Still grappling with an unhealthy addiction to twitter.
It's just that it... is... so... darn... useful for new info, usually linked.
Soooo hard to resist.
And, often, soooo hard not to either RT or draft a reply, which with a total of 140 characters (inc. original) can be a challenge; one that takes time.
But I know it is detracting from here.
The solution, I think is a compromise (for now): I'll keep up with both, but cut down on the rehashing (#re - that is more apt than you think) as frankly a lot of folk just shunt the same info or opinion around endlessly, and try and focus on adding value.
I cannot claim to get hold of much original 'news', so this means, mainly, data and/or ideas.
As here, in the latest 'Thinking Out Loud" label post.
It has been inspired by this:
What happens to email after you die
Inspired but, ironically, little actually to do with its main premise, more on personal privacy.
I'm thinking the 'cost' of online existence.
Already, I daily 'enjoy' gigabytes of stuff flowing in, much of which I don't even look at at all much less skip. I tend to keep 'em all 'cos I'm hoarder by nature, but also the 'missing the nugget in the tailings' fear. I should cancel many... most, but don't. Just in case. And, heck, they might appreciate the numbers on the ratings board.
But what about when I pop off or, as seems more likely, one day suffer info overload rage and decide to really get back to my shed and hope a passing airship full of VCs and journalists passes over head and sees my latest creation?
Plugs may well get pulled, but I doubt that much will happen to the outpouring, though the size of in-box caches may well eventually lead to a blockage. Maybe even a 'full' sign that properly washed mailings will pick up on and self-cancel.
But for the rest...?
Maybe the creation of some kind of e-will of things to cancel might leave a legacy that helps the planet as well, if in a small way? It might need some effort to set up and carry out, plus the scary notion of post-mortem access to passwords, but I wonder if it may be worth it?
Showing posts with label ACRONYM. Show all posts
Showing posts with label ACRONYM. Show all posts
Thursday, November 12, 2009
Thursday, September 10, 2009
CATEGORY - The TOL Bar
Introducing another acronym.
And another of my notions.
The TOL Bar.
That stands for 'Thinking Out Loud'
Kinda of a David Brent-esque 'no such thing as a bad idea combo'd with 'sod it, it's my blog so I'll run whatever I like up the flagpole and see who salutes'.
At the very least, as I seem to live on this PC during my waking moments, it will act as an aide memoire lest the fleeting thought be lost.
And another of my notions.
The TOL Bar.
That stands for 'Thinking Out Loud'
Kinda of a David Brent-esque 'no such thing as a bad idea combo'd with 'sod it, it's my blog so I'll run whatever I like up the flagpole and see who salutes'.
At the very least, as I seem to live on this PC during my waking moments, it will act as an aide memoire lest the fleeting thought be lost.
Thursday, August 06, 2009
BAN - Rise of the quangos
A wee while ago my door knocked and a young lady stood there with a leaflet.
'Did I know about the energy savings grants?,' she asked. I had to say I knew of some, but not this one.
And hence I was seduced into a process, culminating in a visit from a surveyor, which resulted in... zippy. Because the house was old, and complex...and.. and, I did not qualify.
Despite this, I was still fairly onside, as it seemed a commitment of funds in areas I can endorse, namely proactive doing.
But now, thanks to a twitter link, I am looking at this (read the comments for a reality check the Brain-strains behind this one will never have):
Ban sales of poorly insulated homes, says Energy Saving Trust
And hence I am thinking not so much of a bonfire of the quangos, as promised, but a Hydra of them. Limitless numbers of offices, people, boards, pay, pensions, perks, comms budgets consuming bazillions all just stopping things. What a lovely metaphor for the age.
And hence I propose the next, and ultimate of them all: BAN - Ban All Now!
'Did I know about the energy savings grants?,' she asked. I had to say I knew of some, but not this one.
And hence I was seduced into a process, culminating in a visit from a surveyor, which resulted in... zippy. Because the house was old, and complex...and.. and, I did not qualify.
Despite this, I was still fairly onside, as it seemed a commitment of funds in areas I can endorse, namely proactive doing.
But now, thanks to a twitter link, I am looking at this (read the comments for a reality check the Brain-strains behind this one will never have):
Ban sales of poorly insulated homes, says Energy Saving Trust
And hence I am thinking not so much of a bonfire of the quangos, as promised, but a Hydra of them. Limitless numbers of offices, people, boards, pay, pensions, perks, comms budgets consuming bazillions all just stopping things. What a lovely metaphor for the age.
And hence I propose the next, and ultimate of them all: BAN - Ban All Now!
Monday, August 03, 2009
CATEGORY - ACRONYMS EXPLAINED
Bit of catching up on the archive required one day.
Addendum: Also decided to add new words/terms as they come up.
AWARENAFF - I have got to the point that if too many more people get on this bandwagon, travlling here and there to show us the damage we're doing... travelling here and there... the end of the world my be more nigh than even they are trying to scare up. See also 'MESSAGE+MESSENGER'.
CoRMLESS - Could, Researchers May, Latest Enviromental Studies Show (or Scientists Say) - pretty much any headline in the MSM regarding climate issues that uses all sorts of one-off science, often by dubiously-qualified 'scientists', or researchers, to whack out a totally alarmist headline, but with the convenient get-out of it actually only being 'may', 'could', etc...
E&EO - Edited (for space and/or often rampant, redundant client-laden unnecessary verbiage) & Eyebrow-cranked (if I think some claims may be a tad over-egged:) Often.
DDAIDDAIS - Don't Do As I Do, Do As I Say - Basically hypocrisy by the establishment, usually political, media, celebrity or, worst of all, green finger-waggers, where there often seems to be a disconnect between what the public is told how to behave and how those doing the telling seem to manage, usually with the only... poor... excuse, of raising 'awareness'. See AWARENAFF.
enviROI - It stands for 'environmental ROI (Return On Investment)', and can be deemed positive or negative.
Essentially is a measure of some environmental product, service or initiative that is applied to try and get to the actual positive result claimed and/or tangibly, provably delivered/deliverable in terms of our kids' futures upon this planet.
It's not always simple, as no one here needs reminding, but with a bit of knowledge, a few pertinent questions and a well cranked eye-brow it is surprising how many PR guys can end up failing to convince. And already I am finding I am in danger of running into conflicting subsets, for instance such as between the immediate and superficially obvious 'good' of a plastic bag ban vs. the possible down sides that are now emerging, at least into the public domain. The spat between the Soil Association and Fairtrade over airmiles is another example. 'Ecology' now in some cases at odds with 'environment', sadly. And both with economy almost inevitably and always, even more so.
Simply put (and I do not intend to get into any debates about global warming, climate change and or the human race's part in it, or not) it tends to be based on what the ground to ground (dig it up, make it, ship it, sell it, use it, maintain it, dispose of it) consequence is in terms of emissions (carbon or otherwise) 'it' will impose. Will it add (bad), mitigate (better than nothing... usually) reduce or prevent any more (good, I hope, almost invariably). Much smarter folk paid a lot more are doing much more complex things with food miles/carbon footprints and all sorts at this very moment I know, but often I don't quite understand or trust them as they can often be rather selective in the parameters, and the provenance of the authors/supporters can also raise an eyebrow too.
It is related, but different to ROI, as it is perfectly possibly to have a good enviROI yet deliver no financial reward. So long as the costs and benefits are understood, and accepted, someone can choose to lose money but do better by the future.
