"I'm listening"

The following has caught my attention: 'Taxes aren't how Tories will save the world'  . 

And it brought to mind several scenes from the Simpsons when a clearly skeptical, but greedy for promised riches Homer encourages further explanation to be convinced... if not seduced.

It seems a Tory government would not come out with a huge increase in taxes,” according to Zac Goldsmith, he of Ecologist and Tory eco-committee fame. “The Conservative Party doesn’t like forcing people to do anything and I don’t think we have to - most of the obstacles are from bad governance.” With him so far, I have to say. "The best way to reduce the country’s dependence on oil and decrease greenhouse gas emissions is to make people aware of the importance of buying local food and introducing energy-efficiency savings in the home,“ he goes on: “No one thinks they’re going to change the world by switching their light bulbs, but if they knew you could push a button and make all houses change, everyone would push it. The Government has to make that button.”

Well, so far, I'm listening... I'm listening. If there's a chance of making such notions work, I know just the website to try to help make it happen:)

Driving Mother Earth Crazy

Well, they had to know it was going to be a rich source, didn't they? And I don't see why the major media (a few links below) should have all the fun with Mr. 2-Jags and his fellow Cab(inet) members.

And I quote: "All members of the Cabinet have been told by the government car pool that when their car is up for renewal they can swap it either for an XL Jaguar or a Toyota Prius."

Er, why just these?

I actually fully accept that for some selected pols (assuming Ma Beckett can be seduced from her helicopters and RAF flights), trying to escape a bunch of terrorists in a Prius (that's the minister, not the terrorists; one presumes the latter may not have the environment high on their agendas) may not quite make sense. But my R-reg Volvo & Golf fall between the two (and more Prius-wards when I can figure out the right option and how to afford it, LPG, Hydrogen, etc-wise) and would certainly do the necessary, even in converted modes.

In fact, I'm pretty sure that a recent Sunday Times had a selection of well interesting rides that could meet the requirements of all. I really fancied the Volvo myself, and it's not like The House of Commons couldn't sport a filler-station.

But if we're buying British (Toyota's excepted) I believe Morgan, a good British brand, has had a nice bit of grant-wedge to look at alternative fuel versions. Surely there are other options too?

But c'mon guys, is this not just pulling the other one a tad far when trying to persuade the rest of us to act responsibly?

Read more in the: Sunday Times

And in the Indy: Ministers choose between Jags and eco-friendly cars

What's black and white a green all over? Well.. for a day or two at least.

As part of my weekend routine, I jogged, change in hand, to the local newsagents to buy my Sunday Times. But this day it was a double trip (good job I was using Shank's pony) as the change I had was not sufficient. Because the price has gone up... again. In fact I don't know why I was so foolish as to take the exact money as it has steadily raised, by arbritary inflation-busting amounts, almost incessantly.

The lady at the counter sympathised: 'A lot of people have complained,' she said, 'especially as most of it is stuff they just get home and throw away'.

So it's ironic that I am just about to chew now on an insert from the ST's sister publication, The Times, from the previous day, entitled 'How to be Green'.

And even more ironic that when I looked at the online version, the ad that popped up was for a Land Rover 4x4:)

I guess I'd have to say it was another BTN (better than nothing). At least there was a fair bit of positive, proactive content, and even some information and links that added to the value and extent of my knowledge.

The supplement itself was carbon neutral. But without looking into too deeply, I rather got the impression that it was just for this section, of this paper, for this day. Hmn.

Letting that pass, there was also this slight sense that it was being treated as a 'one-off' topic, with issues being cherry-picked. And in tone I felt ever so-slightly talked-down to.

For instance, in another of the multitudinous (un-carbon neutral?) sections called Style (I await with eager anticipation a future feature on eco-fashion, which will probably be between one on fur and flying to Asia to buy fabrics) there is an article about our yoof, titled 'teen queens', billed as a report on what today's teenagers think, including matters such as the environment. Now I am sure a lot of teens' views are shaped by those they are given by those they would wish to be (rich & famous & covered in the media), but I do wonder just how representative of most teenagers are 'Peaches and Pixie Geldof’s gang... gathered togther to help launch the Miss Selfridge spring/summer collection.

Peaches has views on the environment: “... rising sea levels, pollution ... Even if we don’t do anything about them, they are still a worry.”

“The hole in the ozone layer gives me nightmares,” adds Holly Gore, the 16-year-old daughter of the chef Skye Gyngell, who is rummaging through the studio fridge. Then her face lights up. “Oh. My. God. Purdeys. Is. My. Life. Mumalwayshastheminthefridge”.

And... er... that's it. The cure for the ozone layer is opening the fridge (small smile here, as I'm pretty sure ours is still packed with CFCs, being 15 yeasr old 'n all. I'm sure this is not the case Chez Gore) and grabbing a brace of Purdeys.

The article concludes by suggesting these lovely lasses 'are role models for their peers and an inspiration to the majority of inert British teens whose favourite sport is watching cheap telly.' O......k, then.

Moving up an age-bracket, though I suspect not too many postcodes away, by counterpoint we then had 'So you want to be a yummy-mummy', which advises that you don't need to live in a sprawling house in Notting Hill, driving a Mercedes SUV, or employing a full-time au pair.

But I'm sure it helps if you do. Especially when it comes top popping round to do a quick interview.

By way of left/right balance, media-wise, let me end with this, from today's Independent: 'Why I'm seriously cheesed off with my skiing holiday.'

Sadly the bulk of the text was part of the 'paid-for' sub section, so I was denied why the lady in question was unhappy with her lot, but I'm sure the trip was conducted to the highest standards of environmental responsibility.

Which is what role models are for.

