RE:Idol!

This weekend I again found myself wrting in to the media, and with little prospect of my thoughts being covered it is nice to be able to at least commit my thought to print, albeit online, via my trusty blog.

It was prompted by the following question/opinion in a waste industry magazine:

Every day in the news there are more and more stories about the impact global of climate change. As businesses we are constantly reminded that we need to embrace new environmental legislation - but the information is confusing and difficult to access - even for those of us in the waste management and recycling industry! 

Why isn't the UK government taking the lead and offering conferences and events free of charge to encourage businesses to act now on measures that can help? Because - if we do manage to retard climate change it will be the best investment in the future that the government has made in a long time!

To which I replied:

"Although I could not agree with [this] more,  and to be fair there are some worthy freebies about, the answer I fear may be that the money such support would require is unlikely to appear, possibly by not easily being put against a ticked tonnage box. And as a lot of other chaps seem to have it all in hand, why get in the way?

It would be great if such backing came to pass. Recently I was flattered to be approached, I thought, to be a speaker at a major event in an area we are involved in. But somehow it moved pretty quickly to me not speaking so much as attending...  to the tune of a grand. Most of which was the fee. Even our editorial function was deemed insufficient for us to attend as a medium and share it with our public... unless we paid.

I'll spare the time. I'll sleep on a mate's floor. I'll try and get an advance super-saver train ticket. But my little organisation just can't afford several hundred quid for such an affair, no matter how much we'd benefit from being there, and others may possibly also gain by our opinions being shared.

Maybe that's why a lot of these events end up being dominated by the views and actions of major corporates, government departments, councils and all others who can afford to 'invest' their shareholders' and tax/ratepayers' money to keep meeting only with those who can afford to interact with or lobby them. And such financially-secured exclusivity does keep things in the peer group comfort zone.

Being even more fair, there is no doubt these things do cost a lot to put on (but one imagines the number of them springing up also indicate that they are a nice little earner, and it would be interesting to see just how cheap they could be brought if it was all at cost -  which is a lot different to not-for-profit), and the question still remains as to who should foot the bill. And if it is subsidised such that it is free, then with the consequent upsurge in those now able to attend, who conducts the vetting process? There will be space limits, so who gets to come? Money at least avoids any hint of agenda bias in the selection process. So it does get argued that a charge ensures only those most committed attend, but that has certain... flaws in the world of the jolly.

I would have suggested sponsorship as a route, but many conferences do seem to have a fair amount already, and having also been 'invited' to have a stand in reception, those shell scheme/goody bag packages do add up to a lot. Which makes you wonder just how much the cost of the hall, A/V, coffee and speakers' expenses (and a lot don't get any) is not actually covered, and how affordable these things could be made to encourage/allow attendance by those who care enough to spare the time, but may not have the cash.

I'm dreaming up a way to do this. And here's a draft (daft?) notion: RE:idol!

All interested potential attendees could submit a paragraph with their application about who they are, what they'd like to learn, who they'd like to meet, why, and... most importantly, what they feel they could contribute. 

Then once we've all signed up to attend, we get to tick those we think would be worth listening to and/or meeting. Those with the most ticks get invited to speak. Or better yet moderate at topic tables (I usually find sitting and listening to a speech, or worse pitch, the least useful, most time consuming part of such events). Networking and idea-sharing is where the real value of getting together lies, so maximise this aspect. The rest of the list get to come, with a cut-off based on the hall space limit. 

How democratic would that be? The people coming decide who they'd like most to listen to and interact with. And maybe some poor guy with two bob to their name is the one deemed most worth meeting, and the bankrolled lobbyist or consultant deemed not worth it. Less movers and shakers and more doers vs. talkers. 

Maybe then our elected representatives would see merit in funding the hopefully modest costs of staging? 

I'm holding my breath."

You know, having slept on it that's not such a daft idea at all. In fact it would be a good model for conferences for all industries (and public service departments) that seem to place protective layers between themselves and the those, including the genral public, who do deserve access to and a voice in the discussions that get held supposedly in our interest.

Maybe I'll have a stab! It's not like I have got much on at the moment.

Shell Game

Well, we're at it again. Friday night (at about 11.30pm for a
midnight cut-off - let no one say we do not plan well ahead for
comfort) I fired off our application to the Shell Springboard fund.
At up to £40k, it was worth going for, and hopefully will prove worth
the effort.

I've said it before, and been disappointed just as often, but we're
hopeful this may stand a good chance.

For a start, the stated objectives include innovative ideas to reduce
greenhouses gasses, and pretty much every aspect of Junkk.com is
dedicated to that aim, embracing reuse, repair and, of course,
recycling, which still seems to be grabbing the lion's share of
attention and funding of late.

But we are rather hoping our efforts to make merit out of the less
'target-measureable' of the 're's' may stand us in good stead in
innovation terms, with of course our 'reduction contribution'
including information and support for alternative fuels, etc, which
may score some brownie points for relevance to the sponsors!

Unlike many other such efforts, there was also an encouraging
acknowledgment that worthwhile contributions need not come form a
'thing', and we've seen so many previous efforts fall in favour of
the latest gizmo that tech-head judges can play with. So again we are
hoping our online initiative will get a good hearing in this framework.

Finally, it was quite a surprise (a pleasant one I might add) to see
that not-for-profits, charities, universities, etc were not eligible.
The competition was looking for stand alone ideas which had a
rational business footing, and did not see trying to make money in
this manner as a bad thing. This again was a refreshing change, which
we do hope will further work to our advantage.

Last (bonfire) night as I watched a bunch of stuff go up in smoke and/
or disappear into thin air or a black hole, I overheard two guys in
the crowd talking about a certain waste quango's 'not for profit'
status. Looking at their funding, one couldn't figure out how they
managed to avoid making money, to which the other replied 'I know
their Finance Director; if he's any measure, with the wedge he's on,
the building they've bought and the size of the department he's
building, they have NO problem ensuring the money gets spent.'

Once awarded, the Shell get applied directly to the task at hand.
More our style. Fingers crossed we'll find we get picked!

Jobs for the boys

I'm not a big tabloid fan. When they try to play with real news I believe their self-serving agenda does way more harm than good to society.

If they just stuck to celebrity issues it would be fine. A blond soap star 'forgets' her knickers as she exits a car bum first and gets 'outraged' by the consequences being splashed across the front page (well, suitably bepixelled... fiull story inside). A whole industry has in short order been created to serve the careers of talentless singers, actors and... er... people (silicon balloon transporters, etc), and the broadcast and print media who get paid to exist in their expensive worlds and 'report' upon them. And they all work together to keep themselves in business. No harm done, apart from the odd  bit of fodder that falls off the rails and finds this is one industry whose health plan only kicks in if they get the exclusive on the Priory stay.

Which leads me to CSR, about which I was reading just now. It was a an opinion piece in the Telegraph Online by the/a Director of Policy Studies. So it was I suppose not too surprising that she was less than positive on the burden a bunch of of moral duties were being dumped on businesses by a range of folks, from the press through interest groups right on (up?) to Government.

And her main point was a good one. In many cases, why on earth should they? More precisely, why should their shareholders be obliged to pay for all this?

My views on the motivations and hence effectiveness of most not-for-profit and in many cases charities are already outlined in my blogs, so I have a certain sympathy for anyone who is striving to make a profit.  And to quote part of her conclusion: 'business's most socially responsible act is to continue making [this contribution - goods & services, jobs, taxes, etc] by being profitable and successful. The irony of much of the corporate responsibility agenda is that it can undermine business's vital contribution to society by imposing costs and burdens for frequently ill-defined social and moral objectives.'