That said, there is of course a lower limit, where one has to wonder if the money is being spent on something seemingly with a good enviROI when it could in fact be invested in something 'better'. This is less serious in the case of the individual, but can apply when deciding between systems, say solar vs. wind or ground heat. However, when one gets to national initiatives such as windfarms, the balance does need to be more carefully weighed. Hence while I am a huge supporter of the principle of renewables, and accept that they will impose extra costs (though not always.. a win-win!), I can remain to be convinced on the enviROI of some. Just because it is green...er, may not mean it's the most sensible choice, even to holding fire a wee while longer.
I seek not to impose this on anyone. I simply am guided by it and share as something to ponder in discussions and debates. As here.
examplist - A more favoured term for 'activist'
FATWa... 'First Against The Wall.. when the revolution comes!'
GOATs - Government Of All Talents - A self-describing description that one feels may be coming to haunt the nanny state that came up with it.
Inspirist - A more favoured term for 'activist'
IYANWUYAU - 'If You Are Not With Us...' - And sadly, I can mostly apply it to those who should be courting such as me, not driving us away by being incestuous, arrogant, know-all numpties.
hectorvists - Especially on social media. Folk who, once they have your email or @name, etc, seem to think a barrage of bans, days, etc will swing you to their way of thinking. Without enough doing in complement... it won't.
MESSAGE + MESSENGER - Simply put, I am off the view that often good messages can be neutered or indeed bigger issues badly compromised by various messengers (usually self-appointed, but there is a large and dishonourable roll call of pols in there) saying, or worse doing something that pretty much shows them to be false prophets. The danger of one small negative tainting many positives cannot be underestimated. I expect green campaigners to be consistent, honest and sincere. And, preferably, lead by example. See 'DDIDDAIS'. That said, I am not perfect, but then I do not claim to be. But I hope I can inspire by waht I do, and only critique when I feel others are leading the cause of sensible environmental practice astray.
Nagvocacy Groups - NEW - Those who are pushing a cause but erring too much on the nag, fine, guilt, scare aspects at the expense of more motivating methods.
NiWiYCGI - 'Niwikki' - 'Nice Work if You Can Get It'
ORFTARFU (one rule for them; another rule for us)
Polishing a Terminally Unpopular/Unpleasant Rationale, Reprobate or Device - Trying to paint a lost cause in glowing terms, despite all evidence to the contrary.
Ptoo! - Pull the other one!
RE:GOOD packaging... Reuse Executions: Great Opportunities Offered Designers
SOSO - Same Old, Same Old
TMTOTH (prn: 'Tumtoth") - Too Much Time On Their Hands
TOCOTA - Two Opposing Corners of the Apocalypse
VRP - Voltaire Revolution Power - The power that can be generated by hooking up M. Voltaire (he of 'I may not agree..' fame, probably) in his grave to a generator to harness the revolutions he turns when so-called libertarians get a tad irony-free in word and/or deed when it comes to others not agreeing with them.
WPD - WooPeeDoo - mainly for press releases or GO3 written diarrhea that tries to create a lot more out of something than it deserves.
Addendum: Also decided to add new words/terms as they come up.
AWARENAFF - I have got to the point that if too many more people get on this bandwagon, travlling here and there to show us the damage we're doing... travelling here and there... the end of the world my be more nigh than even they are trying to scare up. See also 'MESSAGE+MESSENGER'.
CoRMLESS - Could, Researchers May, Latest Enviromental Studies Show (or Scientists Say) - pretty much any headline in the MSM regarding climate issues that uses all sorts of one-off science, often by dubiously-qualified 'scientists', or researchers, to whack out a totally alarmist headline, but with the convenient get-out of it actually only being 'may', 'could', etc...
E&EO - Edited (for space and/or often rampant, redundant client-laden unnecessary verbiage) & Eyebrow-cranked (if I think some claims may be a tad over-egged:) Often.
DDAIDDAIS - Don't Do As I Do, Do As I Say - Basically hypocrisy by the establishment, usually political, media, celebrity or, worst of all, green finger-waggers, where there often seems to be a disconnect between what the public is told how to behave and how those doing the telling seem to manage, usually with the only... poor... excuse, of raising 'awareness'. See AWARENAFF.
enviROI - It stands for 'environmental ROI (Return On Investment)', and can be deemed positive or negative.
Essentially is a measure of some environmental product, service or initiative that is applied to try and get to the actual positive result claimed and/or tangibly, provably delivered/deliverable in terms of our kids' futures upon this planet.
It's not always simple, as no one here needs reminding, but with a bit of knowledge, a few pertinent questions and a well cranked eye-brow it is surprising how many PR guys can end up failing to convince. And already I am finding I am in danger of running into conflicting subsets, for instance such as between the immediate and superficially obvious 'good' of a plastic bag ban vs. the possible down sides that are now emerging, at least into the public domain. The spat between the Soil Association and Fairtrade over airmiles is another example. 'Ecology' now in some cases at odds with 'environment', sadly. And both with economy almost inevitably and always, even more so.
Simply put (and I do not intend to get into any debates about global warming, climate change and or the human race's part in it, or not) it tends to be based on what the ground to ground (dig it up, make it, ship it, sell it, use it, maintain it, dispose of it) consequence is in terms of emissions (carbon or otherwise) 'it' will impose. Will it add (bad), mitigate (better than nothing... usually) reduce or prevent any more (good, I hope, almost invariably). Much smarter folk paid a lot more are doing much more complex things with food miles/carbon footprints and all sorts at this very moment I know, but often I don't quite understand or trust them as they can often be rather selective in the parameters, and the provenance of the authors/supporters can also raise an eyebrow too.
It is related, but different to ROI, as it is perfectly possibly to have a good enviROI yet deliver no financial reward. So long as the costs and benefits are understood, and accepted, someone can choose to lose money but do better by the future.
That said, there is of course a lower limit, where one has to wonder if the money is being spent on something seemingly with a good enviROI when it could in fact be invested in something 'better'. This is less serious in the case of the individual, but can apply when deciding between systems, say solar vs. wind or ground heat. However, when one gets to national initiatives such as windfarms, the balance does need to be more carefully weighed. Hence while I am a huge supporter of the principle of renewables, and accept that they will impose extra costs (though not always.. a win-win!), I can remain to be convinced on the enviROI of some. Just because it is green...er, may not mean it's the most sensible choice, even to holding fire a wee while longer.
I seek not to impose this on anyone. I simply am guided by it and share as something to ponder in discussions and debates. As here.
examplist - A more favoured term for 'activist'
FATWa... 'First Against The Wall.. when the revolution comes!'
GOATs - Government Of All Talents - A self-describing description that one feels may be coming to haunt the nanny state that came up with it.
Inspirist - A more favoured term for 'activist'
IYANWUYAU - 'If You Are Not With Us...' - And sadly, I can mostly apply it to those who should be courting such as me, not driving us away by being incestuous, arrogant, know-all numpties.
hectorvists - Especially on social media. Folk who, once they have your email or @name, etc, seem to think a barrage of bans, days, etc will swing you to their way of thinking. Without enough doing in complement... it won't.
MESSAGE + MESSENGER - Simply put, I am off the view that often good messages can be neutered or indeed bigger issues badly compromised by various messengers (usually self-appointed, but there is a large and dishonourable roll call of pols in there) saying, or worse doing something that pretty much shows them to be false prophets. The danger of one small negative tainting many positives cannot be underestimated. I expect green campaigners to be consistent, honest and sincere. And, preferably, lead by example. See 'DDIDDAIS'. That said, I am not perfect, but then I do not claim to be. But I hope I can inspire by waht I do, and only critique when I feel others are leading the cause of sensible environmental practice astray.