Grace and favours

Today, Emma and I were on the way back from a JunkkYard mission for our own benefit, and we are now the proud owners (well, as these things seem to work out, custodians) of a perfectly good 3 drawer filing cabinet that was destined for the skip until we got wind of it. The system works!

Anyway, on our way back through Ross High Street we noticed a book signing event at one of our local organic food stores, and decided to drop by in our capacity as journalists. The author in question was Janey Lee Grace (who, amongst many other things, graces R2's Steve Wright show) and she was there to promote her book, 'imperfectly natural woman'.

It was a more than worthwhile stopover, in many ways, as she proved to be a lovely, approachable woman, and it was a pleasure to spend a few moments in her company. We'll certainly be happy to give her a slot on our diRE:ctory, and having succumbed to her charms I bought a copy which we will be reviewing soon for a news feature.

We were also pleased to find that she was very interested in Junkk.com, and thought it was a great idea! Hopefully something she will share with her colleagues back at the radio station. We have been trying to break into the London PR/media club with a notable lack of success to date, and this could well be the break that we were looking for.

She also was kind enough to write some nice things in the cover, which we'll add to our collection of testimonials.

So, all in all, it was a a most rewarding exchange, and I'd like to think mutually. And with our Ideal Home Show fast approaching, the timing could not have been much better to make the most of such a nice opportunity.

Speaking of which, there are a few more rather wonderful developments to report on when I can grab the time.

Building Blocks

I've never been quite sure of the actual value of memberships of business bodies. The benefits have always seemed a little less than those promised, especially when weighed against the costs of participation, which can run from free to a few hundred £ a year. There is also the small matter of time commitments (getting to events, etc), but you can get out a lot if you put in some well-directed efforts.

Being part of the Chamber of Commerce certainly didn't hurt in our being helped by Business Link to initiate Junkk.com. But I have to say I have ceased to go to many of their breakfast meetings any more, as there are only so many life coaches, bank managers and teenage web developers I can face paying £15 and getting up at 6am to drive 20 miles to meet.

But there is no subsitute at our stage for networking (and what could be a more tangible example than our fortcoming exhibitions stands). And one organisation that is bearing fruit is by our being a member of the FPB. And as what goes around comes around, I happily promote them here.

Making it happen took a lot of persistence and work on both sides, but it has resulted in the following feature. Not bad, even if we do say so ourselves.

And it has kinda of snowballed, bringing in many other stands. For instance, we were immediately contacted by another member, Melanie Murrell of Innotec, and as a result a truly delightful and ever-evolving synergy has developed.

Her company have a product which essentially enables the repair of pretty much any plastics. And with a vast number of items made from plastic being discarded unnecessarily due to relatively minor, repairable damage, you can imagine how excited we were simply to feature them as a re:source on Junkk.com.

And now it has already developed much further. For the one month duration of the show we have been keen to 'feature' Junkk.com diRE:ctory clients, and we're pleased that Melanie is keen to come on board and arrange some demos.

The show organisers are very keen on our message of re:pair and re:use (even higher up the re:tree than re:cycling), and have already expressed an interest in our 'product' range for some PR events, including their Green Catwalk show on press day.

Hence Melanie is teaming up with us to try and make a gob-smacking demo model of one of my latest ideas, the Vac:Sac, which is a clamshell rucksack made out of an an old vacuum.

I'm pleased to say we are also getting many other businesses keen to be a part of our roadshow. Hopefully we'll hear from more like Melanie via the FPB. 

It's just what we'd hoped for; acting as a matchmaker between those with ways to re-something away from the landfill, and those who are looking for ideas to help the environment ... and their pockets. Better yet if we can come up with ways via the site to link complementary enterprises together.

Sticks and Stones

So the whole Danish cartoon issue ferments ever more onerously. Meanwhile fingers are being pointed. Intellects engaged and ranged in all directions. Pronouncements made. Actions taken. So much fuss... and on the part of those claiming to try and make sense of it all and/or resolve matters, so far all I can see is a bubbling pot.

It's one to which I have contributed (by submitting the wrods below to a few letters pages and blogs), but only to try and point out that most exchanges I have been exposed make it feel like being caught in the middle of artillery exchanges between those who can only see things in black and white. 

That this issue creeps into this blog is twofold. One is that so much in the world of environmental debate these days also seems to be conducted on similar lines. You are either 'for' or 'against', 'believe' or 'don't believe'. Middle ground does not exist, perhaps because it does not make for such good ratings. Which is my second concern. Those that control the media have the power to shape debate by selecting what they share or omit, not that I can see much that can be done about it.

Spoken or written words and/or images of potential offence will inevitably exist so long is there is one with lips to speak and hands to write, and another with whom they may come into contact who has ears to hear or eyes to read. Plus...

There's an important piece of context that can often be ignored when 'giving, or taking, offence' is referred to. It’s always there ready and waiting, and will be delivered freely and immediately (p&p inc.)... the minute anyone opts to seek it out and collect it. 

Failing to recognize, accept and cope with this is one thing, but to wring hands, deny or, most incredulously, try to prevent it happening (again) is up there with Canute’s tide-restraining demo. 

The threat of physical violence is another matter entirely. Words (or, in this case images) cannot harm us. But allowing even the hint of validation that they may be used as an excuse (and hence somehow should be restricted) is a far more dangerous route to opt for. Hence my disquiet at the tacit approval given in some quarters to 4x4 tyre deflation pranks. Where can this lead but further downwards?

While one could wish they had not existed, the cartoons are therefore essentially irrelevant. 

There will always be tinder available for those with a match and who seek to light a fire. So all the well-meaning efforts being expended on explanation and mitigation are simply helping fan the flames in support of those whose interests are served by this 'event' taking its course. Starve it of the oxygen it feeds upon, in the form of credibility, and it will extinguish. Until the next time. But feed it straw, and it will flare once more.

Pretty Much Ideal

As a subject/title line, that looks pretty positive, doesn't it? Well, let's hope it proves to be the case. But it's also a bit like the sword of Damocles as we at Junkk Towers are currently working like little Beavers to get ready for our being an exhibitor at... The Daily Mail Ideal Home Show 2006!

It really seemed too good an opportunity to miss when it was presented...oh.. all of a week ago. And it has pretty much been a blur ever since. 

Normally one would have months to prepare for such a thing. The small matter of the stand, the logistics of designing it, building it, decorating it, getting it there, staffing it, etc. And we're talking almost a solid month here... or, rather there. And when I think of how much is waiting back at the ranch when we did the 3-day events. Sheesh.

It almost didn't happen. The costs of the stand was bad enough, but the accommodation alone was going to write us off. But then some very good chums rallied round, and that has come off the budget red-zone.

With just a few weeks more things are starting to take shape. But beyond all this design and construction we're also trying to build a coherent campaign around it all. Inviting businesses from Junkk.com to join in with ideas, items and even a spell to help out just 'being there'. Plus PR, marekting to soem of our target fmcg guys. Flyers. The list is as long as time is short.

It has bee... interesting, so far. But no complaints. We could have said no. But with the theme being recycling and sustainable living it was really too good to miss. 400,000 consumers walking past. Lots of press and TV, too.

If we can't make an impression then I don't know what else we can do.

It's shaping up. Watch this space. Or rather, make sure you visit this one.

Cartridge (Nut) Cases

With all our current adventures the blogging is a bit thin on the ground lately, so here's an opportunity to pop one in a quickie in the form of a cut & paste of the text of a letter to our chums at Materials Recycling World, following their carrying a story about Canon winning a court case against a cartridge reseller in Japan. As you'll gather, I was not best pleased.

What I am trying to get my head around is how such a huge, not to mention worthwhile, industry has developed over such a long period when a threat like this was on the cards. How many people now depend (in so many ways) on it? Were those who decided to get into this taking a gamble, or are we again looking at grey areas being made black retroactively by clever lawyers supported by well-funded lobby groups?

Notwithstanding the legal implications to the firms in question, as a member of the confused consumer world, I am meanwhile still trying to get to grips with all the various issues that surround this topic, from the technical, to the financial to the ecological.

I remember having an interesting debate recently with a representative of Brother, who was doing a fair job of presenting the case for the manufacturer, but I'm afraid he just couldn't sway me. We take our old cartridges to Cartridge World, we get given new ones in exchange that work just fine (if we do high end work we may opt for quality if there is a difference that doesn't require a microscope to judge), is guaranteed anyway (so the clogging thing doesn't seem to apply) and costs a whole lot less. Pretty much a win-win unless I'm missing something, with the obvious exception of the manufacturer.

It's hard to feel too sympathetic when you read stories such as the one we noted in our own info category for this topic with an addendum about a BBC report. We run our printers 'til the streaks show, for sure.

On a personal note I'm still steaming about a new Dell cartridge I put in today that required 'aligning', and printed two 1" full width bars of ink. Was that really necessary?

In the spirit of positivity, if such test pages are a valid function, why not design them to produce a page that could be reused? My starter for one would be as a picture frame. I'm sure others may have better suggestions that would still provide the technical function and find a use around the home or office rather than being binned.

Tough Times

Because of our continued involvement with the music business we still monitor various goings-on to get wind of any opportunities. And having some moons ago come across a site called UK radio I was happy to get its free weekly updates, though frankly once Junkk.com became really intense they were a bit too long and detailed to stay on top of as well as I would have liked. But still, I was saddened to learn today that they were ceasing to operate. 

My mood is in part selfish. Here was yet another useful, independent resource run by committed folks who had put a lot of time and doubtless money into something that they were interested and believed in, but they just couldn't sustain it. And this despite the fact that they had a healthy and loyal audience... and took ads, which were without doubt going to a highly-targeted readership.

They are not alone in struggling. This recent year-end/new year season has seen many an email from some highly valued resources seeking 'donations'. Almost all of these have been from the world of ENV/REC, going the charity or not-for-profit route, and many actively avoiding ads. Their call, but for obvious reasons I don't see this as a mechanism for guaranteeing objectivity and, let's face it, revenue is a great way to maintain a healthy business. The trick is to ensure that one is not beholden to just a few masters.

I have to confess I have not responded to any of these pleas. For one I don't find many useful enough to pay for. And for another we don't ask for any money from them, and would be happy to feature them if they asked, so we'll keep our meagre budget to ourselves.

Speaking of which, we're looking at where we can go next. The model is relatively simple. We need to get the numbers of our visitors/registrants up so we can point to an audience base that makes it worth the major media talking about us, and the major brands advertising with us.

And while we are growing virally very nicely thank you, it is not yet at a rate that can sustain us in all our efforts to hone the site functions, research information, write articles, etc. The site is built, and our overheads are very low, but salaries do need to be paid so folk can afford to live. And sadly, while we have had generous support in funding 3rd party constructions and consultations, none of it has come in ways we most need 'to keep us going' at such a critical phase. Funders like widgets, not pay slips.

So we are faced with a dilemma. To keep going we need money. And to get money we have to spend it. Well, one thing is for sure. Sitting here worrying about it isn't going to get us anywhere. So watch this space. Junkk.com is about to get very active.

National Pride

It doesn't happen often, but I must confess felt a twinge of pride when I read the following: UK number five in global eco-league table.

