Tuesday, September 30, 2008


WHEN: Submission Deadline:October 20th, 2008

WHAT: Project 10 to the 100th
WHAT... MORE?: They'll help bring these ideas to life.

Community: How can we help connect people, build communities and protect unique cultures?
Opportunity: How can we help people better provide for themselves and their families?
Energy: How can we help move the world toward safe, clean, inexpensive energy?
Environment: How can we help promote a cleaner and more sustainable global ecosystem?
Health: How can we help individuals lead longer, healthier lives?
Education: How can we help more people get more access to better education?
Shelter: How can we help ensure that everyone has a safe place to live?
Everything else: Sometimes the best ideas don't fit into any category at all.

HOW MUCH: Freeeeee! Yet you can score soem BIG numbers.
URL: http://www.project10tothe100.com/index.html
COMMENTS: Thx to Martin of EnviroAbility for the share! It's big.. yet I hadn't heard of it.

The era of 'Pay To Play' is upon us?

I had to reply to this post from a media forum poster:

We all know how the credit crunch is squeezing us but I was amused by the
fact that the Open University feels that journalists should expect to pay in
order to attend a conference in Milton Keynes. Anyone else been asked to pay
to cover events from other universities or is the Open Uni about to declare
itself full of toxic debt and demand to be nationalised.


Thank you for your email and interest in the ReLIVE08 Conference.
Registration officially closed on the 22nd September however we are holding
four places for journalists and members of the press, on a first come first
served basis, for which we could offer you a special registration rate of

If you would like to attend please could you send your completed
registration and payment forms to us ASAP.

We hope to see you at the Conference in November.

Best wishes
ReLIVE08 Conference Team

I feel your pain. If it is one in your side from laughing.

Just last weekend I was not in London and Brighton for an event run with the participation of UoBrighton.

As a consequence of a kind recommendation from a PR I think I met via these pages, I was 'invited' as you were to an event. I thanked them and pointed out that 3 days away, accommodation and travel were quite enough for me to bear without a fee on top, so ta but no ta.

Having seen my email signature links on Junkk.com I was surprised then to be reinvited, only this time to speak. As it seemed a nifty networking opportunity I agreed.

Sadly, having got cracking on my topic, Powerpoints, etc, it all went the shape of a pear when it was clarified that this was still for a fee (only... that I paid them), but would be reduced vs. other delegates.

The era of 'pay to play' beyond music is with us I guess:(

However, I really struggle to see why I should fund others who go on to profit from charging an audience to share in what I am willing to bring to them, especially when it is all billed as 'helping the planet'. This whole industry is becoming thoroughly discredited, as well as being totally unrepresentative. I was at one a while ago that was £1k for the day, and the only folk there were govt. and LAs and Uni types paid for, big business and lobbyists on expenses and almost no grass roots folk to represent the average person. Which may explain why a lot of these 'summit's result in stuff few with a mortgage, Fiesta and once a week dash round Lidl can identify with.

Rgds, Peter

ps: The 'RE' prefix piqued my interest as I thought this might be another 'green' effort, and hence one I might be interested in, as I am pondering holding an eco-conference using it that does not depend on your ability to pay, get there or who lobbies a slot based on 'knowing people' or being a media luvvie.

In fact I note it refers to Second Life, which I am very interested in for its ability to bring people together, for free, without needing to fly or drive further than their PC screen. My partner now holds live international concerts using it and though she may have to stay up late or get up early to catch an Asia or US audience at their favoured time, it doesn't half make for a better gig on family life, for wallet... and planet.

Monday, September 29, 2008

All change in Alaska

According to this piece from Sunday's Observer, the Yup'ik Eskimos 0f southern Alaska are amongst the planet's first climate change refugees. (There ARE others though, such as Kiribati's inhabitants.)

A fascinating article about how climate change is having really huge impacts on native Eskimo communities highlights how one village is moving location some nine miles to an island where the melting permafrost will not have quite the same effect that it is having on their current village's location.

Some fascinating insights into subsistence living in one of the planet's harshest, and, it seems, rapidly changing, environments. Well worth a read.

n.b. Just love the quote about Sarah Palin - "Alaska's new lipstick-wearing pitbull megastar, Sarah Palin, is intellectually challenged when it comes to global warming. [Ouch!!] Soon after she was thrown into the spotlight as John McCain's presidential running mate she said: 'A changing environment will affect Alaska more than any other state, because of our location. I'm not one, though, who would attribute it to being man-made.' A few days later she tried to retract her statement, but her sentiments as a global-warming denier were crystal clear."

More on bees ...

... and the potential effects of colony collapse disorder from Haaretz, an Israeli publication house.

"Bear in mind that the bee problem has implications not only for fruits and vegetables, but also for beef. Without bees there is no seed for cattle grazing, no alfalfa and no clover," says Shai Spector, head of the Israeli honey producers association. "It's a chain. Costs will skyrocket; chickens and cows will disappear. You can eat bread, but a body cannot be sustained on bread alone. A war will break out over food, with the problems already in place today."

All very worrying, especially at a time of increasing costs in most basic foodstuffs.

Sunday, September 28, 2008


Time to break this out as a separate category.

And also to note that when discussed before (as it is, often), the archiving separates singular from plurals, so you need to check 'BIOFUEL' and 'BIOFUELS' (see links at end) to get the full collection.

I will... one day... try to bring them all under here, but this is where it will all go from now on.

Sunday Times - Biofuels: Fields of dreams - a fair summary to kick off

BBC - Call for delay to biofuels policy

Guardian - Top scientists warn against rush to biofuel

Guardian - Biofuels: a solution that became part of the problem

Food&Drink.com - Nestle chief warns biofuels threaten food supplies - another take... from a surprising source

The Register - Dave of Solarventi has flagged this up in comments: I think it worthy of a main link: Pork and politics energise the biofuel delusion - I really like their contributors' writing style (erring on the very witty, with a touch of sarky), but the sheer logic that their science base makes for compelling argument and opinion. Plus, even if they may not see it in such terms, they are very much in the vanguard of genuine enviROI+ advocacy. I might also have to lob this in the Compost and FWD categories, too.... assuming he's right.

Had to drop a note:

'And the prize for GW claptrap reporting goes, once again to, the BBC.'

To this statement, at the very least... Amen.

Whatever else one might think about the various issues surrounding 'Probably man-worsened climate change', I am still trying to get around our national broadcaster's total lack of irony.

