Page 5 of 9 FirstFirst ... 34567 ... LastLast
Results 61 to 75 of 135

Thread: Stadia

  1. #61
    Senior Member petromax's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Liverpool
    Posts
    317

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Ged View Post
    ...not big enough when a leading world stadium construction company says it is - who should we believe WW

    Yeh, Wimbledon, Wembley, O2 Arena; what do HOK know!!!


  2. #62
    Senior Member Waterways's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    2,924
    Blog Entries
    22

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by petromax View Post
    but no need to list your insults
    Please list these mysterious insults, as I would be interested to read them.
    Last edited by Waterways; 08-04-2009 at 04:26 PM.
    The new Amsterdam at Liverpool?
    Save Liverpool Docks and Waterways - Click

    Deprived of its unique dockland waters Liverpool
    becomes a Venice without canals, just another city, no
    longer of special interest to anyone, least of all the
    tourist. Would we visit a modernised Venice of filled in
    canals to view its modern museum describing
    how it once was?


    Giving Liverpool a full Metro - CLICK
    Rapid-transit rail: Everton, Liverpool & Arena - CLICK

    Save Royal Iris - Sign Petition

  3. #63
    Senior Member Waterways's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    2,924
    Blog Entries
    22

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by petromax View Post
    The single largest contributor (including energy in life time useage) to carbon footprint is the energy used in the creation of the building materials and in the building operations themselves. It is thus very signficantly greener to recycle old buildings for new use rather than to demolish them, deal with waste and rebuild.

    and before you say it WW, I haven't made this up. I do know what I am talking about and I have no vested interest. It's what you might call a fact.
    You are on about the energy life cycle - embedded energy. The same can be said for all products. But right now anything that uses less energy is a good thing, for clearly obvious reasons.
    Last edited by Waterways; 08-04-2009 at 04:25 PM.
    The new Amsterdam at Liverpool?
    Save Liverpool Docks and Waterways - Click

    Deprived of its unique dockland waters Liverpool
    becomes a Venice without canals, just another city, no
    longer of special interest to anyone, least of all the
    tourist. Would we visit a modernised Venice of filled in
    canals to view its modern museum describing
    how it once was?


    Giving Liverpool a full Metro - CLICK
    Rapid-transit rail: Everton, Liverpool & Arena - CLICK

    Save Royal Iris - Sign Petition

  4. #64
    Senior Member petromax's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Liverpool
    Posts
    317

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Waterways View Post
    ...clearly obvious reasons.

    Right now, today, if you knock down an occupied and running, albeit inefficient old building and build a new one in its place, even if that uses less energy to heat and/or cool it, you will increase the carbon footprint.

  5. #65
    Senior Member Waterways's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    2,924
    Blog Entries
    22

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Ged View Post
    So in saying you want buildings of high carbon footprint demolishing WW, I take that also to mean the whole of the Canning area - is that correct
    They are buildings of historic importance, the garden were not. They can have the insulation values uprated far more easily than brick block with landing protruding acts as heat sinks.

    I too want to progress and a perfectly good site such as the tunnel loop which is overgrown with weeds in an area that needs regeneration is so easily discounted by you as not big enough when a leading world stadium construction company says it is - who should we believe WW
    The stadium company would say that. The Loop site is totally crap. A stadium needs a rapid transit rail station incorporated. Guess what, Liverpool has a one and people ignore it. The Loop site cannot incorporate rapid-transit rail. If any is run in it will be footy traffic only, so EFC would have to foot the biog bill. WHP can have all and funded out of public fund and all benefit.

    The Loop is another ill-thought out idea, as is the Stanley Park stadium. A stadium without rapid-transit. LFC must be daft to design a stadium without rapid-transit as they have all to gain by having it. The city is mad to allow such nuisance creators at footy stadia not have use it. London look at Liverpool and think the city is daft. EFC and LFC need rethinks on where to their stadia. EFC, hopefully not in Kirkby.
    The new Amsterdam at Liverpool?
    Save Liverpool Docks and Waterways - Click

    Deprived of its unique dockland waters Liverpool
    becomes a Venice without canals, just another city, no
    longer of special interest to anyone, least of all the
    tourist. Would we visit a modernised Venice of filled in
    canals to view its modern museum describing
    how it once was?


    Giving Liverpool a full Metro - CLICK
    Rapid-transit rail: Everton, Liverpool & Arena - CLICK

    Save Royal Iris - Sign Petition

  6. #66
    Senior Member Waterways's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    2,924
    Blog Entries
    22

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by petromax View Post
    Right now, today, if you knock down an occupied and running, albeit inefficient old building and build a new one in its place, even if that uses less energy to heat and/or cool it, you will increase the carbon footprint.
    It depends on what materials you use. Millions of new homes using 50% less energy reduces emission substantially.
    Last edited by Waterways; 08-04-2009 at 04:28 PM.
    The new Amsterdam at Liverpool?
    Save Liverpool Docks and Waterways - Click

    Deprived of its unique dockland waters Liverpool
    becomes a Venice without canals, just another city, no
    longer of special interest to anyone, least of all the
    tourist. Would we visit a modernised Venice of filled in
    canals to view its modern museum describing
    how it once was?


    Giving Liverpool a full Metro - CLICK
    Rapid-transit rail: Everton, Liverpool & Arena - CLICK

    Save Royal Iris - Sign Petition

  7. #67
    Senior Member petromax's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Liverpool
    Posts
    317

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Waterways View Post
    Please list them as I would be interested to read them.
    I have told you what they are. I could go back through posts but I won't list them again. You don't see them. You are a blind man.