Rather typically, we find ourselves just off the winners' podium, but for such a spiffy bit of research to be at that point out of 133 other countries I reckon that's a big up to us. Well done chaps and chapesses! Admittedly our overall environmental health factors did help a lot, but we did do a lot better than some I frankly would have expected higher.

And then... cor blimey g'vnor, there's nice, way aye  (and whatever makes for a pleasantly surprised exclamation in NI)... if that was not enough, it also seems that "British businesses lead global eco pack".

Double dose of wonderfulness Brit-wise. Do note however, that the results are based on how well a company performs relative to its peers, rather than using a standard yardstick to measure them against. 

But, hey, I'm not into splitting hairs here. Well, not in this article at least.

C..online

That headline is a bit extreme for this topic, but I have to say that
I'm more than a bit dubious about how effective the internet, and
especially specialist comparison sites on it, really are at finding
the best deals. I was prompted to write this by an ad in the Sunday
Times, purporting to compare all the major suppliers of energy
'products'.

The reason for my doubts evolved from some frustrations I'd had the
day before. I was on the hunt for a device to enable me to digitise
my old 35mm slide collection (time to get the porty online and earn a
crust). After a fair bit of surfing I had zeroed in on what seemed
the most promising option, which via the usual Googled-up sites
(Kelkoo, Pricerunner) was swinging in at a sale price of £129.99
(usually £159.99). None could get it lower, and in some cases even
managed to add a few extra tens of £.

Fortunately, as I sat ready, credit card in hand, the online site I'd
opted for suddenly popped up a sign saying its security certificate
was not recognised, so I bottled. And as the family were halfway out
of the door for a day trip I had to leave it there.

So imagine my surprise, and a pleasant one at that, when I sauntered
past a branch of Jessops to see the self same thing at £69!

It's a free market, and people can charge whatever they think they
can get away with, so it's not really a con. But anyone who has
convinced themselves that online automatically means best value is
buying a a dubious line.. along with sinker and hook.

Dirty Money

When I was a nipper, one thing my mum impressed upon me was just how dirty money was. There's actually a very effective commercial on TV at the moment about how your chopping board has more bugs than your toilet seat, using a wooden board bedecked with succulent foods to make this point as it reveals itself to be a loo cover.

When you think about it (and it's bets not to at dinner time), there is probably nothing else that so quickly gets passed, literally hand to hand between us all.

Health not really Junkk.com's main area of consideration, but as it still falls under 'environmental' I found this piece worthy of not (excuse the pun):

Scientists follow the money to predict epidemics

It's about a U.S. Web site with the great title of Where's George? that tracks the geographical circulation of money, and as it, like diseases, is carried by people around the world, there's an opportunity to plot the spread of a potential influenza pandemic by tracking the circulation of dollar bills.

Where things do get closer to our area of interest is their point that human movement is a main cause of the spread of infectious disease, but with modern-day travel involving boats, planes, trains, cars and other means of transport it is virtually impossible to compile a comprehensive set of data on travel.

I'd hazard there's not much we can do about it, but it is a small but significant thing to note that our desire, determination and easy ability to travel long distances quickly that is adding another potent environmental burden (global pandemics) to the mix.

Now, wash your hands.

Your tax dollars at work

And before we go any further I know it should be '£'s', but somehow 'Your tax pounds at work' just sounds daft. Just like a ITV cop show chase scene down an alley in Penge looks naff, but the exact same one in CSI:NYC looks well atmospheric.

Anyway, to get my bloggly, eye-twitching, ROI of the Rovers juices flowing this hour, I have just alighted upon this:

White van men urged to go green 

While I have no problem with anything that is trying to make a green difference I simply have to wonder if this is the best use of £1.3 million of your and my money. 

Apparently 200,000 van drivers are to be encouraged by the government to improve their driving skills, in an initiative aimed at reducing vehicle and fuel costs for businesses and helping the environment, through funding 200 instructors to train 3,500 (or 17.5% of total, and over £400 per newly inspired lead foot by my calculations) van drivers across the UK.

How about subsidising them to convert to something non-polluting? And I'm rather wondering what the time frame is here. Hopefully there will be much better alternatives in place way before this little to gets worked through. And the best part is you don't need to use most of the cash for the scheme administrators' salaries and instructors' pension plans!

Things that make you go... hmnnn.

What do bean counters count when there are no more beans?

This from yesterday's Telegraph: Lloyd's abandons paperless system.

It's actually nothing to with environmental benefits or consequences as far as I can see, though one might ask why that aspect could not play a significant part. And I must make clear I am not well equipped to understand the logistical issues, but it just strikes me that there was the potential of saving an awful lot of paper that will now again go to, along with.... £70 million.

However, these may give a clue:

"the platform was not optimal in ensuring more efficient business processes for the Lloyd's and London market and as a result it will close."

 "The problem was underwriters and brokers just didn't seem to care about getting involved and making the market more technology based."

"Like all institutionalised projects, it fell foul of politicking, agendas, and civil service management structures, which drove costs through the roof."

Lloyd's role "should be primarily on standards setting, not building infrastructure"

Well, that's ok then.

We're in the business of trying to promote better ways of helping the planet. It can often feel like we're in the wrong one.

HELP NEEDED! - APPLY WITHIN:)

I know a few potentially relevant folk do read this blog, so I'm slapping this (with thanks to PRW) up here in complement to all the other feverish activity we're devoting to seeing how we can get in on the act ourselves.

Wrap seeks packaging waste minimisation ideas 

Link 1

Link 2

In a nutshell, Wrap are "asking groups to suggest ideas which they believe will have a significant impact on minimising packaging or food waste from the home. The project should involve a retailer or major brand, though, in order to maximise the chances that any successful innovations are widely adopted...   and are keen to encourage applications from project teams which could include manufacturers, packaging suppliers, designers, as well as brands and retailers. All proposals must demonstrate a potential major impact on minimising household waste.”