Around the ice shelf story they had no problem advocating moon burials and a crew flying to Midway Island to go beachcombing for plastic to show how a bag ban will solve the various e-crises.

ps: Back on-topic, kudos for a most worthwhile story for those simply keen to avoid waste and reduce unnecessary greenhouse nasties going up - no matter what - 'in the name of green'.

Beverage Daily - Biofuels policy requires focus on sustainability, says CIAA

Guardian CiF - NEW - Fuelling the debate - no post as yet, oddly

Edie - Biofuel demand 'will increase GHGs'

The Register - Boffinry bigwig puts another boot into biofuels - Obviously not a 'pro' piece. Worth reading for some interesting (and funny) science-savvy comments.

Guardian - Demands for crackdown on biofuels scam - (links in piece to other info, some objective facts) The negatives just keep on piling up, which is a pity, as I am sure that in amongst it all there could be a positive angle to tell.. and embrace. I feel for all those who are trying to make businesses out of doing the right thing, in the right way, but will get tarred by a rather broad brush.

Guardian - Germany drops 'roadmap to biofuels' for cars

Guardian - Poor go hungry while rich fill their tanks - Lumme.. the negatives are piling up. I have to wonder if we are getting the true picture or as extreme a swing away as we had to that got the industry in this pickle.

Observer - Darling calls for urgent review of biofuel policies - That'll crack it, a 'review' is 'called for'.

Telegraph - Biofuel potential for commercially grown grass - rare good news?

Guardian - Biofuels: a blueprint for the future? - Not sure I'd call it a 'debate' as billed, but some views from a couple of bods who should know a thing or two. Trouble is, they are pols.

Newsnight & Indy - via Junkk -

Guardian - Fuelling the food crisis

Indy - Why biofuels could actually mean more CO2 emissions - That's a no form the UK's chemists (well CEO of their society), then.

gas2org - Twenty-Two Biodiesel Myths Dispelled -

Guardian - Brazil rejects biofuels criticism - And how. I have popped the Prez' comment as Quote of the Day

The Register - Royal Navy warships could run on sunflower oil - if fresh - 'Make smoke...d herrings, Number One' Actually, some interesting facts!

SAAB - Fuelling the BioPower argument - Bear in mind that this is from a company who makes a car that runs on the stuff.

Times - Biofuel: a tankful of weed juice

Guardian - The biofuel solution - Were it as simple as inferred

Guardian - Secret report: biofuel caused food crisis - Oh, dear. But shush, it's a secret. And soon there will be another report that says teh exact opposite, I'm sure.

The Grocer - Biofuels to blame for food price rises

Observer - Exclusive: we publish the biofuels report they didn't want you to read - I crank an eyebrow at anyything billed thus, mind.

Guardian - UK biofuel 'not up to standard' - That's alsmost 1 in 5! Whe do I suspect getting it to 38% might get billed by some as 100% improved!

BBC - EU in crop biofuel goal rethink

Times - NEW - Pumping the biofuels, from Rio to the Humber


BBC Green - Sixty-second-guide-to-biofuels

Guardian - Q&A: Biofuels

Renewable Fuels Agency -
Renewable Transport Fuel Obligation (RTFO)

You are either with 'us', or against 'us'. Apparently.

On this very blog I have had cause to disagree with the protagonist here.

Mark Lynas: the green heretic persecuted for his nuclear conversion

On a variety of green-related issues. Not that: they can be separate, and distinct.

But he has nothing but my sympathies in this turn of events. Even if I may still disagree, in part. If I am allowed.

Careful the enviormental camapaigner who crosses the othordoxy of the main mob.

The responses he has had as an, er, 'Climate change expert' reflect poorly on those who see fit to issue them.

However, I still remain concerned on the disposal of the waste.

Moguls ahead!

I often (and possibly unfairly) allude to those telling others what not to do often being a tad shy on giving up the next ski weekend.

Can you ski and be green?

Beats yellow, I guess.

Saturday, September 27, 2008

Junkk is 'Blue Peter on steroids'

Always liked that quote.

Anyway, reading the Times today I came acrosss this, which seemed worth a share by way of an homage.

It's where I ended up after clicking an ad/icon.

Oddly, I'm not clear on what one is meant to do to find out more, which I would have liked to do.

Fine, maybe. But let's not forget.

The EU's Renewables Directive: unworkable and costly

Slightly O/T but related, as I read this at the same time as my council may have to dip into my wallet to pay for the landfill misses.

Just how many 'targets' are there, irrespective of any actual value they may have as an actual enviROI that helps my kids' futures, that 'we', the tax/ratepayer have been set up to fund the fines for? By whom? And where does this protection racket money go to if (no doubt) and when paid over by those who arranged it all on our behalves?

BBC - UK opposes green aviation target - The Gord caveth, and the Gord diggeth in?

Friday, September 26, 2008

Sling it

As my home for several years, I can testify that Singapore has much to offer.

Singapore slings out tradition and welcomes the bright lights of F1

This... especially at the moment, ain't one.

How to spoil a Friday

Sometimes it's good to share. This is not one of those times.

Pandora: BBC faces Ofcom row over interview edits

I share this not to give ammo to those would use it in defence of a rather extreme climatically optimistic view (which it will, even though it is just about reporting standards), but in the hope that the Nixonian notion of 'don't get caught' rarely applies. If you don't want your dirty laundry hung out for all to see... don't soil it.

If (it still looks in the realms of "what might be", but the Indy is not a great fan of those from a CO viewpoint and has chosen to share) this pans out as billed I must again raise my eyes to the heavens at the sheer, unprofessional ineptitude of those who are allowing personal or corporate agenda corrupt the spirit of objective information sharing.

And 'But Ch4 did it first!' won't cut it outside of my licence fee demand.

Who are these folk? How are they paid? Why? Is there ever an accounting?

Just lay all it all out honestly and let the public decide. The minute you start figuring you know better, then try and rig it, and then get caught, it just makes everything a whole lot worse to try and explain for those working along, steadily sharing what we know, what we think we know and what we don't. And then what we think might help now, just in case.

It will be interesting to see if this escalates as billed. If proven it has to. If not, then it will rumble along anyway I'm sure. But it would have never been an issue if the desire in some quarters to 'enhance the narrative' had not overcome professional standards.

Thank heavens I do not have to pay... for.. all... th..


Daily Mail - QED. BBC investigated after peer says climate change programme was biased 'one-sided polemic' - That's how many million choking up their meat & two veg in suburbia?

