Check out this TVC:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rWgCQgzJOU4&feature=player_embedded
I am... excited.
This is a huge brand not just paying CSR lip service to second use, but building a major marketing campaign around it.
This post will with luck be added to as I request more info.
http://www.designboom.com/design/coca-cola-2nd-lives-caps-campaign-ogilvy-mather-06-03-2014/
Showing posts with label CHINA. Show all posts
Showing posts with label CHINA. Show all posts
Tuesday, June 03, 2014
Thursday, July 30, 2009
China sin dumb?
What can China do about climate change?
I must say I am wondering when China does get to qualify as a first world country, with all the joys we have to offer, and share in.
Maybe we could send back our GOATs (Guv of all talents) in a couple of containers to help work the same magic on their economy that has been conjured here?
Meanwhile...
Guardian - NEW - India gets serious on climate change
I must say I am wondering when China does get to qualify as a first world country, with all the joys we have to offer, and share in.
Maybe we could send back our GOATs (Guv of all talents) in a couple of containers to help work the same magic on their economy that has been conjured here?
Meanwhile...
Guardian - NEW - India gets serious on climate change
Monday, February 23, 2009
The rise of the rest
I actually don't think of other countries as 'the rest', but this is an interesting set of stats, especially if you consider the enviro-impacts.
Rise of the Rest - Futuresgroup.wordpress.com
Mind you, it's good our PM is concerned about Mrs. Tweed, nee Goody, as a matter of priority.
Rise of the Rest - Futuresgroup.wordpress.com
Mind you, it's good our PM is concerned about Mrs. Tweed, nee Goody, as a matter of priority.
Friday, August 01, 2008
Thursday, July 31, 2008
Pledge, target... what exactly are they for?
Its green medal hopes are lost but Beijing must race on - Failure to meet the Olympic cleanup pledge will embarrass China.
I wish I could run my business as most governments (are alloweed to) run theirs.
"So... what I said wee'd do to get the job hasn't happened. Oh, and it's tripled in price, ta very much'.
I wish I could run my business as most governments (are alloweed to) run theirs.
"So... what I said wee'd do to get the job hasn't happened. Oh, and it's tripled in price, ta very much'.
Saturday, July 19, 2008
It's a view, certainly
Over on my other blog, there is reference to a BBC Editor who is 'helping' the government on some political options.
There is a small storm however, based on the fact that he essentially outlines an either/or for them, and by association the reader, that sort of throws the imposition or sparing of pain ultimately back on the public. Basically tax more or provide fewer services.
What he has been caught doing, and held to account for, is ignoring another option which, while equally unpalatable, should at least be in the mix. And that is trim the fat within the machine of government itself first. No real surprise of course, bearing in mind the unique way the BBC is funded, and the way this government has conducted itself over the last decade. How many more packaged and pensioned civ. servs and quango-getters on the public payroll now...1 million?
Which is what struck me reading this, for obvious reasons that will become clear, if horrible to be thinking about:
The natural consequence of human greed
There is no excuse not to do what one can, but it certainly makes me even more determined not to get on the sanctimonious route of many of the greenerati who may do all sorts of stuff, and doubtless rush to print to tell us they are, and we should, but for whom the actual back to basics suggested in this piece would not be part of the programme so long as the economy, nice job and/or trust fund delivers.
There is a small storm however, based on the fact that he essentially outlines an either/or for them, and by association the reader, that sort of throws the imposition or sparing of pain ultimately back on the public. Basically tax more or provide fewer services.
What he has been caught doing, and held to account for, is ignoring another option which, while equally unpalatable, should at least be in the mix. And that is trim the fat within the machine of government itself first. No real surprise of course, bearing in mind the unique way the BBC is funded, and the way this government has conducted itself over the last decade. How many more packaged and pensioned civ. servs and quango-getters on the public payroll now...1 million?
Which is what struck me reading this, for obvious reasons that will become clear, if horrible to be thinking about:
The natural consequence of human greed
There is no excuse not to do what one can, but it certainly makes me even more determined not to get on the sanctimonious route of many of the greenerati who may do all sorts of stuff, and doubtless rush to print to tell us they are, and we should, but for whom the actual back to basics suggested in this piece would not be part of the programme so long as the economy, nice job and/or trust fund delivers.
Monday, June 09, 2008
Thursday, April 17, 2008
New $1Billion polysilicon plant in China
As reported in The Engineer, LDK solar is building a huge new polysilicon plant in Xinyu City, China. Polysilicon is the primary starting material for the production of solar photovoltaic cells. Hopefully, mass production on this sort of scale will lead to a reduction in the costs of PV arrays for power generation.
Just one little caveat. Please, please, please, don't handle the toxic waste materials such as silicon tetrachloride in the manner that other polysilicon plants in China appear to do.
