Thursday, June 12, 2008

Can the can?

To Save Fuel, Airlines Find No Speck Too Small

I wonder if they are still lugging litre upon litre and kilo upon kilo of duty frees and cuddly toys to and fro in hope of a sale?

Or putting out newspapers with such crucial sections as today’s classifieds or appointments?

But I guess the public gets what the public…can.

Would the gent glowing at the back like to speak

(DEFRA) Government invites communities for 'no commitment' discussions on hosting geological disposal facility* for radioactive waste

I'd love to be a 6' fly sitting cross-legged on a chair, taking notes and multi-tasking on his non-mutated Blackberry at that one!

If only to see who lobs up.

*dump

42 Days is a long time ......

.... to be held without charge.

The genius that is Matt of the Telegraph strikes again!

The thing is, there was a heated debate about the 42 days for suspect terrorists yesterday evening in my local. Now I didn't read or hear this, but two people were absolutely adamant that the way that the Bill was worded, it effectively gave the police the powers to hold anybody for 42 days whatever the offense! I've had a quick browse and cannot confirm this one way or another. Can anyone out there cast any light on this?

So, if it is true, whether you are a potential terrorist, or naughty enough to have put the wrong plastic in the wrong recycling bin, beware!

COMPETITION - Our first...

Well, the genesis of one at least. Its working title is... 'Whizz. No Bang'.

Because it's funny how things pan out.

I subscribe to many feeds and forums and lists to not only gain knowledge but also debate with knowledgeable others on various issues, often with a view to getting a... well, view... that might go beyond these pages and on to the site and newsletter. At least in a form that in being shared objectively may help others.

I am in the middle of one currently about the state (and it is sorry) of our nation's flood systems, warning and public comms. Interestingly, I had to go 'off grid' because one of those who know, or think they know better bemoaned having to put up with the input of mere mortals who often cop the sharp end of their highly-resourced conferences, consultations, research and trips all over the shop. And I can find their pronouncements from on high a crock of 'potential energy-from-biomass material'.

However, having gone off grid a while (sadly, you can't get profile and the good stuff without being noticed above parapet), I have found myself in highly productive discussions with some on an other area, namely wind farms.

The reason I am posting here, and hence also in the next newsletter, is that as a result of one conservation I am pondering a competition.

This is to see if there is/can be a low tech, low cost way of preventing bird strikes on wind farm turbine blades that simply make Jonathan Livingstone Eagle avoid the things, and hence at least get this 'yes highly important, yet pretty minor and distracting' issue (in the great scheme) off the cons list for a lot of folk, especially all major media with an eye to what sells papers and generates ratings, if not actually addressing pressing issues.

Thing is... first... we need a prize.

Suggestions?

Offers?

If juicy enough we will then ged our heads round the competition structure and on to as much PR as we can crank up. You never know... it may get spun (geddit?) to greater prominence by those with the media muscle to do so.

Tides of Opinion

I am aware on various issues regrading the controversial Severn Barrage tidal proposal; too much to hope our national news will help clarify matters sensibly.

I have written:

I have just watched the BBC Breakfast News 'report' on the Severn Barrage. Being already aware of the ecological objections I was keen to learn more objective information on the claim that it makes no economic sense, but this only amounted to a member of the RSPB saying so (if based on a 'report'). Hardly in depth. Or objective. 'Balance' was provided by an 'expert' who was quoted more on what the alternatives, specifically wind, would involve... to wildlife. What about the economic arguments we were promised? Or any hint as to this scheme's potential in reducing greenhouse emissions effectively?

I am also intrigued at the comment passed that governments should not be involved in huge energy projects. Er... do what?

Is the BBC just a mechanism to read out press releases, or can we ever hope to get news and analysis in forms these days that allow sensible understanding of the issues?

BBC - Concern over tidal barrage cost