Broadcast - BBC2 show ignites contributor row

Gaurdian - NEW - The battle caused by Climate Wars

For some reason, the author has posted this in the Guardian (I usually enjoy having a debate there, but on this issue it's really not worth it. I've just left one where 'they' are asking why someone who might have a different view to the group is allowed on, and to voice an opinion. Bless):

I must say it makes for an interesting read, even if some links to 'a bloke's blog' seems rather... unconvincing in support.

I must say on first reading I was unclear (great communicators that they are: 'Maybe that's our fault for not being clearer' - that's what £3.5B gets you, I guess) whether he was saying the climate debate was a done deal, or it wasn't..'...even if the scientific consensus is that global warming is a reality', '..makes clear, it is that there is still a furious debate going on out there.'

As to the rest, with bitter irony it mostly makes this committed environmental campaigner weep... or feel like buying a Hummer.

IDEA - Voucher Tree

This, I hope, can be the start of something big.

Let me quote from some PR going out, which I hope will explain:

Sow What?

Local schools and businesses team up to make the most of national retail chain promotional opportunity

Have you got a bunch of vouchers still in your kitchen draw from some supermarket promotion that was over last year? It seems such a pity that these opportunities to get free stuff to the benefit of the local community, especially when they are our schools, often pass by without really being taken advantage of fully.

Well, a locally-organised community collaboration has been launched to try and avoid any such waste this time, and help our nearby schools too.

Shoppers in Ross may have noticed that Morrisons supermarket is running a 'Let's Grow' promo, whereby your purchases can generate free vouchers that your school can use to buy gardening equipment.

There have been many such similar schemes before, but how easy is it to pop these in you wallet at checkout and then never get them to the right person at the right school to be of use?

Well, meet the 'Voucher Tree'. Made by local re:use-advocacy voluntary Junkketeers from old packaging, the 'Voucher Tree' will be available for you to post vouchers when in around town shopping.

Initially, local environmental social enterprise EnviroAbility have kindly offered to place one in their Cantilupe Road shop.

They will then make sure they get to the school you specify (each 'coconut' lists a local choice, plus a generic one whose contents will be divided equally) at the end of the promo.

It is very much hoped that the store itself will also soon be able to have one behind the checkout rows so it can be a simple ‘shop and pop’ in one smooth motion as you leave. But first head office approval is being sought before this will be possible.

As an interesting aside, with some experience in such charitable endeavours, Dennis Humble of EnviroAbility has advised that for some reason many customers still turn down such free vouchers even when offered at the till. Hopefully this initiative, and any publicity that may be generated, will result in higher responses through better awareness combined with more immediate and convenient ways to get the vouchers where they will do most good.

So, when you shop, remember when they ask if you'd like your vouchers – please think 'Sow What' and then come and add them to the tree.

The scheme runs until November 6th.

Now, what we're hoping is that the big guns at Head Office see opportunity staring them in the face. It's happening with or without them. With is better for all, all round.

Because... there's more sinking in:

As an interesting aside, with some experience in such charitable endeavours, Dennis has advised that for some reason many customers still turn down such free vouchers even when offered. Hopefully this initiative, and any publicity that may be generated, might result in higher responses through better awareness combined with more immediate and convenient ways to get the vouchers where they will do most good.

If it works here in Ross, it is hoped it may catch on elsewhere in the county and country and with other promos, too. Hey, it’s a free and easy way to get free and useful stuff to help the community!

If anyone wants to copy the “Voucher Tree” just go to Junkk.com and look in the 'Ideas Section'. But feel free to adapt and/or improve!

OK, this is no longer funny...

... well, of course it is, really. Hilarious frankly. But I still have this sneaking suspicion that Dilbert is using this blog for ideas.

Rewind, review and really enjoy.

ps: some of my best friends are... will be Directors of Green, I hope:)

Thursday, September 25, 2008

AWARD - Rushlight Awards 2008

WHEN: 31 October 2008
WHAT: Rushlight Awards 2008

WHAT... MORE?: The Rushlight Awards are a unique set of awards designed to celebrate and promote UK and Irish organizations that are developing environmental technology and innovation. The categories cover renewable energy, clean fuels, power generation, waste, water and pollution management, including a number of new award categories for 2008 such as nuclear, energy efficiency and water management.

HOW MUCH: There is a 20% discount off the entry fee (£100) for members of the supporting partners and readers of the media partners’ publications.
URL: http://www.rushlightawards.co.uk/
COMMENTS: A new one to us, but the pedigree looks very impressive. Not the cheapest but by no means the most expensive. We are thinking of having a crack ourselves.

Tyred and emotional

Scrap Values

Ready, aim.. missed. Off to another meeting, guys!

The strange science of setting targets

If it's anything, it's an art. If a rather dubious one. The Damien Hirst of social breast-beating as a veneer over rampant self-interest, where you might get to fool the 'smart set' to fork out bazillions for a rotting corpse as it keeps a lot in work even if no one actually benefits.

On the one hand, I accept the need for measures, whereby you can assess what you are aiming for (and have agreed with others), how you're doing en route (in case corrective actions are needed) and how well all involved performed in meeting them.

However, these days, when I hear the word 'targets', and all the associated waffle from those with a box-ticking, bonus-addicted, media-ratings reason to deal in them, I rather switch off.

Perhaps because they, and the industries surrounding them, have been totally discredited?

Jobs for the boys, and girls. Makes you green with envy, eh?

Labour's shocking CO2 admissions

I am, I must admit, still trying to get my head around who actually funds my having my own personal waste / compost advisor / bin checker / sustainability executive / WEEE consultant as I don't think that their pay and pension is covered by them producing anything that actually generates income. Or the vast comms budgets that accompany their roles in Gov, LAs, Edu or quangos.

I know these are not 'meant' to be included in the noble list suggested, but why do I feel they might? I sense, with dread, a pen hovering over a box.

I am wondering who the last poor soul left in the UK will be who is making anything that creates enough wealth enough to support all who need to feed of their taxes.

Wednesday, September 24, 2008

The right person for the job

We're on a roll.

Well, it's certainly true that when life serves of lemons, there are those who can have fun whilst making lemonade.

And as a lot of what ails seems to come from 'politics' (though not just in government), I have recently learned a trick or two.

For instance, if you want to get across something, but don't want to be nailed to or by it too closely (just in case), you refer to what another may have said without comment, in passing, like.

Oh look, I wonder what the genius Dilbert might be saying today...

Proof that it can pay to recycle..