With which it is hard not agree, though in some cases what goods are being made is one that I may wish to keep an eye on. I'll also plug Junkk.com here by saying we have a pretty neat model that enables one to do good AND turn an extra profit if done in the right way.

But you know what really stuck me? It was in the Google Adwords column on the left of this piece. 

All manner of folks advertising CSR consultancies, conferences or jobs in CSR.  I just have to wonder how many of these guys will ever actually do anything to make a real difference. We've approached more than a few to pitch our tale, and never been given the time of day so far. Probably because they are at a CSR conference in Bali, meeting with the very folks from the media, interest groups and government who have managed to create an industry to keep them all in the business of... what? I which way they exit taxis?

Statistics, damn statistics... and reports.

As a bit if Sunday fun, I was reading a report on the United Nations' Official Day of Disaster Preparedness, the title of which attracted me more to find out what happened on the other 360-odd days of the year: unofficial preparedness?
 
Actually it was some cerebral get-together, and the piece involved an interview with a senior environment-type dude, Janos Bogardi.
 
The top line was/is that if nothing is done to cushion the blow of natural disasters, by 2010 50 million could be driven from their homes annually.
 
Though by no means definitive, there are apparently compelling statistics to show natural disasters are getting worse. Don't know if the dinosaurs, ancient Pompeians or anyone with a turn-of the century condo on Krakatoa would agree, but we are 'experiencing 2.5 to 3 times as many extreme events of climatic em4rgncy as we did in the 1970s’.
 
Now that kinda of knocks one of my notions on the head, because in the 1970s we certainly had a pretty fair global communication network. I was there. Admittedly not 'as it happens' satellite uplink images from a mobile, but you could get a concerned reporter with a radio to kick some food and water off a rescue chopper and on the scene then just as easily as you can now. So bang goes my theory that a lot of this is just perception because we get told about it immediately. Though I still think there is a difference between hearing about it on the radio a few days later and watching it live.
 
Now as my title may indicate, I'm not a big fan of reports. For one they seem to consume a lot of effort and introduce a lot of delays to actually doing something, and also can be pretty much made to say anything anyone with an agenda likes. Which is a shame, because it's hard to have a balanced opinion if you have ceased to trust a major avenue of information. A sad consequence of our byte-sized society, I guess.
 
For instance, one thing that was not mentioned in the piece, though it may have been in the report (if not high on the PR agenda), was that it may be that natural disasters are having more impact simply because there are lot more of us, with a lot more stuff, upon which it can impact. I don't think there were too many Swedish sunbathers on Thai beaches back in the 70’s.
 
At least the fact that there being a lot more of us was acknowledged as maybe taking its toll on the land upon which we are living. But there was no mention of what to do about that rather significant fact, concentrating instead on efforts to preserve them. Different department, I guess.
 
The piece was titled 'Preparing for the worst', which may have been the publication's title rather than the aims of the report, but it did seem to focus more on solutions to these disasters, rather than prevention of them, or at least their scale.
 
There was a nice quote, 'we are always arming for the last battle', which is all too true, but it seems to me they are equally guilty of cherry-picking with the same convenience they are trying to label short-sighted politicos.
 
Of course we need to do all we can to prepare and protect, but perhaps now is the time to concentrate every bit as much effort on tackling, with all the complex 'ical' nightmares it would entail, on one of the major the causes of such disasters and the costs they create, and that is overpopulation. Before nature does it for us.

Saving what, exactly?

At Junkk.com, we tend to pretty much wear our heart on our sleeves.
We're trying to do the right thing 'for the future', but at the same
time we're like most normal folk and have various pressures of life,
career and the pursuit of happiness that can cause us to either
transgress enviro-nirvana practice through ignorance, or even suffer
the odd twang of guilt when we do it knowingly. Hence we have tried
to avoid setting ourselves up for any egg on face scenarios by not
seeking to set ourselves up as paragons of the 'only way'.

However, we do want to represent, as much as is possible, accurate
information. So I'm trying to figure a way to create aspects of the
site that are 'as good as we can figure... unless you know
different', that will encourage those who know better to share their
wisdom.

This, then, allows me to at least pose some pretty daft questions and
pop off on some pretty odd tangents, all in the genuine hope of
finding 'a better way' (environmentally, that is) , but which I have
to accept may turn out not to be so. I just think we all have to
accept that some issues are so complex a definitive answer is not
possible, so on balance doing something that 'feels right' may be
better than doing nothing because it might not.

This train of thought has been inspired by an article I was reading
about GPS systems for cars. Now, being a man and not afraid to stop
and ask directions, I have always thought these things to be pretty
way out on the wrong side of the 'making more stuff' vs. 'making
stuff better' debates I am engaged upon with various experts in
various fields (and usually losing, because they spend all day on
their stuff, when I kinda have a passing interest and can't match
their killer facts). And that doesn't include the jam-avoiding bits.

But for the first time I came across a bit of blurb that pointed out
that by making sure you don't get lost, these things actually offer a
genuine environmental benefit. I really don't know the e-consequences
of making the things and selling them to us, but I am prepared to be
persuaded that throughout their lifespans, they may actually result
in less gunk in the atmosphere than if they didn't exist.

So... great! Another possible advertiser for Junkk.com. Unless you
know different.

A token thought.

Like HRH the Prince of Wales, I have more than a passing interest in the environment. Unlike him (apparently), I do not have a Toyota Prius, nor do I intend to wear mine with pride.

The reasons are varied. For one, I have a perfectly good car (two in fact, for altogether justifiable reasons I won't go into here), though I do confess they squeak out a few more atmospheric nasties as they do their bit, despite my best efforts on regular servicing, etc. And as my wallet is a potent force in my decision processes, I am looking at converting them to LPG, though there are certain issues yet to resolve before that happens. Like money. Which brings me to reason number two. In fact that is reason number two: I can't afford one, much as I may like to. I say may, and will stop the whole 'reason trail' here and now, by also still needing to get to grips with a few facts that keep cropping up in the, possibly, more cynical zones of the motoring press. Like the fact that it may actually not be any better on the kind of run we do from our country retreat. But as the first two make the whole thing academic, we'll leave me out of it. For now, and the foreseeable future, we are not getting one. 

But a lot of fine folk are. And telling us. Like HRH. And half of Hollywood. Which is all tickedy-boo. Now, as we at Junkk.com hate to wag a finger, and anything is better than nothing, I'd just like to let that eyebrow twitch again and wonder why these much-trumpeted purchases seem to be in addition to the Astons, Range Rovers, Humvees, etc. And even if these fine fellows do no more than sit in the air-conditioned garage block, they did consume a fair old few resources and generate a few gases in the making, no? New stuff does. Even Priusess (what is the plural?).

Hence I remain a little concerned about the messages going out, which remain, at best, mixed. I've got a bee in my bonnet about this whole issue, which I just know is going to sting me on the rear when our TV needs replacing with a digital thingie and (if I can afford it) I get a wall-mounted LCD/plasma (though I believe there are enviro reason for one vs. the other we're looking at soon, so maybe my e-conscience may end up clear) effort. But we tend not to trumpet our, limited, efforts. We just do what we can, want, and afford to.

It all started with a letter I wrote to a Sunday Times architectural journalist in response to a small debate stirrer he'd lobbed out into the public domain, which was something about getting rid of planners and building wherever we fancy. At the risk of coming over all Nimby, I'd erred in favour of some kind of 'protection' (though whether our planners and their political masters provide this function is open to another debate), if only because of one, simple, inescapable set of... colliding... facts: there is finite space on this planet (especially that devoted to sustaining us), and an ever-increasing number of us trying to occupy and live off it. 