Nagvocacy Groups - NEW - Those who are pushing a cause but erring too much on the nag, fine, guilt, scare aspects at the expense of more motivating methods.
NiWiYCGI - 'Niwikki' - 'Nice Work if You Can Get It'
ORFTARFU (one rule for them; another rule for us)
Polishing a Terminally Unpopular/Unpleasant Rationale, Reprobate or Device - Trying to paint a lost cause in glowing terms, despite all evidence to the contrary.
Ptoo! - Pull the other one!
RE:GOOD packaging... Reuse Executions: Great Opportunities Offered Designers
SOSO - Same Old, Same Old
TMTOTH (prn: 'Tumtoth") - Too Much Time On Their Hands
TOCOTA - Two Opposing Corners of the Apocalypse
VRP - Voltaire Revolution Power - The power that can be generated by hooking up M. Voltaire (he of 'I may not agree..' fame, probably) in his grave to a generator to harness the revolutions he turns when so-called libertarians get a tad irony-free in word and/or deed when it comes to others not agreeing with them.
WPD - WooPeeDoo - mainly for press releases or GO3 written diarrhea that tries to create a lot more out of something than it deserves.
Tuesday, July 07, 2009
Voltaire Revolution Power - VRP
A new 'bon mot' & Acronym.
Voltaire rather famously coined (or, depending on your source, is mostly attributed as having done so - no time to dig deeper for now; frankly it seems odd such a famous quote is not better documented) the phrase that best describes the core root of a civilised democratic society: "I do not agree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it."
I therefore find it interesting, if a little sad, when some, and often the noisily libertarian-claiming entities, kind of miss the irony of a stance that really would generate a lot of power if M. Voltaire was connected up in his grave to a generator:
England's pork barrel politics is paying for airlines to burn the planet
Any readers new to this process will note that this thread has some interesting characteristics:
a. very few of the responses deal with the substance of the article.
b. a large number of them concern the class or other characteristics of the author, rather than anything he has to say.
c. many of them concentrate on seeking to dismiss an issue which was not the central theme of the article but nevertheless informs it: climate change.
You might wonder what on earth is going on. You are not the only one.
Is it really too much to ask that we might have an informed debate about the issues raised here, none of which are trivial: namely the absence of democracy in England, the role of the RDAs and the revelation that taxpayers' money has been used to subsidise damaging activities that the government claims to have left to the free market?
Or are we going to allow these threads to be dominated by astroturfers?
OK, he's miffed. And has some right to be. There are clearly trolls simply there to wind him, and those who agree with him, up. But I fear in reacting as he has, and writing in this way, he has also undermined much of the authority he would seek to claim.
07 Jul 09, 8:36am
I am always intrigued by the use of the words 'we' and 'you' in an open blog, especially when the former is combined with 'allow'.
I'd suggest letting folks' arguments succeed or fail on their merits, or lack of.
Some are still able to make up their own minds without being 'assisted'.
That said, I tend to agree with the rest of the sentiments.
Readers of this blog will know that I have a real issue with 'them' and us' at the best of times, and especially when I find myself rolled up into someone's claim to speak or act for me when they clearly might not.
And, logically, other than venting, on an open blog I would love to hear how Mr. Monbiot proposes that 'he/they' do not 'allow' comment 'they' do not happen to like from some vagauely ill-defined 'others' in future.
'First came the trolls, and I moderated.
Then came for the astroturfers, and I moderated.
Then came those who simply disagreed with me, and I moderated.
Finally, when I had moderated all bar myself, there was no one left to read my blog.'
Paraphrased in honour of another key quote - unarguably attributed - regarding freedoms of speech.
At best pointless. At worst, a slippery path.
Voltaire rather famously coined (or, depending on your source, is mostly attributed as having done so - no time to dig deeper for now; frankly it seems odd such a famous quote is not better documented) the phrase that best describes the core root of a civilised democratic society: "I do not agree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it."
I therefore find it interesting, if a little sad, when some, and often the noisily libertarian-claiming entities, kind of miss the irony of a stance that really would generate a lot of power if M. Voltaire was connected up in his grave to a generator:
England's pork barrel politics is paying for airlines to burn the planet
Any readers new to this process will note that this thread has some interesting characteristics:
a. very few of the responses deal with the substance of the article.
b. a large number of them concern the class or other characteristics of the author, rather than anything he has to say.
c. many of them concentrate on seeking to dismiss an issue which was not the central theme of the article but nevertheless informs it: climate change.
You might wonder what on earth is going on. You are not the only one.
Is it really too much to ask that we might have an informed debate about the issues raised here, none of which are trivial: namely the absence of democracy in England, the role of the RDAs and the revelation that taxpayers' money has been used to subsidise damaging activities that the government claims to have left to the free market?
Or are we going to allow these threads to be dominated by astroturfers?
OK, he's miffed. And has some right to be. There are clearly trolls simply there to wind him, and those who agree with him, up. But I fear in reacting as he has, and writing in this way, he has also undermined much of the authority he would seek to claim.
07 Jul 09, 8:36am
I am always intrigued by the use of the words 'we' and 'you' in an open blog, especially when the former is combined with 'allow'.
I'd suggest letting folks' arguments succeed or fail on their merits, or lack of.
Some are still able to make up their own minds without being 'assisted'.
That said, I tend to agree with the rest of the sentiments.
Readers of this blog will know that I have a real issue with 'them' and us' at the best of times, and especially when I find myself rolled up into someone's claim to speak or act for me when they clearly might not.
And, logically, other than venting, on an open blog I would love to hear how Mr. Monbiot proposes that 'he/they' do not 'allow' comment 'they' do not happen to like from some vagauely ill-defined 'others' in future.
'First came the trolls, and I moderated.
Then came for the astroturfers, and I moderated.
Then came those who simply disagreed with me, and I moderated.
Finally, when I had moderated all bar myself, there was no one left to read my blog.'
Paraphrased in honour of another key quote - unarguably attributed - regarding freedoms of speech.
At best pointless. At worst, a slippery path.
Wednesday, June 10, 2009
PROF'S POSER - Of mice and mending
Actually, this is more of a (and inspires another acronym in the process...) 'WIBNI'.
That's 'Wouldn't It Be Nice If..'
Today my trusty wireless keyboard conked. And being a Mac user, going to back-up (never throwing anything away has its uses) is proving a trail, as I really miss the scroll wheel and especially the right click button.
Anyway, a bunch of surfing and a chat with their tech guys suggests it has gone to the great WEEE pile in the sky, especially as its several years post warranty.
The WIBNI bit is that while the keyboard is no more, the mouse and all the charger/wireless gubbins is not.
It just seems a pity that I could not find a soul that has a dead mouse but still pukka keyboard and come to an arrangement. Even if it is just a central place to pool our respective working bits to recombine one operational unit.
Though I guess the frequencies would need to be matched.
A sort of 'Join 'Em Up JunkkYard' or 'Fix it FreeCycle'
Friday, May 15, 2009
..it's a wonderful town! The battery's flat and the generator's down
Again, I get interested in a bit of science reporting.
Losing sustainability in the urban canyons
I was simply intrigued by the back of envelope calculations, but my enquiry did provoke an interesting response, which at least allowed me the opportunity to expand and clarify (plus indulge in a little blogger teasing:)....