From my lovely wife (and a series of others back to its genius, if sadly now 'anon' originator):

> If you had purchased £1,000 of Northern Rock shares one
> year ago, they would now be worth £4.95.
> If instead you had purchased HBOS shares, earlier this week
> your £1,000 would have been worth £16.50.
> If you'd invested in XL Leisure your £1,000 would now
> be worth less than £5.00.
> However if you'd bought £1,000 worth of Stella Artois
> one year ago, drank it all, then took the empty cans to an
> aluminium re-cycling plant, you would currently get £214.
> Based on the above statistics the best investment advice I
> can give you is to drink heavily and recycle.

'The journey of two thousand more ideas starts with the first second use concept'

All a bit 'doom and gloomy' on the economy front at the moment, so it's nice to share a bit of breaking, ongoing and all-round re-evolving news from Junkk Towers!

Frequent readers of this blog will recall that a wee while ago we were rather chuffed that budget family retail (you know, the ones who are now doing better and better in the current, if sadly looking more and more austere economic climate) chain Poundland had got in touch to say they liked what we're up to, thought re:use was well worth promoting as another 'green' option, and hoped it was OK if they pointed at our site as a way for folk to seek alternative options to the bin and landfill with what they buy.

Well, having recently already noticed a few, we have to say often rather confused/incredulous sign-ups already already on the site, we were pleased to a few days ago at last make these nice folks' acquaintance.

Seems a bit grand to call it a 'meeting', but we had a good chat with both the packaging and PR division heads, and whilst the order of the day is till 'softly-softly' baby steps, we're rather excited at what can, and hopefully will be done by them, by Junkk.com and the two organisations together.

Somewhat of a priority is to get as many bits of data and/or ideas as we can up on site to help and/or inspire those who are tempted our way by the URL on pack. This does actually get rather daunting as we have been told that there is the order of 2,000 lines coming on stream.

Anyway, the journey of two thousand more ideas starts with the first second use concept, so here's one I made just before the progamme (er, blog - you know Junkk is on record as 'Blue Peter on steroids, right?) having been given a sample of the coming Xmas range:


So... the first, perhaps not the best (yet), but then it won't be the last. All you need to do is engage (left) brain and see what transpires.


It needn't cost the earth

A few good points to a well meant article.

I'd just offer that instead of trying to be 'green' (whatever that is) but being allowed to be and (as you say) properly supported in becoming green-er would, as any baby knows, make the steps easier to cope with, learn and seek to master if not improve upon.

Being slammed with all-or-nothing from what is more and more looking like a truly double-standard ridden 'industry'... not so much.

Why I love research. And newspapers. And activists. And...

Maybe in different ways for different reasons, mind.

Green idealists fail to make grade, says study

Amazingly, from the Gaurdian.

Have celebrity, will travel

It has already been noted that 'environment' is creeping down the agenda.

Even on Aunty it hasn't cropped up in a while.

So I guess there is no one around to concern themselves with all these celebrities and crews off hither and thither to raise awareness on this and that. Just two today.

Message and messengers again. While the topics may be valid, when Zoe Ball tells me Mrs. Brown and hubby are with her off to sorts things out elsewhere I am not sure my reaction is the one being sought.

At least she dodn't seem to have a book/show to sell.

Tuesday, September 23, 2008

Rule 1: If it seems obvious to you, it may still not be

Environmentalism needs to take account of cost

While I can only agree, and applaud the sober attempt to articulate and expand upon this, I fear I still have my first thought ringing in my ears:


But then, maybe it does need repeating. Seems an awful lot have not connected a few rather basic dots. Just so long as in getting from ROI to enviROI those coming from a more bean-counting, as opposed to bean-eating, viewpoint don't ignore the social aspects of our continued healthy existence on this planet in the rush to make even more green by now being, or being seen to be it.

In the 'no'

In many ways this is more appropriate for the more political 'El Burro Hotay' sister blog.

Especially today, as our Dear Leader articulates his vision for the future (for the next 10 years?) at the Labour Party Conference.

Thing is, I have come to feel that people, myself often included, seem 'persuaded' by those who claim to know all (and actually know sod) above those honest enough to say they are not too sure, especially about things in the future which, often, and by obvious examples in the past, are hard to predict with accuracy.


Talk... or action?

The methane time bomb

Whatever your climate change combo of choice (man-made, nature only, etc), I would imagine few would argue that methane being released is not a good thing.
Now... is this rather serious, and relatively immediate concern going to be tackled directly, with thought and deed, or will it just get rolled into the ongoing, endless debate about 'global warming' and calls to devote money (in large amounts) to combat 'it'? And oodles on 'awareness', of course.

As with the logic of not cutting down trees (ok, it is inaction, but still counts) that surrounds deforestation as part of the totality, I rather feel this little scenario rather deserves some thought perhaps not so much on stopping it (which seems unlikely as any global fix is still being discussed endlessly) by dealing with it.

No idea how, even if it is possible. But if we can cover half the Atlantic in plastic maybe that's an avenue for here, with a a hole connected to a pipe to capture and then use it.

(Sadly the replies to the theme have tended to fall into the 't'is/t'isn't' camp already.)

I didn't have space to raise the point in more detail, but by way of contradiction/devil's advocacy there is also the need to understand the problem more, or at least to the point that addresses the enviro vs. ecomomic challenges. Still huge, but maybe more manageable than dealing with the whole planet.

Indy - The ultimate gas leak that scientists have long dreaded

Indy Letters - NEW - Methane threat to the climate

In the article "The methane time bomb" (23 September), the common misconception is reiterated that methane is "a greenhouse gas 20 times more potent than carbon dioxide". In fact the situation is worse than this, and methane is actually around 100 times more potent than CO2.

If equal masses, say one tonne each, of CH4 and CO2 were emitted simultaneously into the atmosphere, over 100 years the effect of methane would be 20 times that of CO2, 60 times over 20 years but 100 times when their warming potential is compared directly. If both methane and CO2 are being emitted continually, rather than as one-off events, the factor of 100 is the more salient.

Thus, alarming though the tale of the melting permafrost is, as told, its consequences may prove far worse. Runaway melting of permafrost will almost certainly cause a steady or accelerated release of methane over decades, and so climate models will need to be compensated.

Professor Chris Rhodes

Monday, September 22, 2008


With a suggestion to keep eyebrows cranked ready for any signs of greenbait or greenwash, at least there can be freebies:

generationgreen.co.uk - from British Gas
savetodaysavetomorrow.com - from edf (see a theme here?)