So my bee is/was that we should pretty quick-smart devote a fair amount of our creative energies to making the most of what we have and not encroaching any further on nature. Stuff needs making to be sure to keep economies afloat and innovation alive, but I'd simply advocate focussing more on making more of things than making more things.

For sure a Prius is better, environmentally at least, instead of an Aston when you're going from A to B. But I do question whether the required example is being made when it is as well as. 

You can call me 'Al

I just 'invested' half an hour answering a question posed by The
Times Online. Based on an article regarding the woeful response to a
BA initiative (basically voluntarily buying off your eco-guilt for
flying - check it out here:

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2-1833936,00.html )

they asked if airplane fuel should be taxed

(see here: http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,564-1834561.00.html )

, to which I replied as follows:

"Probably, yes. This despite working for a 'change through incentive
rather than penalty-based methods’ planet-saving organisation. AND
being married to a Singaporean, and hence having 50% of annual family
obligations 12,000 miles away. IF (it's a biggie) climate change is
due to greenhouse gasses out of exhaust pipes, then no Prius purchase
will match the consequences of annual jaunts to Klosters or Barbados.
And of course those who do probably still will carry on doing so no
matter what (don’t see too many Notting Hillbilly, chattering class
eco-champions opting to camp in Kent or having their conferences in
Cardiff), and hence punts us straight into ‘them and us’ territory.
As does any fuel tax. Now, who is the politician – especially one who
is seeking re-election in a few summer holidays’ time - to tell us we
can’t fly unless we pay? Or stand up to the airline lobby and its
global employee base that faces serving only a minority elite. Fuel-
cell powered Jumbos anyone?"

It's why I like blogs. Even if they don't include me, or worse they
do and I miss it when they do (got a few better things to do than
live on every online forum in case I get featured), or much worse,
flamed by those who do have such time, at least I can get my point
'out there' on my own terms.

What's interesting is that in the short time between starting this
and looking back, the posts are up there and on balance agreeing with
my point(s).

It will be interesting to see how this pans out. Talking with Emma we
were projecting to a point where she would not be able to afford to
drive to work here (there is no alternative method) or I could not
visit my UK relatives in Scotland, simply because driving was priced
out of our reach and into the province of an elite.

So can taxing or levies on travel be the answer? It would seem to be
political suicide to try.

Then we debated a non-means-based method. How about we are allotted
so much leisure miles a year by road, sea, train and air? Madonna
gets the same as us. Her call on how she uses it. But then, how about
she really, really wants to go somewhere nice and hence gets to buy
our allotment off us? Woooo. Carbon-trading anyone? I am feeling a
headache coming on just trying to grasp with the social,
environmental and all other 'al' consequences. Good job a bunch of
selfish, self-interested empire builders are doing the thinking on
this for us.

Interesting notion. Soon we'll all be stuck in our villages and can
only communicate virtually unless permitted to travel by those who
know better. Glad we have swans outside our window. At least until
John Prescott concretes them over.

Energy Deficiency

I'm depressed. And I don't even read the Daily Mail (at least not
unless it has a classic DVD I must have, but will never watch). It
certainly doesn't help that the nature of our work here at Junkk.com
involves trawling through masses of information and opinion from
every worldwide media source imaginable. Thanks to these it becomes a
toss up if we'll get to the end of the day before being consumed by a
climatic catastrophe, bird flu, Iranian nukes or pillaging and raping
footballers.

But my more immediate concerns surround mathematics, and if you end
up agreeing with me by the conclusion of this piece, you can at least
be reassured that I wasn't too terrific at it and hence may be wrong.

I have already broached the inescapable fact that, while the earth's
surface area is finite, there has to be a collision point in the
future between this and the expansion of our population and the
demands of each individual's needs throughout their lifespan.

And it is the individual which again concerns me in playing with my
sums again.

Because there are fewer and fewer people 'making' (I have to put that
in quotes as it's a broad definition) anything useful.

Yet the numbers of people 'feeding' (ditto) off them, and in fact
dependent on them for their existence, is growing exponentially.

So I'm afraid I just can't make the numbers add up.

As an example, some very nice working colleagues in the charitable
sector have just found that money they were promised (and spent) on a
worthy project has basically been sucked into a black hole as a
result of the quango that was to disseminate the money creating a sub-
quango, with the net result (I'm guessing) that a bunch of money was
consumed in the creation of this new entity. Now each quango is
pointing at the other as the reason for the shortfall, with the
result of course of the amount not being honoured.

Where is it going to end? We have legions of folk meeting,
researching, administering, assessing, reviewing, legislating,
policing, fining, taxing, building offices, creating empires, going
to courses, giving time off, ticking boxes, meeting targets, paying
salaries and guaranteeing pensions... but who the heck is going to
pay for this? In the short term I just mean financially, but in the
longer term simply by creating useable resources that these ever-
multiplying drains consume every second?

It doesn't really matter if our various future challenges are natural
or man-made, but we're the only race currently in much of a position
to do anything about them.

So by my assessment of the numbers, the most urgent efficiency we
need to address is in how we deploy our own energies. Make something,
or at least make it better.

The Curse of the Council Bugbear

The continuing saga of the missing recycling bags continues. This week, we were actually left with bags. Two white ones, and three black bags. To share between FOUR FLATS.

A couple of weeks ago, I decided to start a thread on the Environment Site Forum, to share my fustrations, and to find out if other people had similar problems. It is becoming quite a popular thread, which you may find of interest. Click on the link below:

http://www.theenvironmentsite.org/Forum/viewtopic.php?t=3351

Happy reading.

No Waste Like Home, No More

Last night was the last in the series of No Waste Like Home. The family featured used a lot of electricity. Everything from lights, televisions, and hair straightners, to the spa was left on 24/7. They consumed enough electricity in two weeks to power a football stadium for an entire football match. To help reduce consumption, light bulbs were changed to energy saving ones, and the spa was put on a timer. Cleaning products were replaced with old favourites such as vinegar and lemon juice. A wood burner was also installed, but again, who paid for that? Did the family themselves stump up, or was it the BBC?

Overall the programme has given us an insight into some attitudes of the general public. People are becoming more and more aware of the environment they live in, and the damage that is being caused. As this show has demonstrated, people do need to be shown what to do to reduce, (repair) reuse and recycle. Many people are aware that it is a good thing to do; they just don’t know how to do it. Hopefully No Waste Like Home has inspired a few more people to think their impact on the environment.

We look forward to seeing a second series.

The Council bugbear

This is just an extra quick one today. My partner and I had a bet on at the weekend about the recycling bags. He thought that I wouldn't get my bags delivered to me on Monday, even though the Council did promise in an email. I had a little more faith (suprisingly) and thought that I would get my bags. He has gone away on a business trip, so will hopefully forget by the time he gets back - because he was right. :(

BugBears - the Prequel

Peter is out and about in London fighting traffic wardens and talking to students. Another bug bear blog I'm afraid. This time it is about my local council. A few months ago I moved into a new flat down the road from where I use to live. At my old flat, I would recieve my one black bin liner and my one recycling bag each Monday. Throughout the week I would dutifully fill my recycling bag (and not so much in the black bin liner), pop it out on a Sunday, and hey presto, it was taken away on Monday morning, and I would recieve new bags.

Now I didn't expect this to change when moving only 200 yards down the road. But it has. For the worse. For starters, I am now rudely awaken at about 6am by the road cleaner. Now, I know they like to clean when there is little traffic round, but at 6am? I'm grumpy in the morning anyway, and this just makes it worse. Sometimes they don't take all the rubbish. Secondly, they don't leave any bin bags. At all. Not even one. My flat (and it is only one bedroom) is looking like a landfill site. I refuse to throw out anything that can be recycled, so my flat is rapidly filling up. 'Contact the council!' I hear you say, well I have. About severn times now. The first time I was sent bags in an envelope through the post, and was promised they would make sure I would recieve bin bags in the future. And I'm still waiting. The last email I had from the council was the beginining of September, promising a bulk delivery to me of 26 black bin liners, 26 recycling bags. Still waiting for that delivery.

Now, I thought councils had recycling targets that they wanted to increase? Okay, so I'm sure my contribution doesn't make a huge dent, but how many other people have complained to the council, and not had a response? Many people know how to recycling, and know what to do, but its no good if the council doesn't provide the bins/bags for people. Councils tend to have poor reputations with their local tax payers. I certainly don't think too highly of my local council at the moment. Wouldn't it be great if I was proved wrong by a council?

Bugbears, the sequel

It's kind of Emma to 'pick up the slack' for me. I had thought I could maintain a dignified 'one a weekday' blog, but circumstances are just getting out of my control.

I was away at the Factory pretty much 48/2 over the weekend making stuff for our fREsher's fayRE stands, then had a nightmare journey to, around and back from London on the Monday delivering it all. That meant all of the previous 3 days' work backed up and Tuesday was a loooooong day.

And I did try to do a blog, honest. It was about the nightmare journey, and when I get a moment I will try and repeat it. But the creation system here did something odd when I tried to add a picture, then swallowed it all when I saved it as a draft and I still can't find it. So it was exit, stage left, followed by a bugbear. Or several.

One day I'll do a blog about these, too. One day.

For now I think Emma and I will just pop up a blog when we are in the mood, have something to say and can spare a moment.

Thinking about it, that is a blog. What I was doing was writing a daily column. Now, where can I find the time to do that I wonder?

Bug Bears

There isn't enough hours in the day, there really isn't. Hence why I am writing Peter's blog for him today. He's a busy man you know. Now before I start, I need to make something clear - Peter is King of Blog (or blag in some cases!) and I am Queen of Forums. So please excuse my ramblings today. I'm a bit of a blog virgin, but I will give it my best shot. Here it goes...

I have been working on Junkk.com for almost two years now. I have done a lot of reseach during this time, particularly reviewing other websites. During this time, I have developed a few bug bears about website design/layout/navigation/content etc. Here is my list:

1) Pink on a white background just does not work. Barely readable, and my eyes start going fuzzy after a few seconds. White on a black background looks scary too. I know it is personal preference, but these colours really don't do it for me.

2) Broken Links. I'm searching a website, come across some really interesting information, want further details, so click on the link to find...error page... blah...access denied... blah blah...that just really annoys me! Website links should be checked regularly.

3) Slow loading pages. Broadband has done wonders for the internet. Some websites forget that although many people have broadband, many others are still on dial-up. Sitting at the computer for half and hour while waiting for the homepage to appear is time wasting, and your website can lose traffic because of it.

4) Online forms. I much prefer to have an email address to write to, so I have a sense that someone will actually read my email, and reply. Many times I have sent an email using an online form, and haven't recieved a reply.

5) This is by far, my biggest bug bear. (Peter will smile when he reads this). Out of date information! Agghhhh! There are a few websites I visit regularly. Under the 'latest news' section there are the 'latest' articles from April 2004! If someone keeps going to your website, and its not updated regularly, your going to lose them. I'm proud to say that something new pops up on Junkk.com almost daily.

I'm not saying that Junkk.com is perfect in comparison, but I like to think we have most things covered, and what we don't have covered, we are working on :)

No Waste Like Students

I sat down next to the cat to watch the sixth instalment of No Waste Like Home last night. I was particularly interested in watching this episode as being a graduate (well two years ago) I was intrigued to see how well the six students would do. We are also promoting Junkk.com at some fresher fayres over the coming weeks, so I wanted to see if students had changed much since I was a student!

They were accurately portrayed – a typical student house share with lots of mess, music, televisions, computers left on all day, along with the heating, topped off with up to 17 bags of rubbish each week. I found it amusing that the one lad would go down the street and drop off the bags of rubbish to his neighbour’s bins.

I feel strongly that people respond more to visual representation of what they are doing to the planet, and this was justified when Penney took the students to a local landfill site to follow their rubbish. They were shocked by the amount of rubbish dumped there, and it really hit home.

One of the tasks of the students was to convert another friend/business/family to be greener. They opted for a local restaurant. Encouraging the restaurant to recycle their food waste seemed an easy task for the students – and the restaurant still recycles over 80% of its kitchen waste today. It could be argued that the restaurant only did it to look good on TV, but I think that they were inspired by the students. Students are big influences in society, and to get them on board with Junkk.com will be fantastic. At the end of the day, they have loans and other debts. The students on the programme were more than happy to try out money saving ideas with Penney. By also going to Junkk.com they can save some money too. Oh and help save the planet.

Score one for us!

Junkk.com is nothing if not a roller-coaster ride of ups and downs, with the consequent highs and lows such events can impose on our morale.

So it's nice to have a pretty big 'up' to report. Yesterday I gingerly opened an envelope from Michael Nuttley, the Editor of NMA (New Media Age). It contained a copy of their latest weekly edition, which he had kindly forwarded.

Those who read my blog from last week will recall that, as a consequence of meeting him at a 'do' in Cardiff, we found he'd subsequently asked a reporter to do a review of Junkk.com, which caught us on the hop as it is still being perfected.

Hence we were VERY nervous. This is a magazine that deals with the cutting edge of online media and marketing, and is read by all the folks we need to reach... positively.

So it was with some relief that we found that not only was it a pretty good review, but we had actually been awarded the accolade of 'Website of the Week' by them!

The review did raise a few issues that we can and will (in fact are, hence the fact we have not yet made a major PR noise about it being live yet) address, and one we can do little about, namely the potential confusion with junk.com.

But, on the whole, not too shabby.

Paranoia is KNOWING they are out to get you!

Two unrelated items inspire today's blog.

Well, they are now related by the reasons for this blog, but you'll see what I mean soon.

First up, a nice bunch of folk we have had dealings with - http://www.grownupgreen.co.uk - had recently sent us some feedback thingy that I had logged away to send back when I had a mo' on a 'why not if it helps?' basis.

Now I've just found that they have had (well, felt the need) to issue
a 'statement' having been tackled by some respondents on the whole
'is it eco to print out forms?' issue. And then they have delved into
a lot of counter-pointing computer time stuff that I rather fear will
get them in further knots with the very guys they were trying to
placate.

On balance, I think the little bit of shared info about cutting and
pasting .docs and emailing back, which they subsequently shared but
earlier either didn't know about... or forgot... would have cleared
the whole thing up nicely.

The other, in which the protagonists will remain nameless as both so
far seem to us ok folk, but perhaps shaping up to have a bit of a
spat, involved a make of eco-stuff being 'outed' for a relationship
with something nothing to do with the eco-world, but not what most of
us may like to deal with, if I can be so obscure. The inference being
that one could/should affect one's intentions, purchase-wise, because
of the link to the other.

Wooooooooooh.

I just know that before long, it's going to be us. We won't mean to.
Wemay not even know until it happens. But from now on, I'm wearing
clean undies, just in case. Washed in the 'right' brand of washing
powder, of course. Any suggestions?

Busy as a beaver

Of course, Junkk.com wouldn't have existed but for one. In fact two. Beavers, that is. Without my young sons losing their neckerchief woggles, I wouldn't have started working on a concept to locate items for reuse from things that would otherwise get thrown away.

So it's all their fault. Sorry boys. 

Because we are currently living in exciting times, which is one above (or is it below?) the rather dark 'interesting'.

And it is stretching Daddy and his merry crew to the limit, both those within Junkk Towers and those working on our behalves.

As I am on a metaphorical roll, the beaver lodge we are building is starting to take shape, but I do concern myself that the swift, but careful pace of construction is getting tested by the number, and indeed size of logs that seem to be coming downstream at the moment. And looking at the next few months these babies are going to be like tree trunks with outboards.

With our various PR and marketing efforts starting to bear fruit, we are finding ourselves required to be in two, perhaps more, places at once, yet until the income stream kicks in we do not have the funds to expand our resources to cover the demand. I am erring on the side of cloning as an option.

But in one area we have so far been positively woeful, and no amount of cloning will make a whit of difference. And that is selling ourselves to the right kind of innovative sponsors. It has become clear that have built it, they may come (and indeed are coming, even before our launch roll-out), but they won't until we can prove a lot of them have. 

So in the spirit of focus we're shifting all our efforts and resources to simply making the site so gosh-darn useful that a whole lot of folk will find it hard to resist... daily.  Then, and slightly more tricky, we get to share this notion with them. Bet ya never saw a full PR campaign strategy knocked off quite that blithely!

But it would be a silly set of sausages who didn't accept that one happy day we will need to sell ourselves so we can keep on doing what we like to do. Or for that matter, know what to do if someone calls up and wants to buy in. 

Which is why we found ourselves up in sunny Telford yesterday talking with some very serious chaps about funding and sales and stuff. I think it went well, though they seemed to be in some state of shock at the way were doing things, though I'm happy to say there also seemed to be a lot of support for what we are trying to do. Not every day you get to be part of saving the planet whilst having some fun.

They may well be able to help. But in case not, if anyone out there happens to know someone who'd like to take a small punt to make a pretty good living by adding some hard-nosed, bulging-Blackberry, top level contacts-driven, S2S (suit to suit) smarts to making our idea for Junkk.com actually work as a business, please point them our way... tomorrow if poss;)

One in the eye for sensible debate

For this blog at least, it was too delicious, though on reflection there are some ramifications that make it less so.

I opened my Sunday paper to find that a person of green persuasion had decided to seek out  a right wing celebrity commentator and register disapproval of his less than 'mentlaist-friendly opinions in the time-honoured, some would say almost obligatory, fashion: a custard pie to the face.

But good lord above, if Jeremy Clarkson didn't exist, they’d have to invent him. Come to that, if the less chilled side of the environmentalist movement didn't exist, he'd have to invent them. I have a conspiracy theory revolving around this very notion if you'll bear with me.

In this particular case it all went to plan. She was suitably messianic in her conviction that she represented all good folks, and got in a few fun facts about where he was going wrong, it being a democracy, with free speech and all, custard pie excepted. He was as gracious as anyone can be when they have to fork out a few quid for dry cleaning secure in the knowledge that they've been delivered a few more years' worth of free publicity and boosted readership. 

I could be convinced that in fact Jeremy is in fact in total cahoots with them, such is the regularity with which he delivers ammunition to inspire their baking squad, and to which they allow their soufflés to inevitably rise. And it's here that it, or rather I, get serious. 

As is to be hoped with the bizarre family in the first episode of 'No waste like home', he is often so grotesque in his views, those of a more fence-straddling bent may actually fall over to the other side in response. And if that were the case I'd say it was a work of genius on someone’s part. Publicity (and there's no such thing as bad..) for the green movement, ratings for Jezza (and there's nothing like a big bad rating.. or is that bad big rating) and maybe the great ‘getting on with our lives’ brigade register enough to be a little more eco. 

Trouble is, he often goes and spoils it by being a pretty insightful journalist at the same time, making a whole lot of sense about a whole lot on waffle and garbage that gets inflicted upon us. I’m afraid to say that in winning hearts and minds I think I know who is gaining some covert nods. Neither side make me feel they speak for me, but getting nanny’d and scolded and guilt tripped about trying to get through the day is not putting me very onside.

It is sad, because Junkk.com is trying to succeed by walking a middle ground. But it is proving so difficult. And one reason is glaringly obvious, and that is to engage any form of media coverage one has to be a bit extreme. I guess I could work with that. But I worry that in doing so I join a very exclusive club, with as its priority an agenda that is highly self-serving. And in so doing we cease to possess the right, or indeed chance, to make an impression with the vast majority who are trying to do their best for the planet by just living their lives in the most optimal manner given the circumstances.

No fuel like an old fuel

Nothing like a bit of a do to get the camps staked out. And now we're
getting slightly over our fit of the vapours it's interesting to see
who said what when the pipe was kinked.

In the greed corner, we had the likes of our Gordo saying it's OPEC's
duty to pump up the volume. There's a good 50 years' worth more (is
that all??) and he'll be cosy on the beach with his full index linked
by then, so some other pol can pick up the tab.

In the better dead than fed corner, we have some enviro lobbies
saying that actually it's it's a good thing as we stop using our
beastly motor cars. Forget the airplanes and all the rest (though a
very sparky young guy speaking from some group/magazine - The
Ecologist? - on the BBC the other morning did seem to be making a
lot of more practical sense and points, with tax-free air fuel thing
included, than the business spokesperson who was stuck in the 'it's
very difficult to change ' groove), let's just score a point here to
keep us in conferences, because we're not for profit and there'll
always be a pension.

Actually I couldn't agree more about it being a wake-up call. Though
it possibly could have been planned out a bit better so that those of
us without access to public transport to do our jobs, etc, or the
limitless funds to absorb the costs of conducting our careers, had a
wee bit more of a chance to sort something out.

In a matter of weeks I have seen the cost of filling up my tank go a
wee bit past inflation. And it's not like I can pass the cost on to
my customers, and hence the general public. Well, not yet.

So I guess I could stop going to things like the MRW conference the
other day. But then how would I meet anyone who might want to take an
ad out on Junkk.com?

Which means... stop?

I don't drive because I like sitting on motorways. I drive because I
have to. And as the public transport system cannot meet my needs, the
best I can do is hang on to my car until I can afford a replacement
that has an acceptable an environmental consequence.

Until then, whatever happens the government will need to maintain its
addiction to revenue, so it looks like using fossil fuels will be
treated as a luxury item. This may drive a further wedge in the
country/urban divide, as the latter tend to be better paid, and need
their 4x4s more for style than substance. It will also be a fun one
to explain to the less affluent in the electorate.

D'oh Nuts

I may be missing something here, but I doubt it:

YEARS OF RESEARCH SWEPT AWAY BY KATRINA'S RISING WATERS

As rising floodwaters swamped New Orleans, Louisiana's chief epidemiologist enlisted state police on a mission to break into a high-security government lab and destroy any dangerous germs before they could escape or fall into the wrong hands.

"This is what had to be done," said Ratard, who matter-of-factly put a sudden end to his lab's work.

http://tinyurl.com/782ky

It looks like a sad tale of loss and noble sacrifice. But isn't it a tad on the barmy side to keep stuff like this (dangerous germs.. bless) in an area that's prone to natural... excesses? If they have to do it, perhaps down a mine, and preferably one unlikely to get waterlogged. 

'Fall into the wrong hands'... what about floating out into the street!?

Would you like a side order of spam with that?

Emma's first foray, and she has fan mail before the electrons had stopped whizzing to and fro. What is it about blondes????!

But before you think the green god of jealousy is striking, I had already called 'he who lured me to the blogside', Lloyd of Perfect Path, to ask if there was such a thing as blogspam.


Sadly, it is so. Hence, having got excited about the nice feedback of late, though perhaps wondering what Iraqi dinars had to do with saving the planet (I actually had got a rather nifty geo-political link concocted in my ego-draining delusions), I guess we remain either alone in the wilderness, though perhaps appreciated by a silent few.. or maybe many.

Another bubble burst.

Though not a flood, something must be done, and Lloyd says there's not a lot that can be. Apparently the software to hijack a blog is simple.

So for now I guess I'll have to switch off the reply button. I'll also see if I can delete those we have had so far. Though I may leave up the first one that had me fooled enough to reply, as a reminder that for all the net can do for good, there are those who will seek to compromise it.

If you ever want to get in touch, there is always Junkk.com!

No Waste Like Water

Here goes my first contribution to Peter’s blog. He missed last night’s episode of No Waste Like Home, so here are my comments instead.

After meeting Penney at the NEC on both Tuesday and Thursday, I was determined not to miss this week’s episode of No Waste Like Home. The couple in question lived in a swish London apartment, and had a good disposable income that was spent mostly on designer clothes and food. Their biggest vice was water consumption. I can’t remember the exact figures, but the water supply they used for bathing and showering in a week could have provided nine people a ten-minute shower everyday. The dishwasher was used for a couple of plates and cups, and clothes were washed everyday. If food didn’t ‘look right’ it was thrown away, and if clothes were unfashionable, they were also thrown away. They came across as a little snobbish. I was able to relate to this, because unfortunately I do have a few friends like this who I nag constantly, and will do even more after seeing this episode. In the first week they managed to cut their water usage by three thirds, started recycling their waste, reduced their food bill and food miles, and reluctantly took their clothes to a second-hand shop. They even purchased organic clothing made from hemp, cotton etc – but they preferred their designer clothes. By the end of the episode, they decided to buy local organic produce online, rather than traipse around the local food market (they didn’t like the look of the food in the market), and had delivered leaflets to all their neighbours campaigning to reduce water usage in their block of apartments. After the episode had finished, the couple had got the local council to install recycling facilities, purchased a Hippo Water Saver for all of their neighbours, and wrote a letter to the prime minister about the environment. They felt that Penney had really inspired them, and they felt that before they knew about the three R’s, but didn’t know how to incorporate it into their lives. I think this has helped to show young, busy people, that small changes can make such a big difference, and not affect street cred!

Stop Press!

No, I mean it... stop the press!

Oh heck... too late.

While we were in the NEC a reporter from an online marketing publication called New Media Age phoned to ask a few questions about Junkk.com.

I guess it was following my meeting the editor last week, when I was telling him what we were up to, and as he showed an interest I followed up to say we'd get some info to them when the site and launch were ready.

But it looks like the cannon has been well and truly pole-vaulted, and they have done a REVIEW!!!!

Sadly it's a subscription magazine (and one we had yet to add to our 'time-to read' and budget-stretching list of publications to digest weekly), and not as prone to lurk on the shelves of WH Smith here as in Soho, so if anyone has a copy, please let us know!

We really, REALLY hope they have been nice, and whatever happens really, REALLY, REALLY hope they will do another one when we have all the new stuff up!

Oh well, they do say there is no such thing as bad publicity.

Nice knowing you...

From today's Independent:

"Global warming 'past the point of no return"

A record loss of sea ice in the Arctic this summer has convinced scientists that the northern hemisphere may have crossed a critical threshold beyond which the climate may never recover."

NEC, NEC

Just back from the NEC again, having decided on another 'investment' in time and money to further the cause.

Fortunately, it proved well worth it.

Having 'done' the Recycling Expo on Tuesday, we decided to focus more on the Direct Mail and Incentives Show next door. Usually this is a rather depressing task for any of an environemental disposition, as there is a staggering amount of wasted resource and utter tat that gets consumed in these affairs.

However there were some glimmers of light, literally, with as an example a company promoting wind up stuff like torches, which was a bit more like it. Sadly the unit costs (at several ££) are still pretty much out of our range for Junkk.com's purposes, though we may consider a batch as bigger prizes.

Getting closer to our budget were several arboreal incentives, including a tree in a tube, seeds imbedded in a card (you don't reycle, you compost and end up with a plant) and even a cactus in a keyring. So far, so alliterative.

The problem is we're free, so paying people to register is a rather expensive business model.

However we did quite well for meeting some good folks, and got called over to the recycling show a few times. Penney Poyzer had returned for a book signing, so we now have a copy of hers (review to follow), with a nice quote for the site which she inscribed on the cover. We'll stick it on the site, most likely under testamonials. She also got to see my 'works in progress' on the rucksack and the extension chord from the old vacuum cleaner I found, and seemed suitably bemused.

These party pieces also came out again when we were kindly introduced by the MRW PR team to a BBC producer, with whom we chatted for a long time. He has a show in production using eco-gurus (I had heard of a couple, but they're not 'celebrities' as such) who are subjected to surviving off the waste. Can't say I envy them that task, but it does sound interesting and quite close to what we're up to. I doubt they'll have access to a laptop and net connection to source or upload Junkk.com ideas though. He didn't mention the name but we'll be keeping our eyes open!

We got there in an hour door to door. Same back. It is a sad fact that to do that any other way than car was not an option, either in terms of time or financially.

Too hot to handle

We have a list of happy problems, which, happily (in some ways) grow
daily. Things like being told our server costs could hit £2k a month,
to which I reply 'if we need that much server use, then we're getting
the kind of traffic we can actually sell to more than cover it'.

One that does concern me is that I really do like to reply in person
to those nice enough to write to us with kind words. Every company
says that of course, and when you're small enough it is still
doable... just... even when the days are long. A few quick lines at
the end of the day round it off a treat.

But when it grows too much more I don't think I'll be able to do it
in person and cope. So I guess the happy problem is figuring a way
around that.

What is not a happy problem is our difficulties communicating with
people who have email accounts with those big guys like aol or
hotmail. And I don't think we can solve this problem, as it is out of
our control.

A Junkk.com user called Zoe, who has a hotmail account, wrote to us
yesterday. As she is registered, at least she must have managed to
set her default settings to allow the sign-up confirmation, so good
for her!

All I did was write a quick 'thank you' for her support. And it
bounced! Now I don't know if it was because my email wasn't on her
list, or because the logo is in our signature, but it is so
frustrating that such simple communication is restricted between two
people who obviously are happy to be in touch.

I really hope that we can find a way around this.

Foot in mouth disease

I thought today may be the first working day when I didn't post a blog, but as I watch the sun sink over the Wye there is too much worth sharing.

This morning I weighed up a round trip of about 150 miles, parking, munchies and two of us out of the office, and still decided in favour of going to the Materials Recycling Week ( http://www.mrw.co.uk ) RWM 05 (there'll be a link off MRW I'm sure) exhibition at the NEC. About 2 hrs later, having diverted to pick up Emma at home, we arrived.

At first it didn't look good. More big bits of kit than you could shake a WEEE directive at. Great for an ex-Civ Eng who still has a poster of Raymond Baxter on his wall (RIP Tomorrow's World), but perhaps not so relevant to our core audience. And Emma's toecaps, while dainty, can express 'Focus' in a very sharp manner.

But as we scooted up and down the aisles, we did find a few nuggets of gold. People who we could help, and people we may be helped by. I was especially taken with a young man from DEFRA who got quite taken with Junkk.com and vowed to make 'them' take note. I have to say, from councils to community groups to govt. departments, there is a promising new generation I have high hopes of engaging with positively.

Anyway, pitches were pitched, cards were exchanged, and I truly look forward to seeing a fair bit more professional activity of the site very soon.

The thing that helped us most in this was my deciding to take my laptop sling with me. This simple but (if I may so, and despite feedback from a few grinches who have said the exact opposite) stylish example of reuse (I must finish my vacuum cleaner rucksack... soon!) caught a lot of eyes and opened up a lot of conversations.

One of which was with Penney Poyzer (between the Google links and MRW's posts, I'm not too sure how her name is spelled), the host of BBC2's 'No waste like home', to whom we were kindly introduced by the lovely Anna, Rebecca and (whatever the male equivalent of lovely is, becuase he really is a nice chap, and I sit here still singed by the attitude of most editors) Paul of MRW. Thanks guys, and I hope the link is a good 'thank you' start, and I will add to your blog soon... promise.

Anyway, back to Penney. And the reason for today's title.

Followers of this blog will remember that I have not been overwhelmingly complimentary about the show in the past, though looking back my blogs were, I feel, balanced in what was good and what was bad. At least on a personal basis, which is what a blog is!

So finding myself presented to the frontperson I was basically thinking to myself 'Whoopsidaisy', or words to that effect. In the end I decided to 'fess up. And here a very nice thing happened. It is obvious from the show that she is a very pleasant and gracious lady (though I think the script and editing does her few favours, as in real life she is a different, and much more interesting person), but she immediately accepted that there may be alternative viewpoints, and did so with good humour. She even waived aside our apologies for driving there (she had trained in) by pinting out that we had car-shared, a fact that had not occured to us.

She also seemed to express more than a passing interest in Junkk.com which, from someone much further advanced towards the Holy Grail of public awareness (to our... er.. zero. When will that launch plan kick in???) was more than welcome. I might also add that, having appreciated more her professional background, it was very encouraging.

I sincerely hope we will be able to engage with her some more, and more often. I overheard her comments in the press briefing (see MRW, above, I guess next week, to read it) and this is one highly informed, passionate yet pragmatic lady. She is also, like us, not so bound by various affiliations to be 'on message' to the detriment of objective public communication, which was one area with which I had felt the TV series was not doing such a good job. That said, it does seem to be getting better each week, and I'm sorry I missed the last episode.

I have also just read Rebecca Allmark of MRW's review of her book, and it looks like it is more what we have been advocating, and one we will buy. Without having read it myself I will hold comment, but by way of atonement to a very nice person, and astoundingly youthful grandma, let me point you in its direction:


http://www.amazon.co.uk/exec/obidos/ASIN/0753510278/amphlettcom-21/202-4893740-7340631

Penny, I hope we will talk more, help each other... and, in so doing, the planet.

By coincidence, her next show features student life. And next week we hit London's University Fresher's Fairs to see how we can inspire students to save money and time via reuse.

Coincidence? No. I'd like to think it's karma:)

Peter is visiting the factory

It was only yesterday that I read of one of our major literary figures (typically his name now escapes me) who named his garden workplace of inspiration 'London', so that if anyone called they could be told that he was 'away in London'.

Hence today's title.

With our imminent roll-out and all that entails (and there is a lot), plus our visiting the the Materials Recycling Weekly (check out some nice things they said about us here:  http://www.junkk.com/index.asp?slevel=0z301z739z870&parent_id=870 ) Recycling Waste Management exhibition this week (fuel protests, or indeed  fuel, permitting - I may have something to say about this soon), I need some more tangible examples of what we're on about.

So, I'm off down the she... to the factory.

If you don't learn from history...

I don't usually write at the weekend, especially one when I am under threat of serious sighing from our Chiefs of Stuff and Prose & Comms if I do not get down my shed and make something. 

 

But things conspire to thwart me. 50% of my shed time was lost by spending most of yesterday picking my kids up from a birthday party in a neighbouring village. A small matter of floods, landslides, closed motorways and jobsworths blocking access to 'their’ town for some odd notion that failed to compute, or turn out to be justified, when it came to getting to my kids. How the 4x4 brigade must have giggled, even though it is of course all their fault it's all happening.

 

Anyway, as I at last prepare to head for the shed, I was idly watching a BBC programme that seemed to be about predictions from the 60's, and coverage of them (how I miss Tomorrow's World). It featured fascinating insights from a variety of folks, including a set of 9-year-olds from a London comprehensive who were frankly outstanding in terms of intellect, creativity and expression. Don't tell me an ‘education, education, education’, education has resulted in a better, er, education.

 

But there was one contributor whose thoughts really resonated: Isaac Asimov.

 

He'd been asked what he saw come the end of the century. Basically he focused on population control and all that failing to address it would lead to in the next 50 years. He mentioned a bunch of stuff including pollution and its consequences, famine, wars of desperation. But he said that really was a most pessimistic view because he was sure we'd sort it.

 

Well, we're here. And guess what. He was right. And he was wrong.

 

Sadly all has happened just the way he said it could. And it’s because we haven't, are not, and it doesn't look like we will address the big issues first, if at all.

There's a welcome... initiative... in the hillsides

I'm looking out of my window towards the River Wye.

Honestly, there could be fewer places than Ross nicer to live and work. But it's not the best of places to do business, because as part of the service industry, and in particular one heavily involved with fmcg marketing and high level government (aspiring, that is) access, we're not exactly at the heart of the action.

And for all the wonderful opportunities offered by the net, there really is no substitute for good 'ole fashioned networking. Face to face, 'what do you do' events that put you in direct touch with a person with whom some mutually beneficial synergies may be explored.

Why I am writing this, now, is that yesterday at crack of dawn I set off to Cardiff University, where I had been invited to participate in an all-day event called 'Adding Value to your Work Through Creativity and Innovation.'. With a title like that you can see why I was tempted.

I walked into a room with a large number of folks, perhaps 90 in all. They were naturally weighted to learning institutions but with a fair number of Council representatives, the odd business (like me, and they don't come much odder than that!), plus the usual 'gawd knows what they do' consultants.

The day was pretty much split into two lectures, one given by a very passionate sociology lecturer, and the other by his direct opposite, a very quietly spoken, wry but equally committed Professor of Engineering.

In between these talks, we were set tasks, both as individuals and as small groups, basically to 'set our minds free'.
And, fair enough, they had an agenda too. Money. To develop what they had started. Did you know that when it comes to global inventions, one fifth of all of them, and 70% of all the significant ones came from the UK? That was courtesy of the Japanese government, back in 2001. Thing is, the guys overseas are not too concerned about us any more. Apparently we are squandering our talent for invention. That is a BIG PROBLEM. And these guys, are trying to do something about it.

Well, I'm up for it. And without being too self-centred (we'll do what we can, when we can, to help in return, but it won't be with money) I think Junkk.com could be not only a beneficiary of their desire to DO something, but a poster child to inspire all those in the equation... public, government, authorities, business and funders.

Because Junkk.com is about taking a new approach to the ‘waste’ problem, by giving consumers, manufacturers and retailers end benefits. Consumers save money and in doing so, put less into landfill. And manufacturers/retailers make money by giving their product/packaging and extra selling point – a second use for things that they produce (packaging/products) and that people might otherwise put in the bin.

Trouble is, the innovators and creators are not the gatekeepers of progress any more. It's the po-faced, grey folks with Specsavers twofers and a meta-matrix that needs creating and box that needs ticking. So we have a certain... challenge... ahead of us.

And they were talking ‘We South Welsh’, which may exclude me/us (a few miles the wrong side of the border), and raises another issue as I see it of diluted efforts through too much being frittered away in separate empires. But in this case I think it’s a matter of ‘you need to start somewhere’, so more power to their elbow.

Was it worth it? Yes. I had fun, learned a bit... and, most important of all.. made a few valuable new contacts which may, if they choose to develop the relationship, work to Junkk.com’s and their advantage equally.

Businesses like mine (creative, innovative, call it what you will – basically people who look at the world in a different way) need to hook up with people like these guys who recognize the value of creative solutions, and are willing to do something about it.

I’m looking forward to the ride.

Charity begins in SW19..?

