
those are the places it was snowing (heavily) last time I drove back in
the snow.

In message , Steve Firth
writes
geoff wrote:

Umm this isn't going to turn into "Would you mind towing a SCUD missile
launcher back to the UK" is it?

You sussed it

Its actually a load (about a dozen) of watch with mother videos

May be possible but there's no guarantee of when it would be possible.

Cheers - He's not located them yet and my grandson in Braunschweig is
only one and a half, so there's no urgency


I'm not sure when the next time I'll go that way will be. Probably later
this year, trying very hard to not get caught in a blizzard.

Snow and Italians is generally ... entertaining

Don't remind me. It's bad enough dealing with the Swiss (Ticinese hence
almost Italian), Germans, French, Luxembuggers and Belgians. At least
those are the places it was snowing (heavily) last time I drove back in
the snow.

I'll never forget returning to germany when I lived in Milan

Snow chains were on top of my wardrobe

Set off in sunshine, started raining through the lakes, came through the
tunnels and .. snow, lots of it. Had to get towed up the last 30 m of
the st bernardino pass by some thieving swiss who wanted 30 Sf for
doing so - a day and a half to get back to nuernberg

--
geoff

geoff wrote:

Set off in sunshine, started raining through the lakes, came through the
tunnels and .. snow, lots of it. Had to get towed up the last 30 m of
the st bernardino pass by some thieving swiss who wanted 30 Sf for
doing so - a day and a half to get back to nuernberg

HAd that a few years ago - left Como in sunshine and it started to snow
as we passed Coldrerio[1]. When we got to the Gotthard tunnel it was
snowing reasonably heavily. As we exited the tunnel, the snow was about
five inches thick.

Oh, I was driving a Ducato based motorhome and no snow chains.

I got to Prateln but it took a full 24 hours from Como. Stopped for much
needed sleep, woke to find the motorhome was snowed in up to the bottom
of the windscreen. I dug us out using the dustpan - the only digging
device we had. Then we set off to Calais. Thick snow all the way.

Passed a crashed snow plough in Alsace. At that point I was scared, wife
had degenerated into gibbering hysterics back in Switzerland.




[1] Aptly named, both Cold and Dreary.

Arfa Daily wrote:
"David Hansen" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 13 Sep 2010 13:24:09 +0100 someone who may be Tim Streater
wrote this:-

The normal definition relates to fuels created out of organic
material, previously living material, laid down in geological times
since the planet was created.

Uranium and other minerals (e.g. other metals such as iron,
tungsten, etc) are what was left in the earth's crust after it
solidified. Not fossil at all.

Iron and tungsten are not used as fuels. Uranium is and it seems
sensible to me to consider it along with other fuels which are dug
out of the ground, no matter what definition some may use. I can see
why nuclear enthusiasts hate the comparison, but it is a valid one.



Sorry, but you simply can't bend definitions to suit your own
viewpoints.
See http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/fossil+fuel

Whilst uranium might be a mined commodity, it is not a fossil fuel,
not least because it doesn't generate carbon compounds when used for
electricity generation ...

Whislt I agree with you Arfa about CF bulbs (I dislike them too), the term
"fossil" is used sometimes to decribe a non-renewable resource. Take fossil
water for example.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fossil_water

This is water extracted from aquifers that is not renewed (or at least not
renewed in any sort of useful timescale).

Tim