  8. #68
    Senior Member Waterways's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    2,924
    Blog Entries
    22

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by petromax View Post
    I have told you what they are.
    You have not. To make it easy for you just list these mysterious insults that are on this thread.
    The new Amsterdam at Liverpool?
    Save Liverpool Docks and Waterways - Click

    Deprived of its unique dockland waters Liverpool
    becomes a Venice without canals, just another city, no
    longer of special interest to anyone, least of all the
    tourist. Would we visit a modernised Venice of filled in
    canals to view its modern museum describing
    how it once was?


    Giving Liverpool a full Metro - CLICK
    Rapid-transit rail: Everton, Liverpool & Arena - CLICK

    Save Royal Iris - Sign Petition

  9. #69
    Senior Member petromax's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Liverpool
    Posts
    317

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Waterways View Post
    It depends on what materials you use. Millions of new home using 50% less energy reduces emission substantially.
    It does not. Energy efficient materials (polyurethane insulants and the like, low-emissitivity glass etc) that reduce life cycle costs have a predominantly high carbon footprint in manufacture and in the case of timber are difficult to sustain. The working of the materials in manufacutre is carbon intensive as is the transport to site and the building processes on site.

    The reduction of emissions in new homes only reduces the increase of carbon footrint less than a new home built from high energy materials would. In short, they make a bad situation slightly better. They cannot compete from a carbon point of view with keeping existing buildings with or without upgrading.

  10. #70
    Senior Member petromax's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Liverpool
    Posts
    317

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Waterways View Post
    You have not. To make it easy for you just list these mysterious insults that are on this thread.
    Do you seriously think I can be bothered?

  11. #71
    Senior Member petromax's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Liverpool
    Posts
    317

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Waterways View Post
    They are buildings of historic importance, the garden were not. They can have the insulation values uprated far more easily than brick block with landing protruding acts as heat sinks.
    Both are historically important for their own reasons and if you think 9" or 13.5" solid brickwork is easy to upgrade thermally without disruption of historic interiors and at reasonable cost, then you know rather less about it than you think you do.



    Quote Originally Posted by Waterways View Post
    The stadium company would say that.
    HOK were paid for an independent assessment and they gave it. They have no other interest other than not getting sued for bad advice

    Quote Originally Posted by Waterways View Post
    The Loop site is totally crap. A stadium needs a rapid transit rail station incorporated.
    It does not. There are plenty without.

    Quote Originally Posted by Waterways View Post
    WHP can have all and funded out of public fund and all benefit.
    Get Real!! Just exactly where will the money come from?

    Quote Originally Posted by Waterways View Post
    EFC and LFC need rethinks on where to their stadia. EFC, hopefully not in Kirkby.
    Maybe they do and maybe it shouldn't, but who can afford hundreds of millions more than is feasible. Even if the city had the power to insist on new rail loops and extraordinary third party benefits, which it does not, absolutely NOTHING would get built on this basis.

    Make a plan that works, is feasible and will get built or talk about it for the next decade or so instead.

  12. #72
    Senior Member Waterways's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    2,924
    Blog Entries
    22

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by petromax View Post
    Both are historically important for their own reasons and if you think 9" or 13.5" solid brickwork is easy to upgrade thermally without disruption of historic interiors and at reasonable cost, then you know rather less about it than you think you do.
    More insults. I know "exactly" what I am on about. I said the Georgian quarter is of historical importance. The Gardens are not.


    HOK were paid for an independent assessment and they gave it. They have no other interest other than not getting sued for bad advice
    Their advice is bad. They never took into account rapid-transit rail.

    Get Real!! Just exactly where will the money come from?
    The same place that the trams money came from and the London Crossrail came from as well.

    You haven't much a clue. Don't take that as an insult, it is just the way it is.
    The new Amsterdam at Liverpool?
    Save Liverpool Docks and Waterways - Click

    Deprived of its unique dockland waters Liverpool
    becomes a Venice without canals, just another city, no
    longer of special interest to anyone, least of all the
    tourist. Would we visit a modernised Venice of filled in
    canals to view its modern museum describing
    how it once was?


    Giving Liverpool a full Metro - CLICK
    Rapid-transit rail: Everton, Liverpool & Arena - CLICK

    Save Royal Iris - Sign Petition

  13. #73
    Senior Member petromax's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Liverpool
    Posts
    317

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Waterways View Post
    More insults. I know "exactly" what I am on about. I said the Georgian quarter is of historical importance. The Gardens are not.

    Their advice is bad. They never took into account rapid-transit rail.

    The same place that the trams money came from and the London Crossrail came from as well.

    You haven't much a clue. Don't take that as an insult, it is just the way it is.
    Saying it's so, don't make it so! An insult is an insult. I think calling someone clueless is pretty insulting and you compound it with arrogance.

    Without bothering to track back and in this post alone, you think yourself a better judge of architecture and its historical importance than anyone here; you believe yourself better qualified to assess the suitability of a site for a stadium than an organisation with immeasurable specialised experience and you blythely disregard the fact that there was no money for trams from any source actually and that Crossrail is funded on an entirely different basis of established demand.

    That my friend, is just the way you are. If you like, you can take that as an insult.

  14. #74
    Pablo42 pablo42's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Wallasey
    Posts
    2,650
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default

    Fighting talk were I come from. Good job I moved.

  15. #75
    Senior Member petromax's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Liverpool
    Posts
    317

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by pablo42 View Post
    Fighting talk were I come from. Good job I moved.

Page 5 of 9 FirstFirst ... 34567 ... LastLast

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •