The curse of 'ahead of your time'

Always hated that phrase.

Mainly as it is usually meant well, but can make for uncomfortable memories subsequently.

Almost 10 years ago Junkk.com was created, with some fanfare, and a fair bit of support (though little actual dosh after the creation phase) or 'interest' from such as BusinessLink, Chambers of Commerce and various quangos and NGOs, such as WRAP, NISP, BERR, DTi, DEFRA, DirectGov, etc.

And our messages have been, from the off, variations of 'turn re:fuse into re:source'.

All featured, often to great media acclaim, around the world.

So this little sequence piqued (gotta love twitter) interest, for all sorts of reasons:

FabianPattberg Good post: Researchers study how to reuse waste in creative, local ways http://j.mp/aZVESR

Sustainability Forum - Good post: Researchers study how to reuse waste in creative, local ways

Greenbang - Researchers study how to reuse waste in creative, local ways

Teeside Uni - One man’s waste is another man’s resource

Now, not being one to miss a chance at promo, I have been on the case. Ride the wave 'n all.

But it was hard to resist pondering what we, and others, might have done over the last decade with the £1.76M earmarked to study this issue further.

Especially as they seem not to be too up on the various efforts already out there in this regard. Or didn't feel like asking before getting this awesome award. I say this guessing Junkk.com is not one of the beneficiaries of : 'It will help provide assistance to 40 enterprises each year, including small and medium-sized businesses (SMEs).

But I might ponder who they might be. Never hurts to ask.

For now... I'm smarting a tad.

Maybe a bit of time to simmer down... and then try and figure out how to capitalise on this.

Because if the powers that be have that kind of money to blow on reuse now...

Reuse gaining favour again?

I have Dave of Solarventi to thank for this:

An £800,000 programme has been launched to ensure more household goods will be reused and recycled across Scotland.

Recycling agency WRAP Scotland has been given the cash from the £7.5 million INCREASE III fund to encourage community organisations to improve infrastructure for collecting and reusing furniture, white goods, carpets and other household items.

Grants can cover up to 50% of the eligible project costs and will be focused on innovative ideas that:

Work in partnership with local authorities to recover items for reuse from civic amenity sites, such as household waste and recycling centres.

Fill gaps in current service provision, either geographically or by type of household item.
Announcing the new fund, Environment Secretary Richard Lochheart said:

“Reusing furniture and household goods is a perfect example of a simple, cost-effective step that can be taken to help us reach our goal of a Zero Waste Scotland.

“This latest round of investment will specifically target areas where reuse facilities are not up to scratch, encouraging the public to reuse and recycle rather than dump their furniture and household goods which are often still in working order.”

Funding will be allocated through a single bidding round. Applications must be submitted by 8 January 2010.

For further information about the programme, visit the WRAP Scotland website (opens a new window)

Source: Scottish Government, 13/11/2009

Not certain quangos I cold mention, who have in the past done their best to ignore me, and my efforts, even to help them in theirs. But I shall persevere.

\:( - RIP?

Waste industry speaks out about WRAP 'super body' plans - UPDATE 2 this

On the one hand I have been an advocate of amortisation to reduce the rampant waste through overlapping quangos. So... cautious welcome.

One the other... the lead is....WRAP???????

And what is it about 'superbodies' that gets my eyebrow cranking (new icon in headline) big time?

These are the guys that demanded my business plan, told us 'reuse was not of interest', and then copied a ton of stuff we had done, were doing, are doing and will do using no public money on driving 'not for profit' board member bonusses up in pretty darn near conflict of interest ways via box-ticking, target-meeting 'awareness' campaigns.

The outfit that figured giving huge amounts to vastly-profitable international companies to help them make more money on their packaging was a good deal.

Enough on the various interest groups surrounding this huge industry speaking out; what about the public and consumers being required to plough millions into all this with near zero say or representation?

You want lies with that?

Is there a bug in your bin?

Yet another example of the box-ticking, target-meeting, bonus-generating process over real result culture we are spiraling down through daily. And I am an ardent environmental campaigner (though more in the areas of reuse and repair, which don't seem to 'inspire' some LAs and massively funded/rewarded quangos and their hands-length (when necessary) masters in Whitehall.... 'who cares if it's making things worse, we have an EU limit and will a) get fined if we miss and b) get lots of goodies if we exceed it! Result!

