It'd be cool to see what generators are ramping up in GB to meet IE's needs & know the actual CO2 intensity of that additional electricity (instead of basing analysis on GB's average grid emissions). Authors point out: doing so leads to an underestimation but the granular data wasn't available

Yes, Paul Deane and a Masters student did this analysis. It’d be interesting to know if broader European electricity flows would change the answer (e.g., was UK importing from the continent when Ireland was importing from UK?)

www.researchsquare.com/article/rs-7...

Where does the appeal to Coolglass decision stand?

The waste heat from DCs will be harnessed to heat homes.

Data centres being built today are more efficient/quantum computing will render all our concerns moot (jevons paradox generally).

Small modular nuclear reactors are just around the corner. No, for real this time.

Brian Mahon with the Mail

Are you seriously saying you had been planning on engaging with the parties pre-publication (like FOE GB did) and the date of publishing the Sinn Féin manifesto made you change those plans?

The foe British election manifesto analysis is available here friendsoftheearth.uk/system-chang...

That's not the choice you made

You chose a much more opaque way of doing things that leaves parties unable to understand let alone challenge the reasoning

You no doubt have a justification but in my opinion, with all due respect to the authors, it seriously damages the credibility of the report

Any bias, mistakes or inconsistencies (which all researchers try to avoid but aren't immune from) are plain for all to see and consider

Of course, parties could challenge the reasoning behind a score but they couldn't quibble about a lack of transparency

Parties were even consulted before going public so that points could be clarifed

It's possible to see what the policy ask was, what the relevant text from the manifesto was considered, what other relevant documents were cited, FOE'S analysis and the score

Compare that to the Friends of the Earth UK manifesto analysis.

Transparency was clearly a key consideration.

I'm not looking for academic journal article, just some transparency about how you arrived at conclusions. It seems from Hannah Daly's reply to my question that 'subjective expert judgement' was one of the chosen tools and we've no insight about how individual policies contributed to a score

The report doesn't even contain the word 'method' let alone 'methodology'. Not sure what you're talking about

Wouldn't it help to create informed voters to be transparent about your methods and data so voters can see whether your findings stack up against reality?

All we have so far is a 'summary of findings' without any indication of what policies were considered and how they were factored in

I find every category extremely opaque tbh