If that's you.. go for it. And good luck. Just remember who passed it on:)

If that's you and you would like to go for it with us... it's amazing how much luckier people can be if they work at it. Together.

Sometimes you can end up with a result that is much greater than the sum of its parts. 

In case you read this before we get in touch with you, we're waiting at: info@junkk.com.

Strike up the bandwagon!

I was the only 6th-former in my school not to be made a prefect. It was not that they could pin anything wrong I'd done on me (not that there was much, and certainly nothing to get me invited to join the Lib Dems), but there was little obvious that I had done right either. As my house-master commented: 'If you devoted half the energy you do to avoiding tasks to actually carrying them out as asked, you'd be looking really good'. Which brings me to today's blog.

Lurking within our information categories is a section headed 'CSR' (by the way, after months of posting and pasting, it has only now been pointed out to me that you can create a hyperlink on a word without adding all the http.. gubbins. D'oh! But I'm still trying to get around only being able to upload with these still intact any way other than un-spellchecked emails), which stands for 'Corporate Social Responsibility'.

Like many things in life it's hard to fault it in theory, but somehow the actual practice seems to to often fail to live up to the promise, intentions or what 'we' might reasonably expect.

Apologies if you have already clicked the link above, as you'll gather there's nothing there... yet. We are but a small, self-funding enterprise still seeking revenues, and so we beaver away as best we can, and will get to it soon.

I think we'll need to. It's a topic that needs addressing.

I don't like slapping links in under such category without there being a Junkk.com article above it to 'set the scene' (Junkk.com tries to stay objective and factual, but is happy to add well-reasoned arguments/opinions to broaden the scope of knowledge and provoke debate, which we encourage by popping across to the Forum), but as it's the blog I'm going to make a small exception.

It's just because these all have arrived or we've stumbled across in just the last few days:

Soft drink makers agree voluntary ban on ads to under-12s

Food miles leave a bitter taste

And my personal favourite:

Dripping in Greenwash, which is based on Ecologists unmoved by 'green' wave   in advertising.

Leaving you to read for yourselves to ensure my choice does not affect context (the trail of the last story showing how things can acquire twists and turns as they progress), I select these key sentences:

"..criticism of the move being self-serving, because there is already a ban on marketing soft drinks in schools starting in September."

"The organic food movement has been hijacked by supermarkets intent on being seen to be green, but their disrespect of food miles shows they are anything but."

"It’s a good sign these companies recognize that American consumers are beginning to develop a green ethic when it comes to purchases, it’s too bad that they’ve relegated that market possibility to a ton of advertising hooey."

Amen. I'm not saying I agree with all of what all of them have said. And it can be easy to cherry-pick in some cases. But it's clear that there is a growing disconnect between what a lot of businesses are doing, are saying they're doing and are perceived as doing by some potent sectors. note that the majority of these articles were not from the eco-activist sector.

Now, I haven't done this for a long time. What would be great if there was a genuine way for these big brands to do something tangible that does make a genuine difference, won't cots them much and potentially drive more sales, rather than p****ing away money pretending they are doing stuff when patently the snake oil ain't selling. Now, what would be worth supporting with a fraction of your smoke 'n mirrors budget if you crank out packaging, are seeking to appeal at a local level or engage with a more environmentally-aware traveling public?

Answers (in case you missed the hint in the last line) please, to info@junkk.com

Standby for action!

Now this is one that really needs addressing!

Britons waste the equivalent of around two power stations' worth of electricity each year by leaving TV sets and other gadgets on standby.

Link To Story

Because I know that, despite my best efforts, I often come into a room next morning to see that red light still glowing. So I think the answer has to be to to get rid of the standby. It's to easy to use and forget. So let's go back to on or off. Simple. And I still get to use the remote.

But then you read the full article and you see the whole issue is not quite that easy. Overseas manufactuers with access to UK markets. Systems that require constant power to function correctly ( to think I was moaning at my Mum for killing her whole system at the socket each night, which meant I kept having to reprogramme her set-top box every day). But for once I do think the answer is clear.

Let's take a stand against standby.

The Pros Of Pro Prose

When I was a struggling copywriter (as opposed to a struggling whatever I am now), I attended seminars held by top creative gurus. They always involved doing concepts, which was fun, and usually for 'issues' stuff, which was even more meaty. 

And I once had my ad held up as the best of the bunch. 

Not because it was the most striking idea, but because I had tried to deal with the topic in a way that addressed the positive apects of the product/service's solution throughout. 

As the guy kindly pointed out: "it's easy to devote a full page or most of a commercial to the juicy fun of a problem and then hope people get inspired enough to dig out the solution and why they buy the product via the logo (or now, URL) at the end... but it's much harder, more worthwhile, and ultimately of more value to the client to come up with something just as creative that shows people how to engage positively thoughout". I liked that advice, and always tried to live by it.

So it came to mind when I was sent the following URL, which is a commercial by/for Greenpeace:

http://www.viralchart.com/media/clips/greenpeace13.mov

In case the link doesn't work it's basically  'what would happen if a plane was rammed into a nuclear power station makes it not worth the risk'. I share it because I think it's a very powerful, single-minded piece of communication, executed well (though I have to wonder about the nuclear family's choice of holiday location). Plus, of course, a fair argument against.

However...

Whatever the cons of nuclear power (and there are a few I can conjure up) in the 'best way to deal with global warming' debate, I have to admit to being unsure about terrorist action being used as a primary. Though now it has been raised so powerfully, and if nuclear is embraced, I really hope that the things are designed so that IT JUST CAN'T HAPPEN THIS WAY. Frankly I think if a nuke is their option of choice it is more likely to be something easier to acquire closer to home, and dirtier to deploy nowhere near their homes, that will be opted for. So maybe devoting some energies to tidying up other areas of nuclear concern elsewhere may be a good use of activist resources.