If it is about what we throw away, which may represent a modicum of opportunity, how in the name of anything is a microchip going to help unless it actually reads something like an RFID on every discarded item, and then traces it accurately to how sold it, bought it and then disposed of it.

As noted, all this might do is weigh the thing, regardless of any other aspects. As Al Hamilton suggests, it is ridiculously easy to skew, though by his suggestion, at best the LAs get their bonuses early, or at worst the householder gets slapped with a massive bill. Whichever way, my kids' futures on this planet are not served by trucks lugging more weight to make a flunky look good to his/her legions of equally unproductive bosses.

'Tonnage, tonnage. My kingdom for more tonnage!'

Addendum

There can, of course, be positives..

But in the spirit of enviROI I'd be fascinated to find out more about the realities surrounding such figures, especially the VAST comms budgets used to drive such figures, and how that money could have been used on tangibles (like coordinating a national system, as opposed to the woeful , contradictory, motley collection we have now) rather than 'awareness' leading to compliance on the part of the public doing work to drive the bonuses of the ever-duplicated boards approving these expenditures to get the public working to boost their salaries.

Almost a conflict of interest, IMHO. That said, in a culture where public servants get bonuses for doing their jobs, well or (insert headline on almost any topic from last decade here] I guess anything is possible.

Times - NEW - Knock, knock: it’s the council bin snoops

From those wonderful people who brought you...

Wrap defends bonuses for senior staff

Just wondering.

If public money is used for massive comms budgets that inevitably lead to increased public 'responses' (if this can be included in the term 'delivered the vast majority of its objectives' - is there a definition of what these were anywhere?) that in turn generate bonuses from the public purse for those who approved the expenditures in the first place, is there not a slight conflict of interest at work?

At the very least, the system would seem to 'encourage' anything the drives a bonus than what might actually serve our kids' futures on this planet a tad better.

Mind you, I simply can't comprehend any system that includes the concepts of 'bonuses' for public servants.

As it is seldom possible to 'make' anything, if it's based on financial performance the main way to effect 'savings' would seem to be through cuts, which is really not that tricky to do. And can prove less than satisfying to those public being 'served', as evidenced as here.

All the research that's fit to print

WRAP research shows four main barriers to recycling

The study found that the barriers are:

Physical – when containers for collecting recycling are unsuitable; when there is no space for storage, when collections are unreliable; when people have no way of getting to recycling sites

Behavioural – if people are too busy; if they struggle with establishing a routine for sorting out recycling; if they forget to put it out

Lack of knowledge – not knowing which materials can be recycled; not understanding how their local scheme works

Attitudes and perceptions – not believing recycling is good for the environment; not wanting to sort waste; not feeling personally rewarded for recycling

The phrase 'Well, D'uh!' springs to mind, Closely followed by 'Has this not been done before?', and then 'If not why not; if so, why again?" and... "How much this time?"

Let's see who dutifully reports this 'wishful list'...

Careful you don't wake up next to a horse's head

WRAP seeks packaging partner

I see Dick Searle in there, who I have met and seems pretty straight. Let's see, eh?

• Full details are here . The deadline for submissions is 12.30pm on 8 October.

I doubt it's worth us having a go, mind.

As opposed to 'ineffective', I guess...

Effective mixed plastics collection needed in UK

Not quite being fair, but it does highlight how we are here, and now, at a point where such a headline in an industry magazine is still on the front page.

Interesting also to note my chums WRAP in there, too. Mixed messages are a problem I guess, unless of course you get paid whatever the message is.

Break out the bubb... er.. choc... er... !

Retailers and brands hit target to end packaging growth in the UK

Wonder what all will do with their bonuses if there is precious little they should be buying or travelling with it all on... if they are serious.

Story telling

Good news to be had here: Wrappers' delight

However, I am not so sure this is the best description of a publicly-funded quango: (Wrap), a private company that helps individuals, businesses and local authorities to reduce waste and recycle more.

And, while true, whether this description of how our money gets spent tells the whole story: 'Lots of major brand owners are becoming converts to this,' Skelton says. He cites Heinz, which has created new lightweight can lids'

Sorely missed

New funding scheme for food packaging innovation

'...a tender process is underway, whereby initiatives from the food manufacturing sector focusing on reusable and refillable packaging, new merchandising and dispensing systems or product reformulation will receive funding for up to 50 per cent of the project costs.'