Just one little caveat. Please, please, please, don't handle the toxic waste materials such as silicon tetrachloride in the manner that other polysilicon plants in China appear to do.
Tuesday, April 15, 2008
You say tomato
What's in a name?
I've always wondered what the distiction between 'Pollution' and 'Emissions' was.
The former has obvious connotations of nasty stuff that shouldn't be there, but thne so does the latter in one form, whilst in another is just the consequecne of 'stuff' taking place.
But in the great AGW/PMWNCC scehme of things you rarely hear of pollution, as the big issue is CO2... emissions. So it was interesting to see this headline mixing the two in a form if have rarley seen before:
China 'now top carbon polluter'
It also riases a few legintimate qustions about how such massive influnces on the possible negative impacts to the planet's ecosphere get encouraged to join in the mitigation drives.
I've always wondered what the distiction between 'Pollution' and 'Emissions' was.
The former has obvious connotations of nasty stuff that shouldn't be there, but thne so does the latter in one form, whilst in another is just the consequecne of 'stuff' taking place.
But in the great AGW/PMWNCC scehme of things you rarely hear of pollution, as the big issue is CO2... emissions. So it was interesting to see this headline mixing the two in a form if have rarley seen before:
China 'now top carbon polluter'
It also riases a few legintimate qustions about how such massive influnces on the possible negative impacts to the planet's ecosphere get encouraged to join in the mitigation drives.
Wednesday, February 13, 2008
Darfur - is the deafening silence broken at last?
The genocide in Darfur has been going on for what seems years now. Ostensibly, at least according to the current Sudanese government, this dispute between local farmers started over water (the shortage thereof), has caused the deaths of over 200,000 people and created the displacement of an even greater number to refugee camps within Sudan and in its neighbours. The fighting has even spread over the border into Chad and supposedly into Ethiopia too.
Yet the world's major media seems to have generally ignored the entire issue, until now. So what appears to have made the media realise that there is actually an important story behind Darfur?
Ahhhhh, I see, an internationally renowned member of the big screen fraternity, Stephen Spielberg, no less, has made the media luvvies sit up and take notice by stepping down from his role as artistic adviser to the Beijing Olympics opening and closing ceremonies. Now that's something really worth getting worked up about.
Isn't it amazing how a bit of celebrity can raise the media image of an issue whilst the deaths of hundreds of thousands can't?
Yet still not a peep about the fact that Darfur lies right across what is probably the largest potential oilfield in Sudan. Is it me?
Yet the world's major media seems to have generally ignored the entire issue, until now. So what appears to have made the media realise that there is actually an important story behind Darfur?
Ahhhhh, I see, an internationally renowned member of the big screen fraternity, Stephen Spielberg, no less, has made the media luvvies sit up and take notice by stepping down from his role as artistic adviser to the Beijing Olympics opening and closing ceremonies. Now that's something really worth getting worked up about.
Isn't it amazing how a bit of celebrity can raise the media image of an issue whilst the deaths of hundreds of thousands can't?
Yet still not a peep about the fact that Darfur lies right across what is probably the largest potential oilfield in Sudan. Is it me?
Saturday, January 19, 2008
Taking from Peter to pay Pa... Choo Feng?
I have never really understood the concept of 'aid'.
The nearest I came was during the Live Aid stuff when it seemed all a bit dodgy. Rich folk gave money to poor folk to buy stuff from the rich folk. Seemed sort of OK, but somehow the poor folk seemed to still owe the money so ended up worse off.
So you can see my grasp of such things.
And I'm still grappling with it all.
Take today (link(s) to follow I'm sure).
Just watched a slot where our Dear Leader got away from the important issues of reporting on plane crashes (a classic bit of 24/7 media non-news scrabble where, after a few days, we have got no further than the startling notion that it hit the ground early by virtue of not flying any more) seemed to be saying that broke Britain is giving aid to the biggest and fastest growing economies in the world. Don't get it at all.
Now, somewhere in there is the worthy notion of our exporting (and getting paid for... but with our won money) 'expertise' in clean technology, but it all seemed a bit drop in the ocean and tenuous at best.
Meanwhile there are oodles of dirty great and just plain dirty coal fired stations still going up, and the 3 Gorges seems to be an eco disaster already.
I wonder what the Chinese for enviROI is?
The nearest I came was during the Live Aid stuff when it seemed all a bit dodgy. Rich folk gave money to poor folk to buy stuff from the rich folk. Seemed sort of OK, but somehow the poor folk seemed to still owe the money so ended up worse off.
So you can see my grasp of such things.
And I'm still grappling with it all.
Take today (link(s) to follow I'm sure).