Just looking at the nice picture at the top, I merely wonder what the consequences might be as the sun moves and certain areas end up in the shade of various tall structures around and abounding. At least in the original piece there was a caveat on the wind contribution, though again I have to wonder to what extent there may be problems from the wind patterns around such urban canyons. I am sure if Mr. Cameron had a penthouse overlooking Central Park we may have some better idea. So no matter what people can and then decide to do, even en masse, I'd still be keen to know what the realistic generation capacities might be, bearing in mind the ambient climatic and architectural conditions, from someone who might know. I am still hoping in matters of renewable energy deliverables, historical data and professional experience and calculations can get pretty close to a reasonable estimate. Perhaps a tad closer than the current rough calculations? This indeed may be of value to the journalists from Bulgaria, India, Kenya and Peru, and the numerous interest groups represented at the meeting, who I am sure have flown in from far and wide to appreciate all the facts about what causes climate change... and possible high enviROI mitigations, of course. Though some terribly reasonable optimistic level lampooners may still prefer to stick a finger up in the air. To measure, of course.
After this, it kind of fell apart on the moderation, which seems to be almost inevitable.
So my questions on the science get buried under stupid finger pointing. Again. Nice one, Aunty.
Losing sustainability in the urban canyons
I was simply intrigued by the back of envelope calculations, but my enquiry did provoke an interesting response, which at least allowed me the opportunity to expand and clarify (plus indulge in a little blogger teasing:)....
Just looking at the nice picture at the top, I merely wonder what the consequences might be as the sun moves and certain areas end up in the shade of various tall structures around and abounding. At least in the original piece there was a caveat on the wind contribution, though again I have to wonder to what extent there may be problems from the wind patterns around such urban canyons. I am sure if Mr. Cameron had a penthouse overlooking Central Park we may have some better idea. So no matter what people can and then decide to do, even en masse, I'd still be keen to know what the realistic generation capacities might be, bearing in mind the ambient climatic and architectural conditions, from someone who might know. I am still hoping in matters of renewable energy deliverables, historical data and professional experience and calculations can get pretty close to a reasonable estimate. Perhaps a tad closer than the current rough calculations? This indeed may be of value to the journalists from Bulgaria, India, Kenya and Peru, and the numerous interest groups represented at the meeting, who I am sure have flown in from far and wide to appreciate all the facts about what causes climate change... and possible high enviROI mitigations, of course. Though some terribly reasonable optimistic level lampooners may still prefer to stick a finger up in the air. To measure, of course.
After this, it kind of fell apart on the moderation, which seems to be almost inevitable.
So my questions on the science get buried under stupid finger pointing. Again. Nice one, Aunty.
Monday, May 11, 2009
How to you manage beans if you don't understand how they grow?
The lack of science qualifications in Government and media continues to frustrate.
I am not alone.
Science in Whitehall
And what is PPE? Procrastinating, Pretension and Expenses? (though I do acknowledge the honourable member is relatively - a key distinction, and not counting the family property empire - 'clean' in comparison to others who see greening in perhaps a different way than some).
Couldn't agree more on the need for more science advice in government.
Just, please could we have it balanced and free of agenda? If the salary depends from the off on making the numbers fit the desired result, that is not science. That is simply politics packaged in a different way.
I am not alone.
Science in Whitehall
And what is PPE? Procrastinating, Pretension and Expenses? (though I do acknowledge the honourable member is relatively - a key distinction, and not counting the family property empire - 'clean' in comparison to others who see greening in perhaps a different way than some).
Couldn't agree more on the need for more science advice in government.
Just, please could we have it balanced and free of agenda? If the salary depends from the off on making the numbers fit the desired result, that is not science. That is simply politics packaged in a different way.
Friday, May 08, 2009
Green..er by design?
Shame it only seems to have garnered two comments, but every little bit helps..
Can good design save newspapers? How about the environment?
Whilst tweaks in certain areas can always improve matters, I would suggest that form and function are essential complements and need to work together, especially when it comes to 'saving' anything. And certainly when it comes to the only thing the really matters: the substantive, end-benefit embracing, customer-pleasing product/content.
As certain events of late have proven, how things look, especially if it is at the expense of tangible delivery, can prove... retrograde in the longer term. Polishing a Terminally Unpopular/Unpleasant Rationale, Reprobate or Device springs to mind.
I am all for designers making the world greener, though.
And would encourage any and all initiatives to try and encourage this.
So long as it's more in the cause actually BEING it as opposed to just LOOKING it. That won't wash any more.
As you mention the genre, one area with great potential is packaging, and I am a great advocate of starting to look at designed-in initiatives from the outset.
However, you, your readers and even some designers might be interested in a little competition currently at Junkk.com called 'Here's One I RE:made Earlier'
A bit of fun, helping save a bit of money, time and, with luck... the planet:)
Now, despite it being online (I think that the impact of IT needs to be viewed vs. previous and even current alternatives before getting too excited about impacts, though efficiency/reduction improvements can always be made and are welcome - but I just squirted 10MB to London that before would have been on a courier or, worse, with a suit carrying a bag) who could argue with that little row of consumer crowd-pleasers as a positive, proactive design principle?
Especially when it can actually help with the marketing too.
Can good design save newspapers? How about the environment?
Whilst tweaks in certain areas can always improve matters, I would suggest that form and function are essential complements and need to work together, especially when it comes to 'saving' anything. And certainly when it comes to the only thing the really matters: the substantive, end-benefit embracing, customer-pleasing product/content.
As certain events of late have proven, how things look, especially if it is at the expense of tangible delivery, can prove... retrograde in the longer term. Polishing a Terminally Unpopular/Unpleasant Rationale, Reprobate or Device springs to mind.
I am all for designers making the world greener, though.
And would encourage any and all initiatives to try and encourage this.
So long as it's more in the cause actually BEING it as opposed to just LOOKING it. That won't wash any more.
As you mention the genre, one area with great potential is packaging, and I am a great advocate of starting to look at designed-in initiatives from the outset.
However, you, your readers and even some designers might be interested in a little competition currently at Junkk.com called 'Here's One I RE:made Earlier'
A bit of fun, helping save a bit of money, time and, with luck... the planet:)
Now, despite it being online (I think that the impact of IT needs to be viewed vs. previous and even current alternatives before getting too excited about impacts, though efficiency/reduction improvements can always be made and are welcome - but I just squirted 10MB to London that before would have been on a courier or, worse, with a suit carrying a bag) who could argue with that little row of consumer crowd-pleasers as a positive, proactive design principle?
Especially when it can actually help with the marketing too.
Thursday, April 23, 2009
Well I do declare... a Junkk FATWa
A Junkketeer wrote in...
The budget made me laugh, new investment in green technology for car development ! How can that be green ?
Eon's name is being bandied around to start burying the CO2 under the sea using Carbon capture technology for coal fire stations .
Hang on !-isn't Gordon Brown's brother one of the directors of Eon .... hmm, and who said the CO2 will remain under the sea.
Electric cars for London , that will course create more C02 than current petrol and diesel .
Useless ! they haven't a ~~~#ing clue .
I too was laughing, but some in the vicinity said it sounded a tad manic.
I thought they had no clue, but now I am not so sure. Having had an ethics by-pass the one thing for sure is they will all get paid, and pensioned, on the ashes of our kids' futures.
I am now erring more on declaring a FATWa... 'First Against The Wall.. when the revolution comes!'
The budget made me laugh, new investment in green technology for car development ! How can that be green ?
Eon's name is being bandied around to start burying the CO2 under the sea using Carbon capture technology for coal fire stations .
Hang on !-isn't Gordon Brown's brother one of the directors of Eon .... hmm, and who said the CO2 will remain under the sea.
Electric cars for London , that will course create more C02 than current petrol and diesel .
Useless ! they haven't a ~~~#ing clue .
I too was laughing, but some in the vicinity said it sounded a tad manic.
I thought they had no clue, but now I am not so sure. Having had an ethics by-pass the one thing for sure is they will all get paid, and pensioned, on the ashes of our kids' futures.
I am now erring more on declaring a FATWa... 'First Against The Wall.. when the revolution comes!'
Thursday, March 12, 2009
It's called carpe... er.. moment
Act now before packs go from BAD to worse
See an opportunity...grab it:)
Not sure it is what was intended. Hey, what's the worse that can happen:)
See an opportunity...grab it:)
Not sure it is what was intended. Hey, what's the worse that can happen:)
Thursday, February 19, 2009
Packing 'em in
I just got back last night from a two-day trip to an intellectual property conference in Glasgow.
And it was one to which I had been invited to as a speaker. The roller-coaster ride that is RE:tie was and still is deemed to be an interesting study. And this time it was in the awesome, but imposing setting of the University's stunning Bute Hall.
Mostly pretty high-end legal stuff which was waaaay over my head, but some useful material which I'll share here for budding researchers and/or inventors. One of my points was that those who 'create' are often not that well served by the highly necessary complementary business aspects to get to sustainable models, and that is often down to not knowing about a lot that is in fact out there for free.
For instance, a speaker from the IPO shared these latest, and highly useful IP tools on their site:
Lambert Agreements - http://www.innovation.gov.uk/lambertagreements/
Gowers Review - http://www.ipo.gov.uk/licensingbooklet.pdf
Patent Licensing - http://www.ipo.gov.uk/licensingbooklet.pdf
IP Healthcheck - http://www.ipo.gov.uk/iphealthcheck - worth doing!
Meanwhile another speaker, from the British Library, shared this:
Business & IP Centre - http://www.bl.uk/bipc/
Plus the fact that they really do have an awful lot of information available that one might not realise is there to be had. For instance, I have been staring at a price of £1200 for a report on the packaging market for bottle caps, and wishing I could have a look. Seems that, via the Library, I may be able to just that! For nothing.
And then, in the course of some spirited discussion between podium and floor, I ended up with some key offers of direct help which I am hoping will prove highly valuable.
One little bit of Kismet was that the very day I spoke the news media were alive with top stories about packaging, and manufacturers and retailers were not coming out well and/or struggling to find and share solutions, and certainly few that would be deemed positive in a consumer sense.
As I was there I missed them, but have had a quick trawl to try and capture a few. They did not hurt my advocacy for Junkk.com or the cause of RE:tie, a redesign that turns grams of plastic from litter or landfill... to reuse.
Telegraph - 'Excessive' supermarket packaging is leading to higher council tax bills
Examples included Britvic saving 1,670 tons of plastic a year by redesigning Robinsons squash bottles
Telegraph - M&S bottom of packaging recycling list - Time for Plan, er... reuse?
Telegraph - There is a Plan B - with a link to a comment I made a while ago! One of ... two so far, even with the revisit.
Telegraph - Packaging 'sinks Marks & Spencer green bid' - Not a headline I fancy they will appreciate. To be fair, and the MSM seem hardly capable of this when a good headline beckons, the last para does suggest 'M&S disputed the research, which looked at 29 of their 5,500 products, and said 91 per cent of their food packaging could be recycled.' Might have been worth a follow-up to check? Or... moving on.
Telegraph - M&S worst supermarket in green report - Archive stuff, but when you end up bottom I guess that is what gets focused upon. Especially if you make some big claims that seem poorly borne out in fact.
Times - Supermarkets fail to shine in packaging study to find the greenest of them all - Interesting that they single out Waitrose instead. It is worth noting the first comment that councils, or rather the national policies, are by no means helping.
Indy - Pay packaging recycling costs, stores told - Just so's we're clear: when they pay... we pay.
Guardian - Supermarkets' excessive packaging exposed by survey - I'm surprised there was not more comment.
Packaging News - Supermarket 'excess packaging' report dismissed as "nonsense"
Packaging News - Retailers fight back as media storm erupts over 'excess packaging'
Packaging News - Soap Box: packaging's public image
Packaging News - The LGA's 'War on Waste': a response
An industry response that is, as might be expected.. 'robust'. But before we go all Mandy Rice Davis WeTWoST (Well, They Would Say That), read some of the responses. Not sure any MSM types did, especially on broadcast. Lots of emotive, and illogical, vox pops supported by often rather conveniently forgetful 'experts' with axes to grind and targets to meet. It IS all vastly more complex and serving the public ill to pretend otherwise.
'..a constructive debate about packaging in the media.'
Bless. When there are agendas to push, ratings to drive and targets to meet, I have long since given up on anything well researched and/or objective from the MSM, complicit at the hands of those who are happy to use their less than challenging reporting abilities to push press releases out as stories.
And I am a green campaigner!
My frustration lies in that all too often the cause of actual overall reductions (waste, emissions, etc... that I categorise under enviROI) is poorly served. Also there can be a highly negative, and damaging backlash if these 'messengers' have their messages shown to be poorly thought through or, worse, often more in the cause of their own self-interest.
Fool the public once, shame on you...
The ever worthwhile Almost Mrs. Average has a balanced, consumer-centric take... Recycling Blame
The public... is not daft.
Tuesday, October 07, 2008
Have press card, will travel (to save planet)
BERG BENCHLESS
Now I have just about got used to endless celebs and their camp following 'journalistic' mates raising 'awareness' of climate change in their sweetly ironic way by helicoptering up to a snow-covered place at the first crack of a calving glacier or to see if saying 'boo' to a polar bear will stress it out... a bit more.
Or getting in a boat which, one presumes, uses some form of internal combustion power ('No dear, you can't put your settee on the funnel as that's where the poisonous gasses belch from when Capt'n Fishstocks yells 'Hypocrisy Ho!'). They have gathered that kayaks don't work too well, especially when trying to make a point.
But I am still trying to get my jaw off the floor as I watch my BBC Breakfast News about a couple who used their Tesco ClubCard Miles to buy Business Class flights.
Hey, whatever keeps the ratings up in Sevenoaks, I guess.
However, what got me, immediately, (and, to be fair a few readers, who whose comments were jokily referred to mid-way) was that what made this advertisement for the 'buy more stuff' scheme by a major private retailer a 'good thing' to share was, apparently, the fact that the couple accrued these points by collecting recycling waste.
Now, I really endorse the notion of reward-based eco-schemes (so long as they make sense.. and work) as opposed to the usual fine or hairshirt stuff, but for the love of Gaia could they not have found someone... anyone... who did not negate the whole effect, and hence point in such a crass manner?
Apparently it was offset. Now, I am no expert, but I am pretty sure the carbon gain of recycling some plastic bottles for 12 weeks is probably going to struggle to cope with what pops out the exhaust of a 747.
I wonder if it was the same one that ferried the bouffant and crew to New York for a quick slot on how the news in America is made. Don't they have guys over there to do that?
And now, as I type, It seems that shrimps in some bay up North are vanishing on account of... the salt water being diluted by all the rain.