I guess we must have slipped their mind, what with Junkk.com and RE:tie n' all.

Ah well, back to the pointless proposal pushing. You never know; they might get interested this time.

Culture of calamity

Bad news sells. Sad, but true.

But it's really getting too much in the media's desperation to fill 24/7 content hungry spaces, and boost ratings. And context seems to go out of the window. Along with any attempt at seeking a satisfactory resolution. The event is all, and the worse, the better. Now... moving on....

So I look at two back-to-back pieces on BBC News.

First up, we have the 'fact' that few parents allow their kids to walk to school. O.....k. So, er, what? Nope, that was it. A few vox pops with a couple of the legions of 'BBC average families' to say they wouldn't do it, and that's about it. What... was... is the point? If they wanted to depress us, they sure succeeded.

Next, waste. WRAP has cranked out another survey, and 'we' waste scag loads. But other than a few minor (if sensible) suggestions such as not over-buying, and a few daft ones (much as I like and respect Janey Lee Grace, she is now a media elite for whom having her fresh produce delivered is not perhaps a real financial hardship... and frankly the manner of its delivery does not seem to suggest much difference in our propensity to reject that which we over-buy), it was simply a case of 'isn't it all just awful'.

Actually, I would be interested in how these food waste figures play out across all sorts of comparisons. The BBC of course famously weighed in on the packaging debate, and without much of that which they took to task, food waste would be a lot worse. They really love it all ways.

There's even the totality of the figures. The numbers seem horrendous, but are they really that bad? Some waste is inevitable, and any reduction and hence savings in money and emissions is to be striven after. But this unremitting negative 'you're all sooooo bad and the country is sooo awful' is just getting a pain.

BBC - Food waste on 'staggering' scale - 3.6m tonnes
Guardian - Britons wasting £10bn worth of food a year, research says - guess we all got the same PR, then.
Indy - What a waste: Britain throws away £10bn of food every year - or, to put it another way...

This last post (Martin O'Brien) is more than interesting. As was the one tucked away earlier noting that the media-frenzy Planet Ban-it of the month is not, if temporarily, packaging. Good job too, as if used correctly, it actually goes a long way to preventing food waste.

But for all the shock and awe expressed, especially by the ladies who launch campaigns at the drop of a budget, as a consumer I remain a little uncertain what all this froth and both makes suggest one DOES.

I rather suspect all here (myself included) throw out zippy. So what do we have for those less incentivised so far to save (money, waste...etc)?:

'Wrap suggested households seeking to balance their finances could save money by following basic tips to prevent food waste, such as planning shopping trips better and keeping a closer check on use-by dates. It also pointed out that many people do not know the difference between a "best before date", which has no implications for food safety, and use-by data, which must be followed.'

Good advice. Not exactly startling in its own right, and nor have I seen it expressed very loud, clear or often. In fact I have seen one, I am sure award-winning, 'Love Food: Hate Waste' ad (at how much media spend???) in a Sunday Supp. It had a crying tomato. Showed it to my wife, kids and Mum. Not a clue what it was on about. You know, I think the money on that, and those who spun it up, could have been better spent elsewhere.

Like most 'awareness' in the name of green that is being served up so far. We need actions and incentives, not platitudes and winger-waving.

Dizzy Thinks - food-for-thought - a mostly fair, and funny complement

QUOTE OF THE DAY - So there

I share this for no good reason at all, save that it does refer to my favourite quango, and shows Jeremy Clarkson to be every bit as adept at cruddy acronyms as me.

Though mine are often better...IMHO:

Potato heads are talking rot on food

'A sinister government agency called Wrap (We Rape and Pillage) has spent vast lumps of our money to determine that...' [actually he does specify something, but I'm happy enough to selectively edit here as it seems to apply]

The article is also quite fun, as much as for the comments it inspires. The Times use to allow links, but as it does so no longer I don't see much point, so I'll just lurk on and quote this one.

Xmas WRAP party

As one who often looks to the human cost of various 'Planet Ban-it' campaigns, I take no pleasure from seeing folk lose jobs. Especially at this time of year. WRAP job losses expected in 25% funding cut as Defra budget pressures bite

As some will know, having not been very supported by WRAP to date, despite having an entity that would seem well in keeping with their remit, I have been on occasion a tad critical of how much has been spent and where... or on whom.