Just watched a slot where our Dear Leader got away from the important issues of reporting on plane crashes (a classic bit of 24/7 media non-news scrabble where, after a few days, we have got no further than the startling notion that it hit the ground early by virtue of not flying any more) seemed to be saying that broke Britain is giving aid to the biggest and fastest growing economies in the world. Don't get it at all.
Now, somewhere in there is the worthy notion of our exporting (and getting paid for... but with our won money) 'expertise' in clean technology, but it all seemed a bit drop in the ocean and tenuous at best.
Meanwhile there are oodles of dirty great and just plain dirty coal fired stations still going up, and the 3 Gorges seems to be an eco disaster already.
I wonder what the Chinese for enviROI is?
Tuesday, November 13, 2007
Where there's a will, there's a way out
This is what I clicked: China 'will agree to cut its carbon emissions'
'China, now the world's biggest greenhouse-gas emitter, will eventually agree to cut its soaring carbon dioxide emissions, one of the country's leading environmentalists forecast yesterday – but only on the basis of a deal with the United States and the rest of the developed world.'
Talk about a let-down.
'China, now the world's biggest greenhouse-gas emitter, will eventually agree to cut its soaring carbon dioxide emissions, one of the country's leading environmentalists forecast yesterday – but only on the basis of a deal with the United States and the rest of the developed world.'
Talk about a let-down.
Tuesday, September 04, 2007
We'll be at the rear of the field come 2020
One of the oft quoted comments from those less inclined to consider the consequences of climate change/global warming is that nothing we do will make any difference while countries such as China are industrialising as quickly as they are.
Well, it would appear that when it comes to setting and achieving targets for generation of power from renewables, we will not even be competing in the achievement stakes. Despite Tony's much vaunted and publicly lauded target for the UK of 20% by 2020, we now know (see Coming Clean on this very blog) that the UK has absolutely zero realistic chance of hitting this target, and the best assessment is that we might, just, get to a 9% result if we really put some effort into the tasks required. (The actual result will be only 5% if current policies remain unchanged!)
This from China View, suggests that they intend to get to 15% of energy from renewables by 2020. Having spent some time in that part of the world, and knowing the work ethic of the Chinese, when they make a plan, they always have every intention of meeting the target set. And I am pretty certain that they will achieve this, whilst the UK slowly continues to fall behind in the renewables race.
Once again, it would appear that our Western predilection for setting totally unachievable targets is going to push the UK to the rear of the field. When will we ever learn?
Well, it would appear that when it comes to setting and achieving targets for generation of power from renewables, we will not even be competing in the achievement stakes. Despite Tony's much vaunted and publicly lauded target for the UK of 20% by 2020, we now know (see Coming Clean on this very blog) that the UK has absolutely zero realistic chance of hitting this target, and the best assessment is that we might, just, get to a 9% result if we really put some effort into the tasks required. (The actual result will be only 5% if current policies remain unchanged!)
This from China View, suggests that they intend to get to 15% of energy from renewables by 2020. Having spent some time in that part of the world, and knowing the work ethic of the Chinese, when they make a plan, they always have every intention of meeting the target set. And I am pretty certain that they will achieve this, whilst the UK slowly continues to fall behind in the renewables race.
Once again, it would appear that our Western predilection for setting totally unachievable targets is going to push the UK to the rear of the field. When will we ever learn?
Tuesday, August 28, 2007
Tunnel vision
Merkel presses China on climate - But China said that it was still catching up economically, making it harder to reduce emissions.
With all due deference to our mucking things up westward ho (neat Euro-sino quip, no?) before and still, this rather smacks of getting a warning from below the end of the pier and saying you still need to run off the end as well first before you pay attention.
Ho (this may be a feature) hum. Let's all play doubles roulette with automatics.
With all due deference to our mucking things up westward ho (neat Euro-sino quip, no?) before and still, this rather smacks of getting a warning from below the end of the pier and saying you still need to run off the end as well first before you pay attention.
Ho (this may be a feature) hum. Let's all play doubles roulette with automatics.
Wednesday, July 25, 2007
The 'R' Word
It's waaay up there with 'population', only seems to get bandied about a lot more: Polluting minds
I think I can just about see what you are trying to say. But sadly, it's hard to agree with much of the reasoning.
For a start, I await an adequate definition of 'racism' in any of the contexts it gets so wilfully misused all the time. I actually celebrate many of the differences that exist between races, cultures, etc, but as it is only ever levelled in the negative, I just wonder at what point one is to be censored (where free speech is allowed, natch) from identifying, much less commenting upon, a culture difference. Especially if it is bent on mutually assured self-destruction.
You surely cannot be trying to say that, having arrived at a point where climate change is accepted as most likely being accelerated by the vast amounts of gunk that ever more affluent consumers pour in the air through having the cash to buy ever more 'stuff', no one can question whether one sixth of the world's population may need to get on board with the notion of restraint a tad.