There was a time when I would have swallowed that hook, line and mayonnaise, but now, without a serious scientist or two elsewhere agreeing, as far as I am concerned this is more likely due to over-fishing due to ever-increasing demands for prawn-cocktails as such the BBC canteen expands with more staff to address the news 'needs' of a growing population.
Times - Honeymoon takes off with recycled Air Miles -
True eco-champions. Where did they honeymoon? Antarctica? Probably not as it's packed with celeb luvvies and media camp followers raising 'awareness'. Besides the 'irony', anyone calculated 60,000 items recycled vs. 2 on Biz Class in Jumbo, Co2-wise? Or doesn't that matter?
BBC - Recycling litter funds honeymoon
ADDENDUM:
Funny who things turn out. I used the above as a mild example of how perceptions matter on a thread about 'International conferences....' (not by me, I might add) which started a long time ago on a, how to say, 'serious' 'list'. Look how it went:
Me:
I have followed the discussions on this thus far with interest.
It is obvious the balance is never going to be easy.
Take today.
A couple is lauded (rightly) in the media for taking advantage of a
pro-active, positive, incentive-driven supermarket scheme (and well
done them) to reduce waste and encourage recycling.
Their reward is 'points', which they choose to redeem for... two
Business Class seats to an exotic location.
Which aspect did my more 'climate optimistic' readers pick up upon?
As the topic did come up, do any experts present have a ballpark of
how 60,000 pieces of mixed recyclate would stack up, carbon-wise,
versus the consequences of their flight?
The issue of offsetting did come up and, though I fear the principle
is more important here, facts on mitigation would still be helpful.
To which I got an 'off list' reply (funny how the list encourages debate) from a person how might actually know:
Gr8 stuff (privately – as i hesitate to make an ‘expert’ pronouncement here!
My guesstimate though – between you and me – is that the 60,000 pieces will be a few 100kg of CO2e
The exotic flight – perhaps as much as 10 tonnes CO2e
So yes – 100 to one against!
To which I replied (off list - I know a lost cause when it presents):
Ta for the guesstimate. Mine was a fair bit higher, but I figured the balance was not that optimal.
I do have a bit of a bee in my bonnet on those talking a lot actually doing very little, and racking up a lot of bad enviROI whilst engaging in little more than that which they seek to scold others for doing: earning a living. I don't deny them the opportunity, but do question the multiplicity of standards.
And if those don't play well with my 'hood, then my kids' futures on this planet are not being served well. IMHO:)
I then made a mistake. I added:
At least I didn't get the usual flood of 'How dare you use this list for such things!!!'
Well, yet.
'Yet'... soon came:
All a bit of a no-brainer, I would have though - but obviously not.
Recycling materials is not an excuse for profligate energy use elsewhere. The simple message is that we avoid all energy waste or the game is lost. Flying to exotic locations is, sadly perhaps, a luxury that we can no longer afford. There are a lot of interesting places in Europe, accessible by train at a lower energy cost than a flight to NY and back.
Its not about balance, its about doing things differently. One saving does not justify another case of waste; that's plainly absurd. Clearly the Government have done a poor job in communicating the problem if such inane comments are still made.
I didn't comment on xx's original email as xx is a colleague and a friend but the plethora of comments deserve a reply. Much of what is achieved at conferences lies in the social interaction that happens between sessions. That's where contacts are made and useful networks established. Video conferencing certainly has a role but it does not replace every aspect of human contact - except amongst the socially challenged. Of course there are unnecessary jollies, conducted every day, but there are also events that require human contact where the nuances of the other delegates can be seen. That is how human communication evolved and it's not going to change any time soon. Events that deal with issues such as climate change, where networks develop that can begin to make more effective change, are sensible uses of travel - and xx did point out that he's not flying. Flying off to exotic locations is, I would have thought, an example of senseless and selfish use of travel.
This is more what I expected.
Clearly the Government have done a poor job in communicating the problem if such inane comments are still made.
I wonder if he meant mine, ad hominem, or the fact that the BBC shared this story as OK because one offset the other. In which cases maybe the government, its national broadcaster and others who would claim to 'know better' are doing a p*ss poor job, I agree.
And I guess Bali is out in future? Then again, getting UK delegates to the US and vice versa will require a nifty train, too.
However, as these guys want 'my sort' out of the club, it is best not to ask in open forum... er... list.
I do fear I touched a raw nerve.
Plus recalling a few past attempts of mine - to point out that when some folk use 'us' as a separate entity to a 'them', the latter might find themselves less sympathetic to the spirit of 'Don't do as I say...' based solely on a bit of perceived 'green cred' - generating more than a couple of old boys muttering about who should be in the club.
Shame then that they are not open to other views, then. Might explain the results generated at a few conferences (very few; I go on my own dime) I have been at where the public and their daily concerns and perceptions are poorly represented.
Sadly, he was also unable to help with my substantive question either. Funny how one willing and able to do so did... off list.
I now have another acronym: IYANWUYAU 'If you are not with us...'
And sadly, I cam mostly apply it to those who should be courting such as me, not driving us away by being incestuous, arrogant, know-all numpties.
Now I have just about got used to endless celebs and their camp following 'journalistic' mates raising 'awareness' of climate change in their sweetly ironic way by helicoptering up to a snow-covered place at the first crack of a calving glacier or to see if saying 'boo' to a polar bear will stress it out... a bit more.
Or getting in a boat which, one presumes, uses some form of internal combustion power ('No dear, you can't put your settee on the funnel as that's where the poisonous gasses belch from when Capt'n Fishstocks yells 'Hypocrisy Ho!'). They have gathered that kayaks don't work too well, especially when trying to make a point.
But I am still trying to get my jaw off the floor as I watch my BBC Breakfast News about a couple who used their Tesco ClubCard Miles to buy Business Class flights.
Hey, whatever keeps the ratings up in Sevenoaks, I guess.
However, what got me, immediately, (and, to be fair a few readers, who whose comments were jokily referred to mid-way) was that what made this advertisement for the 'buy more stuff' scheme by a major private retailer a 'good thing' to share was, apparently, the fact that the couple accrued these points by collecting recycling waste.
Now, I really endorse the notion of reward-based eco-schemes (so long as they make sense.. and work) as opposed to the usual fine or hairshirt stuff, but for the love of Gaia could they not have found someone... anyone... who did not negate the whole effect, and hence point in such a crass manner?
Apparently it was offset. Now, I am no expert, but I am pretty sure the carbon gain of recycling some plastic bottles for 12 weeks is probably going to struggle to cope with what pops out the exhaust of a 747.
I wonder if it was the same one that ferried the bouffant and crew to New York for a quick slot on how the news in America is made. Don't they have guys over there to do that?
And now, as I type, It seems that shrimps in some bay up North are vanishing on account of... the salt water being diluted by all the rain.
There was a time when I would have swallowed that hook, line and mayonnaise, but now, without a serious scientist or two elsewhere agreeing, as far as I am concerned this is more likely due to over-fishing due to ever-increasing demands for prawn-cocktails as such the BBC canteen expands with more staff to address the news 'needs' of a growing population.
Times - Honeymoon takes off with recycled Air Miles -
True eco-champions. Where did they honeymoon? Antarctica? Probably not as it's packed with celeb luvvies and media camp followers raising 'awareness'. Besides the 'irony', anyone calculated 60,000 items recycled vs. 2 on Biz Class in Jumbo, Co2-wise? Or doesn't that matter?