Note: I might forget in time, so make sure any you check have not expired.

Cold Comfort

Loopholes in £1bn insulation plan mean millions struggling with ‘fuel poverty’ will lose out

Aren't loopholes what dodgy folk use to get out of Government obligations; not the other way round?

Despite my wife's best efforts, thanks to Junkk.com and RE:tie's investment/return plot I think we might have qualified, except..

For example, any home with more than 60mm of loft insulation will not qualify for the scheme The recommended standard is 270mm. - er, tick

Nor will most homes built before the 1930s, which are unsuitable for cavity-wall insulation. - tick, again.

Two strikes and we're already out.

“It’s a classic piece of government spin — it sounds great, but it is actually a completely unworkable plan,”

However, looks like we're not the only ones with not as much as we could have upstairs.

Jobs for the boys, and girls

Green growth is the path to economic recovery

An interesting essay, as are some of the comments in reply.

Friday, September 19, 2008

You'll wonder where the yellow went

Well, strike one for planet... and pocket.

For a while now we have had a policy of 'When it's yellow, let it mellow' when it comes to flushing practice.

The boys have been on baord, mainly because they usually forgot anyway and now they had an excuse. I just have becoem a bit more keen since we had the water meter installed.

She who must be obeyed was never keen.

Anyway, one warm day (and we haven't even had the heating on yet), a less used little boys room and an early return from work on Friday means that from now on we're back to 'once in the loo, pull the handle too, and not just for... well, you can guess the rest'.

Tricky, this green lark.

Numbers games

I debated a wee while before plumping for this blog to post upon.

It's nothing to do with enviro issues (well, a tad), but does go to reaching audiences.

Americans get the internet, and are British bloggers' best market

I just found the numbers interesting.

Not just the ones quoted (which is how they attract, and get paid by advertisers), but just a few observations of my own in complement.

I blog prodigioulsy here, but I also often get moved to comment elsewhere.

It just seemed intriguing to me that the author got/gets 65k weekly visitors, yet only 7 commented here for instance. Meanwhile over at the Guardian blog I posted a few days back on the Clean Technology 100, so far... zippy. OK, maybe my crass punt was a put off, but no one else reading felt like lobbing in a wee hello too?

All these folk lurking, with so little to say.

I just have to figure out how to seduce them over here... and then how to make a crust having doen so.

Thursday, September 18, 2008

Quote of the day - it doesn't always need to look black

If from an ironic source (the person, not the piece), all things considered, currently:

“Don't find fault, find a remedy. Anybody can complain.”

Henry Ford

News from the retail front

I have had of late to get a bit closer to the innermost workings of the retail world than is healthy.

And a few things have become clear: the shenanigans of their marketing would do Machiavelli proud, and the corporate structures are so rigid, and the level of fear of making a mistake so palpable so as to make the Russian military look like an anarchists' brainstorming session.

A few months ago we approached the manager of our local supermarket with a proposal to hold a little research on shoppers attitudes to packaging by using the RE:tie as the focus. It would help us get data, him get PR, and the store some 'we care about the future' kudos. Win-win-win.

He was well up for it. But... he needed to run it by head office. To OK a stand in the local carpark.

Several months and countless cross shuntings and requests for more and more info (Ans: 'Er, we'd have a table, and we'd ask if folk would see merit in second use ideas being put in pack designs. Maybe like the way Innocent did it, with a 'Yes/no' bin you pop bottles in. Bit of fun, really. Bound to get the local press covering it') from a bevvy of backside-concerned minions later, we got our answer.. from board level: No, best not.


So I wonder how many person hours in meetings this bit of genius required:

The Grocer - Tesco Extra takes bags under the counter

'Don't ask..don't tell'. Hey, it works in the military!

Talking Retail - Tesco Extra pushes plastic bags under the counter

MRW - Tesco introduces 'bag on demand' initiative

PRW - NEW - Tesco points scheme cuts bag use - This, however, adds up

Plugging away*

Clean technology 100

Don't know if it counts, but...'...don't try, don't get...'

http://www.junkk.com/ - finding uses for rubbish

Leading to:


A bit like another cable tie idea in the news today, but sadly not yet as Dragon Den-friendly. Though we'd like to think it also offers business, consumers... and planet certain benefits.

*Sorry, had to go first.

And why not..?

A wee bittie too much doom and gloom around. Time for a wee boost of +vity:)

Meet the CarrotMob

Forget negative campaigning, why not reward green businesses instead - Yay!

...with a group spending spree? - Oh, that's us out then:(


PLAYING THE PERSON - how not to serve the future

On a more than slightly Climate Optimistic blog (all sides need to be understood) I frequent this review was posted:

When I Am King

Which garnered this by way of slick rebuttal. By, no surprise, 'Anon':

'And Delingpole's qualification's for commenting on scientific matters are? He even decribes the programme presenter as a 'Doctor of Geology'. Thee is no such thing.'
I fear a green mist descended:

As it is so critical to some... er... one:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iai...ki/ Iain_Stewart

Holy heatwaves! He is not a Doctor of Geology, he is.. a Senior Lecturer instead.

This obviously undermines any credibility a subjective (if one-sided, sort of by definition) humourous critique might have on the value of this person's programme and how it may play with a non-scientific audience.

Sod the arguments pro and con... the critic got the main protagonist's title wrong!!!

I am a committed environmental campaigner, and subscribe to the notion of 'Probably Man-worsened negative climate change, so it's possibly best to find out what we can and then do what's practical and possible to deal with the potential consequences before it's too late.'

OK, it's not as snappy as 'Global warming' but seems to me a bit more accurate scientifically and may even serve to act as a better basis for helping the vast majority of the public to understand the issues, make their own minds up and, if so motivated, DO what they can to help self, others and future.

So I also passionately believe in the power of persuasion as a tool, through education, fact, logic, debate, sharing, understanding and empathy.

I DO NOT see any merit to the cause of encouraging environmentally positive behaviours though the mindset of 'I'm/we're right. If you disagree you're wrong. And it's our ball, pitch and everything in it, so nar-nee-na-na until we bludgeon you into seeing things our... 'correct' way'.

And this is typified by any, and I mean any eyebrow crank on dogma, and/or its various publicists' methods, getting slapped back with totally facile counter-argument. Pretty much top of this list - which never works and simply serves to undermine credibility still further - is to play the person rather than the ball in an irrelevant manner.