And by the logic used in the commercial we should probably avoid hydro-electric power in case the dams get sabotaged (though I'm sure the guys upstream of the 3 Gorges would have been keen to pursue that argument).

Frankly I'm a lot more concerned by cost-cutting corporates and complicit pols simply being alowed to get away with 'whoops' when there's another 3-Mile Island or Chernobyl. Or when we have a salt mile with as much space left as our landfills, and they still haven't figured out a way to deal with the stuff.

So I have to say I was a lot more encouraged by a snippet within this piece, which is pretty much about the same debate:

http://go.reuters.co.uk/newsArticle.jhtml?type=topNews&storyID=1035614&src=eDialog/GetContent

Environmentalists are preparing for a battle with the nuclear industry to persuade the public that green, not atomic, power is the path to the future.

"We are going to war with the nuclear industry -- but with a positive not a negative campaign," Tony Juniper, head of Friends of the Earth, told Reuters.

"We are not going to repeat the negative messages of the 1970s and 80s. The campaign for us is to show that the alternatives such as renewables and greater energy efficiency can work and nuclear is not necessary." 

Good luck to him/them. I'm much more in favour of such an approach. The tricky bit will be making it as interesting as a plane slamming into a reactor, and as end-benefit driven as that not happening.

Mr. Fixit

It's always nice to be able to point at something that's actually on our site as a result of someone  - the Community Service Volunteers (CSV) http://www.csv.org.uk to give another worthy bunch a plug, sending us stuff they think we and our readers may enjoy:

http://www.junkk.com/newsarticle.asp?slevel=0z608&parent_id=608&renleewtsapf=195 

It's as simple enough, but inspiring tale, and very 'Junkk'.

The Oscar of the title is a chap who takes in stuff that isn't working, fixes them and then gives the newly useful items to those who can most benefit.

I'm inspired and hope we can track him down. He may have some tips he'd like to share!

And maybe we can point some stuff in his direction that can help him help others.

Marvin has a point

Kids on a sleepover. Wife asleep. Waaaaaay too frosty to do that
gardening I'd planned, and with no heating in the shed my latest pet
project may need to wait a few more weekends.

So of course the best thing to do is overload my already fried brain
by surfing around signing up to a bunch more newsletters. It really
is amazing what's out there if you start looking at odd links tucked
away on more frequently travelled sites.

And one thing struck me. We are not alone. At least when it comes to
the dreaded registration confirmation issue. Because having signed up
to various newsletters that politely advised that 'I would get an
email confirmation with a link to activate...'; I didn't. At least
until I looked in my spam filter. And there they all were.

What was funny, in a tragic sort of way, several of these had little
pleas to 'put this email sender address in the favourites folder to
avoid being intercepted', which of course I wouldn't have known about
had I not been up early on a Sunday and looking at places I don't
usually.

Life... don't talk to me about life.

Getting noticed for all the [your thoughts here] reasons

As you'll have gathered, I was (still am) a tad grumpy at the reaction of some news media to our little bit of Xmas PR. While it has to be admitted it was designed to get us some coverage, and did involve some resources, it's hard to grasp with getting told by one major that they're not in the business of free commercials for start-ups, and getting slagged off by another for wastage when the item sent was a paragon of 2cnd-usefulness.

So I had a certain sympathy for a couple who I read about who have announced... well, for reasons of derriere coverage let me instead quote from a publication, Grist, that quotes some publications:

"Leaving London this week, a pair of drivers set off on a trip around the world, pledging to use fewer than 50 tanks of gas, hoping to "show people that in these hard environmental times they can save fuel." By driving 14 hours a day. For 70 days. No wonder Shell is sponsoring them."

I have to say that when I first read about this, my eyebrow also twitched a bit at the logic behind the message, but you do what you think you've got to do, and in light of our experience I thought it best to keep it zipped to avoid seeming hypocritical. But we did take the decision not to share this editorially  as it simply didn't make much sense to us.

However I have to raise it here in this blog, because it certainly got a fair bit of coverage, and outside of more overtly enviro, and some might say insightful organs as the mighty Grist, there was little questioning of how exactly consuming all these resources (They are planning on using 'only 50 tankfuls, which is my Golf for two years, but there is the small matter of "Some of the fuel has already been transferred to depots along the route, while the rest will be flown out to other points of their journey at a later date... The couple will be accompanied by a crew travelling in two Volkswagen Passat estate cars, including an independent witness, a videographer, a writer and two mechanics") really is the best way to make this point.

Maybe it was deemed worthy thanks to the participation of that well-known non-start up, non-commercial organisation, Shell. Or maybe they have better PR. I wonder if this adventure was one of the Springboard entries?

Sail of the century

If am frequently, and correctly, taken to task by my colleagues for diving off on tangents. That said, if I didn't, Junkk.com would doubtless not have come to pass as it started off as something I felt I wanted to do that really had nothing to do with my day job.

Anyway, I just wanted to share an upbeat tale of something that happened today, that ended up being more than relevant to what we're up to.

Doubtless thanks to our attending some very "you went where?" exhibition, I was sent some magazine that should have gone straight in the bin but couldn't resist at least flicking though... 'just in case'.

And my attention was caught by an ad for a public speakers' agency (and as what goes around comes around, let me share their URL here because they were so helpful: http://www.londonspeakerbureau.co.uk - just make sure you have in mind telephone numbers first if you're serious), and more specifically the picture of Anita Roddick, of Body Shop fame.

We're still very much trying to think up ways to get 'out there', and though I knew the answer I thought I'd phone to see what it would take to get such a person to speak on our behalf. 

Well it should have been a very short conversation. But having got the small matter of 'if you have to ask you can't afford it' out of the way, I ended up in a delightful conversation with a lovely lady called Lucinda about what we were up to and who would be best for our needs (and budget). Sadly, the latter made this aspect of our chat quite short in duration , but I was grateful for her advice and insights.

But the great thing was that thanks to my 'brief' we got onto the subject of her brother, who is Robin Swan, and a rather accomplished fellow all round. Not least of which because he's renowned for such things as going to the Antarctic and clearing up the mess the various other bods down there can't be bothered to deal with and simply discard. So already there was a link.

But it gets better. Warming to a mutual theme, she also told me that he had sailed a very special yacht that used sails made out of old plastic bottles (check it out on http://www.2041.com/sails.html . The rest of the site is worth a gander, too). How awesome, not to mention relevant, is that? So on further tangents I will of course be getting in touch to see if we can feature this on our site. 

Everyone will gain, including the sponsor... Coke. Now, what are the odds of getting hold of some relevant guys from there to whom we might pitch a worthy story to make this a tangent that also pays off, literally?

Ah well, you can have too much of a good thing. But... you never know.

Smokin'

I return here, briefly, to follow up on the proposed increase in incineration recently announced, which has stirred up a rather unsurprising amount of controversy.

It's because of some points I picked up following our being put on the Friends of the Earth mailing list, and I have to say that in amongst all the issues raised (from breathing a huge, selfish sigh of NIMBY-esque relief that if these things are plonked in a backyard, it won't be mine, to the one I shared before on how sending up more smoke didn't seem the best idea if global warming is our biggest problem) a few key ones they made did strike me.

For instance: Incinerators are extremely inefficient generators of energy producing more carbon dioxide per unit of energy than old-fashioned coal-fired power stations. That is a fact, if an FoE one, and I have at present no counter information to doubt it. This alone puts up big red flags for the wisdom of this approach. These things are also, by all accounts, very expensive.

But the big one for me is that they require long term contracts that force councils to continue giving waste to the incinerator company, rather than recycling it. For many, many years. It locks us all in to not only a dubious solution, but one that prevents embracing better ones.

This all makes me feel this is a policy that favours those with targets to meet, those working on juicy design, build and operate tenders... and few others.

With the caveat that it is a view from one side, albeit backed by some hard-to-dispute facts, I share the following as worth reading at least: http://www.foe.co.uk/resource/briefings/up_in_smoke.pdf (I've been meaning to ask Emma to create an info category for such issues for a while, so this is a good one to kick off with. But what should it go under? Waste Disposal? Pollution? To avoid being accused of bias I think maybe both). There may well be equally well reasoned and supported counter-arguments, so if and when we get them we will of course share these, too.

Less Fun on Sunday?

The curse of the Martin Albatross strikes again!

Sunday Times considers closing Funday Times kids' supplement

http://www.brandrepublic.com/bulletins/media/article/536367/sunday-times-considers-closing-funday-times-kids-supplement/

Typical. This was one of the 'influencer media' we'd targeted who seemed likely to feature Junkk.com and reach a relevant audience. I was a bit amazed that it had a staff of five. Shows why we are struggling here with only three of us to generate all the original stuff we have to create, plus acquire and sift all the rest. I hoped they find new homes soon, as I thought it did a good job of informing and entertaining.

It is interesting that it was not deemed to be attractive to advertisers. My kids certainly grabbed each week. I wonder what the reasons were?

Tax needn't be taxing, unless the Govt. really needs money

Today my kids' rucksacks gave forth a letter from the school head, which in two pages' worth of 'exciting times', 'deserving the best' and a bunch more management speak, basically explained that due to money problems staff were going to be let go and class sizes going up. So as you read, I am busy drafting a 'Cross of Ross' for the nationals under the title 'Education, Eddukation... er.. EdUkayshun'.

Because you do tend to wonder where the money goes. And why what people say they'll do... doesn't.

So it was with slightly more than the twitch of an eyebrow that I read that fuels such as biodiesel are getting taxed.

http://www.greenconsumerguide.com/index.php?news=2941&icid=I033-1142108-148A

This surely cannot be right, for all the reasons explained in the article. But it just as surely makes sense, as it has not missed the number-crunchers' minds that the more 'we' do move to less taxed, more environmentally-sound fuels, the less revenue there will be. Our Government is probably the one with the biggest 'can I afford to be green' dilemma of us all.

Speaking personally, I'm still debating an LPG conversion, and the main thing delaying my decision is that the calculations are pretty tight, and if the price gets bumped up much more it simply isn't worth it. And with a poor history of doing what they say they will,, or worse retro-actively clawing back costs,  I simply don't trust what I'm being told any more.

And you can't buy back trust.

Burning Issues

This is certainly one that needs to be in the form of a question. Last night the news was full of the fact (well, as seen in documents) that Waste incineration is 'set to rise' : http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/pr/fr/-/1/hi/uk/4621710.stm

It's not too surprising that this is a favoured option as all those holes in the ground we used to lose the stuff are full.

As I prepared to leap around with my 'how the heck is burning stuff going to help ease global warming????!', I was placated a tad by the promise that the solution would be making "energy from waste", a process in which incinerators are used to power electricity generation plants.

Beyond all the issues about nasties up the pipe and left behind, I must say I had my doubts. I know most things can be made to burn, but how efficiently.

I do note that Friends of the Earth labelled as "myth" claims refuse can provide green energy.

And that DEFRA refused to comment on the report.

So... what is it, chaps? 

Made ya look!