BBC - Recycling litter funds honeymoon
ADDENDUM:
Funny who things turn out. I used the above as a mild example of how perceptions matter on a thread about 'International conferences....' (not by me, I might add) which started a long time ago on a, how to say, 'serious' 'list'. Look how it went:
Me:
I have followed the discussions on this thus far with interest.
It is obvious the balance is never going to be easy.
Take today.
A couple is lauded (rightly) in the media for taking advantage of a
pro-active, positive, incentive-driven supermarket scheme (and well
done them) to reduce waste and encourage recycling.
Their reward is 'points', which they choose to redeem for... two
Business Class seats to an exotic location.
Which aspect did my more 'climate optimistic' readers pick up upon?
As the topic did come up, do any experts present have a ballpark of
how 60,000 pieces of mixed recyclate would stack up, carbon-wise,
versus the consequences of their flight?
The issue of offsetting did come up and, though I fear the principle
is more important here, facts on mitigation would still be helpful.
To which I got an 'off list' reply (funny how the list encourages debate) from a person how might actually know:
Gr8 stuff (privately – as i hesitate to make an ‘expert’ pronouncement here!
My guesstimate though – between you and me – is that the 60,000 pieces will be a few 100kg of CO2e
The exotic flight – perhaps as much as 10 tonnes CO2e
So yes – 100 to one against!
To which I replied (off list - I know a lost cause when it presents):
Ta for the guesstimate. Mine was a fair bit higher, but I figured the balance was not that optimal.
I do have a bit of a bee in my bonnet on those talking a lot actually doing very little, and racking up a lot of bad enviROI whilst engaging in little more than that which they seek to scold others for doing: earning a living. I don't deny them the opportunity, but do question the multiplicity of standards.
And if those don't play well with my 'hood, then my kids' futures on this planet are not being served well. IMHO:)
I then made a mistake. I added:
At least I didn't get the usual flood of 'How dare you use this list for such things!!!'
Well, yet.
'Yet'... soon came:
All a bit of a no-brainer, I would have though - but obviously not.
Recycling materials is not an excuse for profligate energy use elsewhere. The simple message is that we avoid all energy waste or the game is lost. Flying to exotic locations is, sadly perhaps, a luxury that we can no longer afford. There are a lot of interesting places in Europe, accessible by train at a lower energy cost than a flight to NY and back.
Its not about balance, its about doing things differently. One saving does not justify another case of waste; that's plainly absurd. Clearly the Government have done a poor job in communicating the problem if such inane comments are still made.
I didn't comment on xx's original email as xx is a colleague and a friend but the plethora of comments deserve a reply. Much of what is achieved at conferences lies in the social interaction that happens between sessions. That's where contacts are made and useful networks established. Video conferencing certainly has a role but it does not replace every aspect of human contact - except amongst the socially challenged. Of course there are unnecessary jollies, conducted every day, but there are also events that require human contact where the nuances of the other delegates can be seen. That is how human communication evolved and it's not going to change any time soon. Events that deal with issues such as climate change, where networks develop that can begin to make more effective change, are sensible uses of travel - and xx did point out that he's not flying. Flying off to exotic locations is, I would have thought, an example of senseless and selfish use of travel.
This is more what I expected.
Clearly the Government have done a poor job in communicating the problem if such inane comments are still made.
I wonder if he meant mine, ad hominem, or the fact that the BBC shared this story as OK because one offset the other. In which cases maybe the government, its national broadcaster and others who would claim to 'know better' are doing a p*ss poor job, I agree.
And I guess Bali is out in future? Then again, getting UK delegates to the US and vice versa will require a nifty train, too.
However, as these guys want 'my sort' out of the club, it is best not to ask in open forum... er... list.
I do fear I touched a raw nerve.
Plus recalling a few past attempts of mine - to point out that when some folk use 'us' as a separate entity to a 'them', the latter might find themselves less sympathetic to the spirit of 'Don't do as I say...' based solely on a bit of perceived 'green cred' - generating more than a couple of old boys muttering about who should be in the club.
Shame then that they are not open to other views, then. Might explain the results generated at a few conferences (very few; I go on my own dime) I have been at where the public and their daily concerns and perceptions are poorly represented.
Sadly, he was also unable to help with my substantive question either. Funny how one willing and able to do so did... off list.
I now have another acronym: IYANWUYAU 'If you are not with us...'
And sadly, I cam mostly apply it to those who should be courting such as me, not driving us away by being incestuous, arrogant, know-all numpties.
Friday, September 12, 2008
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
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, July 24, 2008
O, solar mi... o mi
I'll be posting this also under the main Solar category (label link below) as it's an interesting set of insights.
One of the blog/forums I frequent is a very worthwhile source of links, thoughts and, until recently, debate. In a less than thrilling example of how some 'purists' can shape the group think I have found myself much less likely to contribute by off-forum... approaches. Makes me all the more determined to police a fair but firm moderating line here to keep the bullies in check and the debate productive.
Recently there was a posting citing a Guardian piece, which I duly noted. Frankly I didn't do much else as it was about a bit of a punt and I tend to avoid these 'til they get serious.
Guardian - £37bn plan to power EU with the Saharan sun
However, a follow-up posting on this forum did catch my eye, and as it was in the ongoing spirit of challenge and making one think a bit more before leaping headlong into the 'green is good no arguments allowed' mode that I am so critical of (and seems all too practiced by so called 'professional journalists' in certain quarters, at best for a quick story, at worst ratings or some subjective agenda. Plus, if you read on, such as Dear Leader and Cher Napoleon, so it has already got serious), I thought what was written was worth sharing at least, and have been given permission by Frank Holland, the author:
I have been examining DESERTEC
http://www.trec-uk.org.uk/csp/in_brief.htm for some time. It all sounds
so simple that even politicians can understand it. You build solar
energy generating systems where there is a lot of sun, the Sahara
desert. Then you send the electricity across North Africa, across the
Med, into Europe and split it into a fabulous grid system, see
http://www.trec-uk.org.uk/elec_eng/grid.htm .
Well look at the distribution map at http://www.trec-uk.org.uk/ look at
all the places terrorists could cause damage...blow up a few lines and
cripple Europe. There are 8 lines feeding Europe, with long stretches
which could not be secured all the time.
Plus a little problem called desert winds, see
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sahara_Desert_(ecoregion)
Sand driven by wind will soon take the shine off all those mirrors used
to concentrate the sun light.
As always with these mega projects there are always downsides, but the
enthusiasts down play those.
Local micro generation will be much more stable with millions of
connections to the grid, a few failures will be unimportant to the whole
system.
I cannot speak for his background but these points were well made, and supported by links to more information, as with this one on my agreeing with his point on wind etching/erosion, having not thought of it until he pointed it out:
Not just erosion, but the risk of burial....sand and wind build sands
dunes, see http://www.saharamet.com/desert/photos/Sahara.html
These are considerations that those standing ready to blow bazillions on projects of still uncertain enviROI will, I hope, at least have answers to. And will be brought to the fore by responsible journalists in major media before charging off on the next set of vast capital projects in the name of green.
There was another poster with some other interesting points on transmission drop outs, etc, based on the proximity principle, but have not his permission yet to quote verbatim and credit.
Addendum -
EU Referendum - Gullible or not?
One of the blog/forums I frequent is a very worthwhile source of links, thoughts and, until recently, debate. In a less than thrilling example of how some 'purists' can shape the group think I have found myself much less likely to contribute by off-forum... approaches. Makes me all the more determined to police a fair but firm moderating line here to keep the bullies in check and the debate productive.
