Who said that the European automobile industry has no political clout anymore? This, from Reuters, suggests that at next weeks EU debate, the industry will be given an additional three years to meet the intended targets on CO2 emissions of 125 grams per kilometer, now extended to 2015.
What are targets for if not to be slipped a little?
Friday, October 19, 2007
CHP to lead the way?
This from Interactive Investor reports that our government is predicting that 10% of power needs will come from Combined Heat & Power technology by 2010.
Now I may be being a little cynical here, but in just over two months time we'll already be into 2008. Our track record at getting things done on time, on budget and to the agreed design isn't exactly one to be proud of. My bet is that this is another foolishly optimistic target that will quietly slip into oblivion.
Now I may be being a little cynical here, but in just over two months time we'll already be into 2008. Our track record at getting things done on time, on budget and to the agreed design isn't exactly one to be proud of. My bet is that this is another foolishly optimistic target that will quietly slip into oblivion.
Stern honour
Peerage for climate change economist
After publishing the report that seemed to trigger some initial movement on climate change by our government, then getting unceremoniously dumped by the very same, Sir Nicholas Stern is now to be made a life peer.
That should provide plenty of opportunity for networking and hobnobbing then.
Imdy - No wonder the British no longer trust anyone
After publishing the report that seemed to trigger some initial movement on climate change by our government, then getting unceremoniously dumped by the very same, Sir Nicholas Stern is now to be made a life peer.
That should provide plenty of opportunity for networking and hobnobbing then.
Imdy - No wonder the British no longer trust anyone
BT, ring true?
When I first read this, I thought 'great!': BT invests £250m in wind farms
But, sadly, these days pretty much anything I read I need to question, just to make sure I am getting the full and accurate story. First for greenwash, and then for agenda.
Now I don't doubt it is probably a good thing, so please remember these are just questions, and the enviROI+ reasons they popped into my head:
'...a £250m wind farm project to generate renewable power that will supply a quarter of its energy needs by 2016.' Will? Or is this another 'at peak, 24/7 job? I just need to know because if not it is misleading, and also using one story to sell in (...puts pressure on other large UK companies with large land banks to consider similar action) others, possibly ill-considered. And I can't see that's right.
'...expects the new wind farm project to help the company hit its new target of 80 per cent by 2016.' Expects? Why not 'will'?
"... the UK derived around 4 per cent of its energy from renewable means, a figure it needs to treble over the next decade." Why? Targets? Or valid science/engineering estimates? What if this achievement does not actually reduce Co2 as well as other means?
" ... this is not the latest trend, this is the beginning of a cultural change. We all have to do this," I worry when I see it in terms like this. What matters is if these measures work. This aspect seems vague or unexplained almost every PR reprint I read.
"...could be windy enough to build wind farms, " Seeing a trend here?
"It said that its wind farms could generate a total of 250 megawatts of electricity, enough to power a city the size of Coventry. The project could save around 500,000 tonnes of carbon being emitted into the atmosphere, " Er...... And it is not even beyond being thought about. C'mon Indy, ask the questions!
"BT is looking for partners to participate in the project, " And finding them? How far off is this non story?
But, sadly, these days pretty much anything I read I need to question, just to make sure I am getting the full and accurate story. First for greenwash, and then for agenda.
Now I don't doubt it is probably a good thing, so please remember these are just questions, and the enviROI+ reasons they popped into my head:
'...a £250m wind farm project to generate renewable power that will supply a quarter of its energy needs by 2016.' Will? Or is this another 'at peak, 24/7 job? I just need to know because if not it is misleading, and also using one story to sell in (...puts pressure on other large UK companies with large land banks to consider similar action) others, possibly ill-considered. And I can't see that's right.
'...expects the new wind farm project to help the company hit its new target of 80 per cent by 2016.' Expects? Why not 'will'?
"... the UK derived around 4 per cent of its energy from renewable means, a figure it needs to treble over the next decade." Why? Targets? Or valid science/engineering estimates? What if this achievement does not actually reduce Co2 as well as other means?
" ... this is not the latest trend, this is the beginning of a cultural change. We all have to do this," I worry when I see it in terms like this. What matters is if these measures work. This aspect seems vague or unexplained almost every PR reprint I read.
"...could be windy enough to build wind farms, " Seeing a trend here?
"It said that its wind farms could generate a total of 250 megawatts of electricity, enough to power a city the size of Coventry. The project could save around 500,000 tonnes of carbon being emitted into the atmosphere, " Er...... And it is not even beyond being thought about. C'mon Indy, ask the questions!
"BT is looking for partners to participate in the project, " And finding them? How far off is this non story?
Bio Fools?
As the Severn Barrage may spell the end to a wildlife reserve here, so Victims of the ethanol rush: Loss of the native prairie
I've mentioned this before; and it's brutal.
While there is a slightly more immediate concern about the sacrifice of nature to meet man's energy expectations, if you don't factor in population then it's all academic in a fairly predictable timeframe anyway.
I've mentioned this before; and it's brutal.
While there is a slightly more immediate concern about the sacrifice of nature to meet man's energy expectations, if you don't factor in population then it's all academic in a fairly predictable timeframe anyway.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)