Sadly, I am less than reassured that the proposed budget cuts will improve matters, as it is now my experience that, especially within government and quango entities, the cuts are seldom where they should be (the causes of waste, losses or inefficiency) and more often than not in the few areas where some good does get done.

One rather wonders who got employed and on what contract now, that they will need to be unemployed and on what terms soon. Hardly seems very joined up or the best use of public funds.

Also, for a 'not for profit' company, it will be interesting to see how many of the rather extensive bonus-blessed board of all the talents bear the brunt of these cuts.

But I do note that this still means that WRAP’s budget will be about £55-60m.

Perhaps a few less campaigns to raise 'awareness' that is directly connected to bonus targets, and a bit more to actual doing stuff, and paying folk just to do a good job, may be in order?

Fund, fund fund, 'til Daddy took the T-bird away

And if your business is into ELV's, or any other 're-initiative', this may be for you: WRAP launches new funding scheme

I'm betting Junkk.com or RE:tie won't qualify. But I gladly 'share the lurv'.

Waste... of food, that is

Well, it's here, as promised: Food Waste is Environmental Sleeping Giant Says WRAP

And as it is so significant, putting plastic bags and 4x4s, etc, into the shade, enviROI-wise, I will try and make the most of it on the site. And even here.

However, this is my blog, and I must get a few points off my chest first.

'A new Government backed campaign that reveals...' - unless I missed it in all the blurb I'll have to await seeing it. But the word 'campaign' fills me with dread already. How much? saying What? To whom? With what intention? Measures? And hence what hope of conversion for the money? The word 'reveals' fills me also with foreboding that what we will get is 90% scraping stuff into the bin and, possibly, 10% some celeb (free or funded?) saying 'don't do that' and then the Daily Mail finding what's in their restaurant skip the week after.

"... for every three bags of shopping we bring home, we effectively put one straight in the bin.' This IS staggering. I just hope the way it gets put across is designed to actually move folk to reduce it to zero.

In addition to press advertising and a supporting PR campaign that features celebrity chefs, home economists and well known personalities, the Love Food Hate Waste campaign features a website (How much to create? And run? And promote? And what bonusses paid on hits?unique visitors?) which gives advice, ideas on preparation, storage, portioning and recipes. - I've been to it. Are you as inspired as I am?

Key findings of our recent research on the nature, scale and causes of household food waste can be found here - worth a gander, for sure.

Indy Letters - Worth sharing (well, or not... you know what I mean)

With the usual sound of banging stable doors, after the 2001 foot-and-mouth outbreak, Defra forbade the use of waste food for feeding to pigs. Traditionally ,of course, the cottager's pig had been fed in this way (and then recycled completely except for its squeak) and commercial herds had been supplied by army canteens and the like.

Not now. If I feed so much as a stale crust or a faded cabbage leaf from my kitchen to my pigs I am liable to be thrown in jail for two years. So into landfill, or maybe in some enlightened circles into compost, waste food must go – and there always will be some waste.

Of course the animal feed manufacturers have benefited hugely from this diktat. The organic pig nuts I buy have soared in price and are likely to go on doing so as the price of grain rises irrevocably. I think the public will soon begin to notice that cheap bacon butties and Philip Hensher's £3 chicken are things of the past. Which is probably good, but doesn't solve the landfill problem unless councils are able to set up composting facilities for all biological waste.

ADDENDUM - Well, I was wrong. No plate scrapings. And I like the line. However, and I simply ask as I think I may be too close as an enviro guy and an ad man, do these immediately make you want to stop wasting as you have been for the last X years? Shoo-ins for next year's Green Awards, though. I am... saddened.

As reported in the Indy : Britain's colossal food waste is stoking climate change

Well, any 'waste' is, by definition, adding to the processes that can possibly/probably cause climate change, so OK. This is the latest 'topic du jour'. And it's important.

So... does this sell it to you... 'Britons must swap their wasteful habits ... shoppers were warned yesterday'?

I was well on board by the second line. No, really.

If 'Most waste arose because people had "over-shopped" as a result of not planning; because they failed to keep their fridge cold enough, allowing food to go off; or because food had passed its "best by" date. ', then surely we need to inject ideas and effort into dealing with these facts and issues. A crying tomato doesn't do that, sorry.

And, while telling and true, tackling the consumer is not going to address "buy one get one free" deals in supermarkets.