Ok, so the 'rest' of us are pretty darn woeful, especially a certain continent to the left, but at least there are existing and ever-developing mechanisms of restraint that are enshrined in their governance, and which the people can use the power of the vote to enact. Along with the freedom to mention some nasty facts to those whose careers extend to the end of a political term as opposed to when they shuffle off to join their ancestors.
Meanwhile, the guy behind you telling you to stump up for the bullet is...?
I think I can just about see what you are trying to say. But sadly, it's hard to agree with much of the reasoning.
For a start, I await an adequate definition of 'racism' in any of the contexts it gets so wilfully misused all the time. I actually celebrate many of the differences that exist between races, cultures, etc, but as it is only ever levelled in the negative, I just wonder at what point one is to be censored (where free speech is allowed, natch) from identifying, much less commenting upon, a culture difference. Especially if it is bent on mutually assured self-destruction.
You surely cannot be trying to say that, having arrived at a point where climate change is accepted as most likely being accelerated by the vast amounts of gunk that ever more affluent consumers pour in the air through having the cash to buy ever more 'stuff', no one can question whether one sixth of the world's population may need to get on board with the notion of restraint a tad.
Ok, so the 'rest' of us are pretty darn woeful, especially a certain continent to the left, but at least there are existing and ever-developing mechanisms of restraint that are enshrined in their governance, and which the people can use the power of the vote to enact. Along with the freedom to mention some nasty facts to those whose careers extend to the end of a political term as opposed to when they shuffle off to join their ancestors.
Meanwhile, the guy behind you telling you to stump up for the bullet is...?
Wednesday, June 20, 2007
Two Wongs don't...
In the interview referred to in my last post, Mr. Miliband made a fair point when challenged about relative actions. But it's hard not be struck by today's Guardian lead - China passes US as world's biggest CO2 emitter - and a rather smaller associated plea - 'Are you doing your bit?' - in the same piece.
Now, as my sons titter, and some quango-funded PC-brigade try and figure out how to bust me for that headline, I can only agree with Mr. M that it does probably make his job a lot harder when he meets his Chinese counterpart if we are doing diddly to put our own house in order.
But....
I'm afraid that, as the man to convince me of anything, much less the wisdom of saving my own future, he is not proving the most inspired of choices... or messengers.
Bar this one reasonable retort, in the interview he was not convincing at all. And the examples of what 'we' are being called upon to engage with and/or do are not doing much either.
Even his 'defence' of the point regarding the example of his soon-to-be-ex-boss' predilection for jumping on a plane at the sound of an envelope being opened was fudged, and deliberately spun away without giving any answer. So why should we listen... or act? And speaking of China, the book I am reviewing, Last Call, paints one heck of a picture of the imminent Asia tourist industry. Scary.
You need more than facts to persuade. You need trust. And passion.
I am looking for what's right to support and do, but on this basis I'm afraid Minister. M is not looking like the one to deliver it.
Now, as my sons titter, and some quango-funded PC-brigade try and figure out how to bust me for that headline, I can only agree with Mr. M that it does probably make his job a lot harder when he meets his Chinese counterpart if we are doing diddly to put our own house in order.
But....
I'm afraid that, as the man to convince me of anything, much less the wisdom of saving my own future, he is not proving the most inspired of choices... or messengers.
Bar this one reasonable retort, in the interview he was not convincing at all. And the examples of what 'we' are being called upon to engage with and/or do are not doing much either.
Even his 'defence' of the point regarding the example of his soon-to-be-ex-boss' predilection for jumping on a plane at the sound of an envelope being opened was fudged, and deliberately spun away without giving any answer. So why should we listen... or act? And speaking of China, the book I am reviewing, Last Call, paints one heck of a picture of the imminent Asia tourist industry. Scary.
You need more than facts to persuade. You need trust. And passion.
I am looking for what's right to support and do, but on this basis I'm afraid Minister. M is not looking like the one to deliver it.
Monday, June 04, 2007
It probably makes more sense in Chinese
At least I hope it does: China says climate policy must make room for growth
Tuesday, March 06, 2007
Dragon's Breath
Tel Blog - Some issues remain untouchable
I think I read elsewhere that China has decided enough's enough and the whole corruption thing must stop now. So that's OK then.
As I flit from blog to blog looking at trendy liberals knock spots off each other as to just how much Fairtrade latte you can fit in a Prius' trunk, I read this and have to wonder if the world really has a chance in hell.
BBC - Global impact of Asia's pollution
I think I read elsewhere that China has decided enough's enough and the whole corruption thing must stop now. So that's OK then.
As I flit from blog to blog looking at trendy liberals knock spots off each other as to just how much Fairtrade latte you can fit in a Prius' trunk, I read this and have to wonder if the world really has a chance in hell.
BBC - Global impact of Asia's pollution
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)