Dr. Stewart - scientist, and climate change programme maker: qualified, eligible and well capable of dishing out and taking science-related bouquets and brickbats

Mr. Delingpole - humourist writer and commentator on TV and how it relates to the public: eligible and well capable of dishing out and taking media writing-related bouquets and brickbats

Such as Roger Harrabin, the face of climate change to 60M UK citizens via our objective national news reporting broadcast medium - arts graduate yet (I may have his title a bit wrong, so sue me) environment analyst: questionably qualified, not really eligible and well capable of dishing out if not taking science-related bouquets and brickbats.

At least he is now joined by Dr. Stewart, but some might argue this hardly adds to the heft of the BBC's output on this critical issue, nor indeed the level of balance.

In their little airmiles-cranking bubble ('But... I flew to the Artic to do this piece to camera to raise awareness'!) it might all seem tickedy boo, but whatever a late-night BBC2 or Guardian piece might do for the already converted (though the level of slap being laid on in these major-lite media almost makes even me want to buy a Humvee) hardly serves when hung out to dry in media that do reach a slightly broader audience.

I know that the green-elite ('you don't get backstage at the concert like we do') 'Coven of Climate Concern' wishes the likes of the Daily Mail, Sun/Clarkson or Ch4 'Axis of Denial' did not exist, but they do. Live with it.

Then work around that fact... and their much bigger, more influential (I know they are deemed unworthy of votes in some quarters by never coming up with the 'right' result, but it's still a democracy... just) audiences.

People join you if they like the invitation; not if you threaten them if they don't.

Me, I'm now off to do my thing, make a few more fun things, and share what I'm up to to try make a bit of dough, feed the family and with luck make the future for them a bit better by being a good provider, slightly less selfish world citizen (I hope) and example (I need the audience ratings).

http://antigreen.blogspot.com/ - Sept 18


http://www.climate-resistance.org/2008/09/biased-broadcasting-climate.html 4:

Caan Do

Just watching James Caan, Dragon's Den entrepreneur, on the BBC News.

I do note that he has a book to sell, but he comes across as a rather charming bloke.

However, I do note major reference to a product he backed, called the 'Rapstrap', by another nice, lucky chap, Andrew Harsley. It is a cable tie variant. Using existing polyprop grade plastic and part-selling on eco-savings.

I think I need look into this. It's not like there is not a precedent.

Wednesday, September 17, 2008

PROFS POSER - Idle talk saves planets

This is the 'inspiration':

Stuck at a level crossing? Turn off the engine or pay £20 fine

Thing is, if you are not in Prius or snazzy Beemer, when is the right time to switch off, and even if there is one (there must be, like for flourescent bulbs) how can it be assessed in advance (ever switched off in a jam afater 5 minutes, only to find that's when it moves off?).

Thing is, I have an old wife nagging that says starting ans stoping uses 'more' (over a period tba) than shutting down.

All the research that's fit to print

WRAP research shows four main barriers to recycling

The study found that the barriers are:

Physical – when containers for collecting recycling are unsuitable; when there is no space for storage, when collections are unreliable; when people have no way of getting to recycling sites

Behavioural – if people are too busy; if they struggle with establishing a routine for sorting out recycling; if they forget to put it out

Lack of knowledge – not knowing which materials can be recycled; not understanding how their local scheme works

Attitudes and perceptions – not believing recycling is good for the environment; not wanting to sort waste; not feeling personally rewarded for recycling

The phrase 'Well, D'uh!' springs to mind, Closely followed by 'Has this not been done before?', and then 'If not why not; if so, why again?" and... "How much this time?"

Let's see who dutifully reports this 'wishful list'...

We shall fight then in the malls, we shall fight them in the car parks...

Lib Dems oppose eco-towns, back CCS and £2,500 ‘4×4′ tax

Just wondering and all (it's not covered here but may be elsewhere), but when 'Transport spokesman Norman Baker proposed road taxes of up to £2,500 per year on gas guzzling 4×4s, which would help fund £1,000 payouts to those buying more fuel efficient cars', where any plans in place to help my neighbours here in the country who use them on their farms? And when this aspect of car industry collapses through there being insufficient market to warrant production (along with local food production, possibly), I question how well our troops gad about various un-tarmac'd hotspots in armoured Priuses.

Not saying certain areas don't need addressing, but have to say I am a little nervous about the priorities and focus and capabilities of those who would choose to lead outside a rather small village in London.

From your other post they may have a rethink on CCS, but nice to see they suss the wind is blowing on 'eco' (they almost come with quotes now as standard, eh?) towns.

Another day, another 'Day'

It's more a 'why not' than a BTN, but I will still pass it on:

National Carbon Footprint Day

I will pass personally however, as I do most other such days, weeks, pledges, etc. They tend to blur into one another, and I am coming to wonder what the total enviROI adds up to vs. not having any at all, and simply applying the cash and energy to doing more enviro stuff than getting on the awareness/measuring roundabout. And I am still rather unclear what a carbon footrpint is.

But I guess some need rallying points. So here is another, neatly hyperlinked for your convenience: www.nationalcarbonfootprintday.org

Tuesday, September 16, 2008

NEWS/GO3 PR - Greenprofs.com Directory

Just been told of a new directory that looks well worth being part of if you qualify:


And the best part is that it is our favourite kind.... free!

Junkk lauds LA councillor shock!

Barmy bureaucratic bin laws make a mockery of justice says Enfield councillor and magistrate

Go, Tel.. go!

But seriously, this does show such 'initiatives' are not just the scares whipped up by the tabloids.

Data, and how to use it...

Had a few dealings with NISP, and they seem to have a better idea than some...

NISP data may kickstart government waste campaign

Careful you don't wake up next to a horse's head

WRAP seeks packaging partner

I see Dick Searle in there, who I have met and seems pretty straight. Let's see, eh?

• Full details are here . The deadline for submissions is 12.30pm on 8 October.

I doubt it's worth us having a go, mind.

As opposed to 'ineffective', I guess...

Effective mixed plastics collection needed in UK

Not quite being fair, but it does highlight how we are here, and now, at a point where such a headline in an industry magazine is still on the front page.

Interesting also to note my chums WRAP in there, too. Mixed messages are a problem I guess, unless of course you get paid whatever the message is.

EU new car CO2 rules

The EU's rules on all new cars averaging CO2 emissions of under 130 g/km now look as if they are not going to come to pass, as the EU's own internal legal committee has declared the new rules to be illegal, according to this from AutoWired.

