Last weekend and the earlier part of this week I was ill (sorry boss). So I took to my bed. My little flat sometimes feels like the coldest part in the UK. As a consequence I use ALOT of electricity as I use two electric heaters. There are storage heaters, but they are worse, so I never use them. I use a pre-pay meter and am going through at least £20 a week in electricity despite trying all the usual energy saving tips. When I was ill, I was at home all day, so obviously using more as I had my two little heaters on the go. I never realised how cold my flat is during the day until falling ill. Luckily a good friend of mine came to the rescue and popped round with a gas heater. My flat was as warm as toast within minutes of this little heater being fired up. Fantastic I thought. I warmed up a treat, and was saving some electricity. Which got me thinking about the environmental impact of this. In theory I think I am saving money. It costs about £12 for a bottle of gas. I don't know how long this will last. But which is better on the environment as a whole? Gas (what is released into the atmosphere?) or electricity? If anyone has any opinions I would love to know. Perhaps it will be an experiment that we will do on Junkk.com one day.
Thursday, February 23, 2006
This morning at the breakfast table we were discussing how the rest
of the year would be panning out, and the subject of holidays came
up. Or rather, why we were not too likely to be having one anywhere
I'd like to say this was down to a major commitment to eco-empathy,
but it was mainly a matter of financing, which being a trendy new age
Dad I felt the need to explain to the boys so they understood the
'So Daddy,' asked Kipp, 'what kind of job is it when don't you make
This being my chance to secure the support of future generations, I
explained that while I certainly was hoping to make a living soon, my
job was to help save the planet, and what good would money be if
there was no planet left to spend it on.
'Still,' said Cody, 'it would be nice to have some to enjoy while it
Maybe he knows more than I do.
Tuesday, February 21, 2006
Monday, February 20, 2006
And even more ironic that when I looked at the online version, the ad that popped up was for a Land Rover 4x4:)
Peaches has views on the environment: “... rising sea levels, pollution ... Even if we don’t do anything about them, they are still a worry.”
“The hole in the ozone layer gives me nightmares,” adds Holly Gore, the 16-year-old daughter of the chef Skye Gyngell, who is rummaging through the studio fridge. Then her face lights up. “Oh. My. God. Purdeys. Is. My. Life. Mumalwayshastheminthefridge”.
And... er... that's it. The cure for the ozone layer is opening the fridge (small smile here, as I'm pretty sure ours is still packed with CFCs, being 15 yeasr old 'n all. I'm sure this is not the case Chez Gore) and grabbing a brace of Purdeys.
Tuesday, February 14, 2006
Today, Emma and I were on the way back from a JunkkYard mission for our own benefit, and we are now the proud owners (well, as these things seem to work out, custodians) of a perfectly good 3 drawer filing cabinet that was destined for the skip until we got wind of it. The system works!
So the whole Danish cartoon issue ferments ever more onerously. Meanwhile fingers are being pointed. Intellects engaged and ranged in all directions. Pronouncements made. Actions taken. So much fuss... and on the part of those claiming to try and make sense of it all and/or resolve matters, so far all I can see is a bubbling pot.
It's one to which I have contributed (by submitting the wrods below to a few letters pages and blogs), but only to try and point out that most exchanges I have been exposed make it feel like being caught in the middle of artillery exchanges between those who can only see things in black and white.
That this issue creeps into this blog is twofold. One is that so much in the world of environmental debate these days also seems to be conducted on similar lines. You are either 'for' or 'against', 'believe' or 'don't believe'. Middle ground does not exist, perhaps because it does not make for such good ratings. Which is my second concern. Those that control the media have the power to shape debate by selecting what they share or omit, not that I can see much that can be done about it.
Spoken or written words and/or images of potential offence will inevitably exist so long is there is one with lips to speak and hands to write, and another with whom they may come into contact who has ears to hear or eyes to read. Plus...
There's an important piece of context that can often be ignored when 'giving, or taking, offence' is referred to. It’s always there ready and waiting, and will be delivered freely and immediately (p&p inc.)... the minute anyone opts to seek it out and collect it.
Failing to recognize, accept and cope with this is one thing, but to wring hands, deny or, most incredulously, try to prevent it happening (again) is up there with Canute’s tide-restraining demo.
The threat of physical violence is another matter entirely. Words (or, in this case images) cannot harm us. But allowing even the hint of validation that they may be used as an excuse (and hence somehow should be restricted) is a far more dangerous route to opt for. Hence my disquiet at the tacit approval given in some quarters to 4x4 tyre deflation pranks. Where can this lead but further downwards?
While one could wish they had not existed, the cartoons are therefore essentially irrelevant.
There will always be tinder available for those with a match and who seek to light a fire. So all the well-meaning efforts being expended on explanation and mitigation are simply helping fan the flames in support of those whose interests are served by this 'event' taking its course. Starve it of the oxygen it feeds upon, in the form of credibility, and it will extinguish. Until the next time. But feed it straw, and it will flare once more.