Recently there was a posting citing a Guardian piece, which I duly noted. Frankly I didn't do much else as it was about a bit of a punt and I tend to avoid these 'til they get serious.
Guardian - £37bn plan to power EU with the Saharan sun
However, a follow-up posting on this forum did catch my eye, and as it was in the ongoing spirit of challenge and making one think a bit more before leaping headlong into the 'green is good no arguments allowed' mode that I am so critical of (and seems all too practiced by so called 'professional journalists' in certain quarters, at best for a quick story, at worst ratings or some subjective agenda. Plus, if you read on, such as Dear Leader and Cher Napoleon, so it has already got serious), I thought what was written was worth sharing at least, and have been given permission by Frank Holland, the author:
I have been examining DESERTEC
http://www.trec-uk.org.uk/csp/in_brief.htm for some time. It all sounds
so simple that even politicians can understand it. You build solar
energy generating systems where there is a lot of sun, the Sahara
desert. Then you send the electricity across North Africa, across the
Med, into Europe and split it into a fabulous grid system, see
http://www.trec-uk.org.uk/elec_eng/grid.htm .
Well look at the distribution map at http://www.trec-uk.org.uk/ look at
all the places terrorists could cause damage...blow up a few lines and
cripple Europe. There are 8 lines feeding Europe, with long stretches
which could not be secured all the time.
Plus a little problem called desert winds, see
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sahara_Desert_(ecoregion)
Sand driven by wind will soon take the shine off all those mirrors used
to concentrate the sun light.
As always with these mega projects there are always downsides, but the
enthusiasts down play those.
Local micro generation will be much more stable with millions of
connections to the grid, a few failures will be unimportant to the whole
system.
I cannot speak for his background but these points were well made, and supported by links to more information, as with this one on my agreeing with his point on wind etching/erosion, having not thought of it until he pointed it out:
Not just erosion, but the risk of burial....sand and wind build sands
dunes, see http://www.saharamet.com/desert/photos/Sahara.html
These are considerations that those standing ready to blow bazillions on projects of still uncertain enviROI will, I hope, at least have answers to. And will be brought to the fore by responsible journalists in major media before charging off on the next set of vast capital projects in the name of green.
There was another poster with some other interesting points on transmission drop outs, etc, based on the proximity principle, but have not his permission yet to quote verbatim and credit.
Addendum -
EU Referendum - Gullible or not?
Wednesday, June 25, 2008
Interesting, but...
I stumbled across this en route to another piece.
Long hours and obsession with minutiae. No 10's private man
It could so easily have been passed over as yet another in the endless series of chatterati-calls drones we get subjected to these days, but my eye alighted on the first 'example' cited - 'whether the government should impose a deposit on bottles of soft drinks and beer, to encourage people to return them.'
Sadly, I for now remain none the wiser. It is to be hoped that, at some stage, an answer, and a good decision, may ensue. But maybe a newer process will take precedence over actually delivering any result. Another POOR - Show (Process Over Obvious Result, mainly for show). It seems to be a trend.
Long hours and obsession with minutiae. No 10's private man
It could so easily have been passed over as yet another in the endless series of chatterati-calls drones we get subjected to these days, but my eye alighted on the first 'example' cited - 'whether the government should impose a deposit on bottles of soft drinks and beer, to encourage people to return them.'
Sadly, I for now remain none the wiser. It is to be hoped that, at some stage, an answer, and a good decision, may ensue. But maybe a newer process will take precedence over actually delivering any result. Another POOR - Show (Process Over Obvious Result, mainly for show). It seems to be a trend.
Monday, June 02, 2008
Getting God on your side
It's an often invoked incentive. I am less sure about how it's serving in t'other direction.
Bishop compares those who ignore climate change to Josef Fritzl
We've had it from the Vatican and now The Bishop of Stafford adds hsi valued opinion to imspire and effect the necessary engagement from the global flock. Not.
Bishop compares those who ignore climate change to Josef Fritzl
We've had it from the Vatican and now The Bishop of Stafford adds hsi valued opinion to imspire and effect the necessary engagement from the global flock. Not.
Thursday, May 29, 2008
QUOTE OF THE DAY - What a LOAD
Yes, it's a new acronym, too: Lexicon Of Absolute Doublespeak
The Register : The Department of Business, Enterprise and Regulatory Reform has decided not to appeal a legal ruling that it must release information on secret meetings between ministers, civil servants and lobbyists at the Confederation of British Industry.
BERR said keeping such information private would "protect the 'thinking space' necessary for good public policy formulation"
So when you don't feel like owning up to any, possibly dodgy stuff you may have been/are up to, just get out of jail free by claiming you are 'protecting your thinking space'.
The Register : The Department of Business, Enterprise and Regulatory Reform has decided not to appeal a legal ruling that it must release information on secret meetings between ministers, civil servants and lobbyists at the Confederation of British Industry.
BERR said keeping such information private would "protect the 'thinking space' necessary for good public policy formulation"
So when you don't feel like owning up to any, possibly dodgy stuff you may have been/are up to, just get out of jail free by claiming you are 'protecting your thinking space'.
Little fleas
The lobby in our house is where no one actually stays longer than they need to.
It merely a gateway to another place, offering a brief interlude between being on the inside and the outside. Hence it is merely functional, usually a bit dusty, prone to draughts and not my favourite place.
I ponder this as I stood in the lobby of the Houses of Parliament during a tour, and learned that the verb came from the noun, as this was where people sought, and seek to influence those in power.
Government ordered to disclose business lobbying on green policy
Just as there will always be politics when you have more than two folk vying for position, it is foolish to think that, where money is involved, there will no be all manner of shenanigans in trying to sway a decision. And, in a democracy, there can be no restriction on any and all people's rights to make their case.
But what I see in the name of 'lobbying' today is a complete corruption of the fair principles originally intended. As this case lays bare.
Nice one, FoE. Respec'. Mind you, it might all just drive the SOSO sods underground.
The Register - Legal blow to secret government lobbying
The Register - NEW - UK gov waves white flag on secret lobbying ruling
It merely a gateway to another place, offering a brief interlude between being on the inside and the outside. Hence it is merely functional, usually a bit dusty, prone to draughts and not my favourite place.
I ponder this as I stood in the lobby of the Houses of Parliament during a tour, and learned that the verb came from the noun, as this was where people sought, and seek to influence those in power.
Government ordered to disclose business lobbying on green policy
Just as there will always be politics when you have more than two folk vying for position, it is foolish to think that, where money is involved, there will no be all manner of shenanigans in trying to sway a decision. And, in a democracy, there can be no restriction on any and all people's rights to make their case.
But what I see in the name of 'lobbying' today is a complete corruption of the fair principles originally intended. As this case lays bare.
Nice one, FoE. Respec'. Mind you, it might all just drive the SOSO sods underground.
The Register - Legal blow to secret government lobbying
The Register - NEW - UK gov waves white flag on secret lobbying ruling
Tuesday, May 20, 2008
Careful who you wish to be
It comes with my Sunday paper, but the 'Style' section is one I could well do without.
It usually has me reaching for the bucket, but now the luvvies have 'discovered' green it's more like the AK.
I was going to pass this one by, but as a poster pointed out, 'Socially Conscious Upwardly Mobile' does have a certain ring: Scuppie power
It usually has me reaching for the bucket, but now the luvvies have 'discovered' green it's more like the AK.
I was going to pass this one by, but as a poster pointed out, 'Socially Conscious Upwardly Mobile' does have a certain ring: Scuppie power
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)