Oh, the joys of large scale bureaucracy. You simply couldn't make this up, could you?

Sunday, September 14, 2008

PROF'S POSER - Don't chill, man?

For once the question is answered as posed (well, presuming the answer(s) provided by the author below are universally agreed).

Is it better to buy canned or frozen food?

I had actually thought fresh was best, but allowing this option to be a given (or...is it? If an NZ lamb can have a better enviROI than near home... as I have heard it suggested).

The points on freezing being an ongoing energy draw are well taken (which is why we have decommissioned one big effort to no more than an insulated larder in fvaour of a wee one to keep the ice cream and a few other, er, 'essentials'), and the recycling aspect of cans is 'interesting' (another PP on the ground to ground cycle of steel/alumimium per gram of food vs. a plastic sack). As to chilled, well, today I fear I (other 3 not too keen) might well enjoy a salad sideplate with lunch, and mostly for coneveince, but also with a hat-tip to waste (too many soggy, smelly, leaves ejected if not used that day), it may well be an option I still consider.

Friday, September 12, 2008

Priorities People

Indy - The City and keeping the rainforests alive

'Rainforest is worth 75 times more alive than dead.'

'..more good for the cause of climate change than any amount of carbon sequestration projects, wind farms, electric cars, and so on.'

And this is tucked away here because...?

Is there a ban-wagon looming that needs front page treatment more?

The rain in Oz..

...is not was.

My concerns are still more about reporting standards than bias as such, but I have to wonder about this from the BBC email digest:
Wind power speed record bid fails A team hoping to break the world land-speed record for a wind-powered vehicle blames global warming for its failure.

Once you get in at least it settles back on 'climate change'.

I happen to be one that thinks it is daft to trade hot and colds, wet and drys on a year by year basis when dealing with climatic or geographical issues, and hence get rather frustrated when those of a more climate pessimistic bent, and their supporters in the media, throw such things about with gay abandon to try and make cases that seem almost set up to be demolished.

I fear that all I could think was that lack of wind seemed a new one on me, and hard to equate with some reports only the other day with increased hurricane activity. And was it not so long ago there was a lack of rain in Oz? (I am one who will admit to thinking that such extremes are worth wondering about, but not yet ready to pin on man as the only cause).

Can't they all just belt up 'til they, and the rest of us, have a slim chance of knowing what the heck might be going on?

This kind of thing just makes even folk like me want to kick back, which surely has to be counter-productive to their charter-busting, social-re-engineering, subjective agendas.

A plug for plugs

Thanks to a post on a blog, I have been introduced to this:

Plug-in hybrid boosts electric motoring

Of course, I have been moved to write:

I have noted that there are some well-informed contributors here whose education and experience in technical matters I have come to trust more than almost any BBC 'analyst' I have to pay for, especially when overseen by editorial selection by agenda rather than objective fact.

This is an interesting and in many ways exciting story as we confront a future of ever-reducing fossil fuels.

Now I have to confess I fully accept that in an urban setting an internal combustion engine, especially running at idle (though a lot of ads I see - BMW - seems to suggest this can be addressed with ic too) is looking less and less ideal.

But then we need to consider urban and non-urban usage in totality. Being that most of these 'reports' are in the city, by the city and of the city (where one trusts, for the sake of one's charging reliability unless you post an armed guard at the parking bay, no local lads have a pair of tin snips), the whole thing seems to focus on this aspect, ignoring those who live and work in the country and have to pile up and down motorways. I am really hoping that the mindset in luvvie central is not a Prius or G-Wiz in the garage for the CC, and then one jumps in the Range Rover to get to Hay-on-Wye to discuss global warming. Frankly, in the city, why does anyone need a car at all? At least the caption on the wee orange jobbie raises the dilemma that presents. To meet my family/work needs/desires we have to plump for one Volvo estate, which we're looking at converting to LPG (which seems better for planet, and pocket if they don't monkey with the fuel taxes). Many (not all) of these things seem only suitable for singles or in combo with others.

I was thrilled to see that at least we no more have a moppet gurgling that electric is 'pollution free'.

But I'd still just like to know how 'environmentally-better' this option is beyond reduced localised pollution, and against all other options, including hydrogen. I am already wondering about the costs and wisdom of pursuing two such options at once, as the infrastructures are surely going to compete and hence dilute the possible eco-benefits of reduced Co2 emissions (which I gather is the main 'problem') NOW?

Ignoring for now the costs of getting the power of these new sources of energy to the wheels (isn't 'leccy soaring? No wonder our Vince at EDF is a fan, er, 'sous la lune' as we say not in the UK'. Seems also that nuke energy is coming in as a dun deel as I'm guessing the Kingsnorth half dozen have done for coal), I would love to know a bit more about the enviro claims, as that is how they come across here... just claims: if the wording of this, again from an EDF (does the BBC have shares?) rep is scrutinised more closely:

'Toyota's plug-in hybrid offers a 40% reduction in overall CO2 emissions compared with conventional petrol vehicles, according to Mr Hofman.'

I'm sorry, but this reads less and less like an objective report, and more and more like a PR for a bunch of various folk who have a fair bit of dosh to make from taking this direction.

No problem at all with that if it also serves my kids' futures well (by their own definitions of what is important to reduce, now), but not so great if this is just helping a bunch of folk use green, and the BBC's unthinking 'anything that claims to be green is good' to jump on a bandwagon.

Any proper tech/eco/economic insights appreciated. Grin:) (as all involved seemd to share their wisdom with them if you read the piece.

With luck I may get some feedback, and will share any that helps.

It also gives me another new acronym: PR As News - PAN Reporting.

Indy Letters - Been here before

I am old enough to remember both the fanfare that accompanied the launch of the Sinclair C5 – an electric vehicle boasting cutting-edge technology that, we were told, would do away with the need for cars – and its descent to popular object of ridicule ("Make way for the Segway", 8 September). If the Segway finishes its days as spectacular a commercial disaster as its British predecessor, it will be because it failed to take into account its cheaper, faster, greener and greatly more efficient rival – the bicycle.

Yannick Read
Environmental Transport Association

Thursday, September 11, 2008


Dilemmas abound in the world of green.

And, sadly, nature is not always the best guide. I think I am safe in saying that we, humin beans, are essentially omnivores. And that includes eating meat. It's not strictly essential, but what we were designed for (OK, actually raw, but that can be covered in an appendix... geddit).

And, in the great climatic scheme of things, that is actually a bit of a design fault, if we are also to ignore our developing intellectually beyond the level of pragmatic and practical population balance measures.

