The THREE E's, again?

An interesting piece that at first blush is more concerned with my 'Two E' dilemma, namely economics 'vs.' environment.

However, a third is worked in, namely electricity. With a hue of greencloaking around too, perhaps.

Don’t let’s fall for all these ‘green’ credentials

What is interesting is how little is devoted to enviROI still. Even by the author. I have lost count of the number of puff pieces with some mic-toting moppet gushing that these things do not create emissions.

Personally I think there is great merit in pursuing electricity as a power option for vehicles. But it has to be done in concert with a realisation, and acceptance that until the method of electricity generation is developed in complement, they can hardly be deemed to be 'green'. 'Greener', perhaps, at least in some aspects, such as localised pollution (though it still ends up in the air elsewhere), hence the value even now in certain applications. Just... so long it is not just to tick a box somewhere that has little bearing on my kids' futures and more on meeting targets, propping up constituency votes, delivering to lobbyists or scoring a bonus.

Plus, as the comments show, there is also this rather unseemly, and uncritical rush to support anything that slaps a green sticker on it. I watch the BBC report on this, and came away thinking it a tad churlish to turn them down.

Now I read the fuller facts, and that there are already niche players well entrenched to tackle such markets as can be gained, there is different picture emerging. Especially to me as a taxpayer, and environmentally-concerned one at that.

Know your [insert relevant noun here]

Prey? Enemy? Target? In most forms, not my favourite group.

Can the lobbyists be stopped?

And to know 'em, is to, well, know 'em.

Some interesting replies already. Mine:

A register. That'll do it.

Just like not requiring a DoB on a CV will prevent ageism-related employment practices.

Gotta love the notion that if it's on paper it can't be circumvented in a millisecond in other ways.

Guardian - Confusing politics with science - I was looking for a place to stick this. As the word is used, I guess here'll do. As well as noting the public interest possibly not being served by most 'sides' arguing over our futures. At least a few in the thread see that being 'right' doesn't mean diddly if the public doesn't get on board.

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

Now you can cast your votes

for the worst examples of greenwashing and EU lobbying.

I assume that this is a rather tongue in cheek, whilst exposing some of the worst cases to a greater public view.

Lobby horses

When we at the awards recently (have I mentioned that?) we were give a conducted tour of the two Houses, which are connected by the lobby. This is where you can go an grab your MP and get a word in.

Hence, I guess, the origins of the word 'lobby'. Like most things it seems to have moved on a bit and, like most things, I have mixed feelings.

Nobody can be denied the right to speak their piece and, I guess, if those with a bit more wonga can drum up a few more to express then I guess that's democracy in a capitalist society.

Where I am erring on being put offside is when this has all turned into an industry and money, in some form or other (from withdrawal of support for, say, jobs in a community to unmarked tenners in a brown envelope) is used to effect some influence on a voting pattern.

Of course I'm sop naive to see how this can happen, does happen and is very difficult to police.

So I cranked the old eyebrow on getting this (no link that I could see):

GREENS REVEAL OIL LOBBY INVOLVEMENT IN TORY CONFERENCE

Green Party Principal Speaker Dr. Derek Wall today questioned how
'green' the Tory Party can be given their links to big business,
especially the oil lobby, after it was revealed that the UK Petroleum
Industry are sponsoring a 'Tory Green Initiative' event at the
upcoming Tory conference. (1)

Dr Wall said: "Crucial to any real action on climate change are
polices that will reduce our reliance on fossil based fuels, and so
curb our emissions.

"But this is at odds with the needs of the oil lobby, who rely on our
addiction to oil to keep their profits booming.

"If the government got serious about tackling climate change,
companies like Shell would see a stark drop in their profits.

"How can the Tory party be expected to understand, or even agree with
that premise when they are hob-nobbing with organisations like the UK
Petroleum Industry at their conference?

"UK PIA are sponsoring the Tory Green Initiative dinner at their
forthcoming conference. Chris Hunt, the CEO of PIA will speak
alongside John Gummer, Chairman of the recent Tory Quality of Life
report. (1)

"This comes as no surprise, the Tories have long been the party of
big business,with a soft spot for fossil fuels. Alan Duncan, Shadow
Secretary of State for Business, Enterprise and Regulatory Reform,
worked as a trader of oil and refined products with Shell.

"But it isn't just the Tories whose ability to make policies that
focus on tackling climate change is compromised, the Lib Dems are
also finding it hard going.

"Deputy Leader Vince Cable used to be Chief Economist for the oil
company Shell!"

(1) Please see

Now the thing is, in trying to be objective, I could point out that the Guardian Climate Change Summit was in fact sponsored mainly by Shell. On the one hand yes, you could say at least they were trying to make an effort, or on the other it was just a bit of greenwashing. Thing is, they got slaughtered on the day, so I think we could perhaps allow folk the opportunity to make their own minds up on a sponsor's motives so long as the agenda stays clear and open. Hob-nobbing is fine. Nobbling is not. To deny the former is a silly step too far, and in any case would only encourage the latter to happen behind much darker doors.

Equally, tackling the player and not the ball is also counter-productive. OK, Mr. Cable used to be employed by Shell. Maybe he has 'links'; maybe he does not. It would surely be better to judge him on his actions as a Lib Dem pol than allude to old allegiances in such a vague way.