And I am stumped as to how this campaign can address the habits of those with fluid work and social patterns. This 50 year-old homeworker works 6 -7 daily to make ends meet, as does his wife. We don't have much time to faff about. But at least I am in the house at lunch to deal with last night's leftovers. I'd say few others are. Plus I have the motivation. I'd say few others have. There are certain realities of a 24/7, stressed and oppressed society, and no amount of 'slots' on a cooking show (it's already smacking of a green special in the fashion rags) is going to change the facts of our leife demands.

You can't make people eat something without first making it seem tasty. And that applies to ads as much as food.

Indy - Our throwaway culture

The food and supermarket industries need to reform their practices. They should cease using spurious "best before" dates that are designed to encourage people to waste edible food. - This I didn't know. I thought it was legislation/litigation drive. If not, it should be stopped.

The Government should be treating this issue with a little more urgency too. Hahahahahahaha. Love that word 'should'.

Joan Bakewell: What a waste! Why can't we all be more thrifty...

Bless.

And what is 'the Waste Reduction Agency'?

She's right of course.

What we need is a good example – in modern jargon "best practice". If we are to take the trouble to turn off electrical switches in our homes, what about those towering city offices that burn with lights throughout the night, even though the workers have long gone home? What about shops windows in every city centre blazing away at times when only a few lingering souls are about to see them?

Plus many, many more. Good examples, that is. Not payroll/pension parasites ticking another comms budget box.

Otherwise we're just tinkering round the edges.

Quite.

Telegraph - Where's the cream?

No leftovers then?

I just ask, because 'we' are getting a multi-lord-alone-knows how much ad/PR/media assault, including the 'contributions' of many celebs, to advocate this in the cause of reducing food waste.

Rated about a day on Aunty's menu, I think.

Amid job cuts, BBC meals come with whine

RWM

Maybe it's all yet to come, but has anyone seen any of this after the first day flurry?

More Directorial input

This just in: WRAP Retail Team restructure

On an equally positive note: WRAP Funded Project Leads to Packaging Savings for Marks & Spencer

By all accounts, it 'can save at least ten per cent of the packaging material used on those products'.

Which must make for a big saving in costs to retailers who are funded to try it.

I agree with what you say. I just hope we'll all understand how you say it

With apologies to Voltaire. Bioploymers Need Careful Introduction, Says WRAP

Can't fault this: '...most consumers are confused about the wide range of new materials emerging with ‘biodegradable’, ‘home compostable’, ‘compostable’ and ‘degradable’ all being introduced in the UK...'.

And here's the rub: '...respondents were less clear of the overall benefits, and were left feeling confused. Apart from some home compostable materials, there is currently no appropriate infrastructure for the materials to be collected and treated in the UK.'

I just hope the ‘statement’ on biopolymers to be published will actually result in Mrs Miggins having a clue as to what she's supposed to do as she hovers the chicken thigh tray and film over the bin.

The research and statement can be accessed from the WRAP website or from retail@wrap.org.uk

Slate, thatch, or crossply?

This is the kind of thing I think WRAP (or, more accurately, its support systems) does well: Recycling Tyres Into Roof Tiles

So long as the numbers add up (inc. enviROI), this looks a winner.

I wish all involved well.

Gamekeeper turned gamekeeper?

I note that WRAP has a new guy in charge of what gets shared with us: WRAP Appoints New Director of Communications

His predecessor has been advised as leaving to join the BBC, though in what capacity I am not sure.

Nick Gammage brings broad communications experience from the public and private sectors to the WRAP Executive team. Having begun his career as a newspaper journalist, he held several senior communications posts in Whitehall before becoming Director of Communications at the telecoms regulator OFTEL.

In recent years, Nick has served as Director of Communications for the Consumers’ Association, the London Stock Exchange, and most recently in the City for Lloyd’s insurance market, where he set up a communications operation in the United States and helped steer the market through the aftermath of the worst hurricane season on record which led to record claims.

All of which I am sure will be of fantastic help in conveying messages to and creating engagement with consumers and the general public more attuned to the efforts of branded fmcg advertisers, as been so successfully achieved to date. Expenditures of multi-millions on campaigns to tell us, for instance, 'to recycle', have generated increased rates that have easily met the targets that warrant significant bonuses.

Here's hoping the WRAP output may now return a decent enviROI, or even just ROI on the ad spend.