There's no getting around the fact that, for a day's worth of sun, an acre of crops feed a lot more folk than an acre of crops feeding a cow... feeding some folk.

So... and accepting it is just another delaying tactic, vegetarianism is another potential mitigation in our march to destruction. Though it does I suppose leave around an awful lot of belching and windy Friesans to serve the cause of greenhouse reduction less well. So, just one last T-bone then?

Note: National Vegetarian Week in May

Links (evolving, natch, as advised or I stumble over new ones)


Indy - Can you reduce your carbon footprint with a vegan diet?
Guardian - Credit crunch? The real crisis is global hunger. And if you care, eat less meat - I think this is the right place for it. A few other sacred cows ('scuse pun) get dragged in, too - biofuels, population, etc. Nice holiday ads though... somewhere to stay when writing about those on $2 a day I guess)
Indy - The Big Question: Is changing our diet the key to resolving the global food crisis?
Observer - It is time to become a vegetarian?
BBC Newsnight - Is it time to turn vegetarian? I argue with the 'facts' of the statement, not the ethics: In environmental discussions, Mother Nature, or doing what's 'natural' is often cited, in my view rightly, as a good thing. As one of her creations, it seems odd that our omnivorous design is now deemed by many as a flaw.

And the meat-banning advocacy might not serve too well some of the poster children of the climate change movement. Polar Bears or Tigers, for instance.

Whilst seeing the logic in part of what he says, I have to disagree with Mr. de Boer that this option is 'a solution'. At best it is a measure that buys some more time if other factors are not addressed.

Especially with greater affluence bringing currently already quite carnivorous cultures to the... er... table. In their billions. I kinda think we've been here before, too.

Guardian - UN says eat less meat to curb global warming - married to a Chinese with a great culinary repertoire, 'one meat free day' is not a stretch for us.

Guardian - Meathead mayor - I didn't post his piece because I thought he was being a bit silly and unnecessarily provocative (basically 'bacon breakfast, lunch and dinner 24/7, 365/365 - which is how to wind up the Guardian readers and ensure a high rating). QED.

Spiked - Why I’ve got a beef with going vegetarian

Guardian - NEW - Eating less meat won't save the planet


Veggievision - source of info


One law for the [ ]*

*insert exceptions/interest groups that will not be you here.

I think this op-ed from Ch 4 sums it up best:

We’ve just heard that Greenpeace have won in their legal battle over their protest at the Kingsnorth power station in Kent. They’ve been found not guilty of causing criminal damage in their protest against the coal-fired station. Essentially the Greenpeace argument was that climbing up a chimney and daubing “Gordon” on it was not criminal damage, as it was lawfully right because it was needed to prevent the greater damage caused by the government’s energy policy and resulting carbon emissions. If you like, it was the old argument: you can bash down a door legally, to put out the fire on the other side of it. So where now? Can you go home tonight and chuck paint over the neighbour’s 4x4, to make a case against emissions? Anyone up for super-gluing the gates of the nearest coal-fired power station? I could go on whilst the lawyer is out of the room. But does it actually open any precedent at all? We take a look, hopefully with a lawyer. Precedent is doubtful. Environmentalists have already pulled something similar to this before, damaging GM crops, but beware of wider precedents.

So now, to add to when I go on holiday overseas I can claim I am raising awareness of climate change, I might try spinning some bit of local law-breaking as part of addressing a greater truth, possibly elsewhere. Worth a try, I guess. Always wondered what lay beyond those flood gates.

Guardian - Policy, not protesters, should be on trial

Times - Protesters cleared over damage to power plant

Spectator - Greenwashing A Jury - Not a good few days for jury decisions to some, but also not great to those who then decide they don't like the result. The system was used, and delivered its result. Seesm to me there was a failure by the prosecution to prove their case. Maybe not enough irony-free experts flown over from the USA to further help, um, 'awareness'?

Pitching envROI

Subsidised recycling is poor value for money

An interesting piece. Whilst there is little to disagree with in matters of fact, the slant taken become significant. Here an almost pure approach to the financial aspects in terms of return is considered. One can almost imagine that at the other extreme there might be one in the Guardian with uncritical green-tinted glasses advocating the 'environment', no matter what.

Such a shame, as surely between the enterprise and the social there is something more valid in terms of money possible, that can both serve the needs and interests of the planet and those upon it.

An attempt to encapsulate these economic AND environmental principles is attempted in the definition of enviROI*

It is hard to put subsidy and value for money together in the same sentence without accepting the 'value' of the social benefits that are gained.

Rationally, 'wasting' anything cannot be a good thing, and sticking raw materials back in the ground lacks a certain logic, unless one looks at it in a purely short term, time-dependent monentary manner. Surely this is evident by virtue of some landfills being considered for mining now? One has to wonder, much as one would putting one's 1960's mass-production sports coupe on blocks until now, what the 'value' might have been of setting aside useful materials in a segregated manner ready for economies re-embracing into the manufacturing system now. Nothing is infinite. So anything that does not tackle a problem and shunts it away is only a delaying tactic imposed on the future. Understandable, if not laudable if there is no imperative to even think about the problem, much less solutions, but very dubious if clear issues have been identified on the horizon.

I fear I must therefore take issue with the defence of landfill just on the basis of there being more places to stick stuff. It doesn't seem very nice, and it doesn't seem to make much sense.

Therefore my personal advocacy is much more energy (mental, that is) is devoted to more creative ways of reducing our waste in the first place, and making more of that which is, I accept, inevitably produced and discarded. Reduction, reuse...recycling. I fear the current cabal who should have/be addressing this for long enough - government, LAs, quangos (so many quangos), manufacturers, retailers, and even many media - have so far been WOEFUL, if not plain dishonest. At best we have bazzillions going on disjointed systems, little empires and epic comms budgets, all of which seem primarily designed to make it the poor public/consumer's problem.

I agree about the targets. I agree about the jobsworths. But also I agree about the green-blinkered groups, who see anything that is not consumerist as therefore automatically 'good' when, if I understand the debate correctly, the key issue now is Co2 emissions rather than stuff in the wrong place... or generating methane in an unmanaged way. Hence silly ban-wagons that make some feel good when in fact pumping more up in the air than was before.

Sadly, this debate already seems polarised. It's either landfill or recycling. I rather like to think there may be something in between that occupies a satisfactory middle ground and even, god forbid, ticks a few boxes, too.