Monday, June 09, 2008

They aims, they shoots... who cares?

'Goal', in sport, it a pretty definitive thing.

You score one. And that's a result.

In politics and business it seems to be a very different beast.

Just in the last few days I must have had a dozen press releases about someone or other setting a goal, ranging from the next few years to the next century. And, more often than not, I have seen this blatant PR faithfully trotted out in some major media.

This blog will not be one. While I can laud any worthy aim, until the evidence that it has been achieved is in, it's about worth the paper it has been emailed upon.

Wish you were here... VISA

Like today, yesterday was gorgeous.

And we are lucky; we live in a part of the UK that when it is gorgeous we don't actually need to go any further than our front door to enjoy it.

In fact we ventured only as far as the back garden.

I attacked the jungle, and then me and the boys pulled my trolley round the dump.

Then we had a BBQ, having picked up the makings en route home.

And then we did sod all the rest of the day. Bliss.

I'd advocate this to anyone.

Thing is, I also see why it might not always be that great, and especially when it's part of a holiday that might fall in a period of unplanned (unlike the trip) bad weather.

The horrifying cost of Britain's top attractions

Been there, been overcharged for that, and got the rip-off T-shirt.

Which is why a holiday to sunnier climes where the boys need no more than water, sand and a spade to spend a blissful 12 hrs is still a pretty good option.

So I think some balance in the 'stay at home' advocacy is in order. To deny the facts is silly.

Space wars

Polluting cars to carry cigarette-style warnings?

Actually.... I am almost on board with aspects of this.
Now, taking as read that all cars (bar my kids box-versions) are polluting to some degree, I think in ad terms it boils down more to good old selfish end-benefit. Or. in this case, end-less pain.
It seems daft to ask folk to get their heads round full life cycle analyses (enviROI of making though using to disposing), and in any case that is a can of worms.
In fact the only figures that are relevant are the tax, running and resale.
Trouble is these are a moving target and changed as soon as issued at the tick of a box-tickers biro in Brussels.
So, I tend to agree, if for slightly different reasons. Cars don't kill people living on planets; people driving them does... er... may So as one moves from what you are doing to yourself to what you might be to others, I'd say that if the space is going to be used for an 'eco' reason, use it for a better one than what is proposed.

Or charge them 'protection' money of 20% on the media cost like the mob, and donate the proceeds to bike lanes or public transport initiatives that might actually work and get money to where it is of value and not some pol or quango's back pockets.

GOOD PACK, BAD PACK - Tiger Tiger Cup Noodle

Hard to see the need for all the gubbins beyond the pot and foil lid.

Even the plastic was was pot was wrapped!

Try and suggest a use for pot or pack.



Guradian - China releases pollution figures

PROF's POSER - Killer Cure?

Carbon capture, but where’s the polluter?

A little science is a dangerous thing. Which is why I lack the certitude of many in the climate arena, and usually content myself with simply asking often daft or at least possibly naive questions. If they are really daft then I get politely put back on track. If they are daft like a fox then it's fun seeing the experts get busy.

I was at school doing Physics, Chemistry and Biology when Isambard K Brunel was in short stovepipes. I did 2/3 of a vet degree but dropped out when it was clear I would not be meeting the lady who played James Herriot's missus in the TV series, and then went on to a Civ. Eng degree I was mainly granted on the strict understanding I didn't try an build anything. So detail is not my strong suit. However I still often have a fair grasp of the bigger pictures.

Some notions may yet go astray. I have merely wondered what might happen if we suck the energy out of all the wind that blows ashore before it gets to where it used to. And while I appreciate the vastness of the earth, I do still concern myself as to the possible consequences of sucking a bunch of heat from down there to up and out on top. I guess all pale to the as yet unconfirmed consequences of sucking bazillions of litres of oil up as well over the last several decades. I have seen the 'Crack in the Earth', you know. Mind you, many of my doubts on nuclear are based on Space 1999.

Anyhoo, this latest wheeze has promoted my next 'but what about...'.

I'm going to plump for the scientific term osmosis. I know it's usually associated with fluids and movements of short distances in liquids, but basically I thinking that basically Nature likes balance, just as it abhors a vacuum. Hence you have a bunch of stuff in one place and less in another, so it will migrate.

Now, ignoring the vastness of our Earth, and even in the form of its wafer thin crust coating and micro-bubble of atmosphere, assuming these calumpter-calumpter machines do what they say on the tin, is there not a slight danger that if they don't suck at sucking, pretty soon there will be less Co2 overall globally to be sure, but won't here also be some very odd pockets where there is an extremely low concentration, namely in a gradient to the hemisphere centered on these things.

So, and just asking here, bearing in mind that some C02 is still part of the old natural balance, is there not a danger that there might be large areas where the plant life is gasping a bit and ends up prevented from its millenia-long task of Co2 scrubbing... and O2 emitting?

In passing... has oft noted the value of the Pringles can (if not that of the contents - tasty, mind) and even its lid.

Hence we would like to give credit to its creator, though sadly now as an RIP - Dr. Fredric J. Baur

Junk Food Container Urns - Inventor of Pringles Can Buried in One