I was very disappointed, not a little angry, somewhat worried (selfishly, on behalf of Junkk.com) and totally unsurprised at the news that blackmailers had targeted with a web attack the site of a student, albeit now a very rich one.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/pr/fr/-/1/hi/technology/4621158.stm 

Alex Tew had created The Million Dollar Homepage, which in four months did exactly what it says on the URL. Best of luck to him.

Now it seems some extortionists have followed through on a denial of service threat since he failed to succumb. Good on him. Bad on 'them'.

Heck of a good way to find yourself back in the news though. 

The rich are different to you and I...

The usual conclusion to this is: '... they have more money'. But I
am wondering if it could not also be said: '... they'll always find
some willing media to be taken for a ride.. and drag us with them'.

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/newspaper/0,,176-1981516,00.html

It was a fluff piece about a super rich couple, and could be
discarded as such, but as you may have gathered by now I have a
slight problem with people in glass (or in this case crystal) houses
heaving bricks around. Especially with the support of the same media
who give us a hard time trying to get coverage 'as they're not here
to advertise new business ventures'.

But as these guys have cropped up in the same paper before for their
'environmental' views, I wondering what is being served here by
pandering to them. Other than a nice trip.
In case you can't access the link, as 'part of their launching
themselves into London society', this couple invited paper to join
them, and to hear the lady partner's “strong views” on animal
welfare. Their planet-saving efforts did not seem to encompass
avoiding flying at the drop of a hat, and they don't 'do commercial',
so let's hear it for the greenhouse gasses by using a private jet as
a taxi.

At least they plane-shared with the journo, which is nice as we're
told that for the property whose purchase that this jaunt was all
about, 'energy must be provided by solar panels and the pool
naturally cleaned with marine salts, not chlorine'.

If it were not tragic, it would be funny, which it also is (at least
they came off looking like complete... well, you decide). But just
what... are we mere mortals supposed to make of this? Why are we
being subjected to such people as examples of worthy eco-behaviour?

I know more down to earth stuff can be less entertaining, but I
really feel there's too much on the facile attempts of the uber-rich
to be green, and not enough on how more normal folks can really make
a difference.

Here's a standing invitation to Ross-on-Wye to see how I'm making a
clamshell rucksack out of a vacuum cleaner if anyone's interested. If
you take the train we'll pick you up at the station:)

Swings and roundabouts

As we hone the website's new pages, I am thinking that a lot that I share here will start being featured within the relevant category on the site. 

So for a kick-off, where would be best to put this, which is an interesting piece (from the US, but still more then relevant) from one of our many daily online surfing expeditions, about insurance for hybrid cars:

http://hybridcars.about.com/b/a/233978.htm?nl=1

Well, it certainly makes sense for us to start creating a section (sorry Emma, when you get time) on Hybrids, as we do refer to them a lot and they are 'topical'. But I certainly had not imagined that Junkk.com would ever stray much into the world of insurance. 

But, of course, why not? And this article shows why.

We're all about incentive-based ways to re:ward consumers into better environmental practices as a sound marketing activity. So... corner the green £'s insurance money by cutting a deal on driving a hybrid.

But as the article cautions, be careful of any claims made. 10% off a loaded amount doesn't help much. As with green energy and a bunch of other 'green' schemes, it can often be hard to figure that the only thing that's getting saved is a dodgy marketer's kids' college fund.

We're all doomed. Oh... no... we're not.

Well, Prof's little bombshell was never likely to just drop in the pond without a few ripples.

I must say it certainly got a few of the Forum pages we play with quite excited, unsurprisingly. Not to mention the media, though it seems to be restricted to an unsurprisingly limited few of the majors:

Anyway, to counter the downer of yesterday's commentary, here's one to cheer you up: Tony Juniper: There is no reason to despair http://comment.independent.co.uk/commentators/article339059.ece Signs of climate change do not confirm that the point of no return has been reached

Mr. Juniper is another hugely experienced and well respected individual in this arena, so we must also take him seriously.

Thing is, and as the title above pretty much covers it I don't propose to analyse his piece in detail, we now have two eminent, concerned voices saying pretty much two different things - not about what's happening, or indeed why we need to address them, but the consequences.

I tend to err on the side of Mr. Juniper as there really is no other choice. And what I do like is that he shares areas of positive behaviour, though again they still tend to feel somewhat remote from the point of view of this person in the street.

What we do need to ensure is that people don't 'give up'. Which is why this article on the reaction of the green community (as opposed to..?)  to Prof. Lovelock's piece is worth scoping:

http://news.independent.co.uk/environment/article339066.ece

It's quite interesting, as I have often felt many of 'them' have alienated the public with a rather unremitting diet of 'we're all doomed' messages. Now they are in the position of saying 'it's not quite that bad yet'. Quite correctly, if it were then we might as well just kick back and go out with a bang.

I do note this, however, from Mr. Porritt: "If there was one scientist you would listen to on a proposition of that kind, it would be Jim Lovelock. Is he right? I simply don't know. I'm not enough of a scientist to make a judgement. With many people you would be tempted to dismiss the idea, but Jim is different."

So maybe we're not getting quite such opposing views here as first thought.

As we are more about factual and/or objective information that can lead to positive solutions and/or actions, and stuff with which the consumer can easily engage, I tend to restrict Junkk.com's participation in such things to this blog (plus our entirely uncontrollable Forum) as it is still all so up in the air, and frankly there are many out there who know much more about it. But it doesn't stop me having concerns, and an opinion. 

That said, debate my be healthy, but delay could be deadly, and that makes me part of the problem as I see it.

So, when I look at the amount of resources I am consuming with what is, basically hot air, I think it may be better to focus more on doing our little bit in promoting lots of little bits that cost nothing (in every sense) and can cumulatively help a lot.