Fresh from a seminar on such things the other night and with our
launch imminent, plus the initiation of our own news feed, I'm
drowning in press releases; both those we're putting out and those
we're getting in. Such immersion has made me interested in how what
is written can get re-interpreted subsequently.

So I'm wondering what happened here: <bold>Oxfam tells Britons: "Don't
give us your rubbish"

</bold>

The facts are clear, and fair enough.

Seems we're a scummy lot and dump a bunch of tat on the poor old
charity, which costs them half a mil to sift. That's half a mil not
going to where it should.

The Association of Charity Shops has estimated that in total about
£4.5 million was wasted each year on the problem, and went on to ask
people use common sense in deciding whether the items are suitable to
donate to charity shops or whether they should be recycled elsewhere.

You know it's coming...

The thing is, was this the right way to go away about it?

In our high street, there are half a dozen charity shops. I've pretty
much given up going most of the big names because they really don't
give out the vibe that some stuff we didn't want but did not seem
skipworthy was, well, up to scratch. So it all goes to a local animal
shelter, who seem cheerful and happy to look, hand pick and generally
sift away. So I'm happy to see stuff go to a good home and in a good
cause, but they wouldn't be my first choice; I'm a bit more human
before animal in my charitable preferences, and a lot more teaching
and assisting than giving. Hard to teach a cat to fish and all… well,
at least better.

So I just wonder if this message a) was the right one, and b) got
broadcast as it should. I don't know about others, but frankly I felt
that I'd just give all the swanky charities a wider berth, and I'm not
sure that was the best result.

Especially as I don't think those that do drop off the real tat will
be in any way dissuaded from continuing to do so. And that means what
exactly, by way of a result? About the only positive message I could
get was as a potential consumer, that they have high standards, but
really what's incoming doesn't bother me, and I kind of expect some
quality control prior to that which I exercise on my own as I rummage
away.

So hate to say it, but it’s simply a cost of doing business,
especially when your supplier chain is out of your control. But at
least it’s free! And there may be a chance the supply may be reduced.
Unless they're trying to get to new stuff, which is unfair competition
to local shops and away from Junkk.com's reuse support.

An example of unwanted goods that fell in the 'how could they’
category was a box of assorted false teeth donated on Monday to the
charity's store in Wimbledon.

Now that seemed a hoot to me. Certainly not for the bin. I couldn't
say for sure, but wouldn't it be great if instead of a problem they
spun it positively by taking a quick pic with the mobly, and popping
it on some website that catered to the SW 19 area in such matters,
especially with a FREE service for charities, and maybe lured in some
Damien Hirstesque cove with Tate Modern in his sights. he may even buy
some other stuff while browsing.

Now, if only such a site existed.. if, oh...!

Talk softly, but carry a big thesaurus?

I have mixed feelings on forums, even though we have one on Junkk.com,
we take part in more than a few as part of our daily grind, and this
blog itself sort of being an area of open comment.

There is no doubting the absolute value of a like-minded group sharing
information and thoughts. Better yet when others can be attracted to
seek help and contribute.

And sometimes there can be even greater benefits to be derived from
spirited debate.

But there's that small niggle that even in areas of comparative calm
(though to be sure all things environmental can be pretty heavy and
hence stir the mightiest passions) there are those who get more than
they bargained for when they make an 'innocent' suggestion that ends up
with some quite negative feedback.

It is very relevant to Junkk.com, because we live and breathe by the
contributions of our audience, young and old, novice planet saver to
eco-warrior. Indeed, it now occurs to me that even on individual idea
posts, there is an opportunity to comment, so these in effect become
mini forums.

So now I'm wondering if that is a problem. And also part of a bigger
issue we need to address.

I'd like to think that there will be no such thing as a bad idea on
Junkk.com. Common. Obvious. Maybe even poorly thought through. But
never bad.

Such thoughts were brought to mind by a series of exchanges on a forum
we follow.

Basically a nice person had shared a reuse (hence our interest)
opportunity she had discovered. And for a while the subsequent posts
were positive. Then came the now almost inevitable 'but is it truly
environmental on a global scale?' question.

Now that in itself was entirely valid. Frankly I had a whole set more
that sprung to mind, though most were more on a practicality basis. But
on balance I figured, hey, it's cute, it's neat, and why not? But like
the whole disposable vs. cotton nappies episode, which somehow seemed
to drag in the environmental costs of donkey transport in India, it can
all get a bit 'deep'. Matters of tone can then make things worse. While
'I'm not sure that going to work because...' is a possible route to an
alternative viewpoint, 'That's the most stupid thing...' tends to end
in MAD. It's a feeling I get when I watch BBC Question Time when
everyone, panel experts and audience alike, are so informed and
impassioned (and chosen to be that way), that I don't feel the true
contributions, appreciations and feelings of normal folk are adequately
represented.

And that's what happened in this forum: Much Deepness in the Mire
(which is also a small village West of here:). Average person ends up
having a big green finger been wagged at her, backed by all sorts of
shaming stats.

I'm not sure what the outcome was, but it seems pretty certain that by
the end all concerned were wishing they had never touched the keyboard,
which is a pity. Especially because I'd suspect that the initial
contributor, and those like them, may not be as keen to share again in
the future.

Hence I'm inclined to relook at our posting system, because I never
want anyone to feel they can't post without risking ridicule from those
more vocal or who 'know better'. Junkk.com is for all those who care,
even if it is a little bit, and I don't want to see things getting
dominated by those who care perhaps too much.

Of course it would be a shame to lose the chance of feedback, as it
can be used to improve an idea, and indeed there may be a need for wise
caution.

I'm not quite sure how we're going to walk the line, but to ensure even
the softest voices are heard I do think we need to create a totally
welcoming environment.

Hmn, 'a totally welcoming environment'; not a bad phrase at all on
which to end.

The 'F-word'

Life can be hectic - and stressful - at Junkk Towers, so that word is
heard a lot. And it is invariably directed at me:

'Focus!!!!!'

Of course, it is easier to say than to do, especially when there is
just soooooo much neat stuff to investigate, create... and share.

Also some recent events have contributed significantly to complicating
matters. Many good. Some perhaps less so. In fact I'm beginning to hate
my 'ra-ra' maxim that problems are merely opportunities that have only
just presented themselves, for solutions that simply await discovery.
No, mostly they are stuff I could do without and wish would go away.

On the up side, our Chiefs of Stuff and Prose and Comms headed off
recently to forge some worthy alliances. This seemed to show that when
I'm not around things work out a lot better, and the logical
extrapolation of that is... I should stay in my shed. So off I go.

Also our launch roll-out is 'imminent'. And our marketing agency is
getting serious interest all around, from schools, unis, councils.. you
name it. All, so far, except the number of sponsors we'd hoped for at
this stage. The very people with the most to gain are the ones who are
dragging their feet. And worse, we can't seem to get a handle of what
is inducing such lethargy. If we know we'd address it... if we could.

So rather than beat ourselves up on unfathomable issues, we're just
going to go and concentrate where we feel most comfortable. No more
worrying about corporate decision chains for now; we're targeting real
people, not targets.

We've built it, and we're going to devote our efforts to seeing if we
can make the people come.

Hence our focus is going to be on our core message and site function:
re:use. And we're devoting our efforts to getting this out, via our
roadshows, PR, etc, in the hope of getting the public enthused, and
onboard. And if the everyday folk back us, the media will take note.
And if the public and the media back us, then we figure that eventually
we'll get the corporate and commercial support we've been seeking.

And if we don't? Even if all else fails, the site is unique, it's
there, it's WYSIWYG, it's free and it can be used by one and all for
common good. It can, and will grow, no matter what.

That's a heck of a legacy already.